People say I’m guilty, he’s guilty etc but it’s unlikely to hear “they were found guilty” outside of jurisprudence, and to say that when referring to a judicial trial and then say you meant a lay term when the professional term exists is a bit lax.
I wouldn’t say “WiFi” in place of “internet” while referring to an IT problem for example.
Israel is a country and the state has killed full families. Reading comprehension is a good skill to have, maybe brush up.
Oh yes of course banning religion is the obvious answer that will lead to harmony. Even in your magical world where religion doesn’t exist this conflict would then be on racial lines.
EC needs to go lol
Yes and you’d have a giant congress with an inflated salary budget. The problem is definitely the ec.
Shitbit is hilarious
It makes sense and is good from a technological standpoint, humans have always wanted to advance. But that means we must be even more politically active to save ourselves from exploitation in the future.
Noone is disenfranchised. By choosing to elect an executive nationally it only makes sense to popularise the vote. Why should Wyoming citizens have more sway than California (per capita)
It was found that he raped someone, he is guilty of rape, but a judge did not find him guilty of rape. Why do you insist so much on muddling the definitions of these things? It’s not good for democracy or the judicial process to use terms randomly and without definition.