Quote:
Originally Posted by PepsiFree
The specificity of that type of killing mattered to people when it happened, and was cited by multiple posters as the difference between Israel and Hamas killing babies (as in, “Israel drops bombs that kills babies, but that isn’t the same as beheading a baby”). Why did it matter then when it was “true” if it doesn’t matter now that we don’t know if it was?
|
It matters, because beheading babies is worse than simply murdering them. It denotes a level of barbarism that's particularly sensational and that's why it was noted in every headline.
... But it's not, you know,
THAT much worse. The kids are still dead either way.
And you know exactly what the difference was that was being referred to between Hamas beheading a baby and Israel dropping a bomb that kills babies - it's the same difference between collateral damage and intentional killing for its own that throughout the entire thread you've said everyone understands and nobody disputes. And that doesn't change whether Hamas beheads its victim, or shoots them, or blows them up with a bomb or rocket, or any other method of direct and intentional murder. Why write this post in a way that suggests that line doesn't exist?