Seek the strongest and reasonable refutation of the marriage theory!! 85

To be honest, I agree with you, but alas, can our momentary thoughts be worth thousands of years of Chinese tradition? I don't think so, it's too weak, and I think why do people have to get married? It's good to live alone, bored to make friends, even if you go home after 12 o'clock at night, no one asks, they all say that marriage is the grave of love, but who wants to die without a place to bury?

So my point of view is that you can get married, of course, you can get divorced if you don't have a good life, it depends on who you meet, everyone gets married, which also shows that marriage is good, doesn't it?

Who are you living for, or who are you living for ...

Live yourself and put the irrelevant where it belongs.

Happiness is for those who are prepared and willing to give.

Don't look for so many reasons.

It is actually easy for a person to think about happiness, and a woman may only move for a smile.

Make... Think about today's things today and don't do things you shouldn't do.

The so-called leaders in the administrative building all have some official frames, and they rely on their own three points of micro-officials, so they put on official authority and play official.

Thinking about it from another angle, they were playing a breeze in front of the security guard.

In fact, if it were an ordinary teacher, it would not be like this.

Forget it, let's get angry, just be angry about this, why bother.

Words to refute: Poor in reasoning.

Poor reasoning means that there is nothing to say because of reason.

And "Xiucai meets soldiers, and it is unreasonable to say", which means that the values and communication methods of scholars and martial artists are different, and it is difficult to communicate cordially and friendly together, and they insist on communication. It may still be a dangerous thing.

Since people say that you are unreasonable, you can say that the other party is clearly unreasonable, and tell him that those who are reasonable are all thinking about it, and only those who are unreasonable rush to say it...

Rebuttal: Are you insulting Xiucai or insulting soldiers If you don't understand this, don't use it indiscriminately.

No matter how you say it, it is unreasonable, you still refute it, and you fall into the dead circle of reasoning again!

Me too, but after the incident, I remember what to say, and I often revel in my imagination, and then hate myself for being useless, maybe we are born with personality and don't react so quickly.

I was too angry to think about it, so I just said it.

So be sure to think twice.

Because that person speaks so nicely.

Because you can't do without.

Because even if there were more reasons at the time.

The man coaxed.

It's totally fine.

I can't help but want to reconcile

1 It's all that, and there is no refutation at all. Everyone has a different view on love, this is not a stereotype that 1 plus 1 equals 2, there is no right and wrong, how to refute it? For example, some people like to listen to rock and roll and some people like to listen to classics, if you have a different taste, the best way is to be a favorite, without affecting each other.

He enjoys his once-in-a-lifetime love, you enjoy multiple-of-life love, and that's enough.

Why refute? This is the ideal love that everyone yearns for. It's just that the world is unpredictable, and there are too many imperfections, which is a pity.

Who defines the word "love"?

My understanding is that people's feelings for their relatives are called family affection, feelings for those who are not of the same sex are called friendship, and feelings for those who are not of the opposite sex are called love.

Let's say you're walking in front of a field of wheat. I want you to pluck the wheat that you think is the best.

Will you pick the wheat in front of you and not keep going and observe and analyze?

How do you get the best?

People have seven emotions and six desires, and everyone has different tastes, and many times in love, they are just choosing the right taste.

It's that you and I get married on the forum, it's called an altar wedding ::hou121:: View the original post".

Forum Marriage. Who knows what's going on, it's all a lack of love, and I'm also lacking haha Check out the original post

What are the specific requirements, go to the asking hall to ask the teacher for advice.

Quite simply, take the recent example of the Saudi coalition fighting the Houthis in Yemen. Saudi Arabia is not bad for money, and it is only expensive to buy **. For example, like the most advanced M1A2 tank in the United States, F-15 fighter jets, and so on.

But in the face of the Yemeni Houthis, which are mainly equipped with light ** and drones, they have been constantly beaten, M1A2 tanks have been thrown all over the ground, and even the F-15, which claims to have never been shot down, was shot down by the Houthis. If we follow the materialist point of view, how can we explain the poor performance of Saudi Arabia? At the same time, it is also possible to refute his second point:

The total strength of the Saudi coalition is more than that of the Houthis (the total strength of the Saudi coalition is as high as 120,000, and it is well-equipped, with a large number of advanced forces, such as the United States M1A2 tanks, Bradley infantry fighting vehicles, F-15 fighters, Apache***, France's Leclerc tanks, Europe's Typhoon fighters, Whirlwind fighter-bombers, etc.), **The generation gap is so obvious (the Houthis only have more than 10,000 regular troops, less than 100,000 militias, and are equipped with only a small number of Chinese-made old Type 69 tanks, After the transformation of R27 anti-aircraft missiles and Scud missiles, most of the soldiers are equipped with AK47 and other light **), and there is also the support of the United States (the United States even sent the Navy to help blockade Yemen), but the result was still beaten by the Houthis, so how to explain it?

There is an advanced ** unless it is a comprehensive suppression of the other party or a comprehensive generation difference lead, even if the quality of the army is very poor, it can also have 40% combat effectiveness, but if there is no such absolute lead, people can't do it, then it may not be able to fight, after all, no matter how good the equipment is, people will use it, only the equipment theory gives me a kind of as long as I wear a skin, ordinary citizens also have combat effectiveness, hehe, just pretend, tofu, the Turkish army is a good interpretation of this, even the Kurdish forces can't beat it.

Can a Yankee have a word of truth in his mouth? Bullshit! The United States can only fight a tie with China, and neither can take advantage.

The War to Resist US Aggression and Aid Korea is the best refutation of the first viewpoint.

War is not a unilateral condition can be won, the time and place are favorable, the Three Kingdoms period, the six countries united to fight against the Qin State, it is best not to fail, the person who called can help you, because there is a relationship of interests, once this relationship is lost, it is a plate of scattered sand, the battle of Muye in history, the battle of Julu in the Qin and Han dynasties, the Huaihai Battle in modern times, in fact, the Communist Party fought a lot of battles with less to win more.

History has proven the correctness of the theory of spirituality.