If you’re not making with the example you insist exist I’m not even gonna read your posts as they’re a waste of time.

No I get it, you can’t prove your point. You don’t have to keep running around with dictionaries that don’t prove your point to impress me. It doesn’t change my view of you at all to know you’re wrong.

Are you still on this? You went in circles so I left.

Still no example, huh?

I’m happy for you …or sorry that happened.

That’s alot of words which notably are not an example of the adjective “illegal” being used as though it were a noun to describe a human being and it not being derogatory.

Come on, bill Clinton. You just gonna yap about what “is” is or you gonna prove your point? Make with the example.

The link you offered does not seem authoritative.
The example it proffered of:

“Sometimes I don’t always feel like jogging” doesn’t make any sense.

Makes perfect sense.

Are you going to keep litigating “Sometimes inherently means sometimes not” or are you going to provide an example of a non-pejorative use of referring to a human being as though they themself were illegal?

“Sometimes” is different than “Sometimes although not always”

That I why I had to use different words to type the two different concepts.
Your definition only listed the first, which does not inherently indicate the second.

The definition does not indicate it can be not derogatory—which makes sense because it’s derogatory.

You despite claiming sans evidence that it is possible to refer to a human being with a pejorative adjective and it be anything other than derogatory, won’t even back up your claim with a single non-derogatory example of its use.

I get why you won’t—'cause you can’t—but if you were right you’d think You could give an example rather than litigating the implied corollaries to “sometimes”.

How the hell are you supposed to play the game and “be better” than the opposition, when the opposition is taking advantage of you?

You do that by not murdering them after you have taken power and over the means of production.

Having all the world’s fortune in the hands of about 10 people. We can’t stop this by playing nice and asking nicely.

Alright so you’ve seized all the money in the world and taken over all the land and machinery that enables production through the application of labor via militant witholding of the same. You and your comrades have all the guns.

…why at that point do you need to use those guns to murder people who are no longer holding murderous control over those common resources?

I refuse to acquiesce to or defend a system of belief that requires people die.

Once you win, you don’t kill or you never had moral authority to employ violence in pursuit of winning in the first place.

see I don’t respect the BBC.

You shouldn’t.

what makes that cutoff meaningful?

Fetuses don’t have rights.

I’m also saying you can’t sieze all their assets. money isn’t just money, and its not the only thing that’s money.

What the heck are you talking about? Find the things which can be exchanged for goods and services and that those things away. Cart off shiny rocks. 0 out electronic ledgers

Billionaire handshakes are meaningless. If you’ve seized all the food and means of production what does it matter if gardeners try to play Parker Bros. with one another?

being human
which is what?

A supernatural comedy drama on BBC3

why?

What are you, a toddler? You asked for a cutoff and I gave you one. If you didn’t want an answer, don’t ask.

okay so when I die where does that dignity go? my writings? my body, my soul?
because your version of this idea sounds anawful lot like a soul.

What’s your point? I never mentioned “a soul” as it relates to human dignity but if even you seem to be using it as equivalent to or allegory for writings so what if it does sound like that?

Like you seem to be trying to sculpt my position to some preconceived notion you have of organized faith so you can then attack that when I have never mentioned religion.

I just said you shouldn’t murder people once you’ve already seized “their” assets.

based on what?

Being Human

at what point(s) does it start applying?

First breath; fetuses aren’t people

at what point(s) does it stop?

It doesn’t.

what about a hypothetical uploaded mind?

Getting a bit off topic your advocacy of murdering people after their wealth has been seized

in an ideal world, maybe we should.

Why the hell advocate violence if not to effect ideals?

You good, mate? Do you need a friend or someone to talk to?

money isn’t money though.

Pretty sure money is money, and you can take it.

in what ways?

It makes you the type of person who can dismiss the humanity of other humans as “other” and we know what kind of atrocities that leads to.

half as many people arguing half as much for the dignity and humanity of the unhoused and laboring classes

What about universal human dignity applying universally takes away the right of dignity from the unhoused?

Human dignity isn’t a zero-sum game. That’s billionaire thinking.

Take billionaires’ assets, not their lives (post-fact).

“DEBBBBAAAATE MEEEEEEE!”

Damn. I’ve found evidence A New Hope (along with Empire Strikes Back and Revenge Of The Jedi) were released on Video8, but I haven’t yet been able to find evidence Enter The Dragon got a Video8 release.

Can anyone find evidence of Enter the Dragon being released on Video8?
The one source I have found doesn’t list it.

I really don’t want the answer to my question to be “Star Wars”. ☹️

and being wealthy diminishes just about all of those reasons.scientifically, there are studies that prove it. the wealthy are less intelligent less logic less compassionate less connected to the world.

So take their money.

they dehumanize, in the terms that matter to me, themselves.

You dehumanize yourself when you dehumanize others.

I’m in favor of actually fixing the problem. that means a guillotine.

How did that work out for Robespierre?

it takes seconds, other way takes years,

And you end up with dirty sheets. No matter how fast it is it doesn’t address your problem.

Don’t call people “it” my dude.
Irrespective how monstrous a person acts they’re still a human and you can’t distance yourself and your capacity to engage in the same monsterousness they did by dehumanizing them.

You’re going to have to provide examples where sometimes means always.

I’m not the one making the claim here, you are.

There’s very little that can be done to reform these people.

Nothing you have tried so far.

How the fuck are we supposed to get the message across when those people have their own militia protecting them and their interests?

Have you ever considered “Progaganda Of The Deed” to encompass modeling being better people than the opposition?

I’m against the death penalty but

Shut the fuck up. If there’s a “but” ever then no the fuck you are not.

They won’t repeat the horrific thing they did while dead

Did the original horrific thing not happen? Does murder ameliorate past suffering in any way?

Vengeance is not justice, it is sick.