It does exist and it did exist, it ought to exist real time. What youre insinuating is that one is ---bought and paid for----, a refernce to non free will. that is correct.

that is not an ---- insult or a shill implication insult either.

Heres a ringer, when a moderator on any site bans a comment, is he violating the constitution? taking free speech online that weighs upon government privilege, aka sharing information that is usually not exclusive to the poster themself, & then censoring an interpreted insult just because one can? didnt the forefathers fight vigorously for the right of negative interpretation and unpopular speech even in the form of insults? i imagine they did alot of that in the boston tea party. so again ----

----I would suggest its treasonous for any individual private, corporate or online to use the web to bypass free speech whereby censorship and deviance is normalized. I would also argue that censorship is exploiting freedoms grace, especially when one is talking about words in themselves that dont detail obscene content of any the sort and when one party or best buddy is clearly the reason for the cherry picking. lets also not pretend like a casual insult is the same as a deep seeded well thought out insult like ----some people are possessed by evil and are seeking to weaponize rules to divide and conquer and control---- talk about free will.

But thats just my free speech ------talking. Dont argue precedence either slavery was normalized for 100s of years and it was inherently incorrect and a treasonous practice. scary skin colors? Good lord thats LOW IQ.


in synopsis if you had free will would you encourage every1 to ban or censor another so that all people might seek to do the same thing where applicable in their own lives - successfuly dividing every person through egg shell ego power dynamics?

PS---no thats not photoshop. Lets not pretend any internet site or private real life corporation does anything 100% across the board. and lets not pretend like corporate body guards are interested in upholding constitutional values LOL please. free will? NAH doesnt exist.
Im very shamed of the world that the free willyless space peoples have not learned the highschool bully MO where by he bullies som1, another reacts and the power structure holds the reactor responsible. really NEGATIVE intelligence stuff going on around the world right now. trying to set people up, the c0p MO 247.



-ME. dont report this since i added a dash, apparently people never made - names in d2.
-------Thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.

Oh I mean... did i mention i use dashes instead of quotations because that button broke...
TLDR the act of using ones free will to censor is inherently more evil and flawed than the content thats being censored - with exception to the detailing of obscenities aka transcribing abominable visions for non warning or educational purposes

This post was edited by lodd222 on Jul 6 2025 09:33pm

Uhm...what?

That's one puny god

It would be a paradox if he could. Its like the often quoted stone so heavy he cant lift it.

Not sure why but something forces me to write this comment at this moment.

Deserved

Looks like you guys understand each other. Good for you.

This post was edited by Saurod on Jul 7 2025 07:23am

Skill issue

ok then tell me what both of them are

i never claimed you did science improperly but since you brought it up. the fact that you refuse to watch very short videos i post strongly suggests you are protecting a cognitive bias.
in a scientific process one is supposed to gather as much data as possible. you dont do that

atheists/antitheist have a horrid mental process. i remember a antitheist in a debate got so flustered as they are so enamored with what they thing is the maximum mental capabilities "if i was wrong dont you think i would know it"


yes?

Religous faith is believing something without any possibility of evidence for or against the claim since the claim itself is by definition supernatural and operates outside of the natural universe. This means we cant gather data for or against the claim. That is religious faith. Its without reason.

Faith/Believe in the natural sense of the word is either based on experience or is based on likelyhood combined with importance of the issue.

For example:

If I have faith in my abilities then I mean I trust myself based on previous experience. So I have a reason to trust myself.

Other example: If you tell me you got 10 bucks in your wallet, I believe you. The reason is that its a very ordinary claim and I have no reason to think you would lie about having 10 bucks in your wallet. Also, its not of importance.

If you would say you have a billion bucks on your bank account, I wouldnt believe it without reason to believe it aince the claim is not ordinary anymore.

I am sure you also know one principle of gun safety, which is: Every gun is always loaded, right? This makes a lot of sense as long as its not your weapon and it needs to be used. If a burglar breaks into your home and you get your gun to stop him, you wont rely on that principle anymore. You'll check if its ready because the occasion has changed.

If I believe theres no free will, I believe it based on the evidence for or against that claim. I thought about it and all I find is things that point towards no free will. I cant come to any line of thoughts that would lead to free will either with or without religion.

The reason why I dont watch videos you post is because I talk to you and not dudes in a video. If an important message is in a video, just tell me. Its not hard.

And to your "Yes?" let me quote yourself if I may:

You wrote: "How do you know its aquired passive knowledge and it wasnt passed to me by other means"

Passed to you by other means is also aquired passive knowledge, so what you wrote made no sense.

This post was edited by Saurod on Jul 7 2025 08:50am