Yes, I agree. I was attempting to get across the hypocrisy of speaking of ethical absolutes which are then followed by the cognitive dissonance of exceptions that nullify the principles of the ethics.
Punishment as a crime deterrent is acceptable, but punishment for the sake of sadism or vengeance is not. Prisons should be applied to keep the vast majority of society safe and to reform who we can so that they can return to society and function beside us all, rather than prisons existing as torture chambers for those who have committed transgressions.
Is the Notre-Dame de Paris the first time since 1957 that Lego has made a set with a direct and specific religious basis? Not counting Advent calendars or Indiana Jones [edit: or Thor] sets. As far as I can tell at the moment, 1309 Church was the one and only religion-based set. I don’t think the Taj Mahal sets would qualify since the building seems to just a mausoleum and not a temple per se?
The phrasing of “was caused by a worm that got into my brain and ate a portion of it and then died” implies that just a nibble of his brain was so toxic that it caused the parasitic worm to die. Hopefully RFK Jr. gets proper treatment and any lasting effects are healed. With a presidential race where the candidates’ mental faculties are such a point of contention, it seems like RFK Jr. will avoid much of the armchair doctors’ criticism despite his affliction because he’s not either of the two main candidates.
Let’s start with clarifying an element of the question:
Which characteristics define a god? Do these characteristics violate the laws of physics and/or internal logic? If these characteristics do not violate the laws of physics, then what aspects distinguish a god from a mundane or natural entity?