• 0 Posts
  • 33 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 21st, 2023

help-circle
  • Yes, I’m on one side, with dictionaries, etymology, and the majority of atheists, and you’re on the other side. I would agree with you but then we’d both be wrong.

    Google:

    noun: atheism. disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

    Gnostic - adjective. relating to knowledge, especially esoteric mystical knowledge.

    Me:

    Theism is belief in a god, atheism is a lack of belief. Atheism is not necessarily a belief that god does not exist.

    Gnostic is about knowledge and not belief





  • Atheism is the belief that there are no gods and out right rejection in the belief of any gods.

    No, not quite. Atheism is not believing in a god, it doesn’t mean you claim there is not a god. A subtle difference, but it is the difference between not believing, and believing not. Also, agnosticism isn’t a middle ground between theism and atheism, there is no middle ground, as it is dichotomous. Agnosticism speaks to knowledge, or what you claim to know. So, a person could be an agnostic atheist, or an agnostic theist.



  • Oh did Democrats stop the Republicans when the winds shifted?

    Oh no they didn’t. They went along with them.

    What the hell are you talking about? Your comment is entirely divorced from reality. There were 175 cloture votes to break a filibuster on nominees during the Obama administration and 314 during Trump. Nearly doubled in half the time.

    When Schumer was minority leader, he vigorously used the filibuster to do just that. Under his leadership, Democrats used the filibuster to block funding for construction of Trump’s border wall in 2019. They used it not once, but twice to impede passage of the Cares Act — forcing Republicans to agree to changes including a $600 weekly federal unemployment supplement. They used it in September and October to stop Republicans from passing further coronavirus relief before the November election. They used it to halt Sen. Tim Scott’s (R-S.C.) police reform legislation so Republicans could not claim credit for forging a bipartisan response to the concerns of racial justice protesters. They used it to block legislation to force “sanctuary cities” to cooperate with federal officials, and to stop a prohibition on taxpayer funding of abortion, bans on abortions once the unborn child is capable of feeling pain, and protections for the lives of babies born alive after botched abortions. - Washington Post


  • It’s not though. The question makes the assumption that he would have been handed over for the Nuremberg trials.

    It absolutely misses the point, and so have you. It is a hypothetical whereby he was captured, turned over to the Nuremberg trials, and found guilty. That’s the basis of the hypothetical. Saying that wouldn’t have happened absolutely misses the point of the hypothetical.




  • Interesting how the reaction is split so far. It occurs to me that lots of celebrities have sold sketchy shit, but female celebrities get grief over it.

    Dr. Oz seems like a great example in line with her. They both made bogus claims about snake oil products that don’t provide the benefits claimed.

    Did Matt Damon get cancelled over his crypto Superbowl ad? Food for thought, guys.

    Damon did an ad as a spokesperson. Crypto is inherently risky; it’s a currency based on nothing that people just made up. Unless I’m missing something, I don’t even know how they’re comparable.







  • it’s not a great approach in most cases

    Any cases.

    Do you think a death penalty for netanyahu unfair, in fact not giving a death penalty is unfair to all the children and women and everyone else he has killed

    Fair? What does fair mean? Does an execution un-kill the victims? What a ridiculous notion that any sort of punishment for a perpetrator could be “fair” for the victims.

    The death penalty is an abject failure. It has no benefits and numerous issues. Practicing barbarism can never be justice.