3RU7AL

In fact, the government doesn't provide a marketable service

Case in point: it was incumbent upon the Ukrainian residents to flee their homes rather than oppose Russia's invasion.

Arguing that one is obligated to pay the government taxes is like arguing one is obligated to pay a local mob "protection money."

IF humans are worth preserving as a species THEN it is worth affording humans basic necessities and human dignity. 

Two whole people, as you continue to pat people who are anti-theists on their back. Don't bother adding insult to injury. Everyone who posts here knows better.

There would have to of been some.. "  off the chart gullibility levels  " 

It's sad to think the only way atheists can be content is if theists no longer exist.  Maybe you guys can come up with a way to take us out then you could have a world that you feel you can be happy and free in. It's sad to think that you can't go through your whole day without thinking about the fact that somebody somewhere doesn't think like you. How horrible it must be when you have an immediate family member like a spouse or a child who has any interest in spirituality that you have to look at them and talk to them and have meals with them when they're just disgusting theists. That you sit while you're eating and look at them and think someday you people will no longer exist. But I'm evil and I'm horrible and I'm lower than you. It would be funny if it wasn't probably the scariest thing if people took any time to really sit and think about it.

No ones existence is guaranteed or justified.

Either we all merit basic necessities and human dignity or none of us do.

I do not conflate "merit basic necessities" with "human dignity."

Since you insinuated that some humans (specifically poor ones) deserve to be deprived of basic necessities and therefore life. You have essentially insinuated that some humans are not worth keeping alive. This is a pretty direct way of communicating how you would gauge human worth. 

You can picture johnny doing a google search in the year 3000.  (  WHAT WHERE PEOPLE LIKE IN THE YEAR 2000 )   

A slight chuckle will occur.   

When they read  .    ( They believed in gods back then ) 

Thus making what we thought of very little importance.

Capitalism is pro government but pro a certain kind of government. The kind, not to put to fine a point on it, which does not force them to adopt ethical buisness practices or to take responsibility for the health amd safety of its workers but which does shelter corperations and the financial officers of corperations from financial loss and legal consequences. 

Only the known exists?

The entirety of my experience and experiential knowledge as limited by human epistemology. I presume and operate under the assumption that this experience represents an actual physical universe which is to the best of my understanding a sparce collection of physical bodies puncuating the vast silent vacuum of turbulent energy fluctuations that is expanding at relativistic speeds. Expanding into what (or if that is even more than a nonsense notion) is unknown not only to me but also to the brightest and best informed minds on the frontiers of cosmological research. 

asking for someone's ancestry would likewise be, on your worldview, a violation of privacy,

A rule change seems fine, just carefully and concisely worded. I really don't have the energy right now to launch a referendum, but anyone else may.

or just cash gifts in general?

what I thought this was common knowledge  ;/

Rather than income, I'm more interested in taxation based on net worth. That's where the greatest inequality (and revenue) is. Though I don't know if taxation based on net worth is viable.

Doesn’t change the fact it is poisonous and unhealthy. 

Well you could say he’s wanting to find a greater reality / truth.

why bother with phaneronism in the first place when it comes to solipsism?

Does the subconscious equally exist?

Alright, how does phaneronism address the subconscious? Or does it skip it altogether?

He finds himself in a box with pre-existent notions, ideas, concepts, etc. Would you consider that a flaw?

Does the subconscious exist? 

https://odysee.com/@LOGICZOMBIE:0/1969:6

What’s this link without context? A way to make cheap shots at me? If only I had the same lack of self-awareness. 

What is the “self”? Is it just your mind, or is it everything else as well.

yeah i'm gonna have to block you. You are honestly delusional. I challenged your ESFJ conclusion.

You are taking the anomaly and applying it to the set. If your standard, being looks, is what determines gender, then 

Self-described CONSERVATIVES are the ones who are more likely to "MISGENDER" someone.

Are you honestly suggesting that LIBERALS are the ones who are more likely to call the cops on someone in a public bathroom for "wearing the wrong clothes" ?

I never remotely suggested it at all, I think you are becoming lost in your bad faith arguments to the point that you're quoting yourself in order to misconstrue what I said.

Is your point just that you are limited or something? You just said S has the opposite to what you said is 'classic S' ...

You haven't replied to over 90% of what I wrote to you in the past few posts,

Self-described CONSERVATIVES are the ones who are more likely to "MISGENDER" someone.

Let's say I am indeed claiming that these cisgendered women are entitled to be mistaken for men.

How can you say I am wrong if you do not refer to the fact that they are female or what precise way did you determine that they have always gone by female because a birth-certificate mentions sex, not gender, even though it uses the term 'gender' it is clearly based on the genitalia alone.

I am curious if you are pushing for they/them pronouns or transition to she/her and he/him pronouns.

So all people who call themselves conservatives are ESFJ and have weak perception of reality? Literally all?

I'm asking where you draw the idea that she was mistaken as a woman without harming the trans agenda.

the problem with that is it doesn't defend trans people.

Why didn't you reply to the rest of what I wrote, are you okay with your reading comprehension?

they can spot a man from a woman fairly easily IRL?

how do we know for sure that the people telling her to get out were mistakenly calling her a him/he?

Sure, it's distinct but it's also in the category of self-identifiable aspects that others can say 'no you're not' but if anything MBTI is even more difficult to justify defying the self-identification of as it is psychology and not overt biology, better luck next time though.

many older (and or taller and or overweight and or muscular) women (who are born as women and also identify as women) can be routinely mistaken for men and face repeated harassment in public restrooms

Give us your source.

Also I am curious of something since you cowered out of replying to my quoted solid retorts to your 'self determination' BS, why is it when I self-identify as INTP you get triggered and need to force me to 'admit' to being ESTJ or whatever it is you think I am?