Do you mean you support Russian ownership of Crimea?

Answering this question would have impact on my ability to acquire German citizenship.

The new Nazis and the old Nazis teaming up is a sight to behold.

They seem quite confident as they proclaim their superiority over religious people and cannot comprehend why anyone would be religious.

I hate to break it to you but this definition of Jew it’s just a racist way to describe Eastern Europeans. Your ancestors were likely Ashkenazi Jews. Polish or Ukrainian or Romanian or Russian etc. Ashkenazim would be a way to describe yourself. Not “Jewish”, as you say you are not a Jew.

This is akin to conflating Muslims with Arabs. Very easy and convenient for people that don’t know better. Used to be true most of the time, but factually not correct. Many TV shows and Muslims self-described all Arabs as Muslims. In the 90’s and 2000’s nobody cared about using the correct naming for things and racist misnomers were fine. Larry David used to play religiously Jewish characters all the time he didn’t mind the trope.

But most people now understand these are not the same and 2000’s entertainment was not an accurate representation of reality. Just a racist one.

You are correct in your assessment of perfection. But the question is what is perfect morality. And mostly one of where to draw the line. The equation with stealing and murder is questionable as that has been a moral wrong through all of humanity. Whereas this debate is mostly one of the last 100 years. In the past this objective morality had never existed thus I question whether it is as objective as you make it seem. When you go a few generations back you’ll usually find your great-great grandfather was a 25 year old dude that married as 13-15 year old.

Flipping to the modern age I knew a 19 year old guy that was ashamed of dating a 17 year old because he felt other people thought there was too big of an age gap. A mere two year difference. The “objective morality” on this subject really appears to be “whatever everyone else thinks about it”. Even funnier is that a 60 year old dating a 30 year old is suddenly becoming predatory too. The last 10-20 years people are starting to condemn two “mature adults” with a large age gap for having a relationship. DiCaprio is a perfect example of this. He violates no laws nor “morals” but somehow is wrong.

The brain would ideally be fully matured before one is to take life-long decisions, however 25 years is an awful lot of time.

If were morally consistent we would acknowledge that if the brain is “fully matured” at 25 that the age of consent would be 25…But as that is currently not the societal norm we see no reason to accept this. If society had already changed into this logic I am quite sure you would adhere to it as well. Especially seeing that there would now be a “scientific reasoning” behind it. And it would be even more difficult to convince you because now I would have to argue with science. Yet we stick to this very arbitrary number of 18. Even you are saying 18 is okay and 16 is weird. I cannot comprehend this. Make it 25.

Just so happens that we’re trying not to behave like wild beasts anymore.

The question of consent is a very emphasized one that was introduced back then. Before the prophet consent was an arbitrary cause. Women were regarded as property at that time. Suddenly men had to actually appeal to a woman to marry her. Even in modern day if a woman does not wish to get married at a young age there is absolutely no reason for her to do so. The legal permissible age refers to the age at which a woman gets control to decide. It does not force her to get married. It only presents her with the right to do so.

We still condone sexual intercourse between teenagers and accept that when they reach puberty some have a desire to become sexually active. We have not mitigated this in fact we promote safe sex in schools and say experimenting is totally fine. We have only restricted it to other “children”. We made the age gap a defining factor in what we deem okay, and don’t say that “children” are being “raped” by other “children”. Once again, I can’t find moral consistency in this. If the brain’s finished age is 25 why do we condone a 17 and 15 year old, but not a 19 and 17 year old? And now even between “adults” this age gap is coming into play.

There appears to be no coherent argument. Everything that is deemed okay is based on current traditions and the “science” is ignored.

https://www.dictionary.com/e/atheism-agnosticism/

There is a key distinction between these terms. An atheist doesn’t believe in the existence of a god or divine being. The word atheist originates with the Greek atheos, which is built from the roots a- (“without”) and theos (“a god”). Atheism is the doctrine or belief that there is no god.

In contrast, the word agnostic refers to a person who neither believes nor disbelieves in a god or religious doctrine. Agnostics assert that it’s impossible to know how the universe was created and whether or not divine beings exist.

Jew is not an ethnicity. The “Jew as a race” was invented by the Nazis. https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/are-jews-a-race/

When your knowledge of Islam is 2002 Fox News it would be a great idea to not type comments on the internet. Or at least get slightly informed beforehand because everything you are saying is comically stupid and actually incredibly racist.

Only able bodied people are commanded to make the Pilgrimage once in their lifetime. Nobody is commanded to die for it. Most of the deaths are unregistered people that did not pass a health check.

But this new mythical Atheist belief that God will let nobody that’s on God’s path die is incredibly weird.

When you read almost any religion you will find even the prophets, the people selected by God, had many hardships and many people died in battles and even of sicknesses. God did not give them an autowin and invincibility by being on his side. Would make for incredibly boring stories too.

Do explain anything.

That’s called Agnosticism.

Atheism means you are certain that god does not exist.

Jew constantly whining about people being uninformed about antisemitism spreads blatantly uninformed Islamophobia

Nah Saudi is scoring big American defense guarantees in exchange for sucking up to Israel right now.

Just a Boeing plane not landing in the expected location

So indeed nothing of value as expected.

It’s difficult to dismantle an argument that does not exist. I suppose if your explanation is non existent you always win the discussion. Le epic Atheist wins again.

Society had no issues with this for the past millenia. This new social construct of adulthood and finding it weird is far more recent. Mohammed’s first wife was 41 when he was 25. Age differences at the time were far more usual.

Granted that our culture now changes so fast that it would mean someone that grew up with Madonna and someone that grows up with Skibidi toilet would get together. The generational cultural gaps are far greater than in the past. But this is overcome when people spend time together.

The only real reason that people can use is that a younger person can be easier to manipulate. Which holds an element of truth but the question remains at what age we allow a person full control over their actions. Currently this is 18. Yet research suggests the brain is only fully matured at 25. So will the new age be 25?

The Leonardo DiCaprio example is a classic one. Most people that say they would never act similar to Dicaprio will do so once they are actually presented with the option. It is moral highgrounding purely based on never having been presented with the option.

You are free to correct a person in a conversation if you feel so inclined.

The discussion is so shunned in Western society that it is well understood one should always repeat your opinion in public and never question it.

I would once again ask why teenagers having sex is regarded as totally normal as long as long as the person they are having sex with is not 18 yet.

If teenagers truly should not be subject to sexual experiences because they are not ready then surely this would not be normal. Or is it okay if a victim performs the deed?

Atheism is certainty of the nonexistence of a creator.

As clearly demonstrated in this thread by people certain of their atheism so much you would be hard pressed to find a religious person so arrogant in their beliefs.

Atheists religiously repeating the word “science” long enough that they trick themselves into believing they have explained the origins of the universe. And thus there is no reason for anyone to believe in God.

Certainly science has achieved a lot. However we are no closer to explaining the origins of the universe as before. As the origin has not been explained why is everyone somehow so confident in the falsehood of a creator?

Agnosticism (not being sure about a creator) is totally fine. However Atheists have a weird obsession about being absolutely certain of something they cannot prove an their alternative for. Atheism runs on pure faith that “science will figure it out in the future”. It is a religion in itself.

The “largest minds” of Atheism are all too often based on pure emotion. As we find with Richard Dawkins, the man so smart that he can explain the universe away… and also believes Israel is not committing Genocide in Gaza.

https://raseef22.net/english/article/1095904-et-tu-dawkins-you-refuse-religion-but-support-israel

Is this for public transport or freight transport?