The problem is female and women aren’t grammatically equivalent, so you can’t just drop one in place of the other anytime you want. It bugs me when people say woman president. Imagine electing a man president. The correct word in that case is male. You’d be electing a male president. I don’t care about anyone’s politics. I’m just getting tired of people in suits on tv using poor language and being asked to be taken seriously. And I’m not singling out democrats. Republicans adopted that language too. There are people on tv who wouldn’t pass kindergarten telling us what they think will affect GDP.

If you are loosing an argument just mention the Nazis.

Neo-puritanism needs to die. I’m getting excited because I think humanity is just generally getting fed up with control. We’re done with this shit.

At least none of these people should be violent. They can have their views. But law is always violent. So it has no business being an extension of anyone’s sexual views. If you violently impose your sexual perspective on others you are as good as a rapist in my book.

Maybe it’s a good reason to reduce public spending in general. People act like public spending is a way to even things out, but in practice as the post evidences, the more we tax and the more the government spends the more wealth has actually been concentrated.

I think adults should be able to sign whatever contract they want.

Exactly. If want to stay connected to reality we should use historical analogies only. Remember when Maduro promised Venezuelans a better life, but life just got shitty instead. And instead of eating Nicolás Maduro they ate out of trash bins.

And he did give them a better life. They ate him because it served the movie’s plot. Also wtf was mufasa doing to make all the land more sunny? Was it that whole circle of life thing where he gets to eat his subjects?

Doesn’t the left sometimes misrepresent the right? Putting the most extreme example of the left in a meme is no different than putting the most extreme example of the right in a meme. People like that do exist.

Well that’s how they feel. You can laugh about it, but that’s not really going to improve anything.

They’ve been told since they were kids that there being less of them is the highest improvement society can make. Imagine if they open taught that to black kids that in public school.

Maybe because they’ve been demonized since they were children?

Simple solution. Move to a town that isn’t fully of pretentious haters. You could always live around normal people. But some towns are cursed with these kinds of people.

I do wish there was a way to hide the thumbnail because it’s kind of a spoiler. I thought about marking it nsfw.

Also it requires shipping oil to fuel the mining operations needed to produce full scale renewable energy. But if we wait a little bit the quality of power output from the same mining inputs will improve which means renewable later requires less total mining than full scale renewable now, and so you will use less fuel to do that smaller amount of mining.

What people don’t realize is that the expense of renewable technology mostly is fuel. Fuel to mine it, fuel to move the raw materials, fuel to refine it, fuel to manufacture it, fuel to ship it to you. The total labor is quite small. So if taken on a specific case the financial perspective alone of a particular application of renewable vs conventional energy the numbers don’t add up then likely the renewable is less green. If you wait a little bit for the green cost to come down that indicates improved efficiencies and now it actually is green.

So the answer to make the world more green is not to shift our calculations to spend money on green solutions beyond financial sense. It’s to work on technology to lower green costs until it naturally makes sense and thereby also make it more green at the same time.

But at least the ships need a non-renewable source. And they are going to need some of it in every country they visit. How do we get oil to every country if not by ship? That’s a lot of pipelines if we go that route. But maybe that is the answer.

Any cause benefited by stupidity is not a good cause. And that does apply to both sides.

It usually involves trying to start some shit with Russia.

It also doesn’t make much sense in the particular context considering on a genetic level Palestinians are as Semitic as modern Ashkenazi jews. And it doesn’t make much sense from a religious stand point because modern Judaism differs from ancient Judaism by about the same amount as Christianity or Islam does. Modern Judaism just has this dogma that Ancient Judaism was secretly observing their form of it even though if we don’t take them at their word there isn’t a lot of evidence of that.

So from a religious standpoint it doesn’t make a lot of sense. And from an ethnic standpoint it makes even less sense.

And also we don’t let Europeans say “these are our ethnic lands” without calling them racist. So then why would we let people who are like 2% ethnic ancient jewish retroactively claim ethnic ownership of some land without calling them racist? They will claim it’s not about race and about religion. Ok, which is worse, a group of highly militant ethno-nationalists, or a group of highly militant theo-nationalists? Zionists are always one of two bad things and they will use arguments to play wackamole about which one to deflect the claims of one. Apparently if you are two bad things at once and it is unclear if you are both or just one of those things you get unlimited license to be both of those bad things.

If you think Rust has zero rough edges you might have drunk too much kool aid.

So then animal sacrifice is meant to be continued by Christians? The “did not come to abolish but fulfill” thing is really an explanation for abolishment. He didn’t destroy the law but completed it, so it’s done. And by law we basically mean Leviticus. So yes, Leviticus pretty much is irrelevant. By your argument and the argument embedded in OPs post Christians should still be stoning women and not eating pork.

How can you know which chapter of Matthew starts the sermon on the mount and not know pretty much the most core concept in Christian theology? Like that is almost the whole central point of Jesus is that he abolished the law by fulfilling it. That and salvation. That’s like the two things.

Of course then why doesn’t Israel do this?