@oralloy,
You are smart enough to know what the result will be if you look for definitions. You are even smart enough to know what the result will be if you argue whether or not a specific action (from the plethora of vaguely evil actions) is evil.
This is the same avoidance you practice each and every time you are asked to back up your words with examples (see below)....for here, you
know that it will turn up different defintions, so you avoid posting them.
Just like when you were asked to show a single place where you have supported a black person involved in a conflict with a white person (you can't, but you claim you wont)
Just like you were asked to show where you have given credence to the perspective of a black person involved in a conflict with a white person (you can't, but you claim you won't).
It all stems from the same nonsense - you avoid anything that disagrees with what you want to believe, then claim you are avoiding it by choice (it is by choice, but the reason is so you never have to admit the truth to yourself)
You claim you deal with reality, then show you don't through avoidance.