3RU7AL

"The activities associated with the governance of a country or area, especially the debate between parties having power." I'd say that military and political aims are very intertwined.

No I’m saying talking about it has no bearing on objectivity.

Twitter can’t be both.

That is why there is evidence given to imply intent.

That amendment would legalize all victimless crimes

The one thing I do know is that nobody knows what the F is going on. 

I can see why you would believe that, especially with such a vast array of information and seemingly contradicting religious sources and a method of study limited to just the material aspect of things but it's not really that complicated and there's been a lot of intelligent beings that have highlighted factual bits of knowledge. Once the pieces are all sorted out and put in the correct spaces we have pretty clear picture. You just need someone who can put all the pieces in the correct order or maybe you configure it yourself. 

I guess though, if the answers were handed to me, I would miss the mystery which is a significant and pleasant, sometimes exciting part of life. 

You say that as if your very wordy shoulder shrugs and pretending to know something everyone else doesn't counts as an argument, when you have literally demonstrated nothing at all.  You're not making arguments. YOu're making assertions.

They show me things I did not know. THat is how I know they are real.

Now lets pretend for a moment that God (as proposed as the origins of our existence) is not the product of wishful thinking, lack of intelligence, indoctrination, mental illness or whatever BS atheists presume and that God does exist. How do you think these presumptuous attitudes help in honest, thought provoking debate? how will this help between two people trying to solve an inquiry about this subject matter?

Our dependence is well expressed in that verse when Paul wrote about the thorn in his flesh. Paul pleaded with God three times to take it away but God told him that His power is made perfect in Paul's weakness. ... God simply wants us to surrender our inadequacy to him so that He can fill us with His strength.

But if a description isn't necessary, HOW THE HELL CAN YOU TALK ABOUT IT.

Talking about facts isn’t necessary either.

It's really not that hard to find... did you not think there were any?

Let’s make our rights real and not an illusion.

Such a way should not be pursued in the land of the free.

No it’s just that reality, a description isn’t necessary.

The first amendment absolutely gives companies like Twitter the right to censor content on their platform.

They can choose to buy Parler or not.

Amazon is backtracking a little now because they know they would lose in court.

"A person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims"

The claim that facts don’t exist without humans,

Additionally, senators don't really have to vote to convict him.

Yes, I am 100% in favor of making ALL LYING ILLEGAL. But there has to a stipulation that the facts are verifiable.

the entire "qualified immunity" is a problem.

Terrorist actually does mean a specific thing

I'm usually defending myself from a position of being treated as inferior because of my beliefs per say.

however this just brings us down the dangerous rabbit hole of identity politics.

Is segregating people by the race wise? Is limiting vocabulary on the basis of one’s race in fact racist?

Atheist forget that small fact when they try to argue that the Bible condones slavery. 

How do you support this claim?

The BOP is on you since your the one that’s adding external factors into the equation.

If I did not do any of these things - I still would not be indirectly killing people.  

There is ZERO chance that senate republicans are going to vote to convict.

Based on what?

The problem isn't the word, its a category, the problem is the connotation and criminal system.

I'm not claiming anyone is a terrorist

Like I said, she me a gov't that follows its own rules unerringly. Go ahead and complain. I'm sure they'll listen. I've stopped.

And I disagree with the practice, thus, terrorist should get civil rights. A terrorist is a criminal, just a criminal who engaged in crime of a higher degree and specific sort - I don't think that rids of us moral obligation.

Tell me, when. does a "terrorist" become an enemy combatant, held on foreign soil in a "secret prison." Do all foreigners on all foreign soils have any other right than due process when on American soil? No. And if not? No, and not even due process.

Please explain what you think "the law" is and where do you think it comes from?

Please explain how you decide who should live and who should die.