← Back to context Comment by Hnrobert42 14 hours ago Because the government is here to serve us. Not the other way around. 5 comments Hnrobert42 Reply no-dr-onboard 13 hours ago The government has a responsibility to protect its constituents. Sometimes that requires collaboration. This isn’t hard. epistasis 13 hours ago Is this one of those times? Seems pretty clear it's not.The third amendment is there for a reason. I am a third amendment absolutist and willing to put my life on the line to defend it. staticassertion 12 hours ago I wonder what you can't justify this way. no-dr-onboard 11 hours ago That’s a good question. Assuming a righteous and just government:The government couldn’t justify the killing of innocent civilians.The government couldn’t justify the killing of the unborn.The government couldn’t justify eugenics.There are objective moral absolutes. 1 reply →
no-dr-onboard 13 hours ago The government has a responsibility to protect its constituents. Sometimes that requires collaboration. This isn’t hard. epistasis 13 hours ago Is this one of those times? Seems pretty clear it's not.The third amendment is there for a reason. I am a third amendment absolutist and willing to put my life on the line to defend it. staticassertion 12 hours ago I wonder what you can't justify this way. no-dr-onboard 11 hours ago That’s a good question. Assuming a righteous and just government:The government couldn’t justify the killing of innocent civilians.The government couldn’t justify the killing of the unborn.The government couldn’t justify eugenics.There are objective moral absolutes. 1 reply →
epistasis 13 hours ago Is this one of those times? Seems pretty clear it's not.The third amendment is there for a reason. I am a third amendment absolutist and willing to put my life on the line to defend it.
staticassertion 12 hours ago I wonder what you can't justify this way. no-dr-onboard 11 hours ago That’s a good question. Assuming a righteous and just government:The government couldn’t justify the killing of innocent civilians.The government couldn’t justify the killing of the unborn.The government couldn’t justify eugenics.There are objective moral absolutes. 1 reply →
no-dr-onboard 11 hours ago That’s a good question. Assuming a righteous and just government:The government couldn’t justify the killing of innocent civilians.The government couldn’t justify the killing of the unborn.The government couldn’t justify eugenics.There are objective moral absolutes. 1 reply →
The government has a responsibility to protect its constituents. Sometimes that requires collaboration. This isn’t hard.
Is this one of those times? Seems pretty clear it's not.
The third amendment is there for a reason. I am a third amendment absolutist and willing to put my life on the line to defend it.
I wonder what you can't justify this way.
That’s a good question. Assuming a righteous and just government:
The government couldn’t justify the killing of innocent civilians.
The government couldn’t justify the killing of the unborn.
The government couldn’t justify eugenics.
There are objective moral absolutes.
1 reply →