▲ 868 ▼ Trump admits he didn’t have to tear down East Wing for ballroom, but just wanted to (piefed.cdn.blahaj.zone) submitted 9 months ago by io@piefed.blahaj.zone to c/nottheonion@lemmy.world 131 comments fedilink hide all child comments https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-melania-upset-east-wing-demolition-b2862932.html
[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 8 points 9 months ago (1 child) I’m not a big fan of your book about imaginary friends that tell you what to do permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -5 points 9 months ago (1 child) If only truth was so easy to dismiss so we can follow our own selfish desires... permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 5 points 9 months ago (1 child) truth If your definition of truth includes religious texts in any capacity other than, perhaps, a very dated take on philosophy, then that’s a point we are simply not going to agree on. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 0 points 9 months ago (3 children) What do you mean by "dated take" - does right or wrong change with time? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 3 points 9 months ago (1 child) Yes. Yes it does. The bounds of what society considers acceptable or reprehensible changes with time, location, and culture. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -2 points 9 months ago (1 child) So if morality is subjective, then who are we to judge the holocaust? It was acceptable in that time, location and culture. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 1 point 9 months ago Oooh, nice, we’ve gone straight from a holier-than-thou categorical rejection of the concept of moral relativism to an attempt to use a straw man fallacy involving the Holocaust to categorically settle the entire scope of a topic that has been debated by philosophers smarter than either you or I for literal millennia. permalink fedilink source parent [–] GojuRyu@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago (1 child) What would you say: is buying slaves from the nations that surround me still right, did god instruct people to do wrong or did right and wrong change? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -1 points 9 months ago (1 child) God never instructed people to buy slaves. Concessions were once made to an adulterous nation because of their hardened hearts. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] GojuRyu@lemmy.world 1 point 9 months ago If you want to say that god made concessions to man go ahead. He still instructed them in how to hold chattel slaves and implied that they could do so ruthlessly, only restricting them from doing so to eachother. Leviticus 25:44-46 44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly. permalink fedilink source parent [–] NeilBru@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago (1 child) The morals of the Abrahamic Religions are the morals of blood-thirsty totalitarian pedophiles. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 1 point 9 months ago Proof? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -5 points 9 months ago (1 child) If only truth was so easy to dismiss so we can follow our own selfish desires... permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 5 points 9 months ago (1 child) truth If your definition of truth includes religious texts in any capacity other than, perhaps, a very dated take on philosophy, then that’s a point we are simply not going to agree on. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 0 points 9 months ago (3 children) What do you mean by "dated take" - does right or wrong change with time? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 3 points 9 months ago (1 child) Yes. Yes it does. The bounds of what society considers acceptable or reprehensible changes with time, location, and culture. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -2 points 9 months ago (1 child) So if morality is subjective, then who are we to judge the holocaust? It was acceptable in that time, location and culture. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 1 point 9 months ago Oooh, nice, we’ve gone straight from a holier-than-thou categorical rejection of the concept of moral relativism to an attempt to use a straw man fallacy involving the Holocaust to categorically settle the entire scope of a topic that has been debated by philosophers smarter than either you or I for literal millennia. permalink fedilink source parent [–] GojuRyu@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago (1 child) What would you say: is buying slaves from the nations that surround me still right, did god instruct people to do wrong or did right and wrong change? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -1 points 9 months ago (1 child) God never instructed people to buy slaves. Concessions were once made to an adulterous nation because of their hardened hearts. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] GojuRyu@lemmy.world 1 point 9 months ago If you want to say that god made concessions to man go ahead. He still instructed them in how to hold chattel slaves and implied that they could do so ruthlessly, only restricting them from doing so to eachother. Leviticus 25:44-46 44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly. permalink fedilink source parent [–] NeilBru@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago (1 child) The morals of the Abrahamic Religions are the morals of blood-thirsty totalitarian pedophiles. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 1 point 9 months ago Proof? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 5 points 9 months ago (1 child) truth If your definition of truth includes religious texts in any capacity other than, perhaps, a very dated take on philosophy, then that’s a point we are simply not going to agree on. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 0 points 9 months ago (3 children) What do you mean by "dated take" - does right or wrong change with time? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 3 points 9 months ago (1 child) Yes. Yes it does. The bounds of what society considers acceptable or reprehensible changes with time, location, and culture. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -2 points 9 months ago (1 child) So if morality is subjective, then who are we to judge the holocaust? It was acceptable in that time, location and culture. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 1 point 9 months ago Oooh, nice, we’ve gone straight from a holier-than-thou categorical rejection of the concept of moral relativism to an attempt to use a straw man fallacy involving the Holocaust to categorically settle the entire scope of a topic that has been debated by philosophers smarter than either you or I for literal millennia. permalink fedilink source parent [–] GojuRyu@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago (1 child) What would you say: is buying slaves from the nations that surround me still right, did god instruct people to do wrong or did right and wrong change? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -1 points 9 months ago (1 child) God never instructed people to buy slaves. Concessions were once made to an adulterous nation because of their hardened hearts. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] GojuRyu@lemmy.world 1 point 9 months ago If you want to say that god made concessions to man go ahead. He still instructed them in how to hold chattel slaves and implied that they could do so ruthlessly, only restricting them from doing so to eachother. Leviticus 25:44-46 44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly. permalink fedilink source parent [–] NeilBru@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago (1 child) The morals of the Abrahamic Religions are the morals of blood-thirsty totalitarian pedophiles. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 1 point 9 months ago Proof? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 0 points 9 months ago (3 children) What do you mean by "dated take" - does right or wrong change with time? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 3 points 9 months ago (1 child) Yes. Yes it does. The bounds of what society considers acceptable or reprehensible changes with time, location, and culture. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -2 points 9 months ago (1 child) So if morality is subjective, then who are we to judge the holocaust? It was acceptable in that time, location and culture. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 1 point 9 months ago Oooh, nice, we’ve gone straight from a holier-than-thou categorical rejection of the concept of moral relativism to an attempt to use a straw man fallacy involving the Holocaust to categorically settle the entire scope of a topic that has been debated by philosophers smarter than either you or I for literal millennia. permalink fedilink source parent [–] GojuRyu@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago (1 child) What would you say: is buying slaves from the nations that surround me still right, did god instruct people to do wrong or did right and wrong change? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -1 points 9 months ago (1 child) God never instructed people to buy slaves. Concessions were once made to an adulterous nation because of their hardened hearts. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] GojuRyu@lemmy.world 1 point 9 months ago If you want to say that god made concessions to man go ahead. He still instructed them in how to hold chattel slaves and implied that they could do so ruthlessly, only restricting them from doing so to eachother. Leviticus 25:44-46 44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly. permalink fedilink source parent [–] NeilBru@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago (1 child) The morals of the Abrahamic Religions are the morals of blood-thirsty totalitarian pedophiles. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 1 point 9 months ago Proof? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 3 points 9 months ago (1 child) Yes. Yes it does. The bounds of what society considers acceptable or reprehensible changes with time, location, and culture. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -2 points 9 months ago (1 child) So if morality is subjective, then who are we to judge the holocaust? It was acceptable in that time, location and culture. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 1 point 9 months ago Oooh, nice, we’ve gone straight from a holier-than-thou categorical rejection of the concept of moral relativism to an attempt to use a straw man fallacy involving the Holocaust to categorically settle the entire scope of a topic that has been debated by philosophers smarter than either you or I for literal millennia. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -2 points 9 months ago (1 child) So if morality is subjective, then who are we to judge the holocaust? It was acceptable in that time, location and culture. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 1 point 9 months ago Oooh, nice, we’ve gone straight from a holier-than-thou categorical rejection of the concept of moral relativism to an attempt to use a straw man fallacy involving the Holocaust to categorically settle the entire scope of a topic that has been debated by philosophers smarter than either you or I for literal millennia. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 1 point 9 months ago Oooh, nice, we’ve gone straight from a holier-than-thou categorical rejection of the concept of moral relativism to an attempt to use a straw man fallacy involving the Holocaust to categorically settle the entire scope of a topic that has been debated by philosophers smarter than either you or I for literal millennia. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] GojuRyu@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago (1 child) What would you say: is buying slaves from the nations that surround me still right, did god instruct people to do wrong or did right and wrong change? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -1 points 9 months ago (1 child) God never instructed people to buy slaves. Concessions were once made to an adulterous nation because of their hardened hearts. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] GojuRyu@lemmy.world 1 point 9 months ago If you want to say that god made concessions to man go ahead. He still instructed them in how to hold chattel slaves and implied that they could do so ruthlessly, only restricting them from doing so to eachother. Leviticus 25:44-46 44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -1 points 9 months ago (1 child) God never instructed people to buy slaves. Concessions were once made to an adulterous nation because of their hardened hearts. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] GojuRyu@lemmy.world 1 point 9 months ago If you want to say that god made concessions to man go ahead. He still instructed them in how to hold chattel slaves and implied that they could do so ruthlessly, only restricting them from doing so to eachother. Leviticus 25:44-46 44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] GojuRyu@lemmy.world 1 point 9 months ago If you want to say that god made concessions to man go ahead. He still instructed them in how to hold chattel slaves and implied that they could do so ruthlessly, only restricting them from doing so to eachother. Leviticus 25:44-46 44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] NeilBru@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago (1 child) The morals of the Abrahamic Religions are the morals of blood-thirsty totalitarian pedophiles. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 1 point 9 months ago Proof? permalink fedilink source parent
