"<a href=""https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOKCNUqbpH0&amp;t=24m45s"">24:45</a> the issue here is that as you compare yourself to the god in the eyes of your child you contradict what you said at <a href=""https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOKCNUqbpH0&amp;t=4m44s"">4:44</a>", if he is omnipotent then why does he need to cause suffering in other to achieve his goal like a human causing slight pain and despair in their child when denying them what they want. As a parent I would rather not cause any pain to my child if i could help it, or is it that he believes that some pain is necessary to the child and if so then how much pain? The problem with believing something so extreme as being parented by a god is that it leads to these fundamental questions who's answers, when supported, lead to a lot of incredible good in the world but at the same time a lot of incredible suffering too amplified by the belief that what you are doing is right because the one in charge, the one who's watching over you would punish you like a parent would do when doing something wrong, similar to a child testing the waters when doing things to see the parent's reaction and when they intervene to know when to stop, but for this case there is nobody there to intervine to stop the atrocities but the belief that there is will still push the one believing. This is somewhat limited by having ancient commandments of morality, but why would there be a need for these limitations in the first place if god was omnipotent? wouldn't an omnipotent parent give the child all the freedom it desires, or is limiting the child's space necessary a primordial necessity, and if so how much? how much should one limit the freedom of others, it's obviously right because parents and god are doing it, so how about close family, how much should they limit eachother, how about the neighbors, church or government, should they also limit the freedoms of their flock/herd? (see what I did there? :) cause even jesus is portrayed as a sheperd limiting the places where sheep can go and guiding them to his own will with the assumption of benevolence) so why shouldn't people take their examples and start building pens around eachother to guide people and punish the ones who stray?<br>Religion is a doozy because it deals with extremes represented by gods that can't really be disconnected from normal human abilities. Just like how it's hard to write genius characters in stories because the author isn't a genius themselves, it is even harder to write god and god's intentions when everyone is human. Wait till they learn that you can declare people as saints and demigods so you can bring legitimacy to your holy texts, oh nvm, too late. Or wait till they realize that you can bypass the  "everyone is human" assumption by declaring people and races above others (*and those who disagree maybe make them subhuman) and closer to god to be able to rightfully write those text as holy, oh, nvm, too late.<br><br>When you start exploring these extreme ideas that make up religions and the history behind them, these massive religious structures don't seem as appealing as the salesmen make them out to be," eh?<br><br><a href=""https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOKCNUqbpH0&amp;t=28m57s"">28:57</a> inocent suffering will be rewarded? wouldn't that make it so that if you should cause suffering to someone for them to be rewarded more in the afterlife? wouldn't that make the one causing the most suffering in the world actually a saint because", at the end of the they, they are making everyone get rewarded more and more at the cost of their own punishment and suffering increasing later," like some sort of martir... hmmm.<br><br><a href=""https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOKCNUqbpH0&amp;t=37m20s"">37:20</a> oh", god he said it," he said it unironically<br><br><a href=""https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOKCNUqbpH0&amp;t=1h04m19s"">1:04:19</a> "to have demonstrations of strength" such a beautiful and vague string of words that cannot in any way be misinterpreted by extreme believers exposed to hatefull rhetoric from their local media or small group of other likeminded extreme believers. And don't think that this was said in any way vaguely on purpose"," its just pure coincidence that it came out so vague.<br><br><a href=""https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOKCNUqbpH0&amp;t=1h05m40s"">1:05:40</a> I don't remember hearing about people going to prison over caricatures of Macron or France", I would have liked some sources on this. But, even if those statements were confirmed to be true, personally I would prefer to get a prison sentence or get deported home than be chopped up with a machete or gunned down at work in a generally considered safe country with little gun violence for those caricatures," but maybe that's just me. <br><a href=""https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOKCNUqbpH0&amp;t=1h06m43s"">1:06:43</a> wait", did Lex just zone out for a minute there while he said that or does he not know about the french caricatures and the aftermath? wow," that's actually pretty cold blooded for lex if he knew and still managed to brush over it to agree on the freedom of speech issue in america a few seconds later.<br>also love how he says this <a href=""https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOKCNUqbpH0&amp;t=1h07m46s"">1:07:46</a> literally 2 mins after he references what happened in france considering who were the ones armed doing the killings.<br><br><a href=""https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOKCNUqbpH0&amp;t=1h16m02s"">1:16:02</a> This is actually pretty interesting", never knew how their pairs worked so it's nice to find out, but im a little disconcerted that there is such things as obligatory and voluntary pairs. I find it pretty weird that there is such a thing as an obligatory ritual, like, what happens if you don't do the obligatory x thing in your religion and what happens if you do the voluntary parts," aren't all the parts supposed to be voluntary in the first place?<br><br><a href=""https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOKCNUqbpH0&amp;t=2h20m20s"">2:20:20</a> wow", really didn't expect him to actually say it. I thought religious leaders were supposed to stray away from the fact that religion is ultimately a tool to controlling people and that a charismatic person that is ok with lying constantly can basically turn a big mass of vulnerable people into comitting some really bad stuff. Like the social media platforms of today, on one hand they can connect people, allow them to help each other faster than people of the past could even dream of, but on the other hand it can redefine morality and polarize half a country to think that the other half is their enemy witch without considerable control and oversight could easily lead to civil wars. Almost like the massive religious establishments were/are the social media of today, whoever controls them has a lot of power, they can "excomunicate" people they do not agree with and the mass will throw the stones, they can lynch anyone they want as long as they can get people to just believe they represent the virtue and what's right.... hmmmm for some reason  that doesn't really inspire trust the more you look at it and it would seem something quite dangerous to dedicate yourself to and blindly follow one of these faiths. Eh, but what can go wrong, history has shown us that it has nothing to do with religions and that it was just a social problem and that overly religious/authoritarian empires/states/countries etc. aren't more likely to commit atrocities. (sarcasm there at the end btw for those that even need this disclaimer, the more aggressive a controlling group spreads propaganda and wants to control the dialogue, the more likely they are to do history's most terrible things to others," but I'm no history major so that's just my opinion)<br><br><br><a href=""https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOKCNUqbpH0&amp;t=2h38m38s"">2:38:38</a><br>this is not a religious conflict", yes, religion is invoked, yes, there there are religious elements<br>(but also," if people don't want to intervine on one (your) side of the conflict they are taking part in a religious conflict that should not in fact be called a religious conflict but a social issue with religious elements?)<br><a href=""https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOKCNUqbpH0&amp;t=2h40m59s"">2:40:59</a><br>we're opposed to islamophobia", but they support that," I tell you're not opposed to islamophobia how can you be opposed to islamophobia when you traffic in the same framings and uh dehumanization that enables the viciousness towards Muslims<br><br><br><a href=""https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOKCNUqbpH0&amp;t=2h54m20s"">2:54:20</a><br>everybody wants", and they're only being further disenfranchised in the name of peace now, because voices are being amplified in the name of peace that are suffocating voices for justice<br>(oh boy, how I love hearing from my religious leader about how we should deamplify the voices for peace because they are suffocating the voices for justice, I hear that it's always a good thing when maximum pacifist Gandhi goes integer overflow, renounces peace and decides its now time for justice),(reply>), <b>ᴛhαnks fσr wαtchíng..</b><br><b>mαkє α nσtє tσ Mason Watson вч tєхtíng hím чσu whєrє rєfєrrєd вч mє чσu’ll вє guídєd rєgαrdíng crчptσ ínvєstmєnt вtc/єth skílls………..±𝟏𝟓𝟏𝟑𝟗𝟕𝟎𝟎𝟑𝟐𝟔</b><br>✍️ ᵒⁿ ʷʰᵃᵗˢᵃᵖᵖ<br><br><b>lєt hím knσw í sєnt чσu🚀💯....…</b>