It feels like you’re trying to make the argument that if a system is somehow corruptible, then there should be no system at all. Is that how you view this?
Where did I say that? But, if you want a robust system, you should probably find a better definition than that handwavey, wishy-washy one in which holes are seen by an internet nobody in a minute. However, this vagueness tracks particularly with English/US law where lawmaking is delegated to the judges who can handwave things in and out as they see fit.
And, what’s certain is that Western law is based on Christian system of morality no matter how much you want it to not be.
Lol! You’re the one who “hand-waved” it away, like it’s some simplified slogan, that you clearly don’t understand.
Western Law isn’t “based” on Christianity. It’s based in logic, and philosophy. It holds that “truth” is based on evidence and objective facts…not faith or adherence to scripture.
It’s literally the exact opposite of religious law, which is dictated by decree, without evidence or rationality.
Sure bud. You produced a ‘definition’ that doesn’t work because it folds under slightest scrutiny, then you accused me of rejecting Western democracy while refusing to explain how your definition would work in practice, now you spout a bunch of empty proclamations worthy of an adolescent edgelord, while failing to grasp where the bulk of religious law comes from. And you say that it’s me who’s handwaving and doesn’t understand. Big ‘in this moment i am euphoric’ energy there. People like you are why online atheist movement is treated as a laughable circlejerk.
Also, US law is based on racism, bigotry, misogyny, self-centered backwardness and corporatocracy, along with ‘Christian values’. So you probably shouldn’t pipe up about that.
There’s no doubt that people much smarter than you wrote about this topic, but there’s also no evidence that you learned anything from them but just the surface ideas.
You should try learning to either troll more subtly, or to produce some constructive thought. Then you perhaps might be treated somewhat seriously outside of the fedora m’lady community.
Oh, I see. You’re a troll, then. That makes sense. No one is this confidently incorrect when Google is available, unless they’re just pretending to be stupid for the lols.
Fuck, you’re really tiring. You can wear your fedora and your cute coat and write stuff that you can’t substantiate all day long, what do I care? I should’ve known better than to pop into a space dedicated to conceited hot-air types like you sucking each other off.
Buddy…based on the ridiculous shit you’ve already said, you’re either a troll, or a total moron. I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt here. Take it.
It feels like you’re trying to make the argument that if a system is somehow corruptible, then there should be no system at all. Is that how you view this?
Where did I say that? But, if you want a robust system, you should probably find a better definition than that handwavey, wishy-washy one in which holes are seen by an internet nobody in a minute. However, this vagueness tracks particularly with English/US law where lawmaking is delegated to the judges who can handwave things in and out as they see fit.
And, what’s certain is that Western law is based on Christian system of morality no matter how much you want it to not be.
Lol! You’re the one who “hand-waved” it away, like it’s some simplified slogan, that you clearly don’t understand.
Western Law isn’t “based” on Christianity. It’s based in logic, and philosophy. It holds that “truth” is based on evidence and objective facts…not faith or adherence to scripture.
It’s literally the exact opposite of religious law, which is dictated by decree, without evidence or rationality.
Sure bud. You produced a ‘definition’ that doesn’t work because it folds under slightest scrutiny, then you accused me of rejecting Western democracy while refusing to explain how your definition would work in practice, now you spout a bunch of empty proclamations worthy of an adolescent edgelord, while failing to grasp where the bulk of religious law comes from. And you say that it’s me who’s handwaving and doesn’t understand. Big ‘in this moment i am euphoric’ energy there. People like you are why online atheist movement is treated as a laughable circlejerk.
Also, US law is based on racism, bigotry, misogyny, self-centered backwardness and corporatocracy, along with ‘Christian values’. So you probably shouldn’t pipe up about that.
Lol! Um, ok. Are you seriously saying that you don’t know anything about this…but, you’re still going to double down anyway?
Go to school, kid. Seriously. Even just read a book or something.
There’s no doubt that people much smarter than you wrote about this topic, but there’s also no evidence that you learned anything from them but just the surface ideas.
You should try learning to either troll more subtly, or to produce some constructive thought. Then you perhaps might be treated somewhat seriously outside of the fedora m’lady community.
Oh, I see. You’re a troll, then. That makes sense. No one is this confidently incorrect when Google is available, unless they’re just pretending to be stupid for the lols.
Fuck, you’re really tiring. You can wear your fedora and your cute coat and write stuff that you can’t substantiate all day long, what do I care? I should’ve known better than to pop into a space dedicated to conceited hot-air types like you sucking each other off.
Buddy…based on the ridiculous shit you’ve already said, you’re either a troll, or a total moron. I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt here. Take it.