MoribundMurdoch

The 2005 Kingdom of Heaven movie really did Guy and Sibylla dirty. I’m fairly sure the history was especially distorted because the writer and director were atheists and clung too tightly to a “religious tolerance is ideal” message, even at the expense of accurately portraying the actions of the actual historical figures.

Realistically, people are sharing abstracts with one another and then citing their preferred, biased sources of information, whether it’s Al Jazeera, the New York Post, The Wall Street Journal, Democracy Now, The New York Times, etc.. In practice, this means relying mostly on secondary sources, with primary studies cherry-picked to support whatever point they are trying to make.

At a minimum, there appears to be roughly a 33% efficiency loss compared to simply going there and doing the work directly through your church (or via the voluntary sector in general). To be honest, I am mostly repeating something I remember hearing at the Independent Institute, which is very biased, lol. I am not even sure I remember the figure correctly, so take that with a grain of salt. I would need to look it up again to confirm exactly what the speaker was referring to. That said, volunteering genuinely makes you feel good. In my opinion, it is far better than taxation. I would def recommend volunteer work, but not taxation.

We need some “everybody love everybody” and some Jesus-style politics, instead of all this identity politics whatnot.

What do you mean by "Do tell"?

As an Estonian, I’d just say that Americans have a heavy presence on the internet, that’s all. In my opinion, it’s a human thing, not a matter of race, nationality, or gender. If there were a study showing that one of those groups had a higher prevalence of that behavior, I’d expect it to change over time, just as women and men in South Korea have recently shifted their voting patterns. In other words, the behavior could be tied to temporary cultural/other factors.

So you actually believe a military should have quotas based on arbitrary characteristics such as race or gender, tied to the population it is meant to protect? That is, if the population is around 50% women, the military should attempt to have 50% women in all positions? And that any disparate outcome would be evidence of racism or sexism? Would that be your position taken to its extreme, while your actual position has the same essence but is much more sensible in degree? Or what do you think?

You should be free to be rude online. It’s useful to know who the rude ones are so you can avoid them. Censoring is a bad idea in this case, and I believe Valve has taken the correct stance.

This reminds me of Jeremy Kauffman's ad, "War is Gay," which advocated for making militarism as gay as possible. The point is that militarism, or zabernism, is considered acceptable and even encouraged as long as DEI quotas are met within the military. https://youtu.be/kdfym6LKpQ0

Just because one does not blame billionaires as the root cause of problems does not mean they are inclined to automatically blame those who look different from them, whether in terms of gender, ethnicity, nationality, or whatever.

Why is being confidently wrong considered an exclusive or primary trait of white males, and why would anyone attribute this behavior primarily to their gender or race?