3RU7AL

Colorado would have standing as it has a duty to protect its citizens.

Kinda like how Trump fully repaying a European bank was zero quantifiable material harm to New York?

Are you saying I am the same as was what is not me? What are you trying to ask here?

Perhaps your anger is directed at the transgender community because you feel excluded.

but that doesn't mean things didn't get worse.

That is not true. If you know God exists, then you can reason to those things by which a God could, would, should, etc reveal Himself.

I disagree with Spinosa for this reason.

for reasons (A), (B), and (C)

For instance there is a presumption that anyone who violates any criminal statute has injured the public. That's why the court case is THE STATE vs THE ACCUSED. Yet for some reason you thought there would be no legal standing for West Virginia to prosecute Obama for murder.

The problem with ideology is that it becomes stagnant and self destructive.

Of course they do! Their idea is to destroy ideas.

One lunatic claiming he is a god is a problem for that lunatic and a few others who interact with him. 50,000 people claiming the lunatic is a god is a problem for a whole lot more than 50,000 people.

I have not actually found any solid atheistic arguments.

When it can't identify reality, there is no chance for the rest.

suppression of ideas in favor of materialism

but if they start to say things like "that piece of silicone makes me a nursing mother" or "that piece of gold makes me a god" there is a problem.

Make parents actually parent and provide emotional stability to their kids. 

Get back to teaching the basics like in scouts: camping, starting a fire, living off the land, firearm (hunting) training.

Make sports competitive as well as education vs everyone getting a damn participation trophy. 

Kids need to learn success as well as failure and learn from the latter, not cry about it and seek other losers who cry when they lose and create alternate realities (alphabet soup) to make themselves feel better. 

Emotional discomfort is all it is. People as of late are simply emotionally (psychologically) damaged. Most leaning towards the alphabet soup (namely trans, nonbinary, etc.) have been emotionally damaged. Mental and/or physical abuse. Sexual abuse. Torment of some kind. They feel despondent. Detached. Peers aren't understanding, so they find a group that would and that group is part of the alphabet soup with open arms to corrupt a new member into believing a fake reality because none of them can accept the real word (reality). 

First, by making it socially, legally, and culturally completely unacceptable. In other words, ZERO tolerance policy.

I am at a loss to understand why anybody gives a damn and am truly mystified by how many people get all bunged up about it. 

How do we fix this to avoid the dysphoria cases?

I'm doubtful that there is an alternative,

I try to focus on what is not me.

Are you an atheist?

Which was only meant to consider the process of internal consideration.

Wherein logic and engineering are not necessarily applicable.

legal standing is perfectly logical and easily determined

You think so huh?

Then why is this a question:

also, why would west virginia care at all about drone strikes ??

 if this is true then Biden can do whatever the hell he wants.

So you believe in "legal standing" but not "qualified immunity" when both are arbitrary inventions of courts.

So should West Virginia be allowed to convict Obama or not?

If there is no shield, why can't West Virginia go after Obama for drone strikes? Why can't Brian Kemp be put on trial for breach of duty? The mayor of Seattle for sedition?

So in order for that hypothetical to even occur we’re already imagining a corrupt administration, and the remedy for this is to ensure these future corrupt administrations cannot be prosecuted?

• didn't know about
  

But calling the police to prevent a murder is an example of a situation where none of these criteria apply. You have no excuse for actively chosing to allow a murder.

I am talking morally speaking. If you could prevent a murder without incurring yourself harm, but CHOSE to be passive instead, then you are MORALLY CULPABLE in my view.

I learn a lot, but my goals didnt really change, ever.

I think my mind is too great to be affected by any circumstance,

Philosophically, everything depends upon how one looks at it.

Can humans truly act selflessly?

So if a stranger is getting murdered, and you did not call the police, then you are not morally culpable for the murder being successful? I don't think so. Passivity is also a choice.

There is no sufficient evidence of any god(s). One cannot say that no god(s) could exist (that is a black swan fallacy) but many god claims can be dismissed as logically contradictory.

Basically, if your moral code is more compelling, you align with that, but if your personal feelings are more compelling, you acquiesce to those?

 communism is always systemic oppression

If there's a train going at 5 and all u have to do is pull a lever where it changes course and kills only 1... it's immoral not to pull the lever even tho ur action resulted in someone's death

I think they boil down to whether the ends don't justify the means, or whether proportionalism is moral. I think dogmatism goes too far with trolley problems and things like terrorists and torture and abortion etc

I won't choose either one, but hide and do nothing, let the track decide. The survivor should not feel any guilt from knowing that their life came at somebody else's expense.