As do I

well, I don't have a "problem" with it, per se

but I don't think it's necessary; if someone's interested in legitimate freedom, a *carrot and stick* shouldn't be necessary

Romerlin and Jonathon are trying to help reverse hard indoctrination, so the terms he uses are what they're used to

Hence why he has to use them

or they I mean

I understand 100%

Hence why he and Romerlin use them .

I'm just not willing to use manipulation to achieve my goals

What?

again, as long as it's all voluntary I'm fine with it

What terms do I use?

Whether it's bad or not is not up for question. We're concerning wherever it is coherent to a non-aggressive norm

GG @Larbi, you just advanced to level 6!

And that's fine

I use direct methods exclusively

Carrot-and-Stick is not my style, but it can be very effective

And I agree with you on this.

You lose when they support aggression

Even 'positive human interaction' is undefined and is a lure

if you can't reason someone away from thinking aggression is necessary, they're a lost cause

Wrong and 'let's throw punches' are different cases

Its more, my religion says so

So I do it

And, freedom is cucked

are you an islamist?

No

uhh Scientology? lol

I am describing the people I debate

Freedom is cucked?

I am a militant athiest

ahh, also known as "*everything wrong with the world today*"

militant athiests and militant theists

are a cancer on this world

Ideology is a cancer

It's disgusting

Not if it's voluntary

I believe your moral compass is expanded beyond 'freedom from coercion'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1x7AHyCoCDo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCcezGuEzvA

GG @Phobia, you just advanced to level 6!

Jesus seemed to be very egalitarian as well