Welcome Old Farts, Tired of wandering around aimlessly?

CodeBuster comments on Apr 26, 2019:

I was, and always will be totally bummed about when Battlestar Galactica was cancelled. And I mean the original, not the attempt to revive it in 1980, or the reinvisioned one. Those Cylons were cool for the time.

chuckpo replies on Apr 26, 2019:

@jwhitten, Erin Gray, right? Ummm,...anyway. What was with the creepy little robot with the dickhead head?

Welcome Old Farts, Tired of wandering around aimlessly?

CodeBuster comments on Apr 26, 2019:

I was, and always will be totally bummed about when Battlestar Galactica was cancelled. And I mean the original, not the attempt to revive it in 1980, or the reinvisioned one. Those Cylons were cool for the time.

chuckpo replies on Apr 26, 2019:

@jwhitten, I'm definitely a fan of the old Battlestar Galactica. The cast. And, it was like Bonanza In Space! Starbuck = Little Joe, Apollo = Adam. Who's Hoss? I'll have to clear my ram for that one.

Welcome Old Farts, Tired of wandering around aimlessly?

jwhitten comments on Apr 26, 2019:

Do you ever look at 'Hackaday.com'? I just saw a cool article about mapping brain signals externally and decoding them directly into speech: https://hackaday.com/2019/04/25/scientists-create-speech-from-brain-signals/

chuckpo replies on Apr 26, 2019:

This definitely should be a new thread. But, very cool. I haven't seen it. I have seen a lot on neurobiology with the psych stuff. I will check our hackaday.

Welcome Old Farts, Tired of wandering around aimlessly?

chuckpo comments on Apr 25, 2019:

HENRY BLAKE! Why? Why Henry? Why are you doing this to me. I'd finally forgotten!

chuckpo replies on Apr 26, 2019:

@jwhitten, the whole show was was just a bigger part of life than it ever should have been. The only character I didn't like much was Houlihan, believe it or not. God, I loved that show. Cried like a baby when Radar left...and when Henry died.

For a few months now, I have been posting Peterson quotes on FB without mentioning his name.

RemiDallaire comments on Apr 25, 2019:

Love it... But When I use quotes I also use other things other quotes without mentioning who they come from.. - We often pardon those that annoy us, but we cannot pardon those we annoy. - Perfect valor consists in doing without witnesses that which we would be capable of doing before everyone....

chuckpo replies on Apr 25, 2019:

**Gratitude is merely the secret hope of further favors.** Ouch.

Bernie Sanders thinks that imprisoned felons (even terrorists) should be allowed to vote.

chuckpo comments on Apr 25, 2019:

That IS ominous...

chuckpo replies on Apr 25, 2019:

@An_Ominous Hahaha, you crack me up. Pick 3 people here and will be your pollsters. We'll do right by you.

Didn't really know where to put this--not loving the group-level posting system yet.

MilesPurdue comments on Apr 25, 2019:

Therapy is one idea, using to explain a way to communicate, but has a mediator, in political ideology you have no mediator. The media is used as a mediator, in the past using media to antagonize polititians and communicate to citizens worked, but in these times the media has put it's controller's ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 25, 2019:

@An_Ominous, this is a rough area for we that value reason over emotion. I fear we've sacrificed a piece of what we are. In choosing emotion over reason, emotional ppl have sacrificed a piece of themselves too. Having 2 different lenses and languages doesn't help. But, the trick is probably not to choose either over the other. The trick is to speak in both languages according to the relevant lens.

I have a questions that popped into my mind after reading about the new IDW post policy.

Troy_Alias comments on Apr 25, 2019:

One can assume true freedom would inherently mean anarchy. Anarchy inevitably leads to tribalism. Tribalism inevitably leads to conquest. Conquest inevitably leads to civilization. Ironically, everything we see today is a direct result of true freedom - or at least that's my take on it.

chuckpo replies on Apr 25, 2019:

@Troy_Alias, interesting. Ummm, are you sure about the truth of your assertions, or are they sort of your opinion? Maybe a theory? Hypothesis? Seems a lot of tribes have existed that haven't relied on conquest. You dont agree? If just this one assertion fails, that can knock down the general premise. Why MUST real freedom equal anarchy without qualification? I don't see why that is necessarily true. Can there be truly free individuals that aren't bound to anarchy? If so, why can't others also escape anarchy? Doesn't make sense to me. No need to apologize. You didn't do anything wrong. But, I'm challenging one of your assumptions. It's okay. We're just talking.

A Canadian man has been charged with "Family Violence" for refusing to call his child a "he" ...

jwhitten comments on Apr 24, 2019:

It is time to declare that Canada is no longer a rational state and their court system can no longer be considered competent.

chuckpo replies on Apr 25, 2019:

@An_Ominous, I can be pretty jaded at times, and I think money first (resources), power and control second (ego), and then the interaction of the two. I don't think we often have to dig deeper than that.

A Canadian man has been charged with "Family Violence" for refusing to call his child a "he" ...

jwhitten comments on Apr 24, 2019:

It is time to declare that Canada is no longer a rational state and their court system can no longer be considered competent.

chuckpo replies on Apr 25, 2019:

@jwhitten, I know someone like that too. As we talked and she told me how she felt in her heart that Brett Kavanaugh was masking his evil, and poor Blasey-Ford innocently wondered into his reach, and the division the republicans were causing by defending Kavanaugh and throwing suspicion onto Blasey-Ford. As I listened to her and validated her perception, I was thinking, 'wow. This is insane.' When it was my turn, I told her how I saw it almost exactly opposite, and I felt it just as viscerally as she. She was floored. She got quiet, turned white, and to her credit considered what I'd said and what she knew of me as a caring, measured person. I could see her wrestling with what it meant. I have no idea what she came to over time to rationalize that experience. We haven't spoken of it sense. But, she was forced to hear me because I was a credible person in her world that she never thought to be evil. The surprising thing is it was so clear she'd had to face the possibility that perspectives vary. FOR THE FIRST TIME! Also to her credit, she didn't accuse me of anything, and she hasn't treated me differently since then. Weird stuff, but I wonder if that's not a window into the mindset of the far left bubble.

I have a questions that popped into my mind after reading about the new IDW post policy.

MickeyRat comments on Apr 25, 2019:

True 100% freedom is freedom without responsibility. We aren't wired for that and we couldn't live with each other in that state. Babies are free. They can do what they want. They can demand anything they can conceive of but, they can't conceive much and they can't communicate it. I don't want ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 25, 2019:

@MickeyRat, makes sense. I may have misunderstood you.

Didn't really know where to put this--not loving the group-level posting system yet.

MilesPurdue comments on Apr 25, 2019:

Therapy is one idea, using to explain a way to communicate, but has a mediator, in political ideology you have no mediator. The media is used as a mediator, in the past using media to antagonize polititians and communicate to citizens worked, but in these times the media has put it's controller's ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 25, 2019:

Fair points. I'm looking for a way for couples to be able to create the safety that's needed to work through the problems. A therapist traditionally creates that safety and guards it in session. But, people don't want to pay for therapy. So, what they're getting in the self-help stuff is not helping, in general. So, along that same line, is there something we can write that will create some safety in 'debate'? Well, there are some things already in existence that are designed to keep the snark contained. Ultimately, it comes down to our own character and our motivation to maintain the safety of the other person. It's possible. I don't know how likely. Reasoning isn't going to do it, and it doesn't do it in therapy. Logic almost never works in actual sessions. Something's missing, and the more emotional one is almost always dissatisfied. In forums such as this I find the safety is held as long as I'm willing to let barbs pass without returning fire. Not easy to do. Other authors also let stuff go by unaddressed. But, this isn't everyone. And, it may not be half. That leaves the onus for peace on a few people's shoulders and allows others to skip their own responsibility and just be knobs. It's not easy.

I have a questions that popped into my mind after reading about the new IDW post policy.

MickeyRat comments on Apr 25, 2019:

True 100% freedom is freedom without responsibility. We aren't wired for that and we couldn't live with each other in that state. Babies are free. They can do what they want. They can demand anything they can conceive of but, they can't conceive much and they can't communicate it. I don't want ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 25, 2019:

I don't know. Seems overly restrictive. Are people free to choose responsibility? Choose civility, decorum? Choose to watch out for each other? Choose to try to understand each other? Choose values? Choose morality? I want government as small as is physically possible. But, I want to maximize personal responsibility to as high a place as possible. Total pipe-dream, but worth something as an ideal.

I have a questions that popped into my mind after reading about the new IDW post policy.

Chicago comments on Apr 25, 2019:

None of us is ever truly free because that would mean being able to do and say whatever your want without any possibility of you or someone else, who is affected by your choice, suffering consequences for being wrong or rewards if you're right. Maturity is what we should be striving for, an ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 25, 2019:

Well, that's just a really good, well-constructed, concise lesson for my son, hahaha. All people, definitely. But, I'm trying to get THAT across to my 19-year-old son who believes essentially life and adulthood is having no responsibility and the total freedom to be as inappropriate as it suits him. I'm going to send him to you for a couple days. If you could this him fixed up, that would be great. Now, in my son's defense, he works 50 hours per week, pays his bills and other taxes. So, he's moving in the right direction. Good post!

I have a questions that popped into my mind after reading about the new IDW post policy.

Troy_Alias comments on Apr 25, 2019:

One can assume true freedom would inherently mean anarchy. Anarchy inevitably leads to tribalism. Tribalism inevitably leads to conquest. Conquest inevitably leads to civilization. Ironically, everything we see today is a direct result of true freedom - or at least that's my take on it.

chuckpo replies on Apr 25, 2019:

Hmmm, I don't find those to be self-evident at all. And I'd suggest everything we see today could be a result of our ability to choose which parts of freedom to sacrifice for some order. I get pretty Libertarian at this level of the conversation. But, we may have populated ourselves to the point Libertarian ideals aren't realistic. We sold true freedom for economy--or probably so some people could have more than others. Complicated topic, but I see no reason there's not a way forward missing all of those traps.

A Canadian man has been charged with "Family Violence" for refusing to call his child a "he" ...

jwhitten comments on Apr 24, 2019:

It is time to declare that Canada is no longer a rational state and their court system can no longer be considered competent.

chuckpo replies on Apr 25, 2019:

@jwhitten, hahaha, you win the internet for the day for this: **The far left seems to have jumped into the loony boat and are busy dismantling the hull at sea. Not the smartest move in my opinion. ** Reasonable positions. And, that's what's GOOD. The divide between the right and left isn't about policy or reason. We've seen reason the right, we've seen reason on the left, we've seen reason in the middle. This isn't that. Something else has happened--too many pulled societal threads. We have an emotional divide that we neither understand, nor have any idea how to proceed. But, talking about reasonable policy will do nothing to solve this one. I think the only thing that saves us a rally around national values. I think if the left wins this struggle, America's gone as we know it. Canada too--any western civilization lacking the foresight to see what's happening. I'm not even sure this global, open-borders, mega-government structure implied in the left's chaos is possible. It's a little like the Miss America pageant answer, 'I just want to make the world better'. Great. How? Well, Miss America never thought that far. That wasn't required. The left hasn't thought at all about how their 'vision' will look once they've torn down every wall and crapped all over everything, let alone the body count. That goes way too far past the talking points they saw on CNN. Hope somebody's trying to figure out how we're actually going to do it--besides AOC that compounds her youth and inexperience with criminal naivete' and possibly a vacuous cavern in her head. Someone should probably fill that thing with asbestos before it collapses.

A Canadian man has been charged with "Family Violence" for refusing to call his child a "he" ...

jwhitten comments on Apr 24, 2019:

It is time to declare that Canada is no longer a rational state and their court system can no longer be considered competent.

chuckpo replies on Apr 25, 2019:

@An_Ominous, ohhhh, don't give exalted wankin wildebeests a bad name. They're just happy-get-lucky-fun-and-frisky-fisters.

The Federalist had a good article about the IDW movement.

iThink comments on Apr 24, 2019:

I believe some obviously left leaning pundits have already characterized IDW as a platform for the "alt-right" movement. Leftists it seems are very quick to label anything related to Jordan Peterson as appealing to or platforming for "alt-right" people. And of course we all know or should know that ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 25, 2019:

By the way, the left is way over-exaggerating the platform of the far right. And, the far right would continue to be small and impotent if they'd just leave it alone. They keep poking at the bee hive, and they could find the swarm a lot more uncomfortable than they'd like. Imagine if the right became distributed like the current left, and coalescing around white identity bled down toward the center JUST to stand against the bleed of the left. Boom!

The Federalist had a good article about the IDW movement.

iThink comments on Apr 24, 2019:

I believe some obviously left leaning pundits have already characterized IDW as a platform for the "alt-right" movement. Leftists it seems are very quick to label anything related to Jordan Peterson as appealing to or platforming for "alt-right" people. And of course we all know or should know that ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 25, 2019:

Yeah, naked weaponized identity politics. It's a lot easier to control people with that than persuasion. And, what are the values the left is pushing? Garbage. This is what they want to replace judeo-christian values with? This is the best they can come up with? Hey, I know, let's crush the church, destroy all of the values we were founded on, replace those values with hate and division, and then meet at Ruby Tuesday's for lunch! Tick, tick, tick. The left has become exceedingly myopic. I'm watching for that first sign--the first insignia to appear. We're all lucky that the left doesn't have a single charismatic zealot to organize around. Right now, they have a hundred pockets of mostly isolated power. Nobody rallies around a single voice. None of the politicians are any good. Man, if that one special person comes along...

A Canadian man has been charged with "Family Violence" for refusing to call his child a "he" ...

jwhitten comments on Apr 24, 2019:

It is time to declare that Canada is no longer a rational state and their court system can no longer be considered competent.

chuckpo replies on Apr 25, 2019:

True, but is it different in the US? We have rogue circuits and rogue judges, and common sense has gone completely off the rails in favor of some kind of social justice activism, but more. Really hard to capture everything that is wrong with us. This ideological divide is huge, and it's growing. I literally can't identify with the extremist left. It used to be there was this small extremist right and small extremist left, but the extreme left has bled so much into the mainstream, it's changing the world. It would be like the far right--the racist right bleeding into the moderate right. That's literally how this is. The extreme on one side has become normalized, and every day people are worshiping the ideology. When that ideology is the hate and division of intersectionality, it ain't good. What do you do with that? What would we do if the KKK rose again and normalized? BTW, just as a separate thought, I wonder if the rise of the extreme left will ultimately lead to a re-emergence of groups like the KKK. It seems a fairly reasonable expectation. I'm not sure that's a slumbering bear we want to poke.

A Canadian man has been charged with "Family Violence" for refusing to call his child a "he" ...

MLACANA comments on Apr 24, 2019:

Wow. I cant even imagine, as a parent, to go through something like that because u are telling to ur kid the truth. No freedom.of speech at all. Well, its the new strategy put in place by the School of Frankfurt - to destroy the relationship between parents and their kids and destroy traditional ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 24, 2019:

@WilyRickWiles, mccarthyism like the whole Russia investigation thing? That's real mccarthyism. The left bringing up McCarthyism ever is patently absurd.

Peterson has said, "I act as if God exists." What does this mean to you?

chuckpo comments on Apr 24, 2019:

Great question. To me, JP is hedging. He's an agnostic (he's said so). He's NOT a Christian--at least not yet. I wouldn't be surprised if at some point in the near future he formally accepted some type of God identity where God is a personal being that relates to each of us daily. JP seems to be ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 24, 2019:

@jnaatjes a lot of what you say resonates with me too.

The Federalist had a good article about the IDW movement.

PalmThis comments on Apr 24, 2019:

This is a place to express yourself. People will either agree with you or call you out. Don't be afraid of criticism. Know that you're not always right, but you do have an opinion. They're like assholes, everyone has one!

chuckpo replies on Apr 24, 2019:

But some are bigger than others which begs the qu...errr....nevermind.

Wisdom and Truth will always make us the most free.

VonO comments on Apr 24, 2019:

I would disagree with both defintions of intelligence :)

chuckpo replies on Apr 24, 2019:

@VonO, actually, that makes perfect sense. As stated above, I'm skeptical of intelligence tests as being even remotely comprehensive, but other than that I can't argue with your comments.

Fed up with this nonsense . Its time for Senate investigations of Democrat business dealings .

chuckpo comments on Apr 24, 2019:

Republicans wouldn't investigate. There's some pretty questionable stuff on their side too. As citizens, however, we should all be outraged that we enrich elected officials. We're not paying them enough for them to be filthy rich. The corruption is soffocating, we know it, and yet we do nothing. Why...

chuckpo replies on Apr 24, 2019:

@Georgesblogforum, hahahahaha. I want to live by you. I'll grab my rifle when you grab yours...

Wisdom and Truth will always make us the most free.

VonO comments on Apr 24, 2019:

I would disagree with both defintions of intelligence :)

chuckpo replies on Apr 24, 2019:

@VonO, I'm just trying to understand. So, intelligence IS knowing everything, and it is NOT the ability to challenge everything you know? I missed the joke, didn't I?

Thoughts !? Why is "Christian" such a scary word these days ?

DufBody comments on Apr 24, 2019:

It is very simple a true Marxist is atheist,Marx insisted on this in Das capital his manifesto!Why because the church is enormous as a body reach a consensus they will not follow blindly down the path of the Communist!So you keep your friends close and your enemies closer! There is No other large ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 24, 2019:

@george, wait, you're saying Jesus advocated socialized medicine? We may have to agree to disagree on the Bible interpretation stuff.

Thoughts !? Why is "Christian" such a scary word these days ?

chuckpo comments on Apr 24, 2019:

I'll make a lot of people mad at me with this conversation, but Christians bring a lot of this on themselves. IN MY OPINION, Christians cling to the judgment side of the Bible, but they take condemnation for themselves and add contempt for various psychological reasons. That's not good, and ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 24, 2019:

@george, okay. I feel like you're talking about something different, but I could just be misunderstanding. I'm not really talking about gender differences or how roles are distributed. I just used an example of a safe topic within religion that the secular world essentially ignores, whether or not that exclusion is intentional. Religion actually talks about fathers and sons and what it means to be good men, as well as what are the values of that role. It may have been a common topic ages ago, but I've seen no direct evidence to that effect, and I don't think it impacts my point anyway. Today, it's something churches will talk about, but there is no secular parallel. Does that make sense? Do you agree we're talking about different things? Did I explain myself sufficiently?

Ideal 2020 IDW candidate

chuckpo comments on Apr 24, 2019:

I remember a time when my limited exposure to Nancy Pelosi made me think she was reasonable. Ummm, nope. She's a nutcase--worse, a dangerous nutcase who believes any heinous action is justified by the latent virtue of her own convictions. Terrifying. SO, I have had some limited exposure to a few...

chuckpo replies on Apr 24, 2019:

@Jay1973, I forgot part of your request. The other member is correct in that Dan Crenshaw is NOT running in 2020. But, who is running on the right against Trump? Trump is likely the right's best candidate, and I wouldn't think he'd get a lot of competition.

Thoughts !? Why is "Christian" such a scary word these days ?

DufBody comments on Apr 24, 2019:

It is very simple a true Marxist is atheist,Marx insisted on this in Das capital his manifesto!Why because the church is enormous as a body reach a consensus they will not follow blindly down the path of the Communist!So you keep your friends close and your enemies closer! There is No other large ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 24, 2019:

@george I think you're conflating charity, which is often spoken of in the Bible with socialism/communism. I'm not sure he mentions taking one from rich people to give to the people who didn't have anything...

Thoughts !? Why is "Christian" such a scary word these days ?

chuckpo comments on Apr 24, 2019:

I'll make a lot of people mad at me with this conversation, but Christians bring a lot of this on themselves. IN MY OPINION, Christians cling to the judgment side of the Bible, but they take condemnation for themselves and add contempt for various psychological reasons. That's not good, and ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 24, 2019:

@Gerri4321, oh okay, that makes perfect sense. Ouch. I'm sorry--sounds painful! I have some experience with that too, though probably a milder version.

Thoughts !? Why is "Christian" such a scary word these days ?

chuckpo comments on Apr 24, 2019:

I'll make a lot of people mad at me with this conversation, but Christians bring a lot of this on themselves. IN MY OPINION, Christians cling to the judgment side of the Bible, but they take condemnation for themselves and add contempt for various psychological reasons. That's not good, and ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 24, 2019:

I don't understand, @Gerri4321. I feel like I should be getting this, but I don't.

Thoughts !? Why is "Christian" such a scary word these days ?

chuckpo comments on Apr 24, 2019:

I'll make a lot of people mad at me with this conversation, but Christians bring a lot of this on themselves. IN MY OPINION, Christians cling to the judgment side of the Bible, but they take condemnation for themselves and add contempt for various psychological reasons. That's not good, and ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 24, 2019:

@george, I was talking in terms of today--modern history. I hadn't considered the history before that. Do you have evidence to point to those programs predating Christianity? I'd be interested.

Wisdom and Truth will always make us the most free.

VonO comments on Apr 24, 2019:

I would disagree with both defintions of intelligence :)

chuckpo replies on Apr 24, 2019:

Which two? I assume that's not in response to the graphic?

I believe humanity doesn't so much inhabit the earth as it infests it.

CalebBaeten comments on Apr 24, 2019:

Most of the comments on this thread belong on Twitter, not here. I, and I'm sure many others, abandoned Twitter for this platform specifically to get away from the unthinking posts like. "I don't agree, therefore kill yourself," or "you're dumb, therefore you shouldn't have an opinion." I ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 24, 2019:

@jwhitten, well thought out as usual, and there's a lot of truth in what you write in my own opinion--useful in all kinds of conversations. BUT (you knew that was coming), we can reason that not surviving is better than surviving. We can consciously choose--not by instinct--to end our lives and cease living. I don't know that another species does that in the same way. We can also choose to starve ourselves for a period of time up to or to death. We can choose to divide with or give up our food to another. We can choose for a stranger to survive when we won't. I don't know that I believe in altruism in its pure form, but we do seem to make decisions that aren't based on some need to serve self. There are lot of topics in your post that are worthy of their own thread. I'm tempted to respond to them, but I think it pulls us off of this topic.

Fed up with this nonsense . Its time for Senate investigations of Democrat business dealings .

chuckpo comments on Apr 24, 2019:

Republicans wouldn't investigate. There's some pretty questionable stuff on their side too. As citizens, however, we should all be outraged that we enrich elected officials. We're not paying them enough for them to be filthy rich. The corruption is soffocating, we know it, and yet we do nothing. Why...

chuckpo replies on Apr 24, 2019:

@Georgesblogforum, okay, that's funny. BUT we don't really control the vote or who we vote for. If there are two legitimately good candidates (when did that ever happen?), it's a win, one good one--one bad one is easy. But, what we get is two bad candidates to vote for. Would you like the corrupt red or the corrupt blue? Wait, what? We're stuck. Vote for corruption, vote for corruption, or don't vote and allow corruption? Tough position.

Excuse Me for Speaking While You are Trying to Interrupt.

MickeyRat comments on Apr 24, 2019:

Here's Monty Python's version. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpAvcGcEc0k

chuckpo replies on Apr 24, 2019:

OMG, the memories. AWESOME! Thank you for that.

I believe humanity doesn't so much inhabit the earth as it infests it.

CalebBaeten comments on Apr 24, 2019:

Most of the comments on this thread belong on Twitter, not here. I, and I'm sure many others, abandoned Twitter for this platform specifically to get away from the unthinking posts like. "I don't agree, therefore kill yourself," or "you're dumb, therefore you shouldn't have an opinion." I ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 24, 2019:

@jwhitten, I don't have much to add to that. I will instead just throw another log on the fire. I believe we're able to transcend mere survival, and we transcend it with morality. It seems unique to our species that we know of (who knows the structure on other worlds). I know everything can always be mapped back to Darwin, but I think sometimes the effort to squeeze things into that frame is evidence that there could be other explanations. Don't get me wrong. I believe in a lot of evolution stuff--just not as one all-encompassing explanation for humanity. Okay, that should be a couple of revolutions on the axle...

Today I read a post on a mom’s group on Facebook.

cRaZyTMG comments on Apr 24, 2019:

You don't "put up" or "walk away" because it's the "easier" way to survive, you stay and work to make it better, because it's family - your family - the one you chose. Unless someone else picked for you (and we are not getting into that) and anything short of violence, you're simply not taking ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 24, 2019:

Important points. I do think it's not only about doing something. You have to know what to do, and I find most people don't have any idea how to be in a relationship--even in the enduring ones. I was 50 when I started learning, and I had always intended to be a good husband and a good father. I just didn't understand. I started to learn the day my 17 year marriage almost died. We're at 21 years now, and our marriage is more alive than it ever had been before that near-divorce...

Today I read a post on a mom’s group on Facebook.

Marta-Amance comments on Apr 24, 2019:

Sounds like the woman's equivalent of a fight club. Very few marriages are ever perfect and all marriages suffer from domination of the one sex over the other. It is a matter of human nature. Our reasons for choosing a life partner are different, as is to be expected. And sometimes we will ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 24, 2019:

@Marta-Amance, I agree that sometimes people choose the wrong partner. Thing is I don't think divorce is always about the wrong partner. It's also possible we just don't know how to do relationships, and that's really sad. There's SO MUCH pain. And, that pain comes out in ways like the OP is describing. There's a lot of pressure in 'choosing the right one'. There's not as much pressure in figuring out how to have relationships. Truth is almost all relationships start off right. What is different about when it's right and when it goes wrong? Where's that line it crosses over? What happens? It's funny. The relationship nearly every married person describes as being the one they want is the relationship they had with their spouse in the beginning! We just have to figure out what that is, why it changed, and how to get back to that place. Honestly, I just think we forget. Everything at the beginning is about each other. Partner priority is really high--probably number one. The, we settle in--get the marriage out of the way and turn to the next challenges--kids, jobs, finances, houses, investments, kids, kids,...kids, in-laws--EVERYTHING now becomes BEFORE your partner (or you). We just f'ing forget. Before you know it, you're 10 years down the road and people say they 'fell out of love'. That's not true. You just forgot, and one thing relationships can't endure is irrelevance. Anyway, I could write a book, so I'll shut up. But, people should think about this for themselves and see if it maybe fits...

Today I read a post on a mom’s group on Facebook.

The_Farseer comments on Apr 24, 2019:

Sound like a bunch of bitter morons who keep dating assholes and ignore the nicer guys as "just friends" and before they know it, they are bitter old shrews with short purple hair who blame everyone else and never wake up to the fact that they're terrible themselves with terrible taste in men.

chuckpo replies on Apr 24, 2019:

Hey, @The_Farseer, if you wouldn't mind, could you please tell it like you really see it? I get tired of all of this beating around the bush. [sarcasm]

How much of the view on Putin is correct, and how much is propaganda?

JayKane comments on Apr 24, 2019:

Let's start pulling back the armored divisions and tank columns the previous administration garrisoned along their western border and find out.

chuckpo replies on Apr 24, 2019:

@JayKane, okay, man of few words, haha. Rare breed these days. I'll look at it. But, if you think you might want to tell me what YOU think about it all, that would be cool too.

How much of the view on Putin is correct, and how much is propaganda?

JayKane comments on Apr 24, 2019:

Let's start pulling back the armored divisions and tank columns the previous administration garrisoned along their western border and find out.

chuckpo replies on Apr 24, 2019:

Would you mind talking about that a little more? I want to better understand what you mean.

I believe humanity doesn't so much inhabit the earth as it infests it.

CalebBaeten comments on Apr 24, 2019:

Most of the comments on this thread belong on Twitter, not here. I, and I'm sure many others, abandoned Twitter for this platform specifically to get away from the unthinking posts like. "I don't agree, therefore kill yourself," or "you're dumb, therefore you shouldn't have an opinion." I ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 24, 2019:

@jwhitten, well now I'm intrigued. Don't tease me! Yeah, I like reading you too. You disappeared for a week there, I think. I was wondering if you'd left. In one of the threads someone was talking about a system of administration like you were suggesting. Did you run across it?

I believe humanity doesn't so much inhabit the earth as it infests it.

Djmzorak comments on Apr 24, 2019:

I love my dogs a lot and I treat them like family but I am the Alpha leader of this pack. If the roles were reversed I would be squat in the food chain fighting everyday for a rotten peice of meat from a kill. And since I cant lick my own ass I a dogs life could be rough! Pride is the first mistake ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 24, 2019:

...you had to go there.

A Canadian man has been charged with "Family Violence" for refusing to call his child a "he" ...

purdyday comments on Apr 24, 2019:

It's so disgusting, I cannot even type out words to comment that wouldn't turn into a massive rant. Thank God, JBP at least, brought to light this travesty of a law. A comatose, silent public on serious issues like these, especially the loss of parental rights, makes you wonder, was Invasion of ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 24, 2019:

I've never gotten that thing out of my head from Body Snatchers--where they point and make that godawful noise when they spot a human that hasn't been replaced yet. Creepy freaking movie--haha, I don't like creepy movies. edit: Wait, it was Invasion of the Body Snatchers. Just looked it up.

A Canadian man has been charged with "Family Violence" for refusing to call his child a "he" ...

chuckpo comments on Apr 24, 2019:

I'm not Canadian, so I hope I'm not over-stepping. Honestly, I don't distingush between you and us (the US). I feel like we're the same people--I know that's insulting to some Canadians, so I'll just note that's only MY PERSONAL feelings, and it's a positive one to me. What a horrific example of...

chuckpo replies on Apr 24, 2019:

@CRBG, thank you for your generosity.

I believe humanity doesn't so much inhabit the earth as it infests it.

CalebBaeten comments on Apr 24, 2019:

Most of the comments on this thread belong on Twitter, not here. I, and I'm sure many others, abandoned Twitter for this platform specifically to get away from the unthinking posts like. "I don't agree, therefore kill yourself," or "you're dumb, therefore you shouldn't have an opinion." I ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 24, 2019:

@jwhitten, CalebBaeten wasn't the op. And, eat a snickers, you know you're grumpy when you're hungry. Haha, your suicide post was a bit direct, even though I got what you were saying. I don't think viruses kill themselves off for the good of other organisms. Their purpose is survival--that happens to be at odds with our purpose, which is survival. We're the only species that thinks about the planet that we know of. That alone makes us somehow different than a virus. We make moral judgments about the way we survive. That's really an incredible quality--amazing--one I think the OP didn't consider. We ain't perfect for sure, but there is enough good to avoid utter nihilism (utter nihilism--wait, we need utters)...Yep, it's like that this morning.

I believe humanity doesn't so much inhabit the earth as it infests it.

REParker comments on Apr 24, 2019:

WOW! You guys really took this to the Dark Side pretty quickly. Between being brow-beaten for a negative attitude and psychoanalized by wanna-be Freuds, I guess I touched a nerve. Let me try to address some of your ass-kicking responses... First of all, nothing lasts forever, and anyone who ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 24, 2019:

@REParker, I guess I don't understand what point you were trying to make in the OP. It seems to be an assertion that humanity is stupid and worthless. I'm actually not insulted by the assertion. I agree about the arrogance/relative stupidity, but I think the worthless assertion isn't settled. The jury's still out. AND, you ignore that despite our arrogance and stupidity, we've done some really cool things. From out midst comes visionaries, innovators who solve problems and grapple with questions WAY above our paygrade. So, what is it you were trying to say? What was the purpose, or what was your conclusion? Sometimes, ideas fall flat because we don't do a great job communicating our ideas. I wonder if that's not the case here. Your post that I'm responding to here has a completely different tenor. After reading everything that's been said, can you address their questions or accusations by giving your original post some extra meaning. There just seems to be something missing. By the way, on the terraforming, I have no doubt humans can solve those problems given time. The technological advancement in just the last 50 years has been frenetic. Unless something comes along to set us back 100 years, it's hard to imagine limits to achieve what is actually possible.

A Canadian man has been charged with "Family Violence" for refusing to call his child a "he" ...

QuigginReport comments on Apr 24, 2019:

Wow this is really bad from the point of view of the treatment of children and from the point of view of freedom of speech. If you disagree with a given progressive narrative - you will be punished and silenced. Just my own guess, but a few years from now their will be a massive amount of ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 24, 2019:

@CRBG ** If this were in the US, there would be mass rallies everywhere.** I'd like to believe that's true, but I don't think so. The activist left and mainstream media--WAY better organized than anything the right has would rise up to crush any opposition. They won't rest until every man's a woman, and every woman's a man. Easier route would be to just swap labels, but feelings.

I will take fake outrage for a 1000 Alex.

chuckpo comments on Apr 23, 2019:

If a 4-year-old knows the term 'active shooter', the parents are politicizing him. I've seen this on so many occasions. I sat in listening to a panel of transgendered people--some present with their mothers, and I swear you could track how a social justice activist parent engineered their children ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 23, 2019:

@AZWoman, I can't explain it. There are no words.

Acceptable posts and comments on this site.

Bay0Wulf comments on Apr 23, 2019:

My first suggestion would be to require a “Title” similar to your “category” requirement for a post. Many of the posts here either simply start by going off on some rambling screed or seem to have no information at all and are just a link to elsewhere. Sometimes it’s not worth looking to ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 23, 2019:

@Bay0Wulf, you pretty much get what you get and more with rambling screeds. If I make jokes, those are short. If I'm thinking,...run!

In Search of Reason

plebeian_lobster comments on Apr 23, 2019:

I have brought this up in argument, but many folks don't even know what an ad hom is.

chuckpo replies on Apr 23, 2019:

@R_D_Russell, thin-skinned doesn't do anybody a ton of good. There are a lot of reasons people will turn toward the speaker instead of the words spoken. Some reasonable, some not so much. But, inevitably the logical fallacies become the point of discussion, and the thing you started talking about just kind of disappears. That's not really what I look for in a conversation, so I either ignore them or just kill the issue quickly and try to go back to the original topic.

In Search of Reason

plebeian_lobster comments on Apr 23, 2019:

I have brought this up in argument, but many folks don't even know what an ad hom is.

chuckpo replies on Apr 23, 2019:

Ugh, the logical fallacies. They're so abused they've become a fallacy in and of themselves. I've never seen them add to a discussion, but I seen them distract/diminish a conversation a thousand times. As an academigeek, I really encourage people to not use them in a conversation--like ever. It's just another flavor of pedantry that most people can't identify with (one thing that gave intellectuals a bad name). BUT, it's often the people who use the logical fallacies too--the pseudo-scientists/pseudo-academics/ 2nd year undergrad students who want to use their 50 hours of higher education as power to pummel their opponents online... You'll win in the long run if you'll just say, 'let's not make the conversation about me...'

In Search of Reason

WilliamLWeaver comments on Apr 23, 2019:

I fear that Identity Politics is the institutionalization of Excellence by Proxy. So many folks are learning the hard lesson as a result of Everybody Gets a Trophy that they do not have talent in all things. Even worse, they are learning that education, practice, and hard work is not a guarantee ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 23, 2019:

**Rey was able to perform in the Top 1% of Jedi skill with no training, just because she identified with a Just Cause. The blow back by GenXers like myself was fiercely punished as being misogynistic and the result of the Tyrannical Patriarchy** Haha, funny.

The police.

chuckpo comments on Apr 23, 2019:

Oh Lord, that picture should probably be my avatar. I should make a poll to find out who all thinks I should shut up and get to the point...I was born with the wordiness disability...errr,...alternatively abled.

chuckpo replies on Apr 23, 2019:

Oooooh, really good op, packed full of discussion fodder. Touche'! 1) When does law cross over from protecting and serving to suffocating liberty and controlling the citizenry? Seatbelt law anyone? Criminalizing drugs? Wonder how many examples we could come up with... 2) 'Cops' are not a hive--just like no group is. There are individuals, so personalities will inevitably vary. Cops as a group are an interesting dilemma for us. Are they the local enforcement of thought crime, or will they side with us against the ruling class if there was ever a conflict? Hard to know, but worth some time thinking about it. 3) I'm hesitant to remove from the police the freedom to err. They're human--not machines. Mistakes are inevitable. Those guys never know what's coming at them. Do you want to be the one walking up to cars out on the road? Very dangerous situation. We should probably rethink how we approach some of our enforcement. Those guys are too often targets. So many things can escalate a situation--none faster than flat out not knowing what to expect. If you're not on your guard, you can be dead. If you are on guard, you risk shooting someone by mistake. It's not a good situation. Maybe we can think of a better way.

Who feels like a pretender?

govols comments on Apr 22, 2019:

I sorta loathe the word. The idea, even. The definition aside, the notion of "other with brainlyness" or "other not so nearly well minded" is just Fu@king offensive. We have among us individuals who are poking at the edges of their own understanding and people who are making a living and doing the ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 23, 2019:

@govols, hahaha, awesome! I had you at, ' I haven't yet found any limit beyond my willingness to do the work.' You're an intellectual. And, that's okay. Look how 'masculinity' was appropriated into something nasty. Well, I reject that noise. Masculinity--it's a model--is about positive traits and identity. I refuse to allow someone of another gender define for me what it means to be a man. I'm fully able to do that on my own. Intellectualism got appropriated in the same way. It doesn't mean some intellectuals didn't bring it on themselves, just like there are some truly awful men that look just like us good men. But, they don't control what the categories 'men' and 'intellectual' are either. I'm proud of what good men are, and I'm proud of what good intellectuals are, and I'm not ceding the ground. There is no power like the power of good people set upon doing good things. It's how we roll that counts. What the F IS wrong with these people? Ummm, I don't care. They don't get to run the world.

Acceptable posts and comments on this site.

Boardwine comments on Apr 23, 2019:

I am against censorship in general. However, I have recently seen an uptick in ad hominem attacks and a overall lack of civility. How about a review board type of approach? Say if a member is "referred" to the board by 3 or more other members for misconduct then a separate group of people could ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 23, 2019:

@Boardwine, me too.

The Way to Properly Conceptualize the Collective I had this thought while listening to Jordan ...

purdyday comments on Apr 23, 2019:

Can you clarify, did you mean to say 'left and white identitrarians'?

chuckpo replies on Apr 23, 2019:

@jnaatjes, don't have any major hiccups, but one. Though I don't see it that way exactly. And, there is bleed between the groups, I think. **White identitarian... plays identity politics on behalf of white people based upon some sort of perceived oppression or grevience, but doesn't actually believe whites are superior to other races. I think much (but not all) of Trump's base falls into this trap.** This statement is interesting. We could flesh it out a bit, and I'd challenge its accuracy as stated. I wonder, does that reflect what you intended to say exactly? Were you completely comfortable with the wording when you wrote it? First, what does white identity politics look like? What specific behavior are you describing? What is the oppression or grievance, and is it possible the grievance is justified? Then, based on the answer to that question, does it really cover most of Trump's base? I need some clarification to fully understand what you mean. It seems slightly off of your normal stances--though obviously I have limited exposure to your ideas.

Acceptable posts and comments on this site.

Bay0Wulf comments on Apr 23, 2019:

My first suggestion would be to require a “Title” similar to your “category” requirement for a post. Many of the posts here either simply start by going off on some rambling screed or seem to have no information at all and are just a link to elsewhere. Sometimes it’s not worth looking to ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 23, 2019:

@beowolf, I want to offer some support for posts here that go 'off on some rambling screed.' I need to start my own group titled, 'The Group For Rambling Screeds'. It will be more like therapy, but that's okay too.

Acceptable posts and comments on this site.

Boardwine comments on Apr 23, 2019:

I am against censorship in general. However, I have recently seen an uptick in ad hominem attacks and a overall lack of civility. How about a review board type of approach? Say if a member is "referred" to the board by 3 or more other members for misconduct then a separate group of people could ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 23, 2019:

I liked someone's idea of giving the author an opportunity to modify a questionable post to remove emotive language. Sometimes I have to write an email 5 or 6 times to remove my own emotion from it. I think some of the problem is other people make digs, but also some of it is the meaning we assign to a statement based on our history with the topic. Let's be honest, reparations for slavery isn't a new idea. I think it reprehensible, and seeing that alone can trigger me. I've lost my patience for that topic. How do you leave that baggage at the door in every new conversation? It's nearly impossible. And, we're all bringing that history with us when we enter into good-faith conversations in the present. I think it could help to get a friendly, 'hey, we think this comment is likely to escalate the emotions in the conversation, so we wanted to ask you if it makes sense to modify the comment. What do you think?' That wouldn't eliminate all escalations, but could it eliminate enough of them to make a significant difference?

The Way to Properly Conceptualize the Collective I had this thought while listening to Jordan ...

chuckpo comments on Apr 23, 2019:

This conversation always gets convoluted because I think some terms are used in too many contexts. Individual is a good example. In some contexts, individual is good (rights). In some contexts, it's really bad (personal individualism that amounts to disconnection from others). Collectivism vs. ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 23, 2019:

@jnaatjes, yeah, no disagreements. It's complicated. We'd better define this stuff pretty soon (or redefine it), because our liberties aren't near what they used to be, and we're losing them pretty quickly. Where's the line when we start saying we don't have liberty? Tough call. We should be having this conversation--probably at a greater level of detail. I think one of the problems is we work in models--actually, that's not the problem. It's a good thing. The problem is we toss them out if something is wrong. Families were mean to homosexual children, throw out the family. It doesn't make sense. It would be better for everyone if we simply taught families how to better handle issues that come up for families. Abuse is never okay, so abusing homosexual children is not okay either. Anyway, we've been harmed greatly degrading the family system in the USA. We've deconstructed so many 'collective' systems, people are confused on what they'd suppose to be and what they're supposed to do. We need those value systems. It's an interesting dynamic, multidimensional (maybe fluid) hierarchical structure--odd to think of the individual as the top of the hierarchy--more natural to think of the collective as the pinnacle of the hierarchy. But, context is key--or maybe the particular lens we choose to view a problem through. The collective is every bit as important as the individual. It's like two necessary parts of a person, and to think of removing one is self-harming. There simply must be collective rights to protect groups against the individual. Both can produce harm, both can be vital and give us meaning.

The Way to Properly Conceptualize the Collective I had this thought while listening to Jordan ...

purdyday comments on Apr 23, 2019:

Can you clarify, did you mean to say 'left and white identitrarians'?

chuckpo replies on Apr 23, 2019:

@jnaatjes **Yes. The left plays identity politics. So do the white identitarians, white nationalists, alt right, whatever you want to call them. All who assume there's something special about people because of the color of their skin, whether they're intersectional leftists or white nationalists, are in the same boat, in my view.** One part that's hitting me funny is by using all of the descriptors for white supremacists, it amplifies their numbers. I don't think the nuts-right is nearly the size of the nuts-left. I think the far right is isolated on the far right. The far left, however, has bled vociferously toward left-center and results in many more millions of people. I agree they're in the same boat, infatuated with skin for some unknown nuts reason. Nutty people being nuts--we should be surprised? Actually, an interesting idea is that the far-right is simply another tribe within intersectionality. Hmmm, that's worth thinking about some more.

Gun control group goes after NRA's tax-exempt status.

criminey359 comments on Apr 23, 2019:

I just wish the NRA was consistent. Barely a peep out of them when that one guy who had a conceal carry permit was shot. Let's just arm every minority as much as possible. If you aren't a straight white person, free gun. Plus lessons in how to use it, clean/maintain it, tactical application, ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 23, 2019:

What a tragic case. I completely agreed with this statement by the lawyer: **Larry R. Rogers Jr., an attorney for Reynolds, said that based on the dash-cam video, “it is clear that Officer Jeronimo Yanez was not in control, was nervous and acted in a reckless, willful and wanton fashion.”** It's terrible. We're never going to eliminate tragedy in the world. Was there a race element? Maybe. The officer is Hispanic, and not white. Wrongful shoots happen--absolutely. Not easy being a cop. There's a difference between people who talk about stuff and people who do stuff. Cops have to do stuff, and it's rough that we come in after the fact with our inadequate judgments--necessary evil. There are definitely a few racist cops, but I don't see this one necessarily being that. It more seemed like a young guy amped up, scared, unsure. I wish the officer would have said, 'stop moving'. Maybe, in the moment, that would have hit differently than, 'don't reach' or whatever it was he said. Anyway, I don't get you about the NRA. I'm not sure what you want them to say. It's not the responsibility of the NRA to comment every time a gun is fired. Whose idea is that? Should we call Ford for comment every time someone gets in one drunk?

If Joe Biden doesn't garner the Democratic Nomination I predict that he will become the next host of...

R_D_Russell comments on Apr 23, 2019:

I can just see him having everyone do a group hug at the end of the show that he gets in on.

chuckpo replies on Apr 23, 2019:

Women and children to the front!

Does the term white privilege exist in America?

chuckpo comments on Apr 22, 2019:

Preposterous. It's just an example of moving the goalposts. Here's a couple of questions. Which way is the better way to treat members of society? Should we adopt the 'black historical experience', or should we adopt the average 'white experience'. Let's just assume nobody's going to argue we should...

chuckpo replies on Apr 22, 2019:

@WilyRickWiles, yep, not worth it.

Acceptable posts and comments on this site.

R_D_Russell comments on Apr 22, 2019:

I’m not one for inflammatory remarks, and I don’t want to see trolls on this site either- I don’t want to see anyone harassed, and I would like the conversation to be generally elevated as it has been. That being said, it’s hard to Champion free speech and thought if we engage in too ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 22, 2019:

@R_D_Russell, hmmm, I'm just looking at me here, and I can piss people off in a new york minute, and it doesn't require overtly inflammatory language. Actually, I just had a guy here block me, and there was never a harsh word or a bout of emotion. I was condescending (I have a real problem with the personality type--hyper-religious-science type that shows no understanding of science AT ALL). Anyway, most veterans of the internet learned how to be a complete dck without going berserk. Most flame wars wouldn't be two guys cussing each other out, because that's an easy mark for moderators. Most flame wars would have useful information in them, but you'd have to sift through all of the garbage to get to it...it's late and I'm babbling, drooling out of the corner of my mouth, enjoying my lobotomy.

Does the term white privilege exist in America?

chuckpo comments on Apr 22, 2019:

Preposterous. It's just an example of moving the goalposts. Here's a couple of questions. Which way is the better way to treat members of society? Should we adopt the 'black historical experience', or should we adopt the average 'white experience'. Let's just assume nobody's going to argue we should...

chuckpo replies on Apr 22, 2019:

@WilyRickWiles, when we talk, this is what I often experience. **I think Obama and Trump have taught people some lessons. Obama taught us that leadership and representation alone don't cure social problems. Trump taught us that people can be manipulated with propaganda.** I'm not sure what to do with that. I tend to push back. 'Obama, the great and wondrous Christ was simply not enough to cover the sins of everyone--which really means republicans'. 'Trump is the devil asshole.' I'm sorry. I just don't find that a reasonable premise for discussion, and I don't respond to it well. It's not interesting to me, and I can see myself getting cranky in my responses. To start with, we have wildly different worldviews--probably irreconcilable, though I'm not sure that applies to a personal relationship. I'm diametrically opposed to the far left worldview. It's not like I'm opposed to it because it feels bad. I think it's gravely ill-considered through my psychosocial lens. I'm just not sure where we can go with that. It's not like we can 'blend' our two perspectives in some kind of mutually beneficial compromise. I feel like I'm trying to fight through a majority 'privilege' culture that's inescapably constrained.

Acceptable posts and comments on this site.

R_D_Russell comments on Apr 22, 2019:

I’m not one for inflammatory remarks, and I don’t want to see trolls on this site either- I don’t want to see anyone harassed, and I would like the conversation to be generally elevated as it has been. That being said, it’s hard to Champion free speech and thought if we engage in too ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 22, 2019:

What's offhanded or crude or inflammatory language? A lot of us don't need ugly words to be ugly or inflammatory. It's always going to be subjective, and that's the only way I've seen these things go and experienced myself. I never succeeded.

Acceptable posts and comments on this site.

Hcfrn comments on Apr 22, 2019:

I think the “uncivil” post should be quarantined as you indicate. The post/comment could be voted on by high level members and if found to be uncivil, it could then be deleted. If not, the post could be reinstated.

chuckpo replies on Apr 22, 2019:

Anybody high in verbal reasoning can be eloquently an ass. Smear lipstick all over that pig. But, it's still a pig. We don't even have a definition for what is 'uncivil'. Is a post that is antagonistic but pretty better than a post that is antagonistic ugly? This isn't easy stuff.

Does the term white privilege exist in America?

chuckpo comments on Apr 22, 2019:

Preposterous. It's just an example of moving the goalposts. Here's a couple of questions. Which way is the better way to treat members of society? Should we adopt the 'black historical experience', or should we adopt the average 'white experience'. Let's just assume nobody's going to argue we should...

chuckpo replies on Apr 22, 2019:

@WilyRickWiles, we're not going to get even close to agreement on that. Systemic racism is solved, but there are lingering effects that need time to dilute further. Kind of like feminism. Women got equality and some thought they should then have the top CEO positions--IMMEDIATELY. No, that's not at all how it works. CEOs most often spent a great deal of time training for those positions--often waiting decades to assume roles as someone retired. Women were not in line to get those promotions. Only when they started training for the positions were those opening up to them. And, you have to wait until someone leaves, because it's not ethical--not responsible in any sense to take someone out of their job to put someone else in there who was at best equally qualified. It's NATURAL. Black people don't need a leg up. You want to teach a new generation of white people to hate black people? Keep doing what you're wanting to do. You don't end racism by being racist. It's antithetical to reason, but it also flies in the face of human nature. Cycle of hate. Y'all on the left are making things worse--not making things better--even in the best case scenario when there are good intentions. You can't sidestep human nature. Also, what happens when you give a lump sum to people who've never had money in their families for generations. What do you think is going to happen? They'll lose it all. Then what? They're going to ask for more money. What will the left want to do? Give them more money? Cycle of dependence on white people--that doesn't seem like what you were wanting to do. You can't duck human nature. And, this is demonstrable. It literally happens all of the time when people are given money they've never had. Very few of them step off with it. I don't agree that Trump is about white identity politics. That's a leftist talking point, and it's NOT demonstrable. It's predicated on flat out deceptions and fear and ascribing the absolute worst possible motive to every breath the guy takes. I'm more for Trump than I am for republicans--mostly because he fights the battles your way. No 'respectable' republican has the sack to do that. Trump is a reflection of the left, and it's fascinating how much they hate him for it.

Who feels like a pretender?

RobBlair comments on Apr 22, 2019:

Its a good day when I read a comment and I'm down the rabbit hole for one or two days lightly researching and looking for holes in an argument. Don't like being wrong but I'm for the better when I get corrected.

chuckpo replies on Apr 22, 2019:

Reasonable. Just want to make this point. We're ALL WRONG ALL OF THE TIME! At our best, we don't know (better off when we admit it). Statistics as discipline were created to measure how wrong we can be at any given time. An entire academic area built because we're always wrong. Who cares? There's no shame in doing the best we can trying to learn.

Who feels like a pretender?

govols comments on Apr 22, 2019:

I sorta loathe the word. The idea, even. The definition aside, the notion of "other with brainlyness" or "other not so nearly well minded" is just Fu@king offensive. We have among us individuals who are poking at the edges of their own understanding and people who are making a living and doing the ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 22, 2019:

Alright, @govols, let's go down that road a bit. What constitutes smart to you? Do you have a sense of scale--even the population parameters in general? There are 7.6 billion people on the earth. Are you in the top billion? Top 2 billion? Given what we know about SES, infant stimulation, education? Were you generally at the 50th percentile or better on most of the testing you did in school? I'm guessing we don't have many below the 50th percentile, and I'd imagine we may not have anyone below the 75th percentile just based on my observations of verbal reasoning. Look, I know there's a temptation to undervalue ourselves in honor of humility, and I think that's a great thing IN CONTEXT. But, we're just having a safe conversation here, and I'm trying to push the thought to what is reasonable inference? In a sense, we're not talking about us at this point. We're talking about the world. Did you know 33% or so in the US now have an undergraduate degree? Used to be 13% of those go on to get a masters, and then 13% of those go on for a PhD. So, think in terms of numbers--how small a number does that end up being? Now, chances are most on this site probably have high school education or an undergraduate degree, but you're still talking about that being pretty good relative to the whole world. It's a scaling question. The term intellectual has gotten a terrible connotation for some good reasons, but the truth is the term is innocuous--appropriated for misuse by people who wanted to sound smarter than they could just by calling someone an asshole. There are tons of terms that have gotten a negative connotation, and we sacrifice our ability to communicate precisely by acquiescing to pop-cultural appropriation. Screw that. So, suck it up and wear it. WEAR IT! Own that sht...hahahaha. Okay, your turn.

I just found out i am somehow shadow banned on twitter.

cRaZyTMG comments on Apr 22, 2019:

I see no signs of censorship. In fact I see policies that require the users to censor themselves - I'm still wondering how that's going to work out long term, but I'm liking it so far. Click on the different "counts" on your home page to filter your content - makes previous posts easier to find.

chuckpo replies on Apr 22, 2019:

I've run into a bit of censorship by a member of the community. Here's how I THINK that works. Someone starts a thread, and you comment on it. Then, you get in a back and forth, and that member--the thread starter--blocks you. He's unable to see your posts and you're unable to see his. But, he started the thread, so you're out. That one person made a decision that potentially impacts others in addition to you, IF others are following the conversation--or even participating. AND, since it's a somewhat non-transparent process, it's kind of confusing. Not a big deal, but it does bump into censorship, I think.

Who feels like a pretender?

An_Ominous comments on Apr 22, 2019:

I have some doubts... the older I get the dumber I feel. When I watch a Jordan Peterson debate... the doubts grow quite a bit stronger. Btw... as to celebrating myself I have a better idea. If I change my name to Diversity, all liberals will have to celebrate me. I mean the streamers and ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 22, 2019:

**the older I get the dumber I feel.** Brilliant! I've never heard anything smarter than that statement right there. And, JP is flat out a better version of me. I admit it. But, here's the thing. Are you comparing yourself to possibly and arguably one of the foremost intellects of our time? How is your basketball? Do you compare yourself to Michael Jordan? It's a bit rough making your standard of acceptable someone that may be in the top 100,000 around the world of 7.6 billion. Really? That's your bar? Pass/Fail? Ouch. I can't compete with JP UNLESS I did the work he's done. He built himself on his own work, and he's earned his place. I haven't done that work, and I haven't earned his place. That doesn't mean I'm an idiot without anything important to say. **If I change my name to Diversity, all liberals will have to celebrate me.** Hahaha, that's funny. Well played, ominous, well played.

Does the term white privilege exist in America?

chuckpo comments on Apr 22, 2019:

Preposterous. It's just an example of moving the goalposts. Here's a couple of questions. Which way is the better way to treat members of society? Should we adopt the 'black historical experience', or should we adopt the average 'white experience'. Let's just assume nobody's going to argue we should...

chuckpo replies on Apr 22, 2019:

@WilyRickWiles, I'd quibble a bit this working class identity. I think we're a long way from the proletariat. What's changed? Like almost everything. Education in non-traditional ways has never been as accessible as it is now. Remember those pictures of caravan's coming up through Mexico where they all had cell phones? Think about that. Think how advanced is the 'working class' now over the same group from the 1800's. It's likely our working class is the educated of the 1800's. I imagine if we asked, we'd find quite a range of education on IDW, and here we are all having conversations once reserved only for the educated. I think the elite divided itself on different lines--maybe ideological--maybe some other factor. I can't be in the elite in THIS world. Even if I won the lottery I'd never be accepted as an elite by the elites--probably for a host of reasons. I think privilege is a stupid idea used in this way. It's a privilege to eat every day. That makes sense. I had advantages that others didn't have ONLY in relation to their disadvantage. Without that disadvantage, my privilege would have no concrete meaning. I don't see the point. It's enough to understand hierarchical structures. For example Herman Cain is well above my reach, and Obama is well above Cain's reach. Two black men who hold privilege over me. I literally can't touch them, and in all likelihood I can't even view them from a distance without armed guards between me and them. What relevance is my privilege in relation to the ruling class? It falls away and disappears, and race has nothing to do with it. Multiculturalism isn't the division at this level. Decades ago, as well as generations ago, black people were directly disadvantaged. It's documented. Provable. However, if they were not disadvantaged, I'd be in no different position than I'm in now (assuming I wasn't disadvantaged). There's only 12% blacks in the country, and we're not talking about all of them being in line for wealth-building--just like all whites weren't in line for wealth-building. So, we're talking about a smaller group of people than all blacks or all whites. Of course, that disadvantage didn't just go away. It's going away. But, the black crime statistics people like to use are likely a reflection of the disadvantage of the 40's. It was someone's decision, and it was based on race, and it was undoubtedly born of remnant bigotry. Our culpability today is those 'race reservations' where so much crime is contained and in a sense controlled (poor black neighborhoods). So, I get the sociological influences underlying the conversation. Most 'conservatives' do too. It's not lost on everybody outside of the left. But, the point is--like feminism--we're working on it. And, we've made huge strides. But, it's not ...

Does the term white privilege exist in America?

chuckpo comments on Apr 22, 2019:

Preposterous. It's just an example of moving the goalposts. Here's a couple of questions. Which way is the better way to treat members of society? Should we adopt the 'black historical experience', or should we adopt the average 'white experience'. Let's just assume nobody's going to argue we should...

chuckpo replies on Apr 22, 2019:

@WilyRickWiles, videos like this are threatening, but that's not the point. They're psychologically bereft. They MUST perpetuate the negative cycle, because they ignore anything remotely close to how you might heal an attachment injury. You'd NEVER see this garbage in couples counseling. Why not? Because that's not the way human beings work. It's naive, puerile in its lack of consideration. These are tactics, and tactics will never work to make an 'other' to feel acceptable, let alone important. Virtue signaling in the best case, and that level of superficiality sends exactly the wrong message, if your goal is to be heard/seen.

Does the term white privilege exist in America?

chuckpo comments on Apr 22, 2019:

Preposterous. It's just an example of moving the goalposts. Here's a couple of questions. Which way is the better way to treat members of society? Should we adopt the 'black historical experience', or should we adopt the average 'white experience'. Let's just assume nobody's going to argue we should...

chuckpo replies on Apr 22, 2019:

@WilyRickWiles, not sure what you're meaning by mainstream identity politics being a product of the automation of captialist elites. We absolutely agree there are nuggets of truth--even in stereotyping. I fully accept, for example, that before political correctness was weaponized, it served simply to create decorum. It was useful, sensible. And, we've all lost something in its weaponization. This stuff always goes full circle, so as people dismiss pc because of it's weaponizing, there's the chance meanness will replace it. Good intention gone bad. White privilege and microaggressions--those never had good intentions. They were designed to be weapons. I think it's important to call this stuff out, because it's clearly an obstacle to anything resembling consensus.

Does the term white privilege exist in America?

chuckpo comments on Apr 22, 2019:

Preposterous. It's just an example of moving the goalposts. Here's a couple of questions. Which way is the better way to treat members of society? Should we adopt the 'black historical experience', or should we adopt the average 'white experience'. Let's just assume nobody's going to argue we should...

chuckpo replies on Apr 22, 2019:

@WilyRickWiles, think psychologically. Does that make sense? Sorry, but that's really annoying. I'd like to think a lot of this new black discontent isn't ginned up by white elitist plastic people appropriating the black experience to heap yet another generation of superiority onto the black community. There are some exceedingly odd dynamics at play in all of this, but we're not supposed to talk about it because white people can't criticize white people who are simply trying to manage black people. Sorry, trigger alert. But, I'm not sure I can write a better, more genuine complaint than that. And, it has NOTHING to do with black people--everything to do with white people who think they do a better job at being black than black people. I'll virtually guarantee you all of this shit was created by white people, and that's disgusting.

Does the term white privilege exist in America?

chuckpo comments on Apr 22, 2019:

Preposterous. It's just an example of moving the goalposts. Here's a couple of questions. Which way is the better way to treat members of society? Should we adopt the 'black historical experience', or should we adopt the average 'white experience'. Let's just assume nobody's going to argue we should...

chuckpo replies on Apr 22, 2019:

@WilyRickWiles, is that a way to not answer the questions?

Does the term white privilege exist in America?

chuckpo comments on Apr 22, 2019:

Preposterous. It's just an example of moving the goalposts. Here's a couple of questions. Which way is the better way to treat members of society? Should we adopt the 'black historical experience', or should we adopt the average 'white experience'. Let's just assume nobody's going to argue we should...

chuckpo replies on Apr 22, 2019:

@WilyRickWiles, so what is the ACTION to white privilege then--that hopefully transcends the current death by a thousand cuts? Is this what it looks like to fix white privilege? Where does the victim narrative of white privilege go off track? The social justice isn't working--perhaps you noticed. There's a reason it's not working. It's called psychology and sociology--a fundamental misunderstanding of social change--or at least a one-dimensional understanding of social change dependent upon catastrophe. That doesn't seem that great. This mess has been recently exacerbated by the power and control through militancy worldview. Remember, this junk birthed antifa. Why? How did that happen? Which hate groups were birthed from MLK Jr.? The speech you cited is a source talking about love and individual responsibility. Did you listen to it? What was different about that message in comparison to today's social justice militancy? Does that sound like what today looks like? Doesn't to me. At all. Or, were you using the MLK Jr. speech to agree with me in general? Maybe I'm misunderstanding you.

Best languages for thinking?

FrankZeleniuk comments on Apr 21, 2019:

Words are essentially sounds that have concepts so in any language there are sounds that convey concepts. Sometimes an idea or concept is difficult to put into words but that may be due to a limited vocabulary. Best thing I can suggest for the individual is to improve vocabulary to improve ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 21, 2019:

Interesting side note--I'm not sure everyone utilizes their own language to its capacity. I wonder how many words there are in English that almost nobody uses. It's possible our inability in certain topics are because we've forgotten the language around those topics. English tends to push us toward metaphor, which could be a limitation of the language or inadequate use of the language. Is that the same for all languages (rhetorical)?

Best languages for thinking?

plebeian_lobster comments on Apr 21, 2019:

I don't know that one language can really capture all dimensions of thinking. I think the best option would be to learn a few different languages from different language families (don't just learn romance languages). I found that when I learned Spanish, I was able to think about things ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 21, 2019:

@DaddyBob, I know my words really break down when I start trying to talk about emotion, love, connection, being vulnerable. I think there's some merit to the assertion. I don't know if there is a single best language for dealing with all topics, or if there is a best language for a particular topic. Really fascinating idea.

I wrote this article about free will with the intention of submitting it to be published somewhere.

chuckpo comments on Apr 21, 2019:

Interesting ideas--ultimately an appeal for less 'hate' in the world. Odd tact. I think this is a thesis set against itself. In the opening line, the premise of contradiction jumps out at you. **If we accept that free will does not exist, these goals would not suddenly disappear. If everyone on ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 21, 2019:

@BFrydell, here's an interesting consideration (I've been thinking about this). In the end, predestination may not be functionally important at all. Because no matter what I do, I'm doing what I was always going to do. So, you still have to make the choices you make--even if that choice is to do nothing. You were always going to do nothing. Ultimately, it puts the onus for choices back onto the individual. This reminds me of infinite parallel universes where every iteration of my possible choices have their own space to be what's 'real'. I'd also suggest there's a difference between predestination and knowing in advance what choices we are going to make. Knowing doesn't make predestination. I know, in general, the stages my children are going to pass through during their lifespans. It's already a near certainty. However, I'm not predetermining their courses. I simply recognize the maturing process within some bands of common behavior. Theism, atheism, agnosticism--it's not like this stuff is easy, haha. We're all just trying to figure it out, and personally I think there's honor in the process.

I wrote this article about free will with the intention of submitting it to be published somewhere.

chuckpo comments on Apr 21, 2019:

Interesting ideas--ultimately an appeal for less 'hate' in the world. Odd tact. I think this is a thesis set against itself. In the opening line, the premise of contradiction jumps out at you. **If we accept that free will does not exist, these goals would not suddenly disappear. If everyone on ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 21, 2019:

@BFrydell, ahaha, REALLY interesting stuff. I don't agree, but I think you're making a reasonable argument worth considering. Fun. I would not say to you I'm providing you feedback. I'm trying to understand the nature of reality too, so it's infinitely useful to come into contact with other people with surprising and innovative theories to compare my own theories to. I can see where the right suppositions allow something like 'free will' to fall away. But, I don't think that is the real reality. I can't say it's wrong. I don't know. It's also unpalatable to me. I'm curious if the idea of predestination is palatable to you? Do you feel good about that or bad about that or nothing about that? Granted either of us feeling any particular way has zero impact on what the truth of the matter is. I'd just like to know how your theory makes you feel, if that's fair to ask. I don't know if this will be interesting to you or not, but I come from the same direction in religion. My observations about human beings don't make sense without continuance--we continue on in some form after death. That could be God, a god, or some natural extension to our understanding of our lives. It seems to me such a system is the predicate for all things human--the answer to why do we care to hold this conversation? A bit of a rabbit hole, but the two seem to be related--maybe necessarily so.

Where are the Marxists Here? (Zizek vs. Peterson)

Zthylacine comments on Apr 20, 2019:

Who came across better? Zizek was funny and engaging but weirded me out with the perpetual nose scratch short adjustment combo. Peterson was Peterson. I’m admittedly biased toward JP.

chuckpo replies on Apr 20, 2019:

I really liked Zizek's request to not make it a competition--just a conversation, so I think they both won, and I think we all won. That's just the best possible scenario, though I came away feeling they didn't quite get to the meat of the topic. I also though the topic constrained where they naturally wanted to go at several points. The only thing I didn't like was the who are the neomarxist postmodernist line of inquiry. I felt it was a cheap point that Zizek already knew the answer to. But, I'm nitpicking.

Do you consider yourself to be a feminist?

Thetruepianoman comments on Apr 19, 2019:

If you believe in equality then you are a feminist. However I strongly believe such delineation are redundant unless used in reference to countries where that gap exists. I think it's largely redundant in the UK but on third world countries is a necessity

chuckpo replies on Apr 20, 2019:

@Thetruepianoman, I'm not sure that tells the whole story, but we can leave it there as far as I'm concerned. Unless you want to go all the way down the rabbit hole.

How do theists account for observing the supernatural when all their tools of observation (senses) ...

chuckpo comments on Apr 19, 2019:

Not sure I understand the question. Like 'truth' (or as a metaphor for truth), God/objective truth may not be able to be observed directly. I didn't say 'a truth'. We look for evidence. In my view, there's as much evidence for a God as against, but what tips it for me is I can't explain us without ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 20, 2019:

@Thetruepianoman, what's the relationship between my belief and science believing something? It doesn't work within a 'parameter of knowledge'. That's just not right. Science guesses all of the time. The field of statistics was designed to get some sense of how wrong our guesses might be. I just don't get your point at all. First, I didn't say anything about my knowledge of the Holy Spirit. I've said I'm a God-leaning agnostic. I don't know. However, there are people who believe very much in the 'guidance' of the Holy Spirit. My position is I don't know--the only sensible and defensible position of science. You valuing evidence or not has no bearing on whether such things exist. That's kind of the point. I believe there is an objective reality that we have only a very limited view of. It's not necessary that we distinguish between reality and nonsense when not knowing is an authentic, sensible position to take. Sheesh, over time a lot of our nonsense has exactly come to pass. I say, there COULD BE more to this world than we can detect. I don't know. Science has uncovered a little, technology, etc. But, the vast amount of what is knowable is most likely unknown. We think we're there, but we're probably barely into the process of learning about reality. Time will tell. We'll have to agree to disagree on what we can derive or merely begin to speculate on. I believe there is more to mankind than our 5 senses can detect. I think that makes the most sense. In fact, there are probably more 'senses' than 5. Again, time will tell.

Trump Obstructed Justice And Lied About It The redacted Mueller report shows enough evidence to ...

chuckpo comments on Apr 19, 2019:

Are your interpretations lies? Everyone's throwing around language bombs--big, heavy words used to coerce, manipulate, etc. The Democrats (that label includes the entirety of the mainstream media) have been using that tactic for years. Now, you have a guy in the whitehouse that does the same thing, ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 20, 2019:

@Daryl **Not positivist reduction. You said that, not me.** True, I did say that--not you--for good reason. **There are times when there are objective facts that most people would agree are facts and application of non-partisan logic to those facts can lead to a fairly narrow band of conclusions.** Great theory. How's that working for you in practice? Well to the degree you're willing to trick yourself into believing it, I guess. Fatal flaw applying the statement to politics. That's kind of what's going on now. We're all NOT agreeing on basic 'facts'. Look at 2A, the right has facts. The left has facts. Those facts don't align to well with each other. Huh? How does that work? Interesting, isn't it? Since I've had this conversation with you before, I understand you believe simply your facts are the right ones and the other side's facts are the wrong ones. But, the key is you BELIEVE. It's ONLY your opinion, which would actually be okay if you didn't loathe the loss in your authority to own truth. That part is tough to reconcile. Your arguments across several threads have proven to be highly positivist and reductionist. It's why I ultimately steer the conversation toward your religious zeal even in the absence of a belief in a higher power. It's the dogma that's important to our conversations. Truth is way more elusive than you suggest, and I'd imagine it's distributed much more widely than you want to believe. That's life on that one. Move the pieces around the board however you'd like, but that one's PROBABLY not going to fly anywhere. **Why not? I'll pit my objective sites against your partisan sites any day.** If you're calling those objective sites, there's simply not enough common ground to base a conversation. That's like me citing Breitbart. I'd put Breitbart up against any of THOSE sites you chose. I do understand those seem objective to you, but I suggest you rethink yourself and go look for just a little disconfirming data. You'll find loads. **I'm a pragmatic rationalist with a science-informed, anti-bias, reo-reason mindset that attempts to lead me to be more rational about politics. ** Among the most anti-scientific statements I've ever read on the internet. Congratulations. That's no small feat. I'll grant that you TRY to aim there. My observation and opinion are that you miss that goal by a pretty wide margin. How do you feel about that reflection? Why would I say something like that? How hard will you try to dismiss the assertions before you've even truly considered them? **That's why I won't intentionally lie or mislead. ** In my view, you are clearly misleading to make statements that sound like you know when you are, in fact, stating your opinion--and not an objective one at that. **You don't have a rational ...

Trump Obstructed Justice And Lied About It The redacted Mueller report shows enough evidence to ...

chuckpo comments on Apr 19, 2019:

Are your interpretations lies? Everyone's throwing around language bombs--big, heavy words used to coerce, manipulate, etc. The Democrats (that label includes the entirety of the mainstream media) have been using that tactic for years. Now, you have a guy in the whitehouse that does the same thing, ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 20, 2019:

@Daryl, positivist reduction. Nothing to interpret because you already KNOW YOUR TRUTH. Meh. We'll have to agree to disagree. YOUR evidence isn't the same as my evidence. YOU CHOSE your evidence, and from my point of view, you introduced bias into your thinking. That's how disagreements happen. Disagreements don't happen when one person gives some absolute objective truth and then someone else denies that absolute objective truth. Is that what you think? The Democrats are chronic liars--nearly all of them, and there is solid evidence to back that up. I won't list a bunch of partisan sites like you have. Ultimately, we'll both just discredit the sources, and it's reasonable to do so. All Presidents probably do lie. In fact, some lies are probably necessary, which is an interesting topic. But, you're making the argument that somehow Trump's lies are unique and pernicious in a way no other politician has lied. I think that's preposterous--demonstrably so. As I said, Trump came along and started playing the game Democrats set up. They don't like it AT ALL! I'm guessing you think the lies your side tells are okay, while lies by the political opposition are not ok? **He was elected to be a chronic liar? That's news to me, especially since most Trump supporters (1) deny he is a chronic liar, and (2) claim to hate lies by Hillary, Obama, etc.** Silly manipulation. Not really worth comment. Agreed? It's not your place to frame my argument, and I patently reject it. I actually am content framing my own words. **I agree with that assessment. That is a major reason why I left the two main parties decades ago and am an independent. I have my own political ideology, which holds that, among other things that lies, deceit, and unwarranted opacity are deeply immoral and unacceptable from any politician in any party and the fewer lies and less deceit a politician uses, the better. No politician will be perfect, but they darn sure can easily be far better than Trump.** Sweet, the conversation just became MUCH easier. Please offer a critical critique of the left's lies. Lies are RAMPANT in politics and in mainstream media. Agreed? Can any politician be better than the litany of Democrat liars and activist media liars influencing public discourse? We can't even get to a real discussion until we set some baseline of truth in our own discussion. That truth will be somewhere in the neighborhood of 'lies in politics, lies in the mainstream media, various lies distributed by the voting masses, etc. Partisanship will drop away, and the lies will become the focal point.

Best of Neil deGrasse Tyson Amazing Arguments And Clever Comebacks Part 1 - YouTube

chuckpo comments on Apr 19, 2019:

Actually, I use people's position on religion as a litmus test for being next level. NeildeGasseBagTysonChicken doesn't gain my respect. Not that religion is the only area I believe he's vulnerable. I'm sorry, not a big fan of Hawking either. But, they both have more intersectional points than I ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 19, 2019:

@ephiroll, wow, I really like your thinking. I'd like to read more, but I get it. If you ever want to have that conversation, message me. I'm a believing-leaning agnostic, btw. I've argued for years the only defensible position on God for science is agnosticism. I get so frustrated when atheists misuse science to beat down on religious people. That's NOT what science is for. Anyway, great comments. By the way again, I don't know why that thumbsdown sign went into my post. Completely unintended. Oh, I put an (!n!) without the exclamation points after heckuva. That must be the bbcode for that emoji. Okay, whatever--I tried 3 different delimiters to write that bleeding sentence...

Do you consider yourself to be a feminist?

Thetruepianoman comments on Apr 19, 2019:

If you believe in equality then you are a feminist. However I strongly believe such delineation are redundant unless used in reference to countries where that gap exists. I think it's largely redundant in the UK but on third world countries is a necessity

chuckpo replies on Apr 19, 2019:

@Thetruepianoman, I feel like we've had a misunderstanding. I'm not sure what we're doing. But, the smelly armpit thing was funny.

How do theists account for observing the supernatural when all their tools of observation (senses) ...

chuckpo comments on Apr 19, 2019:

Not sure I understand the question. Like 'truth' (or as a metaphor for truth), God/objective truth may not be able to be observed directly. I didn't say 'a truth'. We look for evidence. In my view, there's as much evidence for a God as against, but what tips it for me is I can't explain us without ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 19, 2019:

@Thetruepianoman, huh? Where did I say anything about KNOWING or KNOWLEDGE? I've reread what I wrote, and nothing in there even implies KNOWING. How can I be confusing knowing and believing if I'm not even addressing knowing? What you're speaking to in the second paragraph sounds more like science, but you should know other means of experiencing have been suggested, and I can't categorically dismiss the experience of others. One example is the Holy Spirit. Some people believe in the Holy Spirit, and that would not be detectable from the 5 senses, sight, hearing, taste, smell, touch. It would be something else. I can't say the Holy Spirit doesn't exist. Can you? You denying something you don't have isn't proof it doesn't exist. I can't see you or where you are. Maybe you're sitting in a room with a computer. It has no impact on the truth just because I can't see it, feel it, hear it, taste it, or smell it. There's more to the world, I think, than your limited acceptance of YOUR senses.

Converting to Islam

Demere comments on Apr 18, 2019:

You are tough! Truth is I’d probably convert. Not proud to say it but it’s the most likely outcome.

chuckpo replies on Apr 19, 2019:

@CenTexBiker, maybe. You can't make change when you're dead. You can't help anyone when you're dead. Voluntary death is tacit acceptance of the all of the wrong in the world. Does your death have meaning? Maybe. But, I wouldn't just follow the crowd over the cliff without seeing if something could be done. The words have no meaning to God who judges hearts. You're trying to give them some kind of mystical, liturgical meaning like clicking your ruby slipper heels 3 times. Isn't blasphemy only a denial of God in your heart?

I keep hearing commentators ask why the decision by Mueller doesn’t put an end to the constant ...

WilliamLWeaver comments on Apr 18, 2019:

I think Trump Derangement Syndrome is the petulant swan song of the Baby boom generation. They spent a large amount of time telling us GenX'ers that we would amount to nothing and have no chance of creating anything of lasting value. Now that we are challenging the Monument to Middle Management that...

chuckpo replies on Apr 19, 2019:

@WilliamLWeaver, wow, that's REALLY interesting. Thanks for taking the time. I'd buy you a beer or 3 to hear your stories...Good stuff!

I keep hearing commentators ask why the decision by Mueller doesn’t put an end to the constant ...

WilliamLWeaver comments on Apr 18, 2019:

I think Trump Derangement Syndrome is the petulant swan song of the Baby boom generation. They spent a large amount of time telling us GenX'ers that we would amount to nothing and have no chance of creating anything of lasting value. Now that we are challenging the Monument to Middle Management that...

chuckpo replies on Apr 19, 2019:

@WilliamLWeaver **My experiences are limited to NASA and Higher Education.** Ah, only that, hahaha! Impressive. But, it may not be the same in corporate America, which is what you're implying. Makes sense. I just thought your intro was funny. Okay back to reading the rest...

Best of Neil deGrasse Tyson Amazing Arguments And Clever Comebacks Part 1 - YouTube

chuckpo comments on Apr 19, 2019:

Actually, I use people's position on religion as a litmus test for being next level. NeildeGasseBagTysonChicken doesn't gain my respect. Not that religion is the only area I believe he's vulnerable. I'm sorry, not a big fan of Hawking either. But, they both have more intersectional points than I ...

chuckpo replies on Apr 19, 2019:

@ephiroll, actually it's not because of my own beliefs about religion, but about my beliefs about what it means to know. Fundamental to the philosophy of science. Wow, you had one heckuva (n) exposure to religion! What was that like? Did you pick one or pick none?

Do you consider yourself to be a feminist?

Thetruepianoman comments on Apr 19, 2019:

If you believe in equality then you are a feminist. However I strongly believe such delineation are redundant unless used in reference to countries where that gap exists. I think it's largely redundant in the UK but on third world countries is a necessity

chuckpo replies on Apr 19, 2019:

@Thetruepianoman, actually that's not correct, though I recognize that looks better on the pamphlets. Not the practical case at all. In fact, even feminist theory in counseling ignores many aspects of being male despite making some soft platitudes toward inclusivity in the research. It still ignores fundamental considerations that don't fall outside of the exclusively-female-centered-doctrine. The patriarchy is a dubious, loosely compiled weapon that doesn't look to 'raise women's rights to the standard of men.' Of course, there are different types of feminists--much to the consternation of some feminists. But, I do believe some of those fall within that category you suggest.

"Remember humility, love and tolerance every waking hour of the day.

chuckpo comments on Apr 19, 2019:

Beautiful. No doubt.

chuckpo replies on Apr 19, 2019:

@mindmuser, haha, okay. Yeah, I'd missed part of it. Was little stuff falling around you? Did you hear deep rumbling slicing through the silence?

"Remember humility, love and tolerance every waking hour of the day.

chuckpo comments on Apr 19, 2019:

Beautiful. No doubt.

chuckpo replies on Apr 19, 2019:

@mindmuser, oh, there was a blog? I guess I just wanted to look at the picture... Alright, on it.