Ramese Sanders

Teaching humanity how to become cognizant.
Link to book a 1:1 health consultation & all natural products⬇️

[Ramese Sanders @RameseSanders]

@ahmad98mahmood Voting for the lesser of three evils is still voting for evil.

[Ramese Sanders @RameseSanders]

Everyone talks about pollution from plastic and trash…

No one talks about sound and light pollution.

It is absolutely crucial for you to decrease sound and light pollution as much as possible.

You will notice a massive difference in the quality of your life!

[Ramese Sanders @RameseSanders]

Voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil.

The government today is the direct result of you choosing the lesser of two evils for generations.

What has it resulted in?

There’s more taxation, corruption, surveillance, and more evil than ever before.

[Ramese Sanders @RameseSanders]

Many of the same people who believe the government is corrupt and complain that elections are rigged are the very same people who continuously go out and vote.

You genuinely can’t make this stuff up.

When will you guys ever learn?

[Ramese Sanders @RameseSanders]

My favorite vaccine ingredients are:
Anti-freeze, formaldehyde, aluminium, monkey brain serum & human fetal tissue.

What are yours?

[Ramese Sanders @RameseSanders]

They taught in school that the three branches of government are the legislative branch, executive branch, and judicial branch.

It turns out that was a lie.

The three branches are big pharma, big oil, and big banks.

[Ramese Sanders @RameseSanders]

@mmelgar09 So if you go and buy formaldehyde and aluminum and put it on a spoon and feed it to a child, you won’t be put in prison?

[Ramese Sanders @RameseSanders]

If you spoon fed your child vaccine ingredients, you’d be in prison.

Wrap your head around that.

[Ramese Sanders @RameseSanders]

@joedoe03 My farmer accepts cash whether the power is out or not

[Ramese Sanders @RameseSanders]

Cash works without WiFi.

Cash works without power.

Cash works without permission.

That’s exactly why they want it gone.

[Ramese Sanders @RameseSanders]

First, you’re making a fundamental mistake when reading Scripture: You’re assuming that because the Bible records something, God approves of it.

Let’s address your objections individually.

1. The “vengeful” God versus Jesus

Who told you the God of the Old Testament is different from Jesus? Jesus Himself speaks about divine judgment (Matthew 25:46), and the Old Testament repeatedly describes God as merciful, gracious, and slow to anger (Exodus 34:6).

Does God not have authority to judge his creation?

God’s justice and His mercy are not contradictions. They’re both aspects of His character.

2. Blood sacrifices

The sacrifices were never about God enjoying bloodshed. They demonstrated the seriousness of sin and pointed toward the ultimate sacrifice of Jesus Christ.

Hebrews 10:4 explicitly says that the blood of bulls and goats cannot take away sins. Jesus willingly offered Himself as the final sacrifice (Hebrews 10:10–14).

3. Slavery and beating slaves

There is no approval of chattel slavery in the Bible. There were different forms of servitude, including debt servitude, which were consensual.

Exodus 21:16 condemns kidnapping and selling people. Exodus 21:26–27 provides freedom for servants who are abused.

There were clear boundaries on how a servant was to be treated.

4. Lot’s daughters

It’s important to understand the difference between descriptive and prescriptive.

Genesis 19:30–38 records Lot’s daughters getting their father drunk and having intercourse with him without his informed consent.

Where does God command this? Where does He tell anyone it’s perfectly fine to do this?

Nowhere.

Finally, if you want to understand how Jesus relates to the Old Testament, remember John 5:39, where Jesus teaches that the Scriptures testify about Him.

Jesus confirms the Old Testament.

You cannot separate Jesus from the Old Testament simply because you encounter passages you don’t understand that make you uncomfortable.

[Ramese Sanders @RameseSanders]

@heidiswedish You still didn’t answer the questions.

And are you saying an American life has more value than another life in a different country?

[Ramese Sanders @RameseSanders]

They are eating kids and you guys are still talking about voting?

[Ramese Sanders @RameseSanders]

Not voting ≠ doing nothing.

Now can you answer the four previous questions I asked?

1. If you vote for a politician because they oppose abortion, but you’re also aware that they support wars or military interventions that could result in innocent children being murdered, are you arguing that your vote plays no role in empowering those policies?

2. If your vote doesn’t give politicians power or has no impact, then what’s the purpose of voting in the first place?

3. If your vote does help give politicians power and has an impact, which is presumably why you vote for candidates who oppose abortion, how can you argue that your vote has no connection to the other policies you’re knowingly helping empower, including those that may harm or murder innocent children?

4. So where exactly do you draw the line, and what makes that distinction morally consistent?

[Ramese Sanders @RameseSanders]

You didn’t answer the questions lol. It seems like when you vote, you only want to take credit for the things you believe are good, but you don’t wanna take credit and responsibility for the bad things that the politician you vote for does. That’s pretty weird in my opinion.

And I don’t need to write about all of the things that I do to make the world a better place to prove a point, God knows.

[Ramese Sanders @RameseSanders]

@heidiswedish You didn’t answer any of the questions.

[Ramese Sanders @RameseSanders]

So let me get this straight.

If you vote for a politician because they oppose abortion, but you’re also aware that they support wars or military interventions that could result in innocent children being murdered, are you arguing that your vote plays no role in empowering those policies?

Because that raises two questions:

If your vote doesn’t give politicians power or has no impact, then what’s the purpose of voting in the first place?

If your vote does help give politicians power and has an impact, which is presumably why you vote for candidates who oppose abortion, how can you argue that your vote has no connection to the other policies you’re knowingly helping empower, including those that may harm or murder innocent children?

You can’t argue that your vote matters when it comes to protecting innocent lives through abortion policy, but then dismiss its significance when those same politicians pursue policies that endanger innocent lives elsewhere.

So where exactly do you draw the line, and what makes that distinction morally consistent?

[Ramese Sanders @RameseSanders]

So let me get this straight.

If you vote for a politician because they oppose abortion, but you’re also aware that they support wars or military interventions that could result in innocent children being murdered, are you arguing that your vote plays no role in empowering those policies?

Because that raises two questions:

If your vote doesn’t give politicians power or has no impact, then what’s the purpose of voting in the first place?

If your vote does help give politicians power and has an impact, which is presumably why you vote for candidates who oppose abortion, how can you argue that your vote has no connection to the other policies you’re knowingly helping empower, including those that may harm or murder innocent children?

You can’t argue that your vote matters when it comes to protecting innocent lives through abortion policy, but then dismiss its significance when those same politicians pursue policies that endanger innocent lives elsewhere.

So where exactly do you draw the line, and what makes that distinction morally consistent?

[Ramese Sanders @RameseSanders]

The greatest crimes in the world are not committed by people breaking the rules but by people following the rules.

Very few understand this.

[Ramese Sanders @RameseSanders]

I’m referring to innocent children whose lives are lost or endangered by wars, military interventions, and government policies, including those supported by the politicians you vote for.

And your restaurant analogy actually highlights the distinction I’m making.

When I choose a restaurant, I’m voluntarily deciding what I want to purchase. I’m not giving the restaurant authority to impose its decisions on hundreds of millions to billions of other people.

Voting for politicians is different because their decisions affect people who never consented to their authority.

And we’re not talking about disagreeing over something trivial on a menu. We’re talking about policies that can cost innocent people their lives.

So my question remains: If protecting innocent children is a fundamental moral principle behind your vote, how do you reconcile that principle with supporting politicians whose other policies may endanger innocent children?

[Ramese Sanders @RameseSanders]

You hate the government because of who’s in office.

I hate the government because it’s a bunch of Baal worshipping pedos that poison our food, air, and water, try to kill us with vaccines among other things, tear apart the family structure, and divide us all.

We are not the same.

[Ramese Sanders @RameseSanders]

Correct. I choose not to vote.

You say you can’t vote on what’s happening in other countries, but you’re voting for politicians who influence what happens in those countries through American foreign policy.

And that’s exactly my point.

If you believe killing innocent children is wrong and are against abortion, why does that moral principle suddenly become negotiable when you’re choosing someone to exercise political power?