Athias

I thought this was a philosophical question that needed some attention. I want to see what you define what a universe is. 

I know this may seem unimportant but think about it. There are many questions inside this one question - such as:

* Are the worlds inside thoughts and dreams part of our universe or outside of it?

* Are fictional worlds part of our universe?

* Are numbers and abstract objects part of our universe?

* Do other universes exist?

* I can go on and on

here are some common definitions:

* All of time, space, and matter

* all of totality

* all of space

"All of time, space, and matter."

"all of space"

* all of totality

FREEDOM to talk about walking-out

does NOT violate any "freemarketprinciples"

the exception to this "rule of whim" would be labor union negotiations

The left supports believe women, many leftists I met agree.  Prosecute the accused rapist without evidence because it reduces the rape rate and evidence is hard to get.  

It’s not on their radar.

But many left states abolished the death penalty.

Oppose the war; America first.

It takes time.

I’m glad your consistent on firing issues even if we disagree.

Yes, and they make up the majority of Americans with few exceptions.

the exception to this "rule of whim" would be labor union negotiations

The fact that the left chose the more problematic slogan suggests that they really don't believe that accused men deserve the presumption of innocence.

There are 4 following issues in my head:

1) Believe women (which I agree with the right on).

2) Death penalty (which I agree with the left on)

3) The Ukraine war (which I side with the right on)

4) The Iraq war (which I side with the left on)

5) Firing someone for being gay/trans (which I side with the left on)

6) Firing someone for being unvaccinated (which I side with the right on)

Why do most people I come across either agree with the left on all of these issues or agree with the right on all these issues? 

Why are there few people that look at each issue individually? 

Is it because people are partisan hacks?

some corporations will fire you for posting pictures of yourself using a competitor's product

this is not a joke

Ok.

So we are a extra-thinking species.

But procreational drive itself doesn't require thought.

Thought modifies recreational possibilities over time, thereby the organism learns to contradict itself. 

All becomes real enough though.

And paedophilia and transgenderism are all varieties that stem from the same basic requirement.

The evolutionary inevitability of species evolution I suppose.

If it hadn't been us, it might have been a sentient carrot experiencing all this psychological trauma.

And GOD would be a cauliflower.

When do you think that the USA will default on it's Debt?

I would point out that most often what gets called "free speech" issues, are most often institutional issues of the sort you have just described, as opposed to straightforwardly legal issues. For example, Jordan Peterson who was working within the parameters of a teaching position - the considerations are almost exactly parallel here. So I would just point out that your proposed solution - which I agree with - would reduce the scope of "free speech" to the legal domain, which would be seen as a loss to most of those who currently claim to be advocates for the "free speech" side.

However, based on your position, it should apply not only in this case.

For example, imagine that a teacher has a female student that he doesn't like. This student was born female, and is not trans, but is slightly overweight and has some masculine features that she is embarrassed about. The teacher decides to disrespect her by referring to her as male throughout the class, even after she politely asks him not to. Would you maintain your position that this decision is totally up to the teacher's discretion, and that the teacher has no obligation to "indulge" the girl's request to be referred to as female?

On Feb. 1, the U.S. Treasury Department reported that the U.S. gross national debt surpassed $30 trillion for the first time

During the eight years of the Eisenhower presidency, from 1953 to 1961, the top marginal rate was 91 percent. (It was 92 percent the year he came into office.)

Today the tax brackets are adjusted for inflation, but are exceptionally lower than in Eisenhower’s day. The top rate in 2015 is 39.6 percent,

We Need To Get The Top Tax Rate Back To 94 Percent

So one contradiction is the difference between that which is made up and that which isn't made up.

In terms of sexuality, the base reality would be the procreational drive.

How we apply said instinct varies greatly, relative to a whole gamut of ongoing physiological and social pressures.

And also, how we apply Law to said instinct is affected in the same way by ongoing social pressures.

(Physiological pressures  are a separately contentious moot point.)

Nonetheless, in terms of base reality, nothing is actually right or wrong.

Right and wrong are concepts that may or may not have become established socially , but certainly not globally standardised, and also modified greatly over time.L

If disagreement turns you off so much maybe you shouldn’t engage in a DEBATE site, just saying.

 FFS!  I was asked by moderation if I would  agree to a RO with the Witch. And I did.

That word again "mutual".   I was approached not so long back and it was proposed that I agree "mutually" to an RO with the Witch. Are you saying that I didn't really have a choice? 

#Mutual Agreement

To mutually agree to something is to jointly agree to something or when two or more people reach an agreement that is satisfactory to both.

It's okay you want to defend your friend I don't give a shit

the post speaks for itself.

And you told me I was 100% false, little liar.

I never found the original post but I did find where it was discussed.  3RU7AL suggested it would be easy to do a list of banned members, both me and RM were to definitely be on that list, where we would be basically blocked no one could see our post and that in order for people to see those posts they'd have to opt out.  It was also discussed that this list would be secret and that we would just have to figure out that's what was going on. It was basically a list of members disliked or mods hate.  As long as the mods are going to allow people to make disgusting comments then I'm going to use the block function especially so I don't get messages from those people. That said those functions only work when you're logged in anyway log out and you can see everything.

• I can choose to ignore this request, and use the pronouns with which I feel most comfortable.
  
• I can choose to ignore this request, and dissociate with this person.
  
• I can indulge this request, and use the pronouns with which "she" feels most comfortable.
  
• I can ignore the use of pronouns all together.
  

My point is that 3RU7AL wouldn't have had the chance to refute the Witches "100% false" claim had not been able to see it. 

But lets us just hope 3RU7AL never gets his way concerning his proposal.

It wouldn't . Because that would simply mean they BOTH parties chose not to see one another's posts' hence they wouldn't be able to respond to, or refute  one another's  comments, claim's or outright lies. 

that the person a member has chosen to block shouldn't be able to view the comments of the person they have chosen to ignore and block.

good point

that was a proposed as an alternative to "perma-ban"

Witch wrote: I never found the original post but I did find where it was discussed.  3RU7AL suggested it would be easy to do a list of banned members, both me and RM were to definitely be on that list, where we would be basically blocked no one could see our post and that in order for people to see those posts they'd have to opt out.  It was also discussed that this list would be secret and that we would just have to figure out that's what was going on. It was basically a list of members disliked or mods hate.  As long as the mods are going to allow people to make disgusting comments then I'm going to use the block function especially so I don't get messages from those people. That said those functions only work when you're logged in anyway log out and you can see everything.#115

3RU7AL wrote:  100% FALSE#116

Now take a good look at that and tell me, would you have ever had a chance to dispute, deny and or correct what the Witch had to say had she had YOU on blind block where YOU were unable to see and read her  " 100% false claims" ? 

Example world where 3RU7AL's proposal goes into effect (for your own understanding of the concept):

Users A-C are put on a list by mods based on people the mods deem toxic to the community.

Users A-C ARE NOT given a choice about whether to be part of the program because they are on the list.

Users D-J ARE given a choice about whether to be part of the program because they are not on the list

Users D-F OPT IN to the program. They CANNOT see anything that users A-C say.

Users G-J OPT OUT of the program. They CAN see everything that users A-C say.

So on the one hand you speak about  the offenders "right to be forgotten ".

Yet one the other you are happy and it is fine by you then that someone can spread and tell "100%" falsehood's about another member here without their knowledge and where they have no chance of recompense or response to defend themselves against such "100%" false hoods? 

Saying "it is up to the boy scouts" is tantamount to saying that you see no reason a female person should not be allowed to join.

What is a woman?

Women are adult females whose role in reproduction is delineated primarily as gestation.

For sure, within a contrived legal framework.

Which doesn't necessarily take into account base reality.

We seem to casually assume that we have exceeded base reality.

Whereby we end up with glaring contradictions.

For example:

Oh dear, poor gender dysphoric, lets give you all the support and medical help we can, and cut your dick off.

Bastard pervert, let's lock you up and cut your dick off....Preferably without an anaesthetic.

Yes I know I’ve watched the game.

On a different note

I don’t give a damn about narratives, LeBron is more clutch than Kobe. I presented you with 9 occasions where Steph folded in the clutch (without mentioning the OT shot he missed against houston in game 4 of 2018 and his disappearance against Memphis in OT of the play-in game) and layups don’t compare to threes especially for the greatest shooter of all time.

Seriously dude quit implementing every answer I give into your next question, if you have something to say then say it.

So help me out here, can you give me an example of him not being deferential and it having a negative impact on teammates?

Because one thing I know is LeBron is more than willing to play off-ball

Remember when you said

Seem is not an argument;

Well neither was that, however what I said prior to what I felt was if you don’t want to argue the abstract fine but the numbers speak for themselves.

Seem is not an argument; but that's okay, this is a Sports discussion after all.

Fine, yes.

Yet YOUR THE ONE that brought up the 4 of the 11 voters to cast their votes for LeBron James.

I think Iggy’s defense had a little something to do with that, especially in game 4.

There’s some success in putting your team in a position where they take a 2-1 lead,

and why can’t it mean awarding the best player on the floor? Is there no value in that?

I’m sorry but are we talking about LeBron the player or GM?

Based off you assessment of them “doing well” I took it to mean you thought they were stars

and just wasn’t utilized properly in the Cavs system

my retort to that was my case as to why that’s far from the case and you seemed to agree with the “Probably not”. 

By emphasizing that he’s not a top 10 player, that was one of the first things I noticed when you gave me your list and I let it go because I had other things I wanted to address but now since you mention it again YES it’s disrespect.

That’s funny since I’ve been called a LeBron hater in regards to the GOAT debate, but in all seriousness if your arguing that LeBron played with a top 15 player then who?

I’m not saying your competition in the Finals mitigates your status, but I think your doing more deserving players a disservice

by only judging Shaq on the championships in which he was dominant, but what about when he wasn’t as dominant?

I mean you said it yourself Hakeem owned Shaq (a guy you have ranked lower than LeBron BTW).

No, it presumes one can be honest

without letting personal biases get in the way

I think the fact that I said I would love to see Steph prove me wrong proves that.

That Curry choked especially since that Game 7 was in Oracle, if it were the Q it probably would’ve been by more than two possessions.

Honestly, it feels like we’re talking about two different players. LeBron is always looking to pass before scoring (this season being a drastic exception) so much so that he often gets criticized for that. I’ve seen countless times he had an opportunity for an easy bucket and he gives it up. He even said it himself that nothing fills him up more than someone else scoring off his pass.

So I guess he proved you wrong a lot earlier than the 2020-2021 season.

You can’t just look at a teams regular season record (in that case that 73-9 was better than any Warriors team that added Durant) there was a reason Steph got unanimous MVP that year and not the year before because that was the beginning of his peak, also I think that chip he won gave him and his team confidence that probably wouldn’t have happened had a healthy Cavs team rip there hearts out the year prior.

What if I said yes?

Well if we’re ignoring who’s on the winning team would you agree that LeBron deserved FMVP over Curry?

I did but I didn’t understand the correlation between the two and me, I also don’t recall either one of them saying those exact words but whatever you say man.

You and I have very different standards of well, because none of them done well enough to make any all-star teams and none of them are going to the hall of fame.

🤦🏾‍♂️ this Kobe disrespect is getting ridiculous

nonetheless is he at least in your top 15?

Because if he is then I ask if you take other factors into account when you assess dominance and although Shaq dominated (most dominant force since Wilt Chamberlain) he did it with a top 15 player by his side

(which LeBron never had)

and against way inferior competition in the finals (especially Iverson’s 76ers).

Love that expression.

For sure, gullibility is a human trait, as is manipulation.....And within a typical "Western" social context, I obviously know what you are referring to.

Though the  reality of such issues has a split personality.....There's the base reality and the socially contrived reality.....A lengthy and controversial discussion perhaps.

And with such ease of accessibility through social media, we have this absurd social dichotomy......Here's the child/ but do not touch the child.

Very much like the U.S. school shooting thing...... Come on kids and play with the guns/but don't point and pull the trigger.

It does seem that social and technological progress, will always come at a cost.....And to coin a much loved phrase, we always tend to try and shut the stable door after the horse has bolted.....And let's be honest, as far as these two issues are concerned, there is huge opposition to even trying to shut the stable door.

So in the end we just have to live with inherent problems of progress.....And just moan about it.....If we want our kids to be able to shut themselves in their rooms  and spend hours undergoing preparatory dynamics with whomsoever, then don't forget the downside of freedom.

Not that I consider modern addiction to electronic information devices, as freedom.

And until we start genetically editing humanity....There will always be the groomers and the groomed.

What say you?

Dude really? Those two possessions the Warriors could’ve very well have won by if Steph made some of those threes he bricked.

Yet you critique it by saying he should defer to lesser teammates 🤔.

You mean like he did when he first got to Miami? His passiveness is what cost him that championship (among other things).

You can easily nip this in the bud don’t stop sending me links now, I’ve yet to see it.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MvtYUcbenCU

The Warriors were no where near as good the year before.

The two coexist pretty often.

I get the Kellerman reference but Bayless?

He’s an even bigger LeBron hater than you

and he would never accuse him of being the 2nd greatest player of all time.

Doesn’t have to be either or it could be both, but let’s be real anyone with sense knew the Cavs wasn’t going past 5 against the Warriors.

Like I said I’ve seen him make tougher shots

he just folded because the moment was too big for him.

But they had a choice when they denied him in the finals right?

LeBron was the first FMVP to comeback from 3-1 against a 73-9 team (but wait there’s more) and lead all statistical categories. Not to mention his triple double in game 7. What impact did Shaq leave that resembles anything remotely close to that?

So what are you saying facts are an illusion?

Both are commonly implied, if not explicitly stated, conservative views and they are dissonant. Equating presentation of certain subjects as teachers 'grooming' children and thinking these  'groomers' would go against their nature to selflessly and courageously take on a gunman is quite the head scratcher.

Great question! To be clear, in my mind unfittness does not only apply to a person that presents a clear threat. I personally would like to see actuaries take a crack at this. They would determine what factors add up to significant risk. 

Absent this, requiring a delay period for purchase,

increasing the age necessary to purchase some or all types of firearms,

requiring training/permit (getting rid of Constitutional Carry), and storage requirements all would have the tendency to weed out impulsive, immature, careless gunowners who are a danger to themselves or others. 

I'm open to mixing and matching to find the balance preserving a reasonable right to self defense and other rights which can be negatively affected by firearms. 

How is that when YOUR THE ONE that called him overrated? Your a critic too as far as I can tell.

The only reason I made that argument is because you posed the question

Which I thought came somewhat out of left field,

you mention the machine behind him but it shouldn’t affect him anymore then it should affect any other player that’s not in the finals.

There’s other clutch situations like Bron’s block in game 7 of the 2016 finals

I just brought up the shots because that was the only stat I had handy at the time

and he’s the GREATEST SHOOTER EVER

so it seemed more than appropriate to ask for a clutch shot here and there,

and the fact that he’s been in those situations 9 times and failed in each of them can’t be ignored.

That’s one game, do you really believe had Kyrie stayed healthy he and LeBron would allow that to continue throughout the remainder of the series? Hell no, Bron and Love without Kyrie probably would’ve been enough to get the job done.

Your forgetting how great Draymond was in that game 7

https://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201606190GSW.html

Look closely at Draymond’s numbers then Steph’s. You probably would’ve thought it was the other way around since Dray was never accused of being a scorer and Steph (the 1st unanimous MVP in NBA history) broke the record for most 3’s in a season, won the scoring title, and did all of that by joining the 50 40 90 club.

Feel free to explain that one for me.

Because the finals odds were even more lopsided, the Cavs literally had no shot.

🥱 Excuses, excuses, fact of the matter is we’ve seen countless times Steph take and make shots way tougher than that only difference is he made them when it didn’t really count for much and he never made one in a close out game situation with the game on the line.

That’s because I recognize talent when I see it. I have absolutely no issue with Curry when it comes to the regular season, it’s the postseason where there’s a massive drop off.

My argument is that you can’t accuse the media of having an agenda against Curry when they granted him an honor that nobody in NBA history achieved.

That was this season not last season, they still managed to take a 2-1 lead to the Western Conference Champions with a banged up AD (eventually completely injured).

Why do you rank him ahead of Bron?

Care to explain that one as well?

I hope he enjoys that Magic Johnson award because it very well may be the only postseason individual accolade he’ll achieve, you say

But it seems like they made that award tailor made for him.

I don’t think that’s what CRT is. 

Good morning, or what ever time of day it is where you are.

Well, whenever I hear the word grooming, I always think of pampered pooches. in pink parlours.

Or hirsute men having their moustaches and sideburns trimmed.

That doesn’t make him clutch. Especially since not all 4th quarter situations are created equal, in some instances it’s garbage time. Since you want to link me to stats how about I return the favor https://mobile.twitter.com/bball_ref/status/1139377970156429317

So don’t bring up any of his finals to me.

You mentioned earlier that he should’ve gotten FMVP over Iggy that’s a subject for another day

his 1st ring was against a team that had nobody but LeBron on it.

His 2nd trip to the finals he played awful in game 7

And had his team won Draymond would’ve gotten FMVP over him

So here you go https://youtu.be/wgVOgGLtPtc

His 3rd he and his whole squad flew to the Hamptons to recruit KD

"Here's the thing that's interesting about Golden State -- their players have been recruiting Kevin Durant all year. And it goes back to early in the season when the Thunder were struggling."

(because the 2nd greatest player of all time humbled the former unanimous MVP and took his heart out his chest)

where he rode shotgun to form what some may call the greatest team of all time.

His 4th was like a similar situation to his 1st except worse because KD was there.

His 5th he could’ve showed the world something by making a clutch game winning shot but he bricked it as usual

but hey he’s the greatest shooter of all time so I guess we can’t say anything critical about him right?

Like I said he still has a chance to prove the naysayers wrong

but until I see him hit a clutch shot like Ray Allen did in game 6 of the 2013 Finals, he will always be a big choker in my eyes.

The same politics and agendas that made him the 1st unanimous MVP in NBA history?

That precipitous drop off was largely due to injuries to two of the Lakers key players, do me a favor and name a team that sustained the same amount of playoff success without a healthy roster resembling the lakers situation in 2021.

True but there are some guys that put those guys ahead of LeBron for that reason as well.

In case you didn’t know Shaq has played on more teams than anybody else in your top 10?

On the top of your head could you even guess how many?

Could you guess how many times he’s been SWEPT?

I resent that, I think my analysis is pretty objective

because this notion that Steph is clutch is just a bad take.

It's what it all boils down to.

When it comes to the reproduction of the species, we have developed this curious habit of beating around the bush.....No pun intended.

"Sexual manipulation and coercive undertones" as it were.

Think and overthink....It's the human condition I suppose.

if you really want to "save lives", raise the minimum driving age to 25 (the number one killer of teenagers is vehicle accidents)

and focus more resources on suicide prevention (62% of gun related deaths are suicides)

I'm not sure what would lead anyone to equate this stick analogy to across the board gun bans

We should all agree someone who establishes they can't handle being a gun owner, shouldn't be a gun owner.

If anyone wants to discuss how we determine unfitness, I'll be over here waiting for an honest discussion.

Never ceases to amaze me how right wingers think teachers cannot be trusted to teach, but should be trusted to arm themselves and stop mass shooters.

Penises and vaginas hey.

What a kerfuffle.

He lead 3 different teams to NBA championships. When he was in Cleveland the Cavs had the best record in the NBA. When he left they had the worst record in the NBA. Then he returned and they won a title.

He's not Jordan, but to call him a fraud is crazy.

As for this "super team", we've seen this before. The rockets had Olajuwan, Pippen, and Barkly. The Lakers had Shaq, Malone, Payton, and Kobe. No titles for either of them.

I picked Boston because I don’t believe in Steph come crunch time but I would love to see the greatest shooter of all time prove me wrong with his 1st FMVP.

LeBron James legacy as the 2nd greatest basketball player of all time is pretty much set (him passing Kareem next season might enhance it to some folks) but if anything comes close to challenging it this upcoming finals it’s if Steph’s Warriors win because he would then tie James in championships with a chance of passing him (considering his age and collection of talent around him).

Just out of curiosity where do you have James ranked all-time as a basketball player?

I'm going with Boston, of course I say this with no bias.

As for Lefraud James, I personally think he can recover from this.

A superteam on paper that can't even reach the playoffs? Yeah, he is finished.

The guy can't win a ring without the bubble or Ray Allen.