Shila

--> @Shila

The wealthiest 10% of American households now own 89% of all U.S. stocks, a record high that highlights the stock market's role in increasing wealth inequality. The top 1% gained over $6.5 trillion in corporate equities and mutual fund wealth during the pandemic, according to the latest data from the Federal Reserve.

Owning stocks is a way to defer paying taxes.

Which income brackets pay no taxes on the dividends received from or sale of their stocks? 

You could just read the article.

It’s half true because Rubio (not Desantis) voted for a much smaller package, so technically he voted for Sandy relief but it was clearly politics because the reasons he gave for not voting for the bigger package did represent what was in the bill.

--> @coal

"I'm guessing your parents still spank/whip/discipline you?"

I dont see how that helps your case, but then again I am not a psychopath and I dont understand psychopaths like you.

--> @Public-Choice

A baby is the same. You volunteered and signed the contract to take care of it should the situation arise. Just like the hospitals sign the contract to take care of the other people.

Just like all of your other examples, hospitals can change their mind -- they can deny someone service even if they already promised it. Individual employees can also quit and find new jobs. Contracts can be nullified. If they can't, they're prison sentences. 

So if a hospital worker can consent to working and then say "never mind, I want to stop", how can a pregnant person who consented to being pregnant say "never mind I want to stop"?

Can you name another instance where a person, once they agree to something, is not legally allowed to change their mind?

--> @Shila

Other than this reference in John, do you have any evidence that this supposed practice actually existed? There is nothing in Jewish law that involves releasing someone found guilty of a crime, at Passover or at any other time.

Of course, crucifiction wasn't allowed under Jewish law and the judicial methods bear no resemblance to Jewish law, so a random non-Jewish reference seems equally useful.

--> @Shila

to further clarify

objects are objective

your PREFERENCE for objects is SUBJECTIVE

--> @Shila

Stephen wrote: FACT. There was never any such Jewish custom. If you insist to the contrary, I would like you to produce the evidence that supports your claim other than the bible.

The Bible quotes Pilate referring to this custom.

Read what I have wrote:

So am I to believe that interracial organ transplants have many more complications than within-race transplants because of a socioeconomic concept?

Do we prescribe BiDil to only black people because of a socioeconomic concept from the 16th century? Don’t kid yourself

Let’s just be honest with each other here: I know that you don’t care that white characters are being purposely replaced. You might even actively support it as many liberals do. But don’t try to spew out these liberal talking points that are entirely based on an egalitarian fever dream.

It’s fine that you don’t care about these characters being replaced, but don’t try to cloak it in these arguments saying a clearly white character isn’t white. Don’t pretend to be naive and say this isn’t happening

so anyone who disagrees with you is a psychopath? 

--> @Swagnarok

Life is gambles, and we're all players, it seems.

-> @Shila

Jesus was perhaps, from a region, spoke a language, was someone's son, and was probably taught a deistic fantasy ideology which he decided was important.

Sort of a very typically conditioned human.

And we agree that he was not the biological son of a GOD, but the biological son of a carpenter.

Good, we have reached common ground.

--> @Shila

how can i be "objective about the religion i choose" ?

Pick the objects you like in a religion before choosing the religion to follow. Be objective.

If you believe dead Jews can forgive your sins pick Christianity.

If you like virgins pick Islam.

If you like your current life and want to return to it pick Hinduism.

you've only listed SUBJECTIVE criteria

--> @Shila

Nope. There was no insurrection at that point in time. This insurrection had already happened, and this is what they were all on trial for. The bible clearly states that there HAD been an insurrection- past tense.  And that Barabas was one of those that had committed insurrection "WITH HIM", Jesus.

Wrong again. (1) The city mentioned here is Jerusalem. (2)  The population of that city didn't even know who Jesus was. (3) Barabbas was a zealot and a murder of Romans.  Who had Jesus murdered? 

(1) There is absolutely no evidence concerning dispensation offered by Rome to Jewish zealot murderers. It is rubbish that this was any type of Jewish custom.

It is more likely that this was the gospel writer are alluding to the two goats of Yom Kippur as told in Leviticus.  

FACT. There was never any such Jewish custom. If you insist to the contrary, I would like you to produce the evidence that supports your claim other than the bible.

I have said my theory is that the turning of the tables was a lot more than just a girly hissy fit thrown by Jesus. I believe it was a full-blown rebellion. And it was this that had forced the Romans hand and led to the arrest of all involved to the delight of many of Jewish the high priesthood.

 I don't know how old you are shila, but name calling the high priesthood would be the last reason they had to want Jesus gone. The Priesthood had a lot to lose if Jesus was to become king priest. They were puppet priests put in place by Rome.  It was a false and corrupt priesthood.

--> @Shila

so, basically, "objective morality" boils down to "personal preference"

You have to be objective about the religion you choose so you can abide by  its morality.

how can i be "objective about the religion i choose" ?

Being human in origin does not make [a] human being.

A human liver cell (take any organ for that matter/example), when analyzed, is human in origin, contains DNA identifying it as human and the genetic makeup allowing one to determine the kind of tissue that it is (i.e., what organ it is) within the human organism (and whether it is male or female). That cell =/= [a] human being. 

A zygote =/= [a] human being

A blastocyst =/= [a] human being

An embryo =/= [a] human being

An unviable 15 week fetus =/= [a] human being.

Potentiality =/= Actuality

Never has. Never will. 

-> @Shila

>@TWS1405

-->

@Shila

-->@TWS1405

TWS1405 you were trained to use a gun to kill humans.

Irrelevant red herring fallacy.

You defined human being as:  =/= [a] human being (actuality). FACT!

Quoting out of context, and inaccurate quoting. That is NOT what I said.

Check your post#152.

You posted: Cellular life =/= [a] human being.

I don't need to. I know what I wrote. You clearly did not since you misquoted me. 

Cellular life =/= [a] human being. That is a factually accurate statement. A zygote =/= [a] human being. Neither does a blastocyst, embryo, unviable fetus, or any other living cell within the human organism =/= [a] human being

A zygote, a fetus, an infant,

Are they not all human?

Not all to develop in that direction?

Do I not value humans and people?

how do i know which flavor of religion to choose ?

so, basically, "objective morality" boils down to "personal preference"

The pro-life position is predicated on biology and embryology, not religion. 

-> @TWS1405

How it works. Clown.

For sure, I expected nothing better from you.

Do you think a nuclear war is worth having a Ukraine that is aligned with the USA?

--> @Shila

DeSantis will be seen as begging for federal handouts.

Yes— by those who vote for his opponent… who will lose…

That is why religions are seen as the true custodians of morality.

how do i know which flavor of religion to choose ?

-> @SupaDudz

This is simply not true. If there were to be an user who constantly troll voted, obviously there is action done and has been action done in the past. 

• This is false. There are two examples of this currently. FLRW and Shila. Nothing, to my knowledge has been done to either of them as a consequence. 
  
• Apart from this I am not seeing any cogent response to these arguments. Why isn't casting a troll vote a penalty enough to warrant removing voting permissions? What is the argument that people ought not to lose certain freedoms for committing violations of established regulations. You label this as "authoritarian," however it seems like the foundation for any civil society. 
  

--> @Best.Korea

I think children are the most universally oppressed people on the planet. 

The pro-corporeal replies here have practically proven that convenience/comfort over adults is always valued over what actually helps a child grow into a healthy, functioning adult. 

I also think there's a bit of Stockholm Syndrome going on with most adults, because if we honestly admitted how much terrible stuff we do to kids, we'd have to admit how much terrible stuff was done to us and address the scars that were left. Most adults have no desire to do that. 

DeSantis is just the worstest leader ever… who will be the next POTUS in a landslide. Where’s the justice?

--> @Shila

If you are educated you can turn to moral philosophy. Moral philosophy is the branch of philosophy that contemplates what is right and wrong. It explores the nature of morality and examines how people should live their lives in relation to others.

kant's "moral imperative" is a pretty good guideline 

but the actual PRAXIS is still tailored to each individual

and broadly open to interpretation

Nope. There was no insurrection at that point in time. This insurrection had already happened, and this is what they were all on trial for. The bible clearly states that there HAD been an insurrection- past tense.  And that Barabas was one of those that had committed insurrection "WITH HIM", Jesus.

He was a murderer of Romans ffs. Who had Jesus murdered? Insurrection was an attempt to overthrow Roman rule.  An armed attempt to overthrow Roman rule.  

And like I have pointed out; it is hardly likely that Pontius Pilate would have released Jesus Barrabas a known murderer of Roman's. you need to read your bible carefully. And stop reading something that isn't even there.

(1) There is absolutely no evidence concerning dispensation offered by Rome to Jewish zealot murderers. It is rubbish that this was any type of Jewish custom.

It is more likely that this was the gospel writer are alluding to the two goats of Yom Kippur as told in Leviticus.  

I have said my theory is that the turning of the tables was a lot more than just a girly hissy fit thrown by Jesus. I believe it was a full-blown rebellion. And it was this that had forced the Romans hand and led to the arrest of all involved to the delight of many of Jewish the high priesthood.

I agree. He was also a threat to Rome too.

--> @Shila

I didn't disagree, I asked for clarification. 

If spite is my motivator, whom am I spiteful towards?

I was a pro-life Christian.

I am no longer pro-life nor Christian

Immediate loss of voting after 1 troll vote? We don't live in an authoritarian state. Chill out

-->

@Shila

Spite directed towards whom?

I was a pro-life Christian.

I am no longer pro-life nor Christian

Ben Shapiro's argument is it is always a human, not that it has potential to become one:

https://youtu.be/LfmA_ufFDCg?t=471

This is a point that more than 90% of biologists assert is true. It is also backed by the fact that a baby in the womb meets all the biological determiners for life: growth, metabolism, reproduction, and response to stimuli. [1]

The biggest flaw in abortionists' reasoning is this: they make arbitrary, unscientific claims for when a human being becomes a human being.

Show me a science textbook that says a human being is only a human being when it is born? Or what about a biological study that proves pre-birth humans are not human beings.

Tell me where geneticists have found that pre-birth humans do not have the requisite genetic makeup for being a human being?

Tell me where biologists have proven that a pre-birth human is not alive in the womb?

Genetically and biologically it is a human being. No amount of personal feelings can change that fact.

SOURCES:

[1] https://justfacts.org/abortion

I was a pro-life Christian. 

I am no longer pro-life nor Christian. 

--> @Shila

Data transfer and formative conditioning can easily perpetuate a myth. Especially when there's wealth and power up for grabs.

Who and what Jesus actually was, is not known. As things stand, he is just a character from hand-me-down Middle Eastern tales.

Two billion people are easily be trained to bleat like sheep

so, FUNCTIONALLY each person needs to figure out FOR THEMSELVES what they believe is "right" and what is "wrong" ?

Nope. There was no insurrection at that point in time. This insurrection had already happened, and this is what they were all on trial for. The bible clearly states that there HAD been an insurrection- past tense.  And that Barabas was one of those that had committed insurrection "WITH HIM", Jesus.

And like I have pointed out; it is hardly likely that Pontius Pilate would have released Jesus Barrabas a known murderer of Roman's. you need to read your bible carefully. And stop reading something that isn't even there.

I have said my theory is that the turning of the tables was a lot more than just a girly hissy fit thrown by Jesus. I believe it was a full-blown rebellion. And it was this that had forced the Romans hand and led to the arrest of all involved to the delight of many of Jewish the high priesthood.

--> @TWS1405

= "I know you are, but what am I" childish banality.

Meaning, you have no intelligent rebuttal

• You haven't offered any intelligent arguments, instead just relying on opinion and then repeating that same opinion over, and over again.
  
• You're too arrogant and too stupid for anyone to have a constructive and reasonable discussion with. 
  
• Several people have brought valid arguments, thoughts, and responses to this post, but because you're so narrow and seemingly incapable of critical thought, all you can do is dismiss them. 
  
• It is YOU who routinely uses insults and ad hominem attacks. This is to the extent that even the OP included blatant and childish attacks along the lines of "these people don't advocate my view on this matter, so they are stupid". 
  
• In addition to that, you use extremely repetitive and poorly applied retorts. 
  

Can you grasp that, or is it another "false equivalency fallacy"?

You could also choose to own a slave in the past. Just because it was done once in the past does not make it moral. In fact, every progressive's position relies on the very fact of evolving morality.

die fucking cunt

--> @oromagi

You may have given me much to reflect on, based on a cursory glance of the info

Polytheist _Witch: At this point I don't believe you're American.

You post  paragraphs of shit but you have no idea that people pay tax on certain things. Well there's another indication who you actually are. 

--> @Shila

USA didnt. So thats 330 million people.

--> @Shila

The truth is Jesus was rejected. The crowd picked Barabbas.

Why?

 That is a good question.  But we have to notice that Barabbas 's full name was Jesus Barabbas

New International Version

So when the crowd had gathered, Pilate asked them, “Which one do you want me to release to you: Jesus Barabbas, or Jesus who is called the Messiah?”Matthew 27:17

 It is quite difficult to imagine that Pilate would release a known war mongering zealot "who had committed murder in the insurrection.” What insurrection one may well ask?  The only nuisance that seemed to be mentioned in scripture is where Jesus over turned the tables. 

  Unless of course this was something a lot worse than scripture is letting on and the authors are trying to play it down to nothing more than a hissy fit on Jesus' part.  Which I believe they are.

 The bible does say  "another man that had committed insurrection with him".