u/shiro_shiyami

So there are couple of rules within this. Where indirectly here means also weaponized negligence and indifference to the harm you have conducted.

Where accidents include only true accidents and self-defence on a localised scale, not on a war level.

The deciding factor is intent and effort.

So a doctor who tries to save a life but dies either way he doesn't die even if the surgery had high risk.

Other example would be a politician who starts a war on the basis of self-defence and a person dies in the war he also dies because it's not a localised threat to the person itself. Or a judge who signs off a death penalty.

Also this law is inbuilt in human biology and is entirely automatic.

So there are couple of rules within this. Where indirectly here means also weaponized negligence and indifference to the harm you have conducted.

Where accidents include only true accidents and self-defence on a localised scale, not on a war level.

The deciding factor is intent and effort.

So a doctor who tries to save a life but dies either way he doesn't die even if the surgery had high risk.

Other example would be a politician who starts a war on the basis of self-defence and a person dies in the war he also dies because it's not a localised threat to the person itself. Or a judge who signs off a death penalty.

Also this law is inbuilt in human biology and is entirely automatic.

I'm talking about the Protestant Christian View of Hell.

I am born in a religious family (not christian) but turned out to be atheist because of my innate curiousity and a deep understanding of religion through my formal education of how it was constructed historically.

No matter how much I'm told to believe from my heart it wouldn't be possible because i know that religion is a man-made, deliberately created, and modified overtime. There's no physical evidence of God that's why when I look at Christianity when it says "you must not blindly believe in religion" plus "God sends you to hell even if you love truth and duty" both feel highly contradictory.

70% progressiveiem so the government actively innovates and implements laws which are for the benefit for the people.

30% conservativsm acting as the buffer or more like a functional verification body to make the progress effective and doesn't backfire.

Now this split comes because my fundamental problem with conservatism that it values social order over individual human, where lot of its laws significantly affected minorities.

They're sometimes implemented for social exclusion to protect the "morality" of the society which doesn't really exist and is an abstract concept.

Like the ban on abortions with no exceptions in Alabama and other states comes down to how society defines human life—this can be highly contested among two parties. However by putting an absolute ban excludes every single women's opinion on what they want to do when suffering, it's a law which hurts women's autonomy no matter how contested the claim is

Now I know without conservatism every single society fails but a conservative majority society is one which not only devalues individual suffering but also actively hurts it. It's afraid to move forward, like slavery or segregation in past which was considered normal 100 years back.

This is basically a call for reservation and a more meritocratic faced democracy.

70% progressiveiem so the government actively innovates and implements laws which are for the benefit for the people.

30% conservativsm acting as the buffer or more like a functional verification body to make the progress effective and doesn't backfire.

Now this split comes because my fundamental problem with conservatism that it values social order over individual human, where lot of its laws significantly affected minorities.

They're sometimes implemented for social exclusion to protect the "morality" of the society which doesn't really exist and is an abstract concept.

Like the ban on abortions with no exceptions in Alabama and other states comes down to how society defines human life—this can be highly contested among two parties. However by putting an absolute ban excludes every single women's opinion on what they want to do when suffering, it's a law which hurts women's autonomy no matter how contested the claim is

Now I know without conservatism every single society fails but a conservative majority society is one which not only devalues individual suffering but also actively hurts it. It's afraid to move forward, like slavery or segregation in past which was considered normal 100 years back.

This is basically a call for reservation and a more meritocratic faced democracy.

Heyy guys!!! Im from BRC and was thinking of creating an informal club for all the anime fans (including manga, manwha, VN, LNs fans)... I believe there are a bunch of fans in brc who would like to meet each other so i think this will be a good starting point. Please comment what kind of fan you're and what are your thoughts on this!!! I'll dm you the info!!