Eerie Cuties 09-05-16 Siren Brawl pg 11 of 12

[dogsaregreat]

I never said anything about starving to death. That would be painful, and thus, cruel. A sleeping pill overdose or a bullet would be painless. And human lives are not more valuable than theirs, but equal to them, which is why killing humans for food is morally wrong and ethically indefensible. look, if sirens can only survive by killing humans then that's a sh***y situation, but it doesn't change the fact that murder is wrong.

Unless you're a vegan, you're pretty much have to feed on "innocents". Can you really say any of the animals we eat "deserve" to die? The grilled chicken I had never did anything to me but I was hungry so....

You're forgetting the whole "chickens aren't sapient" thing.
1. A bear kills a human
2. A human kills a bear
3. a bear kills a salmon
4. A human kills a vulcan
Only number four in the above examples is morally wrong because both of the participants are sapient. They think and feel, they have hopes and dreams, they want to see their children grow up.
Do you see the difference?

Double post merged. The DAMNed

[Osaru Sensei]

As for the animals we eat, there is an implicit deal: I feed you, take care of your needs, protect you, secure your bloodline... and one day, you take care of me and I try to make it end clean.

And for all of those who say that it's wrong because us humans most assuredly would fight back against a cryptid trying to gobble us down - does a moose just lay down and die when faced with a pack of 5-6 wolves? Frak no. Those barbs on his majestic crown are damn sharp, and he could probably kick pretty hard. Sure, he'd most likely not be walking away from the encounter with his life, but damn if he's not gonna take some predators with him in death, warrior style.

As for the afterlife... Maybe sirens go to the Grecian Underworld instead, or they aspire to Fiddler's Green? *shrug*

Davy Jones locker maybe?

Just an example: the various types of corvidae will fight beak and claw for resources, but if crows see a hawk attack a magpie, they don't go "Ha ha, one less competitor". They will DIVEBOMB that sucker until he gets off the magpie.

"Hey! only we get to bully the magpies!"

[Sk'thloq]

I never said anything about starving to death. That would be painful, and thus, cruel. A sleeping pill overdose or a bullet would be painless.

Great, so their entire species should commit suicide then.

And human lives are not more valuable than theirs, but equal to them, which is why killing humans for food is morally wrong and ethically indefensible.

Not if they literally have to.

Look, if sirens can only survive by killing humans then that's a sh***y situation, but it doesn't change the fact that murder is wrong.

And again, if this shitty situation is the case, (and I'm becoming increasingly convinced it is), then without committing murder, sirens would go extinct. And self-inflicted genocide is much worse than murder.

[dogsaregreat]

To be genocide it would have to be performed by a second party. And I'm getting the impression that you don't think murder is a big deal if you feel like you "Have to". Lots of lunatics felt like they had to kill so ans o but that didn't make it right.

[Hyper Magi]

Both of those methods aren't as "painless" as you might think. The former is basically slow suffocation(Kind of like, oh hey drowning). And people have survived being shot in the head before. I'd rather not know how much pain those people endured. That's ignoring the fact that suggesting either of those to anyone would make you more monstrous than the "person" you want dead. And if you want to get pedantic you're still hurting her friends and family who would be very much in pain over her death. Course even non sapient creatures have been shown to mourn their dead...


And I don't know much about Star Trek, but I'm pretty sure humans and vulcans don't eat each other for subsistence. Sapience doesn't matter, you're still killing a living creature and said creatures CAN feel pain. If you want to shoot yourself a deer for dinner go right ahead, but don't pretend you're not hurting said deer just because it can't talk. You're a bit all over the place with this whole talk about "morality". I hope you're not just messing around.

[Error of Logic]

As for the animals we eat, there is an implicit deal: I feed you, take care of your needs, protect you, secure your bloodline... and one day, you take care of me and I try to make it end clean.

And for all of those who say that it's wrong because us humans most assuredly would fight back against a cryptid trying to gobble us down - does a moose just lay down and die when faced with a pack of 5-6 wolves? Frak no. Those barbs on his majestic crown are damn sharp, and he could probably kick pretty hard. Sure, he'd most likely not be walking away from the encounter with his life, but damn if he's not gonna take some predators with him in death, warrior style.

Yup; the domestic animal lives and dies by the Deal. The wild animal lives and dies by strength and cunning.

As for the afterlife... Maybe sirens go to the Grecian Underworld instead, or they aspire to Fiddler's Green? *shrug*

Davy Jones locker maybe?

Meh. The Locker is sailors' Hell. A whole species aspiring to Hell and endless torment? An eternity of merriment and limitless resources sounds preferable.

Just an example: the various types of corvidae will fight beak and claw for resources, but if crows see a hawk attack a magpie, they don't go "Ha ha, one less competitor". They will DIVEBOMB that sucker until he gets off the magpie.

"Hey! only we get to bully the magpies!"

Hawk: "But... but... You guys are always fighting each other!"

Corvidae: "Yes. We're FAMILY. We're ENTITLED. You're an outsider. Now get off or lose your eyes!"

[dogsaregreat]

Both of those methods aren't as "painless" as you might think. The former is basically slow suffocation(Kind of like, oh hey drowning). And people have survived being shot in the head before. I'd rather not know how much pain those people endured. That's ignoring the fact that suggesting either of those to anyone would make you more monstrous than the "person" you want dead. And if you want to get pedantic you're still hurting her friends and family who would be very much in pain over her death. Course even non sapient creatures have been shown to mourn their dead...


And I don't know much about Star Trek, but I'm pretty sure humans and vulcans don't eat each other for subsistence. Sapience doesn't matter, you're still killing a living creature and said creatures CAN feel pain. If you want to shoot yourself a deer for dinner go right ahead, but don't pretend you're not hurting said deer just because it can't talk. You're a bit all over the place with this whole talk about "morality". I hope you're not just messing around.

Alright, I suggest you check out some legal and philosophical books or articles on the the subject of killing and murder. People have been mulling this over for thousands of years and they have managed to come to some truths that are agreed upon across cultural lines.

[Hyper Magi]

I can't help but noticed how you ignored the rest of my post and homed in on a single sentence.

But legal difference aside, they both mean the same thing to the victim. Taking a life.

Also don't get me started on philosophical. We will be here all day.

[Sk'thloq]

To be genocide it would have to be performed by a second party.

Mass suicide, then.

And I'm getting the impression that you don't think murder is a big deal if you feel like you "Have to".

That's not what I'm saying. What I am saying is that this situation isn't as black and white as you're making it out to be. And that you've essentially been saying the moral thing for the sirens to do would be to go extinct.

Lots of lunatics felt like they had to kill so ans o but that didn't make it right.

And now you've stooped to insults. Once you start name-calling, you've lost the argument.

[dogsaregreat]

Presumably they are only several thousand sirens in the world (or they wouldn't be able to stay hidden from society) and each of those will kill hundreds, if not thousands, of people in a lifetime (I said this earlier). Therefore, the deaths of a few thousand sirens would save the lives of millions of humans. If those lives are equal in value, then the least amount of deaths would be the most desirable result. The extinction of the siren race would thus be the best outcome. That's pure cold hard utilitarianism ethics right there. I find it difficult to comprehend that people on this board are arguing for more death rather than less.

I was not attempting to insult you. I am sorry if you got that impression.

I can't help but noticed how you ignored the rest of my post and homed in on a single sentence.

But legal difference aside, they both mean the same thing to the victim. Taking a life.

Also don't get me started on philosophical. We will be here all day.

The rest of your post was about the particulars of suicide methods or how they might fail and denying the importance of sapience. Sapience is paramount in the ethics of pain and killing( pain comes in at second place to sapience). I cannot stress this enough; ethicists cannot stress this enough. A cow's lack of sapience (this is not the same as sentience by the way) is why it is okay to raise and eat cattle but not your neighbors' children. It has nothing to do with species or a need to eat.

PS: I did not know that about sleeping pill deaths, but properly positioning the pistol will insure death every time. Most people who don't know anything about biology or firearms just point the gun straight to the back of their throat or to the roof of their mouth. This is a bad idea. you must angle the gun to point slightly above your throat so that the round will penetrate your cerebellum and/or brain stem. Wow. My biology degree and southern-fried familiarity with guns has taken me to a dark place...

Double post merged. Quote removed. The DAMNed

[tau neutrino]

I can only find one place where Marine makes any mention of eating humans, which doesn't prove that it's a lethal process.

Tiff (and apparently also Tracy) located this whole adventure opportunity by tracking a series of drownings up the coast. Either this is a coincidence on a cosmic scale, or Marine has been drowning people. And drowned people tend to be dead.

The only way out of Marine being a killer that I can think of is Tiff used "drowned" in the Ranma 1/2 sense. Since there's no mention of people being eaten, I assume she drains life force like D&D sirens.

(I'm glad the vampire supremacist on the VC forum who was banned isn't taking part in this.)

Star Trek has been mentioned, and the first aired episode (The Man Trap) actually addressed this point. The crew ended up killing a creature that was the last of its kind. Similarly, Phantom Quest Corp had a vampire that was trying to humanize, but no one objected to destroying Nosferatu, a monstrous vampire that attacked if not killed humans. People have been commenting about not judging Marine by human standards, but the only reason they're sympathetic to her is because she's been portrayed as human-like, such as flirting with Dusky. If she actually looked and acted like Nosferatu or the salt vampire, fewer people would have a problem with her being killed.

[Sk'thloq]

Presumably they are only several thousand sirens in the world (or they wouldn't be able to stay hidden from society) and each of those will kill hundreds, if not thousands, of people in a lifetime (I said this earlier). Therefore, the deaths of a few thousand sirens would save the lives of millions of humans. If those lives are equal in value, then the least amount of deaths would be the most desirable result. The extinction of the siren race would thus be the best outcome.

We're just going to have to agree to disagree on that. I don't see how the extinction of an entire sapient species simply for doing what they need to in order to survive could possibly be considered ethical.

I was not attempting to insult you. I am sorry if you got that impression.

Fair enough.

[BlairFan]

So she saved Dusky because she thinks he's cute? Well, why not? ;)
Actually this ending makes me feel a bit sad. If Marine weren't a monster, she might be very nice.

[vampire hunter D]

is that surprising? so far, the only really not-nice monsters we've seen are Tia and Cerise. Oh, almost forgot Lucretia

[Gotoh]

@vampire hunter D: You forgot Ana and Hecate.

I'd include Mel, but she's petty rather than outright evil.