Saw a thing that florida let people sue people for being called a bigot and this applies nationally? Can practically hear the 1984, funny from the group constantly invoking the book, they'd probably burn it.
It's easy to accidentally invent the torment nexus when you've banned the torment nexus from being taught in your schools, is the thing.
Everything looks beautiful when you're young and pretty
The tweeter says they aren't commenting on shipping specifically, and I think it can apply to a lot of things. For example, there's been an uptick on social media of people expressing discomfort with sex scenes in movies and TV and extrapolating that out to sex scenes being flatly bad for the medium and wishing for, no shit, the good old days of the Hays Code
Also generally media literacy seems pretty low in some circles these days and lots of people who can't seem to grasp that depicting morally wrong or bad actions or characters is not the same as endorsing them, etc
I don't think media literacy has ever been very high, but it does seem pretty bad now. I think it's problem is its taught alongside reading and the selected books are generally not something students get invested in when reading. Probably media literacy should probably be a separate class that embraces tv and movies and utilizing those to help teach the concepts. But really its going to just become a target of the alt-right like all of the most useful classes because it generally paints them in a bad light.
Saw a thing that florida let people sue people for being called a bigot and this applies nationally? Can practically hear the 1984, funny from the group constantly invoking the book, they'd probably burn it.
Flagrantly unconstitutional, for multiple reasons, but they've never cared about that.
Well, when they have control of the people who can rewrite the Constitution, why would they?
yeah that's my fear, like in the past it'd just be a pain until scotus shuts it down, now? It'll be a pain and then SCOTUS codifies it based on Amy Barret one time having someone make her sad she's in a religious cult.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
That seems unlikely to survive even this Supreme Court.
Why would you have any faith in the religious idealogues currently on the court to not make it fineable to say you disagree? Like their Roe decision showed law doesn't matter. Precedence doesn't matter, they can do whatever they want.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Oh it wouldn't be 9-0, but getting Roberts and Gorsuch on board with that law would be an uphill battle and Alito has written extensively in opposition to ideas like this one too. Nothing is guaranteed but this one seems unlikely.
A judge's primary allegiance is to other judges, and that law would create so much work for judges. Therefore they would rule against it. Also this isn't really important but think that tweet misinterprets the text? I read that as you accuse someone of discriminating against you for being gay, and you can't say the proof that it's true is they go to an evangelical church. That's very different from the tweet saying going to an evangelical church protect them from discrimination you have writing.
0
ShadowfireVermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered Userregular
Would they have to prove that their beliefs are founded in their religion? And then use that to threaten their tax exempt status?
I mean, I'm not saying tax the fucking churches..
Story, I'm being glib because this every day is just one more shade darker.
Would they have to prove that their beliefs are founded in their religion? And then use that to threaten their tax exempt status?
I mean, I'm not saying tax the fucking churches..
Story, I'm being glib because this every day is just one more shade darker.
Basically what the law does is: you say Im racist. I sue you for defamation. You cannot cite anything Ive said in your defense if its part of my religious beliefs or "science".
Also makes anonymous claims presumptively false and undermines protections for journalists.
Or conservatives in general, the cruelest joke is how they scream about everyone else being a snowflake or triggered when they are the biggest sore thumbs in the world and then write laws to make it against the law to say that.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro has announced that state environmental officials made a criminal referral against Norfolk Southern to the state attorney general’s office.
East Palestine is less than a mile from Ohio's border with Pennsylvania.
Would they have to prove that their beliefs are founded in their religion? And then use that to threaten their tax exempt status?
I mean, I'm not saying tax the fucking churches..
Story, I'm being glib because this every day is just one more shade darker.
Basically what the law does is: you say Im racist. I sue you for defamation. You cannot cite anything Ive said in your defense if its part of my religious beliefs or "science".
Also makes anonymous claims presumptively false and undermines protections for journalists.
Its a bonkers law.
That is moving in the same direction the right has been going with their arguments about "the right to monologue" and using their beliefs as a defense against deadnaming. It's just another turn of the knob on the stove.
If there's anything that sounds more likely to go off the rails than pro/anti shipping discourse it's meta discussion about another culture's possible reaction to pro/anti shipping discourse and extrapolating that discussion to totally unrelated issues.
So are you for or against the Supernatural brothers fucking each other? I need a clear position, dawg.
As in, a drawing of how the supernatural brothers would bang?
Accounts pushing Kremlin propaganda are using Twitter’s new paid verification system to appear more prominently on the platform, another sign that Elon Musk’s takeover is accelerating the spread of misinformation, a nonprofit research group has found.
Would they have to prove that their beliefs are founded in their religion? And then use that to threaten their tax exempt status?
I mean, I'm not saying tax the fucking churches..
Story, I'm being glib because this every day is just one more shade darker.
Basically what the law does is: you say Im racist. I sue you for defamation. You cannot cite anything Ive said in your defense if its part of my religious beliefs or "science".
Also makes anonymous claims presumptively false and undermines protections for journalists.
Its a bonkers law.
That is moving in the same direction the right has been going with their arguments about "the right to monologue" and using their beliefs as a defense against deadnaming. It's just another turn of the knob on the stove.
At a press conference in East Palestine, Donald Trump spoke for 10 minutes—bashing Biden, bragging about bringing “Trump water” to the community, and taking credit for the federal response.
Two words he didn’t mention? Norfolk Southern. /1
There’s a reason he didn’t mention the company’s conduct. Trump’s administration carried out the rail industry’s deregulatory agenda and made American communities and workers less safe.
Accounts pushing Kremlin propaganda are using Twitter’s new paid verification system to appear more prominently on the platform, another sign that Elon Musk’s takeover is accelerating the spread of misinformation, a nonprofit research group has found.
Gee I wonder if this one reason Elon's had Starlink be less reliable for Ukraine in defense of their country.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
It would require adult asylum seekers to use an app to book a meeting with US officials or first claim asylum in another country before reaching the US.
Failure to comply would make migrants ineligible if they subsequently reach the border.
Human rights groups likened the plan to Trump-era policies.
The proposed measure is the toughest yet introduced by Mr Biden, who came into office promising a more humane approach to the border crisis.
The proposed rule would apply to adults and families but not to unaccompanied children.
Under the plan, migrants would have to use a phone app to make an appointment to speak with a US immigration official when they arrive at the border.
Joe Biden and the architects of this plan are fetid racists who hate immigrants if they’re not white and wealthy
literally circumvents the Affirmative Asylum Process in order to just be cruel to non-white folks seeking a new life in America
"Sure you're fleeing an either metaphorical or literal warzone, but please remember to bring a smartphone and a SIM card with an international data plan."
-The fine print on the Statue of Liberty, presumably
+53
ShadowfireVermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered Userregular
That's not a book in the statue's hand, it's a tablet.
Reminder that the fundamental reason America has immigration restrictions to begin with is a bunch of late 19th century white motherfuckers went “man these Chinese people are making me nervous. We gotta do something to preserve White America.”
And their solution was “no one gets to come over anymore. Unless you’re white. Then you’re cool.”
And instead of ever repealing those restrictions we just whitewashed the rationale and gradually opened quotas wider and wider while still making immigration a fucking nightmare
Anyway open borders y’all, the only moral and ethical immigration policy that comports with how humans actually fucking function
I feel like you're missing something really obvious
Wealth is virtuous, right? It thus follows that a lack of wealth is a lack of virtue. If people were born in an economically disadvantaged place, they clearly deserve it. Why should someone else's sins be my problem?
So what if America, specifically and directly, disadvantaged that place? Maybe if that place had tried just being better, more virtuous, we wouldn't have needed to do that!
Poorochondriac on
+23
minor incidentexpert in a dying fieldnjRegistered Userregular
They should have thought twice about being born in a country the US might want to destabilize/invade/drop bombs on.
No one to blame but themselves, really.
Everything looks beautiful when you're young and pretty
Posts
It's easy to accidentally invent the torment nexus when you've banned the torment nexus from being taught in your schools, is the thing.
I don't think media literacy has ever been very high, but it does seem pretty bad now. I think it's problem is its taught alongside reading and the selected books are generally not something students get invested in when reading. Probably media literacy should probably be a separate class that embraces tv and movies and utilizing those to help teach the concepts. But really its going to just become a target of the alt-right like all of the most useful classes because it generally paints them in a bad light.
{Twitter, Everybody's doing it. }{Writing and Story Blog}
It's not happening yet, but proposed legislation yeah.
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
Well, when they have control of the people who can rewrite the Constitution, why would they?
yeah that's my fear, like in the past it'd just be a pain until scotus shuts it down, now? It'll be a pain and then SCOTUS codifies it based on Amy Barret one time having someone make her sad she's in a religious cult.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Why would you have any faith in the religious idealogues currently on the court to not make it fineable to say you disagree? Like their Roe decision showed law doesn't matter. Precedence doesn't matter, they can do whatever they want.
pleasepaypreacher.net
I mean, I'm not saying tax the fucking churches..
Basically what the law does is: you say Im racist. I sue you for defamation. You cannot cite anything Ive said in your defense if its part of my religious beliefs or "science".
Also makes anonymous claims presumptively false and undermines protections for journalists.
Its a bonkers law.
Despite, you know.
Or conservatives in general, the cruelest joke is how they scream about everyone else being a snowflake or triggered when they are the biggest sore thumbs in the world and then write laws to make it against the law to say that.
pleasepaypreacher.net
That is moving in the same direction the right has been going with their arguments about "the right to monologue" and using their beliefs as a defense against deadnaming. It's just another turn of the knob on the stove.
As in, a drawing of how the supernatural brothers would bang?
A gas stove or??
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better
bit.ly/2XQM1ke
Gee I wonder if this one reason Elon's had Starlink be less reliable for Ukraine in defense of their country.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Which calls for one thing:
Joe Biden and the architects of this plan are fetid racists who hate immigrants if they’re not white and wealthy
literally circumvents the Affirmative Asylum Process in order to just be cruel to non-white folks seeking a new life in America
-The fine print on the Statue of Liberty, presumably
And their solution was “no one gets to come over anymore. Unless you’re white. Then you’re cool.”
And instead of ever repealing those restrictions we just whitewashed the rationale and gradually opened quotas wider and wider while still making immigration a fucking nightmare
The ones we want do. Everyone else can fuck right off.
Steam, Warframe: Megajoule
I feel like you're missing something really obvious
Wealth is virtuous, right? It thus follows that a lack of wealth is a lack of virtue. If people were born in an economically disadvantaged place, they clearly deserve it. Why should someone else's sins be my problem?
So what if America, specifically and directly, disadvantaged that place? Maybe if that place had tried just being better, more virtuous, we wouldn't have needed to do that!
No one to blame but themselves, really.
America: Don't blame us. Blame yourself, or God
Buddy I'm Cherokee, that slogan ain't new
But we're having it engraved in a new font!
On the Moon!
[stares very intently at the first three letters of your name]