PlasmaSnake

It doesn't assume that there is no source of absolute morality. It says that religious people are incorrect to derive their absolute source of mortality from a deity, whether it exists or not

I prefer to frame the argument like this:

"If you found out your God didn't exist, would you go around killing people? Why not?"

1. This means that if we find a cure for contagious diseases then fucking dead animals becomes okay
2. "Shared moral framework" sounds like a fancy word with no actual logical backing behind it
3. How do we decide which deviant behaviour is acceptable and which is unacceptable

One day we will have a peer to peer video sharing platform... One day...

They should have shot the car until it stopped driving at them smh

The last 2 are the same to me lol

I didn't know liking AI was political

If you are attracted to drawings of children but not real children, I would say that this isn't pedophilia, since pedophilia is an attraction to actual children and not fictional ones

I'm more interested in whether the DSM includes fictional children in the diagnosis, or if the children must be real