Zone1 Who Is Destroying The World?

[BlackSand]

Satan and the WEF are trying their best to destroy the world.

.

Evil will use every tool in the toolbox, from compassion to hatred.
It doesn't care who it uses to accomplish its goal ... And destruction is its goal.

Some people think they are immune, and never see it in themselves.

.​

 

[Clyde 154]

.

Thanks for the Bible lesson and good luck on your Holy Crusade.

However ... If you have to quote the Bible to express your ability to come about a rational thought of your own ...
I don't think you really understand the concept ... You are just using someone else's words.

He gave you a brain ... Try to use it every now and again.
​

.​

WELCOME But I attempt to think before I react. You have rational thought without ever having studied or used someone's elses words? Really? You were born with a moral compass independent from societies teaching and instruction?

I.E...........someone else's words.........morality as explained by the God of Creation. Question? Just where did your ideas come from if not from someone's words? Words such as exist in Common Law. Laws that by majority are based upon Blackstone's theories concerning the laws of England, with Blackstone helping FRAME the United States Constitution. Blackstone referenced the Judeo/Christian philosophy. Easily proven to be true as based upon history actual.

Commentaries on the Laws of England - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Any time that SCTOUS debates the framing of the US Constution.......Blackstone is used as the standard precendent.

I project that the failure to comprehend or understand.........is not on "MY PART". What? Are your moral positions based upon your own ideas of morality........each man is his/her own moral compass? You are above THE LAW?

As far as using someone elses words...........simply prove that the majority of the 10 commandments are not incorporated into US Law.

 

[BlackSand]

WELCOME

I.E...........someone else's words.........morality as explained by the God of Creation. Question? Just where did your ideas come from if not from someone's words? Words such as exist in Common Law. Laws that by majority are based upon Blackstone's theories concerning the laws of England, with Blackstone helping FRAME the United States Constitution. Blackstone referenced the Judeo/Christian philosophy. Easily proven to be true as based upon history actual.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackstone's_Commontaries_on_the_Laws_of_England

Any time that SCTOUS debates the framing of the US Constution.......Blackstone is used as the standard precendent.

I project that the failure to comprehend or understand.........is not on "MY PART". What? Are you moral positions based upon your own ideas of morality........each man is his/her own moral compass? You are above THE LAW?

.

There is a difference in quoting someone else and using language to express your own ideas.
Damn dude ... Can you make a point without referencing someone else, or making your own thoughts subservient to the conditions of another?

Stand on your own two feet and don't try so hard not to understand ...
.​

 

[OneIsTheWord]

"When you have made evil the means of survival, do not expect men to remain good.

Do not expect them to stay moral and lose their lives for the purpose of becoming the fodder of the immoral.

Do not expect them to produce , when production is punished and looting rewarded.

Do not ask, “Who is destroying the world?” You are."

-- Ayn Rand (Atlas Shrugged)

narcissism
society creates the crime the criminal commits them

 

[Jaxson]

Wait all you want.........its you that claimed that animals can comprehend right from wrong and have a moral compass based upon the concept of morality. Science is your supposed realm, you should have no problem presenting the objective, observable, reproducible facts in evidence that demonstrate that aniamls can reason between right and wrong. Go for it.

The example that you attempted to use to define Morality........a mother protecting its offspring, is not based upon morality..........or you would have to admit that any Woman that aborts her child by choice.........is IMMORAL by natures standards. So.....self contradictory.

Why do all so called atheists attempt to project the burden of Proof upon others when its they that ACCUSES but are incapable of PROSECUTING their accusations and demand that others prove their negative opinions? Could be......they possess no evidences of the positions they claim are true? In order to be an atheist.......one would require to be in possession of the knowledge that God cannot exist, or admit their unbelief is faith based void of evidence.....so oxymoronic

Its simple: Only man on earth is made in the "image" of God (Genesis 1:26)........God is a spirit (John 4:24)......thus, the image that reflects God in man...i.e., IMAGE is the spirit that animates the flesh of man and makes him a living being, that image came from God when He breathed life into mankind (Genesis 2:7).........and only man can become like God in self determining Right from Wrong, Good from Evil.

"And the Lord God said, Behold, the man has become as one of US (the Godhead, Father, Son and Holy Spirit) to know good and evil; " -- Genesis 3:22

No animal can be Good or Evil. The question you asked or rather demand that I address with your negative false primise......i.e., logical fallcy (morality exists in nature).....is addressed by Common Sense. Have you ever seen an animal put on trial for breaking any of the actions that society has determined is illgeal by making Common Law by majority consensus?


Show me these animals that have been put on trial........for murder, theft, etc...........

Laws do not establish morality..........they reflect the morality or lack thereof in any society. Laws define immorality. There can be no laws without a lawgiver, just who is nature's lawgiver, that defines morality for all animals? Animals are incapable of sin. Thus, God does not judge aniamls (WP?) for their lack of comprehending right from wrong.......only man is judged in absolute measures of morality. The exact reason that athesits exist.........they can't stand the idea of being judged based upon their abilities to comprehend right from wrong.


What does God say about arguing with FOOLS? "A fool takes no pleasure in understanding...........a fool simply wants to express his opinion." -- Pr. 18:2

So you have no science to back up what you said. I admit, mine was a guess on a dumb concept to even be arguing about, now that I look back, lol. Animals can however show empathy to other animals and help them. That's a fact. Most humans won't even do that, especially GOP Christians. And pedophile priests.

 

[Clyde 154]

.

There is a difference in quoting someone else and using language to express your own ideas.
Damn dude ... Can you make a point without referencing someone else, or making your own thoughts subservient to the conditions of another?

Stand on your own two feet and don't try so hard not to understand ... ​

.​

DUDE! Do you not see just how lame your posts are? You are using and repeating the words of others in your so called self styled philsophy. You are a walking or sitting/squating self contrandiction.

Indeed its called "articulation".........and it reflects one's actual education as opposed to someone pretending to be something they are not......intelligent. Why would someone use 2 different posts and basically declare nothing except an excetional love of one'self? So far you have not only "not" used the words of another...........you keep repeating your same listless stuttering phrases in pretending to say something of valuve. Thus far the only thing your words demonstrate is the basic traits of a narcissist.

To find objective truth one must always apply the same formula that demonstrates facts as per the application of said truth.......... 1. the evidence presented must be OBSERVABLE (if its only contained within the human mind.....its not a fact but a philosophy, as its observable only to the one attempting to communicate via using (wink, wink) only their own words.......you have inverted and projected thoughts as words and declared those thoughts truth void of anyone having the capacity to actually OBSERVE for themselves..........in order to.....point No. 2 of the formula for finding objective truth 2. Reproduce the projected communication that is professed to be truth..........and this should be.......point No. 3. consistent when applied to any conversation.


Only opinions change (evolve) truth does not evovle or it was never truth..........what was true 2000 years ago is just as true today. Simply pretending to be something that you are not (intelligent) is by far the eastiest type of deception to reveal.........

The Big Lie is always repreated. Why pretend that a presentation of Historical Truth.......is an exercise in stupdity? Because its one of many methods to deflect away from one's IGNORANCE on any given subject. I find it most difficult to present a historical truth void of using WORDS, words recorded, bettern known as historical documentation. I (unlike you) was not born with an innate command of the English Langauge with an ingrained copy of Oxford's Advanced Learner's Dictionary shoved up MY ASS. I actually had to study THE WORDS OF "OTHERS" in order to acquire acknowledged historical truths.

 

[BlackSand]

Indeed its called "articulation".........and it reflects one's actual education as opposed to someone pretending to be something they are not

.

Just stop right there at the beginning of your thoughts on the matter.

Articulating someone else's words, referencing someone else's thoughts, and claiming that is education ...
Would only mean that you were indoctrinated, rely on the thought of others,
subjugate your own understanding to others for validation because you are insecure with your own thoughts ...
And want to pretend that somehow makes you something you aren't ...

Consensus is always to serve an agenda and is never independent thought.

.​

 

[Clyde 154]

.

Just stop right there at the beginning of your thoughts on the matter.

Articulating someone else's words, referencing someone else's thoughts, and claiming that is education ...
Would only mean that you were indoctrinated, rely on the thought of others,
subjugate your own understanding to others for validation because you are insecure with your own thoughts ...
And want to pretend that somehow makes you something you aren't ...

Consensus is always to serve an agenda and is never independent thought.

.​

Circular Logic/Logical Fallacy........look it up. Its impossible to artiulate any type of communication void of using Words that are "learned" from someone other than self. Just how "gullible" and "stupid" do you actually assume others to be.....or as my pap would say, "Just how think do you stupid I am"? You are the quint essential example of someone that always claims to be the smartest individual in any room they might enter.....there's a name for such a condition, its called

Narcissistic Phychoses:

Question? Did you gain pleasure from torturing small animals as a child? To assume that you actually believe the things you espouse.........one must also assume that you are a sick puppy void of any type of human empathy or guilt of conscience.......because you are a god unto yourself.

You project yourself as some super intelligent human being that was born with all the knowledge in the world.....you did not have to be taught/instructed by the words of anyone. As I stated: A walking self contradiction. FYI: simply because you have been instructed/taught on any particular subject does not make you smart or truthful..........a lie can be taught as well as truth. Truths are required to be documented. Pretending to have access to all the knowledge in the world contained within your psyche does not make it truth. Truth must be demonstrable through Observation, Reproduction and Consistency.


Or as the Holy Spirit suggested in the Word of God, "Prove all things, hold onto that which is good........" -- 1 Thess. 5:21

Having faith is not Blind.....its based upon things that are observed, tested, and reproducible......even if its HOPE that is placed to the test. Prima Facie truth derives in accepting the supernatural as based upon the 90% of the Holy Word of God that is testable in an objective fashion when applied science and history actual are applied (the scriptures lack nothing in being proven true....where they can be tested by either).

Your lession in logic today: "The Law of the Excluded Middle". You can't be intelligent and independent from the thoughts or words of others. Either something is true or its negation is true..........nothing can be both true and false depending upon choice.

 

[BlackSand]

Circular Logic/Logical Fallacy........look it up. Its impossible to artiulate any type of communication void of using Words that are "learned" from someone other than self. Just how "gullible" and "stupid" do you actually assume others to be.....or as my pap would say, "Just how think do you stupid I am"? You are the quint essential example of someone that always claims to be the smartest individual in any room they might enter.....there's a name for such a condition, its called

Narcissistic Phychoses:

You project yourself as some super intelligent human being that was born with all the knowledge in the world.....you did not have to be taught/instructed by the words of anyone. As I stated: A walking self contradiction. FYI: simply because you have been instructed/taught on any particular subject does not make you smart or truthful..........a lie can be taught as well as truth. Truths are required to be documented. Pretending to have access to all the knowledge in the world contained within your psyche does not make it truth. Truth must be demonstrable through Observation, Reproduction and Consistency.


Or as the Holy Spirit suggested in the Word of God, "Prove all things, hold onto that which is good........" -- 1 Thess. 5:21

Having faith is not Blind.....its based upon things that are observed, tested, and reproducible......even if its HOPE that is placed to the test. Prima Facie truth derives in accepting the supernatural as based upon the 90% of the Holy Word of God that is testable in an objective fashion when applied sciecne and history actual are applied (the scriptures lack nothing in being proven true....where they can be tested by either).

Your lession in logic today: "The Law of the Excluded Middle". You can't be intelligent and independent from the thoughts or words of others. Either something is true or its negation is true..........nothing can be both true and false depending upon choice.

.

I have never claimed to be smart, and never indicated you were stupid ...
That's only what you need to express to maintain your fallacy and is based in your insecurities.

Your Pap was on to something ... Why do you think he was telling you?

You don't even recognize that if you have to quote your Pap to make a point ...
That's not an independent thought ...

.​

 

[Clyde 154]

.

I have never claimed to be smart, and never indicated you were stupid ...
That's only what you need to express to maintain your fallacy and is based in your insecurities.

Your Pap was on to something ... Why do you think he was telling you?

You don't even recognize that if you have to quote your Pap to make a point ...
That's not an independent thought ...

.​

I "think" as my pap would.........there is no nourishment found chewing on dry bones. You attempt to communicate in a never ending circle that reveals nothing. There is no such animal as "independent thought" (you can reason independently and you can critically reason, but.........thinking is a process that requires congnition to reason and logic.......or its nothing but emtional trite (as you engage). If you actually believe that which you espouse, you are at least a half bubble off plumb, as you live in a world between your ears producing nothing but fantasy, imagination unrestricted by the reality that surrounds you. Basic Psychology 101 In the dictionary that you claim you had shoved up your ass at birth.....look up.......leftist/atheism, socialism........mental condition.

You as do all others who professes feigned intelligence........attempt to prove a truth by knocking your arrow of reason........picking out any subject such as the side of a large barn......release your arrow, rush to the barn and draw a target around your arrow, there......PERFECT BULLSEYE every time.

Your "head" requires nourishment just as does the rest of your body requires nurishment.......words are the nourishing and development of the human mind, without which you would be stagnate always remaining unwise and unlearned.

No one can develop intelligence void of processing words into thought processes.....and you would have everyone accept as truth......the logical fallacy that you are totally independent of a "natural" thought process with cognition to logic and reason........something that is contradicted with every WORD you have parroted from the English Langure......words deveopled and spoken first by others.

Example: If one lived as you espouse.......totally independent of using words used by another you would be like the feral child reared by animals. Here is science in action. Without words learned from others and incorporated into your thought process you would be nothing but a wild animal.....incapable of communicating with another human being.

Proven in Science: "Victor of Aveyron".

There is wisdom in the truth presented in the Word of God. Example: "And not holding the head, from which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered..........and knit together, increases with the increase of God." -- Col. 2:19

Logic: How does one find nourishment with an increase from God..........FAITH, "Faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God." -- Romans 10:17

If anyone attempts to tell you that they talk directly to God today.........and God answers them, they are just as much in need of counseling as those clinically diganosed. The only way to communicate with God....is through the Written Word today.

And in spite of all your AD HOMINEM projections (your independent thinking) you have demonstrated none of these words to be false. Just as with all leftists (regarless of what you claim to be).......you do not refute the truth presented IN WORDS..........you use the ad hominem personal attack and attack the method by which the truth was presented. You certainly have not refuted anything presented.

 

[BlackSand]

I "think" as my pap would.........there is no nourishment found chewing on dry bones. You attempt to communicate in a never ending circle that reveals nothing. There is no such animal as "independent thought" (you can reason independently and you can critically reason, but.........thinking is a process that requires congnition to reason and logic.......or its nothing but emtional trite (as you engage). If you actually believe that which you espouse, you are at least a half bubble off plumb, as you live in a world between your ears producing nothing but fantasy, imagination unrestricted by the reality that surrounds you. Basic Psychology 101 In the dictionary that you claim you had shoved up your ass at birth.....look up.......leftist/atheism, socialism........mental condition.

You as do all others who professes feigned intelligence........attempt to prove a truth by knocking your arrow of reason........picking out any subject such as the side of a large barn......release your arrow, rush to the barn and draw a target around your arrow, there......PERFECT BULLSEYE every time.

Your "head" requires nourishment just as does the rest of your body requires nurishment.......words are the nourishing and development of the human mind, without which you would be stagnate always remaining unwise and unlearned.

No one can develop intelligence void of processing words into thought processes.....and you would have everyone accept as truth......the logical fallacy that you are totally independent of a "natural" thought process with cognition to logic and reason........something that is contradicted with every WORD you have parroted from the English Langure......words deveopled and spoken first by others.

Example: If one lived as you espouse.......totally independent of using words used by another you would be like the feral child reared by animals. Here is science in action. Without words learned from others and incorporated into your thought process you would be nothing but a wild animal.....incapable of communicating with another human being.

Proven in Science: "Victor of Aveyron".

There is wisdom in the truth presented in the Word of God. Example: "And not holding the head, from which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered..........and knit together, increases with the increase of God." -- Col. 2:19

Logic: How does one find nourishment with an increase from God..........FAITH, "Faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God." -- Romans 10:17

If anyone attempts to tell you that they talk directly to God today.........and God answers them, they are just as much in need of counseling as those clinically diganosed. The only way to communicate with God....is through the Written Word today.

And in spite of all your AD HOMINEM projections (your independent thinking) you have demonstrated none of these words to be false. Just as with all leftists (regarless of what you claim to be).......you do not refute the truth presented IN WORDS..........you use the ad hominem personal attack and attack the method by which the truth was presented. You certainly have not refuted anything presented.

.

Sorry ... But I am no way required to fit your paradigm ... Just stop lying to yourself.
You are the one who attempting to attack as well, although failing miserably as could be expected.


If I wanted to insult you, I would ask if you always suffer so tragically from your sociopathic tendencies ...
And if you ever wondered if the reason why you are lonely and have so few friends might just be because you are an insufferable prick.

But ... That's not necessary because you would be incapable of giving an honest answer either way ...

.​

 

[Clyde 154]

.

Sorry ... But I am no way required to fit your paradigm ... Just stop lying to yourself.
You are the one who attempting to attack as well, although failing miserably as could be expected.


If I wanted to insult you, I would ask if you always suffer so tragically from your sociopathic tendencies ...
And if you ever wondered if the reason why you are lonely and have so few friends might just be because you are an insufferable prick.

But ... That's not necessary because you would be incapable of giving an honest answer either way ...

.​

exactly.........you never use the words of others but you attempt to retort based upon the content of "MY WORDS". Priceless. Question? How do you know that "I" failed.......if you don't use my words as evidence of my failure? You can't, so you "IMAGINE" that I have failed and you win.

Psychosis: a loss of contact with reality, existing only in the confines of the mind. Why are all leftists "emotional twats" pretending to be something they are not in order to seek the accolade of other emotional twats?

A failure on my part would be the presentation of objective facts in evidence that refute "the words that I presented". Reality: Something you have not succussed in acomplishing. Only a leftist declares a deflection success.....they assume they have deflected away from a demonstration of their ignorance.

 

[BlackSand]

exactly.........you never use the words of others but you attempt to retort based upon the content of "MY WORDS". Priceless.

.

You're beginning to recognize the value ... But still lying to yourself.
That's Funny ...

.​

 

[Clyde 154]

.

You're beginning to recognize the value ... But still lying to yourself.
That's Funny ...

.​

Yet you keep responding to MY WORDS. This is why I frequent this site............the priceless entertainment value. A good belly laugh is good for the soul. I do enjoy.........allowing a lefitst...i.e., a supposed progressive that has not had an original thought since FDRs, new communist deal.............. to paint themselves into a corner via their own words, and come spinning out like TAZ, once they realize what's going on. Some are more dense than others. Continue to THINK for yourself and figure out a method of not losing FACE........everytime you respond, you contradict your self professed philosophy of not using the words of others.

 

[BlackSand]

Yet you keep responding to MY WORDS. This is why I frequent this site............the priceless entertainment value. A good belly laugh is good for the soul. I do enjoy.........allowing a lefitst...i.e., a supposed progressive that has not had an original thought since FDRs, new communist deal.............. to paint themselves into a corner via their own words, and come spinning out like TAZ, once they realize what's going on. Some are more dense than others. Continue to THINK for yourself and figure out a method of not losing FACE........everytime you respond, you contradict your self professed philosophy of not using the words of others.

.

You keep commenting and I will keep responding to your comments.
If you don't want me to respond to your comments, then quit posting your nonsense.
Although I can see where you might be perfectly fine talking to yourself and don't like discussions.

I am not quoting you and pretending that is an original thought ...
Or attempting to use it as a justification or validation to lean on.

Who said anything about losing face?
Everything you post says more about you than me ...


.​

 

[fncceo]

I have to admit. I've looked at the last dozen or so posts and I can't for the life of me figure out that you guys are arguing about.

 

[BlackSand]

I have to admit. I've looked at the last dozen or so posts and I can't for the life of me figure out that you guys are arguing about.

.

Ask Clyde ... I am sure he can give you a Wiki Link and a Bible quote that covers it all ...

.​

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Rand had zero compassion for those in need.

That in my view is evil.

But that does not preclude her from being wrong about her statement and many of her views about government.

Compassion for those in need generally helps them stay needy and in some cases, become even more needy. Then compassion is evil.

 

[sparky]

But, it wouldn't be conducive to others who might be attempting to actually discuss the quote.

The welfare of the state is always subordinate to the welfare of the individual.

The sacrifice of one person (physical or economic) to benefit or even save another is evil in Ms Rand's philosophy.

No man can have a right to impose an unchosen obligation, an unrewarded duty or an involuntary servitude on another man. There can be no such thing as “the right to enslave.”

The group of humans dedicated to themselves don't care about anyone else's feelings, nor about any "God" anyone may identify.

Why? Because I have been endowed with FREE WILL and you are presenting a most illogical argument.

Thus proving that morals cannot be anything we want them to be but are indeed based upon some universal code of common decency that is independent of man and are LOGICAL.

Thanks for the Bible lesson and good luck on your Holy Crusade.

Satan and the WEF are trying their best to destroy the world.

Love the biblical baloney here folks

question to y'all....

didn't Satan get the boot for a similar stance?

~S~

 

[fncceo]

If you read Rand, you will find that she indeed does not condemn compassion.

What she condemns is compassion without justification. The idea that any person, regardless of their personal choices are automatically worthy (in fact, entitled) to compassion is what Ms. Rand argues against.

Promiscuity, not just in with whom we sleep, but in whom we help, or befriend, or work for, is not rational.