let me bet :<

best fixture ever tbh!

A colleague told me that Jackson would probably do suicide before going to jail, and I think she's right.

that's the next bet then :>

ahaha

Taking advice from people who work in walmart is never a good idea.

That's exorbitant disgusting!

rofl

Jacko is innocent I am sure of it. Though I really do think he needs to go into a nut house for treatment, becuase he is seriously fucked up.

soo when's this gonna close? :P

lmfao

lame bet

It's better than some gay CB match no one cares about, tbfh. :>

this bet is gay, it's a site about gaming adn esport or about what ?

I'm bad. Beat it.

And stupid.

Nope, you've been struck by a smooth criminal.

im all in on california wins :D

hung jury 100%!!!!!!!

Best fixture ever!

Just imagine how some people may like Micheal Jackson as much as some of your polish fellows liked a recently deceased catholic leader.

If you were successful, you will now know how hypocritical you are.

If they like him they should bet on "Jackson wins".

Carmac's comment was not about the case itself, but the bet concerning it - that is disgusting.

Or evidence that you and him have a different sense of humour.

Again, you fail to read and think.

I was not criticizing his "sense of humour", but his hypocrisy.

He has no problems with such bets, but censored many jokes about the "Pope"'s dead.

I agree. Michael Jackson is a revered religious leader who's done much good for humanity.

Personally, I think some of the Pope's policies were tyrannical as in many ways is the institution which he represents, but JESUS CHRIST CAN YOU NOT SEE THE DISSIMILARITY?

Do I know that "Jesus" guy?

By the way, don't you see that bets/speculations about a person's future are inhuman?

It's like r*tten.com where you can bet on another people's death.

Yes, it is exactly like rotten.com. Hell, it is almost like killing someone yourself.

You obviously don't see the principle.

Once a human being is subject to speculation, it is inevitably dehumanized.

If the motivation is profit (wether real or not), the individual becomes a ware.

Consequently, bets on indidivuals are inhuman!

E$ profit. Ship it, bitch.

Call me Mr Inhumano.

I bet on Michael :/

Humanist freak.

Okay, let's talk philosophy.

The position you're advocating is called subjectivism. You believe that simply by speculating, we are changing the subject's status as "human". However, objectively speaking this is clearly false, as your speculation has no measurable effect on a person's life, or what other species they might become (since, of course, they're dehumanised - although the word does allow for them to be entirely inanimate too. A rock, perhaps, or a latex dildo).

You might make the case that this hypothetical person (in this instance the illustrious Mr Jackson) might be offended by actually witnessing us betting on him, but that drags the debate into the realm of freedom of speech. Is it wrong, then (by an extension of your own argument), to criticise George W. Bush, Robert Mugabe, Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden, Kim Jong Il, Ronald McDonald, Barney (pick your evil), simply because it might offend them?

Anyway, returning to the original point: the only change to a person about whom something is speculated occurs within YOUR mind. YOU may be TREATING others as non-humans, but this does not affect them in objective reality.

Notice, however, that I've offered no refutation for your position (subjectivism), and that's due to one rather interesting consequence of believing it:

To be a logically consistent subjectivist, you assert that your opinions are meaningful in your own context (your mind) alone, and cannot, by the laws of propositional calculus, be extended to anyone else. Making a normative judgement on someone else (be he/she a subjectivist or objectivist), is a logical impossibility if you maintain your original position.

In summary: shut the fuck up.

I won't comment on your insults.

My point of view is not ethical subjectivism.

You've proven that you don't even know what subjectivism and dehumanization are.

If a human being is dehumanized, it is objectively still a human entity (thus denying ethical subjectivism).

Dehumanization does not change the victim in any way, it changes the perspective of which the victim is seen.

I won't try to compensate you lack of knowledge any further.

If you are interested, you can find and read the information yourself.

My arguments are based on an analogy described by Karl Marx.

Let me guess, you must be a philosophy student!

I never said your point was _ethical_ subjectivism. There's a difference - look it up.

Marx spoke of dehumanisation in the context of economics, by which the modern capitalist system, administered by the bourgeoisie, was to blame for forcing the working class into "selling themselves" as commodities. Marx was a proponent of economic determinism, not the evils of speculation.

Oh ffs, damn arts students spouting bullshit and thinking they are intelligent, ffs.
Too many mickey mouse degrees etc to blame.

This is a very simple issue, the thread is quite funny, but it's not fair for someone like carmac to ban jokes against a polish pope but love jokes against a man that is possibly going to jail for a very long time, and who is probably innocent..

At the end of the day, the pope is fairly responsible for spreading aids in the 3rd world (anti-contraception) and protected KIDDY-FIDDLING priests. Same crime that wackojacko is accused of, however the priests are actually guilty.

Where are the jokes on Catholism ? :)

The problem with dehumanization isn't dehumanization itself, it's what dehumanization leads to. Which, in most modern cases, are things like rape, murder, assault... or on a non-legal scale, emotional/psychological assault (which is commonly found on the internet).

Good point.

I suppose it comes down to practicality then. But are we really contributing to the harrassment of celebrities by betting on Michael Jackson, or does that degree of recognition come with the tacit understanding that people will naturally speculate? It is, after all, built into the definition of the word "celebrity".

Germans don't have a sense of humour :(

should've thought of that before he molested all those children huh

We're clearly toying with people's lives here, causing untold grief and suffering. Fear not, for we shall gnash our teeth for eternity.

Yeah, we will all end up in hell. Next to the pope. ;)

umm theres a small difference between the greatest pope that ever existed and a nigger-turned whitey faggot who assrapes children whose nose keeps falling off.

wrong

Correction: He has no problems with such bets, but censored many jokes about the "Pope"'s death.

I did?

i think this fixture is crossing the line, sorry

california may win but jacko is innocent
or maybe not, he's michael jackcon ffs
so he had a little fun
who the fuck cares, really who cares?

the kid who had to touch that dude's wiener cares tbh

Archive.

15:22, 4 Jun 2005 h3i 1 42.2% - 2

Fixture: (Awaiting result) California vs Michael Jackson - Jackson wins


lol :-p

i beat the system!

This betting fixture is the gateway to incest, premarital sex, drug abuse, rape, pedophilia and, last but not least, sodomy.

Innocent until proven guilty.

and premarital sex is bad because.....?

MOTHER RUSSIAAAAAAAAA FOR THE WINNAAAAAAR....

your lawyer is nothink in court

im not your catholic priest on dm6.

o¦]

What does this have to do with the Pope?!?!?!

I win.

Damnit. I curse my bad luck!

doubled up wooh!

I win.

puts me on the list, HELL YEAH :>:>:>

:D GRATS!!!!!