FA+
Shop
Second Sunday of Advent
General | Posted 5 years ago
Do you hear what I hear?
https://youtu.be/ADj-Ru3JQp0
Harry Simeone Chorale
https://youtu.be/FhTnDaEmA5k
Bing Crosby
First Sunday of Advent
General | Posted 5 years agoMary Did You Know?https://youtu.be/mxnU8fWv7uU
Kenny Rogers & Wynonna Judd
Is my all-time favorite version of this song.
https://youtu.be/ifCWN5pJGIE
Pentatonix
Does a really great version too.
US Thanksgiving
General | Posted 5 years agoThose of us able to gather together safely, and those of us not, should look for things to be thankful for. There are, of course, health benefits to being thankful or developing a thankful attitude, even when things look bleak.
I am certainly thankful for my friends, family, and health.
The US Thanksgiving, of course, is more than just a day set aside to be thankful. There is a retelling of "the first Thanksgiving" where people from Europe, and people native to America, got together to feast. As is usual, there's a bit more to the story. Native Americans are not Tolkien's elves. They didn't simply abandon their historic lands to go to some mythical place.
They are still here and the Wampanoag tribe (the one involved in the usual story, though they are unnamed) are still here. Despite an attempt by the Trump administration to deny them a land grant, they were finally granted it.
However, this only serves to highlight the many issues facing Natives even now. There is, so far as I know, no treaty the US has made with any tribe or nation that has been upheld in full. All have been broken to greater or lesser degrees.
If this is a downer note, those of us able to count our many blessings should also remember that there are homeless, hungry people out there. That justice in the US is often ill-served (if served at all), and that our blessings should not blind us towards the needs of others, nor harden our hearts against them.
I am certainly thankful for my friends, family, and health.
The US Thanksgiving, of course, is more than just a day set aside to be thankful. There is a retelling of "the first Thanksgiving" where people from Europe, and people native to America, got together to feast. As is usual, there's a bit more to the story. Native Americans are not Tolkien's elves. They didn't simply abandon their historic lands to go to some mythical place.
They are still here and the Wampanoag tribe (the one involved in the usual story, though they are unnamed) are still here. Despite an attempt by the Trump administration to deny them a land grant, they were finally granted it.
However, this only serves to highlight the many issues facing Natives even now. There is, so far as I know, no treaty the US has made with any tribe or nation that has been upheld in full. All have been broken to greater or lesser degrees.
If this is a downer note, those of us able to count our many blessings should also remember that there are homeless, hungry people out there. That justice in the US is often ill-served (if served at all), and that our blessings should not blind us towards the needs of others, nor harden our hearts against them.
On the previous Journal
General | Posted 5 years agoIf it seems sudden, it was also prompted by this.
I don't think my fellow Catholic furs really appreciate what it feels like to be gay and Catholic. I don't think most of them understand what it feels like to be simultaneously told you belong and while having the people around you only seeming to want you as long as you pretend you're not gay. Or seemingly wanting to eliminate that aspect of you.
I really wonder if they can understand what it feels like to be told I shouldn't have the option to marry or to adopt. I really wonder if they can understand that when I see countries like Hungary curtailing GLBT+ rights, I also see them cheering it on because it's the same sort of argument they make.
I really wonder if they can understand the pain I feel, especially when people I'd have once considered close friends basically seem to be on the side of people who want me as a second class (or worse) citizen.
I don't think my fellow Catholic furs really appreciate what it feels like to be gay and Catholic. I don't think most of them understand what it feels like to be simultaneously told you belong and while having the people around you only seeming to want you as long as you pretend you're not gay. Or seemingly wanting to eliminate that aspect of you.
I really wonder if they can understand what it feels like to be told I shouldn't have the option to marry or to adopt. I really wonder if they can understand that when I see countries like Hungary curtailing GLBT+ rights, I also see them cheering it on because it's the same sort of argument they make.
I really wonder if they can understand the pain I feel, especially when people I'd have once considered close friends basically seem to be on the side of people who want me as a second class (or worse) citizen.
Good Catholics Should Cheer
General | Posted 5 years agoThe marvelous land of Hungary is now trying to ban Gays from adopting! Isn't that just wonderful? This after ending the recognition of transgender and intersex people.
Surely you must all be praising God for Hungary doing such good work that will protect Christians in their country from having to face the same issues they do here!
Yes, this is sarcasm. Yes, I am very angry.
Do not reply if your whole focus has been on Christians loosing their religious right to say no by refusal; it is the same thing, just made legal in Hungary.
Don't say it's human right's abuse if you're going to say it's okay for a Christian to refuse to give gay couples a wedding certificate or refuse allowing them to adopt.
Don't bother to pretend you care about non-cisgender/non-heterosexual people.
Surely you must all be praising God for Hungary doing such good work that will protect Christians in their country from having to face the same issues they do here!
Yes, this is sarcasm. Yes, I am very angry.
Do not reply if your whole focus has been on Christians loosing their religious right to say no by refusal; it is the same thing, just made legal in Hungary.
Don't say it's human right's abuse if you're going to say it's okay for a Christian to refuse to give gay couples a wedding certificate or refuse allowing them to adopt.
Don't bother to pretend you care about non-cisgender/non-heterosexual people.
Just ugh
General | Posted 5 years agoI'm trying to confirm this because it just seems too awful a thing to be true and yet after Trump I just can't dismiss the most awful of things because it seems unlikely someone would do them.
I really wish I had more viable options than what seem to be fascist (Republican) and Republican (Democrat).
I really wish I had more viable options than what seem to be fascist (Republican) and Republican (Democrat).
Apparently the "screw your feelings" party wants sympathy...
General | Posted 5 years agoI saw a Twitter from a Republican asking Democrats to be sensitive to the feelings of Republicans for the election outcomes.
This from the party that will do something to "own the Libs".
This from the party that loves to call people "snowflakes".
This from the party willing to tear families apart both here and at our borders, yet is so very concerned about abortion.
This from the party that seems to care less what other people feel, unless it fuels their particular brand of sadism to watch them suffer.
P.S.
If you're going to say something like "the deportations happened under Obama too" you're only proving my point--you knew about it happening (which I did not) and you were okay with it.
This from the party that will do something to "own the Libs".
This from the party that loves to call people "snowflakes".
This from the party willing to tear families apart both here and at our borders, yet is so very concerned about abortion.
This from the party that seems to care less what other people feel, unless it fuels their particular brand of sadism to watch them suffer.
P.S.
If you're going to say something like "the deportations happened under Obama too" you're only proving my point--you knew about it happening (which I did not) and you were okay with it.
Toxicity
General | Posted 5 years agoAn article on the Los Angeles Times deals with something I've noticed even in myself when it comes to political stances. Since I'm not sure if people will be able to access the link, I'm copying and pasting it here:
One year ago, a report from the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security assessed the readiness of 195 countries around the world to confront a deadly disease outbreak. Topping the list of most-prepared nations was the United States of America.
But that forecast didn’t account for one crucial factor: the toxic degree of partisanship that would turn something as simple as wearing a face mask into a political statement.
How did things get so bad that Americans couldn’t come together to confront a universal threat like COVID-19, which has killed more than 227,000 of us so far?
A report in this week’s issue of Science offers an explanation — political sectarianism.
The authors of the new report explain that political sectarianism goes beyond mere disagreements about the nation’s goals and how they should be achieved. Nor is it a case of people being trapped in partisan echo chambers, or sorting themselves into Democratic and Republican ecospheres where they’re unlikely to encounter a contrary point of view.
What pushes mere enmity into the realm of political sectarianism is a “poisonous cocktail” of beliefs that turns opponents into mortal enemies regardless of the issue, according to the 15 experts in political science, social psychology, sociology and cognitive science who co-wrote the report.
This cocktail has three key ingredients, they explain.
The first is “othering,” which they describe as a “tendency to view opposing partisans as essentially different or alien to oneself.”
The second ingredient is aversion, a reflex to “dislike and distrust” one’s political opponents.
The final ingredient is moralization, which causes us to see our opponents as not merely wrongheaded, but downright evil.
“It is the confluence of these ingredients that makes sectarianism so corrosive,” they write. “When all three converge, political losses can feel like existential threats that must be averted — whatever the cost.”
It may seem hard to believe, but a voter’s party affiliation wasn’t always determined by his or her ideology. As recently as the 1970s, the Democratic and Republican parties each had a conservative and a liberal wing.
Now, not only are liberals concentrated in the Democratic Party and conservatives in the GOP, but Americans have largely segregated themselves also according to their race, religion, education and geography. The result is that party affiliation has become a “mega-identity” that exaggerates our perception of how little we have in common with those on the other side.
(How off-base are we? When asked how many Republicans earned more than $250,000 a year, Democrats guessed the answer was 38%; in reality, only 2% earn that much, according to a 2018 study in the Journal of Politics. Similarly, Republicans guessed that 32% of Democrats were gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender; the real figure is 6%.)
The media is partly to blame for this chasm, the experts write. After the Federal Communications Commission did away with the “fairness doctrine” in 1987, broadcasters were no longer required to give equal time to both sides of a controversial topic. Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh was the first to capitalize on the chance to target an audience on one side of the political spectrum, and he was followed eight years later by the Fox News cable TV network. MSNBC pivoted left in response.
The rise of social media makes it even easier for people to cut themselves off from contrary points of view. The algorithms that drive platforms like Twitter and Facebook favor posts that “maximize user engagement,” the authors write, and in a homogeneous network, the result is that people’s beliefs are reinforced and strengthened.
(On the flip side, an experiment conduced before the 2018 midterm elections found that people who deactivated their Facebook accounts for four weeks became less politically polarized.)
The country’s political elites have largely led the way in polarizing the rest of us, with Republican politicians embracing views further to the right and Democrats moving further to the left, the experts add. They give special consideration to former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who described his adversaries as not simply wrongheaded or misinformed, but also morally inferior. He used words like “shameful” and “disgraceful” to drive home his point, and encouraged others to do the same.
The effects of political sectarianism can be seen with something social scientists call a “feeling thermometer.” It’s a scale that puts cold feelings at 0 degrees and warm feelings at 100 degrees. If you feel neutral toward someone, they measure 50 degrees.
Over the last 40 years, Americans’ feelings toward members of their own political group have remained relatively stable, around 70 to 75 degrees, according to the American National Election Study.
But there’s been lots of movement when it comes to feelings for those in the other party. Back in the 1970s, opponents registered at 48 degrees, just slightly below neutral. Now, they’re down to about 20 degrees.
In other words, we now hate our opponents more than we love our allies.
That degree of animosity is unmatched among eight other Western democracies — Australia, Britain, Canada, Germany, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland — and by some measures, “it exceeds long-standing antipathies around race and religion,” the experts write in the new report.
This isn’t just an academic concern. Knowing who you like helps predict who you’ll vote for, but knowing who you hate is an even better indicator of how you’ll vote.
This explains why President Trump was probably right when he said, “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose any voters.” Your own party’s candidate may leave much to be desired, but those shortcomings can be overlooked if you believe that “the consequences of having the vile opposition win the election are catastrophic,” the authors write.
In this environment, politicians have little to gain — and much to lose — by trying to find common ground with the other side.
“Issues that are not inherently partisan become politicized,” the authors write. A case in point: the decision about whether to wear a mask to prevent the spread of COVID-19.
Masks have come to be associated with Democrats, making Republicans less inclined to wear them. “The result has been lethal and expensive for Americans across the political spectrum,” according to the report.
Efforts to address climate change and reduce the ballooning federal debt are other casualties of this politicize-everything mentality, the experts write: “Political sectarianism cripples a nation’s ability to confront challenges.”
But there is reason for hope, they add. Partisans on both sides are “fed up” with our poisonous politics, and many would surely welcome measures that aim to make civic life more civil.
For starters, it would help to correct the misperceptions people have about those on the other side. The more we get to know each other as individuals, rather than as members of a hated group, the easier it will be to find common ground.
That extends to elected officials. The report’s authors suggest changing campaign finance laws to limit the influence of deep-pocketed “ideological extremists.” In addition, getting rid of partisan gerrymandering would deprive extremists of safe seats in Congress, they say.
They’ve also got ideas for tweaking social media, but it’s not as simple as you might think. Eliminating echo chambers could backfire if seeing the other side’s messages gets one’s partisan juices flowing. Instead, they recommend interventions that prompt people to “deliberate about the accuracy of claims on social media,” because that would make them less likely to pass along information that’s either false or hyperpartisan (or both).
“Political sectarianism is neither inevitable nor irreversible,” they write, though reversing it won’t be easy.
“Any serious effort will require multifaceted efforts to change leadership, media, and democratic systems in ways that are sensitive to human psychology,” they write. “There are no silver bullets.”
This being the case with me, as I've come to see all Conservatives as enemies. Even fellow Christians. I feel that they hate me and people like me. I feel like they'd like nothing more that to take away the rights of LGBT+ people, and would dance with glee if gay marriage was overturned--no matter how many people that would hurt. And I know that, because of the Church's stance on homosexual relationships, they'll never back the issue of gay marriage as a human right since it goes against doctrine. Ours is a secular society, though. Secular law is not the same as religious law. Anyone wanting to make them the same puzzles me, especially when they fear Sharia, since it's the same thing.
I associate them with the most vial aspects of human nature, with bigotry and with authoritarianism.
Does this make it true? Likely not in most cases. The news has a way of amplifying bad behavior, so the only folks I see associated with Conservatives are white supremacists and their ilk. Similarly, when it comes to Liberals, the ones being shown tend to be associated with looters and with a desire to stifle religious rights.
How do I deal with my own issues? I'm not sure. Just recognizing it is a start, I guess, but the more often I see or hear Conservatives or GOP doing something I consider horrible, the more entrenched my own view against them becomes, and I'm not sure what to do about that.
Fed up with the election? Science explains how politics got so awfulOne year ago, a report from the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security assessed the readiness of 195 countries around the world to confront a deadly disease outbreak. Topping the list of most-prepared nations was the United States of America.
But that forecast didn’t account for one crucial factor: the toxic degree of partisanship that would turn something as simple as wearing a face mask into a political statement.
How did things get so bad that Americans couldn’t come together to confront a universal threat like COVID-19, which has killed more than 227,000 of us so far?
A report in this week’s issue of Science offers an explanation — political sectarianism.
The authors of the new report explain that political sectarianism goes beyond mere disagreements about the nation’s goals and how they should be achieved. Nor is it a case of people being trapped in partisan echo chambers, or sorting themselves into Democratic and Republican ecospheres where they’re unlikely to encounter a contrary point of view.
What pushes mere enmity into the realm of political sectarianism is a “poisonous cocktail” of beliefs that turns opponents into mortal enemies regardless of the issue, according to the 15 experts in political science, social psychology, sociology and cognitive science who co-wrote the report.
This cocktail has three key ingredients, they explain.
The first is “othering,” which they describe as a “tendency to view opposing partisans as essentially different or alien to oneself.”
The second ingredient is aversion, a reflex to “dislike and distrust” one’s political opponents.
The final ingredient is moralization, which causes us to see our opponents as not merely wrongheaded, but downright evil.
“It is the confluence of these ingredients that makes sectarianism so corrosive,” they write. “When all three converge, political losses can feel like existential threats that must be averted — whatever the cost.”
It may seem hard to believe, but a voter’s party affiliation wasn’t always determined by his or her ideology. As recently as the 1970s, the Democratic and Republican parties each had a conservative and a liberal wing.
Now, not only are liberals concentrated in the Democratic Party and conservatives in the GOP, but Americans have largely segregated themselves also according to their race, religion, education and geography. The result is that party affiliation has become a “mega-identity” that exaggerates our perception of how little we have in common with those on the other side.
(How off-base are we? When asked how many Republicans earned more than $250,000 a year, Democrats guessed the answer was 38%; in reality, only 2% earn that much, according to a 2018 study in the Journal of Politics. Similarly, Republicans guessed that 32% of Democrats were gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender; the real figure is 6%.)
The media is partly to blame for this chasm, the experts write. After the Federal Communications Commission did away with the “fairness doctrine” in 1987, broadcasters were no longer required to give equal time to both sides of a controversial topic. Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh was the first to capitalize on the chance to target an audience on one side of the political spectrum, and he was followed eight years later by the Fox News cable TV network. MSNBC pivoted left in response.
The rise of social media makes it even easier for people to cut themselves off from contrary points of view. The algorithms that drive platforms like Twitter and Facebook favor posts that “maximize user engagement,” the authors write, and in a homogeneous network, the result is that people’s beliefs are reinforced and strengthened.
(On the flip side, an experiment conduced before the 2018 midterm elections found that people who deactivated their Facebook accounts for four weeks became less politically polarized.)
The country’s political elites have largely led the way in polarizing the rest of us, with Republican politicians embracing views further to the right and Democrats moving further to the left, the experts add. They give special consideration to former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who described his adversaries as not simply wrongheaded or misinformed, but also morally inferior. He used words like “shameful” and “disgraceful” to drive home his point, and encouraged others to do the same.
The effects of political sectarianism can be seen with something social scientists call a “feeling thermometer.” It’s a scale that puts cold feelings at 0 degrees and warm feelings at 100 degrees. If you feel neutral toward someone, they measure 50 degrees.
Over the last 40 years, Americans’ feelings toward members of their own political group have remained relatively stable, around 70 to 75 degrees, according to the American National Election Study.
But there’s been lots of movement when it comes to feelings for those in the other party. Back in the 1970s, opponents registered at 48 degrees, just slightly below neutral. Now, they’re down to about 20 degrees.
In other words, we now hate our opponents more than we love our allies.
That degree of animosity is unmatched among eight other Western democracies — Australia, Britain, Canada, Germany, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland — and by some measures, “it exceeds long-standing antipathies around race and religion,” the experts write in the new report.
This isn’t just an academic concern. Knowing who you like helps predict who you’ll vote for, but knowing who you hate is an even better indicator of how you’ll vote.
This explains why President Trump was probably right when he said, “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose any voters.” Your own party’s candidate may leave much to be desired, but those shortcomings can be overlooked if you believe that “the consequences of having the vile opposition win the election are catastrophic,” the authors write.
In this environment, politicians have little to gain — and much to lose — by trying to find common ground with the other side.
“Issues that are not inherently partisan become politicized,” the authors write. A case in point: the decision about whether to wear a mask to prevent the spread of COVID-19.
Masks have come to be associated with Democrats, making Republicans less inclined to wear them. “The result has been lethal and expensive for Americans across the political spectrum,” according to the report.
Efforts to address climate change and reduce the ballooning federal debt are other casualties of this politicize-everything mentality, the experts write: “Political sectarianism cripples a nation’s ability to confront challenges.”
But there is reason for hope, they add. Partisans on both sides are “fed up” with our poisonous politics, and many would surely welcome measures that aim to make civic life more civil.
For starters, it would help to correct the misperceptions people have about those on the other side. The more we get to know each other as individuals, rather than as members of a hated group, the easier it will be to find common ground.
That extends to elected officials. The report’s authors suggest changing campaign finance laws to limit the influence of deep-pocketed “ideological extremists.” In addition, getting rid of partisan gerrymandering would deprive extremists of safe seats in Congress, they say.
They’ve also got ideas for tweaking social media, but it’s not as simple as you might think. Eliminating echo chambers could backfire if seeing the other side’s messages gets one’s partisan juices flowing. Instead, they recommend interventions that prompt people to “deliberate about the accuracy of claims on social media,” because that would make them less likely to pass along information that’s either false or hyperpartisan (or both).
“Political sectarianism is neither inevitable nor irreversible,” they write, though reversing it won’t be easy.
“Any serious effort will require multifaceted efforts to change leadership, media, and democratic systems in ways that are sensitive to human psychology,” they write. “There are no silver bullets.”
This being the case with me, as I've come to see all Conservatives as enemies. Even fellow Christians. I feel that they hate me and people like me. I feel like they'd like nothing more that to take away the rights of LGBT+ people, and would dance with glee if gay marriage was overturned--no matter how many people that would hurt. And I know that, because of the Church's stance on homosexual relationships, they'll never back the issue of gay marriage as a human right since it goes against doctrine. Ours is a secular society, though. Secular law is not the same as religious law. Anyone wanting to make them the same puzzles me, especially when they fear Sharia, since it's the same thing.
I associate them with the most vial aspects of human nature, with bigotry and with authoritarianism.
Does this make it true? Likely not in most cases. The news has a way of amplifying bad behavior, so the only folks I see associated with Conservatives are white supremacists and their ilk. Similarly, when it comes to Liberals, the ones being shown tend to be associated with looters and with a desire to stifle religious rights.
How do I deal with my own issues? I'm not sure. Just recognizing it is a start, I guess, but the more often I see or hear Conservatives or GOP doing something I consider horrible, the more entrenched my own view against them becomes, and I'm not sure what to do about that.
Dumber but not Stinkier
General | Posted 5 years agoOne of my personal kinks is dumbing down. I think it's because my brain is always so full of thoughts and worries that I'd like for once to just be able to live in the moment and not have anything really going on in my head.
While brain drain/IQ loss/dumbing down is not particularly hard to find on this site, finding it without the characters defecating themselves or urinating or somehow becoming odiferous slobs is very hard to find. I'm not going to kink-shame anyone, but that stuff just grosses me out.
I wonder if anyone watching me shares the same sort of interest.
While brain drain/IQ loss/dumbing down is not particularly hard to find on this site, finding it without the characters defecating themselves or urinating or somehow becoming odiferous slobs is very hard to find. I'm not going to kink-shame anyone, but that stuff just grosses me out.
I wonder if anyone watching me shares the same sort of interest.
Why "protecting" faith erodes it
General | Posted 5 years agoThere are, and have been, many laws designed to "protect" people of faith. Largely it is more protecting people of Christian faith, but it's always carefully coached so it doesn't actually say that, even if the people it ends up being applied to are.
Such "protection" is usually tantamount to a permission to discriminate. Don't want to bake that homosexual couple a cake for their wedding? Don't worry, you're covered by law. Don't want to give that transgender person life-saving surgery? Got ya covered bro! Go on and refuse to serve or help anyone you want and we'll cover it with a law!
As applied to faith, particularly Christian faith, all this does is breed resentment. We're accused, rightly, of hypocrisy. Didn't Christ tell say to treat others as you want to be treated? Didn't Christ heal those who came to Him? It doesn't take much delving into the various Gospels to see where laws allowing a Christian to discriminate is against the teachings of Christ.
Worse than the hypocrisy, it breeds increasing resentment against Christians. It makes it harder or impossible to be faithful publicly because people will assume that if you're Christian you are a hateful, bigoted, racist person because of these "protection" laws. All these "protection" laws do is make it seem like you just want to discriminate against people.
To add to this, because I just know someone will mention it, "what about those people who sue? Is it really right that someone be sued out of house and home for being faithful?" It ought to be obviously wrong to sue a person out of their livelihood (much less their home!). Even if you want to argue that some kind of lesson about anti-discrimination needs to be taught, do you really want it to come at the cost of making someone unemployed and homeless? And if you do, how does that make you any less hateful?
Indeed, actions like that are why these sorts of laws are being made. The center will not hold on any arguments of someone's particular rights being more important than someone else's. All it leads to is fighting and, inevitably, an erosion of all rights.
Along other lines, I have a very strange idea of duty. If I'm at a job, I feel I should do that job to the best of my abilities--no matter how I personally feel. I tend to apply this to other people doing their jobs. If your job is issuing marriage licenses, you don't get to pick who you issue them to. That is not your job. If you feel you cannot do that, then you either need to find another job or you need to have someone replace you. You cannot just turn people away who have nowhere else to go or no one else to see. If you do you are being negligent in your duties.
If you offer cakes to "everyone for every occasion" you don't get to say no to someone. You should already know that at some point someone is going to take that at face value and order something you're not going to want to do. If you have a stipulation of "can refuse any order for any reason" that's fine, but also expect people to feel slighted when you refuse to do something for them that you'd do for anyone else. Your job is to provide baked goods, not judge people.
I should add, that I feel store owners need to be able to reject customers who are being troublesome. If someone is in your store and causing trouble, you and your employees should not be forced to put up with them. Similarly, if someone asks for something that is well and truly offensive then you should be able to turn them down. However, you can't discriminate against someone. If you go "I'm not serving those people" you are a terrible person.
Such "protection" is usually tantamount to a permission to discriminate. Don't want to bake that homosexual couple a cake for their wedding? Don't worry, you're covered by law. Don't want to give that transgender person life-saving surgery? Got ya covered bro! Go on and refuse to serve or help anyone you want and we'll cover it with a law!
As applied to faith, particularly Christian faith, all this does is breed resentment. We're accused, rightly, of hypocrisy. Didn't Christ tell say to treat others as you want to be treated? Didn't Christ heal those who came to Him? It doesn't take much delving into the various Gospels to see where laws allowing a Christian to discriminate is against the teachings of Christ.
Worse than the hypocrisy, it breeds increasing resentment against Christians. It makes it harder or impossible to be faithful publicly because people will assume that if you're Christian you are a hateful, bigoted, racist person because of these "protection" laws. All these "protection" laws do is make it seem like you just want to discriminate against people.
To add to this, because I just know someone will mention it, "what about those people who sue? Is it really right that someone be sued out of house and home for being faithful?" It ought to be obviously wrong to sue a person out of their livelihood (much less their home!). Even if you want to argue that some kind of lesson about anti-discrimination needs to be taught, do you really want it to come at the cost of making someone unemployed and homeless? And if you do, how does that make you any less hateful?
Indeed, actions like that are why these sorts of laws are being made. The center will not hold on any arguments of someone's particular rights being more important than someone else's. All it leads to is fighting and, inevitably, an erosion of all rights.
Along other lines, I have a very strange idea of duty. If I'm at a job, I feel I should do that job to the best of my abilities--no matter how I personally feel. I tend to apply this to other people doing their jobs. If your job is issuing marriage licenses, you don't get to pick who you issue them to. That is not your job. If you feel you cannot do that, then you either need to find another job or you need to have someone replace you. You cannot just turn people away who have nowhere else to go or no one else to see. If you do you are being negligent in your duties.
If you offer cakes to "everyone for every occasion" you don't get to say no to someone. You should already know that at some point someone is going to take that at face value and order something you're not going to want to do. If you have a stipulation of "can refuse any order for any reason" that's fine, but also expect people to feel slighted when you refuse to do something for them that you'd do for anyone else. Your job is to provide baked goods, not judge people.
I should add, that I feel store owners need to be able to reject customers who are being troublesome. If someone is in your store and causing trouble, you and your employees should not be forced to put up with them. Similarly, if someone asks for something that is well and truly offensive then you should be able to turn them down. However, you can't discriminate against someone. If you go "I'm not serving those people" you are a terrible person.
Telling silence
General | Posted 5 years agoIn both the fact that just one person got back to me on my last journal and I could post this:
Since it's likely Barrett will be confirmed, if she helps undo everything up to and including the 14 and 15th Amendments, is it even worth sticking around to go through all those battles for basic rights all over again, especially since I probably won't live to see it anyway?
on Twitter and no one responds at all.
Usually I don't feel suicidal, but the thought of having to redo a hundred years or more of progress (if it can even be done) is just too much. People will say I'm catastrophizing, but I just want to hope there's better ahead. All these white supremacists and their ilk, so eager to undo all the progress we've made makes me angry, sick, scared, and sad.
And I have an honestly nasty wish in my head that someone here, if I killed myself, would understand how his support of the conservative and his sepulcher faith lead to me doing it because he was part of the problem and might as well have killed me himself.
Since it's likely Barrett will be confirmed, if she helps undo everything up to and including the 14 and 15th Amendments, is it even worth sticking around to go through all those battles for basic rights all over again, especially since I probably won't live to see it anyway?
on Twitter and no one responds at all.
Usually I don't feel suicidal, but the thought of having to redo a hundred years or more of progress (if it can even be done) is just too much. People will say I'm catastrophizing, but I just want to hope there's better ahead. All these white supremacists and their ilk, so eager to undo all the progress we've made makes me angry, sick, scared, and sad.
And I have an honestly nasty wish in my head that someone here, if I killed myself, would understand how his support of the conservative and his sepulcher faith lead to me doing it because he was part of the problem and might as well have killed me himself.
Trades or collabs?
General | Posted 5 years agoWould anyone be interested? I know a lot of folks do artwork for money, and I don't just want to randomly note people and see. I really do want to do trades with someone or work together on something.
To any Christian supporting Trump's border policy
General | Posted 5 years agoYou are violating the Will of God.
Leviticus
"And you shall not strip your vineyard bare, neither shall you gather the fallen grapes of your vineyard. You shall leave them for the poor and for the sojourner: I am the Lord your God."-19:10
“When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God."-19:33-34
“And when you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not reap your field right up to its edge, nor shall you gather the gleanings after your harvest. You shall leave them for the poor and for the sojourner: I am the Lord your God.”-23:22
"You shall have the same rule for the sojourner and for the native, for I am the Lord your God.”-24:22
“If your brother becomes poor and cannot maintain himself with you, you shall support him as though he were a stranger and a sojourner, and he shall live with you."-25:35
Exodus
"There shall be one law for the native and for the stranger who sojourns among you.”-12:49
“You shall not wrong a sojourner or oppress him, for you were sojourners in the land of Egypt.";-22:21
“You shall not oppress a sojourner. You know the heart of a sojourner, for you were sojourners in the land of Egypt."-23:9
Deuteronomy
"He executes justice for the fatherless and the widow, and loves the sojourner, giving him food and clothing. Love the sojourner, therefore, for you were sojourners in the land of Egypt."-10:18-19
“You shall not oppress a hired servant who is poor and needy, whether he is one of your brothers or one of the sojourners who are in your land within your towns."-24:14
“‘Cursed be anyone who perverts the justice due to the sojourner, the fatherless, and the widow.’ And all the people shall say, ‘Amen.’" -27:19
"Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for thereby some have entertained angels unawares." -Hebrews 13:2
“Then I will draw near to you for judgment. I will be a swift witness against the sorcerers, against the adulterers, against those who swear falsely, against those who oppress the hired worker in his wages, the widow and the fatherless, against those who thrust aside the sojourner, and do not fear me, says the Lord of hosts." -Malachi 3:5
"The Lord watches over the sojourners; he upholds the widow and the fatherless, but the way of the wicked he brings to ruin." -Psalm 146:9
"Thus says the Lord: Do justice and righteousness, and deliver from the hand of the oppressor him who has been robbed. And do no wrong or violence to the resident alien, the fatherless, and the widow, nor shed innocent blood in this place." -Jeremiah 22:3
"For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”"-Galatians 5:14
"Now when they had departed, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream and said, “Rise, take the child and his mother, and flee to Egypt, and remain there until I tell you, for Herod is about to search for the child, to destroy him.” And he rose and took the child and his mother by night and departed to Egypt and remained there until the death of Herod. This was to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet, “Out of Egypt I called my son.”"-Matthew 2:13-15
If the Holy Family were to come from Mexico to the US now, Jesus would be seized from Mary and Joseph, who would not have proof they were His parents. People would justify this by saying "child trafficking" and turn Mary and Joseph back while putting Jesus in a foster family here--until He was old enough to be "sent back where He came from" since He was not born in the US.
The fact the Trump administration had to be judicially ordered to give basic grooming like soap to those it imprisoned ought to prove beyond doubt the violation of basic human rights and decency.
Someone, I know, will ask "what about when this happened under Obama"? Well, I was not aware of it happening under Obama, and I would have said the same thing then as I do now had I been aware of it.
Leviticus
"And you shall not strip your vineyard bare, neither shall you gather the fallen grapes of your vineyard. You shall leave them for the poor and for the sojourner: I am the Lord your God."-19:10
“When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God."-19:33-34
“And when you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not reap your field right up to its edge, nor shall you gather the gleanings after your harvest. You shall leave them for the poor and for the sojourner: I am the Lord your God.”-23:22
"You shall have the same rule for the sojourner and for the native, for I am the Lord your God.”-24:22
“If your brother becomes poor and cannot maintain himself with you, you shall support him as though he were a stranger and a sojourner, and he shall live with you."-25:35
Exodus
"There shall be one law for the native and for the stranger who sojourns among you.”-12:49
“You shall not wrong a sojourner or oppress him, for you were sojourners in the land of Egypt.";-22:21
“You shall not oppress a sojourner. You know the heart of a sojourner, for you were sojourners in the land of Egypt."-23:9
Deuteronomy
"He executes justice for the fatherless and the widow, and loves the sojourner, giving him food and clothing. Love the sojourner, therefore, for you were sojourners in the land of Egypt."-10:18-19
“You shall not oppress a hired servant who is poor and needy, whether he is one of your brothers or one of the sojourners who are in your land within your towns."-24:14
“‘Cursed be anyone who perverts the justice due to the sojourner, the fatherless, and the widow.’ And all the people shall say, ‘Amen.’" -27:19
"Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for thereby some have entertained angels unawares." -Hebrews 13:2
“Then I will draw near to you for judgment. I will be a swift witness against the sorcerers, against the adulterers, against those who swear falsely, against those who oppress the hired worker in his wages, the widow and the fatherless, against those who thrust aside the sojourner, and do not fear me, says the Lord of hosts." -Malachi 3:5
"The Lord watches over the sojourners; he upholds the widow and the fatherless, but the way of the wicked he brings to ruin." -Psalm 146:9
"Thus says the Lord: Do justice and righteousness, and deliver from the hand of the oppressor him who has been robbed. And do no wrong or violence to the resident alien, the fatherless, and the widow, nor shed innocent blood in this place." -Jeremiah 22:3
"For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”"-Galatians 5:14
"Now when they had departed, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream and said, “Rise, take the child and his mother, and flee to Egypt, and remain there until I tell you, for Herod is about to search for the child, to destroy him.” And he rose and took the child and his mother by night and departed to Egypt and remained there until the death of Herod. This was to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet, “Out of Egypt I called my son.”"-Matthew 2:13-15
If the Holy Family were to come from Mexico to the US now, Jesus would be seized from Mary and Joseph, who would not have proof they were His parents. People would justify this by saying "child trafficking" and turn Mary and Joseph back while putting Jesus in a foster family here--until He was old enough to be "sent back where He came from" since He was not born in the US.
The fact the Trump administration had to be judicially ordered to give basic grooming like soap to those it imprisoned ought to prove beyond doubt the violation of basic human rights and decency.
Someone, I know, will ask "what about when this happened under Obama"? Well, I was not aware of it happening under Obama, and I would have said the same thing then as I do now had I been aware of it.
Pro Death
General | Posted 5 years agoThe US is very much a pro-death society. The way you can tell this is:
1) People are allowed to die of exposure via homelessness.
2) People are allowed to starve.
3) People are for the death penalty.
4) The only time a human life really matters is when it's in a womb. From the time it's born on no one cares if it lives or dies. In fact they will argue the person deserved to be killed if they make even one mistake in their life and are later killed by a cop, even if the offense is minor.
1) People are allowed to die of exposure via homelessness.
2) People are allowed to starve.
3) People are for the death penalty.
4) The only time a human life really matters is when it's in a womb. From the time it's born on no one cares if it lives or dies. In fact they will argue the person deserved to be killed if they make even one mistake in their life and are later killed by a cop, even if the offense is minor.
To Own the Libs
General | Posted 5 years agoI will say hurtful things and mock them being upset.
I will expose myself and others to a very dangerous disease.
I will ignore scientists and experts and treat any opinion I have as fact.
I will pollute the world I live in, ruining it not only for myself but for future generations.
I will not show compassion or kindness, for those are weaknesses.
I will not forgive others as I wish to be forgiven.
I will not treat others as I wish to be treated.
I will expose myself and others to a very dangerous disease.
I will ignore scientists and experts and treat any opinion I have as fact.
I will pollute the world I live in, ruining it not only for myself but for future generations.
I will not show compassion or kindness, for those are weaknesses.
I will not forgive others as I wish to be forgiven.
I will not treat others as I wish to be treated.
Last of the Old Ones
General | Posted 5 years agoMy last grandparent died earlier this morning. We weren't that close, and it's been obvious she wasn't doing well a while, but it's still a family death. Not sure what's going to happen with funeral and relatives or similar.
Characters and Settings: Copyright 0
General | Posted 5 years agoThough I hope to be around for a long time to come, I want to make my intentions clear: I want my characters and settings to live on after me. Thus if you find what I've done inspiring, please feel free to use it.
Nothing changes
General | Posted 5 years agoExplanation Exhaustion
General | Posted 5 years agoI'm so tired of explaining to fellow Christians why people should be given basic needs. It's particularly tiresome with "pro-life" types. Do you really not see that what someone makes is not what someone is worth?
Happy All Countries Matter Day!
General | Posted 5 years agoBecause all countries do matter!
What's that? You think one specific country should matter more today than all the others? How gauche! Why, next thing you'll be telling me people who are subject to systematic racism need to be helped more than those who aren't. Or maybe arguing the Rainforest is somehow more important to save than all other forests simply because there's more logging and burning there.
What's that? You think one specific country should matter more today than all the others? How gauche! Why, next thing you'll be telling me people who are subject to systematic racism need to be helped more than those who aren't. Or maybe arguing the Rainforest is somehow more important to save than all other forests simply because there's more logging and burning there.
Determination without Faith or Hope
General | Posted 5 years agoI am talking with a therapist, but one of the things I've noticed a while is that while I continue going on, I seem to lack either hope or faith in the future.
My brother would tell me that the overwhelming number of life-time Conservative justices has happened before and probably will happen again on cycle. What he doesn't seem to quite grasp is that I almost certainly will not live to see one that is not. Nor that they can continue doing great harm to people.
The bail system, which is explained here by Boozy Badger (a lawyer) will almost certainly never change because it makes too many people too much money. Similarly our jails are basically slavery enacted under the guise of justice. If you don't believe me you can look up for yourself how much profit is made off of prisoners.
So I have no hope that the supposed justice system will change nor faith that better angels will avail. Not because people in general are bad but because a bad system needs a complete overhaul which will not happen as long as those in power benefit from it.
Which is not to say I want to discourage my friends. I want to see them happy. I'd love to see the light they give off as they accomplish their dreams and goals, and I want to encourage them as much as I can, even from the mire I find myself stuck in. At the least if I cannot hope for myself or find faith in myself I can do so for them.
And so I go on, a life that I feel will never be illuminated except by the distant starlight of friends who made it. Inevitably I will go on until death finally takes me.
My brother would tell me that the overwhelming number of life-time Conservative justices has happened before and probably will happen again on cycle. What he doesn't seem to quite grasp is that I almost certainly will not live to see one that is not. Nor that they can continue doing great harm to people.
The bail system, which is explained here by Boozy Badger (a lawyer) will almost certainly never change because it makes too many people too much money. Similarly our jails are basically slavery enacted under the guise of justice. If you don't believe me you can look up for yourself how much profit is made off of prisoners.
So I have no hope that the supposed justice system will change nor faith that better angels will avail. Not because people in general are bad but because a bad system needs a complete overhaul which will not happen as long as those in power benefit from it.
Which is not to say I want to discourage my friends. I want to see them happy. I'd love to see the light they give off as they accomplish their dreams and goals, and I want to encourage them as much as I can, even from the mire I find myself stuck in. At the least if I cannot hope for myself or find faith in myself I can do so for them.
And so I go on, a life that I feel will never be illuminated except by the distant starlight of friends who made it. Inevitably I will go on until death finally takes me.
A Helpful Cartoon
General | Posted 5 years agoFor those who do not understand why it's Black Lives Matter.
To go with, it's Save the Rainforests not Save All Forests, not because all forests are not important, but because the Rainforests are the ones in particular peril.
To go with, it's Save the Rainforests not Save All Forests, not because all forests are not important, but because the Rainforests are the ones in particular peril.
Noose
General | Posted 5 years agoA noose was found hanging in Bubba Wallace's garage stall. Bubba is the only black driver in NASCAR. The area is supposed to be secure, so only someone part of NASCAR could have done it.
But go on, tell me "all lives matter" I dare you.
But go on, tell me "all lives matter" I dare you.
You're not Pro-Life
General | Posted 5 years agoIf you are for war.
If you are for the death penalty.
If you do not believe all humans deserve food, water, shelter, and medical care as basic human rights.
If you're for any or all of those, or argue the necessity of them, or say how lazy people will just live off the system or anything like that, you are not pro-life, you are pro-birth.
If your stance on "pro-life" is that a mother can be forced to carry a child for nine months, but then you don't care and do not see it as your or society's duty to then provide for them both, you don't care about either of their lives at all. All you cared about was the baby was born, no matter the cost to the mother physically or psychologically.
If you are for the death penalty.
If you do not believe all humans deserve food, water, shelter, and medical care as basic human rights.
If you're for any or all of those, or argue the necessity of them, or say how lazy people will just live off the system or anything like that, you are not pro-life, you are pro-birth.
If your stance on "pro-life" is that a mother can be forced to carry a child for nine months, but then you don't care and do not see it as your or society's duty to then provide for them both, you don't care about either of their lives at all. All you cared about was the baby was born, no matter the cost to the mother physically or psychologically.
