Good and Evil

[Fairy]

“Are you able to explain what you actually mean, exactly?”

Done it.

If 'this' is what you, really, want to believe, here, then okay.

I don’t believe it, I know it absolutely.

Belief is for doubters like you.

[Age]

“When 'you' say things like, Killing is loving. Evil is goodness.' then I do not see how the so-called 'penny' could drop.”

Everything is love.

If you can understand that, then that’s not my problem.

So, if some one was to kill and rape "your children" and/or "your grandchildren", then, to you, that is 'love', and 'loving', right?

[Fairy]

“Again, detracting will not help 'you', here.”

I don’t need help.

I know I am God, and that’s all I need to know.

[Fairy]

“When 'you' say things like, Killing is loving. Evil is goodness.' then I do not see how the so-called 'penny' could drop.”

Everything is love.

If you can understand that, then that’s not my problem.

So, if some one was to kill and rape "your children" and/or "your grandchildren", then, to you, that is 'love', and 'loving', right?

Yes that’s right.

[Age]

“When 'you' say things like, Killing is loving. Evil is goodness.' then I do not see how the so-called 'penny' could drop.”

Everything is love.

If you can understand that, then that’s not my problem.

So, if some one was to kill and rape "your children" and/or "your grandchildren", then, to you, that is 'love', and 'loving', right?

Yes that’s right.

Okay.

Are you able to explain to the readers, here, how the raping and killing of children is 'love', and 'loving', to you?

If yes, then will you do it?

[Fairy]

So, if some one was to kill and rape "your children" and/or "your grandchildren", then, to you, that is 'love', and 'loving', right?

Yes that’s right.

Okay.

Are you able to explain to the readers, here, how the raping and killing of children is 'love', and 'loving', to you?

If yes, then will you do it?

Because they are not my children or grandchildren, they don’t belong to me as if they were my possession, they are free agents.
I might have given birth to them but I don’t own them.
Also I have no control over what others choose to do to others.

These people could just as easily get killed crossing the road.

[Fairy]

Nothing dies anyway, so what’s the problem age?

Have you ever died age?

[Age]

Yes that’s right.

Okay.

Are you able to explain to the readers, here, how the raping and killing of children is 'love', and 'loving', to you?

If yes, then will you do it?

Because they are not my children or grandchildren, they don’t belong to me as if they were my possession, they are free agents.
I might have given birth to them but I don’t own them.
Also I have no control over what others choose to do to others.

These people could just as easily get killed crossing the road.

Once again, your attempts at deflect and detraction does not help 'you' in any way at all.

Now, you said that it is right that if some one was to kill and rape "your children" and/or "your grandchildren", then, to you, that is 'love', and 'loving'?

If you, 'now', want to 'change' and say and claim that 'those children' are 'now' not your children, then this is perfectly fine and okay, with 'me'. But why do you say and claim that the raping and killing of any child is 'love', and 'loving', to 'you', exactly?

Either 'you' are able to explain to 'the readers', here, how the raping and killing of children is 'love', and 'loving', to 'you', or 'you' are not able to. So, which one is it?

Are you able to explain to 'the readers', here, how the raping and killing of children is 'love', and 'loving'?

If yes, then will you just do it?

If no, then why not?

All of your detracting, here, is certainly not wasting time, nor energy, well from my perspective anyway.

[Age]

Nothing dies anyway, so what’s the problem age?

Have you ever died age?

Are 'you' able to 'stay on and with' one thing at a time, here?

[Age]

Nothing dies anyway, so what’s the problem age?

'The problem' is 'any question, asked for a solution'.

Have you ever died age?

The stupidity of this question speaks for itself.

'i' am, here, responding, to 'you'. This can only happen when 'we' are alive. 'we' only live once, obviously. Therefore, asking 'another' if 'they' have ever 'died' is, besides deflection, beyond absolute irrationality.

[Fairy]

Nothing dies anyway, so what’s the problem age?

Have you ever died age?

Are 'you' able to 'stay on and with' one thing at a time, here?

Wot..when it’s actually you, you’re the one who completely talks about multiple things at the same time. You bombard with responses that are off the scale with information overload.

[Fairy]

Nothing dies anyway, so what’s the problem age?

'The problem' is 'any question, asked for a solution'.

Have you ever died age?

The stupidity of this question speaks for itself.

'i' am, here, responding, to 'you'. This can only happen when 'we' are alive. 'we' only live once, obviously. Therefore, asking 'another' if 'they' have ever 'died' is, besides deflection, beyond absolute irrationality.

You assumed that someone could kill my child. What do you mean by kill, what does that word mean to you exactly?

[Age]

Nothing dies anyway, so what’s the problem age?

Have you ever died age?

Are 'you' able to 'stay on and with' one thing at a time, here?

Wot..when it’s actually you, you’re the one who completely talks about multiple things at the same time. You bombard with responses that are off the scale with information overload.

Okay. If this is what you want to believe is true, then this is perfectly fine and okay, with me.

[Age]

Nothing dies anyway, so what’s the problem age?

'The problem' is 'any question, asked for a solution'.

Have you ever died age?

The stupidity of this question speaks for itself.

'i' am, here, responding, to 'you'. This can only happen when 'we' are alive. 'we' only live once, obviously. Therefore, asking 'another' if 'they' have ever 'died' is, besides deflection, beyond absolute irrationality.

You assumed that someone could kill my child.

This, here, is another prime example of how often you go off track. And, you either do this purposely, to deflect away from just being honest, knowing that you will end up just contradicting "your" 'self' once more, or you are doing it subconsciously due to you being so utterly lost and confused, here.

Now, when I question you about 'your child' you said its 'right', but when I question you about 'children', then you say and claim that 'they' are not 'your children', yet now you bring up something else that has absolutely nothing at all to do with what you quoted, you 'now' claim that you do, in fact, have 'your' own child.

And, for some unknown reason you query why some one, so-called, 'assumes' some could kill 'your child' as though 'your child' could not be killed.

What do you mean by kill,

In the context of 'the question' 'I' asked 'you' I meant 'kill' in 'the way' you adult human beings, in the days when this is being written, use 'that word'. That is when 'the body' of 'the one' who you are, here, calling 'your child' is under to breath nor pump blood anymore.

Do you understand 'this'?

what does that word mean to you exactly?

What 'that word', 'kill', mean, to me, exactly, is more or less just the 'changing of thoughts'. However, as as just explained, to you, I was not using 'that word', in 'that context', in 'the time' 'I' asked 'you' 'that question', which you are continually 'trying to' deter away from.

[Fairy]

Are 'you' able to 'stay on and with' one thing at a time, here?

Wot..when it’s actually you, you’re the one who completely talks about multiple things at the same time. You bombard with responses that are off the scale with information overload.

Okay. If this is what you want to believe is true, then this is perfectly fine and okay, with me.

I don’t believe it, it’s just an observational fact.