I'm not gonna clutter this thread on that. We can take this part offline or start a new thread.Perhaps you should include the temporal component - you know, so your thinking isn't so binary/two dimensional
Perhaps a post, answering a previous post, should be viewed in the light of the quoted post it is answering and not expected to answer any temporally subsequent post of yours simply because of where each occurs on the timeline
I am showing you that your invocation of Locke, as contained in those 'enlightenment ideals' you are so enamored of, comes with some additional baggage (from what would seem to be your viewpoint) with the added caveat that most of the founding fathers would have had little to no problem with his view of the Bible
I find it ridiculous that people who insisted Trump wasn't squeaky clean enough to represent THEIR Republican Party will cleave to a mentally insane, self-mutilating freak who happens to embody the perverse flavor of the moment. It smacks of opportunism and desperation
That is not a woman and never will be, and to enable and encourage that delusion is in and of itself a crime against humanity. It is the rough equivalent, to me, of supporting a candidate who thinks he is Captain Kangaroo under the guise that the delusion is harmless as long as he mouths the proper platitudes. For someone who can't even accept the election was corrupt without absolute proof, one wonders when you will cite proof, beyond your personal predilections, that supporting and lionizing this thing will in any way help or broaden republican support in California - which after all should be the goal. Losing sight of that just makes it another 'First [insert current cause célèbre here] candidate ever'
How did that Bootyjudge thing work out