I never err on matters of law. everything including right to life is traded.
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-21 20:10:34 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1263562851261779969
Reply addressees: @TheRealFMCH @Maroeladalx10DB @laurenboebert @austere1717
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1263562375459999744
It has nothing to do with rights.
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-21 20:03:21 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1263561035056807936
Reply addressees: @TheRealFMCH @Maroeladalx10DB @laurenboebert @austere1717
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1263560902743375872
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
@TheRealFMCH @Maroeladalx10DB @laurenboebert @austere1717 We allow women to murder and fail to take responsibility for their actions because they historically pursue risky abortions, murder their infants, or mistreat their young, reduce their marriage value, remain in poverty, and externalize all those harms on the rest of us.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1263560902743375872
We allow women to murder and fail to take responsibility for their actions because they historically pursue risky abortions, murder their infants, or mistreat their young, reduce their marriage value, remain in poverty, and externalize all those harms on the rest of us.
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-21 20:02:49 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1263560902743375872
Reply addressees: @TheRealFMCH @Maroeladalx10DB @laurenboebert @austere1717
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1263559811867848704
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
@TheRealFMCH @Maroeladalx10DB @laurenboebert @austere1717 Actually, it’s the most difficult question of law. Rights are exchanged. So no it’s not a property right. Its irreciproal. So no it’s not a right. It’s decided by consequences.And because we coddle women. We don’t hold them responsible for their actions. We allow them to murder.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1263559811867848704
Actually, it’s the most difficult question of law. Rights are exchanged. So no it’s not a property right. Its irreciproal. So no it’s not a right. It’s decided by consequences.And because we coddle women. We don’t hold them responsible for their actions. We allow them to murder.
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-21 19:58:29 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1263559811867848704
Reply addressees: @TheRealFMCH @Maroeladalx10DB @laurenboebert @austere1717
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1263520322118135809
So you’re confusing excuse making (justification) with ADVERSARIALISM (falsification). The least false wins judgement. Only children are fooled by justification: Infants=Religion, Teens =Philosophy, Adults=Science, The Wise = The Law (The History of Human Falsehoods).
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-20 18:07:04 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1263169383460941824
Reply addressees: @DSchrooner
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1263142178337042435
So, your faith is always untestifiable – that’s what faith means. Claim truth (lie), and attempt to justify (lie), with the claim of justification (lie), then we can only ask what you’re motive for lying is. We know the answer. You’re an addict. (Physiologically that’s the case.)
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-20 18:04:40 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1263168782123622400
Reply addressees: @DSchrooner
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1263168252810846209
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
@DSchrooner You’re depending on the big lie: that anything is justifiable. It isn’t. Justification is a fraud. Decidability is provided by testimony sufficient to meet the demand for infallibility. Science is purely falsificationary. That which is not untestifiable remains a truth candidate.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1263168252810846209
You’re depending on the big lie: that anything is justifiable. It isn’t. Justification is a fraud. Decidability is provided by testimony sufficient to meet the demand for infallibility. Science is purely falsificationary. That which is not untestifiable remains a truth candidate.
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-20 18:02:34 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1263168252810846209
Reply addressees: @DSchrooner
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1263142178337042435
Whether you can testify to an observation or not isn’t subject to error. This is why you can only say ‘i have faith and so I choose to follow faith’. You may not claim a statement of faith is true (testifiable). And you may not lie in defense of your faith. One can’t argue faith.
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-20 18:00:17 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1263167679130734592
Reply addressees: @DSchrooner
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1263142178337042435
There is no subjectivity to realism, naturalism, operationalism, internal consistency (logic), empiricism, rational choice, reciprocity, full accounting, and warrantability. There is only the question of error in interpreting the evidence.
Your faith fails every test.
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-20 16:13:14 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1263140739082526721
Reply addressees: @DSchrooner
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1263139739944849408
You’re mistaken. It’s a lie if presented as evidence. That’s why its inadmissible as evidence.
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-20 16:10:33 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1263140064130981889
Reply addressees: @DSchrooner
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1263139032114040832