"It is more accurate to say that slavery, an institution as old as civilization, still existed in the West at the time of our (USA) founding. The principles articulated at our founding were directly at odds with slavery and led inexorably to it's ending."
Thomas Amidon
I'd add that not only is slavery an institution as old as civilization, but that it was practiced in what would become the Americas long before the arrival of European settlers and that it continues to this very day.
Remember when Kamala Harris said that the first priority of the Biden/Harris administration was to stop COVID?
Remember when Biden had an 11 point plan to stop COVID? (https://joebiden.com/covid-plan/)
Remember when Biden said that there was "no federal solution" to stopping COVID? (https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2021/12/28/covid-biden-no-federal-solution-states-control-pandemic/9034179002/)
Remember when Biden said that he didn't foresee a need for large numbers of COVID tests?
(https://nypost.com/2021/12/21/biden-says-dont-think-anybody-anticipated-omicron-surge/)
Remember when folx on the political left said that Trump was responsible for every COVID death when he was in office?
Are those folx saying that Biden is responsible for all the deaths since he's been in office?
For all of the people who still have their panties in a wad because Garland isn't a SCOTUS justice, maybe you should listen to what Claire McCaskill has to say.
Claire, an incredibly liberal long time politician, said that Garland could "Go down in history as one of the worst attorney generals".
Maybe it's a good thing that he's not a SCOTUS justice.
Remember when there was a ploy by right wing terrorists to kidnap the governor of MI? Remember all the folx on the left using this as an example of how right wing domestic terrorism was the biggest threat we faced in the US? Well, it looks like the FBI played a significant role in the whole thing and this might not be what all the lefties thought it was.
I've seen a meme floating around that points out that The Jetsons was set in something like 2046, and that it's likely that George was conceived in 2021. The point being that people thought/hoped we'd be living in a futuristic world much sooner than reality might indicate.
However, it seems that CNN and the Washington Post are all in on self driving, autonomous, sentient vehicles driving themselves around.
from CNN's official Twitter account. "Wakesha will hold a moment of silence today, marking one week since a car drove through a city Christmas parade, killing six people and injuring dozens of others."
"Five people were killed after a red SUV sped into Wakesha's Christmas parade Sunday afternoon."
From the Washington Post's Twitter account.
"Here's what we know so far on the sequence of events that let to the Wakesha tragedy caused by a SUV."
Why would we think that our media is less than honest in their reporting? Why would the leave out that the SUV was driven by an African American with a long list of prior crimes, released by a progressive DA for political reasons (https://winteryknight.com/2021/11/29/wisconsin-district-attorney-john-chisolm-and-his-teacher-union-wife-colleen/), with a history of racist (anti-white) social media posts? It's so much more credible to believe that this was a "tragedy" caused by an "SUV", rather than a crime (possibly motivated by racism) caused by someone who should have been in jail.
There's a narrative out there this insists that the only way that the GOP ever wins anything is because they've gerrymandered districts to ensue themselves wins. Conversely, the DFL does not and never has engaged in gerrymandering.
As an aside, from what I've seen most instances of gerrymandering are done in order to protect incumbents of both parties and to maintain at least some sort of rough balance of power.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/maryland-democrats-are-advancing-hideously-gerrymandered-congressional-map
Apparently, the Maryland DFL didn't get the memo that the DFL doesn't engage in partisan gerrymandering.
It looks like Rittenhouse was acquitted today, and that he'll likely be the next young person to strike it rich through defamation suits. I've already seen the extremists on both sides and I'm not that interested.
I am interested in two questions.
1. If you believe that Rittenhouse should have been convicted, do you accept misconduct of the prosecution as an acceptable means to accomplish that goal?
1a. Is it appropriate for the state to withhold evidence, violate the constitutional rights of the accused, and defy the rulings of the court in order to get a conviction?
2. Will the acquittal of Rittenhouse (white) for killing/wounding other white men justify rioting/looting/violence/protests against "white supremacy"?
Any comment that doesn't start with simple, direct, unequivocal answers to these two questions, will be deleted. Once the questions are answered, I'll consider opening up any discussion.
Wintery Knight does an interesting look at the new "infrastructure" plan from the Biden administration, https://winteryknight.com/2021/11/18/how-much-does-joe-bidens-build-back-better-stimulus-cost-and-who-benefits/, and it points out something interesting. For years we've been told that tax cuts for the rich are bad, but this bill actually provides an effective federal tax cut for the rich. While at the same time, high inflation lowers the relative income of the poor. This seems like a strange set of circumstances for a progressive administration.
BLM, the wellspring of peace, love, tolerance, and non-violence, provides one more example of how to win friends and influence people. Clearly threatening "bloodshed" is an appropriate response to the NYC mayor elect saying that he'll keep his campaign promises.
https://www.fox5ny.com/news/black-lives-matter-threaten-riots-fire-bloodshed-in-nyc-if-adams-brings-back-police-unit
https://www.nationalreview.com/news/black-lives-matter-leaders-threaten-violence-if-nyc-mayor-reestablishes-anti-crime-nypd-units/
https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/nyc-elections-2021/ny-nyc-mayor-elect-eric-adams-black-lives-matter-20211111-evksw6cs3bg7xptjnsjlxe2tzi-story.html
Friday night, I heard John Piper speak on 2 Corinthians 6:10, then heard my wife's ex boss speak on it as well.
"10 sorrowful, yet always rejoicing; poor, yet making many rich; having nothing, and yet possessing everything."
The most interesting point that Piper made was that most people would think of experiencing these two things as linear. First sorrow, then joy, rinse and repeat. However, he made the point that Paul was talking about experiencing both simultaneously. That our goal is to layer the two. My wife's boss, who knows whereof she speaks, talked about how this verse has guided her life for over 50 years and is her daily reality. It definitely got me thinking about the concept. What's more interesting is if we look at that verse in context.
"3 We put no stumbling block in anyone’s path, so that our ministry will not be discredited. 4 Rather, as servants of God we commend ourselves in every way: in great endurance; in troubles, hardships and distresses; 5 in beatings, imprisonments and riots; in hard work, sleepless nights and hunger; 6 in purity, understanding, patience and kindness; in the Holy Spirit and in sincere love; 7 in truthful speech and in the power of God; with weapons of righteousness in the right hand and in the left; 8 through glory and dishonor, bad report and good report; genuine, yet regarded as impostors; 9 known, yet regarded as unknown; dying, and yet we live on; beaten, and yet not killed; 10 sorrowful, yet always rejoicing; poor, yet making many rich; having nothing, and yet possessing everything."
If Paul can experience joy after all that...
As I thought more abut this, I was struck that the emotion du jour in christian circles, isn't sorrow. No, in 2021 that trendy christian emotion is anger. We see lots of folks embracing anger, some even seem to revel in it. It's "righteous" anger, of course.
What I realized is that I understand the value of experiencing joy and sorrow simultaneously, I don't think it's possible to allow joy and anger to do the same.
The other night, we saw election results that shouldn't bode well for the Brandon administration. The conventional wisdom was the the governors races in VA and NJ were referendums on the Brandon administration.
Things didn't turn out well for the DFL in either case. Add in the failure's in Minneapolis to get rid of the police dept, and get rid of Frey, and it looks even worse.
What's interesting to me, is that the left really only has two choices to explain the results.
1. A failure on the part of the DFL, the candidates, the Brandon administration, and their agenda(s).
2. Racism.
I wonder which one they'll find more reasonable.
-----------------
It's strange that a bunch of anti-immigrant, racist, mysoginists, would elect an immigrant, black, woman to statewide office in VA.
-----------------
I haven't researched this yet, but I suspect that if the demographic splits on the MPLS question regarding eliminating the MPD are made public that the majority of the "defund the police" voters will end up being white, middle/upper income folks, who live in the gentrified parts of the city, while the majority of the other side will be POC who actually live in the highest crime neighborhoods.
...that electioneering in the pulpit was a no-no. That pastors and others could discuss issues and principles as they related to people's voting options, but that actually directly endorsing, or soliciting votes for specific candidates would put churches afoul of the laws regarding tax exempt entities. Back in my non profit days, we were taught to stay far away from politics (at least candidates) to preserve our tax exempt status.
Apparently I was wrong.
https://news.yahoo.com/souls-polls-virginia-churches-air-192800111.html
I went to see the Jesus Music movie last weekend and thought it was pretty good. I thought they ignored a couple of people who should have been mentioned, but realize that they couldn't cover everything in a movie.
What struck me was how this thing that started out with the best possible motives, ended up somewhere completely different. I have no reason not to believe that the young people who gathered in CA in the late 60's early 70's and who found Jesus to be the answer they had been seeking through other means were not 100% sincere in their faith. I also see no reason not to believe that the first "Jesus music" was an attempt to use their God given talents to praise Him and to reach others in their generation.
The question I have is: When did that desire to praise God and reach their fellow "hippies", go off the tracks, and why did it do so?
What's interesting is that I've also been listening to The Rise and Fall of Mars Hill recently, and the podcast explores a similar phenomenon in the Church, more specifically in certain pastors and congregations.
I think that the common denominator in all of these things is fame (celebrity, if you will). What we see is that there often seems to be a point where the fame of the messenger, overshadows the message. I could give examples, but don't see any reason to at this point. I'll simply suggest that the Christian faith is incompatible with individual fame (or at least with seeking fame), to the point where Jesus becomes secondary or obscured.
Finally, I think there's a personal application as well. While I'm not likely to be famous anytime soon, I am likely to place my wants, my desires, my success, my comfort, and my self, in front of God and His glory.
I'm not suggesting that having talented musicians write music that draws lots of people closer to God is a bad thing, nor am I suggesting that the Church doesn't benefit from the wisdom and preaching of pastors when it's published as a book or a video. I'm certainly not suggesting that we not use the technology and media available to us to point people to God. I am suggesting that once we start pointing people to ourselves, and increasing our fame, that there are likely to be problems.
Listening to the sermon yesterday and the part where Paul and his companions end up unjustly imprisoned was part of it. It got me thinking abut how Paul, and the vast majority of Jesus early followers were treated by those in power. We hear about the fact that all the disciples but John were killed, Paul was persecuted and imprisoned, many of the NT letters are written to believers who are suffering, and so on.
As we read these stories, I can't help but look at the examples these believers were setting, how those who were closest to Jesus responded to injustice. For that matter, what example did Jesus set when He was treated unjustly?
What I don't see in the lives of Jesus, those closest to Him, and those who encountered those closest to Jesus, is protest. I don't see them burning or looting, defacing or destroying public property, I don't see marches in the streets (except maybe being herded to face the lions).
I'm just wondering if maybe we should be paying more attention to the examples of those in the NT, instead of to our culture.
The story of the rich young man and Jesus was the scripture yesterday at church, and listening to it raised a question.
Many people would suggest that the most important lines in the story are "Sell all you have and give it to the poor.", and "It's easier for a rich person to get through the eye of a needle, than to get into heaven."
But, what hit me yesterday was that maybe the most important line is "With man nothing is possible, with God all things are possible.
The rich dude couldn't (under his own power) sell everything and give it to the poor, and rich people who rely on themselves and their riches to get them into heaven are going to find it incredibly difficult to get into heaven.
Maybe the key is to focus more on what God CAN do, and less on what humans CAN'T do.
"Our culture has accepted two huge lies. The first is that if you disagree with someone's lifestyle, you must fear or hate them. The second is that to love someone means you agree with everything they believe, say or do. Both are nonsense. You don't have to compromise convictions to be compassionate."
Dave Chapelle
While I think that there might be a tiny bit of nuance that folks will inject into this, Chapelle is certainly much more right than wrong, and his conclusion is spot on.
"We're a nation-state. We have borders. The idea that we can just have open borders is something that...as a practical matter, is unsustainable."
P-BO
When folks I disagree with are right, I'll agree with them. Any time someone can't find anything to agree with in those they disagree with, it seems reasonable to conclude that their disagreement isn't completely rational.
"A "moral" problem for reparations is that Black people TODAY are better off than we would be had our ancestors not lost to Tippu Tipp...and stayed IN nations like Congo. This is ugly but obviously true, and why programs like this have always targeted the affected generation."
"I'm hardly the 1st to say ths, but the reason so many 2021 SJW's turn out to have been openly racist jocks/Heathers in the past is obvious from an amoral perspective: they were simply using the MOST effective form of bullying to exist at each level."
Wilfred Reilly
"They (Ibram Kendi, Ta-Nehisi Coates, Mikole Hannah-Jones) talk a good game about race pride but think anything that is all-black is inferior. They speak about life in Ameriac today as if melanated skin is a congenital defect. Black and brown people need to regain their self-respect and reject what these people are selling.
Delano Squires
"The Black unemployment rate INCREASED to 8.8% in August.
The unemployment rate for Black men INCREASED to 9.1% in and INCREASED to 7.9% for Black women in August.
The unemployment rate for Black youth (16-19 years old) INCREASED to 17.9% in August."
Shermichael Singleton
"One Taboo Obvious point re education is that "bad schools" are bad (violent, etc.) largely because of the students and teachers in them. If you close them down, and simply transfer all the former and half the latter to other schools, those will often soon be "bad schools."
Wilfred Reilly
Remember when we were told that questioning the government was actually a very high form of patriotism?
What changed?
Immunity: Protection from an infectious disease. If you are immune to a disease, you can be exposed to it without becoming infected.
Vaccine: A preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections, but some can be administered by mouth or sprayed into the nose.
Vaccination: The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce protection from a specific disease.
Immunization: A process by which a person becomes protected against a disease through vaccination. This term is often used interchangeably with vaccination or inoculation."
CDC
" a substance used to stimulate the production of antibodies and provide immunity against one or several diseases, prepared from the causative agent of a disease, its products, or a synthetic substitute, treated to act as an antigen without inducing the disease."
Oxford Languages
"A vaccine is a biological preparation that provides active acquired immunity to a particular infectious disease. A vaccine typically contains an agent that resembles a disease-causing microorganism and is often made from weakened or killed forms of the microbe, its toxins, or one of its surface proteins."
Wikipedia
"A vaccine is a suspension of weakened, killed, or fragmented microorganisms or toxins or of antibodies or lymphocytes that is administered primarily to prevent disease."
Britannica.com
Above are multiple definitions of "vaccine", my question is as follows.
If something described as a "vaccine", doesn't perform the functions of a vaccine as defined above, is it actually a "vaccine"?
As a general rule, anyone who proclaims themselves to be a hero, very likely isn't. Anyone who claims that they showed utmost courage, very likely didn't. Anyone who seeks praise for things they (or a group they are a part of) have done, likely hasn't done as much as they'd like you to think.
Pride is addictive.
I can be a bit of a music nerd, and I haven't posted much about music here before, so excuse me for getting a bit nerdy.
I was listening to a couple of podcasts about Christian musicians who managed to change the landscape of Christian music in recent history. (since the 60's) I thought I'd throw out my list and see if it got any traction. I'm not even attempting to rank them.
Larry Norman
Keith Green
Amy Grant
Petra
Toby Mac
Steve Taylor
Stryper
Michael W Smith
And a few that I'm not sure quite make the list
Phil Keaggy
David Crowder
Bill Gaither
Glen Kaiser/Rez Band
Rich Mullins
I've recently been listening to the JFH podcast and really enjoying it. I'm about halfway through an interview with David Crowder and have been interested in the conversation about the Christian tension between the now and the not yet.
They talk about how so much of what people are protesting and yelling about can be seen as a cry for the not yet. The we as humans have an intense desire to see wrongs put to right because, and are impatient for that to happen. So much so that we are willing to settle for something less that God temporarily.
They also talked about how much of social media is simply expressing a desire to be known and loved absent a relationship with God.
I'm probably not totally accurately representing the conversation, and I'll adjust this as I listen further. It reminded me of the ways that we try to fill the "God shaped hole" that Lewis talked about.
https://www.jesusfreakhideout.com/podcasts/Episode137.asp
In this time of desperation, when all we know is doubt and fear, there is only one foundation...
https://news.yahoo.com/more-1-500-coronavirus-positive-205500567.html
If anyone who's worried about the dangers posed by COVID, who advocates for the vaccinated wearing masks, and for additional lock downs/restrictions, isn't appalled by the actions of the Biden administration and actively protesting those actions, then I see no reason to believe that they are actually concerned about the spread of COVID.
7000 COVID positive people...
Someone I saw today suggested that it should be mandatory for anyone who votes to have had the COVID vaccine, I think that I agree with this premise.
As you might know our friendly, innocuous, inoffensive, poutine eating, neighbors to the north have approached COVID differently than we have. Due to Canada's draconian policies we've seen pastors arrested for doing their jobs, a lumber shortage in the US made worse, and more. I want to focus on just one aspect of this situation.
Since Canada has been closed, they have banned US citizens who own property in Canada from accessing their property. I know that Canada doesn't share our constitutional protections regarding property, but doesn't the notion of a "free country" depriving property owners of access to their property seem a bit extreme? Especially when they're still expecting that all of the taxes and fees be paid.
In one case, the property is on a lake that crosses the border between Canada and the US. It's possible to take a boat across the border bypassing the border crossing stations that exist on the road entrances. Guess what Canada has done. They've installed radar and/or sonar in this lake (really all bodies of water that cross the border) and will intercept anyone who tries the water rout.
Why is this draconian border control not drawing protests? How can those folks who want increased cross border traffic with fewer restrictions sit silently by as Canada turns away everyone?
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/26/us/politics/progressives-black-latino-voters.html
How interesting, it seems that the NYT thinks that the POC vote isn't quite as in the bag for the DFL as some folks do.
There's been a lot of talk lately about all the turmoil in the SBC, one of those issues has been sermon plagiarism. There has been an undertone of concern over the past few years among some in the "evangelical" world regarding pastors/authors who present the work of others as if it is their own. I think this kind of sums things up well.
"Do you suppose there's a connection between a pastor believing it's ok to "outsource" the work of studying & preparing his sermons (e.g. plagiarism or using a service to help with sermon prep) and his being led astray from the truth & taken captive be worldly philosophies?"
"Melissa the Homemaking Mater"
Watching video from the Juneteenth celebration in Oakland where young black people were interfering with ambulances that came to deal with the 6 shooting victims from the celebration. Somehow I suspect that the ex slaves in Galveston would be appalled at the scene.
"Systemic racism is woefully inadequate because it:
1. Fails to explain black underperformance relative to other racial groups
2. Casts all white people as villains
3. Casts all black people aspowerless actors with no agency
What is the correct idea that should replace it?"
Tyrone Williams
I thought that defacing and tearing down statues was now an accepted and valued means of peacfully engaging in protest.
I just saw that a Brit has undergone surgery and come out as Korean. Does this mean he’s got grounds to sue 23 & me when his DNA test come back wrong?
NBC is reporting that there are scientists who wouldn’t discuss the possibility or call for an investigation into the true source of COVID because they didn’t want to be associated with Trump.
I’m confused, I keep being told that Science is all about searching for the Truth regardless of anything else. I guess we’ve wasted months of possible investigation time because scientists were worried about politics.
For the Google challenged, here is the link.
https://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/lab-leak-theory-science-scientists-rcna1191
Apparently the woke folk are pissed at Lin Manuel Miranda (a person of Hispanic heritage). Lin, who’s most famous for writing a musical where he re cast the founding fathers as black dudes with mad rap skills, has a movie coming out soon. Apparently this movie, In The Heights, had some serious problems. The movie, set in a neighborhood full of Hispanic folks, who are all played by actual card carrying Hispanic actors, is under fire for its casting choices. I guess it’s not enough to cast Hispanic actors to play Hispanic characters, you also must pick Hispanic actors of the proper hue, to be safe from the woke mob.
Of course it’s completely reasonable to expect that the actors must meet multiple tests of authenticity to be cast. Strangely it seems that Hispanic heritage isn’t enough to satisfy the woke mob. They always find something to complain about.
I saw something the other day about one of the companies that's a darling of the political left, despite it's actual business practices. Yes, I'm talking about Apple. I know they use slave labor to build their products, and that their products are built oversees because of the access to slave labor and the lack of environmental regulatoions. But that's old, ignored news. This is something I just saw recently.
I somehow was exposed to a young woman on Twitter with an absolutely compelling story of success. She was the first person in her (immigrant) family to graduate from college, and was financially supporting her sick mother and brother who was going to college. Laudable, right?
Well, upon investigation, I found out how she was doing so. She was making (lots of) money by monetizing her sexuality on the internet. She was using Patreon and OnlyFans to post "creative content" that was proving to be lucrative for her and her family. Apparently she decided that those platforms charged too much of her income for their services, so she decided to start her own platform that would be more friendly to the content creators. She came up with an alternative platform and it's been a success. Their business model is that the platform (I can't recall the name right now) gets 10% of what people earn, and the creators get to keep 90%. Again, this is all a great success story so for.
Enter Apple. Apple announces that this platform needs to pay Apple 30% of all the revenues generated through the platform if they want to show up in the App Store. Apparently it seems that Apple doesn't charge this 30% to OnlyFans and Patreon, just to the upstart. I understand that Apple has to get paid for their service, but 30% of revenue from a new platform, dedicated to allowing content creators to maximize their profit from their content seems excessive. Seems like the kind of thing you'd see from a monopoly.
It'll be interesting to see how it plays out, and I'm rooting for the "little guy" (really girl/woman) in this. It'll be interesting to see if the political left continues it's love affair with Apple if this ends up becoming a bigger thing.
It's similar to something I heard last week. Someone I know who's a professional musician (one of the hardest hit jobs by COVID) had managed to make a decent living over the last year by providing music to YouTube that users could access at little or no cost for their videos. Unfortunately YouTube decided that they needed more diversity in their contributors and the white guy in his 40's got shut down. Not because his music sucked, not because he didn't put out enough music to meet demand, not because he was difficult to deal with, just because he wasn't diverse enough.
The reason I'm writing this is that I will almost always support people who come up against an obstacle that stops them from doing what they think is right when they take the responsibility on themselves to achieve their goals. Whether I'm supporting some folks who think that the local public schools aren't liberal enough and want to start a charter school to be more liberal, or someone who's making money selling naked pictures of themselves on the internet, they deserve to be able to succeed or fail without Big tech or Big government preventing them from doing so.
Many people were quick to jump on the bandwagon of charging/convicting the officer who shot Daunte Wright. So, one might assume that the same folk would be equally interested in seeing Daunte’s alleged victims get some degree of justice also. Personally it’ll be interesting to watch as the lawsuits against Daunte’s estate (and apparently other BLM heros), proceed. It seems appropriate that the alleged victims of Daunte get their day in court, and get the only possible measure of justice available to them.
Back during the election, and transition, we heard a lot from the Biden camp about helping folks harmed by the COVID shutdowns. We were promised a $2,000 check, and got $1,200. ( I know what the response will be to this, but the reality is that Biden did promise a $2,000 check after the $12,00 checks had gone out.)
One of the things that was done was a program called the PPP, it was a way to help business owners pay the employees they'd been forced to lay off because their business had been shut down. This program wasn't perfect, and wasn't really enough, but it was something. After stringing business owners along for a while, there was finally a second draw from the program. That second draw money was supposed to last through May 31st of 2021. Unfortunately, it ran out around May 5th, 2021. What's interesting is that despite some degree of outcry, the Biden administration has remained silent on their intentions of proposing additional funding for this program. One thing to consider is that the businesses who need this funding are trying to get out of a hole caused by the federal/state government shutting down large segments of the economy. Even though things are opening back up in terms of the government shut down, the reality is that these businesses and their employees are still incredibly far behind because of things beyond their control. It looks like this is just one more thing that the administration talked a good game about, but isn't actually doing much to accomplish.
I know that the "blame the GOP minority" crowd will behave predictably, and ignore the fact that the administration and the DFL majority hasn't proposed any legislation or even talked about proposing any legislation to deal with this. I'm just not sure how it's possible to blame the GOP, when the administration/DFL hasn't even offered a solution.
I'm also a dissapointed in the GOP on this. At a very minimum, a GOP sponsored bill to re fund the PPP program would be a political "win" for them. Especially if the DFL didn't jump on board.
Mostly, I'm just bothered by the relative silence on the matter.
Recently AOC took to social media to complain that her abuela's house in PR was still unrempaired after the hurricane 3 1/2 years ago. Now AOC is pulling down $174,000 as a congressperson, and apparently has enough income to afford a Tesla. The problem seems to be that the US government hasn't fixed her abuela's house and her abuela is living in substandard conditions. Without unduly criticizing AOC, it does seem like there might have been some options for her to mitigate her abuela's suffering rather than to wait 3.5 years to post about it on social media. But, on to the point of the post.
After Matt Walsh, a conservative commentator, saw the original post and commented on it he decided to take action. Instead of waiting for the government, I started a GoFundMe account for AOC's abuela and raised over $48,000 in around 3.5 hours. (Currently over $62,000). I think it's awesome to see conservatives unite around this situation and to generously provide for the abuela of one of their political foes.
I saw yesterday that there has been a court ruling regarding the ban on evictions that was imposed due to COVID, which struck down the ban. This is one of the after effects of to response to COVID that isn't talked abut much and which will possibly/probably end up being worse that anyone imagined.
At first glance, the notion of preventing landlords from evicting people because of the government response to COVID seems like a compassionate and nice thing to do. At least it's nice for the renters. But as for the rich landlords, well screw them.
Let's start with the obvious. People who own rental property do so to make money. However, they first have to pay their expenses. Most likely they have a mortgage or LOC on the property, they are also required to maintain the property to at least the standards required by the city the property is in. They have insurance, assessments, a savings account to pay for major repairs of improvements, and other costs they bear. The money for those things comes from the rental income. Unfortunately the eviction moratorium (at least in MN) doesn't require that the renters continue to pay rent, nor that they make up any back rent. So, you have landlords with reduced income but the same expenses, forced to allow renters to live for free in their property. For over a year.
Now if the Federal and State governments had agreed to make the landlords whole during this period, we probably wouldn't be concerned (beyond the massive increase in the deficit), but the various governments decided that the property owners should bear this burden alone.
So let's jump ahead to the point where this moratorium ends, what happens then.
1. Instead of a smaller group of people being evicted each month and "trickling" back into the rental market, you now have a "flood" of people that all hit the market at once.
2. The rental market over the last few years has been marked by high demand, low supply, and rising prices with make it difficult for lower income people to find affordable places to live.
3. The people who own rental property and who've been living with reduced or no income for over a year will properly raise the rents they charge as a way to recoup their losses.
4. Or they will be forced to sell in a market where prices are increasing weekly, which will also result in higher rents.
5. Various jurisdictions will likely try to legislate caps on rent or rent increases, which will likely force some property owners to sell as they are unable to make a profit with artificial caps on rent.
6. Many cities have made the construction of new affordable housing impossible due to the various zoning limits and permit fees.
I'm sure there will be more results that I missed here, but the big takeaway is that the lower end of the rental market is likely to be a giant shit show within 60-90 days of the removal of the moratorium.
Just one more thing to thank our governments for.
New pictures of a Chauvin juror seem to indicate that he lied during jury selection.
1. Is this one of those ends justify the means situations where the conviction of Chauvin was worth a little trampling on his right to a fair trial?
2. Is this enough to get a win at the appellate level?
This is incredible. Biden just assured us that no one who makes below $400,000 per year will "pay a single penny in taxes". That's like a 30% increase in my income, this is awesome. When do we start?
Is anybody really surprised that Marilyn Manson continues to rack up a growing list of women accusing him of sexual assault?
As we wait for the jury to render their verdict in the Chauvin case, I wanted to mention a couple of outcomes that aren't talked about very much.
------ (edit)
Apparently this verdict will be announced within the next hour.
Yet, crowds of black voices fill the streets of downtown Minneapolis chanting "Burn it down!". One has to wonder if we'll see fires in Minneapolis no matter what the verdict is.
The pro Floyd/BLM folks have a choice to make regarding how they respond. What that choice is will seemingly shape these discussions for the forseeable future.
-------
1. The hung jury. I think that it's possible/likely that there are one or two people on the jury who will end up at one of the extremes (2nd degree murder or acquittal) and who aren't going to budge. I think it's possible, but less likely, that some on the jury will be swayed by the pressure and adopt a contrary position as a way to protect themselves from reprisals. No matter that the reason, I think that a hung jury is possible. The problem I see is that those who are ready to protest/riot are so uninformed regarding the workings of the judicial system that they will see a hung jury as the same thing as an acquittal. I suspect they'll be more incensed if Chauvin gets bail. The question is- Will a hung jury lead to rioting? I suspect it will.
The secondary issues around a hung jury are the reality that the prosecution against the other cops gets put on indefinite hold, and that the prosecution's case isn't going to be any better if they choose to retry Chauvin.
2. Over conviction. I and those in the legal profession I've talked to, do not see how either of the murder charges fits the facts of the case, and that the manslaughter charges are not particularly well suited either. I think that a 3rd degree manslaughter conviction will lead to riots, although I can see the jury thinking that it's a good compromise. But, if they convict him of 2nd degree murder, then the issue becomes the appellate process. There are multiple grounds for appeal, the timing of the settlement announcement and the Waters incitement are the two most obvious. But, let's say Chauvin gets convicted of murder 2 and promptly appeals. I think that it's likely that murder 2 gets overturned on appeal after years in the system. The question then is- Do people riot 3 years from now if Chauvin gets the conviction overturned on appeal?
What's interesting to watch is the National Guard FOB right down the street from my office. They've taken over two hotels and turned them into the staging area for the NG. They've also called in reinforcements from LEO in other states. On top of that are the number of businesses that are already boarded up in anticipation. The reality is that if there is rioting, there is absolutely no rational way to place responsibility on anyone except those on the political left. I know people will try, but it's simply not going to represent reality.
Finally, I can't think of anything that fits the words and actions of Maxine Waters better that inciting insurrection. She (and others) are literally threatening anything from confrontation to rioting if they don't get the verdict they want.
"insurrection : an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government."
Given that the judicial system is an established branch of the civil government of the state of MN, and that the threat is to revolt against the verdict rendered by this branch of the government, it seems like insurrection fits this situation pretty well.
On another topic. Remember the Capitol Police officer beaten to death with a fire extinguisher? Remember how the media covered his death? Well, it seems that he wasn't actually beaten to death with a fire extinguisher and died of natural causes. Do you think we'll see front page headlines with the Truth of the story anytime soon?
While I'm not suggesting that is is a widely held view among those who identify as progressive christians, the author of the piece below certainly identifies as a progressive christian. While I'm certainly not defending those who identify as Evangelical, I've definitely seen news headlines criticizing "evangelicals" for bearing responsibility for the continued spread of COVID because some don't want to get vaccinated. I've also heard folks accuse "conservatives" of being quick to fall for "conspiracy theories", but this sounds just about as crazy as anything I've heard from the Q idiots.
"I am entertaining the thought that the COVID Operation is a biological
attack in addition to being a psychological attack. I think this “virus”
is real in that there are biological agents that have been released
purposely and are causing illness and for the most vulnerable, death. I
also think these so-called “vaccines” make up the centerpiece of this
biological attack. These vaccines also are bioweapons and likely far
more damaging than the so-called “virus” itself. According to Dr. Judy
Mikovits, these experimental jabs could kill 50 million Americans.
Dr. Sherri Tenpenny not only agrees with that figure but adds that many
injured by the injections would wish they were dead. Of course, you
won’t hear from these doctors in the mainstream news.
The global oligarchs are out to kill us with a manufactured virus and its cure. A one-two punch. The masks, social distancing, vax pressure, and relentless fear porn from all of our institutions including the church, education, governments, and especially the controlled media, is the psychological attack. We are now for the most part, a bunch of simpering, muzzled, media-fed morons who have lost all ability to think for ourselves.
I shouldn’t be so harsh on my fellow humans. This is in the end, a spiritual attack. Satan is a smart fella. Smarter than 95% of evangelical leaders who say they will get the injection and 89% of them will instruct their parishioners to do the same. Not in that number is one of the last true Christian pastors, Dr. Chuck Baldwin, who calls this COVID scam “the most evil hoax ever perpetrated on the human race.”
I stand proudly with Pastor Baldwin. As he points out, this is the Tribulation, the rise of the antichrist, and humanity is under a cloud of massive deception. Pastor Baldwin writes:
The devilish powers that manufactured the phony Covid pandemic used fear and intimidation to coerce people—especially Christian people—to accept mandatory mask-wearing as a precursor to coercing them into accepting the Orwellian (or should I say antichrist) vaccine passports.
As I have said repeatedly, I will say again: The entire Covid narrative—including mandatory masks, social distancing, forced lockdowns and now vaccines and vaccine passports—is a totalitarian tool of the spirit of antichrist as a launching pad for global enslavement. The entire Covid narrative mirrors to a T the warnings of John the Revelator regarding the identifying marks of antichrist.
If the demonic powers promoting this narrative are allowed to have their way, we will not be able to work, travel, buy or sell without a vaccine passport. Even a Bible-reading fifth grader can understand the antichrist nature of such tyranny. So, why can’t evangelical pastors?
He goes on to answer his own question regarding the Mark of the Beast. The problem is the phony belief in the “Rapture” coupled with Christian Zionism.
But the fact of the matter is that the evangelical church has been lying down and tolerating almost every imaginable evil for the past half century or longer. Why? Largely because of the false “Rapture” doctrine of Darby and Scofield. And the false Rapture doctrine is predicated upon their false doctrines of Zionism.
In my series of five messages (on one DVD) entitled The Rise Of The Beast: Coronavirus And Antichrist, there is a message entitled The Scofield Rapture: A False Escape From The Beast. I urge readers to watch it.
Acceptance of Scofield’s fallacious Rapture theory has tranquilized the thinking and sedated the spirit of evangelicals. It has convinced them that any act resembling the spirit of antichrist—no matter how vile—must not be real, because they have not been “raptured” to heaven yet. They have been brainwashed into believing that all things antichrist must always be future; that they will only occur during a future Israel-based “tribulation.”
As a result of this strong devilish deception, the evangelical church has lost its saltiness (Matthew 5:13); and evangelical pastors and so-called Christian leaders by the tens of thousands have become vassals of the kingdom of antichrist.
My denomination, the Presbyterian Church (USA), has fallen in lockstep with the Covidian Cult. Recently, my presbytery encouraged pastors to take pictures of themselves “getting the jab” and to post the photos on social media so their parishioners will comply. Most of the churches in my denomination have not even met in person in over a year. In a document about “reopening” this guideline was offered:
Keeping a log of every person who enters our facilities, when they were there, and where they sit. The log should include names and contact numbers. The article suggests labeling pews and assigning seats or table numbers. The log should be maintained for at least three weeks.
Having an individual or staff person identified to maintain registration logs. This person may be the logical choice to be the point of contact with local health authorities.
Seriously? Report all worshipers to the government. Thankfully, I attend worship at a church with no masks, no distancing, no vaccine pushing, and no fearful nonsense. I have been attending regularly for about ten months and I have found it to be the most important thing I do each week for my spiritual, emotional, and physical health.
I used to think Satan was a mythological figure and that the Book of Revelation had already come to pass symbolically in the first century. I no longer think that way. The Tribulation that Revelation and the Gospels reveal is real and is just beginning.
The persecution has already begun with truth-telling doctors, journalists, scholars, and other courageous writers being censored, de-platformed, banned, ridiculed, “disabled”, and slandered. It will get worse before it gets better.
The Good News is that it will get better. Christ is Risen. Christ will not be mocked. Christ will bring home his own."
https://sixdayscience.com/2015/05/11/my-testimony/
I know that Dan will see the source of this testimony and immediately discount that actual testimony because of where it's published, because we all know that it's rational to discount something because of where it's published.
Now, I know that Dan has prudly posted his CV elsewhere and that he's got quite an impressive CV to be proud of. But don't you think that someone with a background in astrophysics is better able to assess the evidence than Dan?
I know she's not in the majority, but she is a woman, so that's in her favor. The real question is what happens when people look at the evidence, not the narrative.
"Instead of demonizing and using race as a weapon, let us move beyond racial divisions and practice RADICAL GRACE, seeing my neighbor as an individual human being lust like me. Our communities need stronger ties and unity to help the least among us and chart a path forward for all."
Bob Woodson
"I have this feeling that Black Conservatism is going to save this nation. Black Americans have to go back to the basics of what made them successful in years past. A culture in strong family values, hard work, and a emphasis in education to produce skilled workers and business owners to develop their communities.
Barrington Martin II
For months Dan has been touting BLM as a force for good in the world, yet he's also demanded that we "listen to black voices", he's also used the Breonna Taylor case as an example, so what happens when those worlds collide?
"I've watched y'all raise money on behalf of Breonna's family who has never done a damn thing for us, nor have we needed or asked, so Talk about fraud."
Tamika Palmer, (Taylor's mother)
I think I'll give her voice more weight than Dan's.
For months Dan has been exalting the wonderfulness of the BLM organization and praising them for all of the blessings they've bestowed on society.
Yet, a recent study projects that 300 people weren't killed by the police (I know that trying to prove that something didn't happen is problematic), but ignores the fact that there were thousands of additional murders during the time periiod of the study.
https://www.vox.com/22360290/black-lives-matter-protest-crime-ferguson-effects-murder
There have been multiple people writing about the massive amount of money raised by BLM, and the absolute impossibility of finding out what it was spent on. Well, now we know one thing. Admitted "trained Marxist" Patrisse Cullors has decided that she needs a 1.4 million dollar compound in the heard of an area virtually devoid of actual black people. We also know, that very little if any of the BLM fortune has gone to the black families that are victimized or the the black communities that their leaders so quickly abandon for the move "to Bel Air'".
Of course BLM scrubbed their website of their actual founding beliefs when those were made public, and the very event that led to their founding is based on a false narrative.
I haven't even mentioned the "peaceful protests" that they organized last summer, and how much they helped the local black community. Or the business owners and landlords that they are slowly driving out of business at 38th and Chicago.
But let's listen to some black voices.
This is one of several podcasts about BLM, that are very well researched, and detailed.
https://justthinking.me/ep-102-black-lives-matter/
"As I've often said, Black Lives Matter (BLM) is the biggest Ponzi scheme in world history."
DB Harrison
"Black Lives Matter is the greatest American grift of all time and it's truely sad how easily Blacks are manipulated with racial identity."
Barrington Martin II
"Given a choice to live anywhere, Marxist BLM Co-Founder buys home far away from the Black Lives that Matter."
Virgil Walker
I've posted plenty more of these over the past year and see no reason to post those again.
It just seems strange how many people are willing to praise these folks when there is so much about their organization that raises so many questions.
"If George Floyd's murderer is not sentenced, just know that all hell is going to break loose. Don't be surprised when buildings are on fire. Just saying."
Maya Nichols (White BLM activist)
Twice in the last week I made the mistake of getting sucked into a thread about how fast choo-choo trains are the answer to all of our transportation fantasies.
“Dear God,
Please help me to hate wh1te people. Or at least to want to hate them. At least, I want to stop caring about them, individually and collectively. I want to stop caring about their misguided, racist souls, to stop believing that they can be better, that they can stop being racist.”
[…]”Lord, if it be your will, harden my heart. Stop me from striving to see the best in people. Stop me from being hopeful that White people can do and be better.
[…]”Let me see them as hopelessly unrepentant, reprobate bigots who have blasphemed the Holy Spirit and who need to be handed over to the evil one.”
I'm not sure that this fits in with the whole "Love your enemies" ethic that Jesus taught, but who really cares about that sort of thing, right?
If you are committed to a particular narrative, have built a movement on trumpeting this particular narrative, and find data that "demolish"es that narrative wouldn't continuing to push that narrative be lying? Would pushing a narrative that is "demolish"ed by data qualify as a stupid lie, or a conspiracy theory? What about the tens of millions of dollars raised based on this narrative, couldn't someone argue that it was collected fraudulently? Or that it should be returned?
It's pretty easy. Apparently you just need to kill a "brown" guy in DC if you're "black", and you'll get off with virtually zero punishment of consequences.
The hopes of all of those who believe that the large amount of drugs George Floyd ingested had absolutely nothing to do with his death, took a hit today. Floyd’s dealer who was with him when this all went down, refused to testify today (through his lawyer) because he’s afraid that his testimony will be used to convict him of 3rd degree murder. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if the prosecution was holding off on charging him to see how the trial goes. Thinking that convicting someone is better than convicting no one.
I saw a post that said that there are 20,000,000 "AR-15"s in private ownership in the US. For the purposes of this post, I see no reason to dispute this figure. But if we look at another statistic we find something else interesting. 364.
364 what, you might ask. 364 instances of a murder victim being killed by a rifle. That's not just "AR-15"s, that's ALL rifles.
But, there's one more relevant statistic, the category of "firearms, type not stated". Well, if we were to assume that every single murder in this category was committed by an "AR-15", we'd add another 3,281 to the total. That leaves us with a maximum of 3,635 possible murders committed by 20,000,000 "AR-15"s.
If my math is correct, that makes 0.00018225% of all of the "AR-15"s are used in murders.
While I have no desire to diminish the tragedy of those deaths, or to support the apprehension, conviction, and imprisonment, of every single one of these murderers, I can't help but think that preventing law abiding people from owning AR platform guns is going to make an impact on the number of murders going forward. It's almost like taking a step that will have virtually zero statistical effect on murders.
Is it possible that the case to ban "assault weapons" is not based on making a dent in the numbers of crimes committed, but on some other goal?
If you were reading through someone's social media posts and came across some information that was presented as fact at the time (although really it was unconfirmed), then later proven to be false, would you say anything?
The Biden administration prevented a record number of immigrants from entering the US and has record numbers of kids in cages.
I’m guessing this isn’t what his supporters thought they were voting for.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/16/us/biden-refugees-cap.html
Apparently Biden is going to keep the Trump refugee cap numbers in place as well.
I'm guessing this wasn't what his supporters thought they were voting for?
" It's not like staying on Trump's path was a viable option for those of us concerned about immigrants."
Apparently, it is a viable path for Biden.
" "The Biden administration is acting on a number of fronts to reverse
Trump-era restrictions on immigration to the United States. The steps
include
* plans to boost refugee admissions,"
Apparently it's not doing this.
" The Biden administration has said it will increase the number of refugees admitted to the country. The new proposed admission caps would be 62,500 refugees for the current 2021 fiscal year and 125,000 for the 2022 fiscal year, which starts in October."
I guess they were mistaken, or lying.
How many of these hundreds of thousands of folks flocking across our southern border have heir vaccine passports?
Isiah 53
Who has believed our message
and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?
2 He grew up before him like a tender shoot,
and like a root out of dry ground.
He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him,
nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.
3 He was despised and rejected by mankind,
a man of suffering, and familiar with pain.
Like one from whom people hide their faces
he was despised, and we held him in low esteem.
4 Surely he took up our pain
and bore our suffering,
yet we considered him punished by God,
stricken by him, and afflicted.
5 But he was pierced for our transgressions,
he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was on him,
and by his wounds we are healed.
6 We all, like sheep, have gone astray,
each of us has turned to our own way;
and the Lord has laid on him
the iniquity of us all.
7 He was oppressed and afflicted,
yet he did not open his mouth;
he was led like a lamb to the slaughter,
and as a sheep before its shearers is silent,
so he did not open his mouth.
8 By oppression[a] and judgment he was taken away.
Yet who of his generation protested?
For he was cut off from the land of the living;
for the transgression of my people he was punished.[b]
9 He was assigned a grave with the wicked,
and with the rich in his death,
though he had done no violence,
nor was any deceit in his mouth.
10 Yet it was the Lord’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer,
and though the Lord makes[c] his life an offering for sin,
he will see his offspring and prolong his days,
and the will of the Lord will prosper in his hand.
11 After he has suffered,
he will see the light of life[d] and be satisfied[e];
by his knowledge[f] my righteous servant will justify many,
and he will bear their iniquities.
12 Therefore I will give him a portion among the great,[g]
and he will divide the spoils with the strong,[h]
because he poured out his life unto death,
and was numbered with the transgressors.
For he bore the sin of many,
and made intercession for the transgressors.
I haven't read the entirety of the new GA voter law, but I've read enough to think that it's possible that it's been at least partly misrepresented for political purposes, and the reality is that it'll likely end up in court anyway.
What's interesting in all of this is that MLB has decided to pull the All Star Game from ATL because of this controversy. Selfishly, I'd be happy to see it back in KC and make a big deal out of the NBL 100th anniversary that got overtaken by COVID and do some cool stuff with the NLBM.
What I think is interesting is that ATL's population is roughly 60% black, and it seems safe to assume that a significant percentage of the ballpark employees (concessions, maintenance, parking, merch) are black. It also seems safe to assume that some significant percentage of the employees that work in the hotels, bars, restaurants, parking lots, and other businesses that benefit from big events like this are black. It's also estimated that an all star game brings in $60-$80 million dollars to the community that holds the game. Some percentage of that windfall is tax money that benefits the citizens of ATL. Given the COVID situation, I can't help but wonder if the MLB is going to end up hurting the black population of ATL by this move.
Unfortunately, it'll probably be impossible to evaluate until after it's all over.
Given that NY has more restrictive early voting provisions than GA, will MLB be moving their headquarters?
WI, requires voter ID, I guess they’re out for the All Star Game.
I’ll eagerly await the upcoming flood of companies and countries that’ll be pulling out of the Beijing 2022 Olympics. Because literal concentration camps, genocide, and not having free elections are way worse than the GA law, aren’t they?
Oh, look. The game gets moved to a state with more restrictive voter laws than GA, flips the bird to the NLBM, and doesn’t even acknowledge their own hypocrisy.
No wonder MLB is losing fans.
ATL is a majority black city, Denver has a small black population. MLB doesn’t give a rats ass about voting or black people.
"To sum up media bias and "The Narrative" in one sentence: If Muhammed Anwar's killers had been two white teenagers, the story would lead the national news for 2-3 weeks."
W. Reilley
Mike Lindell, who's pillows I enjoy and who's got an inspiring story, is back in the news again. He's predicting that his lawsuit will be so explosive that Trump will be back in office by August. This is quite a claim, and is being met with skepticism, rightly in my opinion.
Not that I would object to Biden being litigated out of office, but I think that part of the problem here is the inability to shut up when it's appropriate. For all I know Lindell might have the smoking gun evidence that will do exactly what he claims, but I kind of doubt it. In this case, I think we've reached the point of "put up or shut up". Generally speaking strategic surprise is the single most important factor in any military engagement, and strategic surprise means that you don't announce your intentions before you act. Hell, it usually means that you hide your intentions before you act. But not Mike.
I fully support his right to file all the lawsuits he wants, part of me hopes that there really is some compelling evidence of voter fraud that will lead to increased election security. But the bigger part of me wishes that he'd have kept his mouth shut until the opening argument of the lawsuit in front of a judge.
The reality is that if he fails, as is likely, to follow through on his promise it likely means the end of his career as a politician or as a political influencer. I'm not making a value judgement on that, just wondering if blowing one's political aspirations on this is really worth the time and money.
Maybe the lesson is that knowing when to shut up is a good thing, or "Talk softly and carry a big stick.", or something similar.
The trial has started and it never ceases to amaze me how eager people are to pretend that everything that happened before Chauvin pulled Floyd back out of the police car, had absolutely nothing to do with his death.
Let's start with the fact that Floyd himself set this chain of events in motion completely of his own volition.
He tried to buy cigarettes with a counterfeit $20 and got busted by the black (or brown) clerks at Cup Foods. They literally gave him the opportunity to pay some other way, or leave the cigarettes and walk out the door. No harm, no foul. He could have tried to see if the clerks at the SA across the street were less vigilant, but he didn't. One wonders if he chose Cup Foods to pass the counterfeit bill because he knew it was owned and staffed primarily by immigrants, and he thought they wouldn't know of check his $20.
He could have chosen to spend the money he budgeted for meth and Fentanyl, on cigarettes instead. Of he could have passed the fake $20 to his drug dealer instead. Obviously the drug dealer would have simly accepted the fake $20 with no consequences whatsoever.
He could have chosen to simply ditch his meth and Fentanyl, or accept the consequences of a(nother) arrest for possession, instead of injesting a potentially lethal dose.
He could have cooperated with the officers instead of fighting back and resisting arrest. Let's not forget that arresting someone for passing counterfeit money and drug possession is something that is completely reasonable for the police to do.
Absolutely none of this is intended to diminish the establishment of the proper level of responsibility to apply to Chauvin. Nor is it to suggest that he did everything correctly. It's simply pointing out that our actions have consequences, and that we don't always control the consequences and that we possibly underestimate the consequences (or don't think about them) in the moment.
Just saw this except from a BLM social post.
"George Floyd was human.
His body was glory..."
Obviously no disagreement with the first, George was human from the day he was conceived.
It's the second one the raises questions, not just for Floyd, but for us all. If our bodies "are glory". whatever that means to each of us, then...
Why do we we use them for such un-glorius purposes?
Why do we fill them with so many harmful things?
Why do we use our bodies to inflict negative things on others?
Why do we put our bodies out for sexual objectification, or sexually objectify the bodies of others?
Why do we not use our bodies for their best and highest purpose?
Lest there be any confusion, I fail in all of these areas.
I saw someone make this proposal today and the more I think about it, the more I like it.
They said that if photo ID is good for voting, it’s good for a gun purchase.
I’ll go one better, let’s place the same requirements for both. Whatever you need to do to exercise your 2nd Amendment Constitutional right, you have to do to vote.
There’s not a lefty in the country that would make this compromise, but if I was a young congressman, I’d have the bill written and submitted immediately.
This recent notion that all violence is motivated by hate seems strange to me. Let's start by saying that hate certainly can be, and is, the motivation for violence in some cases. But absent any indication does it really make sense to attribute hatred of a particular ethnic group and the primary or only motive for violence without actual evidence?
I understand that it's a catchy hashtag for those who's idea of changing the world stops at Tweeting. I understand that it's a catchy slogan that is easy to chant or fit on signs, but is it the Truth? Or, do we even care if it's True?
In the past month I've seen Asians being put in the "white" category when data about academic success was being discussed, and then see Asians being put in the POC category after a "white" guy murders 6. strangely enough, we didn't hear this narrative when it was African Americans killing Asians, or African Americans attacking Asians (complete with racial slurs) on video.
Which leads me to think that it's all about opportunities to promote a narrative, regardless of whether of not it's the Truth.
I was going back through my posts from 2020, and 2019, looking for something that is appropriate for the current thread, I haven't found it yet, but I did learn a couple of things.
1. I wrote much more that I thought I did about morality, especially a post which examined multiple moral systems and how Dan's wasn't there. It's safe to say that if Dan has questions about my stance on morality, the information is avaliable for him to find.
2. I was shocked at how often and extensively I posted Dan's actual words in context, and how frequently I did so.
3. I was surprised at how frequently my posts contained in context quotes from people of multiple stripes, links to those quotes, and links to support my opinions.
As I've been following the news regarding DeShaun Watson and the growing number of suits filed against him for sexual assault, I can't help but wonder a few things.
1. When the media and the left are forced to choose between competing victim groups, which group will get thrown under the bus and why?
2. Why has there been so little coverage of this story outside of sports media?
3. If we find out that the accusers are filing suit as a way to get an easy payoff, and that their accusations are either false or exaggerated, will it reset the narrative going forward that we must always believe all women?
4. Will the teams that seemed interested in acquiring Watson from Houston catch flack from the media/left for being racist, when it's more about not wanting to sign a guy who's currently carrying some sexual assault baggage?
It's interesting to see the silence from the left when these sorts of intersections happen, especially on Twitter. I suspect that if Watson was white, that there would be a much greater outcry than there currently is. Obviously, it's still early and we don't know enough to make determinations yet, but I suspect if he was white there'd be all sorts of folks jumping to all sorts of conclusions. Maybe he's got some privilege.
“Let me see if I understand,” I said to my daughter’s high school biology teacher. “The human eye is the evolutionary product of a light-sensitive spot on the skin. Is that right?”
“Right,” she said.
“And by evolution, you mean a mindless, random process that didn’t really have an end in mind. In other words, there was no “designer” for the eye or the body for that matter. Am I getting that right?”
“Right again,” she replied.
But how could an undirected process produce such highly functional complexity, I wondered aloud. She gave me a look that said, “you really don’t have the time or, probably, the background to understand, so do we really have to go there?”
We did, and I persisted, trying another tack that I had been wondering about for a while.
“Okay, well let me ask you just a few questions” I countered. “Would you agree that evolution as you understand it is a gradual process of adaptation over time, where changes that are advantageous accumulate?”
“Yes,” came her quick reply.
“Would you agree that over time these gradual adaptations would lead to the development of complex systems, such as organ systems?”
“Yes, that makes sense,” she said.
“Would you also agree,” I pressed, “that, generally speaking, the more complex the system, the longer it would take for these gradual adaptations to evolve so that a complex system would take longer to evolve than a less complex system?”
“Yes.” The response was a bit slower, more thoughtful.
Shifting gears a bit, I asked, “In the field of human biology, would you agree that generally speaking, the human female reproductive system is considerably more complex than its male counterpart?”
“I’m not sure what you mean,” she queried.
“Well,” I started, “the male half of the equation involves dividing cells to get to 23 chromosomes and providing a, uh, delivery mechanism. The female system involves the production of eggs, the delivery of the eggs to a specific location, the means for implantation, and if that occurs, the creation of a placenta that is fine-tuned to support the development of the life that is growing. The whole system must work in conjunction with the woman’s body, provide for correction of any mistakes occurring to minimize miscarriages, screen the fetus from harmful substances in the woman’s blood, connect the fetus to the mother by means of a two-way umbilical cord, and provide a method for the baby to be safely delivered into the world. More amazingly, the two systems must somehow recognize each other and work together, so that the 23 chromosomes from each half form a single cell that has the complete instructions for a new human life to begin. This seems like a pretty complex, interconnected, and interdependent system requiring multiple components to work just right. And yet it does work right millions and millions of times.”
“I suppose there’s something to that, but” she hesitated, “what’s your point?” Her tone matched her more serious expression.
“Just this,” I responded. “What exactly were all those men doing generation after generation waiting for the first fully functional female to evolve?”
She stared at me, no doubt wondering whether I was trying to mock her. But, though my question was of course facetious, I wanted to know where my logic was flawed. After all, the premises seem valid. If designed, it makes perfect sense that God could create a system in which some parts are more complex than others, and still have them work together for a purpose. But how could mammalian sexual reproduction – involving separate male and female individuals -ever evolve simultaneously? I wanted to know where that very first human male and very first human female came from. She took a deep breath and began her answer…. and it didn’t have anything to do with God.
“Well, it didn’t work that way,” she said. “Evolution occurred gradually, over time, as the predecessors to humans slowly began to change.”
“Fair enough,” I responded. “So, tell me about that first pair of monkeys, the very first male and female monkey from which you say we evolved.”
“Well,” she began, formulating her thoughts, “it didn’t work that way.” I gave her a quizzical look and she continued. “Those predecessors also evolved slowly, over time, from still more primitive forms of life.”
I was patient. “Like what?” I asked. I don’t think anyone had pressed her for answers like this, but after all I wasn’t worried about getting a grade. My daughter, on the other hand, probably wouldn’t be too thrilled about dad’s efforts at higher learning. Luckily, she wasn’t nearby.
In answer, the teacher started to
explain that monkeys had evolved from still lower forms of life. It was a
long process with smaller animals making adaptations, adding features,
becoming larger. It all sounded quite vague and fuzzy, as she painted
the picture of a planet teeming with life of various kinds, widely
dispersed, and being driven by this engine of evolution.
I
tried to stay on track with her. Then she made the jump that I was
expecting – she started talking about life emerging from the primitive
seas. Single-celled life forms that began to replicate and pass their
DNA on to the next generation. She paused when she saw me starting to
shake my head.
“Wait a sec,” I said. “You’re getting ahead of me, or perhaps more precisely, you’re moving back too far. I’ll grant you that life first began in the seas, but even if I grant you the ‘primordial soup’ theory, you’re still making quite a jump. What I want to focus on are the first male and female land mammals. If we wind the clock back, there must be a point on the early Earth in which there are no mammals walking the land. None whatsoever. Whatever life exists, it hasn’t yet evolved to sexually reproducing, warm-blooded mammals. Before that point, maybe there’s life in the sea, but the land is barren; after that point, the land begins to get populated. You with me?”
She nodded.
“I’d like to know what model science has to explain how that first began. That first couple.”
She was still formulating an answer, so I pressed on. “I can understand that once you have thousands of fully functioning mammals that over time they may begin to change, especially if subjected to some environmental challenge. That makes perfect sense, whether it is directed by the genes, as I believe was designed into them, or whether it’s a random process. But tell me how the first pair appeared on the land.”
https://crossexamined.org/problems-with-evolutionary-biology
