by Ichthus77 » Sat Mar 18, 2023 12:11 am
You’re assuming God’s existence while you argue for it? Tsk tsk.
My questions revolve around the fact that we would never have a consent structure with only one person in existence, much less with zero people in existence. Therefore, there has always been someone in existence and that someone has always had at least one other person to consent to, who equally gives their consent, and a context in/through/to which the consent is communicated, constituting a third person inseparable from the being of the first two. It’s whole that re-iterates consent infinitely… fractaliciously.
Just saying.
In order to be/do anti- correctly, you must first understand what you are… shall we say… revaluating.
Things I gave up for Lent: poetry, cliffhangers, chocolate, roses, making out with my boyfriend on the beach, hiking in nature, and a million dollars.