Search results

This is a good point. If they are willing to push a defective treatment for COVID, then they would be thrilled to have people die in WW3... the more horrible the war the better! The thing to remember is that they aren't in complete control. They can set things up the best they can to get the war...

The analogy is usually assumed involuntary because if it were voluntary it would either not mean anything or be a discussion about something only tangentially related to killing innocent children before they are born. In the case of a person being attached involuntarily it is always, unless a...

Ok. It's just that when I find someone who is reasonable on some issues, but irrational about killing innocent babies before they are born using the same explaining logic, there is some unusual psychological reason for the inconsistency. The woman deserves a voice, and the child deserves a...

Of course. Babies are cute. According to your reasoning they shouldn't want the best for babies, but men do. What can I say? You got me. I love babies so I want them to grow up healthy and happy. You want to keep them from experiencing life with the hardships that happen to be included with the...

Could be. But using logic and reason one would realize this question is irrelevant. No. Because we can't be sure they existed. You'll notice that when a miscarriage happens (normal) parents are sad. That's why. That is some prime obfuscation you are spewing. Just as predicted. I don't...

So far my consideration has mostly been about location and biological commandeering simultaneously. I just told you the best dialectic argument for your compromise. Can you recall what it is? My prediction is that you will obfuscate. The problem is that your opinions here stand on nothing but...

Seriously? Care and reverence? How would you actually do that?

Then your compromise does not stand on good principle. Even though I'm also OK with answering a question with a question if appropriate, the questions were rhetorical so they were answers themselves. So here are the answers directly so you can see it: Since he is an innocent human you cannot...

Do any of these things make him not human? Do any of these things change him from innocent to guilty so you can start being violent? Um... what? Is this an emotional outburst?

Ah, so you understand the weakness of your compromise, but you are making political calculations to get what you consider a better outcome. Unfortunately, evil has gravity on its side and the only way for good people to fight against this kind of gravity is by standing on the principles of God...

I don't think you realize that what you claim here undermines your compromise. Going back to the airplane over the Pacific, the unconscious person is neither invited nor being rescued. So why is it wrong to throw them off? According to your compromise it isn't. But the reasons why it's wrong is...

This actually doesn't follow. People have every right to disinvite on a whim, so to follow the analogy every case must be treated as an uninvited person. This also does not follow because in self defense it is assumed the defender has the *right* to destroy the threatener. That right does not...

The compromise won't work. Think about it; what would the rapist want? He wants to get rid of the evidence. Of course this also assumes the justice system will have the death penalty for rapists. Also think about this. If using a dialectic argument, the very best argument for killing innocent...

hey mang, ju aren't one of those illegal hunters are ju? If you are going to gut'n tag take it easy with the gutting, si?

Hola

Your link did not explain the vast sedimentary layers. In fact, the authors only tangentially addressed it. They said the layers came from large shallow oceans that would rise and fall to create a layer. They also claimed rivers could carry the generally pure sediments to achieve the various...

This implies that you have looked at the continent-sized sedimentary layers. But if you had actually investigated those layers you would have found even greater difficulties with the idea that the flood was a local event - their vast sizes are just the beginning of problems for your view. Thus...

Super news!

The derogatory tone comes from you acting like you don't understand clear English. You said, "I'm not sure how science becomes failed science when it contradicts your understanding of the Bible." I gave you a clear definition of what failed science was that had nothing to do with my...

Seems reasonable.