simpletone
That's rich.
> People just want to be treated equally.
Nobody is denying 'gay people' anything. Do you know what gay people did when they wanted to form a family in the past? They married a person of the opposite sex and had children with them and formed a family. Gay people have been marrying for millenia.
> and it happen(-s/-ed) with race.
Which was wrong because people of different races were able to procreate. Two men nor two women can't procreate. Not the same thing. Stop leeching off the suffering of minorities.
> Please let other people be happy when that happiness deprives you of nothing.
Oh god. You got me in the feels. Lets throw truth out the window, harm innocent children and ruin society because degenerates should be happy too. No thank you.
You mean the ones mocking them? The writers were insulting them. You can't be serious. They were essentially calling these emperors 'british cigs'. Not that they were in a same sex marriage.
How did I know you were going to bring these two up? : ' We know at least one roman emperor was executed by their own praetorian guards for degeneracy.'
Hmmm, I wonder if either one of your roman emperors was killed by their own guards?
> but there’s zero direct evidence either of them are false
Funny how there are tons of evidence of their marriages to women. But none for the supposed same-sex 'marriage'.
> so by default we’re stuck assuming them accurate.
So if there is no evidence you murdered a child and also, no evidence you didn't murder the child, the default to be to assume you killed the child? Wow, you don't know how logic works do you.
> That’s a very strong response to a simple factual statement
It's a statement of fact.
> you may need to seek professional help.
Hmmm. Standard M.O. How come you people always respond the exact same way? Must be the same training materials?
I suppose it could be projecting. Seems like it's always the mentally ill degenerates telling others to 'seek help'.
Just like there is no dispute Newton invented calculus, gutenburg invented the printing press or columbus discovered the americas...
People who go into psychology are more interested in what's going on in other people's heads and more importantly manipulating other people. It's more about controlling others than controlling oneself. It's why psychology was founded in the first place.
> people who lack a native impulse to be honest / ethical and are curious about people who do.
Ethics isn't about studying people. It's about studying principles. IE what does ethics mean. What makes an act ethical vs non-ethical. So on. You can delve into the ethics of gods, god, AI or even animals. Are ethical principles universal or not. So on and so forth.
No taxes on Roth IRAs. Even on distributions/withdrawals at a certain age ( I think it's 58 or 60? ).
Roth IRAs are as good a retirement vehicle as you can have.
No. You are in a cultural bubble.
> At least two of the Roman Emperors were in same-sex unions
What bullshit. Love how you try to sneak in same-sex 'union' for same-sex marriage. No roman emperor was in a same-sex marriage. That much we know. We know at least one roman emperor was executed by their own praetorian guards for degeneracy.
> far more were openly in homosexual relationships.
Simply not true. We know the romans admired the greeks for their culture but looked down on them for their degeneracy.
> Same-sex marriage was outlawed on December 16, 342 AD by the Christian emperors Constantius II and Constans.
There was no same-sex marriage before modern times. Not in ancient greece. Not in native american society. No where. These emperors banned sodomy and all kinds of biblically delineated degeneracy because they became christians. But no roman society ever had same-sex marriage. The idea of it would have been unthinkable back then.
> As to recent trends, it’s far from a uniform shift globally. Uganda joined made homosexuality punishable by death just last year.
Maybe you should read the Torah. Sodomy is listed as a mortal sin. You sound like an anti-semitic bigot.
No. The purpose of marriage was for a man and a woman to unite and create a family. All the legality was introduced recently to protect and aid in the creation of a family. Marriage predates legality by millenia. Marriage existed before law.
"The rituals and ceremonies surrounding marriage in most cultures are associated primarily with fecundity and validate the importance of marriage for the continuation of a clan, people, or society."
https://www.britannica.com/topic/marriage/Marriage-rituals
> The idea that marriage is intended for procreation is false
It's the basis of marriage. The fact that a man and a woman procreate is why we have marriage. It's why marriages all around the world have fertility rituals.
"Fertility rites intended to ensure a fruitful marriage exist in some form in all ceremonies. Some of the oldest rituals still to be found in contemporary ceremonies include the prominent display of fruits or of cereal grains that may be sprinkled over the couple or on their nuptial bed, the accompaniment of a small child with the bride, and the breaking of an object or food to ensure a successful consummation of the marriage and an easy childbirth."
https://www.britannica.com/topic/marriage/Marriage-rituals
> a claim made by those who discriminate against homosexuals.
No. People deny procreation as the basis of marriage because they want to push lgbt propaganda.
If you were honest, you would say marriage was based on procreation in the past, but now we redefine as something else.
Or 'Some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust upon them' -- Shakespeare
There are many paths to greatness. The article mentions a lot of hurdles and racism that he had to overcome. But those are specific to him. I'm sure there are plenty 'great' people who haven't suffered.
> One of my great advantages is that I have very low expectations.
I don't think people with low expectations start companies. Certainly those with low expectations don't rise and achieve greatness.
In essence, he is saying people should be resilient and try to persevere through hard times. The rest are just fluff to fill time.
But even with resilience and perseverance, you aren't guaranteed success. It also takes a bit of luck. Being at the right place at the right time. There isn't a magic formula to be successful. And there are only X number of billionaires the economy can suppport...
If it can be done in 3D virtual environments and video games, it shouldn't be much of a leap to do it in the real world. After all we have cameras, voice recorders, sensors, etc that can map the real world into 3D virtual environments already. Have they tried linking this generalist AI to a robot to see how the robot does in the real world?
More standard propagandist talking point. How long before you bring out whataboutism, nazis, etc? What are your reddit usernames?
You seem to have some idealized view of journalism that has never existed. The fact that you linked to the nytimes...
> And no, modern Congress is not more corrupt than historical standards
That's a straw man. He didn't say congress was 'more corrupt' than before. He just wrote 'grotesquely corrupt congress'. You surely can see the difference. If not, you'd make an excellent journalist.
Do you get paid to do this? Are you working for free? Are you with a private organization or with a government?
Thank you for removing all doubt. I wasn't 100% certain until now.
This wreaks of straw man.
> We’ve even had natural-born citizens who served in office born abroad.
What? Are you saying you are a government employee pushing propaganda here? You aren't making much sense.
Which is insane because in 2020, Trump was the one trying to ban tiktok and Biden was defending it. Now the script flipped? In the meantime, all they've done in the past 5 years is give tiktok free advertisement.
Definitely helps.
> Nigel extended ZAP to ZAPATEADOS
My problem is I try to extend the word rather than create new words. So I'd look for zapped, unzapped, zapping, etc. Actually, if I had 'ATEADOS', I would waste my time looking for a 7 letter word ending in S.
> Nigel placed all of his letters between the P and TED, spelling out PERNOCTATED and turning NON into ANON. The play tallied 92 points.
Now that is genuinely impressive.
I wish scrabble had platforms as widely available and free as chess does.
I highly doubt that. I'm told that the 'ccp' controls biden, democrats, etc. So why would they need their police to do anything here?
Also, as a foreigner, why do you post so much propaganda here? Even more than that, why do you comment as if you are an expert on american, chinese, nyc, etc affairs? You've written more than a dozen comments just on this thread.
I didn't know you could 'lose' a native language that you grew up with til near adulthood. Maybe speaking has more to do with muscle memory and hence easier to lose than a somewhat passive skill like listening and comprehension. Makes me wonder how language is stored and processed in the brain. Are there two complete separate regions for speaking and listening? That feels a bit inefficient.
I wonder whether the media is going to write hysterical propaganda pieces about this, like they did with chinese 'international offices'.
With the media, it's always accuse others of what you are doing.
No. You made explicit assertions. "The Mongols undoubtedly wiped out entire ethnic groups during their conquests." I asked you a simple question. Name one ethnicity, language, religion, etc that the mongols wiped out.
There is a difference between being brutal, like all empires are, and genocidal, like european empires were.
> Killing 50 million people
Only a moron would believe this. There were what? 250 to 500 million people back then. Are you really saying the mongols killed 50 million people, a significant portion of the world population, with bows and arrows? All the nonsense about the mongols were written by highly unreliable sources. Your silly wikipedia article has nonsense like 'according to legend...'
> Mongols engaging in deliberate cultural destruction, including the massive wastage of books, and targeted religious persecution
Such as? Be explicit. Which religions and cultures did the mongols target and exterminate.
> I am not sure where the Mongol revisionism comes from but it is surprising to me.
It's not revisionism. It's being logical, factual and honest.
It's why you haven't replied to me directly. Yes the mongols were brutal. All empires are brutal. You are being sneaky and dishonest by building a straw man here.
There is a world of difference between destroying a city or destroying a library to punish a leader and wiping out a culture.
Name one ethnicity or culture or religion that the mongols wiped out. I am still waiting.
The myth about china's money is entirely that. Myth spread by propagandists. When you look at the numbers, europeans are buying up most of the world.
Look at brazil. The dutch pump more money into brazil than the US.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/749238/fdi-brazil-by-cou...
But you won't see that in the news. If you do it won't be portrayed in a threatening manner. It's always the chinese or the japanese or the arabs buying up everything. When the numbers tell you otherwise.
There are a lot of pro-zionists views promoted on the app as well. But in tiktok's defense, zuckerburg's properties, alphabet properties, reddit, etc lean heavily in favor of pro-zionist content because those companies are officially in bed with public and private zionist organizations.
> Wild speculation, of course.
Think it has more to do with anti-china views more than anything. But zionist influence definitely plays some role here.
They didn't. I checked. The fact that you write 'undoubtedly wiped out' without being able to name a single ethnic group, language, religion, culture that got wiped out says something. No?
> They killed millions of people.
They did kill people and were destructive as all empires are. But they weren't genocidal. And most of the 'brutality' is exaggerated for the benefit of oddly enough the conquering mongols and subjugated peoples.
> But to speak of the Mongols as "preservers of knowledge and culture" is silly.
They preserved it because they merged into local populations. Hence mughal persia, mughal india and the various khanates throughout central asia and china. As I said, they were multicultural and multiracial empire. They didn't force their language, customs, religions, etc on the conquered people. They did the oppposite. They adopted the local language, religions, customs. All the way from eastern europe to china to persia and the middle east. Now juxtapose that with what happened to european imperialism?
> but it hardly seems like something they deserve credit for.
It isn't a coincidence that marco polo went to china during the rule of the mongols. The mongols deserve credit for much of the modern world. Starting with the italian renaissance ( it isn't a coincidence that the italian renaissance, medicis, etc ) occurred during the mongol empire, to the rise of russian empire, the rise of china, the rise of the ottomans, etc.
It's remarkable how the mongols were so bloodthirsty and genocidal but the peoples they conquered are the most numerous in the world?
Now compare the mongols to the european imperialists who wiped out an entire hemisphere and more.
Here is a list of regions the mongols and their descendents conquered - china, india, persia, middle east, eastern europe, russia, central asia, etc. Tell me which of these people were wiped out. I'll wait.
The romans conquered greece and nearly adopted ancient greek knowledge and culture wholesale. The mongols were reknown for invading china, persia, etc and taking their best scholars with them. The mongol empire is responsible for much of the cross-eurasian transfer of knowledge. Along with the preservation of much knowledge and culture as they were multireligious and multiculturalists. It's why people in china still speak chinese and arabs still worship as they do. The mongols didn't wipe out entire cultures like 'european imperialists'.
> In contrast, European imperialists set out to distant shores in the hope of obtaining new knowledge along with new territories."
So wiping out entire continents of people ( their histories, language, culture, knowledge ) was in hopes of obtaining new knowledge. We can't even ascertain the etymology of many of the names of towns, cities, lakes, etc because we killed off entire native language families.
And? Besides you being hysterical. What happens?
> The trend towards online everything, is equivalent to putting all your eggs in one (huge) basket.
And? What happens if the internet disappears today? Life goes on.
> but if it is the case that there are no alternative viable options but to accept a compromised state of privacy
For most of humanity, people lived without any right to privacy. You want old-fashioned right?
> I absolutely get why governments and corporations are fine with eroding personal privacy for their benefit.
Governments and corporations are run by people too.
> that there is eventually some consideration given to privacy and its loss.
There is more consideration for privacy today, especially in the online world, than in the real old-fashoined world.
How about you set the example and go offline for a bit? Get some air.
Not only that, the 40 hour work week, child labor laws, etc were created because there was an oversupply of labor due to massive immigration from europe in the 19th century. These legal and cultural shifts occurred to open up more jobs to the unemployed. Else society would break down.
Germany had an influx of millions of immigrants the past few years. How could they possibly have a labor shortage? And how would a 4 day work week solve a labor shortage? It makes no sense. You force people to work less to open up more jobs. The work needed stays the same. If a worker works less, then another worker needs to make up the rest.