>>512800649
>Oof, nice word salad sweetie.
What part of what l said did you not understand?
Quote me directly and l'll try to be more clear.
> You were actually doing good for a while. Now you're going further and further into the rabbit hole because you literally got out in a corner and couldn't think of anything else besides "um other people say gay bag, therefore bad".
l'm different anon my guy, check the lD.
And the question stands:
ln order for something to be shown to NOT be a moral imparitive a definition of morality MUST be given to demonstrate how the articulated premise does not adhere to defined catagory.
That said: What is your definition of morality?
>>512800704
Who said anything about putting people to death?
Should anyone who engages in any immoral activity naturally be put to death??
This a question of degrees to which society accepts and promotes a recuring evil.
ln the case of marriage this would be like a guy trying to get married to the hand he jacks off with; l assure you l'm not for that either.
Or gooners having perades where they jack off in the street for that matter.
