Canada bans assault-style weapons after its worst ever mass murder

[spurraider21]

Doesn't that graph prove my point that the majority of Americans (and majority of Americans are Christian) say it's NOT necessary. And do you have a world poll polling Christians about this?

i dont know where i said "most americans think that" but north of 40% is pretty ing substantial

[spurraider21]

No kidding let's talk about law and legal precedents like the cool kids do

[vy65]

No kidding let's talk about law and legal precedents like the cool kids do

I actually was a philosophy major. I upgraded to law and legal precedents when I started getting pussy ...

[vy65]

Bruh, seriously

[midnightpulp]

i dont know where i said "most americans think that" but north of 40% is pretty ing substantial

And which country has the highest percentage of Evangelicals? That 40 percent is pretty damn near the number of Evangelicals:

Wheaton College's Ins ute for the Studies of American Evangelicals estimates that about 30 to 35 percent (90 to 100 million people) of the US population is evangelical.

And I very much dislike Evangelical Christianity, so you're preaching to the choir. I think it's a blight. And I think they're more motivated by political matters than religious or moral. There's simply no way Christianity is compatible with war (Evangelicals will pound that war drum if it means killing some Moooslums), nationalism, merciless capitalism, profit driven healthcare, and all the other that defines the republican party.

[Blake]

No, it sounds like you're trying to cheat at the thought experiment to try and rescue the idea that telling the truth is ALWAYS the preferred action.

I'm saying telling the truth is the rational response when it comes to the unknown.

Sometimes the truth is "I don't know".

If you want to lie to soften a hardship, it actually might make things harder later on. That's not a rational path.

[Blake]

I actually was a philosophy major. I upgraded to law and legal precedents when I started getting pussy ...

Lol

[spurraider21]

And which country has the highest percentage of Evangelicals? That 40 percent is pretty damn near the number of Evangelicals:



And I very much dislike Evangelical Christianity, so you're preaching to the choir. I think it's a blight. And I think they're more motivated by political matters than religious or moral. There's simply no way Christianity is compatible with war (Evangelicals will pound that war drum if it means killing some Moooslums), nationalism, merciless capitalism, profit driven healthcare, and all the other that defines the republican party.

i dont know about that. the bible has separate rules for god's chosen people vs the heathens around them.

[Blake]

And which country has the highest percentage of Evangelicals? That 40 percent is pretty damn near the number of Evangelicals:



And I very much dislike Evangelical Christianity, so you're preaching to the choir. I think it's a blight. And I think they're more motivated by political matters than religious or moral. There's simply no way Christianity is compatible with war (Evangelicals will pound that war drum if it means killing some Moooslums), nationalism, merciless capitalism, profit driven healthcare, and all the other that defines the republican party.

But they'll find ways to cherry pick the Bible to justify their backing of the Republican party

[TheGreatYacht]

I'm saying telling the truth is the rational response when it comes to the unknown.

Sometimes the truth is "I don't know".

If you want to lie to soften a hardship, it actually might make things harder later on. That's not a rational path.

This. A lie only grows the more you hold on to it. That's why it's important to redpill our children ASAP and not sugarcoat things. Most of us learn the truth on our own a as humans tend to learn the hard way.

This makes me wonder what life would be like if governments and media never lied. What would a world without lies be like? Would it be a better world DMC? I think so.

[midnightpulp]

I'm saying telling the truth is the rational response when it comes to the unknown.

Sometimes the truth is "I don't know".

If you want to lie to soften a hardship, it actually might make things harder later on. That's not a rational path.

I don't disagree with that, but there's many times where we "know."

But it also might make things better, and in that case, telling a lie is the rational path. But since we don't know for certain what the outcome of our response might be, we have to weigh the probability of what telling the truth vs. "sugarcoating" or suppressing might lead to. If I feel it's probable the truth will lead to a worse outcome than not telling the truth, I won't tell the truth. As I've stated before, my concern is utility.

Here's a common situation. A person you think is ugly asks you if you think she's pretty (and this ugliness is beyond her control, so you can't tell her she's ugly with the hopes she'll self improve her looks by losing weight or whatever). There's ZERO utility in telling the truth or at best, telling the truth might have very marginal utility in maybe you'll convince her to stop obsessing about her looks and value "what's inside." The "probability" is that you'll make her depressed if you tell her the truth, so the rational response is that you tell her she's physically attractive.

Maybe we'll disagree here again, and you think the cold, hard truth will lead to something positive for her. I don't.

[Blake]

I don't disagree with that, but there's many times where we "know."

But not about what happens after you die. I thought that was what we were talking about.

[TheGreatYacht]

I don't disagree with that, but there's many times where we "know."

But it also might make things better, and in that case, telling a lie is the rational path. But since we don't know for certain what the outcome of our response might be, we have to weigh the probability of what telling the truth vs. "sugarcoating" or suppressing might lead to. If I feel it's probable the truth will lead to a worse outcome than not telling the truth, I won't tell the truth. As I've stated before, my concern is utility.

Here's a common situation. A person you think is ugly asks you if you think she's pretty (and this ugliness is beyond her control, so you can't tell her she's ugly with the hopes she'll self improve her looks by losing weight or whatever). There's ZERO utility in telling the truth or at best, telling the truth might have very marginal utility in maybe you'll convince her to stop obsessing about her looks and value "what's inside." The "probability" is that you'll make her depressed if you tell her the truth, so the rational response is that you tell her she's physically attractive.

Maybe we'll disagree here again, and you think the cold, hard truth will lead to something positive for her. I don't.

I would just be blatantly honest and tell her she's ugly so she can get her ass to the gym and better herself. If someone is ugly or not naturally attractive the best they can do is to get in shape. Even ugly people who are in shape have a chance at finding someone.

[midnightpulp]

But not about what happens after you die. I thought that was what we were talking about.

We were, but we started to evaluate other dilemmas, like if you knew a troubling fact about something that you felt would lead to negative consequences if revealed, what's the rational response here?

In the case of me as the doctor talking with the Christian parents, I would say no more beyond "Nothing more we can do." That's an innocuous statement that isn't trying to determined what happens after death. Now, if the parents ask me, "Do you think my child is in Heaven?" Personally, I would tell them yes. If it provides more comfort (which it most likely will), I don't see the harm in it. My primary concern at this point would be to maximize comfort for the parents, so any other answer from "I don't know" to "No. Science hasn't proven an afterlife," would most likely not maximize comfort. I'm sure you'll disagree, but we're obviously coming from different schools of thought (me pragmatic and consequentialist, you Kantian: https://brainmass.com/psychology/sta...w-lying-594241).

[Nathan89]

A little video for the disingenuous people that like dismiss reality by falsely claiming something is a "slippery slope fallacy".

[ChumpDumper]

A little video for the disingenuous people that like dismiss reality by falsely claiming something is a "slippery slope fallacy".

This isn't Canada.

[Spurtacular]

Have your guns taken away and count on these bungling idiots to protect you.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/s...anada-n1201696

[Spurtacular]

A little video for the disingenuous people that like dismiss reality by falsely claiming something is a "slippery slope fallacy".

This dude the first gay Canadian prime minister?

[Spurtacular]

Look at all those nigs who have guns.
Good thing Trudeau is single-handedly ing over the law-abiding citizens.

https://www.liveleak.com/view?t=9tDIw_1592020870

[ChumpDumper]

nigs

Racist.

[Spurtacular]

Racist.

I don't speak with any deference towards stone-cold killers. Not sorry.

[DMC]

Look at all those nigs who have guns.
Good thing Trudeau is single-handedly ing over the law-abiding citizens.

https://www.liveleak.com/view?t=9tDIw_1592020870

Looks like Shipment in COD. I'd put a RPG right into that dumpster.

[Will Hunting]

Looks like Shipment in COD. I'd put a RPG right into that dumpster.

10 v. 10 shipment, tbh