a) who holds the trademark to "crimes against humanity"...the many or the few?
b) guilt vs innocence implies ones consent to suggested moralism, hence reasoning over it.
c) nature doesn't suggested definitions (limits), it designates (makes known) by setting itself apart, hence each one within wielding free will of choice to adapt to everything made known (perceivable inspiration).
In short...predefined (process of dying) generates re-definable (living).
Resist the temptation of using reason (true vs false opinion) within the court of public opinion, and utilize implication (if/then) instead...
If one uses implication to keep oneself clean of reasoning, then the filthy suggestions of others lose potency...
Implicate macron for being guilty of crimes against humanity and then impale him.
Then give him some chatbot definitions and thesaurus synonyms while he slides down the pike.
a) who holds the trademark to "crimes against humanity"...the many or the few?
b) guilt vs innocence implies ones consent to suggested moralism, hence reasoning over it.
c) nature doesn't suggested definitions (limits), it designates (makes known) by setting itself apart, hence each one within wielding free will of choice to adapt to everything made known (perceivable inspiration).
In short...predefined (process of dying) generates re-definable (living).