The nativity scene - or crèche as we say in America, although perhaps the British meaning is applicable - with the Trumps and the Queen was interesting.
flame,
Do you think private adoptions should be unlawful? Do you think parents shouldn’t be able to discriminate in who they give their baby to?
why can’t religious people put away their religion long enough to provide a service?
Because they’re exercising their religiois freedom. Various community services and help provided to people emanates from religious belief.
I have to get two cavities filled tomorrow morning. Then go to work afterward.
Uuuuugh.
I was wrong. It was three cavities, across two teeth. I hate life.
I blame the dentists.
I see what you did with that contraction.
What happened?! What did she say?!
Pretty pointless now.
We’ve been telling him that for years but he keeps doing it anyway. And then tells us he did it.
I don’t know what is so bad. I make a typo and then I correct it. What is so horrible about that?
Its pointless, that’s the point.
Why is it pointless?
There’s no point correcting a typo once it’s been seen by a large number of people and entered into their collective consciousness.
We are Borg.
Fixed.
I wanted to say it that way but that’s not what the internet says.
Pretty pointless now.
We’ve been telling him that for years but he keeps doing it anyway. And then tells us he did it.
I don’t know what is so bad. I make a typo and then I correct it. What is so horrible about that?
Its pointless, that’s the point.
Why is it pointless?
There’s no point correcting a typo once it’s been seen by a large number of people and entered into their collective consciousness.
We are the Borg.
They’ve been after my wisdom teeth for awhile, seeing how long I can put that off.
Pretty pointless now.
We’ve been telling him that for years but he keeps doing it anyway. And then tells us he did it.
I don’t know what is so bad. I make a typo and then I correct it. What is so horrible about that?
Its pointless, that’s the point.
Why is it pointless?
Because it’s been made obvious and joked about.
I don’t care either way.
This thread is not meant to concern any topic. It simply exists. Some philosophers may ask why it exists. Others may impose supposed objective truths or societal paradigms upon it. In any event, we’ll see what it’s about.
“Existentialism is a philosophy concerned with finding self and the meaning of life through free will, choice, and personal responsibility.”
I have an urgent communiqué for General Hugs.
fixed.
Extremely belated, but still fixed.
Reported.
https://mobile.twitter.com/_Bernishaaa/status/1013490934464565253?
It’s mainly Frink who complains. Two or three others pipe up after he’s challenged.
There’s no “problem” in having new threads. The backseat modding is extraordinarily tiresome.
Pretty pointless now.
We’ve been telling him that for years but he keeps doing it anyway. And then tells us he did it.
When you quit, please say this is the reason.
I’m taking a few classes over the summer, and one of them is this required communications course. Today, the teacher mentioned how a misogynist disagreed with a feminist’s position to “kill all men”. And yet… I feel like any rational human being would disagree with that.
Needless to say, I find it very difficult to take this teacher seriously.
Did anybody point that out?
Apparently so. Maybe it’s just because I’m evil and lack empathy, but I don’t even understand your reading of those posts.
I don’t believe that you’re evil/lack empathy, only that you test others. As for Jay’s posts, or my own, if you don’t read so much into them and make assumptions they’re easier to understand.
I’m always happy to explain my reasoning or clarify.
mfm, somehow you’re arguing against what I didn’t post.
Forgive me for not understanding the most incomprehensible person in this thread.
I’m only being defensive because I was afraid Jay was going to take my title. Now I can rest easy.
As for the rest of your post, clearly you have a different reading of Jay’s posts than I or Handman have.
The idea that every discussion of current policy boils down to being pro-Trump or anti-Trump is the obsession I’m addressing.
So that’s what you got out of this?
Often.
mfm, somehow you’re arguing against what I didn’t post.
This didn’t start because you criticized Trump. This started with your accusation that Jay supports Trump and/or is unclear for not saying bad things about Trump when discussing a policy choice.
I emphasized that obviously I’m not saying you shouldn’t criticize Trump. Do it to your heart’s content. But don’t demand others do so or insist they’re pro-Trump if they don’t. That is what we’re talking about.
The idea that every discussion of current policy boils down to being pro-Trump or anti-Trump is the obsession I’m addressing.
It’s hard to tell given his near universal unwillingness to actually put his opinions forward in this thread. I have to make educated guesses and since he has an obvious pro-Trump bias, I didn’t take that observation as though it was a criticism.
Jay has put his opinions out there front and center. And I see no pro-Trump bias.
I don’t understand how you couldn’t see it. The refusal to acknowledge most of the President’s faults is a pro-Trump bias in my opinion.
As Jay suggested it’s tedious and unnecessary to constantly criticise Trump. I call that preservation of sanity, not bias.
That’s Trump apologia.
That’s wrong.
This man is the powerful person on the planet. Constantly talking about him, whether it’s criticism or not, is totally reasonable. How is it unnecessary to criticize the bad decisions made by the President? It’s not like we’re constantly talking about Alex Jones or Roy Moore or someone comparatively irrelevant.
That’s a powerful rationalization for an unhealthy obsession with Trump. Obviously, obviously, I’m not saying Trump shouldn’t be criticized. Go ahead, criticize the bad decisions. Others will see decisions that they think are good and will say so. Doesn’t mean they love Trump or that they think the decision is optimal. But your argument is that Jay had to say something bad about Trump and/or offer a comprehensive breakdown of his view of how college sexual assaults should be handled. That’s where your argument goes off the rails.
Jay doesn’t like what the Obama Administration did under Title IX and so he liked the reversal of the policy under Trump. It doesn’t follow that he has a pro-Trump bias or that he doesn’t believe there are better alternative policies.
It’s not just that that makes him have a pro-Trump bias. I came to that conclusion because he has redirected every single criticism of Trump that I and others have brought up either to a previous administration or to something else. For example, the terrible environmental policy of Trump gets redirected to how Obama had a legacy of executive orders so now it’s getting reversed. Trump demanding a safe space in the theatre for Mike Pence gets redirected to some vague and mysterious and irrelevant-to-this-example “hypocrisy” on the left. Trump’s refusal to disavow white supremacists gets redirected to Obama supposedly not disavowing black supremacists. The fascist and inhumane immigration policies of Trump get watered down and dishonestly redirected to Obama and previously existing policy even though it’s been pointed out to him many times that Trump’s family separation policy isn’t a carry-over from previous administrations. The list goes on and on. You not seeing the pro-Trump, pro-rightwing bias is due to your inability to perceive it, not to it being nonexistent.
Jay has pointed out inconsistent and overblown criticisms. He doesn’t share your obsession with Trump. He’s taking the “We Didn’t Start the Fire” view instead of the Trump is the be-all-and-end-all view.
Upgrade.
It’s hard to tell given his near universal unwillingness to actually put his opinions forward in this thread. I have to make educated guesses and since he has an obvious pro-Trump bias, I didn’t take that observation as though it was a criticism.
Jay has put his opinions out there front and center. And I see no pro-Trump bias.
I don’t understand how you couldn’t see it. The refusal to acknowledge most of the President’s faults is a pro-Trump bias in my opinion.
As Jay suggested it’s tedious and unnecessary to constantly criticise Trump. I call that preservation of sanity, not bias.
Jay doesn’t like what the Obama Administration did under Title IX and so he liked the reversal of the policy under Trump. It doesn’t follow that he has a pro-Trump bias or that he doesn’t believe there are better alternative policies.
how does Jay feel about tuesdays?
Based on his lack of commentary we must assume he hates them and thinks they should be replaced by Fridays. Don’t know why he’s refusing to say what he really feels about Tuesday, so let’s assume the worst.
It’s hard to tell given his near universal unwillingness to actually put his opinions forward in this thread. I have to make educated guesses and since he has an obvious pro-Trump bias, I didn’t take that observation as though it was a criticism.
Jay has put his opinions out there front and center. And I see no pro-Trump bias.
I don’t understand how you couldn’t see it. The refusal to acknowledge most of the President’s faults is a pro-Trump bias in my opinion.
As Jay suggested it’s tedious and unnecessary to constantly criticise Trump. I call that preservation of sanity, not bias.
Jay doesn’t like what the Obama Administration did under Title IX and so he liked the reversal of the policy under Trump. It doesn’t follow that he has a pro-Trump bias or that he doesn’t believe there are better alternative policies.
It’s hard to tell given his near universal unwillingness to actually put his opinions forward in this thread. I have to make educated guesses and since he has an obvious pro-Trump bias, I didn’t take that observation as though it was a criticism.
Jay has put his opinions out there front and center. And I see no pro-Trump bias.