YouFound_Lxam

You're arguing pregnancy is biological but sexual desire is not? Ok. 😆

That goes against what you said earlier - that person is not your body. So is it 'my body, my choice' or not?

Consent to sex is consent to sex right now...not anything else; not pregnancy. That is simply a gross misunderstanding on your part. 

 it seems kind of like you are trying to end the conversation and have the last word.

Being pro choice for abortion and being against abortion is conflicting. 

Unknown. 

Let's say you can't. Lets say you wake up in the morning to discover you were kidnapped in the middle of the night and someone was attached to your arm. You start to remove the tubes from your arm, but are told they will die without compounds in your blood. They should be independent in 9 months or so. What do you do?

So, if someone latches on to your arm, that is effectively their arm now? 

So, if someone latches on to your arm, that is effectively their arm now? 

I am making the point that when you have sex with someone else, there is a probability that through biological processes, a repeat performance could be conceived. The same overly broad definition which conflates consent to sex/consent to pregnancy distorts consent into a nonsensical and meaningless conception. 

Even by this definition, pleasure and pregnancy are not tied together. Sex can be for pleasure, pregnancy, or both. 

The womb belongs to the woman. Her womb, her choice, right?

Your arm, so your choice.

If someone consents to sex, are they undeniably accepting the fact that there is a possibility their partner might want sex again later, therefore, consenting to sex with that person forever?

That's just not how consent works...

 Elon Musk; he pays for Tesla employees to get abortions if they want them because Tesla's home state (Texas) outlaws abortions.

2) Israel.  Israel has taxpayer funded abortion with extremely left wing abortion laws.  Palestine does not.

If I'm understanding you correctly, this would mean that the difference between men and women is brain structure?

Everyone knows that Biden’s policies are not as lenient towards the oil and gas industry as they would like, that doesn’t mean he is single-handedly responsible for the increases.

Again, if you know anything about the oil industry you’d know it is a global market, no US President could make that kind of impact.

The White House has tried to deflect blame for the insane surge in gas prices onto Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. And, to be fair, gas prices are definitely not completely within any president’s control. They absolutely are influenced by global factors, and the disruption in the global energy market caused by Putin’s invasion certainly has contributed to higher prices.
But Biden isn’t off the hook. Gas prices started rising long before the invasion, and the president still has direct responsibility for how his policies have contributed to this problem.
Here are three specific things Biden has done that have led to increased gas prices.

1. Canceling Drilling Leases and Limiting Domestic Production

Since taking office, Biden has taken too many steps to count to limit domestic production. These include halting federal permits for oil and gas drilling and leasing shortly after taking office and blocking drilling in a major oil-rich Alaskan region.

To be clear, these decisions will mostly affect future production. But that does still significantly affect gas prices because companies factor in their expectations about the future into the decisions they make today.

“Some say that new leases … would have taken time and would not yet be online, but even so, there is evidence that expectations of increased future supply has a beneficial impact on current prices and expectations of future supply drying up has a negative impact on current prices,” the Competitive Enterprise Institute’s Ben Lieberman said.

“At a day-to-day level, I am hearing from drillers that they are having a very hard time getting all the approvals they need from [the Environmental Protection Agency] and other agencies in order to produce on existing wells, and of course, new federal leasing has come to a halt,” Lieberman added.

It’s just basic economics that when the government throttles future supply in an industry, that will lead to higher prices both now and in the future. Biden was warned by many critics at the time that this would happen, but he proceeded anyway.

2. Choking Regulations that Impose Big Costs and Lead to Higher Prices

Speaking of basic economics, it’s well established that when businesses’ costs rise, that puts upward pressure on the prices they charge consumers. The oil and gas industry is no exception.

And unfortunately, the Biden administration has both proposed and implemented a wide array of regulations on the energy sector, inflicting billions in direct financial costs and incalculable indirect compliance costs — plus further harming expectations for the future.

“The regulatory chokehold imposed by the Biden administration on oil production in place of a Green New Deal has drastically raised gasoline prices, thereby hurting lower-income people the most,” said conservative economist Vance Ginn, who served in the Trump administration.

“This is yet another example of the high cost of big-government environmentalism when the better approach is to remove government barriers so that free markets can better let people adapt to changes in the environment at a much lower cost,” Ginn concluded.

3. Anti-Energy Rhetoric that Discourages Investment

Rhetoric matters. While words don’t literally do anything to change gas prices, the signals coming from policymakers absolutely do affect the long-term investment decisions businesses make.

And even as a presidential candidate, Biden sent very negative messages about what his leadership would mean for the gas industry.

In just one example, as Americans for Tax Reform pointed out, Biden said during a campaign stop: “We are going to get rid of fossil fuels. … We’re going to phase out fossil fuels.” Then, upon taking office, the president followed these words with actions such as canceling the Keystone XL pipeline, blocking leases, restricting imports, and pursuing regulations.

In general, Biden’s open hostility toward the oil and gas industry has almost certainly curbed investment into production that otherwise would’ve occurred.

“Such extinction rhetoric, coming from the now-president, has an unprecedented chilling effect on investment,” Lieberman said. To put it simply, less investment means less supply — which means higher prices.

It’s absolutely true that our high gas prices aren’t entirely Biden’s fault. But the president is not the helpless bystander his defenders would have you believe.

Pregnancy requires the use of someone's body. So...it IS their body and taking away control of it is slavery.

Lose of their freedom of autonomy,

, to instead become property for use as medical devices

 Adding to it, they are not paid for their time and hardships in this

And most obviously, slavery and similar forms of forced servitude are outlawed by the Thirteenth Amendment.

The problem is no actual person is harmed. Whereas enslaving women creates a massive harm to them, their families, and society.

 First thing Bible fool, creation was 6 DAYS, and NOT 7 days like you proposed because Jesus as our serial killer God RESTED upon the 7th day in not creating anything, understood? Duh!

Secondly, which contradicting Creation narrative are you referring to, Genesis 1 or 2, in your comical and out of context Day Age Theory?  

Thirdly, God created the world and the universe at approximately 6000 years ago with the linage of Adam to Jesus, and Jesus to the present day, where I have shown you this Biblical axiom therefore it being approximately 6000 years, GET IT BIBLE FOOL?   

Now, if you want to embarrass yourself further, we'll use your "out of context," which you still don't understand, "Day Age Theory," where a day is a thousand years to God. Then, since Jesus as God used 6 DAYS to create the world and universe, then the linage from Adam to Jesus, and Jesus to the present day, we add 12,000 years because of your birdbrained assumption of using a day is equal to a thousand days to God relative to the Creation Story. LOL!

SIDEBAR: In using your brainless "Day Age Theory," this means that Jesus "rested" for a 1000 years after His Creation on the 7th day!  See how STUPID your thousand years equal a day to God truly is when using it for the Creation Story? Yeah, deep down you do. 

Therefore, EXPLAIN the biblical axiom that we are 6000 years, or 12,000 years to date from Creation, where the dinosaurs existed by science 66 million years ago, or, are you ungodly going with this theory as shown in this image: https://www.imagebam.com/view/MEH9BV7 

- The most this says is the beloved Jesus (pbuh) came to be before the beloved Abraham (pbuh). 

 This is also true for others in your own Bible. I still don't see any reference to anything that resembles the Trinity. 

- The beloved Jesus (pbuh) is also referred to in the Quran as the "Word of God" & the Archangel Gabriel as the "Holy Spirit of God", YET we don't say these are God Himself. There is no justifiable way to make that jump, in fact it's logically & metaphysically impossible.

- So God, the necessary being non-contingent on anything, becomes contingent on His creation?

- Indeed, you yourself reject belief in the Trinity

God not only can be not-God, but in fact, IS not-God.

- You don't understand what God is. God is not your next door's neighbor. God is the ultimate reality, the necessary being on whom all rely. A necessary being is, by definition, such that His existence is necessary that He can not not exist. Saying, God can end Himself is a self-contradiction.

Like I have said before, Jesus and I are going to have a lot of fun at your Bible dumbfounded expense, praise!

I thought you said you refuse to consider politically biased news.

It’s precisely because this is an emotively charged debate that makes pro lifers unequivocally wrong on this subject because they toss all logic and facts out the window with the bath water. 

THE METHODOLOGY

D’Souza and True the Vote analyzed surveillance footage of drop boxes mostly from Georgia, as well as “some” from Arizona, along with “geotracking” data purchased from unnamed brokers.

The “geotracking” data was gleaned from cellphone apps pinpointing device location and movements between Oct. 1, 2020, and election day, Nov. 3, for Arizona, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, according to the documentary. Data for Georgia stretched until January, when there was a runoff vote.

The documentary alleges that by tracking phone locations to the addresses of five alleged “stash house” nonprofits and 10 or more drop boxes, the “mules” were identified.

There were 242 people in Atlanta, Georgia, who fitted the bill; 200+ in Arizona; 100 in Milwaukee, Wisconsin; 500+ in Michigan, and 1,000+ mules in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania – totaling over 2,000 “mules”.

Viewers were then shown multiple surveillance footage clips of different people at drop boxes, which the documentary said it had identified as some of the ballot traffickers carrying out their crimes.

GEOTRACKING

Multiple concerns were raised by experts speaking to Reuters about the “geotracking” portion of the documentary. It was unclear whether the same test was applied anywhere other than the swing states in question (to prove a unique phenomenon had happened), along with data validity, accuracy, and discussion about other possibilities that could explain the findings.

“The entirety of the claim rests on cell phone location data, which doesn’t remotely show that people were actually using the drop boxes (it doesn’t have the granularity to show that, as opposed to just walking or even driving by),” said Kenneth R Mayer, Professor of Political Science at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, who spoke to Reuters via email.

According to True the Vote founder Catherine Engelbrecht, who spoke in the documentary, the dataset had been validated because it was used by the organization to solve two murder cases that were “ebbing on cold case status”.

Only one murder case was detailed as an example in the documentary – that of eight-year-old Secoriea Turner on July 4, 2020, in Atlanta – and which authorities told NPR was solved without anything to do with Engelbrecht (here).

D’Souza, meanwhile, claimed without offering evidence that the dataset had the “reliability of a fingerprint”, expanding in a later podcast interview that it was accurate to between “12 and 18 inches” (here).

 You can’t blame Biden for high gas prices merely because he is the president, and then when prices go down claim he had nothing to do with it.

True, because Trump was doing more damage to NATO than Putin could do himself.

You are stupid. 20 times a day on any conservative media you can hear some Republican blaming Biden for high gas prices, especially in the run up to Election Day.

So is it just coincidence that global food and gas costs skyrocketed during the same time period? Please enlighten me.

Here are 25 decisions the president has made over the last year that have affected gas prices, home heating costs, and other energy-related burdens U.S. families and businesses face.

#1 and 2: Adopting new EPA oil and gas rules
In November 2021, the Environmental Protection Agency announced new regulations governing methane emissions from oil and gas production, transmission, storage, and distribution that would cost more than $1 billion a year.
Last spring, Biden signed a resolution that overturned Trump administration reforms to EPA oil and gas rules. This resolution will worsen energy poverty, reestablish burdensome regulations, and have a disproportionate impact on small businesses.
#3, #4, #5, #6, #7, and #8: Restricting or impeding energy projects
One of Biden’s first actions after taking office was to halt new oil and gas leases on federal lands and waters, the Biden administration has delayed decisions on these leases  — a move that results in higher energy costs for the most vulnerable consumers.
The administration canceled the Keystone XL pipeline and suspended oil and gas leases in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and New Mexico (despite opposition from the Navajo Nation). It also resurrected the “Waters of the United States” rule, which would increase barriers to energy projects.
The White House is pursuing new standards for particulate matter and ozone, likely tightening them to unachievable levels for much of the country and creating new barriers for energy project permits.
The president also has rescinded Endangered Species Act reforms, a move that will increase red tape and allow litigation to slow down energy projects.
#9: Rejoining the Paris agreement
In April 2021, without the consent of Congress, Biden rejoined the Paris agreement, which will result in onerous new regulations that could raise energy costs.
#10: Appointing unaccountable energy regulators
The president has created several bodies within the White House charged with creating new policies to regulate energy. The people who run these councils are unelected and do not need Senate confirmation, but they have been given broad powers to come up with new executive actions — which do not need consent from Congress — to regulate U.S. energy production.
#11: Forcing states to restrict driving
One section of the recently enacted Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, supported by the White House, would require every U.S. state to develop state carbon-reduction plans that must be approved by the U.S. Department of Transportation as well as be updated every four years.
These plans are aimed at reducing driving all over the country — even for people in rural areas where public transportation is limited, and driving is the only option.
#12, #13, and #14: Raising the prices of cars and trucks
The Biden administration has failed to take adequate action on annual requirements and small refinery waivers for the Renewable Fuel Standard and in providing regulatory relief from this biofuel mandate due to economic hardship. His EPA  has finalized a new rule regulating greenhouse gas emissions from cars and trucks. That single regulation could raise the average vehicle price by $1,000.
#15: Instituting a new policy on carbon taxes in organized wholesale electricity markets
This carbon pricing policy statement, issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in April 2021, is a blanket endorsement of top-down policies that have been demonstrated to be costly, ineffective, regressive, and consistently rejected by the American people.
#16: Raising the prices of common household necessities
The EPA has issued a final rule to phase out a common, inexpensive refrigerant. This policy is a de facto tax on air conditioning and refrigeration.
#17: Stifling energy innovation
In May 2021, Biden issued a sweeping executive order that mobilized federal agencies, including the Securities and Exchange Commission, to enforce mandates on businesses, insurers, retirement funds, and suppliers. These policies will stifle innovation critical to improving the environment and will increase costs for a wide variety of businesses.
#18: Altering regulatory cost analyses
The Biden administration has changed key inputs for economic and regulatory analysis, including raising the “social cost” of greenhouse gases. These policies will mask the true consumer cost of regulatory actions.
#19 and #20: Imposing new costs on power generation
The administration attempted to resurrect an aggressive version of the Clean Power Plan for power sector mandates called the Clean Electricity Standard.
In the Fall 2021 Unified Agenda, the EPA stated their intention to propose what can be considered the Clean Power Plan 2.0. This policy would impose burdensome regulations but would have little or no environmental benefit.
The EPA also has mandated that even facilities with reduced emissions must remain on the list of “major” sources, subjecting these facilities to permitting burdens and higher costs.
#21: Impeding Americans exports
The administration is considering potential restrictions on the export of crude oil that would increase, not decrease, energy prices.
#22 and #23: Raising taxes
More than one-quarter of the administration-backed Build Back Better agenda is pulled directly from the “Green New Deal.” The Build Back Better agenda includes new taxes on natural gas and home heating. It also includes new taxes on petroleum and manufacturing.
#24: Picking energy winners and losers
The Build Back Better agenda would spend taxpayer dollars to push utilities to adopt more costly, politically preferred forms of energy, a move that would reduce Americans’ energy choices.
#25: Fueling the fire for future regulation
Finally, through the Civilian Climate Corps, Build Back Better would fund the salaries of tens of thousands of anti-energy activists who would perpetuate high energy costs by demanding new and costly federal regulations and legislation.
Unlike releasing oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, these 25 steps are not just a “drop in the ocean.”
They have made, and will continue to make, a significant impact on Americans’ ability to afford the energy products that fuel their lives and livelihoods.

- No. Nowhere in the Bible does it say Jesus (pbuh) is God. That's just conjecture.

- The Trinity factually does not figure in the Bible, not in letter or meaning. & I have disproven the Trinity, it's False by definition. The same way a married bachelor is False by definition.

13 Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to be baptized by John. 14 But John tried to deter him, saying, “I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?”
15 Jesus replied, “Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness.” Then John consented.
16 As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting on him. 17 And a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.” (Matthew 3:13-16 NIV).

- You first sentence undoes your last. God is outside time & space. The Trinity is about a God inside time & space. It's utter nonsense. 

- So, it is possible for God to not be God?

 Is is possible for God to create His own God? Is is possible for God to end Himself?

Lockdowns are not effective to stop the spread of the virus: 

Second of all, even if we assume everything in the Bible is true, that still doesn't entail Jesus (pbuh) is God.

- I just disproved the Trinity. There is no world in which the Trinity is true, the same way there is no world in which a square circle is true. 

- Don't be too sure. Maybe other religions do offer better proof, you don't know that. 

- Buddy, Christians themselves differ on the truth of the Trinity. The earlier Christians, in fact, had no such belief. Duality was also a belief that predates the Trinity. I don't have to tell you that the Trinity only became mainstream following the Counsel of Nicaea.  

- Level with me here. Jesus (pbuh) is man right? So he is contingent on time & space right? Therefore, he is a contingent being. Therefore, not a necessary being. Therefore, not God. Right?

FINALLY, when you said "well, okay then" you are accepting our serial killer Jesus for what He is, and will be further shown to be jealous, selfish, self-centered, petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capricious, and malevolent primitive Bronze and Iron Age God!.

Something you and many similar to you fail to understand is that just because it is how you feel doesnt mean it is how others feel.

Try your "research" again and look for the points and facts you dont agree with.

I dont really care if you agree or not, but I want you to just see them. They might seem insane and unreasonable to you, but I just want you to know that is is really out there.

Heads up, you didn't say "witnessed through science" did you, bible fool? NO YOU DIDN'T!  This is the best you can do in trying to dig yourself out of a hole that you dug for yourself in what you actually stated? LOL!  

You seem to have missed the part where I explained, so I’ll try again; he spent months before a single vote had ever been cast telling his supporters the election was going to be stolen, he declared victory before the votes had even been counted, he spent months following the election telling his supporters the election was in the process of being stolen, and then he invited all of his supporters to the Capitol where, despite intelligence warnings being issued to him that there was likely to be violence, held a rally telling his supporters to “fight like hell”. Then, while all of this was going on, he sat and watched in the dining room while refusing to make a single phone call or lift a finger of any kind to stop what was happening. He didn’t put out the video telling them to leave till 3 hours later after everyone, including Fox News hosts pleaded with him to tell them to stop.

No president with an IQ above room temperature would not have known that such actions would potentially result in violence. There is a reason we had been using the word “dangerous” to describe them since Election Day.

For him to stand up there in the middle of all this and say “peacefully protest” one time does not override all of this. What Trump did is a classic strategy that no rational person should need explained to them, but Trump’s personal attorney for ten years already has. He testified at length and confirmed in multiple interviews since how Trump operates, that he always throws in lines like this as a way of telling people what he really wants from them. These are mob tactics and his attorney became very familiar with his use of them over the decade he served him. But again, this is all common sense.

If you tell someone that their voice has been stolen, the remedy to fix that cannot logically be to use their voice. That is self defeating as it is a logical contradiction.

We live in a democratic society, which means that we resolve our differences through persuasion. If Trump persuaded the American people to elect him and that was stolen, we no longer live in a democratic society. If we no longer live in a democratic society, the only remedy remaining to get your way is force.

You can’t assemble people and tell them that their only means remaining is force, and then throw one line into a speech to be peaceful and expect that anyone listening too drown out the rest of the speech and take that one line seriously. Read the damn transcript of his speech. The word “peacefully” does not fit with anything else he said that day. All of his supporters that day understood this. Why don’t you?

I deride Trump along with any individual who engages in conspiratorial thinking, which is notorious for its high concentration of classic logical fallacies.

YOUR FEEBLE QUOTE RELATIVE TO THE CREATION STORY TO PROVE MY POINT:  “ .........  but for the human interpretation of it, science explains what it looked like for us. God created all of it, but we witnessed it in a different way than he did.”   https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/8271/post-links/359631

Key phrase of your quote relative to the Creation Story shown above:  “but we witnessed" it in a different way than he did.” 

WITNESSED DEFINITION:  to see an event take place. "a bartender who witnessed the murder,” to be present at an event from personal observation.

Therefore, using the definition of “Witnessed,” that you used, then when you said  “We Witnessed” the Creation Story, you were comically and blatantly WRONG because we were not there at the time our serial killer Jesus, as God, did His 6 day creation!  Get it Bible fool? ROFLOL!

they want us out of politics and stuff, honestly the way to do that is to give us what we want, which isnt too difficult.

So, give us what we want, and we will stay out of your politics...….great...….not a threat at all.

No, I dont believe in objective morality. Humans are crazy, Humans are great, and Humans are also pure evil. Nobody is perfect.

So we should just all go around killing people, gottcha.....

pretty much just a right to safety and freedom like everyone else, y'know?

I'm pretty sure the LGBTQ+ community has just as much rights as everyone else.

it would be interesting to watch it, but it would probably just make me mad. Ben Shapiro and Matt Walsh are skilled debaters and sometimes I think like "hey thats a good point!" then I get mad at myself for accidentally agreeing with something I dont agree with. I need to remember that not only are they debaters, they are also skilled manipulators. 

So you get mad at people who make a good point?

Another person you should watch, is Rob Smith. He is an outright Gay man, who is against the LGBTQ+ movement.

I think its very normal for societies to change very frequently. 150 yrs ago slavery existed in the U.S, then, suddenly it stopped. Difference? 

Yes. Slavery didn't happen all over the world from the beginning of human civilization. Two Genders did.

I personally have everything I need. I am unhappy in my body, but I am not desperate enough for surgery or hormones.

So let me get this strait. People who are unhappy about their body's, should get there organs removed to make them feel better about themselves?

Yea...… a great solution.

there are asexuals, and there are "true" asexuals. regular asexuals do not like sex but don't necessarily hate it. "true" asexuals literally have no reproductive hormones telling them to go out and mate. I am a "regular" asexual. "true" asexuals are very rare. "True" asexuals are usually called Nullsexual.

…hold on let me process this for a second.....

So your telling me, that their are people born out there, with no reproductive hormones??

And the fact that someone doesn't like sex means they have to identify as something else.

Why cant someone just Identify as "a female who doesn't like sex"?

 Personally, if you are banning trans surgery and "cutting off healthy breasts and penises" like they say, Why allow other cosmetic surgeries such as augmentations and plastic surgery? Difference?

Plastic surgery doesn't cause you major health problems, and doesn't chop off pieces of your body just to make you feel better about yourself.

there are asexuals, and there are "true" asexuals. regular asexuals do not like sex but don't necessarily hate it. "true" asexuals literally have no reproductive hormones telling them to go out and mate. I am a "regular" asexual. "true" asexuals are very rare. "True" asexuals are usually called Nullsexual.

a popular anti-trans argument is "Why would you cut off a completely healthy penis/breasts?" So, why would cut off a completely healthy intersex penis? Because it doesnt have testicles? If you want to "fix" the female part of it, where do the testicles come from now? A "male" has to live the rest of their life without testicles, never to reproduce? The person wont reproduce anyway, so what's the point? Why "fix" them? theres no point.

.

YouFound_Lxam, the number 2 Bible fool of this Religion Forum,

THE STATEMENT IN QUESTION TOLD BY JESUS: ”But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.” (Luke 19:27)

YOUR RESPONSE TO OUR BRUTAL SERIAL KILLER JESUS IN BEING GOD TO THE STATEMENT IN QUESTION ABOVE: "Jesus in fact did say that. But he didn't claim that. He was telling a story, therefore saying those words, but not claiming those words. He was in fact a narrator in the parable. Saying that Jesus said that, would be like saying a narrator, who narrates," I killed a man" actually killed a man".

https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/8271/post-links/360691

Good boy, you remedied your Bible ignorance in now saying that Jesus DID say the statement in question above, where before you said He didn't! DUH! LOL!

JESUS SAID IN THE "FIRST PERSON:" "Bring hither, and slay them before me!"  He couldn't help but to CLAIM in what He said, because He said it! GET IT?  Furthermore, parable or not, Jesus said to bring His enemies that do not want Him to reign over Him, and slay them before "ME," key word, "ME," which is Jesus! Therefore, your insidious notion of Jesus "not claiming those words of action to Him " falls flat upon its ass, understood Bible fool? 

DEFENSE ATTORNEY: "Your honor, my client Steve Smith said to his friends to bring his enemy Joe Blow in front of him, and murder him on the spot, would Steve Smith still be considered an accomplice and/or an accessory to murder?"

JUDGE: YES!

OUTCOME: Jesus SINNED in making said statement and therefore not without sin, went against Exodus 20:13, and shows our serial killer Jesus as not ever loving and forgiving like the Bible erroneously states, period!

THE STATEMENT IN QUESTION TOLD BY JESUS IN THE "FIRST PERSON":  ”But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.” (Luke 19:27)

When Jesus specifically stated the above statement, why did He "wussy out" and didn't bring forth His enemies Himself to slay before Him, as it is Jesus' position to do so in the first place in the following passage: JESUS SAID: "Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.”(Romans 12:19)

YouFound_Lxam, address this contradicting situation shown above for us.  

YOU MAY BEGIN:

So, how long are you going to be running away from my post #23 where the Bible states with specificity that the earth as it is now, and the universe, is approximately 6000 years old?  Are you that SCARED and NERVOUS to address it in front of the membership?  Do you need help from another Bible fool equal to you? Explain your RUNAWAY status!  BEGIN:

1.  First thing Bible fool, creation was 6 DAYS, because Jesus as our serial killer God RESTED upon the 7th day, where you have the audacity to now say a day is a thousand years with the Creation Story, therefore God rested for a 1000 years on the 7th day????  Understood Bible inept fool? LOL!

2.  Secondly, which contradicting Creation narrative are you referring to, Genesis 1 or 2?  

3. Thirdly, even if you use your out of context "Day Age Theory," that only takes 7000 years off of the total time of the earth and universe existing between Adam and the present time, which is now facetiously 13,000 years, as I have shown you in the chronological order from Adam to Jesus, and Jesus to the present day, which goes directly against the dinosaurs existing 66 million years ago, GET IT? 

4. Then if you haven't removed one foot to insert the other in your comical presentation, you state that "we" actually witnessed the Creation narrative as you have shown in your quote above! Huh? LOL!  EXPLAIN:

So Jesus did the act which led to the loss of the pigs. Thanks for confirming it.

The rioters weren’t taking their cues from anyone else, they were taking them from Trump. We know because they told us so.

During President Donald Trump's tenure in the White House, the national debt grew by some $7.8 trillion—or nearly 40 percent compared to the amount when former President Barack Obama. left office in January 2017. So you think Trump giving himself a big tax break was a good idea?  Remember that the last smart republican president, Eisenhower, had a tax rate of 91 percent for the rich.

The case however is quite simple. Trump spent months before the election telling his followers the election was going to be stolen, then on election night before the votes had been even counted declared victory. He then spent the following months amplifying every conspiracy theory under the sun continuing to rally his supporters until January 6th where he invited all of his followers to March onto the capital to “fight like hell, or you’re not going to have a country anymore”.

This is where the MAGA cultists jump in; “but he said March peacefully!” which is of course complete bullshit. They showed up because they were pissed and ready to cause a ruckus. No one in their right mind heard that one sentence and thought “oh, I guess we’re not supposed to actually fight”. Trump understood this very well, which is why he said it, because he knew his followers would point to that one sentence to claim innocence. It’s called a false exculpatory, and it’s a classic tactic used by the mob to confuse the jury.

It’s also absurd to tell people that their voice has been stolen from them by people who don’t care about them, and the remedy to that is to yell really loud.

And if you need more evidence that the crowd was taking their cues from Trump just watch all of the video footage of the rioters themselves telling police officers that they were there on behalf of Trump and reading Trump’s tweets with a blowhorn to an animated crowd reacting to it.

At the end of the day you have the choice to ignore all of this no matter how obvious it is. And if that’s the case here’s one final thought experiment… imagine if in early November 2020 Trump had done what every losing presidential candidate before him did; concede the election, congratulated his opponent, and orchestrated an orderly transition. Just imagine. Do you seriously believe January 6th would have still happened?