I am a monster
-
Sander Rossel wrote:
with free healthcare and tuition, but you'd rather pay
As you know, there is no such thing as free and that we all pay, regardless. I'm not against free healthcare but the system is corrupt and there's no easy way to do it.
Sander Rossel wrote:
I'm all for a world where animals do not have to suffer
Except for human babies? As mentioned in another thread. But I don't quite follow your logic. If you don't want animals to suffer then why not cage them all? They'll be eaten by you or some other animal in nature so the suffering is still there. Why live in a house if you don't want them to suffer? Your job causes suffering as we need to clear land for buildings, electricity, etc, etc. This forum is causing suffering to animals. And why are you OK with plants suffering? But not animals? Believe it or not, I'm not trying to argue or even convince you, it's just that the whole "animal suffering" argument doesn't make sense to me because even if you don't eat them, you (as in all of us) do a million different things a day that DO cause them suffering so I'm trying to understand your thought process.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
ZurdoDev wrote:
As you know, there is no such thing as free and that we all pay, regardless. I'm not against free healthcare but the system is corrupt and there's no easy way to do it.
Speaking of selfish, we all pay a bit (and the rich pay a bit more) so that others can profit. For example, I pay a bit more taxes so that children that I don't want can get a free education. I pay even more taxes, or actually health insurance, that I don't need right now, so that others can get free (or cheap) health care. I pay for people who are (temporarily or permanently) unemployed, so they can live a regular life as well, keeping them off the streets (which also benefits me). I went to school for free. If I ever need health care it's either free or cheap. If I ever lose my job I get payment. It's still not a perfect system and some people are still left out, but overall everyone is happier :D It seems that in America you just don't want to pay for others because that's a "libtard" thing to do. And you also don't trust your government enough to let them handle it. Just my European view on things.
ZurdoDev wrote:
If you don't want animals to suffer then why not cage them all?
If we don't eat them we don't need to breed them and we don't need to kill them. Some animals live their (short) lives in boxes and never see the light of day. They are in constant stress and hurt each other because they have too few living space. Animals are literally tortured as they're being cut (or burned in case of disease) while they're still alive! It seems that these animals are treated in the worst way possible. Like people actually thought about how they can make these lives as miserable and painful as possible. Plants don't suffer the same way. It's proven that plants feel "something", but they're not sentient or intelligent like animals. And plants need to be treated with care or they just won't grow. Yes, we need houses, and yes that's not beneficial to animals, but let's find a way that we can all co-exist. Like reserve some space for nature, keep animals there, and don't build houses there. Animals eating other animals is a necessity, but animals don't torture other animals for their entire lives before killing it, so at least it's more humane than what we do to animals.
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com
-
Sander Rossel wrote:
It's not killing if it isn't even born yet.
So the baby is not alive even though it has a heartbeat, blood flowing, etc? It's not alive?
Sander Rossel wrote:
become a human baby.
So, it's not human until it's born?
Sander Rossel wrote:
because it's her body.
How so? The DNA is unique and is not the mother's DNA. It's not a part of her body. That's just biological fact. And as we know, facts don't care about your feelings.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
ZurdoDev wrote:
So the baby is not alive even though it has a heartbeat, blood flowing, etc? It's not alive?
Indeed. A robot may have an engine purring and oil flowing, but it's not alive.
ZurdoDev wrote:
So, it's not human until it's born?
Indeed(2).
ZurdoDev wrote:
How so?
To remove an embryo you have to be inside a woman's body... :~ The embryo itself may not be the woman's body (or it may, pretty irrelevant actually), but to get there... You are not your house, but I still need your consent before entering :)
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Continuous Integration, Delivery, and Deployment arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
-
ZurdoDev wrote:
As you know, there is no such thing as free and that we all pay, regardless. I'm not against free healthcare but the system is corrupt and there's no easy way to do it.
Speaking of selfish, we all pay a bit (and the rich pay a bit more) so that others can profit. For example, I pay a bit more taxes so that children that I don't want can get a free education. I pay even more taxes, or actually health insurance, that I don't need right now, so that others can get free (or cheap) health care. I pay for people who are (temporarily or permanently) unemployed, so they can live a regular life as well, keeping them off the streets (which also benefits me). I went to school for free. If I ever need health care it's either free or cheap. If I ever lose my job I get payment. It's still not a perfect system and some people are still left out, but overall everyone is happier :D It seems that in America you just don't want to pay for others because that's a "libtard" thing to do. And you also don't trust your government enough to let them handle it. Just my European view on things.
ZurdoDev wrote:
If you don't want animals to suffer then why not cage them all?
If we don't eat them we don't need to breed them and we don't need to kill them. Some animals live their (short) lives in boxes and never see the light of day. They are in constant stress and hurt each other because they have too few living space. Animals are literally tortured as they're being cut (or burned in case of disease) while they're still alive! It seems that these animals are treated in the worst way possible. Like people actually thought about how they can make these lives as miserable and painful as possible. Plants don't suffer the same way. It's proven that plants feel "something", but they're not sentient or intelligent like animals. And plants need to be treated with care or they just won't grow. Yes, we need houses, and yes that's not beneficial to animals, but let's find a way that we can all co-exist. Like reserve some space for nature, keep animals there, and don't build houses there. Animals eating other animals is a necessity, but animals don't torture other animals for their entire lives before killing it, so at least it's more humane than what we do to animals.
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com
Sander Rossel wrote:
but overall everyone is happier
Depends on which news source you refer to. :-D
Sander Rossel wrote:
It seems that in America you just don't want to pay for others because that's a "libtard" thing to do.
Actually, no, not at all. In fact conservatives are way more charitable with both time and money. We help others more than the left does.
Sander Rossel wrote:
And you also don't trust your government enough to let them handle it.
Bingo! Government has proven to be inefficient in managing anything. I can't think of a single example where the government has done a good job of managing anything.
Sander Rossel wrote:
Like people actually thought about how they can make these lives as miserable and painful as possible.
That's just mainstream agriculture. All your small farms are very humane in the treatment of animals.
Sander Rossel wrote:
Plants don't suffer the same way.
How do you know? And how do you know an animal does suffer? You are making assumptions. There is no way to know for sure.
Sander Rossel wrote:
but they're not sentient or intelligent like animals.
Another assumption. But even if it's true, why are you OK with torturing non-sentient beings but not sentient ones? Why does sentient vs. non-sentient make it OK? And what about insects? Do you kill them?
Sander Rossel wrote:
And plants need to be treated with care or they just won't grow.
That seems like it should be a true statement. But here in the Southeast US (at least) stuff grows without taking care of it. (Or weeds do anywhere.) 2 weeks ago I was picking beans from my garden and tossing over my shoulder ones that were bad (lousy slugs got to them first.) I then mowed the yard. A week later I noticed a bean plant growing in the middle of my backyard lawn. :laugh: Turns out I ran over it with the lawn mower and shot it to the middle and then it took root. So much for taking care of it. :-\
Sander Rossel wrote:
but let's find a way that we can all co-exist.
I agree with that. I still don't get the argument of "s
-
I do find it amazing that most liberals are anti-death penalty but pro-abortion. How does one get to the mindset of "Protect the guilty; punish the innocent."?
Meanwhile, the republican "pro-life" government has reinstated the death penalty :doh: Speaking of pro-life, why is the quality of the lives involved never discussed? It's just that an embryo needs to become a baby and beyond that the parent(s) have to see however they're going to raise it. It's not pro-life, it's really just anti-choice. I wonder how one gets to the mindset of "we decide what's best for everyone."
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Continuous Integration, Delivery, and Deployment arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
-
ZurdoDev wrote:
So the baby is not alive even though it has a heartbeat, blood flowing, etc? It's not alive?
Indeed. A robot may have an engine purring and oil flowing, but it's not alive.
ZurdoDev wrote:
So, it's not human until it's born?
Indeed(2).
ZurdoDev wrote:
How so?
To remove an embryo you have to be inside a woman's body... :~ The embryo itself may not be the woman's body (or it may, pretty irrelevant actually), but to get there... You are not your house, but I still need your consent before entering :)
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Continuous Integration, Delivery, and Deployment arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
Sander Rossel wrote:
So, it's not human until it's born?
Indeed(2).
So, a baby born at exactly 2:00 PM is not a baby at 1:59:59.999 PM? What magical powers do the birth canal have that pass life on to the baby? And when do you consider it born? When the head is crowned, out, or the whole baby is out? What if a toe is still sticking in?
Sander Rossel wrote:
The embryo itself may not be the woman's body (or it may, pretty irrelevant actually)
Actually, science is pretty relevant to me. :doh:
Sander Rossel wrote:
You are not your house, but I still need your consent before entering
I'm not arguing that we should break into a woman's body and steal her child so that analogy means nothing.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
-
Meanwhile, the republican "pro-life" government has reinstated the death penalty :doh: Speaking of pro-life, why is the quality of the lives involved never discussed? It's just that an embryo needs to become a baby and beyond that the parent(s) have to see however they're going to raise it. It's not pro-life, it's really just anti-choice. I wonder how one gets to the mindset of "we decide what's best for everyone."
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Continuous Integration, Delivery, and Deployment arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
-
Sander Rossel wrote:
but overall everyone is happier
Depends on which news source you refer to. :-D
Sander Rossel wrote:
It seems that in America you just don't want to pay for others because that's a "libtard" thing to do.
Actually, no, not at all. In fact conservatives are way more charitable with both time and money. We help others more than the left does.
Sander Rossel wrote:
And you also don't trust your government enough to let them handle it.
Bingo! Government has proven to be inefficient in managing anything. I can't think of a single example where the government has done a good job of managing anything.
Sander Rossel wrote:
Like people actually thought about how they can make these lives as miserable and painful as possible.
That's just mainstream agriculture. All your small farms are very humane in the treatment of animals.
Sander Rossel wrote:
Plants don't suffer the same way.
How do you know? And how do you know an animal does suffer? You are making assumptions. There is no way to know for sure.
Sander Rossel wrote:
but they're not sentient or intelligent like animals.
Another assumption. But even if it's true, why are you OK with torturing non-sentient beings but not sentient ones? Why does sentient vs. non-sentient make it OK? And what about insects? Do you kill them?
Sander Rossel wrote:
And plants need to be treated with care or they just won't grow.
That seems like it should be a true statement. But here in the Southeast US (at least) stuff grows without taking care of it. (Or weeds do anywhere.) 2 weeks ago I was picking beans from my garden and tossing over my shoulder ones that were bad (lousy slugs got to them first.) I then mowed the yard. A week later I noticed a bean plant growing in the middle of my backyard lawn. :laugh: Turns out I ran over it with the lawn mower and shot it to the middle and then it took root. So much for taking care of it. :-\
Sander Rossel wrote:
but let's find a way that we can all co-exist.
I agree with that. I still don't get the argument of "s
ZurdoDev wrote:
Actually, no, not at all. In fact conservatives are way more charitable with both time and money. We help others more than the left does.
How so? :~
ZurdoDev wrote:
Bingo! Government has proven to be inefficient in managing anything. I can't think of a single example where the government has done a good job of managing anything.
Your government seems to be very well in managing it's military :laugh: The government can be very inefficient (EU X|), but overall they're still doing more good than bad (although I'm all for re-organizing the shit out of it!)
ZurdoDev wrote:
I still don't get the argument of "suffering" as a reason to be vegetarian.
I really got nothing more to add... If you think torturing and killing an animal just so you can eat it isn't (unnecessary) suffering then be my guest :~
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Continuous Integration, Delivery, and Deployment arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
-
ZurdoDev wrote:
Actually, no, not at all. In fact conservatives are way more charitable with both time and money. We help others more than the left does.
How so? :~
ZurdoDev wrote:
Bingo! Government has proven to be inefficient in managing anything. I can't think of a single example where the government has done a good job of managing anything.
Your government seems to be very well in managing it's military :laugh: The government can be very inefficient (EU X|), but overall they're still doing more good than bad (although I'm all for re-organizing the shit out of it!)
ZurdoDev wrote:
I still don't get the argument of "suffering" as a reason to be vegetarian.
I really got nothing more to add... If you think torturing and killing an animal just so you can eat it isn't (unnecessary) suffering then be my guest :~
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Continuous Integration, Delivery, and Deployment arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
Sander Rossel wrote:
How so?
I don't know what you mean by how so? Conservatives donate more money and give more of their time to service than leftists do. It's been surveyed and studied many times.
Sander Rossel wrote:
If you think torturing and killing an animal just so you can eat it isn't (unnecessary) suffering then be my guest
I already pointed out that there is no need to torture an animal to eat it.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
-
As someone who doesn't want children at all it's beyond me why anyone would ever want more than, say, two. Or how you'd pay for more :~ I do think child birth beyond the first or second child should be discouraged, like child support only for the first child, etc. And of course legal abortion possible through late stages in pregnancy.
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Continuous Integration, Delivery, and Deployment arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
-
Sander Rossel wrote:
So, it's not human until it's born?
Indeed(2).
So, a baby born at exactly 2:00 PM is not a baby at 1:59:59.999 PM? What magical powers do the birth canal have that pass life on to the baby? And when do you consider it born? When the head is crowned, out, or the whole baby is out? What if a toe is still sticking in?
Sander Rossel wrote:
The embryo itself may not be the woman's body (or it may, pretty irrelevant actually)
Actually, science is pretty relevant to me. :doh:
Sander Rossel wrote:
You are not your house, but I still need your consent before entering
I'm not arguing that we should break into a woman's body and steal her child so that analogy means nothing.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
-
Meanwhile, the republican "pro-life" government has reinstated the death penalty :doh: Speaking of pro-life, why is the quality of the lives involved never discussed? It's just that an embryo needs to become a baby and beyond that the parent(s) have to see however they're going to raise it. It's not pro-life, it's really just anti-choice. I wonder how one gets to the mindset of "we decide what's best for everyone."
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Continuous Integration, Delivery, and Deployment arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
-
Sander Rossel wrote:
So, it's not human until it's born?
Indeed(2).
So, a baby born at exactly 2:00 PM is not a baby at 1:59:59.999 PM? What magical powers do the birth canal have that pass life on to the baby? And when do you consider it born? When the head is crowned, out, or the whole baby is out? What if a toe is still sticking in?
Sander Rossel wrote:
The embryo itself may not be the woman's body (or it may, pretty irrelevant actually)
Actually, science is pretty relevant to me. :doh:
Sander Rossel wrote:
You are not your house, but I still need your consent before entering
I'm not arguing that we should break into a woman's body and steal her child so that analogy means nothing.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
ZurdoDev wrote:
So, a baby born at exactly 2:00 PM is not a baby at 1:59:59.999 PM?
I wouldn't really care if they killed it hours after it's been born (although I get why you'd have ethical complications with that). The baby doesn't have memories, a personality, or anything and I don't think it really cares at that point. It's unclear when exactly an embryo becomes a person, but for a lot of people it somewhere around six or seven months I guess (in the Netherlands you can have an abortion up to 24 weeks of pregnancy). What matters to me more is that when a child comes into this world it'll probably (you never know for sure) have a good future life. If the parents don't want it or can't care for it, for whatever reason, that probability is pretty low. So I'm actually against the suffering of this (to-be) person, which is why you need to abort it (preferably as soon as possible). So by aborting/killing (whatever) it you're doing it (and the parents) a favor. Of course when it's physically born it would be murder at some point and other people's feelings get involved as well making things harder as well.
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Continuous Integration, Delivery, and Deployment arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
-
Sander Rossel wrote:
How so?
I don't know what you mean by how so? Conservatives donate more money and give more of their time to service than leftists do. It's been surveyed and studied many times.
Sander Rossel wrote:
If you think torturing and killing an animal just so you can eat it isn't (unnecessary) suffering then be my guest
I already pointed out that there is no need to torture an animal to eat it.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
ZurdoDev wrote:
Conservatives donate more money and give more of their time to service than leftists do
And by "service" you mean church? That same church that has prosecuted women and gays, who have abused little children, who have killed in the name of Christ? I'd rather you'd not give at all X|
ZurdoDev wrote:
I already pointed out that there is no need to torture an animal to eat it.
Indeed, it's not necessary, but it happens at a large scale, which is why I stopped eating animals altogether.
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Continuous Integration, Delivery, and Deployment arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
-
Quote:
legal abortion possible through late stages in pregnancyage eleven.
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
I like the way you think :D I hear 11, do I hear 12, anyone? I got 13, 14... 15, 16 anyone? Sold at 15 to the orange gentleman over there!
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Continuous Integration, Delivery, and Deployment arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
-
Quote:
the republican "pro-life" government has reinstated the death penalty
Yes, but only for democrats. ;P
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
We shouldn't really make a difference... You get a...[^] ;p
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Continuous Integration, Delivery, and Deployment arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
-
ZurdoDev wrote:
So, a baby born at exactly 2:00 PM is not a baby at 1:59:59.999 PM?
I wouldn't really care if they killed it hours after it's been born (although I get why you'd have ethical complications with that). The baby doesn't have memories, a personality, or anything and I don't think it really cares at that point. It's unclear when exactly an embryo becomes a person, but for a lot of people it somewhere around six or seven months I guess (in the Netherlands you can have an abortion up to 24 weeks of pregnancy). What matters to me more is that when a child comes into this world it'll probably (you never know for sure) have a good future life. If the parents don't want it or can't care for it, for whatever reason, that probability is pretty low. So I'm actually against the suffering of this (to-be) person, which is why you need to abort it (preferably as soon as possible). So by aborting/killing (whatever) it you're doing it (and the parents) a favor. Of course when it's physically born it would be murder at some point and other people's feelings get involved as well making things harder as well.
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Continuous Integration, Delivery, and Deployment arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
Sander Rossel wrote:
It's unclear when exactly an embryo becomes a person,
No, it isn't at all. At moment of conception there is unique DNA. Period! I am so glad that you do not want to have kids because you are not fit to be a parent or even a human being for that matter. You have no morals whatsoever. The fact that you're OK with murdering unwanted children is beyond description. Yet you'll fight and argue for animal rights. Sad.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
-
ZurdoDev wrote:
Conservatives donate more money and give more of their time to service than leftists do
And by "service" you mean church? That same church that has prosecuted women and gays, who have abused little children, who have killed in the name of Christ? I'd rather you'd not give at all X|
ZurdoDev wrote:
I already pointed out that there is no need to torture an animal to eat it.
Indeed, it's not necessary, but it happens at a large scale, which is why I stopped eating animals altogether.
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Continuous Integration, Delivery, and Deployment arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
Sander Rossel wrote:
And by "service" you mean church?
No. Although, yes, churches provide a lot of service.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
-
Quote:
o, a baby born at exactly 2:00 PM is not a baby at 1:59:59.999 PM?
Until the umbilical cord is cut it is technically a parasite.
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
Forogar wrote:
Until the umbilical cord is cut it is technically a parasite.
Until they're moved out of the house, you could still argue that. :laugh:
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
-
Sander Rossel wrote:
It's unclear when exactly an embryo becomes a person,
No, it isn't at all. At moment of conception there is unique DNA. Period! I am so glad that you do not want to have kids because you are not fit to be a parent or even a human being for that matter. You have no morals whatsoever. The fact that you're OK with murdering unwanted children is beyond description. Yet you'll fight and argue for animal rights. Sad.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
ZurdoDev wrote:
Period!
That's the kind of language that stifles all discussion.
ZurdoDev wrote:
you are not fit to be a parent or even a human being for that matter. You have no morals whatsoever.
Now that's harsh :( I've lived a better life than many people (including Christians) and I wouldn't hurt a living soul, but I'm no saint either. I'm just not for bringing people into this world against the will of those who'll have to raise it, which will not benefit the child nor the parent(s). You asked me for my point of view, which I have given. I am also not alone in these viewpoints as millions (if not billions) of people are pro-abortion. However, if you're going to attack me personally I'm all done with you, goodbye.
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Continuous Integration, Delivery, and Deployment arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
-
ZurdoDev wrote:
Period!
That's the kind of language that stifles all discussion.
ZurdoDev wrote:
you are not fit to be a parent or even a human being for that matter. You have no morals whatsoever.
Now that's harsh :( I've lived a better life than many people (including Christians) and I wouldn't hurt a living soul, but I'm no saint either. I'm just not for bringing people into this world against the will of those who'll have to raise it, which will not benefit the child nor the parent(s). You asked me for my point of view, which I have given. I am also not alone in these viewpoints as millions (if not billions) of people are pro-abortion. However, if you're going to attack me personally I'm all done with you, goodbye.
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Continuous Integration, Delivery, and Deployment arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
Sander Rossel wrote:
That's the kind of language that stifles all discussion.
Ya, I hate it when science gets in the way of my opinion. :-D
Sander Rossel wrote:
if you're going to attack me personally I'm all done with you, goodbye.
You want unwanted children murdered. I'm not sorry if you feel attacked. That point of view should be attacked. Are you a great person otherwise? Probably. But when you want unwanted children to be murdered I'm not sure that all the good you do do, means a whole lot. Especially when you criticize the same thing (religions that have done tons of good but do have some bad periods.) :^) I won't apologize for valuing human life.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
