oromagi

--> @oromagi

But why make a post like that? Nobody thinks CRT has legal standing like a person would, Fauxlaw least of all.

It is a thing, not a person, and still has standing before the law. A contract, a thing and an idea, has standing before the law. Your injury-in-fact, causation, and redressability are all covered matters even through a contract and not a person.

Are you really going to tell me that an idea cannot have standing if sufficient evidence is presented that it is mere formality that alters its designation? Best look at the definition of locus standi.

It doesn’t engage the OP and it doesn’t add anything interesting or new to a potential reader, and you have to know that.

Just don’t get it lol 

For example, why is the world map not upside down?

It’s a legitimate question. I haven’t bothered to look up the answer. Do any of you know why?

--> @oromagi

The OP was a criticism of CRT, saying it doesn’t have a leg to stand on. Your response: “Uhm acktually, CRT can never be a plaintiff or a defendant in a case so of course it doesn’t have standing” 

--> @oromagi

Then atheists and theist will have to live together. 

--> @oromagi

Have you really never heard the expression something doesn’t have “a leg to stand on”

• That's not a different context.  Note that fauxlaw ends with a pun,  "CRT has no leg standing, or one to stand upon" 
  
• Fauxlaw is too a good a writer to mean, "CRT has no leg or one leg to stand on." 
  
• "In the case of CRT, the empiric evidence must demonstrate a current [racist] law or gov't department policy,"
  
• Fauxlaw's context is clearly  US law and whether CRT can support a claim of harm within that framework, the most apt description of fauxlaw's context is "legal standing."  We agree that CRT cannot support that claim but for different reasons.   That is a our context- legal standing. 
  
• "no leg to stand on" is NOT the context.  That is fauxlaw's conclusion- ( CRT's claim lacks support)which he playfully expresses using a pun on the common idiom.
  

--> @oromagi

No idea what the atheists want to do with it ask them.

The OP was quite clearly using the word "standing" in a different context

--> @oromagi

The most salient question we must ask about acts of Russian terrorism on American soil is how these attacks benefit Trump.

I thought Biden said the Kremlin wasn’t behind the attack...

we do not believe the Russian government was involved in this attack. But we do have strong reason to believe that the criminals who did the attack are living in Russia. That’s where it came from - were from Russia. We have been in direct communications with Moscow about the imperative for responsible countries to take decisive action against these ransomware networks.  And we’re also going to pursue a measure to disrupt their ability to operate. And our justice department has launched a new task force dedicated to prosecuting ransomware hackers to the full extent of the law.

--> @oromagi

Teach science, reason, and history from an early age. 

That's already done. If you want to eradicate religion you have to ban it being practiced. Nobody wants to say that but that is really the only way. 

How do we stop giving religious movements airtime and oxygen without talking about them?

who prefers sleep to discussion of Russian cyber attack.

I am constantly amazed at how many KKK members people on the left claim to personally know. I have never met a single KKK member in 50 years across 15 different states.

Not only that, I haven't personally met anyone who has personally met an actual KKK member.

-> @oromagi

• Again, that's not just the media.  Most observant folks will readily agree that racial hostility is not a delusion and would probably agree that public displays of racism have increased in recent years although I think most would also agree that racial harmony has improved over the long term.  I've known too many white supremacists and witnessed to much racial persecution to pretend to buy the characterization "delusion."
  

In a country of over 300,000,000 there were only 8,552 hate crimes in all of 2019

• I note that your statistic effectively disproves coal's claim that racial persecution is an American "delusion." Obviously, only a very small proportion of racial persecutions would even qualify as hate crime (which generally requires conviction of a violent crime) but we should agree that any and every racially motivated hate crime documented by the FBI is an example of real and actual racial persecution, disproving coal's claim "delusion" and reinforcing my skepticism.
  
• The claim that the DOJ's annual collection of reported Hate Crime convictions represents the scope of racial persecution is like claiming that the DOJ's annual estimate of US rape convictions represents the scope of sexual harassment.
  

I am old enough to remember when the so called "war on terror" was front and center of American foreign policy, to the exclusion of nearly all else.  Then, the focus was to dismantle terrorist networks, disrupt their operation and destroy their ability to execute future attacks.  Now, it seems the focus has changed.  Formerly, we were interested in Al Qaeda and ISIS.  Currently, the Biden administration seems preoccupied with "right wing" groups. 

• Stop terrorist attacks against the US,  its citizens, interests,  friends and allies around the world
  
• and ultimately, to create an international environment inhospitable to terrorists and all those who support them.
  

1. Christopher Wray's statements on "domestic terrorism" both before and after the events of January 6, 2021.

2. The media's characterization of the events that took place on January 6, 2021 as an "insurrection" and those who participated in any way in the events of January 6, 2021 as "terrorists."

3. The strange obsession media seem to have with "mass shootings," where a "mass shooting" is defined as the public discharge of a firearm anywhere in the United States where at least two people are injured (see CNN's chart on the same, from a few weeks ago).

4. The strange obsession media seem to have with so called "white supremacy" and other delusions of racial persecution.

If the government is big enough to come after right wing nut jobs, they're big enough to come after leftist dissidents as well. 

-> @oromagi

Well, I'll be watching to see if John Podesta mysteriously is found dead on or after June 1 or is ever heard from again. That will be proof, if not then fake.

• If you believe that HRC was executed on Apr 27 and all the subsequent appearances fake news than you will believe that Podesta died on Jun 1 and disbelieve all his public appearances that come after.
  
• If you don't believe that HRC was exectued on Apr 27, then you have no reason to believe the same source when it tells you that Podesta will die Jun 1.
  

  I looked at the source "beforeitwasnews" and could find nothing about this.

Is this true?

I wont post any sources

 as they will immediately be rejected because I am me and everyone thinks I am crazy.

--> @oromagi

I'm not sure what you mean here.  That Christians are less successful at describing God?  Is there any important distinction between the way Christians describe God and the way Jews or Muslims do?  I'm skeptical.

I mean God as described by Christianity through either text or otherwise. An example of differing descriptions is the Christian's concept of the holy trinity--i.e. the plurality of God. Neither Islam nor Judaism has adopted this concept.

As the largest religion in the world, I guess I would expect Christianity to come under a larger share of criticism, yes, but I guess we've got to define critiicism.  If we mean persecution or harassment,

No, I meant criticism, as in scrutinizing its merits and faults.

--> @oromagi

So, what youre saying is that the act of sex with dead chicken is okay- morally (okay as in neutral okay) but the question would rise within the spectrum of reasons the corresponding person might have behind engaging?

Would it perhaps be more prudent to state that the Christian's description of God is taken in vain?

Abrahamic Religions do share a God, but none are more exposed to criticism than "Christianity," yes?

Having Sex With A Dead Chicken- Moral or Immoral?

Economically left is the same thing as economically authoritarian

(people in this category tend to favor Medicare for all for instance, which is not a libetarian idea)

With this new definition, the following becomes true:

Therefore, someone who is ancom is not as libetarian left as you can go (since ancom is I think exactly the same thing as communism as their talking points are exactly the same),

With few exceptions, there is no such thing as a libetarian leftist.  These people are just leftists.

Why is it that the Christian God is the only one whose name is taken in vain.

Fauxlaw argues that a theory must proven true before it may claim injury before a court but that's quite wrong-headed, ideas may not claim standing.

show me where I made that claim.

Does Critical Race Theory have a legal standing?

Georgia has been unrelenting in its effort to suppress the political

participation of people of color. In fact, of the states previously covered by the

VRA’s federal preclearance requirements, Georgia is the only state that has

enacted voting restrictions across five major categories studied by the U.S.

Commission on Civil Rights: voter identification requirements, documentary proof

of citizenship, voter purges, cuts to early voting, and polling place closures or

relocations. These barriers have made it materially more difficult to vote for

historically disenfranchised communities, including people of color as well as

voters with disabilities, elderly, students, and poor voters.

--> @oromagi

Topic: In principle, wealthy nations ought to give foreign aid to impoverished/developing countries 

Am I doing this right?

1. Submit the most popular topic for one round of arguments
   
• earn one point
  
• topics can be on any subject except that this our DART website, its content and membership are entirely off the table
  
• more than one topic may be suggested by any DARTer but each topic should be posted separately for the purpose of distinguishing number of likes
  

1. Submit the most popular single-post argument affirming the winning topic
   
• earn three points
  
• one post only per round per DARTer
  
• no commentary or critique or campaigning- just arguments and likes
  

1. Submit the most popular single post counter-argument refuting the winning affirmative argument
   
• earn two points
  
• any contestant that wins both PRO and CON arguments for the same round earns ten points
  
• one post only per round per DARTer
  
• no commentary or critique or campaigning- just arguments and likes
  

• popularity is decided by number of likes
  
• we can like as much or as little as we want
  
• we don't have to argue to vote
  
• we don't have to vote to argue
  
• I won't submit any arguments but I may use likes to break a tie
  
• Contestants can join at any point in the contest
  
• Sincere and friendly participation is requested
  
• If we do more than one of these, all points earned will be cumulative and perpetual in radiant glory
  

IN this FORUM TOPIC

1. Submit the most popular topic for one round of arguments
   
• earn one point
  
• topics can be on any subject except that this our DART website, its content and membership are entirely off the table
  
• more than one topic may be suggested by any DARTer but each topic should be posted separately for the purpose of distinguishing number of likes
  

--> @fauxlaw

I'm unsure of 'definition of nuclear family?

As a society, we give little credence to the SoM. Instead, we have allegiance to being woke. Big deal.

You will note a hierarchy of proper attitudes, first to one’s self, and gradually transcending, from Matt 5 through 7,  to society at large, from individual, to family, to society. No, ‘family,’ as a word, is not given, but is implied in the importance of other people.

• Are you suggesting that the NUCLEAR FAMILY  somehow reflects Jesus' teachings or Christian tradition?
  

The nuclear family has a better chance of supporting one another in an attempt to live by it than by a lone individual, and change lndividul by individual, then family by family...

That's a fair point.

So nothing other than an unenforceable promise by Chuck Schumer has been made.

Has she made an official promise since gaining office that she would vote for legalization in the Senate?

The NAACP might like the move, but that doesn't mean that black voters like the move.

From a policy standpoint, it is a good policy that I could see the NAACP liking. However, if you ban a product that many black voters enjoy, then you are probably not winning them over.

Just like if you banned flavored alcohol- do you expect that to make voters happy or angry?  Probably angry. You won't win many points from non-smokers (banning cigarettes isn't an issue that gets people out to vote) and you will lose points from smokers who now have to smoke cigarettes that taste like pure tar.

Go on. What has she done that you think energizes the base and attracts moderates?

@RM

With no moves on weed legalization

and outlawing menthol cigarettes, she is disappointing her base.

• If you would claim that the Sermon on the Mount holds no significant place  at the heart of human benevolence, I'd ask you to name some moral teaching that is more significant  or influential in human history
  
• In what way is the NUCLEAR FAMILY related to the Sermon on the Mount? 
  
• Are you suggesting that the NUCLEAR FAMILY  somehow reflects Jesus' teachings or Christian tradition?
  

--> @oromagi

The original definitions excluded non-biological members- step-children, adopted children, etc.

Oh, so, the older woman [94] who lives with my wife and I, occupying the full basement of our home that we prepared specifically for her  is not her biological mother?

--> @oromagi

• But God takes no wife and 
  
• Jesus takes no wife and fathers no children.  Mary's husband Joseph disappears after Jesus' childhood.  As an adult, Jesus lives with his brother and a group of friends.
  

Says who? That the concept of celibacy applies to God the Father, and Christ is a supposition merely because biblical scripture has no mention of it .  there is no reference to marriage of the Father or the Son, but that does not mean they were not.

There are considerable missing truths from biblical scripture, but I have mentioned on a number of occasions that the Bible as intended holy writ has been corrupted, such as this notion of celibacy.    I not only believe both are married, but that the notion of God's Sireship of you and me is absurd without the notion of a Mother in Heaven, the literal parents of our spirits. We do not know for whom the marriage feast at Cana was for, and, yet, it seems Mary had a more significant role than merely a guest. Hmmm? The marriage of Jesus to a bride otherwise never mentioned, perhaps? He was certainly of age. And why not? Why, to sell this idea of Christ's celibacy, which was, in my view, one of the dumbest ideas to foster in the first place.

The concept of family is far, far older than the 13th century.

--> @oromagi

at the heart of human benevolence,

That's the very problem I specify. Benevolence is haredly the leading factor of society anymore; precisely my point.

• I won't dispute that may have been your rhetorical intent but what you wrote was " Yet [the Sermon on the Mount ] holds no significant place in our hearts as a unifying power for good."  I've have shown that the Sermon is the most popular and significant moral lesson in history.  If the most powerful Sermon has no significant power for good, we must conclude that no lesser sermon is more effective and therefore you seem to be arguing that sermons are a waste of time.
  
• or perhaps you'd like to correct your OP.
  

Benevolence is haredly the leading factor of society anymore

• I'll agree that societies don't form to promote kindness but I disagree with your "anymore."  There never was a kinder or more benevolent age of man than now.  There never was a kinder or more benevolent society than American society in the 21st Century.
  

perhaps even a grandparent, etc, in one household,

I believe, as a related matter, that the nuclear family: father, mother, and children, and perhaps even a grandparent, etc, in one household, is a hidden power that would solve our social problems, but, it, too, is being ignored for the potential it has to heal society of its miseries.

• In what way is the nuclear family related to the Sermon on the Mount? 
  
• The nuclear family is thought to have emerged as Norther European tradition at the end of the 13th Cent. in the wake of the economic crisis of the Black Plague.  For the first time, moving away from the traditional family homestead could provide economic improvement on a large scale and later generations began to prioritize economic benefit over family as a geographic notion.  But neither the Romans or the Jews of the First Century put money before family.  Family was geography as well as history, identity, society and work and families clung together in huge interconnected clans and tribes.  The notion of nuclear family would have seemed strange in Jesus' time.
  
• Chapter 5 preaches that the Children of God are those who act like God  "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect."
  
• But God takes no wife and
  
• Jesus takes no wife and fathers no children.  Mary's husband Joseph disappears after Jesus' childhood.  As an adult, Jesus lives with his brother and a group of friends.
  
• If you are suggesting that the nuclear family somehow reflects Jesus' teachings or Christian tradition then I must strongly disagree.
  

yet [the Sermon on the Mount] holds no significant place in our hearts as a unifying power for good