Lobster Johnson
Player Valuation: £35m
Slightly disingenuous there. When LL called your post repugnant you were calling them murderers and calling for "an eye for an eye". Later you climbed down to putting them on trial for something or other.
Current Affairs General US politics (ie, not POTUS related)
- Thread starter Dylan
- Start date
- Status
Slightly disingenuous there. When LL called your post repugnant you were calling them murderers and calling for "an eye for an eye". Later you climbed down to putting them on trial for something or other.
They said the idea of putting people on trial was repugnant.
But either way, they have said people should be tortured in hell for eternity. I stated there should be an eye for an eye. Both are biblical references. Yet only one is repugnant. Strange that.
And I didnt climb down, I clarified the method by which the justice of an eye for an eye would be meted out. They also stated their opposition to putting people on trial as it would apparently.make things worse.
So as stated, a bit of consistency would be appreciated.
Well that would save the lives of women and girls, so obviously that wont be ok for him.
Well of course we have a dog in this fight. We should have a dog in any fight where human rights abuses are being signed off on.
And the chief justice of Poland should face consequences for their actions.
And yes, let them fight it out. I am on the side of the people protecting human rights, and the victims of rape and paedophilia. Not the ones supporting the perpetrators.
I said it was repugnant because the “trial” you were suggesting was clearly just a extrajudicial made up one so you could then excuse killing them - as you have clarified in the bolded bit above. There are no existing laws that these justices broke, let alone ones that carry a capital murder charge.
I in no way see saying I hope someone rots in hell (a place I do not believe exists) as analogous to calling for someone to get there sooner by force.
I detest this ruling and the people who made it. It does not mean that I support killing them for it and I believe that sort of “eye for an eye justice” would put the already rocky democracy of my nation on an even worse path.
I don't necessarily agree with my own point, it was a devils advocate point but to argue your point using the IRS policy is not a good source to determine when "life" begins. Only science has an answer and science tells us that a fetus has a heartbeat at 6 weeks, which means this is the start of a life.
Bro, I was born because daddy believed every life is precious. Why do you think I'm so anti abortion?
American men have a reputation of knocking up European women in their short stays in Europe but unfortunately some get aborted.
Again as I've said to @Pittsburgh Footy , it's very stupid to base off our answers off IRS or governmental policies. Only science and religious scriptures can answer this question. Bible says life begins at conception. Science says life begins with the heartbeat at 6 weeks.
Is your master's degree gonna be in behavior therapy?
tsubaki
Player Valuation: £90m
no it doesn't
This ruling is going to have wide ranging impacts but one of them is below.
That' not true.
Secondly, since we live in a secular society, built on the separation of church and state, IDGAF what the Bible says
but what do you say. should a 6 week old fetus be a citizen?
- Status