domain:shapesinthefog.substack.com
ABigGuy4U
2hr ago
It means... oh god... it means she might HAVE A BABY?! AHHHHHH I’M GOING INSAAAAAAANE SAVE ME MARGRET SANGER!
BreakerofHorsesandMen
Sweet Sejenus
2hr ago
If they are already married (and you express that as a goal), then in what way are they going to really fuck up their life by using natural family planning?
IGI-111
God was a dream of good government.
2hr ago
What exactly is so dangerous and unwholesome about the Roman Catholic Church's views on sex?
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
2hr ago
What does it even mean to be "equals in dignity" though if inequality at the group level justifies disparate treatment of equals at the individual level?
@VoxelVexillologist I suspect the Loose Change video was what conspiracy theorists refer to as “well poisoning”. It only brings up issues that are easily debunked with ten minutes of research, or ones that are absolutely loony like directed energy weapons.
Also unfortunately even the ones investigating in good faith often tend to focus on the flashy improbable things and often miss the more plausible and often quite damning details.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2hr ago
I can see how you interpreted what I wrote as being about the level of testosterone, but that was not what I meant. I was talking about the sensation being overwhelming - if it makes you feel like Grug the caveman you'll inevitably end up somewhere other than here imo, no matter why it's overwhelming. It is just a guess, but I will stand by it.
dr_analog
top 1% of underdog fetishists
2hr ago
Ok in my story above after the second time she bought a gun in less than a day and pulled it out on him the third time and there hasn't been an incident since.
Here in America we have FREEDOM (in some states)
AlexanderTurok
Alt-MSNBC
2hr ago
Did you miss the "natural family planning" in there? Google it if you don't know what it means.
As far as I can understand it, the timeline is:
-
In 1983, T.B. was involuntarily committed in Ancora. There's some skepticism over exactly what degree of behavior this involved (ie, TB says he was violent pre-admission and then some time later was released after questioning, Ancora wrote that he was violent after admission), but T.B. does not claim that the commitment was illegitimate or trolling.
-
In 2022, T.B. went to LifeStream for outpatient treatment claiming interest in treatment for anxiety (and depression?), but really wanting to get a 'I'm not crazy-crazy' note. Neither anxiety nor depression would be disqualifying for firearms purchase even if he did have them (probably. NJ's a little arbitrary here).
T.B. was not trying to undo the LifeStream visit, but to remove the records about the Ancora commitment. The court held that the standard was not just that " their illness has either "substantially improved" or is in "substantial remission" since their discharge from a mental health facility" -- which it clearly had -- but that T.B. had to actively prove that the expungement of his Ancora record was in the public interest, and as a result it was not sufficient to demonstrate he was not actively dangerous. They had evidence that the man's mental health had improved, and none that it had not, and decided that this left the question unanswered and unanswerable. They had evidence that the man was not dangerous (literally "speaks volumes about not that he’s dangerous to the public safety"); the judge ducked it because the judge determined on his own that TB might forget a safety maybe.
It's possible (even more-likely-than-not) that the courts would have been able to withhold expungement under a more serious standard focusing on dangerousness or on continuing mental illness. But the issue is that they didn't have to actually interact with that more serious standard or any standard at all, and Rov_Scam's jumping in to inform us that it's tots reasonable anyway.
EDIT: you are correct that there was no 2A analysis involved.
Mihow
Lipstick on a guitar
2hr ago
Your last paragraph completely threw me for a loop … I just didn’t see it coming after reading your post.
The woman in your post did the opposite of fuck her life up - it looks like she made her life better. She stopped drinking as much, found community, stopped hooking up, is looking for a family, etc.
I dislike religion pretty vehemently but I understand the community and sense of peace it can bring.
ThomasdelVasto
Κύριε, ποίησόν με ὄργανον τῆς ἀγάπης σου
2hr ago
Through a friend, and a coworker around the same time. I basically had a really difficult time with Buddhism, had been practicing off and on for years and got kind of wrecked by an insight into emptiness.
Happened to have some good Orthodox men around me who I leaned on a bit for support. The rest, as they say, is history!
Tree
3hr ago
The air india jet was, as the pilot kids say, low energy. And it is easier to topple a tall thin building than a short stocky one.
Primaprimaprima
...something all admit only "TRUMP", and the Trump Administration, can do.
3hr ago
Many people here have been asking about my politics: it's actually remarkably simple: I want the old America back where children were born within marriage, didn't try to change their gender, and got all the vaccines their pediatrician recommended.
This is not politics. This is an arbitrary list of demands.
Your "politics" is the constellation of principles and cognitive patterns that cause you to demand certain things. (Or, alternatively, as a Marxist might say: politics is the analysis of the material and social conditions that give rise to certain principles and cognitive patterns, which in turn give rise to concrete demands.)
The interesting thing isn't that you like vaccines, it's why you like vaccines (and what makes you different from people who don't).
Amadan
Enjoying my short-lived victory
3hr ago
Yes, he gets divorced.
This is not what actually happens to any man (or the vast majority of men- I question whether it's even a statistically significant number of men) who get divorced.
Spousal support is rare but not non-existent
You mean "pretty rare"? I.e., exactly what I said in the post you are replying to but framing it as a rebuttal?
but child support is very high and doesn't have to be spent on the children. If his income goes up he has to pay more; if it goes down he still has to pay the same.
"Pretty high" is subjective and depends entirely on how much obligation you think a parent has to provide for their offspring. No, there isn't an itemized accounting for every dollar of child support because household expenses are too fungible, but child support is calculated based on the expected expenses of a child and the income of the parents.
Unsurprisingly, the non custodial parent often thinks any amount is too high. Child support can be adjusted up or down. A judge has to approve increasing it, it doesn't happen automatically if income goes up. And it can be decreased too based on life circumstances , though judges tend to take a dim view of the tactic of taking a lower paying job to decrease child support.
Which is irrelevant, as they were still demanded to have been paying it. And if they get caught, they have their wages garnished down to subsistence or less, they lose their driver's licenses, professional licenses, go to jail for contempt for indefinite periods, etc.
It's relevant when you are claiming child support as an injustice, which it is not. In any case, even the most onerous child support does not reach the level of "taking most of his assets and future earnings."
Jiro
3hr ago
The hearing was supposed to be for expunging his commitment. People don't get committed for forgetting their medication. It's not supposed to be "is there anything wrong with him such that we don't want him to have a gun" even though the state used it that way.
TheAntipopulist
Formerly Ben___Garrison
3hr ago
some people like him because he's a fighter who wins for traditional conservative causes like reducing the size of government
??????
Trump hasn't significantly reduced the size of the government, and even explicitly refuses to touch the largest parts of it (bloated elder care in the form of Social Security and Medicare).
I vaguely agree with everything else you said in your post, and thought it was a bit more interesting and insightful than the article the OP posted.
TeknOShEeP
3hr ago
Jimmy John's has superior cold sandos to Jersey Mikes, but no one can top the Big Kahuna cheesesteak from Mikey.
functor
3hr ago
tkt
3hr ago
It feels very highly British that the article brings up a crime of "criminal conversation" and a "peculiar court".
TeknOShEeP
3hr ago
I do, but boomer-fuddville is convenient to me, so if i need to zero a scope or try a new build I can be in an out in under an hour instead of making it a half-day excursion. I make a point of loudly calling out all of these violations to the RSO, and they are pretty good about clamping down on it, but they shouldnt have to intervene in the first place.
Lewis2
3hr ago
You can drive a car on your own land without a driver’s license, vehicle license, seat belt, etc. By analogy, you should be able to use a gun on your own property without any licensing or training requirements.
Amadan
Enjoying my short-lived victory
3hr ago
It isn't, and I propose a moratorium on this type of argumentation.
If you think my post broke any rules you are free to report it, and I will as usual let another mod adjudicate it. But no, we will not be declaring a moratorium on "types of argumentation" someone dislikes. For example, a type of argumentation I dislike is the "Nuh uh" (e.g. "It isn't").
Note how the poster actually references how societies gave concrete examples of why their strictures were necessary,
"Societies" did no such thing. The poster gave examples of why he thinks such strictures evolved. Some of which I don't even disagree with. (Speaking of not even reading the post you're replying to.)
AlexanderTurok
Alt-MSNBC
3hr ago
Alas, sneering at the actual TRUE things conspiracy theorists
It's true but irrelevant.
I know what I saw on my timeline. And Trump didn't keep his intervention limited because everybody was so supportive of it.
Really? You never ever heard any public official or intellectual from a particular political side being evasive on the question?
More options
Context Copy link