It's the "like" that is the significant detail here.

> You must be 10 years old!

I disagree with your assessment therefore I'm stupid? immature? I hope this was an unusually abusive moment for you, and you don't generally treat folks this way.

This sounds a lot like a cult religion to me.

1. Well, this is rapid deployment, we can't have everything.

2. The enemy here is fairly low-tech. Shouldn't be a problem.

Needless to say, I'm not surprised by this report.

> We’ve found no evidence to support claims of malicious chips or hardware modifications.

That's about as good a denial as you'll get from somebody with a lawyer.

false by definition

And none of that matters, on your view, because we and the Earth are temporary. You can't have it both ways.

I think we're thinking of "unlivable" in two different senses. When I said "belief system is unlivable" I didn't mean you can't agree with it and live. I meant you can't live as though it's actually true. You can't be consistent with it and live.

Why take care of yourself if you don't matter? Why help other people if they are as irrelevant as your help? Why participate in thoughtful discussion if nobody matters, and neither do the conclusions? Folks who think they have no ultimate value do these (good) things all the time -- but they can't and be consistent with their worldview.

> What is the difference between me, and these other systems?

Simply put, you're human, not a plant or a planet. Humans are volitional, trees and rocks are not. "How can trees live without beliefs?" is analogous to "how can humans live without photosynthesis?" -- because we're fundamentally different.

Human actions are the products of our beliefs. We think and long for significance. Why? If you're a just mass of chemicals, atoms clashing with atoms, why do you long to matter? And if you aren't more significant than the tree, why can't I cut you down if it suits me? The typical responses ("it's beneficial for survival", "society says so", etc.) don't make it wrong inherently, yet we know murder et al. are wrong. Actually wrong. And, if we don't matter, why is survival good? Why is society's opinion good? They wouldn't be, they would just be other possible, equally meaningless, states in the vast, purposeless, eternal state machine.

But you do matter. And it's a divine gift. You matter because you were created to matter.

If you believed it, and you were consistent, why did you post what you did? If you don't matter (I think you do matter tremendously), and if nobody who reads it matters, then your post doesn't matter.

But you do matter. And so do we. And you know it because you spoke up. Why do you matter? That's the question. Because you were created in the image of God.

What you've described is called "modalism" (aka "Sabellianism", after a guy named Sabellius) and is taught against in Scripture and rejected by the Church under all non-cultish denominational flags. The doctrine of the Trinity is difficult to "wrap your arms around" but very easy to state:

1. The Father is God.

2. The Son is God.

3. The Holy Spirit is God.

4. The Father is not the Son.

5. The Son is not the Holy Spirit.

6. The Holy Spirit is not the Father.

7. There is one God.

From this the language of the Trinity (1 being, God, who consists of 3 persons, the Father, Son, and Spirit) was developed by the Church to describe what is taught in Scripture.

Maybe read the Gospel of John (4th book in the New Testament) if you want to know the details. It's pretty short, you could easily do it in one sitting. If you don't want to know the details that's your business of course, but be aware that the story you relayed is not Christianity.

This statement was bizarrely totalitarian. I actually agree with the fundamental premise that many schools probably start too early. But to say those who take the other side are dangerous people who need to be challenged? Too far.

Ironically, I think this Soviet-esque mentality that "people who disagree with idea X are dangerous" is dangerous!