and just like that we have forgotten about the files

[Ivy]

yes but the purpose of the attack wasnt to kill the kids, it was to delete that tribe from existence, that brought bad for the world for hundreds of years

Do you have tracking issues ? God literally commands to kill the little children if he didn't had the intent to kill the little children then why mention it specifically lol

 

[chudlite67]

if ur opinion is murder is wrong, then u think abortion is bad. because it is murder

I don’t really think it’s murder tho

 

[Ivy]

if u are an atheist, and u think murder is immoral, then YOUR subjective morality is that abortion is wrong

Premise 1: Killing is immoral primarily because it deprives a conscious person of experiences, desires, and awareness.
Premise 2: Early fetuses lack consciousness, self-awareness, preferences, and subjective experience.
Premise 3: Moral status develops gradually rather than appearing instantly at conception.
Conclusion: Therefore, early abortion may not be morally equivalent to killing a born person.

 

[chudlite67]

1.3 billion kids since 1980, and about 73 million per year. HOW IS THAT NOT A FUCKING GENOCIDE

Yeah they’re not kids

 

[Ivy]

I don’t really think it’s murder tho

Premise 1: People have a strong moral right to control their own body and cannot be forced to use it to sustain another person’s life.
Premise 2: A fetus depends entirely on the pregnant person’s body to survive.
Premise 3: Even if the fetus is considered a person with a right to life, the right to life does not include the right to use another person’s body without consent.
Conclusion: Therefore, abortion is not necessarily immoral, because ending the pregnancy is refusing bodily support, not unjustly killing someone. Use this argument

 

[arniedagoats]

Premise 1: Killing is immoral primarily because it deprives a conscious person of experiences, desires, and awareness.

why is killing immoral because of that? also a sleeping person doesnt have any of these things as long as they are sleeping. should i be able to kill sleeping people?

Premise 2: Early fetuses lack consciousness, self-awareness, preferences, and subjective experience.
Premise 3: Moral status develops gradually rather than appearing instantly at conception.

it is a human life at conception, and the first human right is the right to life. discussion over bozo, if u disagree then u disagree with basc human rights

Conclusion: Therefore, early abortion may not be morally equivalent to killing a born person.

It is.

 

[arniedagoats]

Premise 1: People have a strong moral right to control their own body and cannot be forced to use it to sustain another person’s life.

so they dont have the right to end ones right too. and i think ending ones right is worse than having to sustain ones life for a short period of time. or a few months, whcih isnt the longest time

Premise 2: A fetus depends entirely on the pregnant person’s body to survive.

so kill all people that are bound to machines, kill people with diabetes that are dependend on insulin, or kill people with asthma because they are dependend on an inhalant

Premise 3: Even if the fetus is considered a person with a right to life, the right to life does not include the right to use another person’s body without consent.
Conclusion: Therefore, abortion is not necessarily immoral, because ending the pregnancy is refusing bodily support, not unjustly killing someone. Use this argument

well, killing is worse than using anothers body, and the right to life means u have the right to live. thats it. it doesnt exclude anything, it is the right to live, thats why the baby has the right to life
and it is killing someone. selfishness doesnt justify the murder of an innocent baby

 

[arniedagoats]

Yeah they’re not kids

they are babys. which doesnt change their moral worth at all

 

[Ivy]

why is killing immoral because of that? also a sleeping person doesnt have any of these things as long as they are sleeping. should i be able to kill sleeping people?

it is a human life at conception, and the first human right is the right to life. discussion over bozo, if u disagree then u disagree with basc human rights

It is.

Well you got me here , but anyways the biblical argument is the strongest one right there

 

[chudlite67]

they are babys. which doesnt change their moral worth at all

They are literally not babies
It is a zygote, an embryo, a foetus, and THEN it is a baby

 

[arniedagoats]

They are literally not babies
It is a zygote, an embryo, a foetus, and THEN it is a baby

it is a human life at conception. objectively according to biology and science. embyro is a development stage. its a baby in the developmental stage called embyro. and fetus is a latin word for offspring. and what is the human offspring called? baby

 

[arniedagoats]

Well you got me here , but anyways the biblical argument is the strongest one right there

well, this was a one time command, i explained it to you. murder is immoral according to the bible all of times, this time it had a justifiable reason, to prevent harm/sins in the future.

 

[chudlite67]

it is a human life at conception. objectively according to biology and science.

Well yes it is of the same species as homo sapien.. but under an atheistic word view I can totally pick and choose what I deem moral and so this month I’m getting my 17th abortion can’t wait

embyro is a development stage. its a baby in the developmental stage called embyro. and fetus is a latin word for offspring. and what is the human offspring called? baby

Nga rlly said what does it mean in latinhow does his dick taste lil bro

 

[arniedagoats]

Well yes it is of the same species as homo sapien.. but under an atheistic word view I can totally pick and choose what I deem moral and so this month I’m getting my 17th abortion can’t wait

well, do u think murder is immoral? u are genuinely a piece of shit if u support that, and acutally had those abortions. respectfully tho

Nga rlly said what does it mean in latinhow does his dick taste lil bro

if someone resorts to ad hominem after an argument, then u know that u won

 

[Well3x]

everyone is talking or joking ab the new virus
same with gas prices and war

I dont see anybody joking

 

[Deleted Member 118059]

everyone is talking or joking ab the new virus
same with gas prices and war

Dude even if everything got released, no one would do anything about it.


We are all amazingly smart and unique indivduals, but we are too stupid as a collective group to force any change to happen



We have known that the top 1% were corrupt for years, because they always have been since the dawn of time

 

[zaycism]

I dont see anybody joking

there r many jokes ab it on tiktok abd twitter
ppl r calling it hentaivirus

 

[arniedagoats]

there r many jokes ab it on tiktok abd twitter
ppl r calling it hentaivirus

i have the hentaivirus

 

[zaycism]

Dude even if everything got released, no one would do anything about it.


We are all amazingly smart and unique indivduals, but we are too stupid as a collective group to force any change to happen



We have known that the top 1% were corrupt for years, because they always have been since the dawn of time

we are stupid enough that we stopped noticijg whats actually going on

 

[chudlite67]

well, do u think murder is immoral? u are genuinely a piece of shit if u support that, and acutally had those abortions. respectfully tho

I’m clearly joking bro I haven’t had any abortions let alone 16
And I think we should just agree to disagree because I will not budge and neither will u and I have compassion for my friend zaycism and everyone else in this thread

 

[Ivy]

well, this was a one time command, i explained it to you. murder is immoral according to the bible all of times, this time it had a justifiable reason, to prevent harm/sins in the future.

One time command or divine command is a cope , again killing children is immoral you yourself hold to that position then why special plead when god commands it ?

 

[arniedagoats]

One time command or divine command is a cope , again killing children is immoral you yourself hold to that position then why special plead when god commands it ?

becuse it had a reason. it was the only choice to erase this tribe from existence, and the things this tribe did was far worse than killing a bunch of children or infants, which doesnt mean i think its a good thing. and everyone will be punished for his sins at some point, so the killing of the adults was valid

 

[arniedagoats]

I’m clearly joking bro I haven’t had any abortions let alone 16
And I think we should just agree to disagree because I will not budge and neither will u and I have compassion for my friend zaycism and everyone else in this thread

ok lets agree on that. but can we agree that i was right on this issue? u dont have to take my opinion, but atleast agree that i was inn the right there ok?

 

[Ivy]

becuse it had a reason. it was the only choice to erase this tribe from existence, and the things this tribe did was far worse than killing a bunch of children or infants, which doesnt mean i think its a good thing. and everyone will be punished for his sins at some point, so the killing of the adults was valid

Killing of the adults was valid sure but the same reasoning you used to protect the lives of the little children why don't you use it here ? Also thanks for the concession you saying it's not a good thing actually goes against the Christian belief because according to your belief whatever god commands or does has to be moral it's necessary for it to be moral

 

[xy2m]

everyone is talking or joking ab the new virus
same with gas prices and war

no one has forgotten
they have just accepted
we can't do shit
we are too blinded by comfort and safety to give a shit

just accept that WE are nothing more than numbers to the elites

 

[arniedagoats]

Killing of the adults was valid sure but the same reasoning you used to protect the lives of the little children why don't you use it here ? Also thanks for the concession you saying it's not a good thing actually goes against the Christian belief because according to your belief whatever god commands or does has to be moral it's necessary for it to be moral

well, the killing of children itself isnt a good thing, however it was the best way to do good to the world in this situation

 

[Ivy]

well, the killing of children itself isnt a good thing, however it was the best way to do good to the world in this situation

n***a first of all I know what's your arguments are gonna be like
1. You'll say the children will continue that cycle that's just a pre supposition also there are other measures to prevent that for example you could've easily absorbed them into your culture also let's not forget they were infants they had no ability to harm you
2. Also in no situation does killing an infant brings about anything good that's just a violent act
3. If you're defending this just because it's in your religious book if other religious books had the same thing and the same context wise would you had spoken against them ? If you say yes then it's over

 

[arniedagoats]

n***a first of all I know what's your arguments are gonna be like
1. You'll say the children will continue that cycle that's just a pre supposition also there are other measures to prevent that for example you could've easily absorbed them into your culture also let's not forget they were infants they had no ability to harm you

god is all knowing. so he knows how they wouldve turned out

2. Also in no situation does killing an infant brings about anything good that's just a violent act

again, hes all knowing, he knows what they wouldve done once they are adults

3. If you're defending this just because it's in your religious book if other religious books had the same thing and the same context wise would you had spoken against them ? If you say yes then it's over

no i wouldnt have. i would have said the same thing about these, because normally i respect all religions. (ofc i call some shit out like i did before but u proved me wrong so)

 

[Ivy]

god is all knowing. so he knows how they wouldve turned out

again, hes all knowing, he knows what they wouldve done once they are adults

no i wouldnt have. i would have said the same thing about these, because normally i respect all religions. (ofc i call some shit out like i did before but u proved me wrong so)

God is all knowing and all loving I agree do you think ordering to kill an infant is something god would do ? Also that's a ad hoc explanation, god being all knowing doesn't matter here the weight of what god commands still remains , another thing is god actually allowed the little children to live and absorb them into societies in other verses like verse Deuteronomy 20:14

 

[arniedagoats]

God is all knowing and all loving I agree do you think ordering to kill an infant is something god would do ? Also that's a ad hoc explanation, god being all knowing doesn't matter here the weight of what god commands still remains , another thing is god actually allowed the little children to live and absorb them into societies in other verses like verse Deuteronomy 20:14

he prevented these children from getting bad. he is all loving, thats why he didnt take their free will and controlled them to stop them from doing sins. also if he allowed them to live then thats a good thing too, but didnt it say kill all of them

 

[Ivy]

he prevented these children from getting bad. he is all loving, thats why he didnt take their free will and controlled them to stop them from doing sins. also if he allowed them to live then thats a good thing too, but didnt it say kill all of them

First of all don't use the argument in this way if you're gonna argue against an atheist you'll fully get baked I'm agnostic and so I believe in the existence of god so I might agree with a lil bit but I do overwhelmingly reject your statement, God by definition is all loving therefore he can't command to kill a child based on their fore fathers sins , saying is god is all knowing here is not relevant to the discussion whether it's morally justifiable or not

 

[arniedagoats]

First of all don't use the argument in this way if you're gonna argue against an atheist you'll fully get baked I'm agnostic and so I believe in the existence of god so I might agree with a lil bit but I do overwhelmingly reject your statement, God by definition is all loving therefore he can't command to kill a child based on their fore fathers sins , saying is god is all knowing here is not relevant to the discussion whether it's morally justifiable or not

he knows that the child will commit sins, and didnt u say he let the children live? ion know what agnostic means, and hes all loving, thats why he doesnt take their free will to stop them from sinning, but tells other people to end their sinning.

 

[Ivy]

he knows that the child will commit sins, and didnt u say he let the children live? ion know what agnostic means, and hes all loving, thats why he doesnt take their free will to stop them from sinning, but tells other people to end their sinning.

The child committing sins later doesn't mean that you have to order to kill him ! Also that wasn't my point even if it was gods intention it still is not morally justifiable from the same framework that you used to justify pro life

 

[arniedagoats]

The child committing sins later doesn't mean that you have to order to kill him !

well, he doesnt have too, but as u said, he let the children live. the thing is, that was the best way from stopping sinning, and also give the children eternal life in heaven because they did before ever commiting sins. so he gave them eternal life in heaven

Also that wasn't my point even if it was gods intention it still is not morally justifiable from the same framework that you used to justify pro life

well, it was a one time thing, and killing a baby for no reason is a different thing than eradicating a violent tribe that commited sins for hundreds of years. and as u said yourself, he let the children live sooooo
also i think it was more of a test if the people were actually killiing the kids or only the sinners

 

[Ivy]

well, he doesnt have too, but as u said, he let the children live. the thing is, that was the best way from stopping sinning, and also give the children eternal life in heaven because they did before ever commiting sins. so he gave them eternal life in heaven

well, it was a one time thing, and killing a baby for no reason is a different thing than eradicating a violent tribe that commited sins for hundreds of years. and as u said yourself, he let the children live sooooo
also i think it was more of a test if the people were actually killiing the kids or only the sinners

Okay first of all when I said he let the children that was in a different context and verse , in this context and verse he tells to totally destroy them , also the Catholic church doesn't fully know what will happen to those children they'll just say they're entrusting them to god's mercy , secondly I told you being a one time thing doesn't solve the issue it's a big problem for god's nature being all loving , again I showed you Ezekiel 18:20 nobody inherits their fore fathers sins which means the children being ordered to kill is indeed problematic, lastly it wasn't a test the command was absolute and prophet Saul was told to do it

 

[Deleted Member 118059]

n***a can we not have a theological debate on this bluepilled forum


i guarantee you, no productive discussion will occur here

 

[arniedagoats]

Okay first of all when I said he let the children that was in a different context and verse , in this context and verse he tells to totally destroy them

i think it was a test, to see if the people he advised to do that were actually going to kill the kids

, also the Catholic church doesn't fully know what will happen to those children they'll just say they're entrusting them to god's mercy

, secondly I told you being a one time thing doesn't solve the issue it's a big problem for god's nature being all loving , again I showed you Ezekiel 18:20 nobody inherits their fore fathers sins which means the children being ordered to kill is indeed problematic,

well, the kids will have eternal life in heaven because they never commited sins, so i think thats actually better that just killing their parents and let themm survive on their own (which would probably result in them dying anyways)

lastly it wasn't a test the command was absolute and prophet Saul was told to do it

well, we dont know if it was a test, we only know that he told to do it

 

[Ivy]

i think it was a test, to see if the people he advised to do that were actually going to kill the kids


well, the kids will have eternal life in heaven because they never commited sins, so i think thats actually better that just killing their parents and let themm survive on their own (which would probably result in them dying anyways)

well, we dont know if it was a test, we only know that he told to do it

It wasn't a test both Jewish and Christian scholar think it wasn't a test anyways I'm too tired to argue will continue the conversation later

 

[Ivy]

n***a can we not have a theological debate on this bluepilled forum


i guarantee you, no productive discussion will occur here

Ik , just time passing

 

[Deleted Member 118059]

Ik , just time passing

fair enough


i just don't think there's much value in doing so in a place like this

 

[Ivy]

fair enough


i just don't think there's much value in doing so in a place like this

I do study about religion or theology as a hobby

 

[arniedagoats]

I do study about religion or theology as a hobby

well i was atheist till a few months ago so i dont really know much about this topic

 

[zaycism]

fair enough


i just don't think there's much value in doing so in a place like this

Agreed
people here can’t comprehend most of it