>>2029857 (l/b)

Indeed. Which is why the greatest deception ever practised on humanity was to get them to believe the nonsensical theory of evolution. If we are all a product of chance and survival of the fittest then government by the stongest (or most corrupt/unmerciful/immoral - take your pick) must always win.

When one believes in the truth of a Creator who has endowed his created beings with certain rights then no human givernment can take away those rights.

Small wonder then that the theory of evolution has always been pushed by those who seek power OVER their fellow men instead of empowerment from their creator to SERVE their fellow men.

Modern undertanding of genetics and cell biology has made evolutionary theory look so backward and dumb that it is a wonder that ANYONE still believes such nonsense. People have been brainwashed to believe it, though, because if they were to believe in a Creator they would believe in their inalienable rights granted by their Creator and the Cabal wouldn't want that, would they?

>>2030019

Faith

>>2030180

>(nice digits)

>

>You are assuming innate human nature (including morality) is not stronger than corruption. I beg to differ, which undermines your conclusion that belief in a deity is antithetical to (((their))) power.

>

>(((They))) will lose simply because good behavior is stronger at purveying survival than corrupt behavior. No belief in the supernatural necessary.

If we are created beings then a Creator is necessarily SUPER-natural if natural is the description applied to that which is created.

Futhermore, if morality is not determind by a Creator who has the right to determine what is right and wrong for his creation, it must necessarily be determined by the created. Who is to say which created being has a better understanding of right and wrong than any other vreated being? Why should your conceot of good outweight mine? The only way that is possible is if you FORCE your concept on me.

Think on, Anon.

>>2030290

Q is doing EXACTLY what is needed, started with we Anons. He is re-engaging us in the political process so that we will understand first hand what it means to have a ghovernment OF the people, BY the people, FOR the people.

I cannot think of a more efficacious method than the one that Q has chosen. He is showing us what it means to be ENGAGED in our government.