Man

[Taz]

So we can see from the outcomes that not all behaviors have equal outcomes. That some behaviors have better outcomes and some behaviors have worse outcomes. This is the moral law at work.

Dropping nukes on Japan was good for us but not so good for the civilians of those 2 cities. Morally ok or not to drop nukes on civilians?

 

[ding]

Do you have empirical evidence that God doesn't exist?

No, that's why I'm an agnostic. There's no real proof either way.

Except for what was created.

You've yet to tie what's around us to your preferred invisible guy. You just say, look around you that proves my god. Umm... no, that's not how it works for people with a whole brain.

I say quite a bit more than that, Taz. I back it up and it has yet to be refuted. The fact that you can't even properly characterize it tells me that you know you have lost.

 

[ding]

So we can see from the outcomes that not all behaviors have equal outcomes. That some behaviors have better outcomes and some behaviors have worse outcomes. This is the moral law at work.

Dropping nukes on Japan was good for us but not so good for the civilians of those 2 cities. Morally ok or not to drop nukes on civilians?

Truman called it the lesser of two evils.

 

[Taz]

So we can see from the outcomes that not all behaviors have equal outcomes. That some behaviors have better outcomes and some behaviors have worse outcomes. This is the moral law at work.

Dropping nukes on Japan was good for us but not so good for the civilians of those 2 cities. Morally ok or not to drop nukes on civilians?

Truman called it the lesser of two evils.

Truman's behaviour had a good outcome, so according to you, it's morally right to drop nukes on civilians.

 

[ding]

So we can see from the outcomes that not all behaviors have equal outcomes. That some behaviors have better outcomes and some behaviors have worse outcomes. This is the moral law at work.

Dropping nukes on Japan was good for us but not so good for the civilians of those 2 cities. Morally ok or not to drop nukes on civilians?

Truman called it the lesser of two evils.

Truman's behaviour had a good outcome, so according to you, it's morally right to drop nukes on civilians.

I don't care about his behavior or the outcome of his decision. I only care that he believed it was the lesser of two evils.

 

[Taz]

So we can see from the outcomes that not all behaviors have equal outcomes. That some behaviors have better outcomes and some behaviors have worse outcomes. This is the moral law at work.

Dropping nukes on Japan was good for us but not so good for the civilians of those 2 cities. Morally ok or not to drop nukes on civilians?

Truman called it the lesser of two evils.

Truman's behaviour had a good outcome, so according to you, it's morally right to drop nukes on civilians.

I don't care about his behavior or the outcome of his decision. I only care that he believed it was the lesser of two evils.

So now you're walking this back "This is the moral law at work." Good for you, it was nonsense.

 

[ding]

So we can see from the outcomes that not all behaviors have equal outcomes. That some behaviors have better outcomes and some behaviors have worse outcomes. This is the moral law at work.

Dropping nukes on Japan was good for us but not so good for the civilians of those 2 cities. Morally ok or not to drop nukes on civilians?

Truman called it the lesser of two evils.

Truman's behaviour had a good outcome, so according to you, it's morally right to drop nukes on civilians.

I don't care about his behavior or the outcome of his decision. I only care that he believed it was the lesser of two evils.

So now you're walking this back "This is the moral law at work." Good for you, it was nonsense.

I don't see how I am walking anything back, Taz. Truman himself said it wasn't moral. People do immoral things, Taz. Deal with it.

Dropping the nukes was the lesser of two evils and has absolutely nothing to do with the moral law at work. If you want to see the moral law at work just stop being virtuous to everyone you love. You'll see it then.

 

[Taz]

So we can see from the outcomes that not all behaviors have equal outcomes. That some behaviors have better outcomes and some behaviors have worse outcomes. This is the moral law at work.

Dropping nukes on Japan was good for us but not so good for the civilians of those 2 cities. Morally ok or not to drop nukes on civilians?

Truman called it the lesser of two evils.

Truman's behaviour had a good outcome, so according to you, it's morally right to drop nukes on civilians.

I don't care about his behavior or the outcome of his decision. I only care that he believed it was the lesser of two evils.

So now you're walking this back "This is the moral law at work." Good for you, it was nonsense.

I don't see how I am walking anything back, Taz. Truman himself said it wasn't moral. People do immoral things, Taz. Deal with it.

Dropping the nukes was the lesser of two evils and has absolutely nothing to do with the moral law at work. If you want to see the moral law at work just stop being virtuous to everyone you love. You'll see it then.

So if dropping nukes on civilians is amoral, what were the consequences for having broken that law?

 

[Likkmee]

God created man in his own image. Man occupies a unique place in creation. God in his own nature unites the spiritual and material worlds and established his friendship. Of all visible creatures only man is able to know and love his creator. He is called to share, by knowledge and love, in God's own life. It was for this end that he was created, and this is the fundamental reason for his dignity.

Being in the image of God the human individual possesses the dignity of a person, who is not just something, but someone. He is capable of self-knowledge, of self-possession and of freely giving himself and entering into communion with other persons. And he is called by grace to a covenant with his Creator, to offer him a response of faith and love that no other creature can give in his stead.

God created everything for man, but man in turn was created to serve and love God and to offer all creation back to him. It is only in the mystery of the Word made flesh that the mystery of man truly becomes clear. St. Paul tells us that the human race takes its origin from two men: Adam and Christ. . . The first man, Adam, he says, became a living soul, the last Adam a life-giving spirit. The first Adam was made by the last Adam, from whom he also received his soul, to give him life. . . The second Adam stamped his image on the first Adam when he created him. That is why he took on himself the role and the name of the first Adam, in order that he might not lose what he had made in his own image. The first Adam, the last Adam: the first had a beginning, the last knows no end. The last Adam is indeed the first; as he himself says: "I am the first and the last."

Because of its common origin the human race forms a unity which makes us contemplate the human race in the unity of its origin in God. . . in the unity of its nature, composed equally in all men of a material body and a spiritual soul; in the unity of its immediate end and its mission in the world; in the unity of its dwelling, the earth, whose benefits all men, by right of nature, may use to sustain and develop life; in the unity of its supernatural end: God himself, to whom all ought to tend; in the unity of the means for attaining this end;. . . in the unity of the redemption wrought by Christ for all.

This law of human solidarity and charity without excluding the rich variety of persons, cultures and peoples, assures us that all men are truly brethren. The human person, created in the image of God, is a being at once corporeal and spiritual. The biblical account expresses this reality in symbolic language when it affirms that then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being. Man, whole and entire, is therefore willed by God.

In Sacred Scripture the term "soul" often refers to human life or the entire human person. But "soul" also refers to the innermost aspect of man, that which is of greatest value in him, that by which he is most especially in God's image. "Soul" signifies the spiritual principle in man.

The human body shares in the dignity of "the image of God": it is a human body precisely because it is animated by a spiritual soul, and it is the whole human person that is intended to become, in the body of Christ, a temple of the Spirit.

Man, though made of body and soul, is a unity. Through his very bodily condition he sums up in himself the elements of the material world. Through him they are thus brought to their highest perfection and can raise their voice in praise freely given to the Creator. For this reason man may not despise his bodily life. Rather he is obliged to regard his body as good and to hold it in honor since God has created it and will raise it up on the last day.

The unity of soul and body is so profound that one has to consider the soul to be the "form" of the body. It is because of its spiritual soul that the body made of matter becomes a living, human body; spirit and matter, in man, are not two natures united, but rather their union forms a single nature.

The Church teaches that every spiritual soul is created immediately by God - it is not "produced" by the parents - and also that it is immortal: it does not perish when it separates from the body at death, and it will be reunited with the body at the final Resurrection.

Sometimes the soul is distinguished from the spirit: St. Paul for instance prays that God may sanctify his people "wholly", with "spirit and soul and body" kept sound and blameless at the Lord's coming. The Church teaches that this distinction does not introduce a duality into the soul. "Spirit" signifies that from creation man is ordered to a supernatural end and that his soul can gratuitously be raised beyond all it deserves to communion with God.

The spiritual tradition of the Church also emphasizes the heart, in the biblical sense of the depths of one's being, where the person decides for or against God.

Paraphrased and excerpted from the Catechism of the Catholic Church

Catechism of the Catholic Church - Table of Contents

And foremost He knows a bunch of assholes when He sees them and wipes them off the map.Ask Noe how that works.
Dear God. Part 2 please.
Don't worry about tsunamis and the nonsense you see on the net of FL under 200 feet of water and the Mississippi delta 100-200 miles wide. Not happenin.
This time it'll be fire.
" All the stars of heaven will be dissolved. The skies will be rolled up like a scroll, and all their stars will fall like withered leaves on the vine, and foliage on the fig tree."

"The first angel sounded his trumpet, and there came hail and fire mixed with blood, and it was hurled down on the earth. A third of the earth was burned up, a third of the trees were burned up, and all the green grass was burned up."

Spielberg and Lucas will be really jealous

 

[Likkmee]

So we can see from the outcomes that not all behaviors have equal outcomes. That some behaviors have better outcomes and some behaviors have worse outcomes. This is the moral law at work.

Dropping nukes on Japan was good for us but not so good for the civilians of those 2 cities. Morally ok or not to drop nukes on civilians?

I suppose. Meaheads first. Why didn't they take out the people who owned them ? Japanese at the time were dumb motherfuckers just like the German assholes who tolerated and assisted Hitler....just like the useless assholes in North Korea.
1.4 billion Chinese can handle a million or 2 brainwashed meatheads in jingles and green Halloween suits.Then you can take a dog leash and hang the "leaders" in a public square and be done with it. Same goes for El #1 shithole. Guilty by association.

 

[Likkmee]

The interviewer should jumped up and slashed the whores throat right then

 

[Taz]

So we can see from the outcomes that not all behaviors have equal outcomes. That some behaviors have better outcomes and some behaviors have worse outcomes. This is the moral law at work.

Dropping nukes on Japan was good for us but not so good for the civilians of those 2 cities. Morally ok or not to drop nukes on civilians?

I suppose. Meaheads first. Why didn't they take out the people who owned them ? Japanese at the time were dumb motherfuckers just like the German assholes who tolerated and assisted Hitler....just like the useless assholes in North Korea.
1.4 billion Chinese can handle a million or 2 brainwashed meatheads in jingles and green Halloween suits.Then you can take a dog leash and hang the "leaders" in a public square and be done with it. Same goes for El #1 shithole. Guilty by association.

You mean like the dumb motherfuckers who elected Trump?

 

[Likkmee]

So we can see from the outcomes that not all behaviors have equal outcomes. That some behaviors have better outcomes and some behaviors have worse outcomes. This is the moral law at work.

Dropping nukes on Japan was good for us but not so good for the civilians of those 2 cities. Morally ok or not to drop nukes on civilians?

I suppose. Meaheads first. Why didn't they take out the people who owned them ? Japanese at the time were dumb motherfuckers just like the German assholes who tolerated and assisted Hitler....just like the useless assholes in North Korea.
1.4 billion Chinese can handle a million or 2 brainwashed meatheads in jingles and green Halloween suits.Then you can take a dog leash and hang the "leaders" in a public square and be done with it. Same goes for El #1 shithole. Guilty by association.

You mean like the dumb motherfuckers who elected Trump?

Trump is a show. There are 535 and God knows how many more that you assholes put in positions of great power.Dumb motherfuckers that cant even name a mayor, county manager, governor,police chief or anyone else running the show where they've lived their entire lives.
My daddy and granpappy dunn voted for (R or D) and I are too !!!
The REAL owners know this and present you with a handful of assholes that work for them all. Those are your choices.You have no choices.

 

[Taz]

So we can see from the outcomes that not all behaviors have equal outcomes. That some behaviors have better outcomes and some behaviors have worse outcomes. This is the moral law at work.

Dropping nukes on Japan was good for us but not so good for the civilians of those 2 cities. Morally ok or not to drop nukes on civilians?

I suppose. Meaheads first. Why didn't they take out the people who owned them ? Japanese at the time were dumb motherfuckers just like the German assholes who tolerated and assisted Hitler....just like the useless assholes in North Korea.
1.4 billion Chinese can handle a million or 2 brainwashed meatheads in jingles and green Halloween suits.Then you can take a dog leash and hang the "leaders" in a public square and be done with it. Same goes for El #1 shithole. Guilty by association.

You mean like the dumb motherfuckers who elected Trump?

Trump is a show. There are 535 and God knows how many more that you assholes put in positions of great power.Dumb motherfuckers that cant even name a mayor, county manager, governor,police chief or anyone else running the show where they've lived their entire lives.
My daddy and granpappy dunn voted for (R or D) and I are too !!!
The REAL owners know this and present you with a handful of assholes that work for them all. Those are your choices.You have no choices.

You are almost coherent, not bad for a monkey.

 

[ding]

So we can see from the outcomes that not all behaviors have equal outcomes. That some behaviors have better outcomes and some behaviors have worse outcomes. This is the moral law at work.

Dropping nukes on Japan was good for us but not so good for the civilians of those 2 cities. Morally ok or not to drop nukes on civilians?

Truman called it the lesser of two evils.

Truman's behaviour had a good outcome, so according to you, it's morally right to drop nukes on civilians.

I don't care about his behavior or the outcome of his decision. I only care that he believed it was the lesser of two evils.

So now you're walking this back "This is the moral law at work." Good for you, it was nonsense.

I don't see how I am walking anything back, Taz. Truman himself said it wasn't moral. People do immoral things, Taz. Deal with it.

Dropping the nukes was the lesser of two evils and has absolutely nothing to do with the moral law at work. If you want to see the moral law at work just stop being virtuous to everyone you love. You'll see it then.

So if dropping nukes on civilians is amoral, what were the consequences for having broken that law?

I've only addressed this a dozen times with you, Taz.

So you tell me.

 

[Taz]

So we can see from the outcomes that not all behaviors have equal outcomes. That some behaviors have better outcomes and some behaviors have worse outcomes. This is the moral law at work.

Dropping nukes on Japan was good for us but not so good for the civilians of those 2 cities. Morally ok or not to drop nukes on civilians?

Truman called it the lesser of two evils.

Truman's behaviour had a good outcome, so according to you, it's morally right to drop nukes on civilians.

I don't care about his behavior or the outcome of his decision. I only care that he believed it was the lesser of two evils.

So now you're walking this back "This is the moral law at work." Good for you, it was nonsense.

I don't see how I am walking anything back, Taz. Truman himself said it wasn't moral. People do immoral things, Taz. Deal with it.

Dropping the nukes was the lesser of two evils and has absolutely nothing to do with the moral law at work. If you want to see the moral law at work just stop being virtuous to everyone you love. You'll see it then.

So if dropping nukes on civilians is amoral, what were the consequences for having broken that law?

I've only addressed this a dozen times with you, Taz.

So you tell me.

The consequences of doing something immoral was victory. So much for your law. Doofus.

 

[ding]

So we can see from the outcomes that not all behaviors have equal outcomes. That some behaviors have better outcomes and some behaviors have worse outcomes. This is the moral law at work.

Dropping nukes on Japan was good for us but not so good for the civilians of those 2 cities. Morally ok or not to drop nukes on civilians?

Truman called it the lesser of two evils.

Truman's behaviour had a good outcome, so according to you, it's morally right to drop nukes on civilians.

I don't care about his behavior or the outcome of his decision. I only care that he believed it was the lesser of two evils.

So now you're walking this back "This is the moral law at work." Good for you, it was nonsense.

I don't see how I am walking anything back, Taz. Truman himself said it wasn't moral. People do immoral things, Taz. Deal with it.

Dropping the nukes was the lesser of two evils and has absolutely nothing to do with the moral law at work. If you want to see the moral law at work just stop being virtuous to everyone you love. You'll see it then.

So if dropping nukes on civilians is amoral, what were the consequences for having broken that law?

I've only addressed this a dozen times with you, Taz.

So you tell me.

The consequences of doing something immoral was victory. So much for your law. Doofus.

Not always and not immediately, dummy. This is why it's a waste of time discussing things with you. You can't even get right what you have been told.

 

[Taz]

So we can see from the outcomes that not all behaviors have equal outcomes. That some behaviors have better outcomes and some behaviors have worse outcomes. This is the moral law at work.

Dropping nukes on Japan was good for us but not so good for the civilians of those 2 cities. Morally ok or not to drop nukes on civilians?

Truman called it the lesser of two evils.

Truman's behaviour had a good outcome, so according to you, it's morally right to drop nukes on civilians.

I don't care about his behavior or the outcome of his decision. I only care that he believed it was the lesser of two evils.

So now you're walking this back "This is the moral law at work." Good for you, it was nonsense.

I don't see how I am walking anything back, Taz. Truman himself said it wasn't moral. People do immoral things, Taz. Deal with it.

Dropping the nukes was the lesser of two evils and has absolutely nothing to do with the moral law at work. If you want to see the moral law at work just stop being virtuous to everyone you love. You'll see it then.

So if dropping nukes on civilians is amoral, what were the consequences for having broken that law?

I've only addressed this a dozen times with you, Taz.

So you tell me.

The consequences of doing something immoral was victory. So much for your law. Doofus.

Not always and not immediately, dummy. This is why it's a waste of time discussing things with you. You can't even get right what you have been told.

"Not always and not immediately" so it doesn't work like a real law of nature. Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[ding]

So we can see from the outcomes that not all behaviors have equal outcomes. That some behaviors have better outcomes and some behaviors have worse outcomes. This is the moral law at work.

Dropping nukes on Japan was good for us but not so good for the civilians of those 2 cities. Morally ok or not to drop nukes on civilians?

Truman called it the lesser of two evils.

Truman's behaviour had a good outcome, so according to you, it's morally right to drop nukes on civilians.

I don't care about his behavior or the outcome of his decision. I only care that he believed it was the lesser of two evils.

So now you're walking this back "This is the moral law at work." Good for you, it was nonsense.

I don't see how I am walking anything back, Taz. Truman himself said it wasn't moral. People do immoral things, Taz. Deal with it.

Dropping the nukes was the lesser of two evils and has absolutely nothing to do with the moral law at work. If you want to see the moral law at work just stop being virtuous to everyone you love. You'll see it then.

So if dropping nukes on civilians is amoral, what were the consequences for having broken that law?

I've only addressed this a dozen times with you, Taz.

So you tell me.

The consequences of doing something immoral was victory. So much for your law. Doofus.

Not always and not immediately, dummy. This is why it's a waste of time discussing things with you. You can't even get right what you have been told.

"Not always and not immediately" so it doesn't work like a real law of nature. Thanks for clearing that up.

Not a physical law of nature, dummy.

 

[Taz]

So we can see from the outcomes that not all behaviors have equal outcomes. That some behaviors have better outcomes and some behaviors have worse outcomes. This is the moral law at work.

Dropping nukes on Japan was good for us but not so good for the civilians of those 2 cities. Morally ok or not to drop nukes on civilians?

Truman called it the lesser of two evils.

Truman's behaviour had a good outcome, so according to you, it's morally right to drop nukes on civilians.

I don't care about his behavior or the outcome of his decision. I only care that he believed it was the lesser of two evils.

So now you're walking this back "This is the moral law at work." Good for you, it was nonsense.

I don't see how I am walking anything back, Taz. Truman himself said it wasn't moral. People do immoral things, Taz. Deal with it.

Dropping the nukes was the lesser of two evils and has absolutely nothing to do with the moral law at work. If you want to see the moral law at work just stop being virtuous to everyone you love. You'll see it then.

So if dropping nukes on civilians is amoral, what were the consequences for having broken that law?

I've only addressed this a dozen times with you, Taz.

So you tell me.

The consequences of doing something immoral was victory. So much for your law. Doofus.

Not always and not immediately, dummy. This is why it's a waste of time discussing things with you. You can't even get right what you have been told.

"Not always and not immediately" so it doesn't work like a real law of nature. Thanks for clearing that up.

Not a physical law of nature, dummy.

So who's moral law then, yours?