Search results for query: *

Labor isn't "left".

That is how I would prefer it. As little change as possible, while still removing our ties to the monarchy. I guess the point of contention then is how is the GG chosen?

Disgraceful and inexcusable. It'll get swept under the carpet of course.

I'm not sure why you have gone off on a rant here. You pondered "why these men want to spend their time reading and performing to children". I simply gave you a valid reason why they would.

Because children haven't been conditioned to hate them. Yet. Therefore they have an audience which is completely non-judgmental. Which I'm sure they enjoy immensely.

In hindsight, I shouldn't have asked him the question. So it's not his fault for answering. However, like last night when I got a curt little note from an unnamed mod on another board about not keeping to the thread subject, I had posted figuring it was okay to continue on with the existing...

Why do you even care? I don't get the big deal over this issue.

I'd suggest empathy is more likely to be missing from right-wingers than intelligence.

I put up one post and apparently I'm a bigot. :p If they can't adhere to Christ's principles and philosophies, they aren't Christians, it's as simple as that. Ie, they are Christians in name only.

Except Huddo of course.

Churchgoers could only dream of being as righteous as the woke.

Which makes Israel's persecution of the Palestinians difficult to fathom.

"I'm not buying Cheer now that it has changed its name" say the hordes of commenters who would likely be against cancel culture.

Geezus, not this tired old talking point again.

Yeah, I've come across those too - although they are in fact simply people who think they know more than actual experts. And I'd still bet that this belief (that they know more than actual experts) comes from a more basic philosophy as I've suggested - eg, it's amazing how many conservatives...

So you you think you are better credentialled than experts in the field. What are your qualifications in the area?

I've come across four areas that pre-determine the positions of climate deniers, as I said. Once their position is determined, anything the scientific community says that disagrees with their position is ignored. Political - many of the right-wingers, as we see both locally and in the US...

But what determines your views on the matter?

What determines your view on the matter if it isn't what the scientific community thinks then? I just take the logical approach as my post suggests. You?

I've always found the climate deniers to be interesting. They start with a pre-existing climate denial view - which can be determined by things like politics, religion, self-interest, conspiracy theories, etc, or a mix thereof. Then they go looking for anything that reaffirms that view...

I've read some funny sh*t in my time on BF, but Greta Thunberg being accused of body shaming Tate is up there with the funniest.

https://www.wired.com/story/heres-proof-hate-speech-is-more-viral-on-elon-musks-twitter/

Well said Wesley Crusher.

Elon is about to find out, if he hasn't already, that "free speech" isn't absolute and has very real limitations.

Taking it to its extreme, Twitter will end up being a right-wing echo chamber that advertisers won't want to touch with a pole.

That's hilarious, coming from the champion of free speech.

Elon "Wile E Coyote" Musk.

There is absolutely no point in discussing this with you any further until you understand a concept which has been pointed out several times already - choice. People choose to participate in sports and other activities. Racehorses (in particular) don't get that choice. They are forced to.

When animals die so that people can have a bet, get s**tfaced and dress to the nines, people have every right to complain.

Again, people have a choice when they participate in sport. Horses don't get that choice. And if people form such a close, loving bond with a racehorse, why do they, for example, send it off to be turned into pet meat?