>>1770180>You implicitly claimed Nope. I wasn't making any claims about what people objectively "deserve" at any point.
>I exposed my argumentsNothing you posted qualifies as an argument.
>Do you want me to ask every person in the world if they agree?Appeal to popularity is a logical fallacy.
>I think you can pretty much assume it is an axiomClaiming that your position is an axiom is not an argument.
>That's called empirical evidenceIt would be empirical evidence that people agree with you, not that your opinion is self-evidently true and needs no further justification. I don't know why I'm arguing with a double-digit-IQ invalid like you. It's shameful that I have to explain such obvious things to you.
