It is not the point of this discussion in particular because I am talking about positions held on the basis of reasoning. The wet dreams of an American conservative are not exactly a bright example of logic.

That is not the same as making them cease to exist. A lot of people wish that was the case, but hundreds of martyrs, saints and not, prove them wrong.

Everyone answering me seems to not allow for the option that I may not counter the other person with an alternative I defend with reason. My dislike for that expression assumes that I find myself in a discussion over something worth defending with reason, otherwise there is no discussion in the first place.

Of all things, cooking a steak is the worst example maybe. Also, there is no reasoning around not allowing things or people to exist because, for one, they exist.

“Let’s agree to disagree”.

No, you asshole, we are getting to the bottom of this: you expose your reasoning for your position and I will do the same and this ends when reason doesn’t support anymore one of the 2 sides.

Good like having Disney depicting that.

He used Not Sure as a smokescreen since the beginning, the whole point is that he never really understood what was going on. I am quite sure that American presidents are approaching that level of idiocy.

This is what I love about Mike Judge’s work. It turns out to be always the best metaphor/reference/prophecy of the boring dystopia. Since 1999.

DuckDuckGo is surprisingly good. It is my go-to atm on all my computers. If it only had better maps…

Without the need to resort to blatant racist theories, my bet is still on tax arrangements.

And a huge disruption of astronomical research.

I am looking forward to see the repo man collecting it since it was only a licensed company asset, especially since it is fused with her own tissues.

I don’t find it cool to be machine-like.