Shila

--> @Ramshutu

The DOD has a medical standard for new recruits, and for retention.  

Gender Identity Disorder (aka Gender Dysphoria) was on the exclusionary list. Same as schizophrenia. Social anxiety disorder. Manic Depressive Disorder. Suicidal Ideation. So on and so forth.

Transgenders are diagnosed with Gender Dysphoria with often to always accompanied by depression, anxiety, and oft suicidal ideation. They require constant medication of various sorts to be functional at a somewhat normal level. Surgeries will require significant downtime. All these things preclude transgenders from serving under the medical standards for recruits and retention. At least they did, until liberals forced PC tolerance upon the Armed Forces, using that security force as a social experiment to destroy the very structure of that security force. They are combat ineffective. They are not deployable when under surgical treatment and recovery. They require constant medication and hormones to even keep them functional. 

Why must 95% of the normal population be forced to bend over backwards for 0.5-8% of the population!?! What ever happened to majority rules!?!

-> @Shila

If King Charles screws up. The monarchy will be damaged beyond repair.

Just look at the damage Harry and Meghan have caused.

Harry and Meghan have done nothing to deserve the condemnation they have received and that has been driven by the gutter press, particularly the Sun.

--> @Greyparrot

No, I mean they happen to be where 'some of the chip companies are, or 'some want to build their factories.

--> @Shila

--> @Shila

Human bodies haven’t changed much. But we cover them out of modestly.

I would think that losing one's body hair only to have  replace it with the hair of dead animals for warmth is a giant leap from one's natural state. Something which you have also failed to explain.

Obviously you don’t read your Bible.

 Don't kid yourself.

The advantage humans have over animals is when it is cold they can wear their fur and when it is hot they can take off their fur coat.

Animals have less control over their environment.

No animal has control over its environment including humans. What the weather does it does. But animals can cope better with their environment than humans can cope with theirs.

Grow up and stop being so silly.

I don't know which part of the world you live but here in 21st century England many are expected to die this coming winter through hypothermia. How many Emperor penguins do you think will suffer the same fate?

--> @Shila

Who built this spambot? It's very impressive

May she rest in peace.

That woman wasn't just the Queen of the UK. She was a relic from an older time. Not an actual veteran, but somebody who partook in the civic struggle against Nazi aggression during WWII. Somebody who, frankly, by all reason shouldn't have still been around in 2022.

A pointless legacy institution was given a face that people know and love. I suspect that because of her, the British monarchy will last longer than it otherwise would've. And so will the essence of what makes Britain British.

--> @Shila

Democrats are creating jobs in Red States so they can be taxed to pay for programs in Blue States

Um no. Red States are supported by Blue states. The poorest states in the country are Red. Most of the tax revenue comes from the wealthy. Lue states like California and New 

Huh? I stated nothing rergarding such ideas of you above. I think our confusing me with someone else.  Please read my comments as stated.

Apparrently youve never head of M.A.D. , that, was happening from 1960 til 1990's .  I also call it nuts, and that is why humanity complained enough that governments all agreed, that M.A.D. is NUTS and reduced the amount of 24hr, 360 days a year B-52 bombers in the sky ready to drop bombs on a moments notice.

“They” who?

Cite a legitimate anthropological sources showing the historical source to back up your spurious claim.

Imagin how much a ( Razzor ruble ) would be worth these days. ?

The yanks won't go for free college because they don't like paying for the blacks. 

--> @Shila

He is talking about the ingredients in the vaccine not  improper injection procedures. Geez

--> @sadolite

RationalMadman: you are not blocked anymore, if you didnt notice you are able to @ me for some time now, some time being since last December I'm pretty sure.

-> @Solaris1

You first have to define and get everyone to agree what a human right is and what every right a human has. Good luck with that endeavor. 

Even though the Republicans try to punish blue states whenever they can (2017 Tax Act SALT Cap) Democrats passed legislation that will help Ohio and other Republican leaning states. The Chips Act was pushed through by Democrats and signed by Biden bringing billions of dollars in subsidies to build factories in Red states.

“The federal subsidies, part of the Chips Act signed into law last month, are sparking a wave of chip investment. Micron is holding its own groundbreaking ceremony on Monday for a $15 billion chip factory near its headquarters in Boise, Idaho. Chip maker Wolfspeed on Friday announced plans to build a new manufacturing facility in Chatham County, North Carolina” Taiwan’s TSMC, the world’s largest chip maker, has said it will seek subsidies for a $12 billion factory that it has begun building in Phoenix and is aiming to finish late next year” And a partnership between SkyWater Technology and Purdue University will apply for a federal subsidy to build a new $1.8 billion factory and research facility next to the university in West Lafayette, Ind” Nearby states are hoping to benefit from the cluster of suppliers that industry experts say is bound to develop around the Ohio site. Giant chip factories need chemicals, blank silicon wafers to etch, and equipment and service providers.
“Microelectronics occurs in clusters. We believe Indiana and Ohio are a cluster,” Indiana’s Secretary of Commerce Brad Chambers said in an interview this week. “That Silicon Heartland concept I think is real.”

ALL RED STATES. ALL BENEFITING FROM LEGISLATION PASSED BY BIDEN

Does this make Democrats suckers? Are Red state Americans too dumb to know who helped them?

--> @Deb-8-a-bull

What is the second video of. ?   Talk us through it.

Ive never said anything about beheading are post links to violence. You have me confused with other.

Both vids are about guns of varying sizes and power.  What blows me away is the technological firepower, that, has been built over the years.

I went on a 1944 Battleship once to do self tour and the technology and how these people had to live in these conditions on the ship, was amazing to me. I felt like I got to understand better what the sailors/soldiers consicousness was like because of these technological environment.

Apparrently youve never head of M.A.D. , that, was happening from 1960 til 1990's .  I also call it nuts, and that is why humanity complained enough that governments all agreed, that M.A.D. is NUTS and reduced the amount of 24hr, 360 days a year B-52 bombers in the sky ready to drop bombs on a moments notice.

--> @Tarik

Seriously? Don’t act like there’s no common denominator between what you recently said and the “year old debate” that I brought back up, that referral was exactly that a reference/me simply addressing what you clearly have been ignoring.

There is some crossover, that doesn't mean they are the same points and it certainly doesn't mean you refuted anything meaningful. Let's start by reposting my argument that you ignored a few pages ago:

Let's recap. You claimed morality only makes sense if it's objective. I then asked you for an objective standard to which you replied "love". I then asserted "well being" as the standard for morality and challenged you to objectively resolve this difference. You have been tap dancing ever since.

So let's just cut to the chase; there is no such thing as objective morality. You can have a moral system that objectively follows from the core standard, but the standard itself will always be chosen by the individual, making it necessarily subjective.

If you claim God as your moral standard, I can easily reject God as the standard and as I already have, assert something else. At that point we have two different moral systems. There is no objective resolution to this, not even a god because if one does exist and weighed in on which is correct, the answer would then be *subject to* his will.

First thing to notice here is that the part you zeroed in on so you could drop the rest if it was the very last line. Now if you actually read the post you would notice that the point was made in the first two paragraphs. The last paragraph was not necessary at all, it was just thrown in for emphasis and could have been done without the last sentence.

But that's the part you want to talk about.

And what do you want to discuss regarding this last sentence? A year old debate where you challenged my statement that "subject to" is "literally how you define subjective".

Well, of you look up subjective in the dictionary does it use the words "subject to"? No, so I guess you win on that one. That's not how the word is *literally* defined, so, congratulations on the "gotcha"?

For those of us who care about actual ideas however, the point of what I'm saying still stands. The *literal* definition of subjective is;

"based mainly on opinions or feelings rather than on facts"

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/subjective

In other words, it's based on what the individual says instead of what's actual. Which is another of saying, *subject to* a person's say so.

This is pretty basic English.

So now would you like to address what I've said and substantiate the idea that live is an objective standard for morality, or do you have any other year olds debates you would like to rehash?

--> @Shila

Human bodies haven’t changed much. But we cover them out of modestly.

I would think that losing one's body hair only to have  replace it with the hair of dead animals for warmth is a giant leap from one's natural state. Something which you have also failed to explain.

Obviously you don’t read your Bible.

 Don't kid yourself.

Atheists pretending to be theists doesn't scare me. 

What would be scary is

Imagine a theist with the caliber of smarts as  a Zed or a stepping  hen.  

Obviously such a being couldn't exist but. 

Well that would be scary. 

Oh, you're right. I was reading the Harry Potter series and responding to that instead!

I truly look foolish.

I'll try to read your posts. Thanks for the sincere advice!

No one got the word (I made a new one)

I was reading about Obama's new presidential portrait and started thinking again about my favorite Presidential portrait. Not surprisingly, most are sober paintings of stiff men. Sargent's portrait of Teddy Roosevelt has an interesting sparse, sepia, common-man quality. Kennedy's posthumous portrait is grim, nearly a political cartoon. But Norman Rockwell's Nixon is terrific. Nixon looks likes he's leaning forward to listen. He looks relaxed and confident and focused on the the viewer. No jingoistic claptrap or luxury in the background.  No red white and blue.  Just a man in front of you, listening. All presidential portraits should feel so democratic.

https://ids.si.edu/ids/media_view?id=NPG-NPG_72_2Nixon-000001&container.fullpage&iframe=true&width=85%25&height=85%25

--> @Shila

When sadolite is out of food in the house, then goes to a restaurant, 'then goes to the store,

Is this so that he doesn't buy unnecessary food, as people sometimes do when hungry,

Or simply because he wants his hunger sated sooner, rather than later?

--> @Deb-8-a-bull

You go from . 

Itilans to Jamaicans and Russians and the rest then bammmmmmmmmmmmmmm

You say  Black people  and black teachers.

hey, it's in "the news"

we're told that canada needs more black teachers

because black students stay in school longer and get better grades

if they have black teachers

do you believe this or do you not believe this

--> @Shila

If your first choice was bad why would anyone think your second choice should be considered?

it only counts if there is no first round winner

just like a "run-off" election

It is necessary to live in the shoes of the average citizen of any country before one can give an educated opinion of that country.  You will find you may not like that country at all . I lived in Sweden for a short period, hated it.

--> @Shila

Your ignorance and condescension really shows.

Again your condescension knows no bounds, or your reading comprehension is really really atrocious.

--> @Shila

Nah fam. Look at my definitions again...

Cult is "a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious."

Christianity is a religion. Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses are cults, because they are unorthodox and spurious forms of a religion.

They have firmly held beliefs that are unorthodox and spurious.

I, personally, believe the known universe points directly to God. The realms of philosophy, empiricism, rationalism, epistemic logic, all end up at God, because He created the universe.

--> @Shila

New AD tells Trump supporters they are being scammed.

At least Trump can talk properly.

It’s a running 

--> @sadolite

To shop on a full stomach, or just to get rid of the hunger, sooner rather than later?

And that example is no longer relevant because college today isn't the same as college back then.

:56AM

--> @Tejretics

I would disagree with you on objective morality being uncertain and also on the idea that god almost certainly doesn't exist.

—> @Shila

You made this one up quick. That DDO burned down. Was there a Shila on DDO too? I am new to forums.

Are you really?

And high school English considering you are French speaking.

My speaking French has not adversely affected my English. (If anything, it's enhanced it.) 

Is that how you coverup your regressive behaviour with Regressive humor?

Whatever bone you have to pick with me, put it back in your pants. I will indulge this no more. Enjoy your day, sir

--> @Shila

Your ignorance and condescension really shows. 

--> @3RU7AL

Polytheist-Witch: You don't want people like that in your neighborhoods or around your kids that's up to you. I like growing up with a variety of people around me it was cool to go to someone's house and their grandmother only speak Italian or to someone else's house and their grandfather only spoke polish. We're going to another house and eating Greek food. If you don't want to expose your kids to that that's up to you. And if they don't want to expose their kids to American kids that's fine but why move to a country and then tell your kids that the people that live there are such assholes you don't want to live with them. Doesn't make much sense to me but what the f*** do I know.

--> @Shila

 stole the land from Native Indians

Source?

They never paid the slaves

Not true. In the Reconstruction, reparations were paid to many former slaves in the form of significantly discounted (and even free land) and other federal assistance. [1]

Moreover, the "War on Poverty" was also a significant redistribution of wealth through tax dollars that sought to directly benefit Black Americans communities. [2] [3] [4] [5] [a]

The definition of reparation:

: the payment of damages : INDEMNIFICATION

specifically : compensation in money or materials payable by a defeated nation for damages to or expenditures sustained by another nation as a result of hostilities with the defeated nation —usually used in plural [6]

The definition of indemnify:

 to make compensation to for incurred hurt, loss, or damage [7]

So these programs definitely qualify as reparations.

The problem was that these policies also included many other policies that were not beneficial to Black Americans. So, while it is completely true that black people did receive reparations, the reparations came with other policies that crippled the economies, family structures, and more of Black Americans, such as the War on Drugs. [8] Ultimately, this led to a negative impact.

Americans cannot give away what is not theirs to begin with.

Unfortunately, this is a lie that just won't die due to academia willfully ignoring history.

For starters, Americans won much of the land from Native Americans in military conquests.

Furthermore, Manhattan was purchased from American Indians. [9] The Native Tribe there believed that no one owned land, so they thought they were getting a fantastic deal. [10] But other tribes did begin to implement the same purchasing idea amongst each other. [9] There is a similar such history through much of the early colonial years, through most of America's colonial history, of colonists purchasing land or winning it through military conquests. [12]

Another valuable point to bring up is that we don't really know for certain whom the first aggressor was in the wars between the Native Americans and the European settlers. Both sides would regularly attack and raid each other and rape each others' women. [12]

Get a history lesson.

I studied this issue a lot in college on my own time and, honestly, my conclusion is that we simply can't state unilaterally that white people stole land from American Indians. The American Indians had extremely diverse ideas among the different tribes. Some were warrior tribes that just conquered land. Others were anarchist tribes that didn't have any formal government. Others did not even believe in land ownership as a concept, but looked at the land like mother nature supplying free land for all. American Indians had their own struggles, economies, and wars and such with each other as well, and oftentimes the colonists would ally themselves with whatever tribe promised to be their ally. This led to other tribes attacking them.

Sometimes American Indian tribes just decided to attack colonists for no perceived reason, even though there were treaties. And the colonists also did the same. So we can't really just claim the white man stole everything. There is A LOT of history to consider. Could it have happened? I am certain there have to be at least one or two instances of it. But, unilaterally, we cannot just claim white people stole all of it. Because that is patently false.

SOURCES:

[1] https://www.law.virginia.edu/news/201910/why-land-redistribution-former-slaves-unraveled-after-civil-war

[2] https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/war-poverty/

[3] https://www.heritage.org/poverty-and-inequality/report/the-war-poverty-after-50-years

[4] https://nationalcenter.org/project21/2014/01/08/lbjs-war-on-poverty-hurt-black-americans/

[5] https://www.americanprogress.org/article/the-war-on-poverty-then-and-now/

[6] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reparation

[7] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/indemnifying

[8] https://www.addictioncenter.com/news/2021/08/war-on-drugs-impact-on-black-people/

[9] https://historyexplorer.si.edu/resource/manhattan-purchase

[10] https://shec.ashp.cuny.edu/items/show/1543

[11] https://www.history.com/news/native-american-land-british-colonies

[12] https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/new-england-colonies-and-native-americans

NOTES:

[a] I cited sources from across the ideological spectrum simply to show that virtually everyone agrees that the war on poverty was a massive investment of American tax dollars toward people, while some sources show how the main recipients were Black Americans. This would count as reparations.

--> @Shila

The end of the age happened in AD 70, just like Jesus told His disciples it would. Read the rest of the chapter. It applies to THE DISCIPLES and THAT GENERATION. Anything else is reading into Scripture something it does NOT say. 

What is the issue you have with these verses? 

Jesus openly confessed he was clueless. “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son,but only the Father.”

Speaking in His human capacity, not His godhood. But notice very carefully that Jesus said the day or hour they would not know but when the time is at the door they would. 

Matthew 24:32-39 NASB

32 “Now learn the parable from the fig tree: as soon as its branch has become tender and sprouts its leaves, you know that summer is near; 33 so you too, when you see all these things, [b]recognize that [c]He is near, right at the [d]door. 34 Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. 35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away.
36 “But about that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone. 37 For [e]the coming of the Son of Man will be just like the days of Noah. 38 For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, 39 and they did not [f]understand until the flood came and took them all away; so will the coming of the Son of Man be.

So, from these verses you can gather lots of information. 

1. Who are the subjects of the passage? Have you a clue? Who does "you" refer to in context??? Can you answer that?

2. What are "all these things" Jesus is referring to?

3. Jesus says that "this generation" will not pass until all these things have taken place. Which generation is He speaking about? (Hint: it can only be one)

4. Just like in the days of Noah speaks of judgment. Judgment on who, in context? 

Now remember the context of Matthew 24:3 (see below). Jesus was speaking to His DISCIPLES about the end of the age. Age of what? What age did His disciples live in? It was the age of temple worship and the OT economy where everything revolved around God's relationship with OT Israel. Show me differently.

Matthew 24:3 As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately. “Tell us,” they said, “when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?”

36 “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son,but only the Father.

Notice, what follows from verse 3 of Matthew 24:

4 And Jesus answered and said to them, “See to it that no one [a]misleads you. 5 For many will come in My name, saying, ‘I am the [b]Christ,’ and they will [c]mislead many people. 6 And you will be hearing of wars and rumors of wars. See that you are not alarmed, for those things must take place, but that is not yet the end. 7 For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and there will be famines and earthquakes in various places. 8 But all these things are merely the beginning of birth pains.
9 “Then they will hand you over to tribulation and kill you, and you will be hated by all nations because of My name. 10 And at that time many will [d]fall away, and they will [e]betray one another and hate one another. 11 And many false prophets will rise up and [f]mislead many people. 12 And because lawlessness is increased, [g]most people’s love will become cold. 13 But the one who endures to the end is the one who will be saved. 14 This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole [h]world as a testimony to all the nations, and then the end will come.
Perilous Times
15 “Therefore when you see the abomination of desolation which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place—[i]let the [j]reader understand— 16 then those who are in Judea must flee to the mountains. 17 [k]Whoever is on the [l]housetop must not go down to get things out of his house. 18 And [m]whoever is in the field must not turn back to get his cloak. 19 But woe to those women who are pregnant, and to those who are nursing babies in those days! 20 Moreover, pray that [n]when you flee, it will not be in the winter, or on a Sabbath. 21 For then there will be a great tribulation, such as has not occurred since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever will again. 22 And if those days had not been cut short, no [o]life would have been saved; but for the sake of the [p]elect those days will be cut short. 23 Then if anyone says to you, ‘Behold, here is the [q]Christ,’ or ‘He is over here,’ do not believe him. 24 For false christs and false prophets will arise and will provide great [r]signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the [s]elect. 25 Behold, I have told you in advance. 26 So if they say to you, ‘Behold, He is in the wilderness,’ do not go out; or, ‘Behold, He is in the inner rooms,’ do not believe them. 27 For just as the lightning comes from the east and flashes as far as the west, so will the coming of the Son of Man [t]be. 28 Wherever the corpse is, there the [u]vultures will gather.
The Glorious Return
29 “But immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 And then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky with power and great glory.

Show me how these verses can apply to any other generation other than the 1st century one Jesus came to and show me the "you" is generic rather than audience SPECIFIC, from the text (remember, we want to understand who the relevant or primary audience is that Jesus is speaking to, not us the secondary audience). We want to understand the timeline also. What does that imply to you, our generation or a 1st century generation? Pay also to the verb tense, whether past, present, or future. 

--> @TWS1405

I have also thought of this question, and I believe the answer is that liberals or "the left" generally speak out of emotion rather than reason. This could be a result of many things, but it seems to come to an inability to engage with ideas they don't like. As a consequence, they would rather silence people and/or call them silly names. From the liberal, racist may as well mean "anything I don't like." 

For example: "Thomas Sowell is racist" may translate to "I don't like Thomas Sowell, because he is bad."

--> @Shila

Since DDO is no more. There is no way to check member records. It will take time for Athias to make up one.

I suppose I could. How does "Upgraded-Shila" sound? It'd still be better than trolling DDO and DART, and fleeing to DART under some pretense after DDO burned down, right?

So your comfort zone is high school  humour.

Yup.

For most members that would be going too far back.

Regressive humor is the best humor. 

Black privilege in higher level education compared to Asians. Change my mind

--> @Shila

But your humor is certainly High School level. We can all see why it didn’t go beyond that.

My post-graduate humor would only go over everyone's heads.

Subjective of course.  But I'll make my case:

1. Eating at home saves money.  If someone is looking to save up money for traveling, buying a car/house, emergency fund, or whatever it is, eating out less is often the easiest fix.
   
2. Eating at a restaurant does not necessarily save time.  You save time from prepping and cooking.  But you lose time from the commute there, the commute back, waiting for the food, waiting for the check, and sometimes even waiting for a seat.
   
3. Eating at home allows you to track macros and calories accurately.  While popular chains have info posted, most restaurants in general don't.  With how commonplace the use of butter and oil is in kitchens, it's very easy to underestimate calories when eyeballing.   If your fitness and body composition are priority, dining at a restaurant should be limited.
   
4. Lastly, it depends on what food you order.  Many restaurants have foods that do use uncommon or "high-end" ingredients and/or require a lot of skill to prepare.  But many entrees on menus are also things that are cheap to make, easy to make and use common ingredients.  It doesn't make sense to go to a restaurant just to order things you could make yourself at home.
   
5. At home, you can control the temperature, lighting, music that's playing, what's on television.  And there are no screaming kids.
   

--> @Athias

Out of curiosity, what was your DDO account? Have we spoken on there?

--> @ILikePie5

Also, the GOP national is out of cash two months before the election.  Democrats have outraised Republicans the last four months running.

--> @Shila

RCV is unconstitutional.

The rule is “one person one vote”.

RCV allows choice up to 4 choices for every voter.

each voter only gets one vote

ONE VOTE

if and only if their candidate is the lowest ranked, AND a "run-off" election WOULD BE REQUIRED PER NORMAL PROCEDURE (because nobody received at least 51% of the total votes cast)

then and only then is the second choice vote, and only the second choice vote is counted for people who voted for the LOWEST RANKED CANDIDATE ONLY

functionally this is exactly the same as a "run-off" election

without the inconvenience of physically driving back out to the polls a second or even a third time