@Keijones97@beyoncegarden So no, it’s not unreasonable to completely disregard the philosophy of something/someone who didn’t exist in the manner they supposedly did based on non existent objective evidence.
@tstret56@beyoncegarden What is the argument? I said you have to know Jesus in order to speak on things like it’s fact. She said I believe. The story says something else. I’m not telling y’all to believe it I’m just saying read first. Understand. Apply it to life. Then speak. Is that just me?
@Keijones97@beyoncegarden And I’m telling you it’s impossible to “know” Jesus through subjective accounts which were made after his supposed death. That’s where the belief part come into play. I don’t believe it, due to their being no objective evidence. So don’t expect non believers to accept such takes.
@Keijones97@nice_nawt@beyoncegarden can you not see the irony in such a response?
You acknowledge it to be a form of “fan fiction” ( a subjective historical account) but then used a sports team debate for your analogy, debates which commonly are fought using objective facts, and not subjective like Jesus’s story
@nice_nawt@beyoncegarden A pretty impactful fan fiction. I stand by my saying. If you want to speak philosophy then read what you’re arguing about. It’s like me going to a debate rally saying the Steelers are better than the The Bears but having no evidence to back it up. I see her point tho
@jrhartley151515@SkyNews So hypothetically if a soldier was to deliberately/consciously shoot and kill an innocent civilian you believe their superiors should face justice, and not the guy who pulled the trigger? Are you deranged?
@SkyNews If anyone should be prosecuted, it should be the leaders that send our military into these hell holes in the first place ….they send out the military and then prosecute them when they get home , it’s absolutely ridiculous and disgraceful the way some troops have been treated.
@SnoopDegB@rpatto9219963@Dan_M0718@RestoreBritain_ So you can’t answer a simple a or b hypothetical which demonstrates the lack nuance you’re unable to demonstrate in regards to your ethics regarding euthanasia? How surprising…
@rpatto9219963@SnoopDegB@Dan_M0718@RestoreBritain_ They beg you to shoot them, and claim the wait for a legal method of death is too long a wait. Do you shoot them, as to them, it’s the most ethical decision? They have full mental capacity…
@tstret56@SnoopDegB@Dan_M0718@RestoreBritain_ "legal and ethical" shooting an animal to mercifully kill it, is not illegal and it's more humane with less sufferring; so it's also more ethical.
A person can much more readily decide "how to die" for themselves and if they're incapcitated without a DNR, why kill them.
@rpatto9219963@tstret56@Dan_M0718@RestoreBritain_ I was going to reply something along those lines, also saying that rupert hasnt even done anything illegal so i dont see where the argument is, but I decided to just laugh at him instead coz after reading it again, he can't be serious 🤣
@SnoopDegB@Dan_M0718@rpatto9219963@RestoreBritain_ So hypothetically you live in a country where assisted dying is legal and you also own a gun. A close family member insists to you that they’re in agony and wish to die. Do you A. Shoot them immediately to end their suffering.
Or B. Go through the legal and ethical process?
@Dan_M0718@rpatto9219963@RestoreBritain_ The urgency is what required the method.
What welfare is there to making the dog suffer unnecessarily for an extra 4 hours? There is none.
Whats your opinion on non stunned halal slaughter?
@tstret56@_Evolutionism@SkyNews Show me what 'genocide' i support?
Only an evil person would say that about a complete stranger.
Explain why you think thst?
@tstret56@SkyNews maybe try to disassociate but when you argue with retards who act like a 10 year old on the school playground who can do nothing but name call you and you cant tell them otherwise you just cant be bothered wasting time