All The Things You Aren't Supposed to Talk About : Politics, Religion, & Money! && Grammar!!
- Thread starter simplyTravis
- Start date
Probably an unpopular opinion, but I personally hate using the terms "Democrat/Republican||Liberal/Conservative. Nothing wrong with these words mind you, it is just that from what I have seen most people tend to have Pavlov induced knee-jerk reaction to them depending on which party and or ideology they consider themselves aligned with, which can make it very difficult to have intellectual or thought out conversations. Granted, this is more a problem with human nature than the words themselves, but I digress.
This is some real petty pathetic shit right here. What a hate-filled douchebag.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/19/politics/marlon-bundo-book/index.html
https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/19/politics/marlon-bundo-book/index.html
Yeah that's really cool, it's not like the money made from the original book was going to worthwhile causes, oh wait, no, proceeds were going to non profits that fight human trafficking, sexual exploitation and child slavery, and to help fund art therapy programs for children in hospitals. Well, those aren't that important enough to mention on your news show I guess, that's fine. It's more crucial to undermine a little girl's creativity to... attack her father. Wow.
I'm not denying the original book donates to good causes also. If anything, people should buy both just to support those causes. That being said, Mike Pence is a piece of shit homophobe that deserves none of my respect. If I were to buy the original book, it would be for the causes it donates to rather than the man it's representing.
I'm somewhat replying to @theMightyME discussing Twitter and Facebook. My thoughts sort of went too far for the CT, I believe
I stopped really using Facebook quite some time ago. It has just turned into a propaganda tool for everyone to browbeat each other with.
Twitter is a little better because it's closer to a newsfeed for me. It's still quite skewed. I really hate how we can see what people "like" on there now. It makes it a very unpleasant experience. Luckily I can mute those people when I get tired of them simply liking things and not saying anything.
Of course, I rarely say anything since we live in a virtual society of people hell bent on being offended and making others pay for it. If you don't follow certain lines of thought or provide any sort of counter to them you can very publicly be raked upon coals. Since I work in the public, so to speak, I try to keep my mouth shut.
Maybe I should just go ahead and erase all of my social media. I might do that this summer. Hell, I might be happier.
I keep hearing people ask what is our problem nowadays as a civilization. We keep having mass shootings, hysteria, bombings, etc... While I still contend we are far, far more safe than almost any time in the past, there is always that question as to what make people turn/crazy/snap, etc... I started thinking about an old study I've read about by John Calhoun regarding utopian societies called Universe 25.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smar...-1960s-led-grim-predictions-humans-180954423/ (take a quick read, it's very interesting)
Universe 25 was an experiment with mice where they essentially gave them everything they could ever want, plenty of space, food, water, etc... and tried to see what would happen. Well, basically the mice started having aggressive behaviors towards each other and stopped reproducing as much. The female mice even left their children behind at times. There was no obvious reason since they had everything they wanted. Theories for this behavior range from moral decay, poor distribution, , etc...
Our current American civilization reminds me of this utopia in some ways. We have nearly everything needed when you look at basic survival. What we consider poor still has an amazing amount of safety nets and free food being handed out everywhere. Larger cities obviously have more issues with violence and those that are well off tend to have lower birthrates.
There is an alternative theory regarding Universe 25 other than those said earlier that sound very interesting to me. The theory that mice are having way too many social interactions that essentially overworked and short circuited their brain. This makes a bit more sense in the scope of our current overly-socialized world. We now deal with potentially hundreds to thousands of interactions per day. This is well beyond the original capacity of our ancestors. Could this be what we are dealing with in modern America? People who just aren't capable of coping with the amount of pretty much forced interactions breaking them mentally? Currently parents give middle school to high school age children unrestricted access to social media causing thousands more interactions per day than anytime in the past. The behaviors on these interactions can be quite violent at times also.
What do y'all think? Am I on the right path thinking that we may be re-enacting these sorts of experiments as a society by being over socialized? Do you know of any other interesting behavioral studies to discuss in here also?
I stopped really using Facebook quite some time ago. It has just turned into a propaganda tool for everyone to browbeat each other with.
Twitter is a little better because it's closer to a newsfeed for me. It's still quite skewed. I really hate how we can see what people "like" on there now. It makes it a very unpleasant experience. Luckily I can mute those people when I get tired of them simply liking things and not saying anything.
Of course, I rarely say anything since we live in a virtual society of people hell bent on being offended and making others pay for it. If you don't follow certain lines of thought or provide any sort of counter to them you can very publicly be raked upon coals. Since I work in the public, so to speak, I try to keep my mouth shut.
Maybe I should just go ahead and erase all of my social media. I might do that this summer. Hell, I might be happier.
I keep hearing people ask what is our problem nowadays as a civilization. We keep having mass shootings, hysteria, bombings, etc... While I still contend we are far, far more safe than almost any time in the past, there is always that question as to what make people turn/crazy/snap, etc... I started thinking about an old study I've read about by John Calhoun regarding utopian societies called Universe 25.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smar...-1960s-led-grim-predictions-humans-180954423/ (take a quick read, it's very interesting)
Universe 25 was an experiment with mice where they essentially gave them everything they could ever want, plenty of space, food, water, etc... and tried to see what would happen. Well, basically the mice started having aggressive behaviors towards each other and stopped reproducing as much. The female mice even left their children behind at times. There was no obvious reason since they had everything they wanted. Theories for this behavior range from moral decay, poor distribution, , etc...
Our current American civilization reminds me of this utopia in some ways. We have nearly everything needed when you look at basic survival. What we consider poor still has an amazing amount of safety nets and free food being handed out everywhere. Larger cities obviously have more issues with violence and those that are well off tend to have lower birthrates.
There is an alternative theory regarding Universe 25 other than those said earlier that sound very interesting to me. The theory that mice are having way too many social interactions that essentially overworked and short circuited their brain. This makes a bit more sense in the scope of our current overly-socialized world. We now deal with potentially hundreds to thousands of interactions per day. This is well beyond the original capacity of our ancestors. Could this be what we are dealing with in modern America? People who just aren't capable of coping with the amount of pretty much forced interactions breaking them mentally? Currently parents give middle school to high school age children unrestricted access to social media causing thousands more interactions per day than anytime in the past. The behaviors on these interactions can be quite violent at times also.
What do y'all think? Am I on the right path thinking that we may be re-enacting these sorts of experiments as a society by being over socialized? Do you know of any other interesting behavioral studies to discuss in here also?
We shouldn't succumb to our base natures, but rather aspire to transcend them that is why studies based on the activities of nature under human influence are useless to us as humans when exploring humanity because we are self aware and not limited to act out "natural" behaviors .. It is why we plan to travel to Mars instead of hitting a woman over the head and dragging her back to our caves for procreation
When ever someone brings up nature as an argument for ill human behzvior I am a little upset. We aren't natural anymore, we surpassed that, as such we have far more, but also have a greater responsibility for our actions
Yes it is the least violent time in human history that didn't mean we should try to even that out by bringing violence up, or that we should give up on stamping out what violence there is.. In 100 years our current era should be looked back upon as too violent and a hundred years from then that era should be looked back upon much the same
We should ALWAYS be progressing it is never enough and it never will be enough
Should we be saying that violence is already pretty low so a few mass shootings of innocent kids is cool?
Of course not, and every time we refuse to progress when the path ahead is so clear is a moment in which we have failed as an advanced species.
When ever someone brings up nature as an argument for ill human behzvior I am a little upset. We aren't natural anymore, we surpassed that, as such we have far more, but also have a greater responsibility for our actions
Yes it is the least violent time in human history that didn't mean we should try to even that out by bringing violence up, or that we should give up on stamping out what violence there is.. In 100 years our current era should be looked back upon as too violent and a hundred years from then that era should be looked back upon much the same
We should ALWAYS be progressing it is never enough and it never will be enough
Should we be saying that violence is already pretty low so a few mass shootings of innocent kids is cool?
Of course not, and every time we refuse to progress when the path ahead is so clear is a moment in which we have failed as an advanced species.
First, some music for reading my reply to this...
Smokin' Joe Kubek - RU4 Real
That is the thing...we still are born as natural beings with various urges programmed into us from day 1. We don't start synthetically. My concern is that, I don't think everyone can take the intense societal reprogramming that they are consuming.
Currently we are changing society at breakneck speeds. In the Discord we were discussing that generations need to be renamed more often because they change so often. Is there a breaking point when things are moving too quickly for humans to catch up and feel accepted? We have all these interactions which work as somewhat of an input to how a person should behave and react. When we multiply those a hundred fold can that cause a short circuit in some people that is measurable on a sociological scale? That is more along the lines of the thought process I have. I know I am less mentally fatigued when I give up social media for awhile. Everyone has to unplug, but plenty of people are learning that they need to be in the midst of it all 24/7. Even the blue light emitted by various devices mess with our biological clock.
Now when you talk about us no longer being "natural" in pursuit of progress towards an advanced species is an interesting thought process. At what point does a person no longer become natural? I'm curious to what the line would be there. Should we strive to be as far away from humanity as possible? Would that make us turn back into animals?
Also, not sure how you extrapolated that comment about mass shootings being cool from what I said. No way indicated that in here. I just don't believe that we are more violent as a society compared to times where entire civilizations may have to worry about having towns sacked, burned, and various other tragedies that have happened in the past. Things are relatively calm. We just know more of it and have it thrown in our face 24/7 due to social media.
That is the thing...we still are born as natural beings with various urges programmed into us from day 1. We don't start synthetically. My concern is that, I don't think everyone can take the intense societal reprogramming that they are consuming.
Currently we are changing society at breakneck speeds. In the Discord we were discussing that generations need to be renamed more often because they change so often. Is there a breaking point when things are moving too quickly for humans to catch up and feel accepted? We have all these interactions which work as somewhat of an input to how a person should behave and react. When we multiply those a hundred fold can that cause a short circuit in some people that is measurable on a sociological scale? That is more along the lines of the thought process I have. I know I am less mentally fatigued when I give up social media for awhile. Everyone has to unplug, but plenty of people are learning that they need to be in the midst of it all 24/7. Even the blue light emitted by various devices mess with our biological clock.
Now when you talk about us no longer being "natural" in pursuit of progress towards an advanced species is an interesting thought process. At what point does a person no longer become natural? I'm curious to what the line would be there. Should we strive to be as far away from humanity as possible? Would that make us turn back into animals?
Also, not sure how you extrapolated that comment about mass shootings being cool from what I said. No way indicated that in here. I just don't believe that we are more violent as a society compared to times where entire civilizations may have to worry about having towns sacked, burned, and various other tragedies that have happened in the past. Things are relatively calm. We just know more of it and have it thrown in our face 24/7 due to social media.
We are all born from nature, so everything we do is a result of nature. (aka, it's in our nature). We don't look at the animal world, watching a cheetah chasing after a baby elephant, and think, "That cheetah is doing something wrong." Rather, we look at that scenario, and say, "Nature is fucking lit!"
Whether I want to admit it or not, violence is essentially hardwired into our DNA. It's who we are. It used to be a method of self-preservation, but now we use it as a means of solving a disagreement we have with our next door neighbor because their dog shits on the lawn.
I'm not agreeing with it, but how our minds are wired, and how are behaviors are created and used in all this, it's just who we are. We are fundamentally flawed as a species, and I doubt there is much we can do about it. We areeffectively in control of our own evolution though. We have the ability to wipe out diseases that once destroyed civilizations. We have the technology to recreate organs in petri dishes, or outright replace limbs with prosthetics. It's what is known is transhumanism, and it is something I expect to see in the coming decades and centuries, long after I'm dead and reintroduced into the realm of earth. If it means we could alter the way how our brains function, and perhaps program humans to not feel anger, or subdue their emotions, as well as get Christian Bale in some fancy black outfit with his defying Gun Kata, maybe the world would be a better place.
I need to stop getting ideas from movies...
Whether I want to admit it or not, violence is essentially hardwired into our DNA. It's who we are. It used to be a method of self-preservation, but now we use it as a means of solving a disagreement we have with our next door neighbor because their dog shits on the lawn.
I'm not agreeing with it, but how our minds are wired, and how are behaviors are created and used in all this, it's just who we are. We are fundamentally flawed as a species, and I doubt there is much we can do about it. We areeffectively in control of our own evolution though. We have the ability to wipe out diseases that once destroyed civilizations. We have the technology to recreate organs in petri dishes, or outright replace limbs with prosthetics. It's what is known is transhumanism, and it is something I expect to see in the coming decades and centuries, long after I'm dead and reintroduced into the realm of earth. If it means we could alter the way how our brains function, and perhaps program humans to not feel anger, or subdue their emotions, as well as get Christian Bale in some fancy black outfit with his defying Gun Kata, maybe the world would be a better place.
I need to stop getting ideas from movies...
About social media: I don't have a Facebook account. I tried but I just don't like this sort of thing and people call me nuts, but I don't care, I don't have facebook and I don't care about socialising with cousins that I don't know much or school colleagues from 15 years ago.
Having said that, I'm way happier than those folks on Facebook, I believe. I don't have to deal with some many daily idiot memes and overall comments about the news and I don't have to socialise much. I agree with you that socialising too much must be breaking people's brains and personally I usually prefer my own company.
I've got Twitter though. As you said, it works like a newsfeed. So I don't follow people on Twitter, I follow Twitter accounts. There are twitter accounts about Baseball, series, games, my work field, etc. I also don't care about AI, I usually go access the accounts I like and read their tweets. I don't want robots choosing the tweets I read. When a twitter account is too personal or too political, I try to ignore or unfollow, and when I unfollow people don't get mad at me, because it's Twitter. I hear people saying that they can't unfollow someone on FB, because the person will get cross, I think: what? what kind of social media is that? I don't need facebook and I never will, I guess.
--
You mean American civilisation or the West? Because it's not only in the US that people have first world lives, however the US is far more violent than many other OECD nations.
Having said that, I'm way happier than those folks on Facebook, I believe. I don't have to deal with some many daily idiot memes and overall comments about the news and I don't have to socialise much. I agree with you that socialising too much must be breaking people's brains and personally I usually prefer my own company.
I've got Twitter though. As you said, it works like a newsfeed. So I don't follow people on Twitter, I follow Twitter accounts. There are twitter accounts about Baseball, series, games, my work field, etc. I also don't care about AI, I usually go access the accounts I like and read their tweets. I don't want robots choosing the tweets I read. When a twitter account is too personal or too political, I try to ignore or unfollow, and when I unfollow people don't get mad at me, because it's Twitter. I hear people saying that they can't unfollow someone on FB, because the person will get cross, I think: what? what kind of social media is that? I don't need facebook and I never will, I guess.
--
You mean American civilisation or the West? Because it's not only in the US that people have first world lives, however the US is far more violent than many other OECD nations.
I enjoy Twitter, it makes me smile whenever I think about how much depraved shit I'm intentionally throwing into the feeds of my mutuals be it through likes or straight up retweets.
Most people I know dont just have the one social media account on any website. Like the norm is two or three. Not sure if its the same for all people my age, but I do have a professional account, a personal account, a VERY personal account, and a fabrication, on Twitter. In my facebook peak, I had around 5 accounts, but now I have just one that I dont use at all other than just to see some content locked to facebook. None of them were my own self, of course, I felt I missed the facebook zeitgeist and never bothered to get myself onboard personally. I'm not sure employers will really look at facebooks anymore, they're more likely to scout out your Instagram. At least in my circles, might be different in a strict business setting. Any of the sciences wont give a fuck.
Most people I know dont just have the one social media account on any website. Like the norm is two or three. Not sure if its the same for all people my age, but I do have a professional account, a personal account, a VERY personal account, and a fabrication, on Twitter. In my facebook peak, I had around 5 accounts, but now I have just one that I dont use at all other than just to see some content locked to facebook. None of them were my own self, of course, I felt I missed the facebook zeitgeist and never bothered to get myself onboard personally. I'm not sure employers will really look at facebooks anymore, they're more likely to scout out your Instagram. At least in my circles, might be different in a strict business setting. Any of the sciences wont give a fuck.
On the note of the video I posted: I really hope that more and substantial laws are put into place regulating these kinds of electronics. Better security should mandatory for many of these things, and the companies that make them need to be held to those standards (and any penalties for breaking them).
Granted, the internet and cyber security as whole is something that ALL of the US needs to drastically modernize in. A massive cyber terrorist attack is infinitely more possible to happen than another 9/11, and depending on the potential targets hacked it could potential MUCH worse. (Google white hats were able to hack into a nuclear power plant for example)
Never-mind corporate and political espionage; China and its many companies are well known for literally and blatantly stealing crucial and proprietary information, programs, plans, patents, designs, etc; never mind Russia and North Korea. The US may have the most powerful military in the world, but its homeland is almost completely vulnerable on the cyber front.
There are security issues, but they aren't that big of a deal on the broader spectrum ... If you want really good and honest coverage of cyber security without fear mongering, Look into Steve Gibson, check out the podcast "security now"
A lot of the fears are just media overreacting, still a problem, just not so terrifying as it is made out to be
Most of the end of the world security issues that people flip out over would only result in an annoying inconvenience if realized... There is a layer of logic that exist within the institutes affected that makes these worst case scenarios far less terrifying than they seem to be
A lot of the fears are just media overreacting, still a problem, just not so terrifying as it is made out to be
Most of the end of the world security issues that people flip out over would only result in an annoying inconvenience if realized... There is a layer of logic that exist within the institutes affected that makes these worst case scenarios far less terrifying than they seem to be
Reminds me of when people were all fear mongering after 9/11, and saying we shouldn't be flying. Air Travel is still magnitudes more safe than driving cross country. The difference though is when there's a car crash, and some people die as a result, it might be in the local newspaper, but if there's a jumbo jet that crashes, and kills all those aboard, it becomes national news. It doesn't negate the safety of air travel as a whole though. The majority of aircraft accidents are caused by human error.
Life is full of risks, so we as a society should take that into consideration when factoring in stuff going on. For example, I know several people who always have a gun on their person, and even sleep with them every night. The words, "You never know" is something I tend to hear as justification for these sort of actions. I could argue with statistical analysis that you're more likely to slip and die in the shower, get killed in a car crash, or even shoot yourself than some assailant breaking into your house at night, or trying to mug you in public.
Like you said, media contributes to many of the over exaggerations in society.
Life is full of risks, so we as a society should take that into consideration when factoring in stuff going on. For example, I know several people who always have a gun on their person, and even sleep with them every night. The words, "You never know" is something I tend to hear as justification for these sort of actions. I could argue with statistical analysis that you're more likely to slip and die in the shower, get killed in a car crash, or even shoot yourself than some assailant breaking into your house at night, or trying to mug you in public.
Like you said, media contributes to many of the over exaggerations in society.
exactly... in the case of 9/11, flying IMMEDIATELY after that event would have probably been the safest time possible to fly, because everyone involved in your safety is on edge
I did okay at a casino the other day, partly because I left a slot when I did well on it... its like "well that thing probably wont pay out for a while"... a few times I fought that logic and those were the times I lost money on a machine... the part of me that was a hindrance, was the part that wouldn't leave a machine unless I was above what I had originally put in, that stubbornness cost me, one mahcine I went from $20 down to like 3, then got back up to $19... I should have cashed out then, but I wanted to get over $20, so I ended up losing the full $20... on the other hand, I went quickly from $20 to $60 on another machine, and promptly left it, making the right choice...
part of my point here is that our base instincts can trick us away from the best course of action.... I lost all of my money on 3 machines, and in all of those cases there was an opportunity to walk away after a big recovery that didn't take me over my starting point, but which I should have left on anyways... if I had, I would have walked away from the slots about $50 up instead of breaking even
on a side not, I screwed up in BlackJack too, came in with $40, should have left when I got to $70, and I did, but then I felt the itch to hit another blackjack table, and then I went down to $20
overall I spent about 5 hours gambling and lost $20... my mom on the other hand, lost $200... she never walks away.... I have seen her up to double on a slot, and we had to go, so she started using more lines so she could use it up faster.... I mean wtf, her idea of successfully walking away was making sure the casino took everything she put in
I did okay at a casino the other day, partly because I left a slot when I did well on it... its like "well that thing probably wont pay out for a while"... a few times I fought that logic and those were the times I lost money on a machine... the part of me that was a hindrance, was the part that wouldn't leave a machine unless I was above what I had originally put in, that stubbornness cost me, one mahcine I went from $20 down to like 3, then got back up to $19... I should have cashed out then, but I wanted to get over $20, so I ended up losing the full $20... on the other hand, I went quickly from $20 to $60 on another machine, and promptly left it, making the right choice...
part of my point here is that our base instincts can trick us away from the best course of action.... I lost all of my money on 3 machines, and in all of those cases there was an opportunity to walk away after a big recovery that didn't take me over my starting point, but which I should have left on anyways... if I had, I would have walked away from the slots about $50 up instead of breaking even
on a side not, I screwed up in BlackJack too, came in with $40, should have left when I got to $70, and I did, but then I felt the itch to hit another blackjack table, and then I went down to $20
overall I spent about 5 hours gambling and lost $20... my mom on the other hand, lost $200... she never walks away.... I have seen her up to double on a slot, and we had to go, so she started using more lines so she could use it up faster.... I mean wtf, her idea of successfully walking away was making sure the casino took everything she put in
https://www.tumblr.com/blog/juicingthenation
I run a blog that specializes in political and economic content, with some gaming stuff which I'm trying to avoid since I can just post that here.
I run a blog that specializes in political and economic content, with some gaming stuff which I'm trying to avoid since I can just post that here.
So, Kanye West came out with glowing praise for Trump and Chance the Rapper tweeted some interesting stuff also.
Twitter bots and angry communists have gone nuts in the replies.
I think we are going to see some interesting pro-Trump support pop up here very soon.
The guy is doing a good job. Jobs are up, business is booming in the US, North Korea is starting to straighten up, we have the upperhand in the vast majority of business relations in the world right now, taxes are getting lower, and over-regulation is going out the window.
With the Comey memos being a big bag of nothing there isn't really anything holding him back soon. I can only wonder what will be happening in the next couple years without that obstruction.
I really hope they start focusing on getting healthcare back in order and dropping the size of the budget soon.
By the way, #dragonenergy is probably the funniest hashtag I've seen all year. Wow...
Twitter bots and angry communists have gone nuts in the replies.
I think we are going to see some interesting pro-Trump support pop up here very soon.
The guy is doing a good job. Jobs are up, business is booming in the US, North Korea is starting to straighten up, we have the upperhand in the vast majority of business relations in the world right now, taxes are getting lower, and over-regulation is going out the window.
With the Comey memos being a big bag of nothing there isn't really anything holding him back soon. I can only wonder what will be happening in the next couple years without that obstruction.
I really hope they start focusing on getting healthcare back in order and dropping the size of the budget soon.
By the way, #dragonenergy is probably the funniest hashtag I've seen all year. Wow...
Its strange. Very strange.
But I dont really care for it too much. Its funny to me and seeing the blowup is just as entertaining. Its unfortunate how ugly it gets but that's par for the course when you're big and on the internet and have a dissenting opinion. You're gonna get reamed from some side. Its cool that the climate is such that he feels secure expressing his opinion like that, and despite what people are saying, I think its clear that its actually his opinion and not some weird PR play. Its odd times we're living in (on the web), I think its cool.
I've unfortunately fallen into the deep end, though, folks. I've been following the Q-anon LARPfest that's going on the corners of the web and twitter. And sadly I've bought into it. The coincidences are just really interesting, and has made media days more fun to digest.
But I dont really care for it too much. Its funny to me and seeing the blowup is just as entertaining. Its unfortunate how ugly it gets but that's par for the course when you're big and on the internet and have a dissenting opinion. You're gonna get reamed from some side. Its cool that the climate is such that he feels secure expressing his opinion like that, and despite what people are saying, I think its clear that its actually his opinion and not some weird PR play. Its odd times we're living in (on the web), I think its cool.
I've unfortunately fallen into the deep end, though, folks. I've been following the Q-anon LARPfest that's going on the corners of the web and twitter. And sadly I've bought into it. The coincidences are just really interesting, and has made media days more fun to digest.
Oh I've seen those. This is nothing like that, because it's all on the internet, but it's probably just as cringe. It's more like an ARG combined with modern conspiracy theories.
I'm gonna do a real bad job of condensing this, but this is where the LARP comes in.
The basics of the reality are these: the Illuminati exists, the Deep State exists, and they are currently being dismantled by the presidency.
Q-anon is a supposed member/members of the Trump administrations inner circle, and the central figure of this "LARP". They'll drop information, often coded, into the chans (formerly 4chan, currently 8chan) for some reason, popular theory is that it's a "thanks" for playing a part in Trumps successful election. The main purpose of the messages for the "players" is to decode them, analyze them, and then spread it around to the masses without sounding like maniacs. And that's the ARG, right?
Well unfortunately there's just a solid amount of coincidences that seem to lead to the conclusion that this entity is the real deal, so the LARP stops becoming a game and actual reality becomes ever stranger. And thus I am at the deep end.
I'm gonna do a real bad job of condensing this, but this is where the LARP comes in.
The basics of the reality are these: the Illuminati exists, the Deep State exists, and they are currently being dismantled by the presidency.
Q-anon is a supposed member/members of the Trump administrations inner circle, and the central figure of this "LARP". They'll drop information, often coded, into the chans (formerly 4chan, currently 8chan) for some reason, popular theory is that it's a "thanks" for playing a part in Trumps successful election. The main purpose of the messages for the "players" is to decode them, analyze them, and then spread it around to the masses without sounding like maniacs. And that's the ARG, right?
Well unfortunately there's just a solid amount of coincidences that seem to lead to the conclusion that this entity is the real deal, so the LARP stops becoming a game and actual reality becomes ever stranger. And thus I am at the deep end.
This whole situation is fucked, right?
https://abcnews.go.com/amp/Health/w...-challenge-54725065?__twitter_impression=true
https://abcnews.go.com/amp/Health/w...-challenge-54725065?__twitter_impression=true
I think it's the second baby in the UK, right? I remember a case like this last year, I guess.
I'm totally pro life. These days dog's lives have more value than human's. After abortion becomes common, soon law will let parents kill toddlers whenever they're tired of them. We're going back to become barbarians, bringing back infanticide.
I'm totally pro life. These days dog's lives have more value than human's. After abortion becomes common, soon law will let parents kill toddlers whenever they're tired of them. We're going back to become barbarians, bringing back infanticide.
That might have been the same child, if not I don't know what the fuck is going on in the UK.
It's not even a pro life/choice issue, this child has been born already, alive out of womb.
It's so fucked. I'm sure the courts (the fucking courts let this child die wtf) have some logic behind it all, but it's impossible to see their reason, they just starved a kid to death
It's not even a pro life/choice issue, this child has been born already, alive out of womb.
It's so fucked. I'm sure the courts (the fucking courts let this child die wtf) have some logic behind it all, but it's impossible to see their reason, they just starved a kid to death
Is it really a slippery slope like that, though? Or maybe women are only considering abortions when they are under extreme financial and societal pressures and they know they won't get the help they need from their families or from a state that views welfare as shameful, and would never do something inhumane once that pressure is relieved.
Maybe we should be talking about how the way we shame people who need help is the real slippery slope towards becoming barbarians.
Maybe we should be talking about how the way we shame people who need help is the real slippery slope towards becoming barbarians.
First it's all about rape baby and "can't afford baby" abortion. Then it's gonna be "baby will be ill or have disabilities" abortion. Then "I just don't want this baby" abortion. Then "baby is almost born but I regret it, pls doctor, get rid of it as soon as it's born".
Search about about sex-selection abortion, Dawn Syndrome abortion and after-birth abortion and you'll see.
Do you mean shaming people that commit abortion?
If you or someone you care have had an abortion, I'm really sorry for you, but I have to keep my opinion: abortion is a homicide. We that are against abortion can't be shut up because of shaming. This is nonsense.
Before the Christian Roman Empire, infanticide was common among all civilisations and the barbarians. The idea of infanticide coming back as acceptable by the law is not bonkers. In the 1950's the idea of legal abortion would be unthinkable. Everyone didn't see any difference between a "fetus" and a real human being back then. 50 years later and fetus are like meat.
Soon enough Dawn Syndrome will be extinct, because parents will just kill them all while babies.
Search about about sex-selection abortion, Dawn Syndrome abortion and after-birth abortion and you'll see.
Do you mean shaming people that commit abortion?
If you or someone you care have had an abortion, I'm really sorry for you, but I have to keep my opinion: abortion is a homicide. We that are against abortion can't be shut up because of shaming. This is nonsense.
Before the Christian Roman Empire, infanticide was common among all civilisations and the barbarians. The idea of infanticide coming back as acceptable by the law is not bonkers. In the 1950's the idea of legal abortion would be unthinkable. Everyone didn't see any difference between a "fetus" and a real human being back then. 50 years later and fetus are like meat.
Soon enough Dawn Syndrome will be extinct, because parents will just kill them all while babies.
It might be the same baby, I'm not sure.
UK is one of the leaders of the world, I'm sure HM Gov can afford keeping a baby alive in the public system. It's not about the UK, I'm sure things like this will soon happen all over Europe and Canada, because "public health care costs" sake. Govs just waste money all the time and then they can't keep a baby in the system when their parents want to keep them there. That's ridiculous. I read they even didn't let they fly the baby to an Italian hospital... why?
UK is one of the leaders of the world, I'm sure HM Gov can afford keeping a baby alive in the public system. It's not about the UK, I'm sure things like this will soon happen all over Europe and Canada, because "public health care costs" sake. Govs just waste money all the time and then they can't keep a baby in the system when their parents want to keep them there. That's ridiculous. I read they even didn't let they fly the baby to an Italian hospital... why?
There's nothing in the article not everywhere in all the other articles I've read that says why the UK had to let a baby die when their parents wanted to keep him on life support.
What other reasons would you attribute to?
When doctors says that a patient is brain dead, they want to get rid of the patient to give another patient space (cut the cost). That's usually the only reason.
That's also the reason that in many countries some people advocate denying health care to fat people and smokers... cut cost.. save money to treat others...
What other reasons would you attribute to?
When doctors says that a patient is brain dead, they want to get rid of the patient to give another patient space (cut the cost). That's usually the only reason.
That's also the reason that in many countries some people advocate denying health care to fat people and smokers... cut cost.. save money to treat others...
the reason is arguable, I would say the reason is because the court system found keeping a brain dead baby alive to be cruel and so decided to override the parents, you may not agree with them... but it is clearly not money since another nation offered to cover that by moving the baby to Italy, offering it full care AND citizenship
you say nowhere int he article was a reason given, but you cna put these together
"Medics caring for him at Alder Hey Children's Hospital in Liverpool have said further treatment is futile, and the toddler's life support was withdrawn Monday after a series of court rulings sided with the doctors and blocked further medical treatment."
"Under British law, it is common for courts to intervene when parents and doctors disagree on the treatment of a child. In such cases, the rights of the child take primacy over the parents' right to decide what's best for their offspring."
"The evidence is that he is unlikely to have pain, but that tragically everything that would allow him to have some appreciation of life, or even the mere touch of his mother, has been destroyed irrevocably,"
put that together and it is clear to me why it wa ordered, I am not sure I agree with the order, but I can see the reason... that the court found the parents desperation to be causing a perverse cruelty to the child
AGAIN, I am not saying I agree with them... but I can SEE where they are coming from
the money issue is irrelevant because of these quotes:
"Britain's Court of Appeal on Wednesday rejected a new bid by the parents of terminally ill toddler Alfie Evans to take him to Italy and continue his life support against the wishes of his doctors and judges."
"Alfie's parents continued their fight to take him to Italy to be cared for at the Vatican's children's hospital, which has said it is willing to take him."
"Italy has a military plane on standby to transport Alfie to Rome if the courts allow it. Alfie has also been granted Italian citizenship to facilitate his arrival and transport."
it COULD be argued that it is an issue of national pride, in that Britain has put its foot down and said no, so if Italy is allowed to take the child, and celebrated for it, or if the child somehow wakes up it will all make Britain look bad... so that COULD be argued, not money, but perhaps something that started with money and then became an issue of nationalism
I would argue that this wouldn't make sense either as the incident has spurred far more outrage, and as such, trouble than simply giving him to Italy would have done
this is the hard kind of issue I do not want to touch, because I have mixed feelings... I am pro-choice, but I am also conflicted about it
for example.. I know a girl who was sort of my childhood girlfriend (you know, before you know what that means) who has had 4 kids from different fathers, and only the youngest is still with her, the oldest is at college, the next 2 oldest are with their respective and different fathers, the father of the oldest isn't in her life at all, but before college she had moved in with a friend to be away from her mom... before this mom had her 4th child she was pregnant with a different child, the father of that child (another different father) had a bad break up with her after she was pregnant and so she got an abortion... the father was a bit crazy, and the mother, as I have shown, is very selfish and irresponsible, so that child would have had a mess of a life, but so did her other kids that got to live... so the whole situation just makes me a bit ill
I don't get all moral and holier than though about it, but I just mostly ignore the mother now, I don't outright reject her as her whole family ar every important family friends of my family, and I don't want to cause a rift because of her that will kill my relationships with her mom and sisters who I am much closer to than I was to her anyways (after childhood of course)
to me, I think the importance of beign pro choice even in this case is that women's needs are ignored in many parts of the country and world, and the second you start invading that area you cause unforeseen and bigger problems... problems that I am not equipped to tackle in any way, as such, I stay out of it, it is an issue that has yet to directly effect me, and it is an issue with merits and faults on both sides that I am unequipped to properly navigate
I feel that my place in such an argument could only cause more harm than good... as is I think the case for most of us here
I am not religious, and as such I do not feel that life is sacred in any way... I DO think that abortion should ALWAYS be a hot button issue that is constantly being reevaluated, I DO think that even if life isn't sacred, that it is an ethereal property of sorts, and shouldn't be toyed with by those who do not own it (as in, I do not own your life, so I have no right to TAKE IT or negatively affect it against your will and actions)... I also think the same applies to parents, but pregnancy is a different issue, because for me to deny an abortion to a woman is to ignore her right to protect her own life, and since i do not own her life or her future child's, I have NO say in it
but I don't also assume that a parent has the right to the life of their own child... a child is its own entity with the rights to its own life...
the question always remains as, what constitutes the shepherding of a life you do not own, and what about a life that you do not own having an unwanted effect upon yours
a life is more than just your state of being alive after all... so who the f' am I, somebody who cannot be pregnant, to tell somebody who is, what they can or cannot do for the sake of their own life, does pregnancy incur a 9 year prison sentence... and then what about in the case of rape/incest/molestation?
I think EVERYONE who takes a strong stand on either side of the issue is suffering an overwhelming amount of hubris
you say nowhere int he article was a reason given, but you cna put these together
"Medics caring for him at Alder Hey Children's Hospital in Liverpool have said further treatment is futile, and the toddler's life support was withdrawn Monday after a series of court rulings sided with the doctors and blocked further medical treatment."
"Under British law, it is common for courts to intervene when parents and doctors disagree on the treatment of a child. In such cases, the rights of the child take primacy over the parents' right to decide what's best for their offspring."
"The evidence is that he is unlikely to have pain, but that tragically everything that would allow him to have some appreciation of life, or even the mere touch of his mother, has been destroyed irrevocably,"
put that together and it is clear to me why it wa ordered, I am not sure I agree with the order, but I can see the reason... that the court found the parents desperation to be causing a perverse cruelty to the child
AGAIN, I am not saying I agree with them... but I can SEE where they are coming from
the money issue is irrelevant because of these quotes:
"Britain's Court of Appeal on Wednesday rejected a new bid by the parents of terminally ill toddler Alfie Evans to take him to Italy and continue his life support against the wishes of his doctors and judges."
"Alfie's parents continued their fight to take him to Italy to be cared for at the Vatican's children's hospital, which has said it is willing to take him."
"Italy has a military plane on standby to transport Alfie to Rome if the courts allow it. Alfie has also been granted Italian citizenship to facilitate his arrival and transport."
it COULD be argued that it is an issue of national pride, in that Britain has put its foot down and said no, so if Italy is allowed to take the child, and celebrated for it, or if the child somehow wakes up it will all make Britain look bad... so that COULD be argued, not money, but perhaps something that started with money and then became an issue of nationalism
I would argue that this wouldn't make sense either as the incident has spurred far more outrage, and as such, trouble than simply giving him to Italy would have done
this is the hard kind of issue I do not want to touch, because I have mixed feelings... I am pro-choice, but I am also conflicted about it
for example.. I know a girl who was sort of my childhood girlfriend (you know, before you know what that means) who has had 4 kids from different fathers, and only the youngest is still with her, the oldest is at college, the next 2 oldest are with their respective and different fathers, the father of the oldest isn't in her life at all, but before college she had moved in with a friend to be away from her mom... before this mom had her 4th child she was pregnant with a different child, the father of that child (another different father) had a bad break up with her after she was pregnant and so she got an abortion... the father was a bit crazy, and the mother, as I have shown, is very selfish and irresponsible, so that child would have had a mess of a life, but so did her other kids that got to live... so the whole situation just makes me a bit ill
I don't get all moral and holier than though about it, but I just mostly ignore the mother now, I don't outright reject her as her whole family ar every important family friends of my family, and I don't want to cause a rift because of her that will kill my relationships with her mom and sisters who I am much closer to than I was to her anyways (after childhood of course)
to me, I think the importance of beign pro choice even in this case is that women's needs are ignored in many parts of the country and world, and the second you start invading that area you cause unforeseen and bigger problems... problems that I am not equipped to tackle in any way, as such, I stay out of it, it is an issue that has yet to directly effect me, and it is an issue with merits and faults on both sides that I am unequipped to properly navigate
I feel that my place in such an argument could only cause more harm than good... as is I think the case for most of us here
I am not religious, and as such I do not feel that life is sacred in any way... I DO think that abortion should ALWAYS be a hot button issue that is constantly being reevaluated, I DO think that even if life isn't sacred, that it is an ethereal property of sorts, and shouldn't be toyed with by those who do not own it (as in, I do not own your life, so I have no right to TAKE IT or negatively affect it against your will and actions)... I also think the same applies to parents, but pregnancy is a different issue, because for me to deny an abortion to a woman is to ignore her right to protect her own life, and since i do not own her life or her future child's, I have NO say in it
but I don't also assume that a parent has the right to the life of their own child... a child is its own entity with the rights to its own life...
the question always remains as, what constitutes the shepherding of a life you do not own, and what about a life that you do not own having an unwanted effect upon yours
a life is more than just your state of being alive after all... so who the f' am I, somebody who cannot be pregnant, to tell somebody who is, what they can or cannot do for the sake of their own life, does pregnancy incur a 9 year prison sentence... and then what about in the case of rape/incest/molestation?
I think EVERYONE who takes a strong stand on either side of the issue is suffering an overwhelming amount of hubris
Cause shit like this happens every so often
https://www.rt.com/usa/327077-family-coma-hospital-texas/
It's cool you feel that way, most thinking adults do have tools called "lawyers" that can draw up living wills for anything, so best start signing some of those in case, God forbid, someone cares about you enough to keep you alive and hope a miracle happens.
https://www.rt.com/usa/327077-family-coma-hospital-texas/
It's cool you feel that way, most thinking adults do have tools called "lawyers" that can draw up living wills for anything, so best start signing some of those in case, God forbid, someone cares about you enough to keep you alive and hope a miracle happens.