Simcountry
Forum General This is going to sound terrible, but.... (Kebir Blue)

This is going to sound terrible, but.... (Kebir Blue)

O
Open Sesame (Little Upsilon)
23 Apr 2011 15:42 Link
Imagine...

There's no countries. It's easy if you try.

Imagine...

Replacing all those sims. They all have to die.

- John Lenin of the United Beatles Socialist Republic
C
Crafty (Golden Rainbow)
23 Apr 2011 17:20 Link
@Jo. The illusion of power
F
FrozenGeneral (White Giant)
23 Apr 2011 19:53 Link
I agree it's definitely not a nice idea, but it is an idea, and I also agree that it would make politics a lot more intersting and war a lot more rampant.

While interesting politics and more war is almost always fun, if these things could be acheived without genocide, then I would support that.
B
Billy_Bob_Joe_Bob_Steve (Kebir Blue)
23 Apr 2011 20:12 Link
You know, I thought that everybody would just outright hate that idea. I'm surprised that people seem open to it. @EC: for one thing, it's not real genocide. It's a tiny computer program. @Jo: Fuck religion. God doesn't exist. If you want proof, send me a message.
F
FrozenGeneral (White Giant)
23 Apr 2011 22:45 Link
First off, I think what EC is trying to say is that genocide in the mind or on a computer is still genocide. Even if you are killing 1's and 0's, you are still willing to kill for no apparently good reason accept to gain land for your own people, which rings to the tune of many of the genocides commited in the history of the world.

Secondly, can we try not to be disrespectful of religion, of any kind? I'm a Christian personally but I don't approve of anyone making jokes or insulting anyone else's religion. So, Billy Bob, I don't agree with what you believe, but I refuse to insult and disrespect other people's legiitmate beliefs, and you should try to do the same. Thanks man.
B
Billy_Bob_Joe_Bob_Steve (Kebir Blue)
24 Apr 2011 00:00 Link
Sorry General, I wasn't thinking. And are you saying that because I'm perfectly willing to kill off 11,000,000 parts of one giant computer program, that means that I would kill real people? There is a major difference between a real person and a computer program. Ever attacked another country in the game? You've killed, and in a way, that was a genocide. So if you've ever attacked another country, or destroyed a hospital, or not built more hospitals to increase health, then you have killed a virtual citizen. No matter what you do, there will be deaths. And what if there was a compromise: you commit an in game genocide, maybe you lose the ability to get security council aid. If you're already ineligible, maybe you become open to attacks from larger empires even if you have protection on. You commit a bunch, the security council could start a trade embargo. You see were I'm going with this.
S
Scarlet (Little Upsilon)
24 Apr 2011 08:37 Link
1. I almost forgot that this was not a game for some folk.
2. The option to kill off the population of a country could be useful since this is a game. However, there would only be a very limited usefulness of this kind of thing (denying population to a conqueror).
3. Personally, I think simlanguage groups would be cool - as in require a minimum percentage (maybe 20%) to speak the "empire language" to attack from countries or to join CMs or federations (basically requiring a lingua franca among the simfolk of groups of players). Homogenous empires could have decreases immigration and rebellions while diverse empires (maybe something like fully public corps, the dominant language only has less than 25% of the population) could have increased immigration and rebellions. The education index could determine the speed at which language demographics shift to the "empire language" and the "empire language" could be changed. However, this really has little to do with simocide . . .
A
Accordion_This (Little Upsilon)
24 Apr 2011 09:10 Link
@Crafty...sigh. Firstly, the rules about homosexuals are from Leviticus, not Revelations - Revelations has nothing at all to do with what is right and wrong. Secondly, although some Christians may disagree, the laws that state that homosexuality is sinful are no longer relevant because of their context. The same passage that forbids homosexuality tells the Israelites to burn everything a menstruating woman touches. Why? Those two rules are *hygiene* laws for a primitive society.

And regardless of whether or not homosexuality is sinful, God repeatedly instructs us to *love* (that is, to the point of being willing to die for) everyone. Just because some Christians are douches doesn't mean all are.

No offense to you, Crafty, but please don't start such an argument with me. I've grown weary of these arguments over the years, this a forum for a game, and I don't want to start debating historical context and morality with you.
L
Laguna
24 Apr 2011 11:47 Link
<!-Quote-!>Quote:

@Jo: Fuck religion. God doesn't exist. If you want proof, send me a message.<!-/Quote-!>


And just where did that come from, when Jo didn't even came close to mention religion?

One's religious alignment does not automatically indicate how tolerant he is. The rest is nonsense.
C
Crafty (Kebir Blue)
24 Apr 2011 13:30 Link
Accordian, my apologies for not knowing the correct book from whence that passage came, my bad entirely, I should have researched before I posted.

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

Sorry to pick you up on that one little statement, but it does kind of suggest that religious people are intolerant.<!-/Quote-!>



But please dont make it sound as if religious people (of any creed, but NO means am I singling out any one religion) are more tolerant than anyone else.

The ethics and teachings of any relgion I know of are obviously for the good of all mankind, but unforunately they clash and seem to be the cause of most, if not all, man made pain and suffering throughout history. Including genocide.

I respect your wish to not want to enter into debate here and dont wish to antagonise you further. Please - enjoy the game.

CC
J
Jojo T. Hun
24 Apr 2011 14:11 Link
<!-Quote-!>Quote:

The ethics and teachings of any relgion I know of are obviously for the good of all mankind, but unforunately they clash and seem to be the cause of most, if not all, man made pain and suffering throughout history. Including genocide.<!-/Quote-!>


Here's an idea that's thrown around a lot. I don't think people give it much thought when they say it, or when they hear it.

It's actually an outrageous statement. You're smart and thoughtful, Crafty...care to back it up, or is it just throw-away rhetoric?
C
Crafty (Little Upsilon)
24 Apr 2011 14:29 Link
I hold these truths to be self-evident.
E
EC (White Giant)
24 Apr 2011 14:39 Link
Actually the discussion on homosexuality is in Romans chapter 1 verse 26

Dead horse beaten sufficiently...moving on

Happy Easter by the way ;)
B
Blueserpent (Fearless Blue)
24 Apr 2011 14:40 Link
Religion is the root of most the worlds evil.

The US poke their nose into other countries beliefs and the the way they run a country.

World police my arse.

Using religion for oil..poor excuse.

Half of irans pop suddenly woke up one morning, all finding guns underneath their beds....
saying " seems like a nice day to take over the country"

No.
Who you think put the idea there and even the guns

Coming from the god fearing christians you purport to be....Bollocks

Where next? Korea?
J
Jojo T. Hun
24 Apr 2011 14:41 Link
@Crafty: Haha, rhetoric it is then.

edit:

Hey Blue, throwing it all out in a shock and awe effort I see. I'm surrounded by your posts and can't keep up... how about the first thing: "Religion is the root of most the worlds evil."...how so?
B
Blueserpent (Fearless Blue)
24 Apr 2011 14:43 Link
Persuasion is only needed by your own government so you believe the crap your fed ;)
C
Crafty (Little Upsilon)
24 Apr 2011 15:08 Link
Jojo... In my part of the world for example, Catholics and Protestants have fought to the death for hundreds of years, they still are, killing and destroying and causing grief in terrible amounts.

Western governments would have us believe the 'crusades' in the middle east are over our moral (read religious) superiority. See Blues post. Talking of the crusades...11th to 13th centuries.

Even slavery, probably the worst atrocity perpetrated by mankind, has some religious roots in that it was the belief of Christian superiority over the black mans ignorance and blasphemy.

You will of course agree that it would take a doctoral thesis to scratch the surface of this subject, but my opinion is that a brief glimpse of history justifies my statement.

And your "throw away" dismissal of my opinion is symptomatic of middle Americas indoctrinated attitude to others beliefs.
B
Billy_Bob_Joe_Bob_Steve (Kebir Blue)
24 Apr 2011 15:55 Link
Alright everybody, this is going in a very interesting direction, but instead of debating and quoting biblical rules against homosexuality, we could get back to the topic of, as scarlet so intelligently called it, simocide. I actually never thought about it as a possibility of preventing resources from falling into enemy hands. That would probably be the best use of simocide. And I gotta say, I thought that absolutely everyone would hate it. But some people seem to be kind of in favor of it. Although I doubt that even if every player in the game wanted it added in it wouldn't be. And for the record, I believe reading something about someone killing an abortionist, purely for the reason that he was doing his job. I dare you to call that tolerance, and if you can find a way to prove that it was, I'll turn off war protection and give you my country.
L
Lorelei (Fearless Blue)
24 Apr 2011 16:13 Link
BBJBS - WHO are you???? lol
E
EC (Little Upsilon)
24 Apr 2011 16:37 Link
Now who is changing the topic JoeBob? Onto abortion now?

make up your mind
O
Open Sesame (Little Upsilon)
24 Apr 2011 16:43 Link
I would actually be in favour of simocide as a way to:
1) Reduce terrorist attacks in large empires.
2) Prevent resources like sims to fall into enemy hands by reducing the population all the way down to say, 10M.
3) Create demand for trains if they become a product.
C
Crafty (Kebir Blue)
24 Apr 2011 17:12 Link
Wow. I hope I'm not reading into #3 what I think I am...
A
Accordion_This (Little Upsilon)
24 Apr 2011 17:13 Link
Okay, it looks as though I am going to have to flex the knowledge muscles. Fuck my life.

Jojo: yes, I also find it humorous that that statement is bandied around so much without a shred of a clue as to why it's said.

EC: No, the original commandment against homosexuality is Leviticus 26. Apologies, my friend.

Blueserpent: Thank you for starting with an outrageous claim. Humorously enough, the US does not actually represent God on Earth. The funny thing is that the United States of America is a multicultural country that is far from dominated by Christianity, and that does not go to war for Christian reasons. There is no commandment to "police thy neighbour".

Crafty:
1: The fighting of the Catholics and the Protestants amounts to politics and tradition and has no spiritual or Biblical basis. The Catholics fought the Protestants to keep control over the Church - for power, because, in that day and age, the Pope was more like a Mafia Don than a holy man. The Protestants fought back for religious freedom. They have been going at it ever since, and, much like the Serbs and the Croats, no one actually knows why they do it anymore. It's political - nothing more, nothing less. If anything, this fighting is just another confirmation that: "All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God."

2: Ah, the Crusades, the most often touted example of Christian immorality. The Crusades are *not* an example of a Godly or Christian action. In the Bible we are not commanded to fight or to kill others. We are told not to kill others. We are told to love our neighbour - which, by the way, means everyone (it's actually quite proto-hippy! :P) We are told to tolerate and respect others. Yes, we are told not to venerate other Gods, but that is the same as telling someone who has one wife not to go and sleep with another: it disrespects God. The point I am getting at here is that the Crusades were a sinful action by Christians. Humorously enough, atheist, agnostics, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims (need I go on) have all committed sinful actions. Remember: "All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God". That includes Christians. You can't say "Religion is bad" because religious people have fought in wars.
But now, you are saying to yourself, "But Pope Urban II claimed that the Crusades were a holy war!" Yes, sirs, and I claim that I am hung like a horse to get the ladies. Why? Because went you want something - whether that something be lands, political power, subjugation of a massive threat from a foreign region, or women, you are willing to lie to convince people to help you get it. Pope Urban II lied - it was not a holy war, and the people that died in that Crusade did not die to fight "the Infidel". They died because the Pope needed to secure himself against the new Muslim threat. They died because the Pope was hungry for lands. They died because of ambition, not because of God. Any questions?

3: And this has to be the biggest fallacy of all. Jesus advocating slavery? What an insult this is to both God, the Church, and the millions of Christians (both black and white) who fought slavery in the name of God.
Slavery occurred because of racism, not because of God. But I suppose you would have a point *if* even a single point in the Bible or the teachings of the Lord claimed that anyone was superior to anyone else.
Humorously enough, yet again, there is not a single word in the Bible which calls Christians or white men or Martians superior over any other person. At the time of Jesus, the Jews thought themselves superior to the Gentiles. What did Jesus do? He welcomed Gentiles into his discipleship, he told stories of the glorious and holy things that Gentiles had done (cf. Good Samaritan parable) and, when he died, Gentiles were welcomed into his Church. Why? Because no where did God ever tell the Jews or the Christians that they were superior over anyone else. Let's take a look at that verse again:
"For ALL have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God."
"ALL have sinned"
"ALL"
This one phrase is one of the most powerfully egalitarian statements in history. Whether you be black, white, or Martian, you have sinned, and thus, in the eyes of the Lord, we are all sinners, and equal in our sin, and equal to each other because we are sinners. The disgusting fallacy behind slavery was that "the black man" was a "savage", and that he was therefore an animal. Slavery's first roots were in pre-Roman times, and in the time of Jesus, it was a Roman practice. When the early Church was formed, thousands upon thousands of slaves flocked to the Church because of its powerful egalitarian message: in the eyes of the Lord, we are all equal, and we can all be born again and receive the love of Jesus. This message brought hope to thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands, of slaves throughout the Roman Empire because it was so radically different to what was being preached by everyone else at the time.
And when the Afro-American people threw off the chains of racism during the early to mid-20th Century, what group was at the forefront of the movement, giving them hope? The Church - the black gospel Church (c.f. Martin Luther King, Jr.). And why did those men and women find so much hope in Jesus? The same reason that those Roman slaves found hope almost 2000 years before them. It's up there a few times if you can't remember it.
Finally, if I may make one last, passing statement: the driving "moral principle" behind the British enslavement of native peoples was, in fact, the "scientific" belief that they were superior to the natives. That belief was one day melded with Darwinism to create Social Darwinism, the ideal that motivated Hitler to murder 6 million Jews in the Second World War, along with hundreds of thousands of gypsies, homosexuals, and the disabled.

4: Thank you for your time.

Billy Bob Joe Bob Steve/EC: Let's not get onto abortion. To BBJBS: the killing of an abortionist, regardless of whether or not abortion is immoral, is a great sin. It violates the spiritual laws that forbid both the judgement of others ("Judge not lest ye be judged", as people like to quote), and the commandment not to kill. Oh, and the commandment to love one's neighbour. Oh crap - it also violates the commandment not to idolise, because you are idolising yourself over God by telling yourself that you must enact God's will. Oh, and that violates the commandment against having another God alongside Jesus - because to idolise yourself is to lift yourself above God. I guess you could say that one who kills an abortionist is acting in an extremely un-Christian manner.

Now, can we *please* move on? I really don't want to enter a massive theological discussion here.
A
Accordion_This (Little Upsilon)
24 Apr 2011 17:15 Link
Oh, and Happy Easter to you too, EC. May I add that I hold no grudge against anyone here for their statements - if I come across as irritated or angry, it's because I've been having debates like these for years, and I'm weary of them.
J
Jason Graves (Kebir Blue)
24 Apr 2011 17:21 Link
@BBJBS-For one, why would you want to execute a genocide when ethnicity, race, religious and national identity has no function in the game whatsoever? Fantastical fulfillment perhaps?