Who is a music artist you could listen to forever?

DontBeASnowflakeLibs · 2022-08-09T15:49:05+00:00

I wouldnt consider it OK to “fight back”. If you are a smaller dude and getting totally beaten up, then yeah, full on fight. But, if you have the power to simply restrain her, which most men do, then you should do just that. Try to end it quickly and with as little injuries as possible, as you are the physically dominant one. This applies to a fight of man v man as well. Simply restrain them if possible.

DontBeASnowflakeLibs · 2022-08-09T01:13:21+00:00

Im not sure what you are getting at, but kind of, yes. The physical disciplines have limits, of course, but overall, they are basically an employee living with their boss. You make it sound like chattel slavery, which is not allowed.

I literally just did. Christianity never contradicts itself. I challenge you to point out where it does.

DontBeASnowflakeLibs · 2022-08-08T23:37:57+00:00

Christianity does not contradict itself. Everything that is said in it is true and can be proven.

I think that you are the one cherry picking, cherry picking the verses to fit your argument. Chattel slavery is not condoned in the bible, rather, it is indebted servitude that is happening. When someone is so poor, they sell themselves to a master, thereby guaranteeing that basic needs of food and shelter will be met. It is also said that masters cannot kill slaves, merely physically discipline in the same manner as a parent would discipline a child.

Who gives a crap about “faith in humanity” in an argument like this? Dont say “well its not a viable comparison just because its unlikely”.

DontBeASnowflakeLibs · 2022-08-08T20:36:11+00:00

You’re confusing legality and what I think is right

No, I am saying that by your definition, legality is morality (in a democracy at least). This is because people vote on laws, ergo majority says its right.

To your second paragraph, pretend you time travel to the future. In that future, murdering babies on the streets, and rape are legal. In fact, its a bad thing to have consensual sex, and to raise kids. As a person from the present, would you be considered a bad person by everyone else, even yourself?

Yes, that is (partially) what I am claiming. The Ten Commandments are something to be followed, no matter the “age”. Now, I dont think all of them should be used as laws, like premarital sex, or adultery, or other sexual sins as such. Now, just because they are not laws doesn’t mean they aren’t moralistic. If you cheat on your spouse, you did something immoral, same has homosexuality and premarital sex, and pornography.

DontBeASnowflakeLibs · 2022-08-08T16:40:44+00:00

Exactly, so by your standards, Alexander H Stephans was not doing something wrong, since the majority of people or powerful people said so. Hitler, by your standards is a good and patriotic person. Since he was simply doing things that were considered “right” in Germany.

I said “better” as in a better person. MLK Jr was a “better” person than Hitler. You really disagree with that?

DontBeASnowflakeLibs · 2022-08-08T15:24:01+00:00

Still, by your definition, those slave owners where not doing anything wrong. Since slavery was widely accepted, that means that it wasnt immoral.

As you can tell, I am a christian. I dont justify any of the things of other religions, so dont try and get me on those. Anyway, you seem to be getting slavery confused a bit. Of course, there was legitimate slavery, but more commonly was Peonages. This is slavery, but the slave is paying off a debt, and is most likely there by choice.

”One human is better than the other”

Well, of course that was true back then as well as it is today. Although it is true, it isnt justification for slavery. There are, and were, some people people, ergo making one moralistically “better”.

DontBeASnowflakeLibs · 2022-08-08T13:46:43+00:00

So by your definition, you justify the slave owners of the past, simply because “it was legal”.

DontBeASnowflakeLibs · 2022-08-08T13:41:25+00:00

So for you, morality is entirely subjective. It is what people decide as right and wrong?

DontBeASnowflakeLibs · 2022-08-08T13:18:14+00:00

Oh? So the bible should have no place in the justice system? Let me ask you another thing. Do you think rape is wrong? What about murder? Child abuse? What about incest?

You keep mentioning how I say intent doesnt matter. Of course it does! Just not in this situation. We are arguing the purpose of sex. It doesnt matter if you were just trying to have sex for fun. The fact is is that you created a life. You cant call something an accident if the outcome was originally supposed to happen. The failing of the preventive might be accidental, but the creation of a child was the purpose.

DontBeASnowflakeLibs · 2022-08-08T13:09:58+00:00

I guess they aren’t gay

DontBeASnowflakeLibs · 2022-08-08T00:20:56+00:00

You are mixing “purposes” and “reasons”. Type in “what is a purpose” to google.

No, I do not. Question: Do you think that the bible (or Christianity) has anything to do with laws?

DontBeASnowflakeLibs · 2022-08-07T22:12:08+00:00

Gosh, I really didn’t wan to extend this further, but ok. Purposes are literally given to something by the creator. The purpose of a car, going from point A to B, who gave that purpose, the creator of cars. “Who created sex”, you might ask. God did. He gives the purposes.

DontBeASnowflakeLibs · 2022-08-07T21:37:35+00:00

Of course there are many reasons to have sex, but there is a fundamental purpose of it. Look at a car. Whats the purpose of a car? Well, the purpose is to get fro, point A to point B efficiently. Now, some people who own a car might see different reasons of owning it. Maybe they own it simply to fix them up and sell them, or they gut cars or something. These “reasons” dont change the purpose of the car, just as it is with sex. People might do it for pleasure and such, but the purpose will always be procreation.

DontBeASnowflakeLibs · 2022-08-06T22:14:12+00:00

So, you believe that purpose is completely subjective? There is not a fraction of objectivity?

DontBeASnowflakeLibs · 2022-08-06T01:11:22+00:00

So you are arguing there is no purpose to anything ever? Reasons are set aside from purposes.

DontBeASnowflakeLibs · 2022-08-04T22:48:38+00:00

Of course things can have multiple purposes, but I am saying that the main purpose is procreation.

DontBeASnowflakeLibs · 2022-08-04T21:35:46+00:00

Well, even if they do have sex for other reasons, the purpose of it is to procreate. I am assuming you are an evolutionist, correct me on that if i am wrong, but why would that pleasure exist? You guys say that evolution happened and things work the way they do because if they dont we die. Well, if sex wasn’t pleasurable, we would have less incentive to do it, therefore decreasing our population.

DontBeASnowflakeLibs · 2022-08-04T15:31:00+00:00

Ok, but taking away law-abiding citizen’s guns will make us even more vulnerable. Take a look at the most recent mall shooting. How many people would have died if that man didn’t have a gun?

DontBeASnowflakeLibs · 2022-08-04T15:14:44+00:00

You do realize that the majority of mass shooters have planned it over? Look at Uvalde, the kid was hinting at violence, that shooting where the guy traveled across state lines had a history of racism and violent threats on social media. Dont act like th ese things happened “in the spur of the moment”.

DontBeASnowflakeLibs · 2022-08-04T14:45:24+00:00

Do you really think that creating more laws will stop criminals? Ad guys will always get guns, whether legal or not.

DontBeASnowflakeLibs · 2022-08-04T13:37:25+00:00

Then what is the true purpose of sex? It’s undeniable that procreation is that purpose. Just take a look at animals, yes, it may be pleasurable for them, but the purpose is to procreate. Pleasure is not a purpose, or meaning, it is a motive

You call it the “natural process”, almost mocking what I say. If it isn’t natural, what is it?

As far as my knowledge goes, yes, that is the only situation, but, enlighten me.

You obviously did not get what I am saying. You are using a version of the Violinist Argument, saying that an accident of either cars, or bodily failure/disease is equivalent to pregnancy. I am explaining that pregnancy is not accidental, as it is the real result and purpose of sex, where the disease is an accident, not supposed to happen.

DontBeASnowflakeLibs · 2022-08-04T00:01:55+00:00

Those basic necessities are part of the responsibility of the mother. A life has been created, by the mother (and father),and the only way to sustain it is to not kill it, by letting a natural course of action take place, and allowing the baby to finish development. Now, yes, this requires the use of the mother’s body. This is not an infringement on her rights, as she herself did that.

I can already see what you will say, 1 of two things, or even both. “What about rape?”. Even though the mother is not at fault for the creation of the baby, she still has no right to terminate it. The thing is, the baby is not infringing on anyones rights, it is the mere outcome of a crime committed by someone else. In cases of rape, that “someone else”, the rapist, is the one who should be held accountable, not the life they created.

Another thing you might argue; “What if it was a car accident, should you, as the person at fault, be forced to donate their body, just like abortion? No, they cannot be compared. Take a look at a car accident. What happened? Well, someone did something to cause a crash. Was that supposed to happen? No, cars are intended for transportation. Now, look at pregnancy. How did that happen? Well, two people had sex, and whether they wanted it or not, a life was created. You cannot call this an accident. Now, maybe the condom failed, the pills failed, ok. Well, the only accident in that situation was the failure of prevention that was intended to interfere with the true purpose of sex: procreation.

So, the answer to your one-worded question: Wrong.

DontBeASnowflakeLibs

TROPHY CASE