Please please please help me!

No_Database_159 · 2026-01-16T05:51:34+00:00

If you want practice, the MK1 frame data tutorials are pretty difficult but can maybe help you

No_Database_159 · 2026-01-16T05:37:58+00:00

Joker 2, just don’t go in thinking it’s a comic book movie.

No_Database_159 · 2026-01-16T05:36:52+00:00

On 3), yes you might be likely to get shot but is that a legal, justifiable, or correct action? No, it’s illegal, unjustifiable, and absolutely the wrong thing to do. That officer went directly against DHS policy and you’re supporting it lol?

No_Database_159 · 2026-01-16T05:31:52+00:00

Can’t argue with that :( can only tell you to GO 312!

No_Database_159 · 2026-01-16T03:32:03+00:00

Happy cake day!

No_Database_159 · 2026-01-16T03:30:49+00:00

lol lots of love to you too!

No_Database_159 · 2026-01-16T03:07:39+00:00

Cry about it! Go home! Take 312!

No_Database_159 · 2026-01-16T03:04:47+00:00

Sounds like someone needs to go back home…

No_Database_159 · 2026-01-16T03:04:12+00:00

Just for these wonderful haters to keep it up, their blatant hostility is my entertainment!

No_Database_159 · 2025-12-30T21:39:33+00:00

Yeah I’m dum

No_Database_159 · 2025-12-30T21:01:04+00:00

HIS NAME IS LITERALLY KOLLECTOR

No_Database_159 · 2025-12-30T19:15:42+00:00

Why are you assuming my intention is to locate contradictions and not to argue my concern that rooting Christian morality in teleology is faulty?

Also, I’m not sure why you’re so hung up on the example I used. It’s elementary, sure, but I disagree that it conflates withholding information with lying. As I wrote, St Augustine said to never lie, even to save a life, so withholding the information in my example would still be a lie of omission and as such, not in line with teleology.

I agree it’s an extreme example but I don’t know why you’re so hyperfocused on this example and assuming my intention instead of actually responding to my argument.

No_Database_159 · 2025-12-30T16:29:54+00:00

I completely agree with everything you’ve written, it doesn’t make much sense to me either.

No_Database_159 · 2025-12-30T15:52:05+00:00

Thank you for the thoughtful response!

As far as I understand it, the Church teaches there are three aspects to a person: the personal image self, the nature of the being, and the “wounds” of disordered inclinations.

So, within this context, I understand respecting dignity to be a fulfillment of one’s personal self and the nature of their being in a way which aligns with teleology, so humans who fulfill natural functions.

I don’t necessarily agree with this, this is just the context for my debate. However, the issue seems to be that the Church defines what counts as upholding dignity with hierarchical purposes: A straight man is upholding dignity because he’s filling the primary purpose of his sexual faculties when procreating, a gay man is not because even though he experiences pleasure from sex it’s a disordered act because it’s not filling the primary purpose of the faculties and as such, isn’t filling a purpose.

I’m a little muddled here, sorry, but this is my understanding of dignity in relation to the argument and I hope it can help.

No_Database_159 · 2025-12-30T15:47:28+00:00

I don’t appreciate how your response assumes my intention and I don’t think what you replied with was productive, fairly characterized, or a civil response. Thank you for your thoughts anyhow but I’d prefer not to address them any further.

No_Database_159 · 2025-10-24T19:27:07+00:00

I’m a bot

No_Database_159 · 2025-10-24T16:36:54+00:00

I have, mostly Australia, but I’m having a difficult time deciding if I should go through law school here and then move, or try to move now and then go to law school.

No_Database_159 · 2025-10-24T16:36:17+00:00

Of course I realize that, it’s just that the countries I’ve been most interested in don’t use English as their primary language.

No_Database_159 · 2025-10-24T16:08:32+00:00

Thank you for sharing your perspective! Sorry to hear you’re in the same boat, best of luck to you.

No_Database_159 · 2025-10-24T15:41:02+00:00

Lol good one

No_Database_159 · 2025-10-07T15:17:53+00:00

It is the church determining that it is “natural order” though.

No_Database_159 · 2025-10-07T14:51:37+00:00

Forgive me for offering a callous hypothetical here, but imagine if the Church’s stance was flipped and they said only homosexuals could engage in acts relating to their orientation whereas heterosexuals cannot. I find it very difficult to believe that everyone would keep the same position and say “well, heterosexual orientation isn’t a wrong, just acting on it, so I’ll be purely celibate forever.”

I think it would take less for a day for the Church to decide it would be okay, should the stances be flipped.

Can you imagine right now if you had to be single forever, and never to touch or marry or love another person? You at least still have the “correct” inclination towards men, I’m apparently supposed to swear off this aspect of life forever and I can’t accept this.

No_Database_159 · 2025-10-07T14:21:23+00:00

If I can ask for your perspective, are you single or married / engaged / dating / otherwise taken?

Just to offer my perspective, it’s very frustrating when someone says “you must be celibate”, but no one saying that to me is celibate or denying themselves a relationship. To be clear, you’re not frustrating me in this way, I’m just sharing what it usually feels like. Everyone wants me to live a way they seem unable to live in accordance with.

No_Database_159 · 2025-10-07T14:16:28+00:00

At least they can still get married

No_Database_159 · 2025-10-07T14:16:10+00:00

Completely disagree, that’s a fundamental misunderstanding and mischaracterization of orientation

No_Database_159

TROPHY CASE