S

Yeah, well, philosophy is overrated. Politics is where it's at. The real deal.

You’re suggesting that advocates of barbaric and inhumane punishments such as stoning should be respected?

Exactly. Thank you. You seem dumbfounded for some reason. Did you not pay sufficient attention in your history lessons at school? Do you not read hist...

But the difference is that you're wrong and I'm right. And yes, I know you think the same about me in that respect also, but you're wrong about that t...

He is, obviously. :rofl:

By the moral standard. The latter shouldn't require proof. If you require it to be proved to you, then that's your moral failing.

If they thought that stoning was acceptable, then obviously not. That's a very good test for sound moral judgement. Thinking that stoning is acceptabl...

It doesn't matter what an ancient hypothetical version of myself would have thought. If he would've thought that stoning is acceptable, then he would ...

No, no, no. The message of Jesus is more about stoning people and chasing people with whips. It's about mindless submission to God and carrying out ac...

That's a false dilemma, since it could be both or neither. It's also a poor analogy, since the word "divisive" is not typically used in that kind of s...

No. Agustino don't need no stats, or facts, or experts. He gots his eyes, his Trump-tinted glasses, and his evil fictional God.

Firstly, your use of loaded language is counterproductive. For those of us who can see through it, it reflects back on you and only serves to cast dou...

Whatever it is, let's at least pick a sensible place to start contemplating that question by recognising that it's no more God than the Easter Bunny.

I say it is wrong, and I say it is wrong for good reasons. Do you disagree? Yes or no. If no, then we have nothing further to discuss. If yes, then yo...

Relativist nonsense. That it might not have stood out at the time, that it might have been viewed differently, or that it might not have been as cruel...

It is beside the point, it shows no such thing, I am honest with myself, and I have reached a different conclusion. Your reasoning is clearly erroneou...

That's beside the point, so I choose not to answer.

That's sickening.

You should be worried. That's very disconcerting. No one who permits stoning adulterers to death, whether your fictional "God" or anyone else, can rig...

01:22 "I pledge before my Heavenly Father, that I-I-I-I-I-I-blu-blub-blur will resist them wuh-eh-uh-eh-uur..." Oh, wow. You done the whole thing! Tha...

A baseball bat. And then you take that baseball bat, and you swing it as hard as you can, aiming for Tucker Carlson's head.

Or ever has, to the best of our knowledge. (According to your definition, that is).

It's a type of cheese.

Don't get me started. I got all the way to the Domino's pizza online checkout the other day before I finally managed to overcome myself and go to the ...

Yeah, we established quite early on that Agustino has got it wrong, and that he doesn't know what he's talking about.

That's like rule by Santa. Do you have a realistic political theory to put forward for consideration?

Yes, it's more of a multi-party system than the US. Of course, most go with one of the two main parties, and more so in the last few years than in pre...

Yeah, that's the most comical part of the tweet for me. The rhetoric is reminiscent of May's "strong and stable". It's like it's screaming out, "Look ...

No. I used to be. I have since joined the Labour Party.

No, fun can only be had with my permission and adversarial is always necessary. Now, wipe that smile of your face, stop trying to be agreeable, and sa...

You agree with your own misinterpretation? Okay. Have fun with that.

The Economist explains... Why tariffs are bad taxes Who are we to believe? That's a toughie. On the one hand, we have Agustino, a fervant Trump suppor...

Your comment misses what the debates on the topic are about, and is therefore trivial. No one is denying that, hence your hypothetical "someone" to sh...

Yeah, you'd know all about moral insanity, wouldn't you?

Wow.

Good luck getting through to him. This is the guy who asked, "Why should it trickle down?".

This is one of the most transparent examples of superficially puffing up your own personal opinion to give it an illusory appearance of fact that I ha...

A pass on what? You want me to continue to point out errors for you to explain away?

That you have to ask why speaks for itself. Why should it be? Why have you ruled out the possibility (well, I think it's more than just a possibility,...

It doesn't really matter whether they were or weren't trying to trick Jesus. If that's what matters to you, then sadly you'll miss the point. Jesus wo...

You've implied that if the Pharisees had brought both the man and the woman, then Jesus would've had no reason to say what he did, and that he would'v...

Jesus wouldn't have said, "Stone her", and he wouldn't have said, "Stone them", either. You're missing the point.

You're right, it's not hilarious at all. And your views on adultery, biblical interpretation, human rights, and other matters, are not in any way ridi...

I agree: it's hilarious. So, like, if they had brought both the man and the woman, then Jesus would've been like, "Go ahead. Stone away!".

Analysis? More like apologetics and whataboutery.

A leopard can't change its spots. Trump was being played from the start.

Can we possibly add an off topic, chill out area to post casual comments? We could call it "The Sitting Room".

I know. That's how our discussion started, remember? I took issue with the definition that you presented at the time. I don't see an answer to my ques...

Ohhhhhhh, Jer-em-eeey Corrrrr-byn. Oh, the other JC.

Do you remember when you used to call yourself a socialist?