Religion is the biggest scourge against humans. Controlling behavior, brainwashing the young and stolen untold trillions of $$. Fuck religion. They all need to be labeled as cults and treated as harshly.
At the risk of interrupting the circlejerk here, most churches have tiny budgets that aren’t worth taxing, and run by clergy with very little pay. The other side of that is the established ones sit on land in the center of towns that has been in their hands for decades or centuries: they may not be able to afford the property taxes.
On the other hand, if you were thinking of modern televangelist millionaires, by all means tax their income. I don’t know where to draw the line and it’s probably good to be conservative about it, but some of these people really seem to have crossed it already
I think a better option would be stripping the tax exempt status from the ones that politik from the pulpit. Actually enforce the law we have now instead of being afraid of looking like we’re persecuting them. Hell, they all have that complex already anyway.
I dont think the churches that just sit and read a book are really deserving of a “flood”. I also wouldn’t call taxes a flood though, so I’m not opposed to that.
It’s very inline with the church’s teaching to pay taxes.
Mark 12:17 Then Jesus said to them, “Give to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and give to God the things that are God’s.” The men were amazed at what Jesus said.
There is no religious conflict at all with taxing churches.
This is in a thread about a sect of Christianity. I am not aware of another religion that uses the word church. The dictionary definition is christian house of worship. Jewish Synagogue. Islamic Mosque. Hindu Temple. Norse Hof. Greek and Roman temples.
Talking about taxing churches is about a tax on Christian houses of worship. There is no Christian religious rule against it, which means that it would be a stretch for anyone to claim that the government is violating the first amendment.
If you allow taxing churches you open the door for Republicans to just tax every church they disagree with, and I’m pretty sure you can figure out how that will go.
You are aware that the entire reason taxing churches was a big deal in the 18th century is that we’ve already seen what happens when taxing churches is made political, right?
Do you know this is a topic with historical precedence, in a situation in which it is laughably easy to predict what a certain party would do with this power?
I’d argue being a policy realist is an absolute necessity, rather than a “barrier for ideas.”
I am a volunteer climate lobbyist in a deeply red constituency, so I very much live a life bound by practicality.
My rep I lobby most often has solar panels and drives an EV and votes against climate change proposals unless we can sell them as “job creation” so he can sell them to his constituents.
The messy details absolutely take precedence over what we’d like.
IDK, if we’re comparing scourges against humanity I’d say “the rich” in general are worse, be they kings, CEOs, religious icons, politicians, or whatever. Their pursuit of money and the power to keep that money corrupts everything. They ruin everything from companies to countries and even religions (makes them even worse).
Really though, the most evil thing is cancer. It kills indiscriminately and tortures its victims the whole way. Even if you win, you never get the peace of knowing it’s truly gone. True evil.
Look at how much hate we’re getting. All of my posts about corporatism and GOP spouting nonsense getting blasted. This place is another spot for GOP, facism and the church to have a voice in the form of bots.
I’d have a hard time believing that Hitler was super cool with the people who worship a Jew as a god.
Hitler in his table talks: “The dogma of Christianity gets worn away before the advances of science … Gradually the myths crumble. All that is left to prove that nature there is no frontier between the organic and inorganic. When understanding of the universe has become widespread, when the majority of men know that the stars are not sources of light, but worlds, perhaps inhabited worlds like ours, then the Christian doctrine will be convicted of absurdity.”
Good rule of thumb is to never underestimate Hitler’s ability to hate a group of people lol
Don’t have a hard time believing it. Christianity has indoctrinated most into believing Jesus was white. Just look at all these southern baptist molesters that want Trump as their new god.
I’m sorry, I’m genuinely not sure I understand your comment. Are you saying that because you believe Christian propaganda to be that powerful, you’re ready to believe that Hitler also fell for the same propaganda? I get why you’re ready to make that assumption, but I don’t think choosing to believe an assumption made out of heavy bias is appropriate in the face of evidence directly to the contrary. Hitler outright condemned the belief more than once
I didn’t say that at all. I’m saying Christianity isn’t about God. It’s about power, slavery, money, pedophilia. Same as with the elite now. Hitler was just a part of it. It’s all a big club.
Yuh if we’re gonna go that deep, the rock are responsible for the deep corruption running thru society, across all society’s ills around the world. I agree that american religion’s descent into facism-promotion is a symptom of that rather than a driving force.
And yet a lot of people are still religious so if you’re running around suggesting destroying the thing they love and feel positive about you might find they are unwilling to listen to anything you have to say. Right now I really would rather we focus on collective action over the climate than worry about whose version of faith is correct.
When this sorry undeserving species is all dead, alien archaeologists will learn how religion was the biggest, most successful device used by the powerful to sedate the poor and keep their interests driving everything (including destroying the habitability of the planet for short term luxury), from the early civilizations until the very end. Then they will find your comment on an HDD and fucking laugh at you, at all of our stupid asses.
------ian doomsday fantasy is one of the major drivers of climate change. They have always viewed the world as disposable, indeed, the sooner disposed the better.
Maybe anti-religious people need to make an effort to understand how to better communicate their views as frankly many cone across as the same as bigots do.
I dunno if it’s actually possible (for me) to be honest and communicate evenly with the faithful. I cannot see their beliefs as anything other than wishful thinking and fantasy.
Not to say the religious are stupid, i don’t believe in binary smart/stupid in most cases. I know some very intelligent religious folks who have what i consider at best a blind spot for their belief.
I frankly believe it to be impossible. Any discussion where one side has “faith” to fall back on and calls poking holes in religion as an attack on that faith is fated to fail before you start
Don’t talk about their faith then. Talk about what needs to be done and if a member of an Abrahamic faith asks why remind them it’s what God told Adam to do. Genesis makes it clear humanity is to tend the earth not exterminate all life on it.
Well that is a good point. I’m not well versed in the Bible however, and i would hesitate to quote it even if i were. how would it sound to someone faithful to have someone without, quoting their faith at them? It would further require my reading the Bible with the express purpose of busting their chops, which wouldn’t feel good to me.
how would it sound to someone faithful to have someone without, quoting their faith at them? It would further require my reading the Bible with the express purpose of busting their chops, which wouldn’t feel good to me.
There’s a whole list of 8 points over what constitute a cult.
I don’t remember the whole thing, but it was something like : Cults don’t let you leave. If you do leave, your family and friends who are still in the cult will not speak to you. Cults control you in details. They make sure you are tired at the end of the day, too tired to think for yourself. Cults make you dependent financially. Once you are that deep in, leaving means starting over economically.
There’s more, but it is different from how most people experience mainstream religions (I mean there are pockets here and there that are very cultish, but really the religion as a whole is a different beast that just works differently than an actual cult).
I’ll gain an iota of respect for Frankie and Catholics when they unilaterally decide to stop donating money to this church until they purge all of the child rapists and reform their teachings on confessions so child rapists are no longer protected.
We’ve just changed the form of monarchal feudalism, it’s still very much alive. Just disguised as CEOs and Presidents in our present oligarchy. But they might as well be kings and queens. And an enormous amount of those people still manipulate religion as a means to holding on to power. We are a long way from strangling our last king or priest.
Yes, modern religion has many rules made by the dicks once they took over. Before the dicks rules were things like don’t steal shit, don’t fuck your neighbor’s wife, don’t murder people, don’t lie about shit, etc. The dicks were so bad that some other guy had to come along and say “seriously guys, stop being dicks”. But the dicks didn’t like that so they killed him.
And yet the golden rule usually doesn’t get written down until multiple generations after the religion is formed. Took almost a century for Christianity to bother.
Many religions are more “don’t be a dick to your fellow brothers in faith, but feel free to be a dick to others”. In-group out-group dynamics were historically quite important.
You know - “don’t murder”, but at the same time Deuteronomy says
10 When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. 11 If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. 12 If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. 13 When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. 14 As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves.
Also
(19) “You are not to lend at interest to your brother, no matter whether the loan is of money, food or anything else that can earn interest. 21 (20) To an outsider you may lend at interest, but to your brother you are not to lend at interest, so that Adonai your God will prosper you in everything you set out to do in the land you are entering in order to take possession of it.
You know - “don’t murder”, but at the same time Deuteronomy says
If you take each verse at face value, this is a problem and what you imply is true.
But the thing you quoted from Deuteronomy were instructions to the Israelites. It’s recorded history, not instruction. You can’t just point to a verse in the Bible (like Acts 8:8 "Saul, for his part, approved of his murder") and say “see? The Bible says to do bad things!”
And going deeper shows that the Mosaic Law (the laws in the old testament, excluding the ten commandments), part of which is in your second block quote, was superceded by the Law Covenant when Jesus died. Again, it was a law directed specifically at Jews of the time.
You can kinda think of the first five Bible books (called the Torah in Judaism) as a speed run of history. So much happens in terms of time covered in those five books.
Not everyone who considers Deuteronomy to be scripture is Christian. For example, basically any rabbi would disagree with you.
The Deuteronomic code is literally presented as instruction from Moses to Israel as a normative set of rules for israel to follow. Many of the rules in it are included in the traditional lists of the Torah’s 613 commandments.
I don’t know of similar commandments in the new testament, but it’s had its fair share of religious leaders inciting sectarian wars, pogroms, persecution, etc. For example, Pope Paul IV wrote a decree that forced the Jews of Rome into a ghetto in 1555, prevented them from owning property or working most skilled jobs. The Spanish Inquisition primarily targeted Jews and Muslims who converted to Christianity under threat of exile.
Not everyone who considers Deuteronomy to be scripture is Christian. For example, basically any rabbi would disagree with you.
Sure, but this thread is mostly about Christianity (the post is about the Pope and the Catholic Church).
The Deuteronomic code is literally presented as instruction from Moses to Israel as a normative set of rules for israel to follow.
Yes. I said basically this. I wrote: But the thing you quoted from Deuteronomy were instructions to the Israelites.
I don’t know of similar commandments in the new testament
Because there aren’t any like that.
had its fair share of religious leaders inciting sectarian wars, pogroms, persecution, etc. For example, Pope Paul IV wrote a decree that forced the Jews of Rome into a ghetto in 1555, prevented them from owning property or working most skilled jobs. The Spanish Inquisition primarily targeted Jews and Muslims who converted to Christianity under threat of exile.
And? Your next door neighbour can be a “Christian”, go to church every week, etc, but then find out he’s a regular thief and had murdered someone. Would you then conclude there must be a commandment somewhere in the Bible that condones stealing and murder? Or would you conclude that he didn’t follow the principles of the Bible he proclaimed to believe in?
Examples of people doing bad things in the name of the Bible is not evidence of anything against the Bible. It’s just an example of terrible people being manipulative, exploitative, and ultimately evil. Many people throughout history (and many alive today) have realized that many people are more willing to listen to and accept what you say when you claim it’s from the Bible. These people don’t care about the Bible, they just care that it’s a tool they can use for manipulation.
Examples of people doing bad things in the name of the Bible is not evidence of anything against the Bible.
Christianity, and catholicism more specifically, are more than just the Bible itself.
Religious teachings evolve over time based off of new reinterpretations of old passages, teachings from influential leaders, folk traditions that spring up, etc. Those are all part of the religion, too.
For example, most Christians would say that the serpent in the garden of eden is Satan. Yet Genesis doesn’t say anything about that, and the New Testament doesn’t explicitly say it either. Mostly, it’s a folk tradition some people found a couple verses you could squint at to support it.
And particularly in the case of Catholicism, there’s a world of difference between a pope issuing an official bull, and your neighbor being a catholic who happens to be a shitty person. There’s a huge difference between a random person teaching to be nice to your neighbor but shitty to outsiders, and for St Jerome to do that.
Christianity, and catholicism more specifically, are more than just the Bible itself.
Catholicism yes. Christianity, no. Christianity is literally based on the Bible and a “Christian” is a follower of Christ (it’s actually what the word means).
most Christians would say that the serpent in the garden of eden is Satan. Yet Genesis doesn’t say anything about that, and the New Testament doesn’t explicitly say it either.
Well, that’s not exactly correct. It’s true that in Genesis it doesn’t say “the snake in the garden that spoke to Eve was Satan”. However, Satan is referred to as “the father of the lie” and “the original serpent”. Satan is the only one to directly challenge God’s right to rule and the lie to Eve was the first challenge. It has nothing to do with folk tradition. There are other supporting scriptions also.
And particularly in the case of Catholicism, there’s a world of difference between a pope issuing an official bull, and your neighbor being a catholic who happens to be a shitty person.
Yes, there is a difference in the sense that the Pope has a huge and wide reaching audience and the neighbour is mostly a nobody. But that doesn’t matter when we’re talking about their conduct as it relates to “doing the right thing according to God”. Each person is accountable to God for their own behaviour and actions.
On the other hand, there’s an argument to be had about whether or not Catholicism should even be considered Christian anymore. There are so many doctrines and teachings that aren’t in the Bible, or flat out taken from other “pagan” religions (religious syncretism). Sometimes even going against teachings in the Bible.
Reference:
John 8:44 “You are from your father the Devil, and you wish to do the desires of your father. That one was a murderer when he began, and he did not stand fast in the truth, because truth is not in him. When he speaks the lie, he speaks according to his own disposition, because he is a liar and the father of the lie.”
Revelation 12:9 “So down the great dragon was hurled, the original serpent, the one called Devil and Satan”
And going deeper shows that the Mosaic Law (the laws in the old testament, excluding the ten commandments), part of which is in your second block quote, was superceded by the Law Covenant when Jesus died. Again, it was a law directed specifically at Jews of the time.
While rabbis don’t agree on much, the official line of all the denominations is that messianic Jews are Christians, not Jews.
Every “rabbi” that accepts that the Torah was superceded by Jesus is a messianic Jew, basically by definition. That makes them not a rabbi, but a Christian minister in cosplay.
I don’t disagree with you entirely I was pointing out that using absolutes with Jews is fraught with contradictions. I wasn’t necessarily trying to support the person you responded to. Even within the framework that they were rules to follow there is an extremely wide variety of interpretation. And while I agree with your messianic assessment, as an atheist Jew that remember a tiny amount, I also think gatekeeping a religion is sketchy territory. Most fundamentalists don’t believe any other sect is truly part of their religion, hard to draw lines using the perspectives of people that have a clear in group mentality. To me, if you say you’re a Jew, you’re a Jew, I have no reason to challenge the claim.
The problem is “don’t be a dick” meant different things in different points in time. Now, enough time has elapsed that there are a huge amount of different iterations of “don’t be a dick” rules and people just pick and choose which rules suits them.
If you’re talking about all religions, I can’t speak to that. But if we’re talking about “Christians”, then that’s not the case. “Love your neighbour” and “Continue to love your enemies and to pray for those who persecute you” are pretty hard to interpret “differently”. There’s no excuse.
When the rules are laws, lawyers argue in front of judges and define the grey areas. They change the grey areas from time to time. We as a society have agreed to have a single interpretation of those rules.
In religion, when people don’t agree on the rules or how they should be interpreted, they can break apart and form their own religion. There is no governing body with the power to enforce the single interpretation.
Thus, people who missed the dont be a dick memo just find each other and pretend their interpretation of the thousands of years old text is more valid than the don’t be a dick crowd.
Calling religion the biggest scourge on humanity is a huge exageratrion. I’d probably say slavery is significantly worse, and human trafficking shows no signs of stopping. Capitalism is also clearly worse, and it’s the most impactful force today. A large reason religion, and specifically Christianity, has gotten worse in recent years is because of the influence of capitalism.
I’d elaborate a bit on my interpretation of what the fella said.
The religion in point - catholicism, and maybe we can generalize to all abrahamic religions, I’m not very familiar with other religions to speak of them, instill a way of thinking that doing wrong is all fine and well as long as you repent and ask for forgiveness. Sound sensible, right? Except we’re dealing with people here so they take it to mean that you can do all sorts of crap as long as you say you’re sorry. It got so bad at some point that the pope was selling indulgences. ‘Give me money and I’ll let you sin’.
They also instill a sort of moral superiority on the adherents to said religions versus the pagans.
So yeah, slavery is worse (and I’m counting human trafficking here as well - it’s the modern version), but is it not facilitated by the mindset instilled by religion? First - you see them as savages needing to be civilized - that’s the moral superiority talking - you enslave them, BUT you bring them to god as well, so there’s a load off your moral issues. Add to that the fact that even if you were wrong and did bad stuff, you didn’t ‘know’ any better, and it’s ok cause hellfire won’t get you because you repent, there’s your free ticket.
On the other hand, if you kidnap and force good christians into sexual slavery, you can be pretty sure that you most likely won’t get murdered / maimed while you’re raping because their moral teachings say to turn the other cheek instead of fighting back. And one of the 10 comandments is thou shalt not kill. Also a belief in sky-papa dishing out punishment in the afterlife makes people less inclined to seek vengeance (compounded with the previous point - thou shalt submit to being dehumanized by a fellow human without recourse).
This is an oversimplification to make a point, but sure, religion is seemingly not worse than other crap people are capable of but it sure sets the groundwork nicely. Sort of like you need to know a language before you can swear in it. A tool, but less like a hammer and more like a scythe. One good use, but so many other bad ones.
The messengers and the prophets will come to you and give you what belongs to you. You, in turn, give them what you have, and say to yourselves, 'When will they come and take what belongs to them?'
Jesus (but in a text buried in a jar for centuries after becoming punishable by death for just possessing it)
Modern day religion. In the past your faith was quite important and dictated morals. It’s unfortunate it’s been so twisted over the years. And by past I’m not just saying the 50s, but even back in the 1500s.
Everything has two sides to it. I think it was predominantly used more for good back in earlier civilizations, but I don’t think there’s a need for it today.
It’s much easier now in 2023 to be able to look back at how religion was used for thousands of years and criticize it. I’m an atheist myself and I think the necessity of religion was to learn from it and advanced society. Today I think we’re so advanced we no longer need it.
What? Look, I’m an atheist myself by choice but I’ve seen religion fix up a homeless man and through “God” he was able to get himself back on his feet and reenter society. I think reddit/Lemmy has too big of a hate on religion, but in the outside world it’s still the majority dominated beliefs.
Plus you can’t overgeneralize “religion” as there’s about 4000 of them. Buddhism is pretty dope if you read into it. Regardless, I think we will see a shift into more atheists/agnostic people in the future though.
Yea I don’t think I’m changing your opinion here. I think everything has two sides to it. I’m of the opinion of just let people live their lives. Shoving atheism down everyone’s throat is equally as annoying as shoving religion. Remember that religion ≠ Christianity. The Greeks gods are also pretty cool in my opinion.
It’s just human nature to “worship” something. Whether it be materialism or idealism. As I see it, there couldn’t have been an early world without religion because humans are just that way.
My mom isn’t going to be scammed by the Nigerian prince if she already knows it is a scam. That’s the importance of educating yourself.
Brain washed religous people ≠ religion. That’s my distinction. Just because people murder each other in Harry Potter doesn’t mean kids are going to interpret that to go on and be murderers.
The people who should be ridiculed for the actions are the murderers, not the entire fanbase.
Dude I’ve literally been agreeing with you. From my first comment I don’t think there’s a place for religion in MODERN society. But at the same time, we wouldn’t have this current modern society if it weren’t for religion in the first place. Many early philosophers and scientists believed in “God” to some degree, despite questioning their faith, too. I’m not defending it today, but there was a time and place for it at some point. It’s archaic today, but that doesn’t mean there haven’t been good influences of it throughout history. Therefore I can’t say religion is all 100% bad. It’s original intentions weren’t that, but thousands of years of humans playing telephone through a book has led to its awful usage today.
Plus if my gram who is a god fearing woman is dying on her death bed, I’d rather her die peacefully with the lesser understanding of the universe than keep telling her that her beliefs are wrong and there’s no afterlife. I’m okay with the acceptance of no religion, but not everyone is completely prepared for that. Education is key and that’s why our current society is shifting towards more atheists than ever in human history.
That being said, as long as strong beliefs are held true by individuals, then even a “religion” of anti-religions could exist. May I introduce you to Pastafarianism lol, they worship the flying spaghetti monster to prove the point that “God” is not needed as a concept, but in doing so they’ve created a new religion, just one without a deity.
Religion has always been a cancer on humanity. We don’t need an imaginary sky daddy for morals. We would have got there (and likely much quicker and much better) without religion.
I’m not religious myself, but “God” played a role in at least trying to comprehend the world before science. Whatever we didn’t know was “God” until we did know. I don’t think modern society needs it, but our concept and understanding of the world and universe is so broad now that we don’t.
It’s dangerous now to label whatever we don’t know as “God” but earlier in humanity I think it’s part of the reason why some (not all) laws and morals were established in the first place.
Religion can fuel some truly abhorrent things, but at the same time I know people who have used religion and faith to pull themselves out of a really bad spot in life.
There can be a middle ground between admonishing all religious practices and dogmatic bible thumpers, and that starts with religion being a understood as a personal choice and how people interpret the religion being a reflection on their self and not the every religious person ever.
Imo the biggest problem is that it’s way too easy to use. Something as simple as an 8th grade math question or hiding the tweet button in a menu would make it so much better
Maybe. But the fact is that it was used by people in uprisings. It is a powerful tool for the people. There is a reason why wealthy people from the middle east backed and funded musk taking it over. They wanted to take away a tool used by the people in revolution.
It probably contributed to a lot of stupidity and human suffering, but it also could have been used to great effect if us common folk could have learned to wield it appropriately. The rich and powerful were afraid of it, that alone should tell you that it’s death is a bad thing.
This guy can’t help but be in trouble with the law. Dude is banned from flying Delta because he removed his face mask early pandemic. Pandemic killed a lot more American than Osama ever did. Fuck this guy. 47 years old getting lit at a bar starting fights. Chump
US military is the single largest socialist, and most culturally/intellectually diverse organization on the planet, of course it will draw a few morons in.
I know the argument for it being socialist but I really dont think its true. Government services arent 'inherently' socialist. And its more of an opportunistic mincer than some "diverse organization".
They allow literally any race, religion, socioeconomic or ethnic group to join.
Everyone knows who gets paid what level salary because it's posted publicly, as well as the same for each rank/grade. Both genders/sexes get paid the same. You get a predictable linear path to progress your career. If you don't know what you are doing, they will go out of their way to train you and ensure you can do your job.
They subsidize your healthcare so you don't pay anything no matter where you go, and if you are unhappy they will move mountains to help you get better (only so you can get back to working) or help you transition back into being a civilian (DoD Transition Assistance Program [TAP]).
It is successful at almost everything it does, and does not exist to create profits unless interfered by with politicians.
They are willing to commit exteme acts of violence to protect you and each other.
If society creates something great (Canadian made night vision optics with thermal outlines or a better rifle design like the Austrian SIG Sauer MCX) it will be shared with by everyone equally.
and does not exist to create profits unless interfered by with politicians.
Yeah, because there is definitely no group of people becoming absurdly wealthy off of the military industrial complex and invasions of foreign countries with valuable resources /s
It also exists “to be interefed with by politicians” by its nature.
.. thats not socialism. Dont get me wrong, im all on favour of everyone getting those things, in fact im a socialist as well. But socialism is about overthrowing relationships, not "getting free stuff". The "free stuff" (from a capitalist perspective) is a result of overthrown relationships.
They allow literally any race, religion, socioeconomic or ethnic group to join.
And what happens to these people? Ask the afghans that were left behind or the victims of rampant rape culture.
My point is that a meat grinder does meat grinder things. By not discriminating when joining, but not caring from whence the blood flows.
It is successful at almost everything it does
Again, Afghanistan (or more generally, citation needed). Also what does this have to do with the topic?
They are willing to commit exteme acts of violence to protect you and each other.
Thats like... a bad thing. You do realize this, right? Also, again, how is this relevant for the topic? Socialism isnt some kind of virtue ethics thing.
If society creates something great (Canadian made night vision optics with thermal outlines or a better rifle design like the Austrian SIG Sauer MCX) it will be shared with by everyone equally.
They all sign up to get paid to kill people, not in defense but for our greedy elite. Not sure they are that diverse. Id suspect it draws in a lot of morons and psychopaths
It’s just a huge group of people that the majority of are just like him and they reinforce each others behavior. Maybe the military doesn’t “make” then but it cranks their behavior from slightly right leaning to extremist brainwashed goon level all day every day. I didn’t even know my cousin was a right wingers until he joined the Marines at 20. Now hes a Qanon trumper lunatic.
Another part of the transcript reads: “Mainly I’m going to slave these bitches […] I’m going to make them work even more hours and hours and hours… I work these bitches like slaves. […] SLAVE work. Minimum 10 or 12 hours a day.”
Pieces of shit deserve to rot in jail. I hope he does for a long time and doesn’t end up back on YouTube and social media otherwise his braindead fans will say see he was innocent that’s why he’s back.
The difference is: Walt is the guy that want‘s to install Leopards because he thinks it will make him richer and more powerful. DeSantis is the first if the Leopards trying to eat Walt‘s face.
Now, because Walt is as powerful as he is, he can put that Leopard in it‘s place. But others will come and eat him alive later.
That‘s the thing with fascism - it‘s like a forest fire, it will burn down everything. People like Walt think that setting fire will benefit him (because people are busy fighting the fire that they can‘t focus an what he‘s up to). In the end, ge will burn as well.
That’s just what they want you to think. That was a leftover animatronic duplicate they froze. Mickey told me all about it over drinks that time Minnie cheated on him.
Semi related. I figured out that chatgpt will follow you along conspiracy theories as long as they aren’t well documented. I can’t make it agree that Walt Disney was frozen but I can make it agree that Philip K. Dick might be living in an abandoned Blockbuster with only movies based on his books on the shelf.
While that may be, companies should not be able to have a stronghold on what should be considered a basic human need. Housing is already in pretty short supply, and it’s worsened by the fact that these companies buy a considerable chunk of this short supply and then turn the purchased properties into rentals.
“Buying one home and charging 4x as much for it” is the actual problem, but I suppose you have your head in the sand by default when the large boot of capitalism is on your neck.
The idea being proposed here doesn’t outlaw renting, only corporate ownership of residential property. It means that the people you’re renting from are human beings who will eventually die and either be estate taxed or the house will be sold, rather than a corporation who owns your property until they go bankrupt or until the sun explodes.
A) 100% death tax on all money over 100,000,000.00 at time of death.
B) Closing loopholes that allow hiding that kind of money in unnecessary corporate assets or non-charitable trusts.
C) Cracking down on what qualifies as a charitable trust. Want to leave that money to trust that makes the world better, better have numbers to prove it or it gets disolved automatically into other more effective charities.
D) Automatically splitting every corpportation the moment it crosses a reasonable value threshold.
As a US citizen living in another country and trying to buy a house, you want me to have to change my citizenship to do this? 0.o I've lived in Japan for the better part of a decade and am trying to buy a property where, hopefully, my wife and I can live for the rest of our lives. Having to become a citizen in Japan (which does not allow other citizenships except in some very specific cases) is a non-starter for me. I need to be able to freely enter and leave the US in case my family have any issues. Why should I be fucked like this?
And you could make that non-local residents and it would still work out well. Stop letting foreign and domestic “investors” buy up all the housing in cities they don’t live in.
I just happen to live in Japan, but you can reverse the countries in my example if it helps. If I were a Japanese citizen living in the US almost 10 years and wanting to just buy a home for my family, I think it's unreasonable to have to give up Japanese citizenship just to get a house in the US. Using my example, I would not give up JP citizenship because I have aging family I need to have unlimited access to in Japan.
I’ll be honest, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to need to go through some form of certification to purchase residential housing.
To use US terms, as those are what I’m familiar with, a greencard would be sufficient, since it would allow you to legally live and work in the country.
I would say "valid status of residence/visa" (greencard/permanent residence can be super long processes of over a decade), but yeah that makes sense to me.
So if that process takes a decade or more the person can just... go fuck themselves despite any intention of permanently living somewhere? This is especially rough on people who move mid-life. I also don't know if the US has an upper age on mortgages which could basically keep people out of home ownership which can also keep them in a position of less stability.
Young people can’t own homes now because we have a lot of corporations and foreign ownership buying them to either rent at exorbitant costs or leave vacant as investments. I don’t really care about the hypothetical person who might come over here at some point maybe pinkee swear when folks here are having issues now.
Also, I confirmed with someone who does mortgages that there isn’t an upper age limit on getting a mortgage in the US, so that’s not a concern.
I mean, this is just dodging the situation. I'm a hardworking, tax-paying person, but fuck me because some other people are doing bad things? That's not good policy. Stopping people living in the country on valid status paying taxes from buying a place to live is asinine.
According to your comments, you’re living and buying property in Japan in order to reside there for the rest of your life, so you’re arguing about policies that aren’t effecting you and that you’re not even a party to.
I guess you can find someone more in tune with Japan’s housing market and issues there to discuss the best practices for Japanese laws.
I have known people who have gone through the same thing in the US. I also have family in the US still who very much are impacted by the housing situation there.
This just reeks of "foreigners bad" and possibly racism.
There are many things that can be done other than banning foreigners who haven't yet achieved greencard status but just want to have a place for themselves and their families to live to still achieve that. I don't think you'll find foreigners are the big issue here, and you already mentioned corporations which are a big issue. Attacking foreigners wanting to buy a house is not OK; that's approaching apartheid-level bullshit.
Who’s going to make apartment buildings? Isn’t that the best solution towards making more housing, to have compact apartment structures? How do you think those get built?
You could make every one an HOA and have it be condos.
Honestly I don’t think outright prohibition of companies owning buildings is good, but there needs to be a better mix of ownable housing units to rentable ones. There also needs to be better anti-trust enforcement so that three companies don’t own and price control nearly all of the housing in a city (I think there’s maybe six companies in my city that own almost all of the apartment complexes).
They should mandate that a certain subsection of newly zoned housing be owned by people instead of corporations. It would be a much better, much more competitive market for housing if it were possible to own apartments because you could get small time landlords in those buildings as well as people that own their places outright.
I guess my question is, what’s the point in arguing about this? Are you saying the only housing corporations should own are apartment buildings, the biggest most efficient source of housing for individuals in large cities?
My bad I thought residential prop meant single family homes.
But I didn’t say anything about who should own apparements. My only point was when people refer to residential property that refers typically to single family homes and is likely what op is referring to as well.
They’re not really thinking we’re gonna live through the walking dead, but it’s good to practice planning for things and analyzing how those plans are developed and if there are any holes.
He will chicken out. He’ll pull some excuse about unfair rules or a biased moderator that will be completely and utterly transparent to everyone except his base.
It’s transparent to his base too. It’s not that they don’t see the lies, it’s that they don’t care.
To Republicans, winning matters more than playing by the rules. This isn’t some gentlemanly game of chess. It’s a knife fight. The future of their country hangs in the balance, and the only thing that matters is being the people who steer the ship. If you have to lie cheat and steal to get there, so be it.
The Dems need to wake the fuck up and start doing the same.
Sounds pretty awful, but remember that prosecutors don’t have ESP. So “prosecutors claim she didn’t want to jeopardize her career” is not the same as “she didn’t want to jeopardize her career”.
It’s not like she wrote in her diary “Today I killed my newborn because I thought it would interfere with work.”
My guess: didn’t know she was pregnant until very late. Options were dwindling or nil. She was completely and insanely career obsessed and career-anxious.
Arrives the last month or two. Pregnancy is hard to ignore then, but it was probably daily terror and panic as she didn’t know what to do. She probably felt cornered, insane with anxiety and barely holding it together in a field that doesn’t give you any room for error.
By the time she has to deliver, her brain is likely already pure soup from the anxiety, obsessing with how she can’t handle it, how it can’t be happening, how she can’t be a mother, doesn’t want to be a mother, can’t - not doesn’t want to, but can’t! CAN’T you understand?! - stop to work.
So she delivers secretly. By this point she’s too far gone, mentally a complete mess, insane, unstable.
So she kills her newborn.
Not as a heinous premeditated act of hatred, violence and mischief, but as a completely insane act of post partum depression, psychosis, work related anxiety and sheer craziness.
She didn’t choke or shake the baby then dug a grave at night - she didn’t do some elaborate crime and elaborate body-hiding shenanigans.
She threw. The. Baby. Out. Her. Own. Window.
And she’s a lawyer.
There was no attempt whatsoever to not get caught or to act surreptitiously.
Just pure terror, psychosis and a horrible, tragic impulse that ended up terminating a new life and ruining another.
German-language media says that she claims to not have known that she was pregnant, her Internet search history showed she likely did. Defense said that she was traumatized and had suppressed that she knew. Psychiatric evaluation says she was fully accountable. It’s kinda obvious that there was something very wrong going on, though.
You think you would notice missing 9 periods, having your entire nipple area change color and produce milk, need to go pee every thirty minutes, feet swelling, rapid temperature changes, focus problems, food cravings, vomiting for three months, odor sensitivities, not being able to tie your shoes, weird fast reflexes, urge to take on home repair projects, and skin changes.
But I am positive someone here will tell me about their friend’s cousin former yoga instructor’s roommate who didn’t notice for some reason and act like this is the norm
No joke I have a friend of mine who just went to sleep one night and woke up with a baby covered in blood crying on her bed, umbilical chord still attached… Glad she doesn’t roll over in her sleep
I think it’s a bit unfair they call it just “paint” when it was merely cornstarch that would wash off by itself.
There’s a huge difference in the degree of vandalism if it’s something that wash off by itself.
Media uses language like this on purpose, most of their copy comes from single-sources and everyone on every news station is repeating the same rhetoric. They did this with the soup/painting incident as well, making it seem like the protestors ruined priceless artifacts instead of spilling harmless food products on a sheet of plexiglass.
It’s possible. And I think it’s likely. That the activists wanted this exact news cycle, where they falsely report that there is damage, gaining widespread coverage, and drawing attention their way, only for people to later learn that it was temporary and grow to respect the act.
Possibly. I’d imagine the vast majority of people don’t see the followup that there wasn’t damage, here, or the Mona Lisa, or the other events. The goal was outrage coverage for sure, and without causing damage so anyone who actually cares is fine with it. The media will just call it paint, and now that the potential for damage is clear they’ll stop talking about it.
This freak lost a fucking Casino. The place where people just give you their money. A CASINO!!!
He is an idiot and the worst "business man".
Con man looking for a new con.
Fuckwit is my go to. Or “Too stupid to breathe.” Or bring out some Linus Torvalds, but honestly Trump doesn’t deserve to be graced by that mans insults, as awesome as they are from a “JFC dude, that is going way too far”, except Trump would actually deserve them unlike the poor kernel maintainers.
news
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.