You are the best IDF could spare?
The problem is metaphysical. A socially constructed system like law can't help you universalize subjective preferences that are still grounded in the individual human mind. It's just appealing to majority.
Because they are NOT human beings but disgusting animals! STOP DEFENDING HOMOSEXUALS!
That's not Christian. Those who engage in sodomy are made in the image of God and this is precisely why it's problematic. If they were mere beasts, God wouldn't care or judge them. Homosexuality is a grave sin but no one should define themselves by the sin they indulge in. Everyone is called to repent and renounce sin and be sanctified through Christ.
Not all of them are jews. There are lots of shabbos goyim.
Evil is subject to good because evil has no independent existence. It is not a force in itself, but a distortion of what is good—a privation, absence, or misdirection of the good.
Yes, this is the Christian worldview. I'd only add that God is the ultimate good because the good having a universal existence can't be grounded in the subjective and finite mind of man.
At least you don't have to worry about that. You need to have sex with a woman in order to have children.
How do you mean? Let's hear the argument.
That's the plan. Coudenhov-Kalergi, the jewish mastermind behind the EU, envisioned that racial intermixing due to spread of migration and globalism will lead to a single future mongrel race of Eurasian-Negroid type.
“The man of the far future will be of mixed race. Today’s races and classes will gradually disappear owing to the vanishing of space, time, and prejudice. The Eurasian-Negroid race of the future, similar in appearance to the ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of peoples with a diversity of individuals.”
- from his Practical idealism
Shame. No real men left so women have to speak up instead. The 100 year old fabian plan is a success in UK and Europe. Next phase is the USA and they're already have the lib states under their thumb.
My point was that rights is a legal term and don't have ontological existence (aren't found in reality). They are social constructs that are based on a bunch of beliefs people hold to be true with no justification. Which ironically is what idiot atheists accuse Christians of doing. Rights are their "sky daddy" basically.
The purpose was to showcase we all have believes based on faith, regardless of being secular or religious. What's important is how are those believes justified and I'm arguing that atheists can't justify any of it in their worldview.
Nobody should have their healthcare taken away...
There shouldn't be special payoffs for people who have kids.
Ok, let's go the pragmatic route: Do you need people for a functioning society? Who's going to provide you with healthcare and services? Maybe there's a reason behind state incentives for people having children?
Anti-natalism is self refuting. it is plain retarded.
That's a tu quoque. I grant you that Christianity is false - how does that help your case?
You believe in fairy tales, dude. A bunch of wigged men with leggings got together and crafted your holy book of rights that they pulled out of thin air. Why do we even have rights if we're a product of a blind deterministic meaningless process of atoms bumping into each other in a vast chaotic universe? Where do you get value from?
Well, if they were defined and written down by a bunch of people, they must be real and objectively true then. Unlike God of the Bible which was also written by a bunch of people who defined Him. Case closed.
Any involvement of the government in personal choices is an infringement of basic human rights.
Oh wait, you believe in rights? Where are they? Can I touch and smell them? Do they exist or are they made up like sky daddy is?
But wait, I thought we're not supposed to hold unjustified beliefs? I asked you to give a justification for your belief things should be the way you say and I get "I explained the premise with examples" which is begging the question and ad homs about sky daddy?
Aren't you supposed to be the reasonable one here who deals with logic and facts and not unfounded beliefs?
Those are a lot of shoulds and should nots. I'm asking where do you get those from and why ought we follow this premise?
The current admin is religious? That's funny. I'd say it's pretty secular materialist and pragmatic - basically classic liberal.
Anyway, why is any of the above bad? Maybe that's how society should be ran. Where do you get your standard for how society should be?
Makes total sense.
This isn't a bad thing.
Why is anything bad at all? Can you give an argument why religion is bad and why we should be secular?
It's true. Secularism works wonders. Men can now become women, population is in decline, children get castrated for free by the state, the state promotes butt stuff and we have gmo stabbies for everyone! I love Science!
Not all killing is murder. Killing can be justified and no sane person can be a true pacifist.
Are you saying we should follow the mosaic law as written? Should we hang idolaters, blasphemers, sorcerers, adulterers, those who curse their parents, children who rebel too?
You'll have no people left bro.
"And he shall take of the congregation of the children of Israel two kids for a sin offering",
You understand this is a word-concept fallacy and the word "kid" doesn't have the same meaning in hebrew, aramic, greek or any other language beside English, right?
If there's a war it will be in the Middle East to support Israel's interests (the Greater Israel project) and/or against Russia - the US is de facto fighting this war already through covert means. It has been going on since 2014.
Remember that the Anglo-American establishment policy is not to allow consolidation of power in a strong central European state - Germany and Russia. This was the reason for both World wars and the following Cold war. This policy also led to Russia invading Ukraine because they've been encircled by US military bases as part of the Pentagon's Full Spectrum Dominance doctrine and PNAC.
He's talking about the Haavara agreement of 1933. Up until the war this was the official policy of the Reich.