3RU7AL

Why are you arguing as if I’m equating the two to one another, I’m not. Although you could make an exception if both parties agree to the middle ground.

Yes, but I didn’t say that’s the same as common ground.

If you truly believed this you wouldn’t continue to engage in this banter.

meet you halfway with 50

And, if the vaccine prevents neither its contraction nor its spread, why is it being recommended even to those who are at low risk of dying from it?

This is not true for the Covid-19 vaccine, mRNA vaccines are a new type of vaccine to protect against infectious diseases. To trigger an immune response, many vaccines put a weakened or inactivated germ into our bodies. Not mRNA vaccines. Instead, they teach our cells how to make a protein—or even just a piece of a protein—that triggers an immune response inside our bodies. That immune response, which produces antibodies, is what protects us from getting infected if the real virus enters our bodies.

And this is not concerning? Tell me: how does an mRNA vaccine "teach" a cell?

No it’s not, let’s say your dealing with a lunatic whose goal is to kill 100 people are you willing to be transigent in regards to your views and say he meet you halfway with 50?

which is what I was alluding to when I said it’s self refuting.

And it's already known from Darwin's studies that species need stressors to learn and grow and evolve. The reason why humans became smarter than chimps is because the chimps kicked humans out of the forest.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktkjUjcZid0

What if your grandparents made a contract with a bunch of people to give them a bunch of land they could presumably hunt and farm on (so they could stay alive) and then changed the deal and gave them much less land than they had promised and also polluted the water supply and killed off the animals.

You didn't do any of this.

But you know, hypothetically, what if your grandparents did this.

Does the passage of time magically make "wrong" things "normal"?

How could they have changed the deal if they made a contract, at least unknowingly to the other party? The stipulations should have been made known to each party involved before the deal was final. That is, if the other party did not want less land and a polluted water supply, then they could've opted out. 

Let's say there's a kid, and their mother gives him 2 pieces of candy, while telling him to give 1 of the pieces of candy to their other sibling in another room.

The first child eats both pieces of candy.

The stealing his siblings candy was an evil necessary to satisfy his sweet tooth and greed.

Or let's say there's a child at their blind parents death bed, and the parent asks if their other child who happens to be mute is there as well.

The child who is there 'lies and says yes they are.

Parent dies happy.

The lie was an evil necessary to satisfy the childs desire to make his parent's death happier by thinking their other mute child was there as well.

Charles Blow in his new book "the devil you know: A black power manifesto" This guy is thinking generations ahead of others.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b75aBjXtGbc

In a few thousand years, MAYBE fit Humans can be selected to exist in a Utopian world. The current genes will NOT allow it though. Not without an extinction event as shown with the mice experiment.

Good video though about how genes change over a million years.

Consider this experiment in a Utopian society void of any meaningful purpose for life.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5m7X-1V9nOs

According to whom? Your sock puppet?

If you don't want to call that then please provide an alternative term.

Just because some sports star or movie star or rock star is "popular" doesn't mean that it's my personal favorite.

No but if your of the belief that EVERYBODY should be in AGREEMENT in regards to this stars popularity then it’s hypocritical to say that when in the next breath you DISAGREE with them. You see it’s not the DISAGREEMENT that’s the hypocrisy it’s the fact that you preached AGREEMENT and went against just that.

You can't have socialism or communism without a strong democracy in place

Why should I dare not mention Taosim? A little testy, yeah?

The problem is contradiction on his part, like how are you gonna argue in favor of agreeing on terms right after rejecting the dictionary that has many terms people agree on (hence why there usage is so popular).

Doesn’t change the fact that you contradicted yourself with your statement.

There is no such thing as "private property" in the united states.

Only for the ultra-rich.

Peons like you and me are fucked.

Taxation is Theft, just like someone stealing your money

The "protest" was funded by elite farmholders exploiting loopholes in the law that give no property rights to their competition. California is riddled with laws that have exemptions instead of universal property rights. The elites in California have the strongest property rights of all. Why do you think they are there?

Why do you think the Middle -Class with no access to equal property rights are fleeing California?

Ok, I like where you're going with this.

Would you perhaps say, INACTION IS NEVER IMMORAL?

Yes, I would.

Do you understand the definition of "peasant" is basically "NOT-a-land-owner"?

So it was a Marxist revolt?

Modern Marxism.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNJjBC_w-oI

If you are labeled "rich" by a Marxist government, you have no property rights.

Did French peasants seize the property of the rich?

Or were they just protecting their own land and own property?

Fourms have to be open for everyone to speak their minds.  If something objectionable gets said on the fourm, the site is not in trouble.

"opposites" only "exist" in abstraction.

Not according to most Eastern and Western philosophy, with or without quotes. Want to try under the Northerners? Well, in that case, the blues were opposed by the grays...

It is a delusion which attempts to diminish the evils perpetrated on select individuals under the guise of a collective benefit. It is as cognitively dissonant as the notion of "the greater good."

Modern society is based on money which you get from a job. So if you tell people you need to work to survive then yes it is an evil. 

What is the opposite of tree

Really? Assuming your tree is alive, a dead tree. 

Mathematics? Formulae whose elements do not equate, like most alleged syllogisms. Come on, is this a serious question? Go find your Tau to teach yin yang. The idea of opposition is so basic, it's a sidewalk trip.

Do you believe it is a "moral good" to let someone starve to death while you have more than you need?

One can't "let" someone starve. That presumes that one has a responsibility to the nourishment of others. (I'm fairly certain you know where I can extend the logic of this rationale.) And does one's need really qualify one's claim to a possession or mitigate the theft of that possession? One's need will always be determined by him or herself, not that necessity is necessary to establish a claim.

Stealing a loaf of bread because you're starving MIGHT BE a "necessary evil".

That's just prioritizing survival. It doesn't mitigate the nature of the action, which is wrong.

Well the dictionary has terms that consensus agrees on, I guess that’s why there usage is so popular.

I don’t get the distinction between a “necessary evil” and just plain evil.

Well stated. "Necessary evil" is nothing more than a cognitively dissonant prose which attempts to justify doing evil.

The primary goal of KayKayKay is killing of people of color.

Declaring 1975 “Year Zero” in the country, Pol Pot isolated Kampuchea from the global community. He resettled hundreds of thousands of the country’s city-dwellers in rural farming communes and abolished the country’s currency. He also outlawed the ownership of private property and the practice of religion in the new nation. [**] [**]

Pol Pot’s regime also executed thousands of people it had deemed as enemies of the state. Those seen as intellectuals, or potential leaders of a revolutionary movement, were also executed. Legend has it, some were executed for merely appearing to be intellectuals, by wearing glasses or being able to speak a foreign language.

aBoLISh cAPiTaliSM

there is an immediate consequence to inflation that other countries can avoid for years.

Monetary meritocracy? Sure. May the most stable currency prosper.

If you're getting vaccinated every five years, what has the vaccine accomplished? If it's to bolster one's immune system, then there are alternatives that don't require intravenous introduction of an infection/disease/syndrome. 

In a meritocracy void of equitable outcomes, businesses fail.