I think you misunderstand me. I am not on the side of taking this alleged virus as a deadly fact, nor am I on the side of having experienced these alleged vaccinations as so deadly. If you experience it differently, I don't disagree. In any case, I think it is unnecessary to be vaccinated against something of which I doubt the existence. In fact, if everyone around me dropped dead, I would worry. As long as that is not the case, I consider it too hot to be eaten. So do you grant me my doubt or do you deny it to me? In so far as you seek to subdue my will with your own, I am a very poor listener to you. I suspect that you feel the same way.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
All you have to do is go to https://banned.video and if you do not, then you are ignorant.
I am very well aware of censorship. I talk to you, is that not enough? You chose to ignore my question
but call me ignorant. That's kind of funny.
Humans can have doubt but there is so much information out there, so many videos, articles, videos, diagrams, humans can look at the details if they want to. Those with more doubt should be the ones looking at what doctor Robert Young said, look at his videos, he shows photos of the red blood cells, specifically with the hemoglobin which contains the oxygen. Think of the hemoglobin as air balloons. Imagine what would happen if those air balloons begin to pop. Try to visualize your cells getting less and less oxygen due to the air balloons getting depleted more and more over time. Try to imagine what that might do. You can have doubt about that all you want and yet you can also simply look at those balloons popping. Pop pop pop. But you have the right to doubt the sound of balloons popping.
I am not reacting very positive if I am told that I "should" do something, without the person I am speaking with, knows me very well. And even then, I tend to disagree even though I may find that I "should". When I decide by myself what I should, it's fine.
You see, I am coming from totally different premises and it would take a long time to reveal those premises to you. I could suggest you read my last ten or twelve postings to realize from which direction I come. I would not ask you to do that. It's your free choice.
When you talk to me in the way you do here in the above comment, I see no inspiration or need to follow what you suggest or have found out yourself. I hope, you are not offended by my honesty.
I stand by what I wrote because it is based in science.
Now, have I in any way wanted to convince you otherwise?
My point is that science is a good foundation for any logical individual. Why would anybody not want to look at the science of something?
People are getting sick from many different things, period. But people can do things to seek after health.
That is obviously the case. Why do you use a "period" behind a matter of fact? Is it that you want to lecture me? I need not to worry about all earths people. I can choose to care for those near me, if needed. Case by case. Don't you do the same?
Government is like bandages which can help or hurt people.
I asked you if you don't do the same. It is not a rhetorical question, even though it may appear so.
Like above, this is a matter of fact. Though I have some difficulties to speak about "government", I prefer to speak about people, who, in the end, are the acteurs.
Yeah. Some leaders in governments can be like actors or puppets.
If you were asking me if I lecture people or if I lecture you, then the answer is yeah but I would call it educating or sharing.
The thing is, I haven't asked you to lecture me. You can call it "educating me", but still, I have not given you the mandate to educate me. If you share something, that's an offer, I think. An offer, does it come with a "period" after it has been casted? You don't offer someone a chocolate cake and put a "period" behind it, don't you? Sharing, is it not something with an open end towards someone who might or might not take up what you like to share?
Doing what is right is better than doing what is desired.
That's a philosophic matter, what is "right" or "wrong". Nations and peoples started wars over this question. I am not participating in this war.
In other words, you believe in subjectivity as opposed to objective principles, eternal truths, facts, evidence. You believe anything can be right. That type of philosophy can justify cannibalism, abortion, murder, etc.
If you don't believe that certain things are right and certain things are wrong, then you can be pressured to change your views on certain ideas over time. Some people have this problem and that is how people were conditioned to believe there are infinite amounts of genders or sexes, that a man can say he is a woman because he does not believe in right and wrong.
Instead, he believes that truth is based on perception and on feelings as opposed to a foundation, an eternal system, grounded on higher dimensions beyond the mere three-dimensions we are locked inside.
When people like you fail to participate in the informational culture wars, that is when and how civilizations decay over the course of many centuries in some cases as you study the fall of the Roman Empire for example.
Corruption in government accelerates as people choose not to confront the evil. Too often in world history, good people choose not to stand up to be the leaders of their families, communities, cities, tribes, groups, neighborhoods, states, countries. In those situations, compromised individuals end up rising up, fueled by their lust for power, control. Evil rises when good people choose to do nothing.
One of my main passions in life is in encouraging people to stand up to evil, that is why I do everything that I do and I do do a lot of things and that drives me to share the love in that endeavor because that is a main pillar to the meaning to life.