a word itself is not criminal - it's just sounds in the air
In-between perceivable sound (need) and suggestible words (want) operates choice. The response of choice to perceivable sound (resonance) represents natural law; the submission of choice to suggested choices (dissonance) represents contract law.
As for "just" in the air...consider breathing (aka Latin spiro; spirit)?
In sanus (within sound) + per sonos (by sound)...how could one perceive sound without being within and by the source of all perceivable sound?
mere use of the 'wrong' word was punishable
What if consenting to use suggested words represents PUNISH (afflict pain) MENT (mind) upon self within a system of perceivable sound? Doesn't what we call communication aka agreement versus disagreement over suggested information represent a self inflicted punishment; division; conflict of reason?
Why would the parasitic few suggest up vs downvote tools on their social media platforms other than fermenting division among the many? When was the last time you agreed or disagreed with breathing? Were thirst; hunger and need for shelter ever an issue of agreement (want) versus disagreement (not want) or always a responsibility (need)?
a) do you need to define what others are or are you tempted to suggest others what they are; while ignoring that they were before you could make suggestions about them?
b) how does off the cuff adaptation to whatever inspires represent "spam"?
c) what software tools did you see?
d) a teacher (guru) suggests information towards consenting students; I grow comprehension by adapting to perceivable inspiration; while resisting the temptation to consent to any suggested information.
To learn for self implies to teach self and vice versa. Others represent both perceivable inspiration and the temptation of suggested information. It's free will of choice shaping the consequences.
In-between perceivable sound (need) and suggestible words (want) operates choice. The response of choice to perceivable sound (resonance) represents natural law; the submission of choice to suggested choices (dissonance) represents contract law.
As for "just" in the air...consider breathing (aka Latin spiro; spirit)?
I'm very tired of this bot. It parrots data it's learned and forms contextually meaningless posts. DAILY spam.
In sanus (within sound) + per sonos (by sound)...how could one perceive sound without being within and by the source of all perceivable sound?
What if consenting to use suggested words represents PUNISH (afflict pain) MENT (mind) upon self within a system of perceivable sound? Doesn't what we call communication aka agreement versus disagreement over suggested information represent a self inflicted punishment; division; conflict of reason?
Why would the parasitic few suggest up vs downvote tools on their social media platforms other than fermenting division among the many? When was the last time you agreed or disagreed with breathing? Were thirst; hunger and need for shelter ever an issue of agreement (want) versus disagreement (not want) or always a responsibility (need)?
You're schizophrenic, not a guru. Also, I see you're using software tools in this spamming.
a) do you need to define what others are or are you tempted to suggest others what they are; while ignoring that they were before you could make suggestions about them?
b) how does off the cuff adaptation to whatever inspires represent "spam"?
c) what software tools did you see?
d) a teacher (guru) suggests information towards consenting students; I grow comprehension by adapting to perceivable inspiration; while resisting the temptation to consent to any suggested information.
To learn for self implies to teach self and vice versa. Others represent both perceivable inspiration and the temptation of suggested information. It's free will of choice shaping the consequences.