An ideal and some common sense.

[AlexandrosTsolis]

Common sense isn't an ideal...the way the Human senses are built is in one that is common for the human species.

Humans use their senses, and after they spend some time and effort can communicate with one another, however this is not given for any case.



it goes like this...



CASES

that most people view similarly for some time become

FASHIONABLE

but ways that most people view similarly

OVER AND OVER IN TIME

become

common sense...

 

[Jack]

^This is easier to read.

 

[AlexandrosTsolis]

^This is easier to read.

How about this?

When you have a group of people and you give them money, but also it happens that there are no laws that this group of people follows specifying how violence plays out, so that violence isn't the law in the group, then people in the group follow violence, and whoever masters violence, this one in the group people follow and then people built an economy around this one, regardless who you want to give money to, but regardless how violence in the group plays out, and...


regardless of the time...people in the group want to play and have fun in their lives from their nature, or when people in the group don't want to have fun in their lives, then their lives are not fun, and then their lives are meaningless to them in reality, as nature doesn't seem to have a reason to make a not fun life meaningful over and over...and over in time...as it wouldn't be really funny for the one living such a life, would it really?


At the moment of birth of one of the people in the group, another one from the group has to be there, meaning another one has to be there to give birth to one, and another one is free after giving birth to kill one, but that doesn't make sense for another one to do at that moment, as the nature of another one is to want to raise one, and one has to understand, that regardless the nature of another one, nature's law is another one is really free to kill one, at the moment of birth.


When you have a group of people where violence is the law, over and over and over in time, in order for this group to sustain all the violence in reality, some are needed to give birth to the ones to commit violence from their nature, and some are needed to do that so that there are some still left, after all the violence is committed, and that is by some deciding together who is not fun in the group, so that the rest in the group show to the ones who commit violence against the will of the ones who can give birth from their nature how...


...MAMA in the end puts order.

 

[Kamala Trump]

How about this?

When you have a group of people and you give them money, but also it happens that there are no laws that this group of people follows specifying how violence plays out, so that violence isn't the law in the group, then people in the group follow violence, and whoever masters violence, this one in the group people follow and then people built an economy around this one, regardless who you want to give money to, but regardless how violence in the group plays out, and...


regardless of the time...people in the group want to play and have fun in their lives from their nature, or when people in the group don't want to have fun in their lives, then their lives are not fun, and then their lives are meaningless to them in reality, as nature doesn't seem to have a reason to make a not fun life meaningful over and over...and over in time...as it wouldn't be really funny for the one living such a life, would it really?


At the moment of birth of one of the people in the group, another one from the group has to be there, meaning another one has to be there to give birth to one, and another one is free after giving birth to kill one, but that doesn't make sense for another one to do at that moment, as the nature of another one is to want to raise one, and one has to understand, that regardless the nature of another one, nature's law is another one is really free to kill one, at the moment of birth.


When you have a group of people where violence is the law, over and over and over in time, in order for this group to sustain all the violence in reality, some are needed to give birth to the ones to commit violence from their nature, and some are needed to do that so that there are some still left, after all the violence is committed, and that is by some deciding together who is not fun in the group, so that the rest in the group show to the ones who commit violence against the will of the ones who can give birth from their nature how...


...MAMA in the end puts order.

You're a psychotic criminal.

But you're right. Reason and morality and generally the purview of men, since women know nothing of these concepts.

What you are is a simp, turning on other men to get a whiff. it's pathetic.

 

[Kamala Trump]

I prefer schopenhauer.

 

[Kamala Trump]

Just like any other ‘–isms’ that label people and make them fit into a certain category (either/or), feminism is another West-inspired, culturally-alienating ideology that has sucked the feminine out of the female! So much so that the male and the female have come to be constructed as two distinct and opposing categories under the imposing influence of the West that it is.

Tracing its roots from critical theory in sociology, the basic premise of feminism that sex and gender are two disparate concepts in themselves is an utterly ill-informed one. It is on the basis of such a falsely-inspired binary notion of the masculine and the feminine that the feminine eventually has been robbed of its basic nature. India, that is Bharat, the land of Ardhanarishvara and Shiva-Sakti Parampara, does not need a borrowed intellectual discourse in the form of feminism to teach us about gender equality! Because, gender here is very much about the male as much as it is about the female. They co-mingle, co-exist, and are co-dependent on one another to reproduce and create life. Sooner we accept this fact, the better it is or else, it results in distancing oneself away from one’s basic biological nature, thereby negatively impacting the mental health of people in an overtly individualistic, technology-driven world.

The ancient Hindu sages believed that Shakti is a part of Lord Shiva himself and they co-exist. In Sanatan Dharma, it is believed that when Shakti is separated from Shiva, she assumes the form of Rudrani or Kali performing a destructive dance indicating an impending natural disaster. A beautiful explanation indeed!

https://kreately.in/whats-wrong-with-feminism-today/

 

[Kamala Trump]

Who's your daddy?

 

[AlexandrosTsolis]

Who's your daddy?

Daddy's dead...MAMA puts order now.

When you have a group of people and you give them money, but also it happens that there are no laws that this group of people follows specifying how violence plays out, so that violence isn't the law in the group, then people in the group follow violence, and whoever masters violence, this one in the group people follow and then people built an economy around this one, regardless who you want to give money to, but regardless how violence in the group plays out, and...


regardless of the time...people in the group want to play and have fun in their lives from their nature, or when people in the group don't want to have fun in their lives, then their lives are not fun, and then their lives are meaningless to them in reality, as nature doesn't seem to have a reason to make a not fun life meaningful over and over...and over in time...as it wouldn't be really funny for the one living such a life, would it really?


At the moment of birth of one of the people in the group, another one from the group has to be there, meaning another one has to be there to give birth to one, and another one is free after giving birth to kill one, but that doesn't make sense for another one to do at that moment, as the nature of another one is to want to raise one, and one has to understand, that regardless the nature of another one, nature's law is another one is really free to kill one, at the moment of birth.


When you have a group of people where violence is the law, over and over and over in time, in order for this group to sustain all the violence in reality, some are needed to give birth to the ones to commit violence from their nature, and some are needed to do that so that there are some still left, after all the violence is committed, and that is by some deciding together who is not fun in the group, so that the rest in the group show to the ones who commit violence against the will of the ones who can give birth from their nature how...


...MAMA in the end puts order.

 

[Kamala Trump]

Daddy's dead...MAMA puts order now.

When you have a group of people and you give them money, but also it happens that there are no laws that this group of people follows specifying how violence plays out, so that violence isn't the law in the group, then people in the group follow violence, and whoever masters violence, this one in the group people follow and then people built an economy around this one, regardless who you want to give money to, but regardless how violence in the group plays out, and...


regardless of the time...people in the group want to play and have fun in their lives from their nature, or when people in the group don't want to have fun in their lives, then their lives are not fun, and then their lives are meaningless to them in reality, as nature doesn't seem to have a reason to make a not fun life meaningful over and over...and over in time...as it wouldn't be really funny for the one living such a life, would it really?


At the moment of birth of one of the people in the group, another one from the group has to be there, meaning another one has to be there to give birth to one, and another one is free after giving birth to kill one, but that doesn't make sense for another one to do at that moment, as the nature of another one is to want to raise one, and one has to understand, that regardless the nature of another one, nature's law is another one is really free to kill one, at the moment of birth.


When you have a group of people where violence is the law, over and over and over in time, in order for this group to sustain all the violence in reality, some are needed to give birth to the ones to commit violence from their nature, and some are needed to do that so that there are some still left, after all the violence is committed, and that is by some deciding together who is not fun in the group, so that the rest in the group show to the ones who commit violence against the will of the ones who can give birth from their nature how...


...MAMA in the end puts order.

women love violence.

hybristophilia
n. sexual interest in and attraction to those who commit crimes. In some cases, this may be directed toward people in prison for various types of criminal activities.

simping isnt the answer, dummy.

 

[AlexandrosTsolis]

women love violence.

hybristophilia
n. sexual interest in and attraction to those who commit crimes. In some cases, this may be directed toward people in prison for various types of criminal activities.

simping isnt the answer, dummy.

if women love violence, what's your problem player, afraid of girls judging you player?


Daddy's dead...MAMA puts order now.

When you have a group of people and you give them money, but also it happens that there are no laws that this group of people follows specifying how violence plays out, so that violence isn't the law in the group, then people in the group follow violence, and whoever masters violence, this one in the group people follow and then people built an economy around this one, regardless who you want to give money to, but regardless how violence in the group plays out, and...


regardless of the time...people in the group want to play and have fun in their lives from their nature, or when people in the group don't want to have fun in their lives, then their lives are not fun, and then their lives are meaningless to them in reality, as nature doesn't seem to have a reason to make a not fun life meaningful over and over...and over in time...as it wouldn't be really funny for the one living such a life, would it really?


At the moment of birth of one of the people in the group, another one from the group has to be there, meaning another one has to be there to give birth to one, and another one is free after giving birth to kill one, but that doesn't make sense for another one to do at that moment, as the nature of another one is to want to raise one, and one has to understand, that regardless the nature of another one, nature's law is another one is really free to kill one, at the moment of birth.


When you have a group of people where violence is the law, over and over and over in time, in order for this group to sustain all the violence in reality, some are needed to give birth to the ones to commit violence from their nature, and some are needed to do that so that there are some still left, after all the violence is committed, and that is by some deciding together who is not fun in the group, so that the rest in the group show to the ones who commit violence against the will of the ones who can give birth from their nature how...


...MAMA in the end puts order.

 

[Kamala Trump]

if women love violence, what's your problem player, afraid of girls judging you player?


Daddy's dead...MAMA puts order now.

When you have a group of people and you give them money, but also it happens that there are no laws that this group of people follows specifying how violence plays out, so that violence isn't the law in the group, then people in the group follow violence, and whoever masters violence, this one in the group people follow and then people built an economy around this one, regardless who you want to give money to, but regardless how violence in the group plays out, and...


regardless of the time...people in the group want to play and have fun in their lives from their nature, or when people in the group don't want to have fun in their lives, then their lives are not fun, and then their lives are meaningless to them in reality, as nature doesn't seem to have a reason to make a not fun life meaningful over and over...and over in time...as it wouldn't be really funny for the one living such a life, would it really?


At the moment of birth of one of the people in the group, another one from the group has to be there, meaning another one has to be there to give birth to one, and another one is free after giving birth to kill one, but that doesn't make sense for another one to do at that moment, as the nature of another one is to want to raise one, and one has to understand, that regardless the nature of another one, nature's law is another one is really free to kill one, at the moment of birth.


When you have a group of people where violence is the law, over and over and over in time, in order for this group to sustain all the violence in reality, some are needed to give birth to the ones to commit violence from their nature, and some are needed to do that so that there are some still left, after all the violence is committed, and that is by some deciding together who is not fun in the group, so that the rest in the group show to the ones who commit violence against the will of the ones who can give birth from their nature how...


...MAMA in the end puts order.

You're a fucking idiot.

female violence and criminality is also wrong.

Giving birth doesn't give you permission to murder.

Simping isn't the answer, dum dum.

 

[Kamala Trump]

mgtow for the win.

 

[AlexandrosTsolis]

You're a fucking idiot.

female violence and criminality is also wrong.

Giving birth doesn't give you permission to murder.

Simping isn't the answer, dum dum.

Giving birth doesn't give you permission to murder.



none of the shit you wrote above idiot have arguments...what you wrote is just your opinion there man...read and learn how to argue idiot...



Beginning of life in society

When the beginning of the lives of people in society happens, the freedom for the beginning of their lives to happen, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, belongs also to the people who it belongs to from the beginning of their lives, because

Otherwise when the beginning of the lives of people in society happens, the freedom for the beginning of their lives to happen, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not belong also to the people who it belongs to from the beginning of their lives, but

If in the end when the beginning of the lives of people in society happens, the freedom for the beginning of their lives to happen apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not belong also to the people who it belongs to from the beginning of their lives, it doesn’t seem to me that for the people who, the rest from people out of all there is, give them the freedom to be able to give birth from the beginning of their lives, this freedom doesn’t belong to them from the beginning of their lives.

(...does it seem to you idiot?!)


Duration of life in society

When the lives of some people in society happens now, the freedom for the duration of their lives to happen, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, belongs also to the rest people in society, because

Otherwise when the lives of some people in society happens now, the freedom for the duration of their lives to happen, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not also belong to the rest people in society, but

If in the end when the lives of some people in society happens now, the freedom for the duration of their lives to happen, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not also belong to the rest people in society, it doesn’t seem to me that the freedom for the duration of the lives of the rest people, does not belong to some people in society.

(...does it seem to you idiot?!)


End of life in society

When the end of the life of one person in society happens, the freedom for this to be decided, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, belongs also to the people who the rest from people out of all there is give them the freedom to be able to give birth from the beginning of their lives, because

Otherwise when the end of the life of one person in society happens, the freedom to for this to be decided, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not also belong to the people who the rest from people out of all there is give them the freedom to be able to give birth from the beginning of their lives, but

If up until now, when the end of the life of one person in society happens, the freedom for this to be decided, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not also belong to the people who the rest from people out of all there is give them the freedom to be able to give birth from the beginning of their lives, it doesn’t seem to me that, for the people who the rest from people out of all there is give
them the freedom to be able to give birth from the beginning of their lives, at the end of the birth the rest don’t leave them free to decide the end of the life they gave birth to, to happen, regardless of what they want to do, and regardless what the rest people in society want to say.



Get it idiot?

 

[AlexandrosTsolis]

mgtow for the win.

what's your problem player, afraid of girls judging you player?


Daddy's dead...MAMA puts order now.

When you have a group of people and you give them money, but also it happens that there are no laws that this group of people follows specifying how violence plays out, so that violence isn't the law in the group, then people in the group follow violence, and whoever masters violence, this one in the group people follow and then people built an economy around this one, regardless who you want to give money to, but regardless how violence in the group plays out, and...


regardless of the time...people in the group want to play and have fun in their lives from their nature, or when people in the group don't want to have fun in their lives, then their lives are not fun, and then their lives are meaningless to them in reality, as nature doesn't seem to have a reason to make a not fun life meaningful over and over...and over in time...as it wouldn't be really funny for the one living such a life, would it really?


At the moment of birth of one of the people in the group, another one from the group has to be there, meaning another one has to be there to give birth to one, and another one is free after giving birth to kill one, but that doesn't make sense for another one to do at that moment, as the nature of another one is to want to raise one, and one has to understand, that regardless the nature of another one, nature's law is another one is really free to kill one, at the moment of birth.


When you have a group of people where violence is the law, over and over and over in time, in order for this group to sustain all the violence in reality, some are needed to give birth to the ones to commit violence from their nature, and some are needed to do that so that there are some still left, after all the violence is committed, and that is by some deciding together who is not fun in the group, so that the rest in the group show to the ones who commit violence against the will of the ones who can give birth from their nature how...


...MAMA in the end puts order.

 

[Kamala Trump]

what's your problem player, afraid of girls judging you player?


Daddy's dead...MAMA puts order now.

When you have a group of people and you give them money, but also it happens that there are no laws that this group of people follows specifying how violence plays out, so that violence isn't the law in the group, then people in the group follow violence, and whoever masters violence, this one in the group people follow and then people built an economy around this one, regardless who you want to give money to, but regardless how violence in the group plays out, and...


regardless of the time...people in the group want to play and have fun in their lives from their nature, or when people in the group don't want to have fun in their lives, then their lives are not fun, and then their lives are meaningless to them in reality, as nature doesn't seem to have a reason to make a not fun life meaningful over and over...and over in time...as it wouldn't be really funny for the one living such a life, would it really?


At the moment of birth of one of the people in the group, another one from the group has to be there, meaning another one has to be there to give birth to one, and another one is free after giving birth to kill one, but that doesn't make sense for another one to do at that moment, as the nature of another one is to want to raise one, and one has to understand, that regardless the nature of another one, nature's law is another one is really free to kill one, at the moment of birth.


When you have a group of people where violence is the law, over and over and over in time, in order for this group to sustain all the violence in reality, some are needed to give birth to the ones to commit violence from their nature, and some are needed to do that so that there are some still left, after all the violence is committed, and that is by some deciding together who is not fun in the group, so that the rest in the group show to the ones who commit violence against the will of the ones who can give birth from their nature how...


...MAMA in the end puts order.

They're fine.

It's just that their shit also stinks.

simping isnt the answer player.

giving birth doesn't give you the right to murder as you assert, dum dum.

 

[Kamala Trump]

Giving birth doesn't give you permission to murder.



none of the shit you wrote above idiot have arguments...what you wrote is just your opinion there man...read and learn how to argue idiot...



Beginning of life in society

When the beginning of the lives of people in society happens, the freedom for the beginning of their lives to happen, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, belongs also to the people who it belongs to from the beginning of their lives, because

Otherwise when the beginning of the lives of people in society happens, the freedom for the beginning of their lives to happen, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not belong also to the people who it belongs to from the beginning of their lives, but

If in the end when the beginning of the lives of people in society happens, the freedom for the beginning of their lives to happen apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not belong also to the people who it belongs to from the beginning of their lives, it doesn’t seem to me that for the people who, the rest from people out of all there is, give them the freedom to be able to give birth from the beginning of their lives, this freedom doesn’t belong to them from the beginning of their lives.

(...does it seem to you idiot?!)


Duration of life in society

When the lives of some people in society happens now, the freedom for the duration of their lives to happen, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, belongs also to the rest people in society, because

Otherwise when the lives of some people in society happens now, the freedom for the duration of their lives to happen, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not also belong to the rest people in society, but

If in the end when the lives of some people in society happens now, the freedom for the duration of their lives to happen, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not also belong to the rest people in society, it doesn’t seem to me that the freedom for the duration of the lives of the rest people, does not belong to some people in society.

(...does it seem to you idiot?!)


End of life in society

When the end of the life of one person in society happens, the freedom for this to be decided, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, belongs also to the people who the rest from people out of all there is give them the freedom to be able to give birth from the beginning of their lives, because

Otherwise when the end of the life of one person in society happens, the freedom to for this to be decided, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not also belong to the people who the rest from people out of all there is give them the freedom to be able to give birth from the beginning of their lives, but

If up until now, when the end of the life of one person in society happens, the freedom for this to be decided, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not also belong to the people who the rest from people out of all there is give them the freedom to be able to give birth from the beginning of their lives, it doesn’t seem to me that, for the people who the rest from people out of all there is give
them the freedom to be able to give birth from the beginning of their lives, at the end of the birth the rest don’t leave them free to decide the end of the life they gave birth to, to happen, regardless of what they want to do, and regardless what the rest people in society want to say.



Get it idiot?

no. stop repeating yourself and use more clarity.

it's seems like you promote a gynocentric death cult.

 

[AlexandrosTsolis]

no. stop repeating yourself and use more clarity.

it's seems like you promote a gynocentric death cult.

I did idiot, read and think, or ignore my thread and read other threads IDIOT!!!!

DO YOU REALLY HAVE TO KEEP REPLYING TO MY THREAD IDIOT THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO READ??!!

READ IDIOT OR GET LOST!



Giving birth doesn't give you permission to murder.



none of the shit you wrote above idiot have arguments...what you wrote is just your opinion there man...read and learn how to argue idiot...



Beginning of life in society

When the beginning of the lives of people in society happens, the freedom for the beginning of their lives to happen, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, belongs also to the people who it belongs to from the beginning of their lives, because

Otherwise when the beginning of the lives of people in society happens, the freedom for the beginning of their lives to happen, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not belong also to the people who it belongs to from the beginning of their lives, but

If in the end when the beginning of the lives of people in society happens, the freedom for the beginning of their lives to happen apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not belong also to the people who it belongs to from the beginning of their lives, it doesn’t seem to me that for the people who, the rest from people out of all there is, give them the freedom to be able to give birth from the beginning of their lives, this freedom doesn’t belong to them from the beginning of their lives.

(...does it seem to you idiot?!)


Duration of life in society

When the lives of some people in society happens now, the freedom for the duration of their lives to happen, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, belongs also to the rest people in society, because

Otherwise when the lives of some people in society happens now, the freedom for the duration of their lives to happen, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not also belong to the rest people in society, but

If in the end when the lives of some people in society happens now, the freedom for the duration of their lives to happen, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not also belong to the rest people in society, it doesn’t seem to me that the freedom for the duration of the lives of the rest people, does not belong to some people in society.

(...does it seem to you idiot?!)


End of life in society

When the end of the life of one person in society happens, the freedom for this to be decided, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, belongs also to the people who the rest from people out of all there is give them the freedom to be able to give birth from the beginning of their lives, because

Otherwise when the end of the life of one person in society happens, the freedom to for this to be decided, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not also belong to the people who the rest from people out of all there is give them the freedom to be able to give birth from the beginning of their lives, but

If up until now, when the end of the life of one person in society happens, the freedom for this to be decided, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not also belong to the people who the rest from people out of all there is give them the freedom to be able to give birth from the beginning of their lives, it doesn’t seem to me that, for the people who the rest from people out of all there is give
them the freedom to be able to give birth from the beginning of their lives, at the end of the birth the rest don’t leave them free to decide the end of the life they gave birth to, to happen, regardless of what they want to do, and regardless what the rest people in society want to say.



Get it idiot?

 

[Kamala Trump]

I did idiot, read and think, or ignore my thread and read other threads IDIOT!!!!

DO YOU REALLY HAVE TO KEEP REPLYING TO MY THREAD IDIOT THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO READ??!!

READ IDIOT OR GET LOST!



Giving birth doesn't give you permission to murder.



none of the shit you wrote above idiot have arguments...what you wrote is just your opinion there man...read and learn how to argue idiot...



Beginning of life in society

When the beginning of the lives of people in society happens, the freedom for the beginning of their lives to happen, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, belongs also to the people who it belongs to from the beginning of their lives, because

Otherwise when the beginning of the lives of people in society happens, the freedom for the beginning of their lives to happen, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not belong also to the people who it belongs to from the beginning of their lives, but

If in the end when the beginning of the lives of people in society happens, the freedom for the beginning of their lives to happen apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not belong also to the people who it belongs to from the beginning of their lives, it doesn’t seem to me that for the people who, the rest from people out of all there is, give them the freedom to be able to give birth from the beginning of their lives, this freedom doesn’t belong to them from the beginning of their lives.

(...does it seem to you idiot?!)


Duration of life in society

When the lives of some people in society happens now, the freedom for the duration of their lives to happen, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, belongs also to the rest people in society, because

Otherwise when the lives of some people in society happens now, the freedom for the duration of their lives to happen, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not also belong to the rest people in society, but

If in the end when the lives of some people in society happens now, the freedom for the duration of their lives to happen, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not also belong to the rest people in society, it doesn’t seem to me that the freedom for the duration of the lives of the rest people, does not belong to some people in society.

(...does it seem to you idiot?!)


End of life in society

When the end of the life of one person in society happens, the freedom for this to be decided, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, belongs also to the people who the rest from people out of all there is give them the freedom to be able to give birth from the beginning of their lives, because

Otherwise when the end of the life of one person in society happens, the freedom to for this to be decided, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not also belong to the people who the rest from people out of all there is give them the freedom to be able to give birth from the beginning of their lives, but

If up until now, when the end of the life of one person in society happens, the freedom for this to be decided, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not also belong to the people who the rest from people out of all there is give them the freedom to be able to give birth from the beginning of their lives, it doesn’t seem to me that, for the people who the rest from people out of all there is give
them the freedom to be able to give birth from the beginning of their lives, at the end of the birth the rest don’t leave them free to decide the end of the life they gave birth to, to happen, regardless of what they want to do, and regardless what the rest people in society want to say.



Get it idiot?

No. try more intelligence and better writing skills.

still seems like you promote a gynocentric death cult to me.

 

[AlexandrosTsolis]

No. try more intelligence and better writing skills.

still seems like you promote a gynocentric death cult to me.

I did idiot, read and think, or ignore my thread and read other threads IDIOT!!!!

DO YOU REALLY HAVE TO KEEP REPLYING TO MY THREAD IDIOT THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO READ??!!

READ IDIOT OR GET LOST!



Giving birth doesn't give you permission to murder.



none of the shit you wrote above idiot have arguments...what you wrote is just your opinion there man...read and learn how to argue idiot...



Beginning of life in society

When the beginning of the lives of people in society happens, the freedom for the beginning of their lives to happen, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, belongs also to the people who it belongs to from the beginning of their lives, because

Otherwise when the beginning of the lives of people in society happens, the freedom for the beginning of their lives to happen, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not belong also to the people who it belongs to from the beginning of their lives, but

If in the end when the beginning of the lives of people in society happens, the freedom for the beginning of their lives to happen apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not belong also to the people who it belongs to from the beginning of their lives, it doesn’t seem to me that for the people who, the rest from people out of all there is, give them the freedom to be able to give birth from the beginning of their lives, this freedom doesn’t belong to them from the beginning of their lives.

(...does it seem to you idiot?!)


Duration of life in society

When the lives of some people in society happens now, the freedom for the duration of their lives to happen, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, belongs also to the rest people in society, because

Otherwise when the lives of some people in society happens now, the freedom for the duration of their lives to happen, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not also belong to the rest people in society, but

If in the end when the lives of some people in society happens now, the freedom for the duration of their lives to happen, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not also belong to the rest people in society, it doesn’t seem to me that the freedom for the duration of the lives of the rest people, does not belong to some people in society.

(...does it seem to you idiot?!)


End of life in society

When the end of the life of one person in society happens, the freedom for this to be decided, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, belongs also to the people who the rest from people out of all there is give them the freedom to be able to give birth from the beginning of their lives, because

Otherwise when the end of the life of one person in society happens, the freedom to for this to be decided, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not also belong to the people who the rest from people out of all there is give them the freedom to be able to give birth from the beginning of their lives, but

If up until now, when the end of the life of one person in society happens, the freedom for this to be decided, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not also belong to the people who the rest from people out of all there is give them the freedom to be able to give birth from the beginning of their lives, it doesn’t seem to me that, for the people who the rest from people out of all there is give
them the freedom to be able to give birth from the beginning of their lives, at the end of the birth the rest don’t leave them free to decide the end of the life they gave birth to, to happen, regardless of what they want to do, and regardless what the rest people in society want to say.



Get it idiot?

 

[Kamala Trump]

I did idiot, read and think, or ignore my thread and read other threads IDIOT!!!!

DO YOU REALLY HAVE TO KEEP REPLYING TO MY THREAD IDIOT THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO READ??!!

READ IDIOT OR GET LOST!



Giving birth doesn't give you permission to murder.



none of the shit you wrote above idiot have arguments...what you wrote is just your opinion there man...read and learn how to argue idiot...



Beginning of life in society

When the beginning of the lives of people in society happens, the freedom for the beginning of their lives to happen, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, belongs also to the people who it belongs to from the beginning of their lives, because

Otherwise when the beginning of the lives of people in society happens, the freedom for the beginning of their lives to happen, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not belong also to the people who it belongs to from the beginning of their lives, but

If in the end when the beginning of the lives of people in society happens, the freedom for the beginning of their lives to happen apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not belong also to the people who it belongs to from the beginning of their lives, it doesn’t seem to me that for the people who, the rest from people out of all there is, give them the freedom to be able to give birth from the beginning of their lives, this freedom doesn’t belong to them from the beginning of their lives.

(...does it seem to you idiot?!)


Duration of life in society

When the lives of some people in society happens now, the freedom for the duration of their lives to happen, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, belongs also to the rest people in society, because

Otherwise when the lives of some people in society happens now, the freedom for the duration of their lives to happen, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not also belong to the rest people in society, but

If in the end when the lives of some people in society happens now, the freedom for the duration of their lives to happen, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not also belong to the rest people in society, it doesn’t seem to me that the freedom for the duration of the lives of the rest people, does not belong to some people in society.

(...does it seem to you idiot?!)


End of life in society

When the end of the life of one person in society happens, the freedom for this to be decided, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, belongs also to the people who the rest from people out of all there is give them the freedom to be able to give birth from the beginning of their lives, because

Otherwise when the end of the life of one person in society happens, the freedom to for this to be decided, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not also belong to the people who the rest from people out of all there is give them the freedom to be able to give birth from the beginning of their lives, but

If up until now, when the end of the life of one person in society happens, the freedom for this to be decided, apart from the rest from people out of all there is, does not also belong to the people who the rest from people out of all there is give them the freedom to be able to give birth from the beginning of their lives, it doesn’t seem to me that, for the people who the rest from people out of all there is give
them the freedom to be able to give birth from the beginning of their lives, at the end of the birth the rest don’t leave them free to decide the end of the life they gave birth to, to happen, regardless of what they want to do, and regardless what the rest people in society want to say.



Get it idiot?

no. could you try again with less repetitive gibberish? thank you.