Supporting genocide is a good reductive test for if someone has any kind of morality. Same as with racism.
The fact that you don’t recognize that, and think that not recognizing that makes you an adult that is not a cartoon says everything about your morality.
It says nothing about my age or how many people I interact with.
EDIT: You also didn’t answer the question on why you think Genocide shouldn’t be a reductive label.
.
Genocide is something that should be reductively absolute.
Why do you think it shouldn’t be?
If you support genocide, that should be something you are saddled with for the rest of your life.
.
I’m 45.
Supporting genocide is a good reductive test for if someone has any kind of morality. Same as with racism.
The fact that you don’t recognize that, and think that not recognizing that makes you an adult that is not a cartoon says everything about your morality.
It says nothing about my age or how many people I interact with.
EDIT: You also didn’t answer the question on why you think Genocide shouldn’t be a reductive label.
Do you think that genocide is ever justifiable?
.
I have. And you know what? Genocide isn’t a matter of disagreeing. The fact that you think it is says everything anyone needs to know about you.
.
Seems like they’re avoiding answering direct questions about their beliefs or even fully explaining them. Why you might do that is anyone’s guess
.
I’ll take “more apologetics the abhorrent” for 100, Alex.
.
I don’t really care dude
.
I really don’t have any intention to do that, I don’t know you. Anyway looks like she chose correctly now. So it’s all good.
.
Them: “We don’t want a VP candidate that supports genocide”
You: “Oh look here comes the circular firing squad” ie “these people who take issue with the candidate are the problem, not the candidate”
Please tell me how this isn’t apologetics or playing defense for someone supporting genocide
.