In article >,
Rudy Canoza > wrote:

> Ron wrote:
>
> > In article . net>,
> > Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>anal leakage wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>In article >,
> >>> Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>anal leakage wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>Because of their active, voluntary, fully aware
> >>>>>>participation in a *process* that leads to deaths they
> >>>>>>consider immoral.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Let's apply this thinking to another example.
> >>>>
> >>>>No. You didn't honestly consider my example. Do that,
> >>>>then maybe you can try again.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>All you've done is to provide me with more evidence that it is time that
> >>>we remove this feature from our laws.
> >>
> >>No. You actively support such laws. You WANT the
> >>getaway driver in a robbery that results in a death to
> >>be punished more harshly than the getaway driver in a
> >>robbery that does not result in a death.
> >
> >
> > Typically,
>
> Typically, you lie and pretend to avoid the obvious.

You consistently demonstrate your intellectual dishonesty. I'll check in
from time to time to see if you have evolved any.