Aeon21

@_OKJ__ People who argue for objective morality simply choose to follow someone else's subjective morality. Doesn't actually make their morality objective.

I’ve never seen anyone in my life provide an argument for “objective morality” (Whatever the fuck that even means ) that isn’t essentially arbitrary or an appeal to emotion influenced intuitions.

@ProblemSolved57 @RepChipRoy I think Don has a valid case that he was there as an independent journalist but otherwise yeah, protesting and interrupting a church service infringes on the first amendment right to religious freedom and is a violation of the FACE act. Prosecute 'em.

@Aeon212 @RepChipRoy Which is why Don Lemon and all those fks that did this at a church are done. Same applies.

Powerful exchange as Rep. Roy hears the testimony of Eva Edl, a 91-year-old survivor of a Yugoslav communist concentration camp, who faced up to 13 years in prison under the FACE Act for engaging in non-violent protest at abortion clinics. Rep. Roy: “I want to thank you for your life, your life story, your dedication to life, and for fearlessly standing against the power of government being used against your God given ability to try to stand up in defense of the innocent.”

@WilsonJFox @LifeNewsHQ Your sex-shaming means nothing. Having sex isn't a crime. Either stop trying to treat it like a crime or actual advocate for making it a crime.

@Aeon212 @LifeNewsHQ Si no quieres un niño dentro tuyo, no abras las piernas o lugate las trompas, ese niño se pudo haber evitado, pero tomaron la decisión consciente de ser irresponsable, es culpa de la madre que no se cuido que ese niño terminó ahí, si no lo quería ahí debió evitar el sexo

@WilsonJFox @LifeNewsHQ The right to live does not entail access to another person's body, so it isn't being violated, as I have repeatedly stated. You are welcome to offer a counter example to prove me wrong.

@Aeon212 @LifeNewsHQ Y ahí te estas contradiciendo, porque dices que ningun derecho prima sobre el otro pero en tus tweets están dando prioridad del derecho de la madre a su cuerpo sobre el derecho del niño a vivir. Decidete, prima el derecho de la madre a su cuerpo o el del niño a vivir?

@WilsonJFox @LifeNewsHQ Not if your child is inside of your body and the only to remove them kills them. Come up with a realistic comparison and maybe I'll take what you say seriously.

@Aeon212 @LifeNewsHQ Matar a tu propio hijo es un crimen, mucho mas si es en su etapa mas vulnerable, si tu hijo se te agarra a la pierna y no la suelta durante 9 meses, no tienes derecho a matarlo para que te la suelte

@WilsonJFox @LifeNewsHQ There is no hierarchy to human rights. Neither are above the other and neither can be used to violate the other. The unborn's right to life does not entail access to another person's body, ever.

@Aeon212 @LifeNewsHQ Y ella debe hacerse cargo y no tiene derecho a acabar con esa vida solo porque le restringe de una manera. El derecho a la autonomía corpórea no esta por encima del derecho a la vida. Donde queda el derecho del bebe a que no mutilen su cuerpo y no lo maten?

@WilsonJFox @LifeNewsHQ Running someone over with your car is generally a crime. Having consensual, unprotected sex is not. She has committed no crime, so you cannot punish her by forcing her to gestate.

@Aeon212 @LifeNewsHQ Ese ser humano que termino dentro del cuerpo de la mujer no se metió a la fuerza, esta ahí por la falta de precaución de la mujer irresponsable, asi que ella es culpable de que esté ahi. Si u a mujer atropella a una persona y esta queda en coma, ella es culpable de esa situación+

@WilsonJFox @LifeNewsHQ The right to remove them is based on the pregnant person's right to bodily autonomy. The right to life doesn't grant someone rights to another person's body, so it's not being violated. I've never seen someone call it filicide, but they do acknowledge they killed their offspring

@Aeon212 @LifeNewsHQ Entonces el derecho a sacarlo esta por el derecho del niño a vivir? Podemos vulnerar el derecho mas fundamental de un inocente porque sí? Y jamas he visto a una mujer que aborta hacerse responsable de filicidio

@BasedMikeLee That’s not dehumanizing. That’s just stating facts.

You de-humanize pre-born humans by dismissing them as “a half-ounce fetus with no consciousness, self-awareness, or feeling of pain” You also make assumptions that are affirmatively at odds with modern science

@WilsonJFox @LifeNewsHQ If the kid is inside of your body and the only way to remove them results in their death, then you have the right to kill them to remove them. Being responsible doesn’t require your moral approval. It just requires acknowledging your actions caused the outcome.

@Aeon212 @LifeNewsHQ No tienes derecho a matar a tu propio hijo. Y una mujer cuando aborta no esta siendo responsable, está huyendo de las consecuencias de haber abierto las piernas sin usar anticonceptivos

@REEZOZO20 @RepChipRoy Call it whatever you want. The law is clear and she broke it.

@Aeon212 @RepChipRoy a murder clinic yes

@ChrissiePartin @RepChipRoy That’s not a violation of the FACE act, but yes, they should be arrested because it’s still illegal.

@Aeon212 @RepChipRoy So, for example, all the protesters blocking roadways and obstructing people from getting to their destination, should all be arrested too?

@TPUSA @MattWalshBlog I doubt the omnipotent and omniscient deity needs you getting upset on his behalf about people supposedly offending him. Oh wait, you’re not. God is just a useful shield for you to hide your hatred, fear, and bigotry behind.

Matt Walsh: “What was the point of trans ideology to begin with? Well, it's the ultimate statement. It's the ultimate middle finger to God, basically saying, ‘I am my own God.’” @MattWalshBlog live at the This Is the Turning Point Tour

@TarlaghBreen @ZELLKLUMPEN Any contract that would force you to work against your will is not legally binding. You cannot sign your rights away.

@Aeon212 @ZELLKLUMPEN If you sign a contract to work for someone for 9 months, then no.

@brentbarrelson @ThatOneFFox @ZELLKLUMPEN Everything I do, God already knows I'll do. He knows apparently before I'm even conceived that I won't believe in him. Honestly, if he would punish me for literally making me this way, he can go fuck himself.

@Aeon212 @ThatOneFFox @ZELLKLUMPEN To all who earnestly and humbly seek, they will find God (Jer. 29:13, Ps. 34:4) We all will face God and give an account. We are all guilty of sin. Jesus has come and paid the penalty. I sincerely pray you seek God and put your faith in Christ.

@brentbarrelson @ThatOneFFox @ZELLKLUMPEN How do we have free will if God knows exactly what we'll do it before we do it? How can he punish us for things we only do because that is how he made us?

@Aeon212 @ThatOneFFox @ZELLKLUMPEN There’s nuance. God foreknows what we will all do. This doesn’t mean we don’t still make choices. God knows what Absalom will do and declares that by it David will reap what he sows Reading the passage strongly implies Absalom is acting on his own apart from any command from God

@brentbarrelson @ThatOneFFox @ZELLKLUMPEN I guess, but it's not like we'll ever know if there's actually an afterlife much less if it'll be a just one.

@Aeon212 @ThatOneFFox @ZELLKLUMPEN If a victim knows the one who committed an atrocity against them cannot escape judgement even if no one believes them or the victim never gets caught, I feel that provides closure. I don’t conclude anything to be true as a result, but it seems to coincide with God’s good justice

@brentbarrelson @ThatOneFFox @ZELLKLUMPEN I see your point. Whelp, who knows how the universe began. We'll probably never know and can only guess.

@Aeon212 @ThatOneFFox @ZELLKLUMPEN If the universe is infinite, then it logically follows that today cannot exist. If there are an infinite amount of days until today, then today will never come. An ever-existing universe creates this problem. I also think the scientific consensus leans towards a beginning.

@MAGASPARTACUS @RepChipRoy I'm sorry the truth offends you so.

@Aeon212 @RepChipRoy shut your fucking bitch ass up.

@brentbarrelson @ThatOneFFox @ZELLKLUMPEN Is there a translation of the bible where God does not say, in first person, that he will be the one to give David's wives to someone else?

@Aeon212 @ThatOneFFox @ZELLKLUMPEN God declares that a terrible thing is going to happen as a result of a terrible thing. This does not mean God endorses it nor does it excuse the free will of Absalom who commits the atrocity 4 chapters later. God allows man to choose evil.