"*_//B_//B*" <*TheAngel*@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message
news:48a7f260$1_3@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...
>
> "William Wingstedt" <William_Wingstedt@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:48a7397f.982113244@Newsgroups.Comcast.net...
>> On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 20:20:43 +0100, "*_//B_//B*"
>> <*TheAngel*@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>"William Wingstedt" <William_Wingstedt@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>news:48a189a7.609398658@Newsgroups.Comcast.net...
>>>> On Mon, 11 Aug 2008 23:41:06 -0400, "Hybrid Angel/Messenger"
>>>> <xxx0110@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>~>
>>>>>Twonky.......
>>>>>
>>>>>Hybrid Angel/Messenger
>>>>>
>>>>>The human race needs a parental gene for it's inheritable intelligence.
>>>>>The missing link....
>>>>>
>>>>>And we Hybrids have it, in Cain. An intelligent modern man, and a
>>>>>premeditating, cold blooded murderer. Better than being evolved,
>>>>>and insulting the Chimps or any Ape, as being our ancestor. They
>>>>>never committed premeditated, cold blooded murder.....
>>>>
>>>> Wrong. Chimps do engage in murder. It's premeditated and  it's cold
>>>> blooded.
>>>
>>>No.
>>>
>>>The Definition of Murder:
>>>
>>>Intentional Homicide (the taking of a  Person's/Human Being's life by
>>>another Human Being of Sound Mind), without Legal Justification or
>>>Provocation.
>>>
>>
>> Very well. The concept of murder must then be mapped onto chimp
>> behavior. Call it what you will, a rose by any other name smells just
>> as sweet.Thankfully the world is more complex than the mere definition
>> of it.
>
> No. Insincerity and Deliberate Willful nonsense noted.
>
> The Legal Definition/Concept of Murder applies ONLY to Human Beings.
> Pray tell us how in God's name do you establish 'IDENTITY' before even
> trying to establish without Legal Justification or Provocation in the case 
> of
> Apes vs.Apes when Apes are Incapable of 'IDENTIFYING' themselves?
>
> Apes cannot be Cross-Examined in a Court of Law to establish Guilt or no
> Guilt. Apes are Animal beings, bound by Instinct, and cannot CHOOSE to
> act or be Human Beings & as such are deemed not Guilty of Murder in the
> Eyes of the Law.
>
> The Law therefore concludes that:
>
> Apes Kill 'WITH' Provocation and 'WITH' Legal Justification in the Jungle.
>
> God's Name  =  *I* am that/what *I* Choose to be...
> *Amen*
>
>>>>>That's an inborn 'skill', of an intelligent being...and applies in 
>>>>>one's
>>>>>knowledge of it. The knowledge of evil.....
>>>>
>>>> Apes are intelligent beings. There is no evil. There are intentions,
>>>> actions and consequences.
>>>
>>>Apes are Subject to the Law of the Jungle/Natural Law, Human Beings
>>>are not.
>>
>> How so? When the law of the jungle is brought to bear on a human
>> being, they are just as subject to it as any other animal. The idea
>> that natural laws suspend their operation at the mere protestation
>> that you are not subject to them is ridiculous. Sure we have some
>> attributes that have enable us to survive, much as any other animal,
>> but to imagine that we have escaped the consequences of natural laws
>> is delusional.
>>
>>> I.O.W, Apes can't choose to act like Human Beings, however,
>>>Human Beings can choose to act like Human Beings or Apes.
>>
>> That is not as clear as you seem to think it is. I suppose it may
>> depend on what you mean by "act like." Whether you mean "act" as in
>> what an actor does or "behave" I think it can be shown that apes
>> engage in both. Of course then your position hinges on what it is to
>> say such behavior is chosen or if choosing a behavior is itself a
>> behavior. That human beings can act like apes can easily be attributed
>> to them being apes.
>>
>>>
>>>>>(Dollar to a doughnut you never thought about that stuff!)
>>>>>
>>>>>We are of Cain & Seth...flat and sloped....foreheads......
>>>>>
>>>>>Which are you?
>>>>>
>>>>>And blockheads, with a high forehead that ends in a point......
>>>>>
>>>>>And forgot all about the 2012 visit......
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>