>>6361577 lb

>all face these questions, at least those that seek

>when both arguments sound correct, that's GOOD debate

>can both be right and wrong

>one has to be right for the other to be wrong

The other side that I didn't articulate very strongly is that those who were complacent, those who did not try to discover the truth, those who accepted the comfortable lies, those who actively supported candidates and causes that are demonstrably evil … are in some measure responsible for the results. (??)

Children and people are dying from the cabal's actions.

So by extension we would like to know to what extent those who – admittedly with blinders on – supported the evil, should be held culpable for the cascade of results.

This is a tough question because it hits close to home.

Many of us have family who STILL support candidates and causes and parties that WE now know to be evil. And yet telling them so is totally counterproductive, so we don't.

Does that make us evil too? Because we are unable to successfully redpill anyone in our extended family?

So it's a slippery slope.

My conclusion:

One must do good as they understand good.

One must actively try to learn what is good and not take anybody else's word for it.

One is not to blame for others' beliefs, choices, actions; each one is responsible for themself.

Fortunately we have a Savior, an Advocate, who took on human form and experienced the same things we have all experienced.