3RU7AL

(IFF) you can stop child abuse and you DON'T stop child abuse (THEN) you are guilty of being a party to child abuse

well no, it is the result of mans actions and does not involve God

Knowing the consequences for certain is indistinguishable from intending those consequences.

i am concerned

it isnt horrifying, free will isnt freedom your talking about

aside from not being fully FDA approved, there's no good reason not to get it. every credible scientist says it's safe for almost everyone. there's a chance of death if you dont get the shot, but there's almost no chance of death if you do get the shot. 

i expect a lot of non sense in this thread. probably a bunch of conspiracy theories. a whole lot of "consensus science isn't necessarily true even though i trust my own versions of authority". a lot of saying things without really saying anything. 

Did you win your 2nd attempt here?

1. Those stumbling to slaughter others
   
2. Those stumbling to be slaughtered
   

Which do you think is the best grammatical interpretation for that verse and why?

1. Those stumbling to slaughter others
   
2. Those stumbling to be slaughtered
   

Which do you think is the best grammatical interpretation for that verse and why?

Who exactly do you have to "justify" or "excuse" your action to ?

• God.
  

The only exception I can see as possibly being justified would be if the unborn child puts the life of the mother in jeopardy. But those are the exception and must be approached individually based on the situation.

Why do you think different factions of christians have historically slaughtered each other ?

Is there one specific interpretation of the "ethics" outlined in the holy scriptures that is superior to any other ?

Yes, there is one correct interpretation of every biblical text. It is superior because it is correct, but it requires a consistent method of interpretation. Consistency is typically where people go wrong, and that error has led to disastrous results as you pointed out. But that shows a problem with the people not the text.

Without having placed this definition under strict scrutiny, I would personally use this one as biblically accurate:

• Killing a human being without justification or excuse.
  

If every life has inherent value, it is wrong for me to murder someone else. But it is also wrong for me to end my own life without justification or excuse. Discomfort, discontent, or poverty is not a justification to end someone else's life, nor my own.

The mask mandate is a great example because while medical masks such as N95's in indoor settings are effective, clothe masks do little, if anything at all and wearing masks outside has been completely unnecessary throughout the entire situation outside of extreme situations like a packed outdoor concert or something. Yet, many blue areas implemented outdoor mask mandates  and as far as I know nobody ever mandated N95 or other medical masks instead of clothe masks. This is just as unscientific as proclaiming that masks as a concept are universally worthless, but many of the same people that "trust the science" dutifully line up to wear their masks outside on a bike ride. Just as the rights bias leads many to believe masks are worthless, the lefts bias leads many to way over emphasize the importance with things like outdoor mask mandates or mask mandates for vaccinated people. At the end of the day so much is poisoned by the culture war, virtue signaling, etc that people can hardly even think straight.

It is impossible to generalize this impact.

Your mood and at least one of your primary motivation schemes (your model of sexual desire) are affected by your private habits.

Your mood and your model of sexual desire affect how you interact with others.

I don't deny this. I'm asking can the influence be identified and pinpointed to masturbation?

(IFF) a competent adult wishes to painlessly opt-out (THEN) what moral theory would deny them this option ?

Simply put, suicide is murdering yourself.

Per post #171, the Bible is my source of ethics. It is objective since it is outside myself. In a general sense, it functions similar to the U.S. Constitution.

Of course, the "no just reason" part is where we deal with the extreme cases like rape or medical issues, but those are special cases.

Noun

a small garden ornament in the form of a bearded man with a pointed hat.

I see what you mean. But I will have to disagree with you on that. 

But I have a foundation for what I believe is right and wrong that is outside myself.

And I'm not desperate to save anyone.

The ability to control oneself is the nature of your will as a conscious being

I find the free will debate to be ultimately pointless. If we don't have free will, then whatever it is, is something no one has ever experienced before. Therefore not only do we lose nothing, but we don't even know what it is we are supposed to have lost.

Voluntary suicide should be an option.

For homeless people? Because they're poor?

or is it the zygote's/embryo's/fetus's physiological underdevelopment which renders it incapable of surviving outside of its mother's womb that causes its death?

the core disagreement in this debate will always be the question of whether we think of a fetus as a CITIZEN or not.

You have to be a human being before you can be a citizen

That means 99.633% of the un-vaccinated have survived after being exposed to this virus for almost two years.

and yet 99% of all COVID deaths are of the unvaccinated.

Being unvaccinated does not necessarily mean you will certainly die.

Would you consider it "immoral" to "deport" the gnome ?

A gnome is an inanimate object. If an inanimate object is causing harm, then I don't care if you throw it out.

Since I only care about people, then assuming it could die, I wouldn't care because a gnome is non-human.

This is a misinterpretation of the Abrahamic religions. It's not a sin to masturbate; the sin stems from not obliging by one's duty to impregnate one's dead brother's spouse. It centers on the story Onan who did not want to impregnate his dead brother's widow and thereby wasted his seed.

Let me rephrase: can the influence of one's masturbation and it's alleged impact on others be identifiable as a result of one's masturbation?

So you'd prefer to pay $40,000.00 per year per prisoner ?

No. Our current prison system is unbiblical, but that is a whole different conversation.

But I find your attitude toward children that might grow up in adversity concerning. Especially given your concern for homeless people. I imagine you wouldn't say to one of them, "It sucks that you're homeless. Too bad your parents didn't abort you." Should kids in third world countries be aborted?

Your "will" is a slave to your desires and instincts.

The physical body is a slave to everything it desires, craves or needs but consciousness as it exists independent of the physical body runs parallel to that fact. That's why you can resist such urges and stretch the body to its limits....albeit you can only resist for so long before the physical body can no longer sustain itself. But you can see for certain how consciousness is free of the limits of the physical body, there's many ways you can demonstrate this. Mind over matter has been displayed time and time again. The point here is to cast light on the reality and distinction between the physical body vs the soul (consciousness).

If there was no distinction you would have literally no ability to control oneself, constrain, restrain, discipline, wait, resist, abstain or be patient. All those factors show how your will is separate from any mechanical instincts.

Consider the process Doc.

How random can random  be?

Ultimately a random choice is an internal choice, subject to internal data analysis.

More like a snap decision perhaps?

If there were values to control the freedom, then there would be no sexual undertones today. Take a look at vietnam. It bans pornography and cites the reason being " it is against the values of the Vietnamese people". THAT is what needs to be done, lets get rid of this whole "freedom" and "live and let live" attitude

i am arguing that free will compatibilism EXISTS, it isnt inheritably good nor evil, its free will

That is trying to fight the natural way you are born.

are you saying that people can not make a random choice?

How do you know that? It sure appears that way, but where does cause and effect end and the "will" begin?

i have literally no idea what on earth you are saying

Free will can be calculated in advance,

But the fact of the matter is that you value the result so much you are willing to override the discomfort of waking up early with the results. 

Consider the following example. Not a lot of people like working out (the act of lifting weights), but almost everyone loves the result, that is, health and looks. However, as human beings, we are able to weigh and judge and action in it's entirety. This is further proven through the fact that people often take vaccinations despite the physical discomfort of doing so. The reason people get their jabs is because despite them not "wanting" the pain of the shot, they weigh the goods and find that doing so is a larger benefit, i.e something they want. 

P2. Being forced to do something is not illustrative of free will.

When you are forced to do something, you are free to not trust the person to force you but you chose to trust them and do what they say. 

Forcing an unwed teen to give birth without offering any sort of safety-net is only going to "punish" the child (that you seem to care so much about).

Personally, I see the death penalty as a much more severe punishment for the child than growing up poor.

The government is not obligated to convince people to obey the law at the taxpayers' expense.