A moral question

[Sensei]

Originally Posted by RN1204

Not all do. I have a passion for justice in whatever way it is delivered. Your understanding of what soldiers do and don't do is quite limited, I would suspect. The opinion of one is not the opinion of all who have been involved in such. Unless you have encountered hundreds or even thousands of men of war, what you deduce as being the norm is an opinion rather than a fact. No offense taken however.

I will, for the sake of peace, keep my thoughts of such to myself and discuss it with only understanding company.

Ciao

Audience dictates the conversation, my head counts only get discussed with those that ask or who will understand. Here, we should all be quiet professionals.

As for the movie download there is a reason the popcorn and drinks cost more than the tickets. Most movies get relegated to background noise while I surf the web because it seems they have run out of ideas..just upgraded reruns in my view. There have been way too many movies that leave me wishing I had waited for them on TV or downloaded them first.

[TexTushHog]

Originally Posted by Tiffany Cums

Yes, stealng movies is wrong. There is a differance between right and wrong, legal and illegal. Stealing movies is wrong. Paying a girl for a great time, what is wrong with that? Nothing....it is only illegal.
If you really enjoyed a movie, go buy it and contribute to the ones responsible for bringing you such of a great movie. They deserve it!

I generally agree with this. There are some circumstances in which I think that prostitution is morally wrong were participation is less than voluntary. That line may at times be gray, and questions of whether adverse economic circumstances "compel" prostitution or just set up circumstance where women may choose to voluntarily participate can be debated, etc.

However, stealing a movie, at least in my mind, has no such gray area. The only consolation is that perhaps the damages in any one instance of theft is de minimus.

[RN1204]

Originally Posted by ElisabethWhispers

You might be surprised at some of our "understandings", RN1204. Might wish to tone down your condescending tone.

I am not sure how you deduce that my tone is condescending in the pure sense of the word. Assuming is the more appropriate word, and I do not mind be branded with that label -- or any other for that matter. I am indifferent when it comes to what people think of me, although I make effort to be entreating and friendly. I wish not to strive with anyone here. I do not start trouble, and neither do I run from it.

The point in my statement was that the one responded to was based on one civilian's encounter with military personnel which is usually limited. I will throw you a bone and admit that my statement was opinionated as well, but it did have first hand experience and military comradery behind it. There is not need to take offense with me and label me as condescending because I have an opinion about an opinion.

If you wish to maintain the idea that I am condescending, I have no control over that and no worry for the matter either. I am a very nice person unless substantially offended, and that occasion is sparsely encountered. I attempt to be friendly to all. If you will notice, my original post to the person who is stealing ended with the comment that, "although I am not...to be condescending toward you." I am opinionated, of a certainty, but I do not consider myself better than anyone else by no means, and I certainly do not wish to convey that conception. I will admit that my writings are sometimes blunt, but the purpose is not to be unkind. I suppose I should take more thought of the potential perception of the things I say. They are benign, although opinionated, notwithstanding.

I do hope that you have have not called me out as being condescending for having an opinion that differed from yours and others because you are a moderator. I openly (on the thread) apologized to the lady for any offense; that should be proof enough that I have no desire to be condescending, patronizing, or any other negatively mannered way toward anyone. I now apologize to any and all that I may have offended, and I give a double apology to the lady that the response in question was directed to. Please do not believe that I am doing this because you carry the title moderator. I am doing it because it is the right thing to do and only because of that. I do not bow to anyone, but I do attempt to respect everyone, within reason. The two should not be confused.

The problem with writing is that true tone is not fully realized, and it is very easy to be misunderstood. For you and others, this (hobby) may be a substantial part of your life. I do not know and will not assume. It is a very finite and dispensable part of mine which I indulge in for occasional pleasure on the side of something (relationship) better. My point being, reluctance to post or cessation of the same because I was misunderstood will be a small thing. I shall carefully consider posting anything from this point on for the sake of avoiding opinion clashes and petty issues that will not matter at the end of the day.

Again, to anyone I offended in any thread, post, or whatever the case may be, I apologize emphatically.

Ciao

[RN1204]

Originally Posted by TexTushHog

I generally agree with this. There are some circumstances in which I think that prostitution is morally wrong were participation is less than voluntary. That line may at times be gray, and questions of whether adverse economic circumstances "compel" prostitution or just set up circumstance where women may choose to voluntarily participate can be debated, etc.

This is a very pertinent point...about the participation being less than voluntary, that is. Even so, if that were to be the case, how is society wronged by that? Even if done out of necessity, consent still stands, but the motive is drastically different. I would think that the law against prostitution is much more morally based than criminally based. At least I think so. I would be interested to hear the opinions of others on the topic of a woman participating more out of necessity rather than interest in the act.

Again, that is a very pertinent point. Thanks for the contribution.

[Nitwitboy]

What the hell happened to my topic?? First off, I am not Pirating. I am downloading watching and then I delete. Not a ton of space on this laptop. Am I a pirate? My question was simple. Where is the line drawn on the laws. So I use limewire to steal movies. Some of you pick up street walkers. Some go to massage parlors. My point is simple. This is a hobby but we all know it is illegal. That in and of itself is ridiculous. We can all agree on that. What other laws are you breaking. I cheat like a mother fucker on my taxes but yes, another law most of us break. I am not a pirate by the way.

[Nitwitboy]

Another law I broke - On the last house I sold, I failed to disclose the fact that 6 out of the 13 spirnkler heads did not work. Funny, but failure to disclose is a crime. Do any of you have any idea as to why this topic is funny? I steal movies and we all pay for sex in a society that would punish more for the sex offense than fior a limewire offense?? we got off topic. Where is the line on law breaking drawn?

[onehitwonder]

Nit, are you hip to Pirates Bay? That's where I 'borrow' my movies from.....

[charlestudor2005]

Originally Posted by RN1204

I have a passion for justice in whatever way it is delivered.

It appears to me from your several posts that your "passion for justice" as you call it is nothing more than a justification as long as you can be judge, jury and executioner (with the emphasis on executioner).

You seem to justify your "right" to be a ruthless and evil killer because: there is evil in the world, and only military (wo)men know how to deal with it. The upstanding military (wo)men I know disagree wholeheartedly with your point of view.

And no, killing someone for petty theft is inappropriate in the extreme. You have made yourself no better than the evil people you rail against.

[Sweet Heather]

[quote=Cpalmson;538330]
As to the morality, yes, it is immoral to download movies. It is also immoral for the motion picture industry to charge me $10 to see the shit they put out.
That may be true sir, but if you produced a product of some sort and people found a way to steal your product because they thought it was too expensive, would that be OK with you? If I didn't like the sticker price of my BMW would it be OK to just steal it?

[Cpalmson]

[quote=Sweet Heather;538767]

Originally Posted by Cpalmson

As to the morality, yes, it is immoral to download movies. It is also immoral for the motion picture industry to charge me $10 to see the shit they put out.
That may be true sir, but if you produced a product of some sort and people found a way to steal your product because they thought it was too expensive, would that be OK with you? If I didn't like the sticker price of my BMW would it be OK to just steal it?

I know I'm splitting hairs here, but there is a difference in value. A BMW is a real, physical object that I can take. A movie or music is nothing more than a series of ones and zeroes combined in digital code. A movie or music is what they call "intellectual property" not real property. BTW, I'm not condoning downloading music or movies. I'm just pointing out that the movie producers steal from us all when they charge us $10/movie (add $3 for 3D). I don't think James Cameron is complaining that Avatar made too much money.

[Cpalmson]

How many here obey the speed limit? Come to a complete stop at a stop sign when there's no traffic? Wear their seat belts? I could go on and on. We have too many stupid laws on the books (and yes, speed limits and seat belt laws are STUPID).

[offshoredrilling]

Seat belt and helmet laws I can see as stupid. But speed, na. If going 36 in a 35 you are not obeying. But most can go 40 and will not get pulled over. But someone going 45 or more will be and should be. Many highways made good for 100 or more. Yet the limit is set at 55 or 65. Amount of cars can make the need for slower. Safty comes with keeping all in a range. So set limit at 65 highway, the guy going 75 or more just as the ones going 50 or less, need to be pulled over.

As to topic. Downloading watching and then delete, is still wrong.

[Outdoorsman]

Great topic. Morality is the individual's perception of what is right or wrong, thus I beleive each person's morality is different. For me it would be immoral to download movies, but I also do immoral (things that i know are wrong for selfish reasons) things all the time. I know it is wrong to sleep in and not show up to my appt. on time but I also know I can get away with it, so I do it. If I knew how I would download movies because I felt I could get away with it. I hobby knowing it is illegal but I do not think it is wrong, because I feel I can get away with it. I speed on occasion because usually I get away with it.

So, how far does each individual go to breaking the law or their own morals because they feel they can do it and pay no consequences. I do not rob banks because I know I will get caught. But if I found a briefcase with ten thousand dollars in it and I mean found not stole would it be right for me to keep the money, not in my opinion. Would I keep the money? probably because I thought I could get away with it.

I would think most providers do this job out of necessity. Most people must work or be homeless, can they chose other professions - absolutely will they make as much money as quickly prolly not.

As far as military service, I chose not to speak about my encounters because RN I agree others do not understand. Nothing wrong with that, but if a woman was to talk with me about the pains of her monthly cycle, i can only relate on a certain level. I understand pain, but have no idea about the specific pain of PMS, bloating, etc. Women usually talk amongst themselves on that issue because their audience will understand. Very few people outside of my buddies know very little about my overseas activities. And no I was never a soldier, I was and always will be a Marine. Have I ever carried out orders that I thought were morally wrong - absolutely - because I knew I could do it and not pay any consequences.

Just my humble opinion.

[Chevalier]

Originally Posted by RN1204

Now, I would have little remorse about stealing a tankful of gas from Exxon or BP because they have fucked me (and others) at the pump many times without good reason.

Originally Posted by Cpalmson

As to the morality, yes, it is immoral to download movies. It is also immoral for the motion picture industry to charge me $10 to see the shit they put out. Plus, have you seen the prices they charge for popcorn and a drink? Same goes for the music industry. $20 for a CD that has maybe one good song-- please! The way I justify things is this. They have over-charged me over my lifetime, so I feel entitled to download their product without paying. In the end, the industry still comes out ahead.

A common theme here seems to be:
1) A business offered me a product or service at a given price.
2) I was not compelled to purchase at that price from them (absent a lack of competition or proven conspiracy to manipulate prices).
3) I chose to purchase.
4) But because I think I overpaid, stealing from that business is not wrong.
5) After all, the businesses still made money, just less than they wanted to.

I certainly wouldn't try to convince anyone of appropriate moral guidelines they should follow. None of my business. But it did raise a question in my mind:

If a client sees an escort, concludes that she charges more than he thinks she should, but he doesn't feel as though he has a choice because all of the ladies conspire to fix prices behind our backs . . . is he morally justified if he sees her again but stuffs the envelope with cut-up paper instead of $$$? Thereby, in effect, enforcing a 50% discount to bring her price down to what he thinks is reasonable? After all, she'll still make money.

If not, what exactly distinguishes the examples above from the average escort? Is it that she is a small business rather than a giant corporation? Is theft against any large corporation morally justified because of its size? Is it the product/service, as opposed to the seller? Is there something particularly evil about gasoline or movies as opposed to P4P?

Obviously, there are practical reasons not to short the envelope and not to steal from Exxon, BP, or the owner of the movie rights. I was just curious about the moral perspective.

[charlestudor2005]

Originally Posted by Cpalmson

A BMW is a real, physical object that I can take. A movie or music is nothing more than a series of ones and zeroes combined in digital code. A movie or music is what they call "intellectual property" not real property.

Not to be nit-picky or anything, but a BMW is personal property. Your house real property (as is your cemetery plot). However, I wouldn't want to be in your place arguing that the music or pictures had little or no value, especially to those that create them. The theft of someone's original creative effort seems to me to be a greater offense than stealing a BMW. Stealing the BMW hurts the owner briefly. Stealing someone's creative effort not only takes the food off his/her table but also cheapens the gift s/he so obviously has.