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, which is why you can have an agnostic theist. Agnostic is not a middle ground between theism and atheism, there is no middle ground. I can correct you, but I can’t make you understand it.
What I said is absolutely correct. If you have a disagreement perhaps you should be more clear and less snarky.
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.
People need to stop with ridiculous conspiracy theories. You’ve become what you hate
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.
Take away their veto, it belongs to the Soviet Union, which they are not. Give it to Ukraine while you’re at it, they have roughly as much claim to it.
Is my pareidolia flaring up or does that glacier look like Trump’s face? (which also appears to be melting)
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.
Was the George Foreman grill a high quality product?
Yes. It was a grill. When you plugged it in it heated up and cooked food, exactly what they claimed. Unlike her “snake oil”.
Because bad guys show up for every election, and the good guys, which are the majority, don’t.
20 gunmen killed*
we don’t even need evidence to know
No matter what follows this…yes, we do. You should need evidence to believe anything; understanding of course that the more extraordinary the claim, the more extraordinary the evidence needed.
giving them merely some jailtime is not working either, but whatever
Then imprison them for life. Guess what, life imprisonment is cheaper than the death penalty, and can be overturned if there’s an error.
it definitely will make other people think twice before they do the same thing
There is absolutely no evidence to support that assertion.
There is no proof that the death penalty deters criminals. According to the National Academy of Sciences, “Research on the deterrent effect of capital punishment is uninformative about whether capital punishment increases, decreases, or has no effect on homicide rates.”
US Department of Justice
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.
I have no opinion on the Mexican president, but I live in the States and there’s about 70m people I could ask if Trump is an authoritarian or fascist and they’d say no. So simply living somewhere may not be the best barometer.
Capitalism is self regulating
It most certainly is not. The bargaining power of a corporation and individual worker are not the same. It’s why labor unions exist. Additionally governments should regulate commerce for the benefit of everyone.
Lastly, please review and understand the differences between your and you’re, as well as their, there, and they’re. Absolutely frustrating trying to read what you wrote.
come up with a solution
But not just a bandaid solution… probably something more final.
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:
Me: