84821 pts ยท December 14, 2012
There's also a school of thought in various homophobic religions that says that homosexuality is innate and by God's design, but it is a sin. Just like many other sins, the point is not to not be tempted, but to resist temptation.But that's the problem with these religions. They can always fall back on "Well God works in mysterious ways" and their arguments boil down to "God said so so shut up!"
humanity having become irredeemable. This is par for the course, and now it's up to us to make sure the swing back is as short as possible and the baseline we return to is further ahead than it was.
It's not just that, people have a predisposition to "rebel", and that is seen even at a population scale, just much slower and more distributed. In the long run, it's a healthy habit since it's built in sanity checking of the ideologies driving the system. But that's a lot easier to swallow when it's statistics and not people being kidnapped off the street.That being said, hopefully people can find some hope in the fact that this is a societal-level self-regulating phenomenon and not a mark of
No, it isn't. People want justice, but ACAB police don't offer that. Police that overstep will categorically overstep elsewhere. I get that you want to see these guys get justice but a police beating wouldn't be it. Worse, someone who actually did do something wrong would be completely coincidental.
Or you're not American and wondered why it would be impossible to do one of the most common things one does with a football.
Point is, suggesting that maybe some people deserve police brutality undermines the whole system. Police need to be held to an absolute standard or they will become ACAB police. If some people deserve harsher punishments, that's on the legal system to ensure. Not the police.
And folks this is exactly how you get ACAB for everyone.
It will. As will other countries. That's a characteristic of societal evolution, trends and ideologies tend to generate a counter-movement or an opposing ideology, and that will gain ground. It is expected that after a period of ostensibly quite progressive development, a conservative degeneration will happen. The important thing is to work to make sure that after this cycle ends, the end result is in a net positive spot.
Bloopers are often bits that start off as mistakes but the actors go off on a humorous tangent since they know the take won't be used. Sometimes the mistake isn't even obvious, the actor may have forgotten their lines and instead improvs something on the spot.
Life draining from the eyes is just a side effect of being part of MAGA, it has nothing to do with the surgery.
The problem is that the assistant character is horribly written, doesn't fit at all, and way too many of the tasks are performative.
Depends on what you mean by a handful, but honestly I don't think it sounds unreasonable. You'd expect there to be around 12 gay people in the first place in a cohort that size, and how many of them are still figuring things out and how many just never had it come up? I'm not downplaying the discrimination of the time, or of today, but I feel a lot of people overestimate how prevalent homosexuality actually is and, on top of that, how likely you are to know someone's sexuality anyway.
How big was your class? The expected rate is around 3-4% in the first place, and not everyone who isn't openly gay is in the closet. I graduated 15 years ago in a class of around 90, and no one was openly gay. But about half of them weren't openly anything, either.
But the comment I was replying to did. That was the context. The US has natural reserves Trump will tap before turning to Russia because that's how he lines his and his cronies pockets. He will, likely, fill the national reserves out of those previously unprofitable natural reserves.
But the US is a net exporter. It's self-evident Trump is going to use this as a business opportunity because that's exactly what he's done previously, but it has little to do with Russia. He's lining pockets at home by buying from local producers at the inflated price while also making local ramped up production viable.
The US has more than enough natural oil reserves for all their needs, the problem is that it is in forms difficult to extract and refine. A jump in oil prices suddenly means that a huge portion of previously unprofitable reserves become profitable to extract.
And Switzerland hasn't? Switzerland is wildly capitalist, but the thing is that capitalism is an economic system that allows for stuff like co-ops. The problem is that in America propaganda has made people think that anything except maximizing profits at all costs is evil and communism.
start a market panic, and the aftershocks would be felt across all industries. Of course, if the influx is gradual, the crisis wouldn't happen. But for a project on the scale mining an asteroid in the belt, you'd expect more than a modest trickle of gold.
We're a century away technologically from mining it, and that's optimistic. We're decades away from mining the moon, even under ideal conditions, and Psyche 16 is far, far more difficult a prospect.Some countries do still back their loans with gold collateral, and even the US uses it as an emergency asset. The tanking of an emergency asset, even if not in daily use, would increase uncertainty and decrease investor and loaner certainty, which would have far-reaching implications. It would start
It's 20 times the radius of the dinosaur killer. The least damaging scenario would be to maybe not sterilize the whole planet.It would also take more jet fuel than we've ever produced, times many thousands, to nudge it even a tiny bit.
Gold is easy to extract on Earth. From an asteroid? Not so much. And while gold hasn't been an official standard many countries maintain huge reserves and a sudden influx of gold would have the same effect as if gold were an official standard.
Virtually everything has *some* monetary value, including literal garbage. The original comment is a bit semantic, sure gold would retain value, and a decent amount of it due to how useful it is, but it would still crash gold's capacity to act as standard. Well, depending on how difficult it would be to extract the gold from the asteroid.
Also, he's a playwright, not a book author. Theatre is like 90% showing anyway. The fact he lore dumps for context does not take away from the fact that the majority of the relevant information is relayed through acting, plays just don't have the luxury of establishing character traits in separate scenes. A play is constrained by its length.
True, but ergot isn't yeast, is it?
They used the specifier of being psychedelic though. Yeast isn't.
Well yes and no. It's true that cancer is an umbrella term that describes, on a very high level, the general mechanism of the disease, but the root causes and many facets of the disease vary and they all behave a bit differently. At the same time though, many breakthroughs in the medical field aren't just hyper-specific, they apply to many types of cancer and sometimes even apply generally.
In general, assume every sensational news piece about cancer to be false or at least misrepresented. Progress is made, and a lot of it, but in increments. And often the increments add up to a sum that is far more than their parts, but it happens slowly, over time.
closet. The sum total of quality of life is worse, but it doesn't mean they aren't really trans.
It's not that clear-cut. Gender is a social construct, and the vast majority of people who transition do it in part to address social dysphoria as well as other symptoms. It's not a bad question: a lot of transitioners hope for the transition to improve their social identity even if it is not the most important reason for most of them.The answer is basically that those that do detransition usually feel the discrimination of being "visibly" trans is worse than the dysphoria of being in the
Hence the asterisk and explanation.
There's also a school of thought in various homophobic religions that says that homosexuality is innate and by God's design, but it is a sin. Just like many other sins, the point is not to not be tempted, but to resist temptation.
But that's the problem with these religions. They can always fall back on "Well God works in mysterious ways" and their arguments boil down to "God said so so shut up!"
humanity having become irredeemable. This is par for the course, and now it's up to us to make sure the swing back is as short as possible and the baseline we return to is further ahead than it was.
It's not just that, people have a predisposition to "rebel", and that is seen even at a population scale, just much slower and more distributed. In the long run, it's a healthy habit since it's built in sanity checking of the ideologies driving the system. But that's a lot easier to swallow when it's statistics and not people being kidnapped off the street.
That being said, hopefully people can find some hope in the fact that this is a societal-level self-regulating phenomenon and not a mark of
No, it isn't. People want justice, but ACAB police don't offer that. Police that overstep will categorically overstep elsewhere. I get that you want to see these guys get justice but a police beating wouldn't be it. Worse, someone who actually did do something wrong would be completely coincidental.
Or you're not American and wondered why it would be impossible to do one of the most common things one does with a football.
Point is, suggesting that maybe some people deserve police brutality undermines the whole system. Police need to be held to an absolute standard or they will become ACAB police. If some people deserve harsher punishments, that's on the legal system to ensure. Not the police.
And folks this is exactly how you get ACAB for everyone.
It will. As will other countries. That's a characteristic of societal evolution, trends and ideologies tend to generate a counter-movement or an opposing ideology, and that will gain ground. It is expected that after a period of ostensibly quite progressive development, a conservative degeneration will happen. The important thing is to work to make sure that after this cycle ends, the end result is in a net positive spot.
Bloopers are often bits that start off as mistakes but the actors go off on a humorous tangent since they know the take won't be used. Sometimes the mistake isn't even obvious, the actor may have forgotten their lines and instead improvs something on the spot.
Life draining from the eyes is just a side effect of being part of MAGA, it has nothing to do with the surgery.
The problem is that the assistant character is horribly written, doesn't fit at all, and way too many of the tasks are performative.
Depends on what you mean by a handful, but honestly I don't think it sounds unreasonable. You'd expect there to be around 12 gay people in the first place in a cohort that size, and how many of them are still figuring things out and how many just never had it come up?
I'm not downplaying the discrimination of the time, or of today, but I feel a lot of people overestimate how prevalent homosexuality actually is and, on top of that, how likely you are to know someone's sexuality anyway.
How big was your class? The expected rate is around 3-4% in the first place, and not everyone who isn't openly gay is in the closet. I graduated 15 years ago in a class of around 90, and no one was openly gay. But about half of them weren't openly anything, either.
But the comment I was replying to did. That was the context. The US has natural reserves Trump will tap before turning to Russia because that's how he lines his and his cronies pockets. He will, likely, fill the national reserves out of those previously unprofitable natural reserves.
But the US is a net exporter. It's self-evident Trump is going to use this as a business opportunity because that's exactly what he's done previously, but it has little to do with Russia. He's lining pockets at home by buying from local producers at the inflated price while also making local ramped up production viable.
The US has more than enough natural oil reserves for all their needs, the problem is that it is in forms difficult to extract and refine. A jump in oil prices suddenly means that a huge portion of previously unprofitable reserves become profitable to extract.
And Switzerland hasn't? Switzerland is wildly capitalist, but the thing is that capitalism is an economic system that allows for stuff like co-ops. The problem is that in America propaganda has made people think that anything except maximizing profits at all costs is evil and communism.
start a market panic, and the aftershocks would be felt across all industries.
Of course, if the influx is gradual, the crisis wouldn't happen. But for a project on the scale mining an asteroid in the belt, you'd expect more than a modest trickle of gold.
We're a century away technologically from mining it, and that's optimistic. We're decades away from mining the moon, even under ideal conditions, and Psyche 16 is far, far more difficult a prospect.
Some countries do still back their loans with gold collateral, and even the US uses it as an emergency asset. The tanking of an emergency asset, even if not in daily use, would increase uncertainty and decrease investor and loaner certainty, which would have far-reaching implications. It would start
It's 20 times the radius of the dinosaur killer. The least damaging scenario would be to maybe not sterilize the whole planet.
It would also take more jet fuel than we've ever produced, times many thousands, to nudge it even a tiny bit.
Gold is easy to extract on Earth. From an asteroid? Not so much. And while gold hasn't been an official standard many countries maintain huge reserves and a sudden influx of gold would have the same effect as if gold were an official standard.
Virtually everything has *some* monetary value, including literal garbage. The original comment is a bit semantic, sure gold would retain value, and a decent amount of it due to how useful it is, but it would still crash gold's capacity to act as standard. Well, depending on how difficult it would be to extract the gold from the asteroid.
Also, he's a playwright, not a book author. Theatre is like 90% showing anyway. The fact he lore dumps for context does not take away from the fact that the majority of the relevant information is relayed through acting, plays just don't have the luxury of establishing character traits in separate scenes. A play is constrained by its length.
True, but ergot isn't yeast, is it?
They used the specifier of being psychedelic though. Yeast isn't.
Well yes and no. It's true that cancer is an umbrella term that describes, on a very high level, the general mechanism of the disease, but the root causes and many facets of the disease vary and they all behave a bit differently. At the same time though, many breakthroughs in the medical field aren't just hyper-specific, they apply to many types of cancer and sometimes even apply generally.
In general, assume every sensational news piece about cancer to be false or at least misrepresented. Progress is made, and a lot of it, but in increments. And often the increments add up to a sum that is far more than their parts, but it happens slowly, over time.
closet. The sum total of quality of life is worse, but it doesn't mean they aren't really trans.
It's not that clear-cut. Gender is a social construct, and the vast majority of people who transition do it in part to address social dysphoria as well as other symptoms. It's not a bad question: a lot of transitioners hope for the transition to improve their social identity even if it is not the most important reason for most of them.
The answer is basically that those that do detransition usually feel the discrimination of being "visibly" trans is worse than the dysphoria of being in the
Hence the asterisk and explanation.