News & Events Oscar Pistorius (the blade runner) kills girlfriend.

[tesseract]

You have assumed that "her actions" exist in some material form, and she is not an innocent victim

Yeah I know, you said "but" a while back so that excuses everything.

You might want to speak to a professional about your feelings towards women, before you end up having to explain them to a magistrate.

It's been reported that she text messaged a South African rugby player, so there's an action that exists in material form. It's presumed that cheating was involved too. That's why from the first word, of the first line, that I posted in this thread, an "If" was involved. You've assumed that she's an innocent victim, despite it being obvious that jealousy could be involved, and that her actions (text messaging and possibly cheating) played a part in that jealousy.

What's this vague BS about this alleged 'but'. Is it your way of hiding the fact that you've got no argument to make?

And you might want to take a course in how not to be a white-knight who panders to women by being an apologist for their actions.

 

[tesseract]

Nah. Of course it takes 2, a killing always does. No one exists in a vacuum, we know that. So if she played a role is not really an interesting question. Because she obviously did. Just like the victim who looks at a crazy person the wrong way plays their part.

What she did just helps explain why the murder happened. It doesn't automatically follow that she should be held accountable for it, that's a different question. And surely cheating does not "deserve" any more of a repercussion than a relationship ending.

As to whether she played a role or not is being questioned, or haven't you been reading the thread. As for whether it's an interesting question or not, who cares, it's being debated nonetheless. We have Sanders who questions her involvement. We also have Catfish Alley, who liked your post, which goes against what he's been saying, when he down plays her actions to the point of being inconsequential due to his sympathy for her due to her death.

Btw, your "Just like the victim who looks at a crazy person the wrong way plays their part" is a stupid analogy, for what occurred in this case isn't close to being the same.

I believe that she should be held accountable for her actions, not that such could occur now that she's dead; but never did I say or imply that she deserved death for cheating. In fact, I said that killing her over cheating is unacceptable. When it comes to cheating, what it deserves and what is socially acceptable in regards to consequence is subjective and are two different things.

 

[tesseract]

Martin Bryant was in the right too. I heard sometimes people made fun of him. It is immature to believe they didn't all get what was coming to them.

Some scary thought process going on behind those eyes of yours.

What you've posted here has nothing to do with my post at all. And you wish to discuss scary thought processes. Gee whiz.

 

[woopedazz]

What you've posted here has nothing to do with my post at all.

I tend to do that.

 

[Gough]

As to whether she played a role or not is being questioned, or haven't you been reading the thread. As for whether it's an interesting question or not, who cares, it's being debated nonetheless. We have Sanders who questions her involvement. We also have Catfish Alley, who liked your post, which goes against what he's been saying, when he down plays her actions to the point of being inconsequential due to his sympathy for her due to her death.

Btw, your "Just like the victim who looks at a crazy person the wrong way plays their part" is a stupid analogy, for what occurred in this case isn't close to being the same.

I believe that she should be held accountable for her actions, not that such could occur now that she's dead; but never did I say or imply that she deserved death for cheating. In fact, I said that killing her over cheating is unacceptable. When it comes to cheating, what it deserves and what is socially acceptable in regards to consequence is subjective and are two different things.

You seem to be a bit of a sky pilot man, what part of thou shall not kill are you misunderstanding here. I don't ever remember seeing any caveats on that particular commandment?

 

[tesseract]

You seem to be a bit of a sky pilot man, what part of thou shall not kill are you misunderstanding here. I don't ever remember seeing any caveats on that particular commandment?

I'm not repeating myself again just for you. Re-read my posts, they start on page 3, that will show that I don't condone her killing.

 

[nicky]

It's been reported that she text messaged a South African rugby player, so there's an action that exists in material form. It's presumed that cheating was involved too. That's why from the first word, of the first line, that I posted in this thread, an "If" was involved. You've assumed that she's an innocent victim, despite it being obvious that jealousy could be involved, and that her actions (text messaging and possibly cheating) played a part in that jealousy.

What's this vague BS about this alleged 'but'. Is it your way of hiding the fact that you've got no argument to make?

And you might want to take a course in how not to be a white-knight who panders to women by being an apologist for their actions.

They're not "pandering" to women. They're correctly challenging your belief that a woman deserves to die if she cheats on her boyfriend. Seriously, that is really fkd up thinking.

 

[tesseract]

They're not "pandering" to women. They're correctly challenging your belief that a woman deserves to die if she cheats on her boyfriend. Seriously, that is really fkd up thinking.

The pandering to women comment was made in response to a generalisation, so I made a generalisation in return. Don't get your knickers in a twist before you understand why it was said.

What part of "Because it's not acceptable to kill someone, even if she cheated on him" do you not understand? Why are you, and others, trying to put words in my mouth? What is fkd up is that there are too many folks here who can not read properly. So, no, they're not correctly challenging my beliefs, because they're challenging something that they thought I said, not what I actually said. If one is going to take issue with something I've said, be sure to get it right, before going off half-cocked.

 

[Sanders]

It's been reported that she text messaged a South African rugby player, so there's an action that exists in material form. It's presumed that cheating was involved too. That's why from the first word, of the first line, that I posted in this thread, an "If" was involved. You've assumed that she's an innocent victim, despite it being obvious that jealousy could be involved, and that her actions (text messaging and possibly cheating) played a part in that jealousy.

What's this vague BS about this alleged 'but'. Is it your way of hiding the fact that you've got no argument to make?

And you might want to take a course in how not to be a white-knight who panders to women by being an apologist for their actions.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2013/feb/26/domestic-violence-workshops-teenage-behaviour

 

[tesseract]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2013/feb/26/domestic-violence-workshops-teenage-behaviour

At least your post here explains your inability to form a coherent argument. When you have no argument, resort to slinging mud. Grow up!

 

[Sanders]

At least your post here explains your inability to form a coherent argument. When you have no argument, resort to slinging mud. Grow up!

I liked this bit:


the group are looking at some of the excuses an abuser might use for violence – from "Treat them mean, keep them keen" to "I hit my girlfriend because my dad used to hit my mum" – and learning that none of these excuses is valid;

 

[tesseract]

I liked this bit:


the group are looking at some of the excuses an abuser might use for violence – from "Treat them mean, keep them keen" to "I hit my girlfriend because my dad used to hit my mum" – and learning that none of these excuses is valid;

I'm happy that talking through your DV problem in an online forum helps you. I wish you well.

 

[half_back_flank]

I'm happy that talking through your DV problem in an online forum helps you. I wish you well.

Don't dance around his post, answer it.

Why is, 'because she cheated on me' a valid excuse for murder?

 

[tesseract]

Don't dance around his post, answer it.

Why is, 'because she cheated on me' a valid excuse for murder?

You must have comprehension issues, because that question I've already answered numerous times. Considering your reading difficulties, ask a grown up to read you my posts in this thread.

 

[half_back_flank]

You must have comprehension issues, because that question I've already answered numerous times. Considering your reading difficulties, ask a grown up to read you my posts in this thread.

I've read all your posts and can't find an acceptable answer to that question. Kindly point out where you have answered it. All i've found is this:

I believe that she should be held accountable for her actions, not that such could occur now that she's dead; but never did I say or imply that she deserved death for cheating. In fact, I said that killing her over cheating is unacceptable. When it comes to cheating, what it deserves and what is socially acceptable in regards to consequence is subjective and are two different things.

In your first post you said that she, "reaped what she had sowed." That's strongly implying that she deserved to suffer the consequences of her actions, which was death.

 

[Sanders]

You must have comprehension issues, because that question I've already answered numerous times. Considering your reading difficulties, ask a grown up to read you my posts in this thread.

Yeah nah.

What you have done is the typical closet racist/homophobic/misoginist trick of saying "obviously I'm not saying this BUT..."

I'm not racist BUT...
Someone of my best friends are... BUT
I'm not saying she deserved it, BUT

 

[tesseract]

I've read all your posts and can't find an acceptable answer to that question. Kindly point out where you have answered it. All i've found is this:

In your first post you said that she, "reaped what she had sowed." That's strongly implying that she deserved to suffer the consequences of her actions, which was death.

I given my answer, and pointed others to it numerous times. It seems you've skipped over it. Rephrasing that answer in words that you find acceptable isn't something I care to do.

 

[tesseract]

Yeah nah.

What you have done is the typical closet racist/homophobic/misoginist trick of saying "obviously I'm not saying this BUT..."

I'm not racist BUT...
Someone of my best friends are... BUT
I'm not saying she deserved it, BUT

This is but more of your fail. You've got no argument and nothing worthwhile to say, so you sling mud. Perhaps you should be getting back to dealing with your DV issues.

 

[half_back_flank]

I given my answer, and pointed others to it numerous times. It seems you've skipped over it. Rephrasing that answer in words that you find acceptable isn't something I care to do.

What about your first post, saying that she reaped what she had sown?

There can really only be two answers here;

1. You accuse others of comprehension issues, when you use relatively simple sayings in which you can't understand.

2. She deserved to be murdered, aka she reaped what she had sown.

 

[tesseract]

What about your first post, saying that she reaped what she had sown?

There can really only be two answers here;

1. You accuse others of comprehension issues, when you use relatively simple sayings in which you can't understand.

2. She deserved to be murdered, aka she reaped what she had sown.

3. You've misunderstood and used 'she reaped what she had sown' to mean what you want it to. There is an explanation among my posts.

Btw, it seems you still haven't found what I've pointed others to. Given my numerous directions to others, don't bother asking for a pointer yourself. Simply look back at my posts.

 

[Sanders]

3. You've misunderstood and used 'she reaped what she had sown' to mean what you want it to. There is an explanation among my posts.

Btw, it seems you still haven't found what I've pointed others to. Given my numerous directions to others, don't bother asking for a pointer yourself. Simply look back at my posts.

So even you can't work out when or how you've disclaimed yourself and want others to do it for you?

I think we're done here.

 

[tesseract]

So even you can't work out when or how you've disclaimed yourself and want others to do it for you?

I think we're done here.

When it came to actually debating this issue, you were cooked quite along time ago. Run along.

 

[half_back_flank]

3. You've misunderstood and used 'she reaped what she had sown' to mean what you want it to. There is an explanation among my posts.

Btw, it seems you still haven't found what I've pointed others to. Given my numerous directions to others, don't bother asking for a pointer yourself. Simply look back at my posts.

Please stop directing me to your previous posts, they are full of contradictions and inadequate answers.

You said that, "never did I say or imply that she deserved death for cheating."

When in actual fact, you have strongly implied that with phrases such as, "you reap what you have sown" and "in a way, she brought it upon herself."


I think you have extremely warped ideas on the subject, yet your constant contradictions and lack of understanding have made them seem worse.

 

[JUBJUB]

 

[Messenger]

I don't believe it to be harsh not feeling sorry for her, for her actions set this whole incident into motion. Cheating on someone is a screwed up thing to do. She couldn't possibly have known his reaction to being cheated on, but her wrongdoing makes her partially responsible for the consequences of the outcome.

I don't feel sympathy just because she's female, pretty, or because she perhaps cowered in a bathroom; I'd rather look at her actions and how it played its part and take that into consideration too.

So if you scratched my car and I beat you to within an inch of your life with a baseball bat, I could look at your actions and see how it played its part and take that into consideration too?

Reaction or not, it's disproportionate.