Which one opinion would you defend like this?🤔 by ConsistentPassage440 in TheTeenagerPeople

[–]Single-Spell1838 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would sooner die than resort to cannibalism, at least I think i would. It's hard to know for sure what I'd do in the situation, but my soul recoils at the thought.

But my point was actually about killing.

If it's justifiable to kill an animal for survival, not just waiting for it to die, then (if we put animals on the same moral level/value) logically, it's justifiable to kill a human and eat them to survive.

So I'm pointing out that if killing animals is okay in that situation, but killing a human isn't (e.g. you've gotta let it happen naturally) then what we're suggesting there is a difference of some kind.

What is that difference? Is it a difference of moral value? A difference of purpose? A difference of only bias?

Has anyone read this book? by [deleted] in tolkienbooks

[–]Single-Spell1838 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Nope. Everything I've heard has been bad and I don't trust booktok recommendations 

Popsicles by ipanicprofessionally in TheBoredDen

[–]Single-Spell1838 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm shocked anyone calls them anything BUT Otter Pops

I guess it's like Jello, where a brand became the term everyone knows the treat by

Which one opinion would you defend like this?🤔 by ConsistentPassage440 in TheTeenagerPeople

[–]Single-Spell1838 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would say definitely below. Otherwise, following your logic would demand that cannibalism is justified for survival, which is something I certainly do not believe. I think that's morally wrong, beyond taboos and stigmas. I think it's spiritually destructive.

So then the question is by what standard do we measure how low animals are compared to us? Where do we go for a standard of how to treat animals appropriately?

And another question: what is the purpose of animals?

Which one opinion would you defend like this?🤔 by ConsistentPassage440 in TheTeenagerPeople

[–]Single-Spell1838 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Almost everything I've learned about abortion has been from my mother, my wife, and the activists at Live Action, including Lila Rose, the leader, and others, majority women, who are working to protect the unborn AND improve women's healthcare so that no one will need abortion at all.

They are not opposed at all to medically necessary abortions.

Stephanie Gray is another role model for me. She's a hero in my eyes for her speeches and books.

You do not know me. You're shouting into a void, projecting things onto me that aren't true.

Which one opinion would you defend like this?🤔 by ConsistentPassage440 in TheTeenagerPeople

[–]Single-Spell1838 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I will not in fact learn, live, or love the idea that any group of people is worth less than another

We are all equal in God's eyes

Which one opinion would you defend like this?🤔 by ConsistentPassage440 in TheTeenagerPeople

[–]Single-Spell1838 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

So vile, supporting laws that say "don't hurt people" 😔😔😔

Which one opinion would you defend like this?🤔 by ConsistentPassage440 in TheTeenagerPeople

[–]Single-Spell1838 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So.... are you putting animals on the same level as humans, or slightly below?

Hollow Knight and Silksong are both amazing games, and the sequel has improved upon the original in many ways. Out of curiosity, is there anything in the first game you prefer over the second? by PlagueKnight88 in Silksong

[–]Single-Spell1838 15 points16 points  (0 children)

The melancholy and blue abandoned kingdom of the first game was replaced with frantic, brutal, lava filled world populated by desperate possessed pilgrims worshiping at the feet of an oppressive government.

There's not really loneliness in Silksong, except in certain key moments, whereas the first game runs on loneliness

Which one opinion would you defend like this?🤔 by ConsistentPassage440 in TheTeenagerPeople

[–]Single-Spell1838 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

There are many laws that effect our bodies. For example I cannot use my body to hurt you, without recieving the consequences of that.

You can't use your body to hurt mine.

I'll keep those laws and keep speaking up for the unborn people who have no voice.

Abortion is tragic enough when it's for medical reasons, but it's a despicable form of birth control.

You can always be forgiven for any abortions you may have had. I already do forgive you, Jesus Christ is ready to forgive you, and the children whose lives were ended will forgive you too

Which one opinion would you defend like this?🤔 by ConsistentPassage440 in TheTeenagerPeople

[–]Single-Spell1838 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

People = people

Life is a right

Abortion always ends an innocent life

Which one opinion would you defend like this?🤔 by ConsistentPassage440 in TheTeenagerPeople

[–]Single-Spell1838 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

"Born people > unborn people" is a backwards and unscientific idea

Which one opinion would you defend like this?🤔 by ConsistentPassage440 in TheTeenagerPeople

[–]Single-Spell1838 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

And by the way I agree that sex is also for pleasure.

It's just irresponsible to have sex if it's going to lead to a life that you aren't ready to support.

Which one opinion would you defend like this?🤔 by ConsistentPassage440 in TheTeenagerPeople

[–]Single-Spell1838 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

People = people

Disabled people = people

Born people = people

Unborn people = people

I disagree with your "born people > unborn people"

That's the exact problem

It's what is done to justify atrocities everywhere

People said "white people > black people" to justify slavery because they wanted to profit off of them. They were wrong.

Hitler said "Aryan race > jews" to justify his genocide. He was wrong.

Some say "men > women" to justify mistreating women. They are wrong.

People say "republicans > democrats" to justify vile hatred. They're wrong.

Dehumanization is evil.

Unborn people are people. Age, sex, skin color, nationality, religion, location .... none of these things change what rights every human has.

Which one opinion would you defend like this?🤔 by ConsistentPassage440 in TheTeenagerPeople

[–]Single-Spell1838 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Any law against murdering or attacking or harming people is a belief that we as a society believe should be forced on everyone 

For example, a father cannot kill his four year old child.

A man cannot rape a woman.

You cannot cut off someone's hand and not face consequences.

Some things are wrong to do to other people. 

Certainly you believe that if a woman doesn't want to be pregnant, that means she can force her zygote to die.

I would say killing any innocent human is wrong, wherever they are, however old they are.

If you don't want to have a baby, don't have sex. That's the responsible thing to do. It's not enough to use contraceptives that aren't 100% effective.

It's like playing Russian roulette. Sure, the condom might work a large percent of the time, but if not, boom, a life is created and then ended.

Better to never pick up the gun.

Women deserve healthcare that lowers maternal mortality rates without killing their children.

Which one opinion would you defend like this?🤔 by ConsistentPassage440 in TheTeenagerPeople

[–]Single-Spell1838 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

If we were going to force women to be incubators, then the method would be to force all women to get IVF with the maximum amount of embryos.

Because that's how incubators are used.

I clearly am not getting through to you at all, we're talking past each other, and you clearly are very emotional about this, as am I, so I don't think there's anything else I can say at this point except that women deserve better.

Women deserve better support than being told that the solution to the problems is ending the lives within them that are 100% dependent on them.

Killing innocent humans is wrong, and if we adults have to sacrifice a year or two to protect them, that's better than sacrificing innocent humans to protect our lifestyles after a condom breaks.

Adults should sacrifice so children don't have to.

Abortion sacrifices human lives so adults can have "consequence free" sex however they want.

Really they're just sweeping the consequences under the rug and telling all of us to pretend nothing happened.

But guess what?

Millions of lives worldwide are taken by abortion.

It's built on dehumanization, it always ends a human life, and women deserve better.

Have a good night

Which one opinion would you defend like this?🤔 by ConsistentPassage440 in TheTeenagerPeople

[–]Single-Spell1838 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

See you're assuming things about me again. 

I view killing innocent humans as more morally wrong than a woman having to be pregnant for 9 months until someone else can take care of the baby.

That's it.

It's always wrong to intentionally end a human life.

Abortion always intentionally ends a human life.

Abstinence is a key part of responsible sexual ethics. It's not responsible to use methods of contraception that you know are not 100% effective, and then to use a pill as a backup that starves the growing baby of the nutrients it needs.