Total posts: 2,613
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
In facts, what should one strive for?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
No I'm serious. You should know I in particular am not 🚫 on here for fun and games. If you don't know me by now, you will never never never know me.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Nothing like having your own mind.
President Trump probably the only one that has his own mind in office .
Who else went unconventional, with the proper label of fake news, border protection, decrease in taxes and increase in employment?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
Just behold , look.
You're more bold than they are . Left and Right people would challenge me when I first started participating on here.Â
The excuse of them losing patience and frustration are just excuses for themselves.
I know people have dropped off of here.Â
Debate.org was lovely in comparison.
Created:
Posted in:
People dare not to challenge the big badd wolf , I.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Let's put your opinion aside, what are the facts in this subject that you can determine?
Created:
-->
@Sidewalker
Use big badd wolf that can't be challenged by you or anybody. Use that whole sentence as the pronoun.
Created:
Most of this site knows not to challenge me. They back away. Keep back from the big badd wolf .
Created:
-->
@FLRW
False Republican as they would say.
Created:
-->
@FLRW
You Republican voting in a Democrat. You're a traitor to your party.
Created:
Posted in:
Should a woman be allowed to participate in men's sports?
Should a man be permitted to participate in women's sports?
Any person looking to be transgender must have full efforts of psychoanalytic therapy and any applicable de-conversion or reverse therapy at all costs .
Now this would be for the good of the person and society particularly involving trans gender restrooms.
Thus exterminating LGBT is not hate but healing.
Created:
Thank you. Thank you readers.
Slavery as I mentioned in another topic, the 9-5 is modern day slavery, is basically obligation which has an affect over your freedom.
Freedom is not good in nature. It is neutral just as slavery.Â
Now obligation which has an affect on your freedom you can say is dominating you.
Those are the two awesome components or traits of slavery.Â
Domination and obligation. Obligating and dominating.
Straightforward enough right.
Now there are circumstances where dominating and obligating something or someone proves to be necessary in order to have a constructive conclusion.
The same is true for the opposite.
One straightforward example is the penal prison system.
It is moral and humane for society to obligate individuals that would otherwise do society wrong if not obligated or forced to be imprisoned dominating their freedom.
The same is true for the opposite.
I know slavery gets a negative connotation so it is outright considered wrong in and of itself.Â
Slavery is actually neutral but based on how you use the term, a person can see what I mean .
But the average person most likely would not use the term the way it has been in this topic.
So semantics, yes but nevertheless according to what I've said by those terms, they're either consistent or not.
They indeed are as represented here.
Created:
There's no sense in arguing over definitions just as there's no justice in arguing over words.
People use words in different ways.
So when you communicate with people, that keyword communicate, there has to be understanding of what is being said.
Simple enough right.
What happens often times is misunderstanding by assumption of what the other means by a word.
When you don't have a clear understanding, ask for it. Ask "what do you mean by that term?"
We don't get into "well you're using the wrong term or you have the incorrect definition".
We don't debate over terms and definitions because the point of words and definitions are for the use of communicating and relaying messages.
Now when contradictions are spotted with the use of the terms by the same individual, that can be pointed out and countered.
The importance of stating definitions as an introduction in a debate is to set the goalpost and foundation of an individual's position.
This isn't to be contested . There is no arguing on what the definition should be . There is no redefining it to fit the opposing side's case .
Definitions are not up for debate. Contradictions can be pointed out or definitions can be corrected according to a dictionary. This means if I say such and such dictionary says this, you verify that it does not, hence the correction. That's the end of that.
Now that we're on the subject of dictionaries, they are not the sources of the meaning of words.
The source is that which something comes from. Where do words come from?
Dictionaries. No. Encyclopedias. No
From the language, audible language from the tongue. The people.
This means the very first native tongue used to communicate to another uttered a language made up by words , sentences, phrases, jargons along with verbal gestures.
This communicated reality, what was occuring in it and the world around one person conveying it to another. Dialogue is conveying the life and energy of the world around two persons or more .
This world, reality through a system of whatever means has been processed with a series of labels and identifiers.Â
Everything that has a name to be identified is done so via language to communicate references to specific and distinct objects.Â
To further communicate , expand and expound the identity of things, more words are put together which are basically definitions.Â
So language and all terms are socially derived.
Socially woven into societal constructed fabric.
The time when recording came along with the advent of writing, the languages were written and documented.
Society grows and continues record and documentation as the language expands. But where do these documents and records acquire the information?
I think I just laid it all out . The document which is nominally the dictionary today references the use of a word commonly among the users themselves. In some, I can't say all but in some what is also recorded are the idiosyncrasies.
Now because it's recorded, does it then become a valid word? No.
It had to exist in a valid state first before being printed . Remember what I just laid out.
Does it become valid because of majority consensus?
No. Dictionaries can have uncommon usages as well.
When someone says "that's not a word", then what is it?
Is it letters tied together?
Yes. Well that's what a word is.
What really is the case is a person uses a word, constructs a word as it was done from the foundation but it has not been reported or recorded officially.
Â
Why is a word valid as soon as it exists or made up by the user?
It's because it meets the validating or correct parameters of what a word is and is meant for.
A word is made up of letters to convey a message or some sort of communication. An array of words make up a definition to further in-depth communicate a single word.
This is all the extent of what a conversation, a dialogue, even a monologue delivers.
Speaking back to the consensus. An agreement on a definition doesn't make the definition valid.
Why?
The definition simply is already valid before an existing agreement of multiple individuals .
Then it becomes arbitrary. What are we going to do?
Play the numbers game and see which number beats out who last for validity, no .
That is not the foundation for validity. It is not the criteria for where validity begins.Â
I understand why people argue definitions and cite a dictionary publication against another.
People believe it starts with a dictionary. It starts with consensus or a majority or common use. It's popular, it's much might so it must be right. No again.
This is not the source. People in error hold it as the source of language. Therefore it is held as "be all end all". No . Over and over ,no. Wrong.
The source exists outside of the dictionary. The source existed before the book did. The foundation of language was founded first in order to put into the book. Persons are the origins of language.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
Mass suicide is beneficial for the environment. What environment?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Owen_T
Animals non humans and humans have different values for different folks. Some are more content with killing people than animals non humans.
Some are against harming their pet but for consuming pets of others.
Society is liberal, no secret.
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
"There are lots of things that I believe should not be changed, "
Is that evil?
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
Is there anything you want to remain as law or in policy never to change?
Created:
-->
@FLRW
So you'll sit this one out.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
So there's no right or wrong candidate to vote for.
Created:
Why do you particularly vote democrat or republican?
Why are you non partisan or libertarian?
What will it take to convert you to the opposing party?
Will it be with you voting in the wrong party?
Nine times out of ten, you will be casting the wrong vote .
You were told so and afterwards you will remember this post.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
What does the scripture say?
"A soft answer turneth away wrath: but grievous words stir up anger."
"He that hath knowledge spareth his words"
"Even a fool, when he holdeth his peace, is counted wise: and he that shutteth his lips is esteemed a man of understanding."
Even this can apply to you .
"Even a fool, when he holdeth his peace, is counted wise: and he that shutteth his lips is esteemed a man of understanding."
You yes so just hold it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
The word was spread . As you continue to read on in Mark see:
"9 When Jesus rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had driven seven demons. 10 She went and told those who had been with him and who were mourning and weeping. "
The gospels will vary, that's nominal. But all have similar but varying accounts, individual points of view .
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tradesecret
Yes he is just as the scripture says.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
Do you have something in the scriptures you think is a contradiction?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
I don't know nothing about that, can't speak on what others may do.
From me , it's strictly all seriousness and education.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
I'll address what you say after you answer this question.
"Hey are you the one that believes the lie Jesus wasn't mentioned in the old testament?"
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
Do you still hold pedophilia views , in support of pedophilia?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Hey are you the one that believes the lie Jesus wasn't mentioned in the old testament?
Created:
Posted in:
Don't anybody have what they think is a biblical contradiction?
Do I have to make an example?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
So what?
Just because you don't agree with what you think love should be , it's not necessarily a contradiction. It's just against your thought process.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
Oh I'm not skilled at using an AK47 so I probably be worse than the attacker. But you don't have to agree now just smoke on it.
Created:
Posted in:
One more chance.
-List or state what you believe is a biblical contradiction.
Please offer the book, chapter and verse and briefly state in your own words what the conflict is .
After you receive your explanation, you can question it or accept the reconciliation offered to you.
Created:
I got nothing here that's contradicting here.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tradesecret
I think your answer is yes , to the question, bottomline.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
Just because I don't give you the answer you want , I'm still going to give my best answer the way I see it.
The problem is, you just look for hypotheticals. Doesn't prove anything of what I do in the real situation.
So I'm going to be honest and say I don't know what I'd do in a situation until I'm actually in it. I can't foretell the future. I don't know like I said.Â
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tradesecret
Is forgiving of sins not just of God?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
I don't know. Which one am I skilled with the least?
I'm not skilled very well with a handgun so trying to pick up machine gun, I'd probably do worst than the attacker.
Hey, if you think a gun is the best and only way to kill somebody, unlike Bruce Lee , you limit yourself.
But then when you don't know martial art, you go to martial firearms.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
Depends on how you look at it. If I don't believe you're not guilty, I have made a judgment. If I believe you are guilty, I have made a judgment.
It's the same judgment. Both statements are the inverse of the other. It's just half full half empty. Either way you have a positive in both those statements. Which is the "guilty" portion which amounts to the same. Half full, you still have half a container. Half empty, you still have half a container. It amounts to the same value.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
I'm going to defend myself from somebody using a gun or knife. That attacker is not harmless because the person doesn't have a gun. A gun is not the only way to kill somebody. It is what it is.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
Hey, if you see people on the bus, do you see people on the bus?
Watch, I get no response .
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
That's up to the individual person. My point is on believing not guilty or not believing guilty.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
I don't know. If he sucked with using firearms but is a skilled butcher, then what?
Why would I play would you rather with an attacker?
He can be deadly with either unless you, which none of you can disprove not knowing the assailant.
Created: