You could lose your medical license for that in scenario 3. Given that the contents of their pockets are probably less valuable than your license, utilitarianism would proscribe that action.
Romans 8 says no men are without excuse for not knowing god. Of course, that was before anyone in the Middle East knew the world was round and populated with unknown indigenous populations. So, can?t hold the author accountable for that I suppose.
According to the mythology - the multi-murdering, homicidal and genocidal "god" of the Judaeo-christian businesses of religion created everything including sin but "Satan" killed no one and punishes sin.
Open advocates of dominionism declare that "America is a Christian Nation," and that therefore Christians have a God-given mandate to re-assert Christian control over political, social, and cultural institutions. Yet many dominionists stop short of staking out a position that could be called theocratic. This is the "soft" version of dominionism.
There is a conservative Catholic site Lifesitenews where is is pretty much the antichrist!
WRONG MARXIST CUNT!
Now, you need to explain that word in the context. Do you mean that when discussing they they don't say what they believe and they don't believe what they say?
the drama teacher bought us one
According to whom?
Yep. I already showed you that link. You judged totally wrong. That is no "blog" of mine. That is a Skeptic forum. Many people there. Just like you. That is also linked to two other Skeptic forums. Many thousands there. All speaking together just like here.
Thank you but that isn't my point.
let me again explain the strawman
After one year of dating and no marriage proposal, I would have been having serious doubts that eh was the man for me.
It is not possible for a "person like me" to be against interracial marriages.
How is this relevant to the Religion Channel?
A valid point, however, I would say the same applies. Being offensive is integral to freedom of speech.
A toltec is one who has overcome fear, the first enemy of a man of knowledge.
Learn this one from the Quakers?
Dude that's me before starting to code an enormous project
Then you have to have a law that makes heterosexuals with genetic problems unable to marry a person of the opposite sex. That is YOUR reasoning - applied.
Young straight men are constantly told by media and pop culture that they're supposed to find a girlfriend, that this is the way they're supposed to establish a sense of self-worth, identity, and meaning in life. Then many of them can't find such a person, because a pretty large percentage of men, many of whom might actually be very high-quality people with lots of potential in life, are just not that appealing to women. Even if they worked on their personalities, or went to the gym, or whatever, they still wouldn't be that appealing to women, and it's dishonest of the culture to pretend this isn't true. The wider culture (and both men and women within the culture) needs to stop telling these men that the only way they can prove their worth and live a meaningful life is to wind up with a girlfriend. Being in relationships, marriages, etc, is actually a mixed bag which can sometimes feel miserable and prisonlike (but can also feel amazing, and can also feel just mediocre). There are lots of other ways to get the most out of life.
Don't forget two failed marriages and one that exists on paper only.
As opposed to the dead god?
Fiction? You are glorifying violence, you are in not alone here in America. It doesn?t offend me, but it doest say funny
I lack an understanding of why a human being would negate its natural diet. We've evolved so that meat tastes delicious. Meh, to each their own.