Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
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?
|
Because the specificity of the type of killing mattered to people at the time, which I said. There was posts specifically mentioning the beheading as a defining factor of that difference.
How did I suggest the line didn’t exist when I was describing the conversation that was had a week ago? You do a lot of assuming what I’m suggesting instead of just asking, and it’d be a lot less annoying to answer a question than respond with a correction.