I did not ask what you meant in your sentence.
CXORA
I understand that it is a parable.
But it is still literally scripture, where someone suffers in the afterlife. That the moral of the story is the rich must share their wealth to avoid the same fate rather supports my position.
In what way?
Luke 16:24 is absolutely in the afterlife.
Explain how what i said was wrong? I understand you disagree, but none of the rest of your comment explains why.
Peta accepts animals that other shelters reject... so of course their rates are worse. Do you object to euthenasia in general?
So they had one bad ad campaign.. Okay.
Peta does not, as an organisation, steal pets.
I see you've fallen for the anti-peta propaganda.
"there's certainly enough ammunition in religion as a whole for anyone who hates religion to think that they're right."
Is a crazy way to phrase "there is evidence that supports their views"
Oh, you're not racist. You just hate people because of how they look... Do you think that's alright or something?
It's also humans with morals vs. Conservatives. None of this would work if conservatives didn't salivate at the thought of making others suffer.
There is text in the bible referring to unworthy people suffering after their deaths.
That it was not literally called "hell" in the original text is a distraction.
I'm glad that worked for you!
I just think having a cage sitting in my house looks really ugly.