just because you are pea brained

doesnt mean what i say is wrong

>robolx dabbing pfp

Aight mate

"haha im smart because i dont think its wrong to kill"

Not my claim

Me when someone unironically has "Democracy" as their role

every time some1 loses a debate w/ me, they bring this upo

thats why i have the pfp

baits people easily

Im saying the axiomatic morals that are proposed are not universally confounded

why

Ok Norman. I agree it's wrong to kill

not talking to you jackass

BUT is that belief inherent to the universe

talking to the bleach

OR did society agree on it

Because what universal standard is there for morality?

You cant falsify morality being universal

if its only wrong because society says so, then its not really morally wrong is it?

@Norman how can you like dictatorship but also be a Christian?

was the holodomor justified, because the society agreed to iy?

Youre starting to debate the right question! Nice

@Norman “thAtS wHy iTs SubJEcTive”

I'm proud of you

not an argument

You’re retarded

no

Please study epistemology

please

Its not hard

i have all 41 chromosomes thank you very much

Isnt it 46?@Norman

only 4 mutants

The normal number is 46

I don't think it was justifiable morally because it happened. I'm not sure the society that it happened in found it justifiable either.

You can have immoral actions occur.

so if the society found it justifiable, you would not object to it?

So is the question you're asking me:

If there was a society that found genocide moral, would I also find it moral?

What does that have to do with the fact they are literally subjective

Stop setting up priori

If so, no. But your question presupposes that morals are subjective, defeating your own argument that they're objective