I am a “regular” flyer and a stoner and I never fail to bring with me a sample of devil’s lettuce when I’m leaving for extended period of time and never once I’ve had any issue bringing my hazardous material with me.
One time I even embarked with a small firework in my wallet I forgot I placed there after a party and none bat an eye.
Security level: top (not gun)
Gonna watch the vid while doing my chores but I really don’t understand this take about idiocracy and eugenetics I’ve already encountered in the past. Idiocracy it’s not a movie about eugenetics, it has more to do with overthinking your life choices and avoiding the responsibilities of being a parent due to a lack of confidence in oneself while other people less prone to thinking in general go on with their lives leaving offsprings around without a care in the world.
The movies never state these people lacking the ability to think about the future should be barred from breeding, if anything its message is for the other side of society and it states “quit being worried about the future all the time and start following your instincts a bit more”. In medium stat virtus as the old saying goes.
Anyway I’ll be back with a more in depth commentary about the video once done with it. See ya
It Will get better IF after the 2024 elections the GOP will be left with a minority in both the houses, Congress and senate. At that point it will be only on the democrats to pass legislations, notwithstanding eventual characters like Sinema and Manchin.
The best steps would be the ones taking them to the guillotine
That’s really metal \m/ \m/ \m/ \m/ \m/ \m/ \m/ \m/
Content moderation is gonna be tough, especially when advertising for absolute freedom of speech. It’s possible trolls will ruin the environment in a very short time if moderation and its rules wouldn’t be very clear and applied when necessary
If I may spend my two cents in this discussion I’d like to also propose Mr. Hicks as one of the true thinkers and philosopher of the last century. He had a lot in common with George from a social analysis standpoint and he also saw us humans as bi-faced entities capable of producing both the nastiest and the most beautiful acts while recognising that usually the lowest and most destructive instincts were the one guiding our choices.
As George did for you he also helped me forming my vision of the world and its current state of affairs while also making me laugh manically.
A huge thanks to both these men for helping some of us finding a way to navigate through this sensless journey, you’ll not be forgotten
Well, the statue will be more than material when he will be judged by the law.
The most funny thing is that you believe the infernal potentates are all aligned and following a ruler. By definition the hellish powers are independent and individual in their scopes and objectives, Satan fought God exactly because he didn’t recognize its ultimate authority over his own free will. Confusing Satan with Baphomet is like confusing Drumpf and Putin: they both are evil and terrible people supporting one another when their interests collide while also ready to jump at each other throat should the situation require so, but I would never accuse Drumpf of having moved war to Ukraine since it was Putin to do so.
But I don’t see you as a reasonable person so I presume this distinction will fall flat at your feet. Oh well, nothing bad, the guy will still be judged for his actions and will suffer the consequences (hopefully) for his sensless violence. Keep seething in your ignorance good boy
Okay, you go first tho. I’m following you, believe me, just jump from the bridge first
Kinda sure that’s not Satan but Baphomet. Completely different characters if you know what you are talking about; which is not your case since your Christian mindset doesn’t allow for the retaining of useful information as it is normal for a sheep mindset
That’s not Satan, that’s Baphomet.
A bit of demonology (or culture in general) can go a long way in helping these people avoiding this kind of nonsensical responses.
It’s like if someone were to deface a statue of the archangel Michael and I went on a tirade about how evil all the cherubims really were. Michael is an archangel, not a cherubim. Similar but not the same.
Love how you ran away from your stance as soon as you were required to provide the evidences cited in your comment. Really a true conservative
Ah yes, the Grand Old Projection party.
The “party” p is lowercase because the name is not referring to a proper political party but rather to a group of people came together to have fun among themselves while making the lives of everyone else a living hell, just like frats do during off-seasons.
I’d much prefer a panel if doctors deciding my fate rather than my mother or my father who may be blinded by their own emotions.
Even more if my family members were part of a sect like the Jehovah’s witnesses, for whom not even blood transfusions are acceptable. How stupid do you have to be to leave a loved one to die just to follow the instructions given by illiterate people living 2000 years ago? This kind of decisions should be informed but should also have limits around them. Keeping religion outside if this realm should be a very clear one for instance
First of all, gun laws have been more or less the same for the past 100 years in the U.S., so how can they be the cause of the recent rise in mass shootings? Simple answer: they’re not.
But they are, would your laws be stricter the appearance of these mass shootings would drop significantly since they perpetrators would have to go through a much mor rigorous screening process before being allowed near a firearm. The copycats and emulators are able to repeat these crimes ALSO because they have easy access to firearms, don’t act like this wouldn’t be a root cause for the mass shooting problem
Secondly, mass shootings make up a tiny fraction of gun violence; the fact that so many White liberals harp on mass shootings really just shows that they only really care about the gun violence that threatens to affect them and their kids. If they were serious about curbing gun violence, their focus wouldn’t be on mass shootings so much as smaller-scale gun crime
Those who commit small-scale gun crime use the same laws in place for mass-shooters and everybody else to access firearms used in their crimes
Third, many liberals are openly willing to kill a hobby that most gun owners enjoy without harming anyone, because they personally find said hobby unsightly and stupidly think they can stop gun violence in the U.S. by getting rid of gun stores—because that’s always put a stop to gun violence in other countries wherein it’s illegal to buy/sell guns (/s).
The Australian experience after the mass shooting in Port Arthur at the end of the 90ies tell a different story and it shows that guns buyback/confiscation can and will reduce crime committed by guns
I personally want to see many improvements to our gun laws in the U.S., such as more stringent background checks, laws against people with histories of serious psychiatric illness having access, laws against people with violent criminal histories having access, etc, but getting rid of all guns? No, total overkill, and such hardline, unreasonable stances are costing Democrats much-needed votes and ironically helping right-wing Nazis get closer to taking over the country. These views make no fucking sense when you scrutinize them and are clearly fueled by emotion rather than logic.
Tell that to the republicans, who see any intervention on the existing gun laws as an attack to the second amendment. More background checks? No thanks. Red flag laws? No thanks. Limiting firearms possession to those convicted of violent crimes? No thanks.
Who is the party operating according to feeling and who is the one operating according to common sense and logic? Let me give you a hint, it’s not the blue one who is using scare tactics to keep everything as it is
Money corrupt anything that wants to be corrupted. Having principles should avoid this corruption but, evidently, Tools have decided they don’t have principles to care about.
And mind you, it was a free and informed decision for them. I cannot fathom anyone forcing a band like them with their reach and love from their fanbase to do anything they wouldn’t be willing to do themselves in the first place
I’m really sorry to bother but the link provided does not work for me, I also tried to use the way back machine but it seems no one has saved a clear copy of the page so far… Have you another link to a non-paywalled version of the article to share by chance? Thank you for your help in any case!!
I do like their music and I enjoy listening to most of their albums, from a musical technique point of view there is literally nothing bad to say about the band.
But, recently, I found out that, in order to be able to see them live, one has to be subscribed to their on line fan service which gives access to the pre-order of their live events tickets even before they hit the normal sale channels. Given their fame it’s already hard to be able to find a ticket to one of their live shows, which are also already quite expensive themselves. If we count the cost of the subscription to their fanclub (50$/year) it seems like they don’t care about their less wealthy fans.
This has changed my perspective on the band and its message: before making this discovery I always saw Tools as a group focused on the enrichment of individuals through art and self-improvement. Now I see them as the guys who speak nice words but then act in a complete opposite way for their own benefit, because walking the way they talk about it’s too much of an hassle for themselves.
In conclusion I’ve decided to avoid going to their live concerts and to only listen to their music via open platforms such as YouTube.
Money are not needed for spiritual awakening so I’m sure they won’t be bothered by missing my money from their cachets
Once more if heritage didn’t naturally inherently change then there wouldn’t be anything to fight. Heritage changes.
You’re still talking about culture while referring yourself to heritage, how thick can you be?
And because if enough people change course in culture and society adopts that heritage will change. If heritage didn’t change then conservatives wouldn’t need to give a shit about culture or society changing because heritage would stay the same.
That heritage will not change, it will disappear little by little while culture change around it. I notice that you didn’t reply to my comment about the southern American heritage, do you think it has changed from the '800 or is it still the same racist construct it was 200 years ago?
I am better. I am considering the general case.
Keep telling you that, you might start believing it
My heritage says I ought to be going to church every sunday. I don’t. Still get along great with the family and everyone at church.
You haven’t considered that the culture around you has slightly changed from the past I see. That’s because you don’t understand the difference between heritage and culture and this is also the reason why we are having this conversation, but you are too prideful to accept my definitions and challenging them while also refusing to give your own. Scared of being proven wrong?
The definition that you came up with has elements that no other definition has and which are counter to the usage of the concept of heritage by the entire rest of the world. That is the major reason why your definition lacks merit.
Please prove this point, don’t just put it there without evidence to corroborate it
Your definition is like defining weather as only being when its raining and claiming that the weather never changes.
My definition is like differentiating between weather and climate. They seem similar but if I state that “the weather hasn’t changed because yesterday was raining and today it’s raining too” is a correct statement. If, on the other hand, I’d say that “the climate hasn’t changed because yesterday was raining and today it’s raining too” I’d be wrong since climate is not related to a single couple of days but to a much larger time scale
when you are too stubborn to back down after saying something embarrassingly wrong you will run into that.
So we can assume that people talking about the same points over and over again without giving any merits to their beliefs are the cultured ones? I start to understand how you ended up being so lackluster in your debating skills
Weather is only when its raining and weather never changes.
You are confusing weather and climate like you confuse heritage and culture. A not very bright example from a not very bright mind, what else is there to say?
I’ll return to this conversation whenever you will feel like providing me with your definitions, until then I’m talking to a wall which cannot see its being made of bricks as the worst possible argument for a debate.
Have a good one in the meantime 👋🏼👋🏼
Proceed to kill all his political opponents for a span of 30+ years.
God, gotta love the hard adherence to one’s principles