It’s a common mistake to assume that gun buybacks are being proposed as a solution. The solutions being proposed are a set of laws/policies to tighten gun controls, like who’s allowed to buy guns, what guns are allowed to be owned and how many, improving checks and mitigating newer loopholes.

Tighter gun controls are shown to reduce mass shootings. In Australia, the laws have loosened a lot since the big wave of gun laws in 1996. The buyback program is a consequence of bringing people in line with the new laws.

The realistic goal is not to make it absolutely impossible for a motivated extremist with lots of resources to plan and commit a mass shooting, it’s to make it much harder to prepare to do and to create more opportunities to notice their preparation.

The counter-claim is not that racism is exclusively a men’s issue. The counter-claim is that the claim “men’s rights don’t vary by state” is false, as evidenced an example of how men’s rights do vary by state. The implied part that should have been explicit is that the way racism manifests from state to state also has gendered aspects, with some disproportionately affecting women (e.g. hair/dress policing in the workplace) but some also disproportionately affecting men (e.g. incarceration). That is to say, racism and sexism are intersectional. Another example might be how custody rights typically vary from state to state often unjustly disfavoring the father, given all other things being equal.

I’d suggest that this argument does not go against the underlying position of OP that “patriarchy bad”, rather it corrects OP to highlight how institutional sexism typically falls along normative/conservative conceptions of gender for men too. That is to say “patriarchy bad mostly for women, but also bad for men too”.

It’s never stopped the US from selling them modern-for-the-time F-15s, their advanced versions, and other advanced weapons systems. Or Europe from selling them the Eurofighter Typhoon.

I’m not saying this is the same or not a horrible decision full of corruption. Just that SA has been a longstanding strategic ally that has received a lot of military support from Western countries.

This sale is horrible for many reasons including military intelligence. However a lot of the responses seem a bit ignorant of the current state of things. I’m sure there are lots of key technologies in materials, aerospace engineering, and digital warfare let alone the strategic intelligence of capabilities. However, China also already has many of the F-35 plans, enough to build a version of their own in the J-35. These fighters are also no longer next gen fighters. They are current 5th gen. Both US and China are developing their next 6th gen fighters.

That’s a historical text interpretation of the Bible, which is legit to me. However I’d say only a minority of practicing Christians regard it that way. With the rest, you have more fundamentalist views of the Bible as the literal word of God and the flexible view of it as metaogorical teachings inspired by God. Therefore these views treat the Bible specifically as authoritative, timeless, and divine, elevating it above a mere human document and transcendent of historical context. Timothy 3:17 seems to reflect the common idea that “the Bible is the only book you need”.

I do agree that one can make a historical argument for an interpretation of scripture, and maybe even do so in a way that reifies one’s personal relationship with God. However it doesn’t engage with the Bible the way most Christians do and therefore is not likely to be all that persuasive.

Exactly. People need to take in the full context. Here is the full chapter, with the quote in the final paragraph, which… Makes the quote even worse?

Instructions on Worship

2 I urge, then, first of all, that petitions, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for all people— 2 for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. 3 This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4 who wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave himself as a ransom for all people. This has now been witnessed to at the proper time. 7 And for this purpose I was appointed a herald and an apostle—I am telling the truth, I am not lying—and a true and faithful teacher of the Gentiles.

8 Therefore I want the men everywhere to pray, lifting up holy hands without anger or disputing. 9 I also want the women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, adorning themselves, not with elaborate hairstyles or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, 10 but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God.

11 A woman[a] should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man;[b] she must be quiet. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15 But women[c] will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

Are trying to say Timothy 2:12 is old testament?

Yes, people keep finding ways to put others down in order to feel superior. It’s called being a bully. When everything was “blame and shame millenials for this”, there was a section of us millenials that swore we’d break the cycle of generational blaming. Now it’s all about blaming and shaming Gen-Z, because that shit gets clicks. Apparently being a bully never really goes out of style.

Fuck AI, it’s a bubble, etc. But I do wonder how much of the spending is actual revenue-generating operating costs and how much is further investment/R&D. I doubt Sam Altman sees spending Microsoft’s billions on whatever tf he wants as a loss.

Because sadly, the attitudes and views of people making up Jan 6 are shared by a large proportion of the US population, even if they would not have participated given the means/opportunity.

Jan 6 is viewed by them with analogous sentiment to how the left views civil disobedience for civil rights movements, regardless of the substance/justice of the event.

While Ukraine is not anywhere near the scale of WWII, they’re hardly isolated. While the hot battlefield is geographically isolated, the logistical and economic battlefields deeply involve many countries around the world, including NATO countries, China, and Iran. It’s much bigger than a proxy war.

Thanks for sharing that idea! I appreciate what you’re getting at: that basic care (food, clothing) embodies the tenet of equality in socialism. However, the example of a parent feeding a child doesn’t quite capture the power-relations, freedoms, and systems aspects of socialism. I don’t think we really want to say a master feeding/clothing their slave or a king feeding/clothing a favorite court jester is really “demonstrating socialism”. Socialism is about how society as a whole arranges ownership, production, and resource distribution (i.e. collective ownership of the means of production). It’s a counter to capitalism.

Parental relationships are, ironically, a special case where limiting freedoms and greater power disparity are justified in most egalitarian systems. We usually don’t give children ownership over the means of production.

Good formal description: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/socialism

So if socialism is bad because it’s in the name of Nazis, then democratic republics for the people must be pretty horrible too, going by the DPRK.

While we’re cherry-picking, the Kingdom of Norway is consistently one of the best countries to live in across several metrics. So clearly we should go back to kingdoms, because it’s in the name. Sometimes the old ways are best XD

Well, my friend, I’m glad you’re not disputing the point, despite the poor comparison. I wish you peace and love :)

The comparison I’m making is to Nazi Germany’s war for global domination. So yes, there was Jewish armed resistance in occupied Europe. Now, I don’t condone Hamas’s massacre of civilians and hostage taking. I do believe Palestinians have a right to armed resistance in the face of Israel’s control over Palestinian sovereignty and the continued extreme injustices they’ve been inflicting on Palestinians collectively.

I was pointing to a distinction in the logic of “rightness”. If you ignore morality, then yes, eradicating a population will effectively stop groups within it from continuing to attack you in the future. However, with morality, genocide is wrong. It’s the same reason why wiping Israel off the map would finish things and end the IDF’s war crimes. However, it would still be morally wrong.

By that logic, Hitler/Nazis should have finished the job too so there would be world peace. If millenia of history and the present is anything to go by, nations keep going to war with each other, so coexistence will never work in the long term.

No, the vertical spit and the term doner kebab is traced back to Bursa in the 1800s, with offshoots into shawarma and gyros thereafter. It wasn’t until the 1970s that German Döner Kebab evolved in Berlin.

The article literally refers to the Traditional Specialty Guarantee label in the second sentence. They want to treat it like Pizza Napoletana or Serrano Ham, but it’s too general for that now.

Someone wants to buy US soy farms for cheap.

I am sympathetic to the frustration with and resistance to feeling marketed to, but this person just seems to lack self-awareness… And lack of awareness in general. Not a good look.

I won’t assume he’s representative of large swathes of developers 👀👀👀