OracleOutlook
Fiat justitia ruat caelum
No bio...
User ID: 359
Are you doing ok? I know we just had a long back-and-forth about the nature of God (except you might not agree with the word Nature, so just substitute what-God-is-ness.) And this is the "arguing about things politely" website. But I want to express to you how sad I was to hear the news, and how much I hope that LDS and Catholics can stand against desecration of safe and holy places.
There are some Protestants who do not consider Catholics to be Christians because we don't "Believe in the Gospel" which is reduced to Sola Fide. Who gets to be The Gatekeeper of what a Christian is? I don't know. I know you're not Catholic and I'm not LDS - that's something that we get to decide within our sects. But the term Christianity is so broad that no single group can claim the authority to gatekeep. If you consider yourself Christian, then that's good enough for me.
The Medievals believed Islam to be a Christian Heresy. If muslims count, LDS certainly does.
but the other sacraments (including Mass) are necessary for almost everyone and do require sacramentally ordained ministers in apostolic succession.
The Catholic view leans more towards, "God is not limited by His sacraments, but this is the only sure way He taught us." Meaning it's possible others are saved through the Church without knowing they are connected with the Church, like Abraham was. But the Church isn't going to change what it's doing, because this is the only sure way they know of.
It's not even a good slogan. It's lazy. Throwing your life away without even being able to come up with something catchy and fun is... stupid.
Yeah, and I hope I was clear in my first comment that I think Vance can do a Weekend at Trump's and that would still show competent leadership. But that's clearly not what Kamala did, she was comfortable getting shut out of the decision tree and then couldn't fight back into a position of leadership.
Plus, the VP is supposed to stand by and just be ceremonial/decorative, not try to muscle in on the presidential turf.
Our Constitution and the 25th Amendment is pretty strong evidence against this. They're the president's backup, expected to take over the role if the president becomes incapacitated.
If Harris couldn't take on Jill Biden, then how can she possibly take on Putin? Why didn't we have Jill running for president instead?
No one intends to hand you the reins, a leader TAKES the reins. Like Jill took the reins. Harris could have gotten the Cabinet on her side and just pulled a 25th, nothing Jill could have done. But the Cabinet preferred a zombie Biden and Jill in charge over Harris.
Likewise, if Trump becomes a zombie, I fully expect Vance to take over, otherwise he's not worth backing for 2028.
One reason why I didn't consider voting for Kamala (of many) was that if she were half-way competent she should have taken control of the Biden White House. Either become President herself, or otherwise controlled things. If the Cabinet didn't think she'd make a good president, why should I?
I give Vance to after the Midterms, when he could serve 2.5 Presidential terms legally. If he doesn't take over and Trump keeps deteriorating to the degree we saw Biden, it tells me that he's not actually a leader. That doesn't necessarily mean the 25th Amendment gets invoked right away, but there would be a clear move of the Cabinet deferring to him, him taking more direct actions, etc.
When pregnant I got headaches at the normal-to-me frequency. With Ibuprofen I can just take one pill, small dose, and it's gone. With Tylenol I would take the recommended dose, wait four hours of suffering, and then on the second dose I could finally feel some effects. The pain was gone but I could still feel the headache waiting. Numb but still pounding? It was weird and not pleasant.
But still better than absolutely nothing, which is what is left to pregnant women now.
Do you feel the same way at the DMV when you learn from some bureaucrat that they can't give you what you need today because you need to get some piece of documentation that you didn't know about?
I view the police as basically the same as any bureaucrat - they want to keep it boring, get the forms submitted, move along. Maybe you messed up, maybe they messed up, but you both just want a functioning society so be polite and get through the encounter as smoothly as possible.
I really liked The Way of Kings but looking back on it the reasons I liked it are not that good.
For background, I was in college, depressed, and hadn't read a physical book for pleasure in a long time. In search of a familiar comfort from my childhood, I got a library card and picked up The Way of Kings because it was the first of a series and the author seemed familiar - like one of those you saw come up on Reddit threads.
I liked that the world felt like a puzzle. It was a truly alien world! And there were mysteries that happened in the past. It felt like the reader had more clues than the characters, so we should be able to put things together faster. This wound up disappointing me in the sequels, but for the first book it felt full of potential.
I liked that the book was easy to read, which makes the motivation required to read it much lesser. I think a lot of the "I enjoyed reading as a kid, but now I don't" that young adults experience is tied to attempting to read more difficult books, when as a kid they were probably reading books with simple prose and an uncomplicated plot.
But what I liked the most was that Kaladin seemed to get it. Yep, there's no point. Nothing matters. But he made the oaths to put life before death anyways. And then goodness was vindicated in the end. Trite? Sure. But it kept me off a bridge of my own.
Now my reading palate has expanded and I can see all the flaws with it. But it still holds a special place in my heart.
Low is normal, who's going to upvote the automatic threads? But negative seems weird.
Is there a roving gang downvoting all the topics? Why is this at -1 and the Culture War thread at 0? Are we being brigaded or is someone just having fun?
In the real world, almost all parents want what is best for their kids, they just disagree about the facts.
Yes, and a conservative is more likely to have a kid than a liberal.
Is this actually a thing
There are surveys that say it's gotten worse, but whether that's a screen-time effect or an inherent neuropsych effect I don't know. https://www.edweek.org/leadership/is-student-behavior-getting-any-better-what-a-new-survey-says/2025/01
Conservatives are the ones having kids and so are the more concerned now about what they're putting into their kids bodies.
They are also more aware of the breakdown in classroom behavior, increase of violent outbreaks, and having a medical reason to pin it on is useful.
It might be cultural, my parents always preferred ibuprofen. But also migraines run in the family, and ibuprofen is more useful for that sort of pain.
In the US there was an infamous Chicago Tylenol Murder spree when my parents were in the 20s, which probably gave the brand a bad name.
I hate having Tylenol in the house. It was one of the scarier parts of pregnancy and neonates. My 2 year old slurped up half a bottle while I was trying to dose the 3 month old and I called poison control crying. Couldn't sleep all night from shaking, though they told me it was below their threshold for going into the ER. An overdose is a miserable death.
That said, pregnancy sucks and you have to be able to give women something. If they can't take willow bark tea, can't have a shot of brandy, can't take anything more modern, they're going to come up with something. And that something is likely going to be dangerous.
Sinclair plays both sides. Sinclair Quietly Backs Out of Airing Charlie Kirk Special People are floating around X that it is due to threats made to Sinclair stations.
I think there are many diverse opinions on the Right, some who are Libertarian free-speechers. But there were some who have been honest from the start.
Tim Pool told Jack Dorsey that he was introducing a bias against conservatives through Twitter's policies. Ironically I think Pool is more Libertarian, but the point he makes is specifically that the "neutral" policies mostly harmed normal, ordinary conservatives. Not that there shouldn't be moderation at all.
Kevin Dolan was up front about supporting cancellation over a year ago: It's different when we do it
The best way I've seen it put is that the Right isn't actually against cancelling those outside the Overton Window, they were just protesting the arbitrary narrowing of the window by a handful of powerful state and corporate actors. In that frame, the recent cancellations make sense and look less hypocritical.
Kazuo Ishiguro writes the same story over and over and over again, but he does it well. The servant who believes in their service and doesn't mind that it eats their life up.
It's kind of an anti-novel. You hope for character development, but it doesn't happen. It's more like a series of vignettes.
His other novels do have more development and plot, but never to the point where the main character advocates for themselves.
I found his body of work poignant and depressing.
Kazuo Ishiguro writes the same story over and over and over again, but he does it well. The servant who believes in their service and doesn't mind that it eats their life up. Klara and the Sun is the same. After reading The Remains of the Day, Klara and the Sun, and Never Let Me Go I realized that I've seen pretty much all he has to say.
Jesus' prescriptions were all about making the aggressor view you as a human, not so much as non-resistance. It's resistance through excessive submission.
You have heard that it was said, βAn eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.β But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if anyone would sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you.
In order:
If someone slaps your right cheek, present them your left cheek. Most people are right handed, so to strike a right cheek they need to use the back of their hand, which denotes an inferior. If you turn your cheek, you are demanding that they slap with the palm of their hand, something that would denote an equal.
Jesus does not say, "Let him beat you up to a pulp."
If anyone sues your for a tunic, let him have your cloak as well. This would leave you naked, which is not allowed. You are shaming the person who sued you for your tunic.
Go the extra mile - you are acting like it was your choice to carry the Roman soldier's gear. The Roman soldier can only force you to carry their gear for one mile, but by going two miles you're shaming them.
The message is - by humbling yourself just the same amount you've already been humbled, you can shame your opponent A Lot.
"I forgive you," is comparatively a small sacrifice next to actually losing her husband. But by saying it she is shaming the killer and everyone knows it.
Regardless of her forgiveness, society has a need to keep dangerous killers off the streets. Even if Erika began advocating for the killer's release, every judge, police officer, etc has a higher duty to keep the killer imprisoned.
I assume when people talk about women being inherently more valuable than men they mean it in the sense of:
If you have 100 men and 1 woman, the most babies you can have at the end of the year is 1-3. If you have 1 man and 100 women, you could have 100+
But that doesn't hold as true in a monogamous society so I don't understand where the idea that men are extra expendable is coming from.
You would still only have as many pregnant women as there are men, making men a bottleneck to reproduction the same as women.
Only in a polygamous society which I'm not sure is very common in Gaza.
Historically, marriage to cousins was once common. Polygamous marriages are rare among Muslim Palestinians, except among some Bedouin communities. As Palestine does not have a civil marriage option, marriage law follows the religious faith of the couple.
- Prev
- Next
Can you expand on this? My impression is that these universities have endowments that should give them all the funding they need in perpetuity, but still require ever-increasing tuition that is payed by the government with debt. This debt cannot be discharged with bankruptcy which is distorting the market. It doesn't seem efficient to me, just more of the Beltway woes exported across the country. But maybe you were thinking of something different?
More options
Context Copy link