2
lapalapa 2 points ago +2 / -0

Naturally, post-birth abortion was always the next step. How else are you going to allow people to be free? Freedom from the bondage of responsibility. Freedom to be selfish.

9
lapalapa 9 points ago +9 / -0

People in hell have lost all good in them. They do not want to get out of it, they want to get everyone in it.

22
lapalapa 22 points ago +22 / -0

It's apple. Their customers are the softest people.

3
lapalapa 3 points ago +3 / -0

They're at least too young not to wave them around to showboat.

2
lapalapa 2 points ago +2 / -0

Not sure about that. Russia talks about a number of biolabs making things that target Slavic genome. Anything could be true.

by folx
4
lapalapa 4 points ago +4 / -0

Can this happen through ideology alone, with no previous molestation?

7
lapalapa 7 points ago +7 / -0

Excellent counter-argument you bring up. The real question would then be whether or not the war is just (I do believe that sanctions intense enough to provoke a revolution is an act of war, especially if purposefully aimed towards it).

St. Thomas Aquinas has three conditions which need to met before a war can be called “just”:

  1. Does the prince who declares war have the correct authority to do so?
  2. Does the war declaring nation have just cause to seek redress for an injury done to it?
  3. Does the party declaring war have just intent in promoting good or avoiding evil?

Ignorant as I am, I'll try to answer these questions:

  1. Yes, the federal government has the authority to declare war (or enact/influence acts of war by today's modern forms of warfare).
  2. Who knows who deserves what at this point in the middle east. Redress of injury isn't the goal so much as making Iran predictable.
  3. I don't know. It's either a desire for stability or a desire to consolidate power. Iran is either a danger worse than North Korea that would use nukes suicidally if they had them, or a country that wishes it had deterrents to safeguard itself from the west.

Answers to questions 2 and 3 aren't clear. That's all I got.

6
lapalapa 6 points ago +6 / -0

How does that wise saying go? Invest in what you know.

That money is going to evaporate into microtransaction nonsense and marxist-infested cancer.

7
lapalapa 7 points ago +7 / -0

Why are you vaccinating the underage for STD's? FFS, teach chastity and discipline. Let the ones who want degeneracy vaccinate themselves.

2
lapalapa 2 points ago +2 / -0

You won't, but you'll see it at the end of time, regardless on which side you end up.

3
lapalapa 3 points ago +3 / -0

Why is that more likely than the USA doing it?

by folx
6
lapalapa 6 points ago +6 / -0

Yeah, it's a nonsense stereotype of the past, like people saying progress stopped during the Medieval Era, or that people used to think the Earth was flat.

2
lapalapa 2 points ago +2 / -0

Ah, the plant? That isn't woke, it's an alien. Rather, the show implicitly admonishes the Peacekeeper's destruction of the family.

2
lapalapa 2 points ago +2 / -0

The old woke, before woke.

What? The show is pro family and implicitly pro life.

1
lapalapa 1 point ago +1 / -0

You're thinking too small. The USA could completely fall and just be a small chapter in the global dark age I'm referring to.

1
lapalapa 1 point ago +1 / -0

You get lots of details on second watching.

17
lapalapa 17 points ago +17 / -0

Watch Farscape instead. First season is a bit iffy, but the crew truly ends up becoming a family. The show has a heart and little tidbits of interesting science fiction ideas.

Supernatural was always more for teenage girls tbh.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›