• 0 Posts
  • 16 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 12th, 2023

help-circle

  • TommySalami@lemmy.worldtoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldOk. Now they've done it.
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    I mean, in context that verse is about being aware one’s belief in Jesus may cause strife with their family/community, and how Christians are meant to endure this strife without denying their faith. The choice of wording makes sense in the context of the time it was written, when affirming Christ is God would have absolutely caused some major animosity with those who don’t believe. It’s assuring the reader that the division and pain that will come from those disagreements is not lost on God, and also not something we can turn away from and ignore.

    The Christians that everyone is up in arms about all the time are close to the worst representation of the faith as possible, and you can easily point out their lazy interpretations as well as scripture that, more often than not, outright rejects their twisting of the faith. Modern day Pharisees all the way. Unfortunately the church on a national level is inundated with them, and has done a poor job of separating from them.



  • I used to think this way, until I tried writing more sci-fi and I kept running into weird moral quandaries trying to keep stuff realistic on a human level. I genuinely don’t think there will ever be a threat that could rally all of humanity at this point. Not only because I don’t believe aliens are a thing we’ll ever experience, but also because everything I’ve seen points to people being too chaotic. Even the perfect enemy (some bugs that just want to kill us all) would have humans helping them out, a contingent of people who think the whole thing is a deep fake, and a multitude of people preying on the flawed reality of those groups and others to horde whichever resource (money, food, manpower, etc.). That’s before you even get into the various well-intentioned factions that would form around a variety of “best” approaches to the issue.

    I’m not even saying this in a doomer kind of way, I’m rather optimistic and believe we tend to stumble forward. I’m just saying the rally around the flag moment for humanity feels like a total fantasy.


  • TommySalami@lemmy.worldtomemes@lemmy.worldOccupational fulfillment
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    The headline, which very likely isn’t even real, is also not inherently fascistic. If anything its more a statement on people being so stressed with life, that a fantastical idea of going off to live a sci-fi movie life is appealing.

    You’re pulling the fascism from the movie, which is inherently satirical. It makes sense something like that, which was already popular, continues to be so when the satire has more real world connections. You’re on a platform with a ton of nerds, they’re gonna reference sci-fi classics. If anything I’d say that’s a healthy sign. Satire is arguably one of the strongest forces pushing back against fascism and the like on a cultural level.


  • This was the biggest adjustment for me with my last program. I was one of those annoying people that tested super quickly, and I developed some bad habits such as picking out the key parts of the question and immediately moving on as soon as I hit an answer that checked the right boxes. When I came up against “they’re all technically correct, but you need to choose the MOST correct answer” it was a goddamn brick wall. I adjusted and grew because of it, but holy shit do I have a new button to push when it comes to multiple choice (and trick questions, but that’s a whole soapbox).

    I say all that to add that there is something to it. It made me learn the material in a more applicable way. I stopped trying to just retain lecture based on what seemed likely to be tested, and starting understanding concepts as a whole. It kind of forces you to work abstractly with what you’ve learned. I still hate it, but I won’t deny that kind of testing had a positive impact.


  • TommySalami@lemmy.worldtomemes@lemmy.worldSure grandma...
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    So now we’re saying she actually did have both signficant political and legislative experience, but won because of a penchant for fundraising. Which is something you see as soliciting bribes. That’s a fair interpretation.

    From your original comment:

    That’s how Pelosi became Speaker in the first place in spite of having no legislative accomplishments to speak of nor seniority: she was simply the best at collecting fat checks from rich people and their corporations.

    My gripe is why invent this idea that her taking a bunch of bribes and being good at soliciting more is the sole reason they made her speaker, with no other qualifications? She had held prominent positions within the party for a while (decades), and was minority whip (second in command essentially) for some time prior to becoming Leader/Speaker. She was minority leader when Dems took the house, which automatically makes her a major contender for the position and she was comparable to her opponents on the whole. A cursory search of her career casts a ton of doubt on your claims, and they’re obviously flawed to someone who lived through that time.

    Getting caught up in bashing Pelosi waters down the legit criticism you have, and makes your viewpoint seem biased. We should be upset that her penchant for fundraising is such an asset, not that she was good at it in the first place.


  • TommySalami@lemmy.worldtomemes@lemmy.worldSure grandma...
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Pelosi had literal decades of political experience, and was co-authoring legislation in the late 80s concerning the AIDs crisis. She became Speaker after Democrats won control of the house with her as minority leader – a position she won in 2002/2003 after being directly under it for a couple years.

    I get not liking Pelosi, or fundraising I guess, but it’s bizarre when criticisms are spun seemingly whole cloth.




  • How do you factor in the overabundance of cheap, nutritionally fucked food, and how that may affect those living paycheck to paycheck? It feels odd to recognize it’s a problem, but then also claim obesity is an absolute failing that should be universally shamed.

    Side note, as a nurse I’ve seen patients who are obese because of circumstances and medical issues. Someone who has to work two jobs, has a kid, and newly discovered hypothyroidism is not obese because they don’t care. They have a medical issue and no extra time/resources to compensate for it with a refined diet and exercise (especially considering one of the most common symptoms of hypothyroidism is fatigue). You’re not even factoring in the undiagnosed, or those who don’t have access to sufficient healthcare.

    My overall point is if you’re targeting obese people specifically, you’re not on the right track.


  • I think it’s just something people are sensitive about, and understandably so. Most obese people (by choice; i.e. self admittedly just have a bad diet and sedentary lifestyle) I know are never really offended by memes and consistently express a desire to do better. Fact is fixing the problem is genuinely difficult once you pass a certain point, as it requires a dramatic lifestyle change. Anyone who says that is easy is full of shit.

    I avoid jokes like that mostly because it feels like punching down on people who are not happy with their health/weight and struggling to fix it. Especially when it’s the typical low hanging fruit, it’s just not fun when the joke makes me feel like kind of an ass.


  • Well, you can definitely narrow it down to what you want to read and talk about. I’m interested in doing that with politics (US), and I’m very far away from any kind of PR or marketing person. People can genuinely want to talk politics, it’s not always a corporate conspiracy.