Comments by "D. San" (@DSan-kl2yc) on "Secular Talk" channel.

  1. 436
  2. 82
  3. 60
  4. 41
  5. 41
  6. 34
  7. 33
  8. 31
  9. 31
  10. 24
  11. 23
  12. 22
  13. 18
  14. 17
  15. 14
  16. 14
  17. 13
  18. 13
  19. 12
  20. 11
  21. 11
  22. 11
  23. 11
  24. 10
  25. 10
  26. 10
  27. 9
  28. 9
  29. 9
  30. 9
  31. 9
  32. 9
  33. 9
  34. 9
  35. 9
  36. 8
  37. 8
  38. 8
  39. 8
  40. 8
  41. 8
  42. 8
  43. 8
  44. 7
  45. 7
  46. 7
  47. 7
  48. 7
  49. 7
  50. 7
  51. 7
  52. 7
  53. 7
  54. 6
  55. 6
  56. 6
  57. 6
  58. 6
  59. 6
  60. 6
  61. 6
  62. 6
  63. 6
  64. 6
  65. 6
  66. 6
  67. 6
  68. 6
  69. 6
  70. 6
  71. 6
  72. 6
  73. 6
  74. 6
  75. 6
  76. 6
  77. 6
  78. 6
  79. 6
  80. 5
  81. 5
  82. 5
  83. 5
  84. 5
  85. 5
  86. 5
  87. 5
  88. 5
  89. 5
  90. 5
  91. 5
  92. 5
  93. 5
  94. 5
  95. 5
  96. 5
  97. 5
  98. 5
  99. 5
  100. 5
  101. 5
  102. 5
  103. 5
  104. 5
  105. 5
  106. 5
  107. 5
  108. 5
  109. 5
  110. 5
  111. 5
  112. 5
  113. 5
  114. 5
  115. 4
  116. 4
  117. 4
  118. 4
  119. 4
  120. 4
  121. 4
  122. 4
  123. 4
  124. 4
  125. 4
  126. 4
  127. 4
  128. 4
  129. 4
  130. 4
  131. 4
  132. 4
  133. 4
  134. 4
  135. 4
  136. 4
  137. 4
  138. 4
  139. 4
  140. 4
  141. 4
  142. 4
  143. 4
  144. 4
  145. 4
  146. 4
  147. 4
  148. 4
  149. 4
  150. 4
  151. 4
  152. 4
  153. 4
  154.  @mikenunya4491  the framing itself is misleading. It's not a guarantee. It's a guess based on the care you can get. It was over 20% at the start when people knew less about it. And you ignore that even 1% is considered high, and part of the problem with covid is how infectious it is. Phrased another way, it's about 900% more deadly than the flu(10-20 times more likely to kill you). There's also reinfection, intensive care and hospitalization, and long term side effects. And the fact that the outcome is a roll of the die. The u.s case fatality rate is around 1.78 based on confirmed cases and deaths. And about 2.28 for my state. “However, even when this uncertainty is taken into account, we still find that COVID-19 has a high fatality rate - on the order of 1% for a typical high-income country. This risk is concentrated in older ages, with the probability of dying from COVID-19 doubling approximately every eight years. https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20201030/covid-19-infection-fatality-ratio-is-about-one-point-15-percent " The estimates of infection fatality rate tended to be more homogeneous within each location, while they differed markedly across locations " This is guessed based on the possible total case number which is unknown vs deaths. And guessed to be around 1.15-1.65. But this is just looking at areas around the world, which may be have a different health level than the U.S. So it's important not to treat these things as strict numbers with a guarantee. Or to act like it's nothing. It can be nothing. Or it can be severe. Or it can be life ending. And it can keep mutating. It's not that you're wrong, but it's that your wrong. Not on the data, but on how you interpret it. We're upto 500,000+ deaths. And that's using the same data as your figures. In fact, it's using harder data that is confirmed. https://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/99/1/20-265892/en/ https://ourworldindata.org/mortality-risk-covid#what-we-want-to-know-isn-t-the-case-fatality-rate-it-s-the-infection-fatality-rate
    4
  155. 4
  156. 4
  157. 4
  158. 4
  159. 4
  160. 4
  161. 4
  162. 4
  163. 4
  164. 4
  165. 4
  166. 4
  167. 3
  168. 3
  169. 3
  170. 3
  171. 3
  172. 3
  173. 3
  174. 3
  175. 3
  176. 3
  177. 3
  178. 3
  179. 3
  180. 3
  181. 3
  182. 3
  183. 3
  184. 3
  185. 3
  186. 3
  187. 3
  188. 3
  189. 3
  190. 3
  191. 3
  192. 3
  193. 3
  194. 3
  195. 3
  196. 3
  197. 3
  198. 3
  199. 3
  200. 3
  201. 3
  202. 3
  203. 3
  204. 3
  205. 3
  206. 3
  207. 3
  208. 3
  209. 3
  210. 3
  211. 3
  212. 3
  213. 3
  214. 3
  215. 3
  216. 3
  217. 3
  218. 3
  219. 3
  220. 3
  221. 3
  222. 3
  223. 3
  224. 3
  225. 3
  226. 3
  227. 3
  228. 3
  229. 3
  230. 3
  231. 3
  232. 3
  233. 3
  234. 3
  235. 3
  236. 3
  237. 3
  238. 3
  239. 3
  240. 3
  241. 3
  242. 3
  243. 3
  244. 3
  245. 3
  246. 3
  247. 3
  248. 3
  249. 3
  250. 3
  251. 3
  252. 3
  253. 3
  254. 3
  255. 3
  256. 3
  257. 3
  258. 3
  259. 3
  260. 3
  261. 3
  262. 3
  263. 3
  264. 3
  265. 3
  266. 3
  267. 3
  268. 3
  269. 3
  270. 3
  271. 3
  272. 3
  273. 3
  274. 3
  275. 3
  276. 3
  277. 3
  278. 3
  279. 3
  280. 3
  281. 3
  282. 3
  283. 2
  284. 2
  285. 2
  286. 2
  287. 2
  288. 2
  289. 2
  290. 2
  291. 2
  292. 2
  293. 2
  294. 2
  295. 2
  296. 2
  297. 2
  298. 2
  299. 2
  300. 2
  301. 2
  302. 2
  303. 2
  304. 2
  305. 2
  306. 2
  307. 2
  308. 2
  309. 2
  310. 2
  311. 2
  312. 2
  313. 2
  314. 2
  315. 2
  316. 2
  317. 2
  318. 2
  319. 2
  320. 2
  321. 2
  322. 2
  323. 2
  324. 2
  325. 2
  326. 2
  327. 2
  328. 2
  329. 2
  330. 2
  331. 2
  332. 2
  333. 2
  334. 2
  335. 2
  336. 2
  337. 2
  338. 2
  339. 2
  340. 2
  341. 2
  342. 2
  343. 2
  344. 2
  345. 2
  346. 2
  347. 2
  348. 2
  349. 2
  350. 2
  351. 2
  352. 2
  353. 2
  354. 2
  355. 2
  356. 2
  357. 2
  358. 2
  359. 2
  360. 2
  361. 2
  362. 2
  363. 2
  364. 2
  365. 2
  366. 2
  367. 2
  368. 2
  369. 2
  370. 2
  371. 2
  372. 2
  373. 2
  374. 2
  375. 2
  376. 2
  377. 2
  378. 2
  379. 2
  380. 2
  381. 2
  382. 2
  383. 2
  384. 2
  385. 2
  386. 2
  387. 2
  388. 2
  389. 2
  390. 2
  391. 2
  392. 2
  393. 2
  394. 2
  395. 2
  396. 2
  397. 2
  398. 2
  399. 2
  400. 2
  401. 2
  402. 2
  403. 2
  404. 2
  405. 2
  406. 2
  407. 2
  408. 2
  409. 2
  410. 2
  411. 2
  412. 2
  413. 2
  414. 2
  415. 2
  416. 2
  417. 2
  418. 2
  419. 2
  420. 2
  421. 2
  422. 2
  423. 2
  424. 2
  425. 2
  426. 2
  427. 2
  428. 2
  429. 2
  430. 2
  431. 2
  432. 2
  433. 2
  434. 2
  435. 2
  436. 2
  437. 2
  438. 2
  439. 2
  440. 2
  441. 2
  442. 2
  443. 2
  444. 2
  445. 2
  446. 2
  447. 2
  448. 2
  449. 2
  450. 2
  451. 2
  452. 2
  453. 2
  454. 2
  455. 2
  456. 2
  457. 2
  458. 2
  459. 2
  460. 2
  461. 2
  462. 2
  463. 2
  464. 2
  465. 2
  466. 2
  467. 2
  468. 2
  469. 2
  470. 2
  471. 2
  472. 2
  473. 2
  474. 2
  475. 2
  476. 2
  477. 2
  478. 2
  479. 2
  480. 2
  481. 2
  482. 2
  483. 2
  484. 2
  485. 2
  486. 2
  487. 2
  488. 2
  489. 2
  490. 2
  491. 2
  492. 2
  493. 2
  494. 2
  495. 2
  496. 2
  497. 2
  498. 2
  499. 2
  500. 2
  501. 2
  502. 2
  503. 2
  504. 2
  505. 2
  506. 2
  507. 2
  508. 2
  509. 2
  510. 2
  511. 2
  512. 2
  513. 2
  514. 2
  515. 2
  516. 2
  517. 2
  518. 2
  519. 2
  520. 2
  521. 2
  522. 2
  523. 2
  524. 2
  525. 2
  526. 2
  527. 2
  528. 2
  529. 2
  530. 2
  531. 2
  532. 2
  533. 2
  534. 2
  535. 2
  536. 2
  537. 2
  538. 2
  539. 2
  540. 2
  541. 2
  542. 2
  543. 2
  544. 2
  545. 2
  546. 2
  547. 2
  548. 2
  549. 2
  550. 2
  551. 2
  552. 2
  553. 2
  554. 2
  555. 1
  556. 1
  557. 1
  558. 1
  559. 1
  560. 1
  561. 1
  562. 1
  563. 1
  564. 1
  565. 1
  566. 1
  567. 1
  568. 1
  569. 1
  570.  @aaayhvcvb3219  I'm sorry but some things you've said don't add up. The little bias from companies isn ot little at at all. That's huge when it comes to something like healthcare. And the reason the government doesn't follow what people want, is due to companies interference. And where does the government bias come from... If it's from the government not listening, like I said that's from money from interest group. here's an example. The traffic light. There's cameras on them to deter speeding. They work. Someone with a financial incentive wanted to use them to make people pay more to justify it, meaning anyone going over red. instead of the two shot approach that is used. But the police turned them down because the incentive is safety. Not profit. Same thing with a national park. This one isn't so bad. But the guy wanted to pay for the park, or the park to pay for itself, by letting people camp in it... but the whole point was a conservation that people can't use. A profit bias is huge compared to an agency that merely wants to do what it sets out to do. In a health care situation, the best way to get money is to cover less sick people. The best care or even basic care is priced out of range. People need companies to pay for them. That's broken. Sometimes an incentive for profit is broken. When the major incentive should be something else. Also the government might not follow what people want(do to the same people you want us to support) but companies definitely don't. Or they don't just as often. We have more control over our government then a company. A vote vs a dollar. some companies would be fine without my money. But organizing a vote is easier than a boycott.
    1
  571. 1
  572. 1
  573. 1
  574. 1
  575. 1
  576. 1
  577. 1
  578. 1
  579. 1
  580. 1
  581. 1
  582. 1
  583. 1
  584. 1
  585. 1
  586. 1
  587. 1
  588. 1
  589. 1
  590. 1
  591. 1
  592. 1
  593. 1
  594. 1
  595. 1
  596. 1
  597. 1
  598. 1
  599. 1
  600. 1
  601. 1
  602. 1
  603. 1
  604. 1
  605. 1
  606. 1
  607. 1
  608. 1
  609. 1
  610. 1
  611. 1
  612. 1
  613. 1
  614. 1
  615. 1
  616. 1
  617. 1
  618. 1
  619.  @youngmachiavelli7625  I don't think it's a stunt because the U.S has a conservative strain. And this is very much in line with it. Let me reiterate some points..this would target all politicians, not just Biden, any catholic one. And that it isn't about political power. Not sure if I can or am explaining this well. But power over church doctrine(not officially but to people). In other words these bishops see the politicians as the ones dictating what the church considers ok, not politically through laws but by authority of office. So they don't want to condone it, and to try make a break between them. This is about public perception. One of the unforeseen potential problems will be that it might only focus on democrats for example. Though most republicans are protestant. Though this would seemingly just be a guideline and not binding either. it's also very much in line with how conservative evangelical protestants have sort of shrunk into their own bubble. That's what I meant by it being in line with the conservative strain in the U.S. If it's not on purpose pulling voters away could be another negative side effect. but Catholics don't really work that way, as least not the foreign ones I know. In fact another side could be the opposite. It might hurt catholic's connection to the church. At the very least it's already causing more animosity which has never been lacking. Or politicians might switch churches(sects), meaning less visible people in it. Meaning more obscurity if this guideline passes, it could just potentially be ignored. And be forgotten. The person overseeing Biden's area already said he's welcomed. Let me explain that this is sort of being done like a senate as well. Meaning that the conservative areas are probably the ones introducing this, or they have an influence on this.
    1
  620. 1
  621. 1
  622. 1
  623. 1
  624. 1
  625. 1
  626. 1
  627. 1
  628. 1
  629. 1
  630. 1
  631. 1
  632. 1
  633. 1
  634. 1
  635. 1
  636. 1
  637. 1
  638. 1
  639. 1
  640. 1
  641. 1
  642. 1
  643. 1
  644. 1
  645. 1
  646. 1
  647. 1
  648. 1
  649. 1
  650. 1
  651. 1
  652. 1
  653. 1
  654. 1
  655. 1
  656. 1
  657. 1
  658. 1
  659. 1
  660. 1
  661. 1
  662. 1
  663. 1
  664. 1
  665. 1
  666. 1
  667. 1
  668. 1
  669. 1
  670. 1
  671. 1
  672. 1
  673. 1
  674. 1
  675. 1
  676. 1
  677. 1
  678. @Mason Rued yeah you're acting crazy. And you didn't explain your implications. You want to say it's a non issue then that's great. Let's make it a non issue. We were discussing whether something should be allowed or not. Let's say the player that got his money, fairly won from blizzard, taken away. We can all agree that's a harsh response. That was one way to take away people's ability to speak by punishing them. The company is apperently within in their right to do it but it doesn't make it right. And let's be clear that this right wing talking point is supported by Kyle kylinski. And it's only a right wing talking point because you say it is. There's nothing defining it as right wing. I have no idea why you're rather agrression about this. Nor am I saying people are being oppressed or any specific issue. I'm saying it's unnecessary to deplatform people. Whether by a mob or a company because as you show, there's lots of jumps and aggressions and ways it can go wrong. When we can just as well ignore it. Or refute it. And if you take away a papers right to be published, that would be an issue. Average person isn't rich. Whatever they have access to, especially when it's free, is how they communicate. Ostracizing anyone starts to hinder ones ability to say anything. Whether it's theoretical or not doesn't matter. The principled stance shouldn't be that if it's those people it's fine. Stop with whatever preconceptions you have man. We don't know each other. And it's fine to disagree.
    1
  679. 1
  680. 1
  681. 1
  682. 1
  683. 1
  684. 1
  685. 1
  686. 1
  687. 1
  688. 1
  689. 1
  690. 1
  691. 1
  692. 1
  693. 1
  694. 1
  695. 1
  696. 1
  697. 1
  698. 1
  699. 1
  700. 1
  701. 1
  702. 1
  703. 1
  704. 1
  705. 1
  706. 1
  707. 1
  708. 1
  709. 1
  710. 1
  711. 1
  712. 1
  713. 1
  714. 1
  715. 1
  716. 1
  717. 1
  718. 1
  719. 1
  720. 1
  721. 1
  722. 1
  723. 1
  724. 1
  725. 1
  726. 1
  727. 1
  728. 1
  729. 1
  730. 1
  731. 1
  732. 1
  733. 1
  734. 1
  735. 1
  736. 1
  737. 1
  738. 1
  739. 1
  740. 1
  741. 1
  742. 1
  743. 1
  744. 1
  745. 1
  746. 1
  747. 1
  748. 1
  749. 1
  750. 1
  751. 1
  752. 1
  753. 1
  754. 1
  755. 1
  756. 1
  757. 1
  758. 1
  759. 1
  760. 1
  761. 1
  762. 1
  763. 1
  764. 1
  765. 1
  766. 1
  767. 1
  768. 1
  769. 1
  770. 1
  771. 1
  772. 1
  773. 1
  774. 1
  775. 1
  776. 1
  777. 1
  778. 1
  779. 1
  780. 1
  781. 1
  782. 1
  783. 1
  784. 1
  785. 1
  786. 1
  787. 1
  788. 1
  789. 1
  790. 1
  791. 1
  792. 1
  793. 1
  794. 1
  795. 1
  796. 1
  797. 1
  798. 1
  799. 1
  800. 1
  801. 1
  802. 1
  803. 1
  804. 1
  805. 1
  806. 1
  807. 1
  808. 1
  809. 1
  810. 1
  811. 1
  812. 1
  813. 1
  814. 1
  815. 1
  816. 1
  817. 1
  818. 1
  819. 1
  820. 1
  821. 1
  822. 1
  823. 1
  824. 1
  825. 1
  826. 1
  827. 1
  828. 1
  829. 1
  830. 1
  831. 1
  832. 1
  833. 1
  834. 1
  835. 1
  836. 1
  837. 1
  838. 1
  839. 1
  840. 1
  841. 1
  842. 1
  843. 1
  844. 1
  845. 1
  846. 1
  847. 1
  848. 1
  849. 1
  850. 1
  851. 1
  852. 1
  853. 1
  854. 1
  855. 1
  856. 1
  857. 1
  858. 1
  859. 1
  860. 1
  861. 1
  862. 1
  863. 1
  864. 1
  865. 1
  866. 1
  867. 1
  868. 1
  869. 1
  870. 1
  871. 1
  872. 1
  873. 1
  874. 1
  875. 1
  876. 1
  877. 1
  878. 1
  879. 1
  880. 1
  881. 1
  882. 1
  883. 1
  884. 1
  885. 1
  886. 1
  887. 1
  888. 1
  889. 1
  890. 1
  891. 1
  892. 1
  893. 1
  894. 1
  895. 1
  896. 1
  897. 1
  898. 1
  899. 1
  900. 1
  901. 1
  902. 1
  903. 1
  904. 1
  905. 1
  906. 1
  907. 1
  908. 1
  909. 1
  910. 1
  911. 1
  912. 1
  913. 1
  914. 1
  915. 1
  916. 1
  917. 1
  918. 1
  919. 1
  920. 1
  921. 1
  922. 1
  923. 1
  924. 1
  925. 1
  926. ​ @VitalVampyr  I didn't make it a binary offensive or defensive allotment. That's how your thinking. I even asked how you defined it. You're projecting your mentality onto me. Maybe because you're reading my response to your response. Also you used a historical view at first, and now you're switching to a contemporary one. That in itself is not a problem. But don't act like that's what we were talking about before. How do these people feel about U.S involvement? I'm not one of them. So I can't say. And I can't say I know the situation in these places. This is a disclaimer. Let's see what a quick search shows. The U.S invaded Afganisthan Pakistan seems to be an ally Yemen is in a civil war. And I'm guessing you didn't read the article I linked or read about it's history. That was also a civil war. The U.S might not be correct in who it backs at all. part of the reason they're at war is because the previous leader backed the U.S... C'mon. I feel like you're trying too hard already to support whatever military centric view. People tend not to like another country apply their power on them. The U.S is fighting the government of Yemen, backed by saudi arabia. That's them being aggressive. Uganda is an ally but the U.S isn't fighting them or even defending them. The U.S is backing someone that is damn near a dictator. And helping him terrorize people. And the rabbit hole that is U.S involvement in the Congo. You can't see how they flipflop with who they support. Like the death of Patrice Lamumba by their backed Motobu. This is the history of U.S involvement. Again, no one is against the U.S helping people who are approved by, everyone, allies, supported by the U.N, who aren't full of human rights violation. But that's not what's happened. So why are they going into these costly wars conflicts. And even if they aren't, they're definitely back horrible people. If they help one of these people win, that becomes on them. When it doesn't have to be. U.S definitely invaded Iraq. U.S was involved in Syria. Even before there was a war. They literally helped cause a war. I don't know what that falls under. But that's pretty fucked up. At least twice, you're acting like the aftermath and occupation of an invasion, means that there weren't invasions. The occupation is related, and connected to the invasion. And that's another Civil War. Well I'm asking these questions rhetorically. Your viewpoint I can imagine. suffice it to say that Syria is not a good example of the U.S being in support. And even Assad has accused The U.S of regime change. So I don't know how much in defense that is. But he's not someone to support either. Either way the U.S would have to live with the morality of it's decisions because it chose to get involved. I'm not even sure if the U.S knows who it's supporting. Basically, Using your own definition, I don't think Syria falls under the "defense" angle. So 4/7 were invasions. But Uganda is like supporting saudi arabia. And the history of U.S involvement in the African countries can't be said to be good. 2/3 are horrible governments.
    1
  927. 1
  928. 1
  929. 1
  930. 1
  931. 1
  932. 1
  933. 1
  934. 1
  935. 1
  936. 1
  937. 1
  938. 1
  939. 1
  940. 1
  941. 1
  942. 1
  943. 1
  944. 1
  945. 1
  946. 1
  947. 1
  948. 1
  949. 1
  950. 1
  951. 1
  952. 1
  953. 1
  954. 1
  955. 1
  956. 1
  957. 1
  958. 1
  959. 1
  960. 1
  961. 1
  962. 1
  963. 1
  964. 1
  965. 1
  966. 1
  967. 1
  968. 1
  969. 1
  970. 1
  971.  @dagoatwut6792  I said I did it since the beginning of the pandemic. I supported this before it did. But it got to me, and it got to me family. So I do have first-hand experience with it. Say that you want to go to work instead of acting like someone who's in a death cult. The path through this has always been the goal. And the way is to follow guidelines and make sure we lower the numbers. If instead of fighting that you actually joined the effort, and told other right wingers to, we'd be in a much better place. Support the effort instead of making the problem worst. It's that easy. You want to go back to work, then make sure everyone is doing what they have to, advice them to, instead of stopping half way and quitting and making the situation worst. One comment summed it up, it's like quitting a doctor's recommendation halfway through and then the injury takes much more to cure. I imagine the right wing ethos just tell you to find a job you can do from home. Or one where you can get sick in retail. That's the attitude of people that don't care. So now you want everyone to be so sympathetic to you that we risk human lives for you. I do sympathize with people who need help and aren't working. There are solutions for this. What does it matter if it's from the government. But more importantly, your solution isn't good. I don't know how to say that without insulting and I don't want to in this regard. We need to follow through with this "medicine" before we reopen. That is the goal. There's no conspiracy against it. But it means following through with this the right way.
    1
  972. 1
  973. 1
  974. 1
  975. 1
  976. 1
  977. 1
  978. 1
  979. 1
  980. 1
  981. 1
  982. 1
  983. 1
  984. 1
  985. 1
  986. 1
  987. 1
  988. 1
  989. 1
  990. 1
  991. 1
  992. 1
  993. 1
  994. 1
  995. 1
  996. 1
  997. 1
  998. 1
  999. 1
  1000. 1
  1001. 1
  1002. 1
  1003. 1
  1004. 1
  1005. 1
  1006. 1
  1007. 1
  1008. 1
  1009. 1
  1010. 1
  1011. 1
  1012. 1
  1013. 1
  1014. 1
  1015. 1
  1016. 1
  1017. 1
  1018. 1
  1019. 1
  1020. 1
  1021. 1
  1022. 1
  1023. 1
  1024. 1
  1025. 1
  1026. 1
  1027. 1
  1028. 1
  1029. 1
  1030. 1
  1031. 1
  1032. 1
  1033. 1
  1034. 1
  1035. 1
  1036. 1
  1037. 1
  1038. 1
  1039. 1
  1040. 1
  1041. 1
  1042. 1
  1043. 1
  1044. 1
  1045. 1
  1046. 1
  1047. 1
  1048. 1
  1049. 1
  1050. 1
  1051. 1
  1052. 1
  1053. 1
  1054. 1
  1055. 1
  1056. 1
  1057. 1
  1058. 1
  1059. 1
  1060. 1
  1061. 1
  1062. 1
  1063. 1
  1064. 1
  1065. 1
  1066. 1
  1067. 1
  1068. 1
  1069. 1
  1070.  @jonsmith9838  I agree. Anything that is like physical or legal oppression or flat out illegal is fine to talk back on, and take a stand on. The trans room thing is fine. I think most younger people weren't very vocal about it. What I've seen them be vocal about is trans athletes, which requires explaining. And when young trans kids should start transitioning, which also requires explaining, and different trans people have ideas on. We have to realize that some people are against the whole thing(they take any anti argument essentially in bad faith). But some people require explaining, or are more reasonable. But might have caution. But aren't going to vote in a republican. Ultimately this is like an issue for doctors and the people involved cause it's not like we're going to be that well informed by comparison. These cultural issues aren't on that level usually. So we or you think we're talking about this but they're talking about something on a less grandiose level that affects them. I agree it's not about throwing anyone away. I think it's about having some tolerance. About leaving some people alone. About understanding where some views come from(backgrounds, different eras ect), and understanding that some people are at different points of the journey. Going back to economic policy. Sometimes we're talking about young people, some that didn't go to school, or didn't like what they were told there cause it seemed one sided. Who just aren't looking at economic policy or aware of it. Their first exposure to this is culture war stuff. And I don't know where that will take them. Whether it's down to right-wing economics or just not voting. Worst case scenario is if they're white, is racism. Racist lurk in those right-wing outrage circles. Let me state again I don't think it's right wing republicans necessarily that matter here. It could be regular but apolitical people.
    1
  1071. 1
  1072. 1
  1073. 1
  1074. 1
  1075. 1
  1076. 1
  1077. 1
  1078. 1
  1079. 1
  1080. 1
  1081. 1
  1082. 1
  1083. 1
  1084. 1
  1085. 1
  1086. 1
  1087. 1
  1088. 1
  1089. 1
  1090. 1
  1091. 1
  1092. 1
  1093. 1
  1094. 1
  1095. 1
  1096. 1
  1097. 1
  1098. 1
  1099. 1
  1100. 1
  1101. 1
  1102. 1
  1103. 1
  1104. 1
  1105. 1
  1106. 1
  1107. 1
  1108. 1
  1109. 1
  1110. 1
  1111. 1
  1112. 1
  1113. 1
  1114. 1
  1115. 1
  1116. 1
  1117. 1
  1118. 1
  1119. 1
  1120. 1
  1121. 1
  1122. 1
  1123. 1
  1124. 1
  1125. 1
  1126. 1
  1127. 1
  1128. 1
  1129. 1
  1130. 1
  1131. 1
  1132. 1
  1133. 1
  1134. 1
  1135. 1
  1136. 1
  1137. 1
  1138. 1
  1139. 1
  1140. 1
  1141. 1
  1142. 1
  1143. 1
  1144. 1
  1145. 1
  1146. 1
  1147. 1
  1148. 1
  1149. 1
  1150. 1
  1151. 1
  1152. 1
  1153. 1
  1154. 1
  1155. 1
  1156. 1
  1157. 1
  1158. 1
  1159. 1
  1160. 1
  1161. 1
  1162. 1
  1163. 1
  1164. 1
  1165. 1
  1166. 1
  1167. 1
  1168. 1
  1169. 1
  1170. 1
  1171. 1
  1172. 1
  1173. 1
  1174. 1
  1175. 1
  1176. 1
  1177. 1
  1178. 1
  1179. 1
  1180. 1
  1181. 1
  1182. 1
  1183. 1
  1184. 1
  1185. 1
  1186. 1
  1187. 1
  1188. 1
  1189. 1
  1190. 1
  1191. 1
  1192. 1
  1193. 1
  1194. 1
  1195. 1
  1196. 1
  1197. 1
  1198. 1
  1199. 1
  1200. 1
  1201. 1
  1202. 1
  1203. 1
  1204. 1
  1205. 1
  1206. 1
  1207. 1
  1208. 1
  1209. 1
  1210. 1
  1211. 1
  1212. 1
  1213. 1
  1214. 1
  1215. 1
  1216. 1
  1217. 1
  1218. 1
  1219. 1
  1220. 1
  1221. 1
  1222. 1
  1223. 1
  1224. 1
  1225. 1
  1226. 1
  1227. 1
  1228. 1
  1229. 1
  1230. 1
  1231. 1
  1232. 1
  1233. 1
  1234. 1
  1235. 1
  1236. 1
  1237. 1
  1238. 1
  1239. 1
  1240. 1
  1241. 1
  1242. 1
  1243. 1
  1244. 1
  1245. 1
  1246. 1
  1247. 1
  1248. 1
  1249. 1
  1250. 1
  1251. 1
  1252. 1
  1253. 1
  1254. 1
  1255. 1
  1256. 1
  1257. 1
  1258. 1
  1259. 1
  1260. 1
  1261. 1
  1262. 1
  1263. 1
  1264. 1
  1265. 1
  1266. 1
  1267. 1
  1268. 1
  1269. 1
  1270. 1
  1271. 1
  1272. 1
  1273. 1
  1274. 1
  1275. 1
  1276. 1
  1277. 1
  1278. 1
  1279. 1
  1280. 1
  1281. 1
  1282. 1
  1283. 1
  1284. 1
  1285. 1
  1286. 1
  1287. 1
  1288. 1
  1289. 1
  1290. 1
  1291. 1
  1292. 1
  1293. 1
  1294. 1
  1295. 1
  1296. 1
  1297. 1
  1298. 1
  1299. 1
  1300. 1
  1301. 1
  1302. 1
  1303. 1
  1304. 1
  1305. 1
  1306. 1
  1307. 1
  1308. 1
  1309. 1
  1310. 1
  1311. 1
  1312. 1
  1313. 1
  1314. 1
  1315. 1
  1316. 1
  1317. 1
  1318. 1
  1319.  @iliketrains263  ha you don't know about comics at all. I read the original x men story in collections. It wasn't about civil rights. It's the same thing spider Man was about. Weird young people. The concept was broad and so it evolved or encapsulated anything to feeling weird, outsider, and discriminated against. You think the Jewish Stan Lee didn't know a little about that or heard of it. Comics are adventure stories. First and foremost. Superman was not an immigrant story. Superman was raised as a child only knowing the U.S. he didn't even learn he was an alien till an adult supposedly. Now did the real world informed the fiction, of course because all fiction comes from reality. And thr writers wrote whatever they wanted, and their childhood. Jack Kirby wrote about poor kids in gangs because he experienced that. But was that a political book about poverty, no it wasn't. Comics have had a mixed tie to issues of the day off and on. Sometimes as PSAs. Especially in the 60s. Marvel got slightly political later in the 60s and 70s. But they are adventure stories and trace their origin to adventure comic strips that were... Adventure stories. Which trace their origins to pull mags which were adventure stories, which trace their origin to adventure literature which were adventure stories, which trace their origins to mythic stories that were adventure stories. Didactic soap box or heavy handed caricature politics often is not good writing. Which is another part. How well it's delivered. And superman was an alien to justify his powers that were similar to the character from Gladiator, Hugo Danner. Maybe they were inspired by Moses or it just so happened. But this secondary idea is just a later extrapolation
    1
  1320. 1
  1321. 1
  1322. 1
  1323. 1
  1324. 1
  1325. 1
  1326. 1
  1327. 1
  1328. 1
  1329. 1
  1330. 1
  1331. 1
  1332. 1
  1333. 1
  1334. 1
  1335. 1
  1336. 1
  1337. 1
  1338. 1
  1339. 1
  1340. 1
  1341. 1
  1342. 1
  1343. 1
  1344. 1
  1345. 1
  1346. 1
  1347. 1
  1348. 1
  1349. 1
  1350. 1
  1351. 1
  1352. 1
  1353. 1
  1354. 1
  1355. 1
  1356. 1
  1357. 1
  1358. 1
  1359. 1
  1360. 1
  1361. 1
  1362. 1
  1363. 1
  1364. 1
  1365. 1
  1366. 1
  1367. 1
  1368. 1
  1369. 1
  1370. 1
  1371. 1
  1372. 1
  1373. 1
  1374. 1
  1375. 1
  1376. 1
  1377. 1
  1378. 1
  1379. 1
  1380. 1
  1381. 1
  1382. 1
  1383. 1
  1384. 1
  1385. 1
  1386. 1
  1387. 1
  1388. 1
  1389. 1
  1390. 1
  1391. 1
  1392. 1
  1393. 1
  1394. 1
  1395. 1
  1396. 1
  1397. 1
  1398. 1
  1399. 1
  1400. 1
  1401. 1
  1402. 1
  1403. 1
  1404. 1
  1405. 1
  1406. 1
  1407. 1
  1408. 1
  1409. 1
  1410. 1
  1411. 1
  1412. 1
  1413. 1
  1414. 1
  1415. 1
  1416. 1
  1417. 1
  1418. 1
  1419. 1
  1420. 1
  1421. 1
  1422. 1
  1423. 1
  1424. 1
  1425. 1
  1426. 1
  1427. 1
  1428. 1
  1429. 1
  1430. 1
  1431. 1
  1432. 1
  1433. 1
  1434. 1
  1435. 1
  1436. 1
  1437. 1
  1438. 1
  1439. 1
  1440. 1
  1441. 1
  1442. 1
  1443. 1
  1444. 1
  1445. 1
  1446. 1
  1447. 1
  1448. 1
  1449. 1
  1450. 1
  1451. 1
  1452. 1
  1453. 1
  1454. 1
  1455. 1
  1456. 1
  1457. 1
  1458. 1
  1459. 1
  1460. 1
  1461. 1
  1462. 1
  1463. 1
  1464. 1
  1465. 1
  1466. 1
  1467. 1
  1468. 1
  1469. 1
  1470. 1
  1471. 1
  1472. 1
  1473. 1
  1474. 1
  1475. 1
  1476. 1
  1477. 1
  1478. 1
  1479. 1
  1480. 1
  1481. 1
  1482. 1
  1483. 1
  1484. 1
  1485. 1
  1486. 1
  1487. 1
  1488. 1
  1489. 1
  1490. 1
  1491. 1
  1492. 1
  1493. 1
  1494. 1
  1495. 1
  1496. 1
  1497. 1
  1498. 1
  1499. 1
  1500. 1
  1501. 1
  1502. 1
  1503. 1
  1504. 1
  1505. 1
  1506. 1
  1507. 1
  1508. 1
  1509. Jobu_Cerrano free police, free fire services, free military. Where does the money come from. Let's be clear. We're not objectivist. Isn't this part of things evolving. Things change. Businesses are disrupted. One of these is that healthcare would be better if we all helped each other and it fell under the government. Everything else is negotiable. Some college based on passing the class. Means people can have actual better opportunities. Its bad if it's state by state. If we're going to have a min wage it should be tied so that it grows in a sensible way. But compared to healthcare, everything is a lesser problem. Literally saving lives. Then University in some way is second most important. Or job training. We are letting companies play us and manipulate the government by not just doing it ourselves or together and using the tools we have. I was just reading that the government asked and basically threaten tax companies to have some method to help people instead of doing it themselves. And what the tax companies came up with, they obviously don't advirtise. Now we can have a welfare state where people are to only willing to, almost unfairly, help the poor. And people can be pissed about that. Or we can be fair and help everyone. And it'll cost a lot less. Heck various states ha e managed to do some things. And various could tried have managed to do some of these too. You can look up how many states do each single one of these. And how many countries have some free or subsidized healthcare. It's possible without things going nuts and people making it about gender or whatever dumb politics
    1
  1510. 1
  1511. 1
  1512. 1
  1513. 1
  1514. 1
  1515. 1
  1516. 1
  1517. 1
  1518. 1
  1519. 1
  1520. 1
  1521. 1
  1522. 1
  1523. 1
  1524. 1
  1525. 1
  1526. 1
  1527. 1
  1528. 1
  1529. 1
  1530. 1
  1531. 1
  1532. 1
  1533. 1
  1534. 1
  1535. 1
  1536. 1
  1537. 1
  1538. 1
  1539. 1
  1540. 1
  1541. 1
  1542. 1
  1543. 1
  1544. 1
  1545. 1
  1546. 1
  1547. 1
  1548. 1
  1549. 1
  1550. 1
  1551. 1
  1552. 1
  1553. 1
  1554. 1
  1555. 1
  1556. 1
  1557. 1
  1558. 1
  1559. 1
  1560. 1
  1561. 1
  1562. 1
  1563. 1
  1564. 1
  1565. 1
  1566. 1
  1567. 1
  1568. 1
  1569. 1
  1570. 1
  1571. 1
  1572. 1
  1573. 1
  1574. 1
  1575. 1
  1576. 1
  1577. 1
  1578. 1
  1579. 1
  1580. 1
  1581. 1
  1582. 1
  1583. 1
  1584. 1
  1585. 1
  1586. 1
  1587. 1
  1588. 1
  1589. 1
  1590. 1
  1591. 1
  1592. 1
  1593. 1
  1594. 1
  1595. 1
  1596. 1
  1597. 1
  1598. 1
  1599. 1
  1600. 1
  1601. 1
  1602. 1
  1603. 1
  1604. 1
  1605. 1