good bye to life as we knew it amerika

TheInterlooper comments on Jun 25, 2022:

I'm no fan of the supreme court's decision to overturn roe, but this has always been the case for men. Even in cases where a teenage boy is raped by an older woman, they're still required to pay child support.

ChestRockfield replies on Aug 2, 2022:

@TheInterlooper Because more women would opt for abortion?

good bye to life as we knew it amerika

TheInterlooper comments on Jun 25, 2022:

I'm no fan of the supreme court's decision to overturn roe, but this has always been the case for men. Even in cases where a teenage boy is raped by an older woman, they're still required to pay child support.

ChestRockfield replies on Aug 2, 2022:

I think it's bullshit that men have no option to relinquish rights to absolve responsibility. Women can do it through adoption or abortion, why exactly can't men?

I live in Lawrence, KS and this shameful text was sent to me yesterday.

Garban comments on Aug 2, 2022:

Women having a choice is shameful?

ChestRockfield replies on Aug 2, 2022:

@SeaGreenEyez Yeah, abortion is fairly well protected in Kansas at the moment, it's not great, but it's a fair level of abortion access, but most importantly, it's codified. They actually need to pass this amendment so that they have the ability to write any laws about abortion. They wrote this in a manner making it seem like this provides protections for rape and incest when it fact there already is and they'll just use it to go the opposite way and completely ban abortion.

I live in Lawrence, KS and this shameful text was sent to me yesterday.

Castlepaloma comments on Aug 2, 2022:

Governments have no right of what gose in or out of our bodies. This is constitutional and internationally illegal. I'm sure someone volunteered their organ to be sold. Nobody stealing any of my organs, without a good kick in the balls and a court case.

ChestRockfield replies on Aug 2, 2022:

I don't know if I 100% agree with that. It is illegal to sell your organs, I tend to think that's smart policy.

I live in Lawrence, KS and this shameful text was sent to me yesterday.

Garban comments on Aug 2, 2022:

Women having a choice is shameful?

ChestRockfield replies on Aug 2, 2022:

I assume the proper pro-choice vote would be 'no' and this is a pro-life group of assholes that are sending misleading texts.

[m.

ChestRockfield comments on Aug 1, 2022:

Just imagine if he had an efficient killing machine like a an AR-15. I guess this means there's always going to be sick or angry people hell bent on causing harm and we should probably do whatever we can to limit the tools they have access to to do it.

ChestRockfield replies on Aug 2, 2022:

@Tejas Ah ha ha ha. Your list of 11 dates back to AT LEAST 2006 (some have no dates on your site or any other story that reported them almost as if they were made up to bolster that ridiculous argument) meaning there's approximately 1 'good guy with a gun' every year and a half compared to the hundreds of mass shootings. Again, you'd have to be a fucking idiot to think that myth is real.

Who remembers the days when the US sought people, apprehending them to bring them to face justice, ...

ChestRockfield comments on Aug 1, 2022:

There's a lot of shit wrong with a lot of shit, and this, I'm sorry to say, doesn't move the needle for me anymore. I know that's probably a shitty thing to say, but it's true. Every single person in Afghanistan could get killed by an American drone strike and it wouldn't affect my life as much as ...

ChestRockfield replies on Aug 2, 2022:

@puff Not knowing about the bad shit that can fuck up your life doesn't stop the bad shit from fucking up your life...

[m.

ChestRockfield comments on Aug 1, 2022:

Just imagine if he had an efficient killing machine like a an AR-15. I guess this means there's always going to be sick or angry people hell bent on causing harm and we should probably do whatever we can to limit the tools they have access to to do it.

ChestRockfield replies on Aug 1, 2022:

@Tejas So you're admitting you're an idiot, then? Even if there have been 3, which I doubt you'll actually be able to prove with links to those stories, that's still a small amount because there have been 11 mass shootings with 63 dead May through July.

[m.

ChestRockfield comments on Aug 1, 2022:

Just imagine if he had an efficient killing machine like a an AR-15. I guess this means there's always going to be sick or angry people hell bent on causing harm and we should probably do whatever we can to limit the tools they have access to to do it.

ChestRockfield replies on Aug 1, 2022:

@Tejas Like all of the practically 0% of the time "good guys with guns" save the day? Only incredibly stupid people still believe that myth. You may as well be a flat-Earther. https://m.lasvegassun.com/news/2022/jul/20/if-youre-keeping-score-at-home-good-guys-with-guns/ https://time.com/6182970/good-guys-guns-mass-shootings-uvalde/ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States

New Rule: Let the Population Collapse | Real Time with Bill Maher (HBO) - YouTube

Flyingsaucesir comments on Jul 30, 2022:

In the subfield of biology known as population dynamics, there is this thing called a boom and bust cycle. When resources are plentiful, the population booms. When resources become scarce, or waste products build up to toxic levels, the population busts. Now the human population has been booming for...

ChestRockfield replies on Aug 1, 2022:

@Flyingsaucesir Oddly enough, I was just scrolling through whatever Google calls their feed and found this... https://news.yahoo.com/climate-scientist-says-total-climate-042317772.html

New Rule: Let the Population Collapse | Real Time with Bill Maher (HBO) - YouTube

Flyingsaucesir comments on Jul 30, 2022:

In the subfield of biology known as population dynamics, there is this thing called a boom and bust cycle. When resources are plentiful, the population booms. When resources become scarce, or waste products build up to toxic levels, the population busts. Now the human population has been booming for...

ChestRockfield replies on Aug 1, 2022:

@Flyingsaucesir Another major problem is that this is a global problem that is not being treated with a global solution. Trump stoked the fires of "Why should *we* work to solve this problem when China is doing the exact opposite to gain a financial and competitive advantage over us" and many people agreed with him. Countries like Brazil aren't compensated for maintaining their rainforest, so they're chopping it down at record pace. And who can blame them? If the benefits of the Rainforest are going to be enjoyed by everyone, than the profits from not having large swaths of protected land should also be shared. But people, especially those that make up our governments, are too selfish, stupid, and shortsighted. No matter how possible people think a solution to this is, they should be taking measures to mitigate how bad the negative effects will impact them, which I think is the primary reason to not have kids. Not that population collapse wouldn't help, but if there is a catastrophic outcome anyway, you're not subjecting a loved one to live through a potentially horrible existence.

New Rule: Let the Population Collapse | Real Time with Bill Maher (HBO) - YouTube

Flyingsaucesir comments on Jul 30, 2022:

In the subfield of biology known as population dynamics, there is this thing called a boom and bust cycle. When resources are plentiful, the population booms. When resources become scarce, or waste products build up to toxic levels, the population busts. Now the human population has been booming for...

ChestRockfield replies on Aug 1, 2022:

@Flyingsaucesir Congress currently has 139 members who deny climate science, 30 in the Senate. I'm not sure how fast, or even if, that number will go down, but it seems unlikely it'll occur fast enough.

I may have to start going to church. I have lots of demons.

glennlab comments on Jul 31, 2022:

What I want to know is, who turned her in?

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 31, 2022:

My first guess would be somebody's wife...

New Rule: Let the Population Collapse | Real Time with Bill Maher (HBO) - YouTube

Flyingsaucesir comments on Jul 30, 2022:

In the subfield of biology known as population dynamics, there is this thing called a boom and bust cycle. When resources are plentiful, the population booms. When resources become scarce, or waste products build up to toxic levels, the population busts. Now the human population has been booming for...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 31, 2022:

@Flyingsaucesir Well, if humans can somehow go massively carbon negative, then I suppose it's not too late, but considering the people that make our laws are so fucking stupid they bring snowballs into congress to "prove" global warming doesn't exist, I'm not going to hold my breath for a political solution to this problem.

New Rule: Let the Population Collapse | Real Time with Bill Maher (HBO) - YouTube

Flyingsaucesir comments on Jul 30, 2022:

In the subfield of biology known as population dynamics, there is this thing called a boom and bust cycle. When resources are plentiful, the population booms. When resources become scarce, or waste products build up to toxic levels, the population busts. Now the human population has been booming for...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 31, 2022:

@Flyingsaucesir Then I'd read what they're saying about the permafrost's contribution to global warming specifically. Maybe you won't find it as ominous as I did??

Bond set for Sebring man charged with murder in death of fetus | WYTV

TheMiddleWay comments on Jul 28, 2022:

All those questions are irrelevant to me in light of the fact that it was not her choice. Hence, pro-life and pro-choice should both be of one voice in supporting a first degree murder charge.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 31, 2022:

@TheMiddleWay "Because abortion isn't theoretical nor hypothetical" Are you saying you are incapable or unwilling to discuss any theoretical situations to help determine what the results of something might be? That seems like a very silly hard line to draw. *"Hello Mr. Smith, I'm doctor Middleway. Normally in the consent process before a procedure like this we would ask what you'd want us to do in the event of certain emergencies. For instance, if you were to start to bleed and were in need of a blood transfusion to save your life or if your heart were to stop, we'd need to know ahead of time if you'd want the transfusion or heroic measures to save your life. However, I don't deal in hypotheticals, so even though it's theoretically possible for those things to happen, until they actually do, they're not of my concern. Not basing anything on probables or possibles is also why I don't carry auto, home, health, life, or malpractice insurance."* Anyway, my point in all that is that the situation *could* get complicated and laws, at least in my opinion, should be logical and have the ability to be applied consistently across any situations that may arise those laws would need to cover. I think calling it felony murder if one person kills a fetus but nothing even recognized under the law if someone else does it doesn't make much sense to begin with, and only get more nonsensical when you add other conditions on top of that like not even knowing the woman was pregnant or like a million other hypotheticals you'd never entertain. That's my only point, and I'm not sure why you're so resistant to that notion.

The Webb telescope vs. young Earth creationism [religionnews.com]

anglophone comments on Jul 30, 2022:

Given that the distance from us to Sagittarius A(asterisk) is greater 6,000 light years ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 31, 2022:

I had a young-Earther explain our ability to see light from sources greater than 6,000 light years away from us as resulting from it passing through wormholes. Had another young-Earther explain away carbon dating as a result of "Noah's flood rearranging the strata of the Earth's crust."

New Rule: Let the Population Collapse | Real Time with Bill Maher (HBO) - YouTube

Flyingsaucesir comments on Jul 30, 2022:

In the subfield of biology known as population dynamics, there is this thing called a boom and bust cycle. When resources are plentiful, the population booms. When resources become scarce, or waste products build up to toxic levels, the population busts. Now the human population has been booming for...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 31, 2022:

@Flyingsaucesir I wish I would have saved them, but they weren't really a resource to prove to people we need to change our ways, they were a statement about the fact that we no longer had the option. There were papers on studies that had been completed that were released the beginning of this year. They concluded that the permafrost was releasing 4x the amount of carbon that humans produced. Some of them were a little scarier than others, but if you read between the lines, they basically said the same thing.

New Rule: Let the Population Collapse | Real Time with Bill Maher (HBO) - YouTube

Flyingsaucesir comments on Jul 30, 2022:

In the subfield of biology known as population dynamics, there is this thing called a boom and bust cycle. When resources are plentiful, the population booms. When resources become scarce, or waste products build up to toxic levels, the population busts. Now the human population has been booming for...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 30, 2022:

None of that matters. The positive feedback loop on the permafrost has begun and it's releasing like 4x the amount of carbon that humans did. Human involvement can make it worse, but even the entire global population going carbon neutral can't stop it now. We are doomed; that is not up for intelligent debate. Climate scientists warned us for decades and we didn't listen. Now, even though it has happened (the point of no return), most people don't even know it, and a ton of people are actually citing our current position as evidence that the climate scientists were wrong all along. It doesn't get more stupid and arrogant than that.

Bond set for Sebring man charged with murder in death of fetus | WYTV

TheMiddleWay comments on Jul 28, 2022:

All those questions are irrelevant to me in light of the fact that it was not her choice. Hence, pro-life and pro-choice should both be of one voice in supporting a first degree murder charge.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 30, 2022:

@TheMiddleWay Embryos *do* get stolen. Pretty sure every category of any thing of value has been stolen at least once before. Not sure why you couldn't treat hypotheticals as valid questions in a theoretical discussion, that's a problem for another time I guess, but now that you have evidence that embryos have indeed been stolen, do you care to weigh in, or are you willing to agree that it gets really dicey, especially for pro-choice individuals, when trying to say the same action by different people is either perfectly fine or punishable by severe prison sentences or potentially in some states that may count it as 1st degree felony murder, execution? And that it gets even more difficult when REAL extenuating circumstances come into play like the ones I mentioned? https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1997-01-21-9701210061-story.html

Bond set for Sebring man charged with murder in death of fetus | WYTV

TheMiddleWay comments on Jul 28, 2022:

All those questions are irrelevant to me in light of the fact that it was not her choice. Hence, pro-life and pro-choice should both be of one voice in supporting a first degree murder charge.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 30, 2022:

@TheMiddleWay But *who* is the mother? In the two cases of a stolen embryo and a surrogate the "mother" means the woman carrying the fetus, right? But didn't that woman take the choice away from the woman whose embryos they are? And the precedent you mentioned was decided that way based on a signed agreement prior to the creation of the embryos. And in that case, the woman's choice to have the baby that she wanted was stopped by the man who didn't want her to, so maybe the "mother's" choice *isn't* the be all end all? Unless like the scenario above she's *not* the mother until the embryos are inside her?

Bond set for Sebring man charged with murder in death of fetus | WYTV

TheMiddleWay comments on Jul 28, 2022:

All those questions are irrelevant to me in light of the fact that it was not her choice. Hence, pro-life and pro-choice should both be of one voice in supporting a first degree murder charge.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 30, 2022:

@MyTVC15 I'm not comparing and contrasting those two things, those are clearly not equivalent offenses, I'm saying that how anyone feels when personally wronged may produce (or even likely produces) feelings that probably shouldn't be relied on as a maxim for governing all of society.

Trump's Tough Promises: If Elected, He'd Execute Drug Dealers, Repress Protests And... - Benzinga

puff comments on Jul 29, 2022:

Makes me recall George Carlin's view on execution. He was all for it, but not the drug dealers..........the bankers who launder their money. Bill Burr, as he gets older, is becoming more Carlin like in his shows which is great to see. Trump is a very good salesman, able to read a crowds mood. ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 30, 2022:

There are huge swaths of the American electorate that will vote for anyone over a Democrat. The literal Hitler himself could rise from the grave and if he got the Republican nomination, they'd vote for him over literally any person willing to take the nod from the Democrats. After Bush's second win then Trump, I will never again underestimate the stupidity of electorate here.

Trump's Tough Promises: If Elected, He'd Execute Drug Dealers, Repress Protests And... - Benzinga

Redheadedgammy comments on Jul 29, 2022:

I believe you have millions of people who agree with your thoughts here. That orange monster neither deserves to live among Civilized people or continue breathing. The day he is no longer among us the world will be a better place.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 30, 2022:

I'm definitely throwing a Trump is dead party. I'll probably bake a giant celebratory cake for work, too.

Bond set for Sebring man charged with murder in death of fetus | WYTV

TheMiddleWay comments on Jul 28, 2022:

All those questions are irrelevant to me in light of the fact that it was not her choice. Hence, pro-life and pro-choice should both be of one voice in supporting a first degree murder charge.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 30, 2022:

@TheMiddleWay Again, I agree with the legally responsible part, just the basis for the charge is what is at issue from the pro-choice perspective. I can be legally responsible for stealing that pacifier, but should it be grand theft? They are saying, "I'm allowed to kill it because it is not an independent, self-sustaining human, but if you kill it, it was a human and murder/manslaughter/etc." The change should be an offense against the mother, not a separate charge for an offense against the fetus. If it's an offense against the fetus, it opens up a whole host of problems, especially when you start looking at in vitro fertilization. If the woman makes a bunch of embryos and doesn't implant them all and then ultimately destroys the rest because the first procedure worked and she doesn't want to pay to store the rest anymore, why wouldn't there be a change against the mother? Or, given the embryo is just as much the property of the father while it's not implanted, why wouldn't the mother destroying it be an offense by the mother for taking the choice away from the father? Or what if a third party implanted one of those embryos, then what principle takes precedence? The woman who is carrying the fetus is the only one who gets the choice? What if it wasn't stolen, but they were a surrogate? Then who gets to decide if it's murder if it's killed accidentally or on purpose? If you're pro-life, it's really easy to reconcile all of these things: it's always a human with rights, and it's always murder to kill it. Easy peasy. I'm saying it makes a whole lot less sense when a pro-choice person tries to make claims about it being a human and murder to kill it.

Bond set for Sebring man charged with murder in death of fetus | WYTV

TheMiddleWay comments on Jul 28, 2022:

All those questions are irrelevant to me in light of the fact that it was not her choice. Hence, pro-life and pro-choice should both be of one voice in supporting a first degree murder charge.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 29, 2022:

@MyTVC15 Everyone always thinks an offense to them or theirs is especially egregious and should be punished more harshly. Someone stole some Magic cards from me once and I would have been fine with them getting skinned alive. But should that be the policy we go by for all theft? Probably not. So I don't think 'I would have considered it murder' is really the best yard stick to try to determine what should be punishable and how harshly. What if a man, maybe all men, plus all the anti-abortion women think that a woman getting an abortion the father would classify as murder should count as murder, and then that became the law of the land? I think there needs to be clear logical, supportable, consistent reasoning for our laws and punishments for breaking them.

I would like to address the issues of moderators who block people from groups.

Theresa_N comments on Jul 28, 2022:

If whenever you block someone aren't they then blocked from all your groups? Just asking because I've seen this question posed many times.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 29, 2022:

@glennlab Not taking about notifications. I'm taking about seeing their posts directly in my feed every day.

Bond set for Sebring man charged with murder in death of fetus | WYTV

TheMiddleWay comments on Jul 28, 2022:

All those questions are irrelevant to me in light of the fact that it was not her choice. Hence, pro-life and pro-choice should both be of one voice in supporting a first degree murder charge.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 29, 2022:

@TheMiddleWay I also don't see classifying it as murder/homicide/manslaughter for pro-choice individuals. Seems odd to say, "I think killing a fetus is a serious crime, but only if killed by people other than me!" Imagine trying to apply that logic to other crimes. "I think it should be a felony that locks you up for life if you have sex with a child [against their will]. Except of course if you produced that child. Then it shouldn't be a crime and there should be no punishment or even police involvement."

I would like to address the issues of moderators who block people from groups.

Theresa_N comments on Jul 28, 2022:

If whenever you block someone aren't they then blocked from all your groups? Just asking because I've seen this question posed many times.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 29, 2022:

@glennlab See, posts from the snowflakes in Conservative Atheists still show up in my feed, but if you click on them it says something to the effect of, "We're sorry, the owner/moderators of this group are thin-skinned, echo-chamber-dependant little bitches that can't stand when people point out how stupid the shit they say is, so this content is unavailable to anyone they fear may shatter their fragile worldview. We're sorry you have to see evidence in your feed everyday how incredibly stupid the members of this group are. Hopefully scrolling a little further and instead engaging with content from members with IQs above 80 will result in a more pleasant experience on this on site." That may not be verbatim, but I'm pretty sure that's close to what I read...

Bond set for Sebring man charged with murder in death of fetus | WYTV

TheMiddleWay comments on Jul 28, 2022:

All those questions are irrelevant to me in light of the fact that it was not her choice. Hence, pro-life and pro-choice should both be of one voice in supporting a first degree murder charge.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 29, 2022:

@MyTVC15 @TheMiddleWay I agree with the it wasn't her choice so even though she shouldn't be punished if she killed her fetus, he should. HOWEVER, the punishment shouldn't be for something that can't be supported logically/rationally/legally/with consistency. Murder requires premeditated killing of a human being, one or both of which may have been missing from a pro-choice perspective. If someone stole something like a used pacifier from me, should I be able to claim it's sentimental value to me makes it worth $500,000 so that the thief would have to be charged with, and serve a sentence commensurate for, grand theft? Another scenario: what if he didn't know there was a fetus? If you would get charged with involuntarily vehicular manslaughter in a given set of circumstances, but then add to those circumstances a pregnancy for the individual that died, should you then also get charged with first degree murder for the fetus 'because it wasn't her choice for the fetus to die'? Do you see how that's not a reasonable or sufficient condition to support such a charge?

Bond set for Sebring man charged with murder in death of fetus | WYTV

OldMetalHead comments on Jul 28, 2022:

I want these Nat-C's (xtian nationalists) to run on the pro-stoning ticket. Make them run on slavery, genocide, and every other fucked up thing in their holy books. Saddle them with all of it, and make them articulate why it's ok, or how, if it's not ok, that ithe bible is divine inspiration. ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 29, 2022:

Republicans basically already ran on this and won with it in '16.

Bond set for Sebring man charged with murder in death of fetus | WYTV

anglophone comments on Jul 29, 2022:

"Never mind the medical facts, kill him regardless."

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 29, 2022:

Jesus, this just took a hard 180 from the tone of the OP.

Bond set for Sebring man charged with murder in death of fetus | WYTV

Dougl35534 comments on Jul 29, 2022:

Question, if an law enforcement attempts to arrest someone who is 8 weeks pregnant and causes a miscarriage / spontaneous abortion would law enforcement be charged with murder or would we have a new type of charge...murder by resisting arrest?

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 29, 2022:

Sadly, it probably depends on the skin color of the fetus.

House passes a new anti-human-trafficking bill—no thanks to these 20 Republican members of ...

ChestRockfield comments on Jul 27, 2022:

Ew, who's the deplorable fuck who voted no? Oh, I looked at recent visitors to this page and I think I have a good guess...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 29, 2022:

@TheInterlooper You thought it would be hard to prove how I voted?? I didn't *say* it was you, but I notice you took a picture from your computer that could have been logged in with a different account so it didn't show your vote. Wonder why you didn't just screenshot with your profile information at the top like I did. Keep sleazin' brother.

Still building back better every day.

ChestRockfield comments on Jul 28, 2022:

I love how there's a criminal investigation that may be brewing for the traitorous pile of shit you support, and all you got against the opponent that mopped the fucking floor with that orange bucket of chicken grease is an old picture of a half-empty bread aisle with no time stamp or context. 😂

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 29, 2022:

@CourtJester There still no context. At the end of the picture the shelves are completely stocked. Are they moving stuff? Selling out of particular items/brand because of a really good sale? And even if the was a supply chain issue for *some* bread company how is that the fault or the purview of the President of the United States? And how do you not realize that it makes you look like a fuckin' idiot to cheer on someone who almost ended the oldest democracy on Earth and complain about another because of bread.

I would like to address the issues of moderators who block people from groups.

Theresa_N comments on Jul 28, 2022:

If whenever you block someone aren't they then blocked from all your groups? Just asking because I've seen this question posed many times.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 28, 2022:

@Redheadedgammy Yeah, it's bullshit. The whole execution of the blocking mechanic and what happens after is ridiculous.

Islam allows a man to have four wives. Why does Islam not allow a woman to have four husbands?

ChestRockfield comments on Jul 27, 2022:

We subjugate the fuck out of our women and treat them like second-class citizens/property/incubators now. Don't think we have much room to talk about how any country or religion treats their women.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 28, 2022:

@Flyingsaucesir For sure. They are a majority. They could, if they cared about their rights more than anything else, vote as a bloc and control every single elected and appointed position in the country. Instead, men are actually *more* pro-choice than women now (according to a poll Maher referenced on his show).

I would like to address the issues of moderators who block people from groups.

TheMiddleWay comments on Jul 28, 2022:

You run your group any way you want, as silly as it may seem to him. He runs his group any way he wants, as silly as it may seem to you. Not sure what more there is to think about. 🤷

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 28, 2022:

@TheMiddleWay I mean, it was set up that way when he was at the wheel...

I would like to address the issues of moderators who block people from groups.

Theresa_N comments on Jul 28, 2022:

If whenever you block someone aren't they then blocked from all your groups? Just asking because I've seen this question posed many times.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 28, 2022:

@glennlab Group blocks do not make the group invisible, it just makes it so you can't enter or comment. Their stuff will still show up in your feed.

I would like to address the issues of moderators who block people from groups.

Diaco comments on Jul 28, 2022:

Oh, boy, Krish55 !!! :D leave that guy and that group alone, you lose nothing! He's Just and Just an Anti-West person! Who apparently lives in the USA! I wonder why still lives there and doesn't move to that damn Utopia ( Russia or China ) Arguing with these kinds of people is pointless, they ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 28, 2022:

@Redheadedgammy To be fair, if I realize someone has blocked me I immediately block them back. If I can't respond to the debate or argument, they shouldn't get to either.

I would like to address the issues of moderators who block people from groups.

Beowulfsfriend comments on Jul 28, 2022:

I believe that moderators need to be more tolerant with members, unless those members are abusive, especially to other members. Healthy dissent and debate is better than an echo chamber. That said, there are a number of groups that will block anyone who dissents from their norm.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 28, 2022:

Yeah, the Conservative Atheists are the biggest pile of snowflake bitches on the face of the planet. They block ANYONE for even the tinest thing that threatens their thin-ass skin.

I would like to address the issues of moderators who block people from groups.

TheMiddleWay comments on Jul 28, 2022:

You run your group any way you want, as silly as it may seem to him. He runs his group any way he wants, as silly as it may seem to you. Not sure what more there is to think about. 🤷

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 28, 2022:

@TheMiddleWay I can tell you one problem with blocking people from groups they joined, they still have to see all the shit that group posts without being able to open it or comment. And they probably love that it pisses the blocked people off...

Islam allows a man to have four wives. Why does Islam not allow a woman to have four husbands?

ChestRockfield comments on Jul 27, 2022:

We subjugate the fuck out of our women and treat them like second-class citizens/property/incubators now. Don't think we have much room to talk about how any country or religion treats their women.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 28, 2022:

@Flyingsaucesir I'm not just taking about men. Women are voting to take rights away from women here as well. So if *some* men don't, it doesn't much matter on a nation-wide scale. Just like there's probably *some* Muslim men that don't have more than one wife, but that didn't prevent commentary on the fact that they're allowed to.

"The inquiry is related to the department's broader probe of efforts to overturn the 2020 election ...

rainmanjr comments on Jul 28, 2022:

I read this as walking back wording in order to remove any claim that AG Garland is targeting a political rival. It doesn't change anything and a crime can be charged at any time during this "probe." It does bare watching but I'm not going to lose faith because of it.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 28, 2022:

@rainmanjr Much less likely? This is all they should have needed. https://youtu.be/-b71f2eYdTc No one wants that fuckin' piece of shit to suffer more than me, but I just can't believe he'll ever be held accountable after everything else we've ever seen him get away with. I'm firmly in the 'I'll believe it when I see it' camp.

No, Kamala Harris Is Not Headed To The Supreme Court | Ron Johnson Gets Tough On America's Babies - ...

Toonman comments on Jan 28, 2022:

A person cannot be part of two different branches of government at the same time. Don't you ever get the feeling large numbers of Americans spent 9th grade civics class eating glue?

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 27, 2022:

Technically that's not true. The separation of powers prevents members of congress from also holding positions in the Judicial or Executive Branches, but nothing prevents someone from holding concurrent positions in those two branches. Also, though it says this is technically barred, the President of the Senate is also part of the Executive Branch. Yes they can't address congress or vote on anything unless there's a tie, but that still seems like an important role and "being a part of" to me, but I guess they don't count that.

Term limits

ChestRockfield comments on Jul 27, 2022:

I honestly don't think it matters. If the elected official is amazing then you're doing yourself a disservice my forcing them to retire (and also now paying benefits to yet another person who ultimately takes their place). If they're bad, but keep getting elected, it's an indication that the ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 27, 2022:

@Unity Ted Cruz is the most universally fuckin' hated person in the Senate (maybe the State, country, or world for all we know). Al Franken's running joke was, "I like Ted Cruz more than most of my other colleagues like Ted Cruz. And I hate Ted Cruz." Yet he won his Senate race in Texas twice and would have been the republican nominee in '16 were it not for Trump. He's a pile of shit, but Republicans by and large are piles of shit, so he gets their votes. So if an area has a majority of shitty people, a shitty person like Cruz will be elected, and if he can't run, another shitty person will take his place collecting shitty people's shitty votes.

Democrats introduce bill to enact term limits for Supreme Court justices | The Hill

skado comments on Jul 26, 2022:

I like that idea a lot better than adding more justices.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 26, 2022:

@puff This is a 18 year term limit if none step down or die...

Maybe that explains it.

ChestRockfield comments on Jul 26, 2022:

The real question is why do people find it so offensive when other people are wearing masks in situations they think it's unnecessary? Does it hurt you for someone else to be wearing a mask in their car? Maybe those people should untwist the panties out of their ass cracks and live their own ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 26, 2022:

@jeshuey I'm not offended by the joke, but I do think it's stupid you're offended by what other people do in their own cars. Who's actually the snowflake bitch in this scenario? Your dumb ass whining about other people doing shit you don't like even though it doesn't affect you at all, or me simply pointing out you're a fuckin' Karen.

Trump Peeved He Couldn’t Give Himself the Medal of Honor: ‘They Wouldn’t Let Me Do It’ ...

OldMetalHead comments on Jul 25, 2022:

I really wish they had not dissuaded Trump from giving himself the CMOH. Maybe a draft dodger getting the MOH would have taken away some of his support with the military and veterans, but who knows. He did call KIA WWII vets losers after all.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 25, 2022:

Yeah, he prefers soldiers who didn't get captured.

No politics intended.

CourtJester comments on Jul 24, 2022:

Biden has a lower approval rating than Trump but got more votes than any president in American history???? C’mon man….

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 24, 2022:

That goes to show how fuckin' hated the idiot you support was. People showed up in record numbers to prevent that traitorous asshole from staying in office.

Lesbian in Georgia told by her church 'Christians must not interact with you' unless she 'repents' |...

ChestRockfield comments on Apr 24, 2021:

At least they're trying to be consistent; the bible's pretty clear about homosexuality. The more people that recognize that god does in fact "hate fags" as WBC so eloquently puts it, the more people will have to make a choice.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 24, 2022:

@OldMetalHead But they do not need to look at the Old Testament to support their claim that god hates homosexuality. He *still* condemns it in the New Testament. If you're still throwing hate at the gays across two books, you probably mean it... 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (you mentioned this in your reply as if it were part of the Old Testament) Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 1 Timothy 1:9-10 We also know that the law is made not for the righteous, but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine And to be honest, I think this is great. Pick a side. Your religion's holy book clearly says this perfectly natural thing is wrong and will send you to burn for all eternity in hell. So either you recognize that your holy book is stupid and wrong, or double down on the hatred. I can understand either of those positions because they're both logically consistent. It's the picking and choosing that makes people look extra stupid to me. I have more respect for the members of the WBC than I do average cafeteria Christians.

FrayedBear must be a member of the Russian Imperial Movement (RIM).

Flyingsaucesir comments on Jul 23, 2022:

I have gone 15 rounds with that nut job, metaphorically knocking his sorry dick in the dirt time and time again. I will give him this: he keeps on picking himself up and trying again. It got me thinking, why would anyone put their self through such a humiliating exercise? I conclude that he must be ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 24, 2022:

@FrayedBear Again, another assumption. Why would it have to be me that is making the enemy? Again, there may be a cost, but the potential for overall gain, so not necessarily cutting off one's nose, and especially not preventing it from growing. Check your assumptions. Also, nothing you said here contradicts or invalidates my claims. Thinking you could make a friend or would be cutting off your nose doesn't in any way change the fact that his laws of stupidity 3 & 5 are false.

FrayedBear must be a member of the Russian Imperial Movement (RIM).

Flyingsaucesir comments on Jul 23, 2022:

I have gone 15 rounds with that nut job, metaphorically knocking his sorry dick in the dirt time and time again. I will give him this: he keeps on picking himself up and trying again. It got me thinking, why would anyone put their self through such a humiliating exercise? I conclude that he must be ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 24, 2022:

@FrayedBear Why would you think that's a logical impossibility? You apparently have preconceived notions about what one must value in this world (or what constitutes intelligence) that are causing you to make conclusions that do not necessarily follow from the premises. There are plenty of things that are losses that are considered acceptable in pursuit of harming one's opposition or enemies. I could probably start typing examples of scenarios where it actually happens or could happen and not stop coming up with examples for hours. In my personal life, I routinely accept proselytizing materials from religious or conservative groups so that I can throw them directly into the trash. It is a cost of a little bit of my time to waste their money. Political parties and campaigns have been known to produce items and robocalls that deliberately mislead the other camp's voters in various ways. They are spending money and time to destroy the other side's chances of winning. And the amount of loss that would be acceptable scales to how much of the thing you are losing you have to spare (and also how highly you value what you could possibly gain from it). I hate the board members of my condo association so much it's hard to put into words. If I won the Powerball, and had hundreds of millions of dollars, I would spend millions of dollars to cost them hundreds of thousands and ruin their lives. Which also brings us back to the first point. Don't you see that a more intelligent person would be able to devise more and better ways to harm those individuals than a stupid person?

FrayedBear must be a member of the Russian Imperial Movement (RIM).

Flyingsaucesir comments on Jul 23, 2022:

I have gone 15 rounds with that nut job, metaphorically knocking his sorry dick in the dirt time and time again. I will give him this: he keeps on picking himself up and trying again. It got me thinking, why would anyone put their self through such a humiliating exercise? I conclude that he must be ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 24, 2022:

@FrayedBear Independent of everything else here, you should stop quoting Cipolla's laws of stupidity. Laws 3 & 5 are fundamentally untrue. 3. Causing losses to an individual or group whose ideology or goals run counter to yours, even while incurring what you deem acceptable loses for the amount of damage you've done them, is the exact opposite of stupid. 5. An extremely intelligent person who desires to cause harm is FAR more dangerous than a stupid person.

Maybe not ALL religions, but sure seems this way with the religion behind the ultra right in ...

skado comments on Jul 21, 2022:

Is it really religion that is the culprit here, or just human nature? Does it make sense to say a religion is judgmental and promotes hatred when its actual teachings are "Judge not, that ye be not judged." and "And now abide faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love." or...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 21, 2022:

@skado It's part of the picture. Just like an apologist to ignore all of the pertinent points and damning evidence and simply ask a question that makes it seem like my search words are the problem here...

Maybe not ALL religions, but sure seems this way with the religion behind the ultra right in ...

ChestRockfield comments on Jul 4, 2022:

A couple of the apologists here blocked me, so I can't tell if they're whining in the comments.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 21, 2022:

@Julie808 Not anymore...

Maybe not ALL religions, but sure seems this way with the religion behind the ultra right in ...

skado comments on Jul 21, 2022:

Is it really religion that is the culprit here, or just human nature? Does it make sense to say a religion is judgmental and promotes hatred when its actual teachings are "Judge not, that ye be not judged." and "And now abide faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love." or...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 21, 2022:

This is exactly why people call you an apologist: defending religion as this pure wonderful thing that only seems bad because of evil-natured people. If the text you're basing your religion and religious teachings on is so rife with evil shit you have no problem justifying the worst of human nature, how do you not see there's a problem with the source material? It must be your rose-colored glasses... This was just a section of the first page of a single Google search on just one topic of only one religion's hateful messaging. But I'm sure you assume the rest of all the other results are all about turning the other cheek and loving your neighbor, huh?

I am a little confused by this website. What is it supposed to be?

ChestRockfield comments on Jul 8, 2022:

Don't forget religious apologetics. You'll run into a decent amount of that here, too. It's probably best to just ignore those people because they essentially behave like trolls. They don't care if you prove them wrong or what you say, they'll just keep spewing the exact same shit over and over and ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 20, 2022:

@skado Everyone paying attention thinks you're one. That should be no surprise to you; we say it to your face. I don't remember the name of one of the other big ones as he blocked me a while ago.

Hi everyone, I'm brand new to the group and pretty new to the site.

ChestRockfield comments on Jul 13, 2022:

Thankfully for you, the apologists here all seem to be males.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 20, 2022:

@skado Not sure. Several of them block me so I can't call them on their bullshit.

If this is really what they think is the slippery slope, they really need to take a better look at ...

Sofabeast comments on Jul 20, 2022:

It is all subjective. We humans like rules, and we like to break them. For myself, as long as adults freely consent, then what problem is of mine? If I don't want to date another man, then that is my concern. If three men want to marry each other, then why should I find that evil? Anyway, I ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 20, 2022:

A lot of it is about money. If gay people can get married, their [multiple] spouses can collect benefits. Rich corporation owners are greedy enough to shit on a ton of people just to make an extra buck.

If this is really what they think is the slippery slope, they really need to take a better look at ...

Druvius comments on Jul 20, 2022:

Slippery slope arguments are usually bollocks. Like "If we allow marriage equality people will want to marry their pets."

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 20, 2022:

Some people *do* want to marry their pets, but gay marriage has nothing to do with it or a reason to legalize it. 😝

Laureate adjective deserving or having special recognition for achievement, as for poetry.

HippieChick58 comments on Jul 20, 2022:

It seems the nation and every state has a Poet Laureate. Why, I don't know. I am not a fan of poetry so I just don't get it.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 20, 2022:

I graduated with my state's poet laureate from last year. He came to a restaurant I worked at a long time ago with a bunch of our friends. He was the only one who didn't get a piece of prime rib, but that didn't stop him from eating that chunk of fat on the tail from everyone else's meal. He probably ate a pound of pure fat. None of that is important information, just thought it was funny.

I was watching a movie (that's about the sum total of my life) and this older woman was about to ...

KKGator comments on Jul 20, 2022:

I will only share my bed with an atheist.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 20, 2022:

How *you* doin'?

I was watching a movie (that's about the sum total of my life) and this older woman was about to ...

Sgt_Spanky comments on Jul 20, 2022:

About thirty years ago, I got the phone number of a very pretty young woman who worked behind the counter of a crystal store at the mall. We went out three times, each time things heated up a bit further. After that third time, she called me the next day and broke up with me saying: "*If I go out ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 20, 2022:

@Beowulfsfriend I accidentally slept with a Republican once.

Richard Rohr

ChestRockfield comments on Jul 18, 2022:

Weren't you just saying a couple days ago that Christianity can't be nailed down to a simple definition (e.g. one who believes in the divinity of Jesus Christ)? But now it's "such silliness" to call oneself a Christian unless they adhere to the lifestyle principles at the beginning? You and Rohr ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 20, 2022:

@skado 1. You don't need to be in a formal debate to expect others to adhere to logically sound arguments. That you think a formal debate is a prerequisite is rather telling, and sad. Being logically valid, sound, and consistent is something we should all strive for all of the time, and I'd bet my bottom dollar it's a principle that would more likely lead to better society than most things in most religious texts, and it is 100% in the helpful column when trying to determine truth (that's essentially the literal definition of soundness in argumentation). 2. No matter how you try to spin it, you were both making a logically fallacious statement, and I showed with a direct quote from you only a few days before that you were being inconsistent. If there's no authority as to what constitutes a Christian, than on what authority is he claiming (and you by extension with a repost) that it is silliness to claim to be one even though XYZ? 3. It's not the holding of one perspective while recognizing the existence of another I find dishonest, it's espousing contradictory beliefs a few days apart because they happen to fit your narrative for the day or the post that I find dishonest. 4. Check your list of logical fallacies. Calling one's character into question in and of itself does not make a fallacious Ad Hominem. One has to suggest that the character flaw is *the reason* their argument is wrong, AND the criticism isn't valid. "Consider, for example, former New York governor Eliot Spitzer, who was caught on a wiretap arranging to hire a prostitute for $4,300. Because this behavior ran counter to Spitzer’s anticorruption platform, its unveiling would prevent Spitzer from governing successfully; thus, criticizing this aspect of his character was relevant and fair. In an earlier scandal, in 1987, televangelist Jimmy Swaggart was seen at a motel with a prostitute. Because his behavior undercut his preaching and status as a Christian role model, a character attack based on this incident would have been spot-on." 5. Technically everything is "optional" for humans in relation to evolution. For one, we've been fighting against the evolutionary process and natural selection for quite a while with no end in sight, so doing something that [we think] may not be to the advantage of the species is both something we already do and something we can't predict the outcome of. Not only that, but the health of the species you keep referring to is not the basis for evolutionary progress if Dawkins is to be believed. So at this point you seem to be grasping at any reason to defend religion, all of which have basis in the past alone, none of which can guarantee promise for the future, and in stark contrast to your claim that you have no affection for it. Furthermore, you're ...

Richard Rohr

ChestRockfield comments on Jul 18, 2022:

Weren't you just saying a couple days ago that Christianity can't be nailed down to a simple definition (e.g. one who believes in the divinity of Jesus Christ)? But now it's "such silliness" to call oneself a Christian unless they adhere to the lifestyle principles at the beginning? You and Rohr ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 19, 2022:

@skado Dude what?! That was like two days ago. This is yet another example of your dishonesty. This was from "Religion asks too much of people like me." "No, in my view, that’s not right. There is no single 'right' definition of a 'Christian'. There are lots of folks who call themselves Christians, and who are welcomed into the church, but who have very different beliefs." So which is it? No single right definition, or silliness to call oneself a Christian if XYZ? I'm not trying to turn it into a contest, I'm saying that using logical fallacies is not intellectual or gentlemanly. If those things are really your goal, I suppose it's possible you are somehow unaware you are performing actions in direct contravention of them, though that seems unlikely considering when informed (on multiple occasions) you deflected instead of recognizing your error, apologizing, and offering a correction. Your other issue here is that even if it's one's intention to invoke Christianity for what [they think] is charitable, they still untimely contribute often in tangible, but definitely in non-tangible ways to Christian organizations or hierarchy (in the form of actual funds, or perpetuating the myth that religion is a force for good, or both). The fact of the matter is that people do good things or bad things independent of their religious affiliation (otherwise we wouldn't see countless children getting raped by clergy or atheists doing charitable things). So to claim there's two camps, and the better one is to support the continuation of "good" religion, while completely ignoring the reality that religion is no longer necessary, simply because you feel/think/believe/hope religion is still necessary, is yet another logical fallacy you attempt to trick people with (false dichotomy).

Fairly certain this is meant to go on the outside of the door, but still great.

Lilac-JadeCanada comments on Jul 18, 2022:

Yes, but could be a reminder for the residents too, when opening the door.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 18, 2022:

@Kynlei Cats part makes sense on both sides. Except for my door when I had Chandler. He was an everywhere cat.

Fairly certain this is meant to go on the outside of the door, but still great.

Lilac-JadeCanada comments on Jul 18, 2022:

Yes, but could be a reminder for the residents too, when opening the door.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 18, 2022:

Agreed, why would you tell someone that is outside not to the let the cops in?

It’s not really about whether you consider yourself an atheist or a theist.

ChestRockfield comments on Jul 13, 2022:

Aside from all of the usual objections to your nonsense, there's this: "...serves to enhance their reproductive fitness, or it would not exist..." Nothing about what we think happened in the past guarantees performance or results in the future. There are tons of things humans do, invented, use, ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 17, 2022:

@skado If your "not *always*" is only guaranteed on the technicality that at some point humans will be extinct, then that's a disingenuous use of the phrase, and part and parcel to your bait and switch argument style. No one here is stupid enough to think that the cessation of all human life *wouldn't* end human use of or need for religion. "I don't have a plan that I expect to be satisfied." "The religion I'm talking about does not require a belief in anything that is not supported by science. It's tolerant of that, but it isn't required. What's required is a universal narrative that gets all 8 billion of us on the same page before we collapse into Word War Last. The two human institutions that are best positioned to do that are science and religion. They need to learn how to co-operate. And there is a clear path available for that co-operation." But you clearly have a plan. "Stopping it altogether would be ten times harder than just modifying it." A completely ridiculous characterization of what you're suggesting. "Just modifying" in no way describes the complete abandonment of the supreme being, reward system, punishment system, and general reason to behave in any particular manner for a vast, vast majority of religious people around the world. To get people to do that is essentially the abandonment of their religion, and then you still have work to do on top of that. No reasonable person would say that would be easier than just an abandonment of religion. "Pew Research documented the fact that religion is growing as a percentage of world population - not diminishing." And I bet it's also true that the percentage of people that believe in god is growing as well then. But those things are both irrelevant and not at all surprising considering mankind seems to be regressing in a number of ways.

Starting today Americans can dial '988' to access suicide hotline, mental health resources

ChestRockfield comments on Jul 16, 2022:

Question is, do they make you identify yourself...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 17, 2022:

@rainmanjr What if they want help but are afraid an involuntary commitment would result in some really negative outcomes?

Starting today Americans can dial '988' to access suicide hotline, mental health resources

ChestRockfield comments on Jul 16, 2022:

Question is, do they make you identify yourself...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 16, 2022:

@rainmanjr Maybe they just don't want anyone to know and they'd rather suffer in silence.

It’s not really about whether you consider yourself an atheist or a theist.

ChestRockfield comments on Jul 13, 2022:

Aside from all of the usual objections to your nonsense, there's this: "...serves to enhance their reproductive fitness, or it would not exist..." Nothing about what we think happened in the past guarantees performance or results in the future. There are tons of things humans do, invented, use, ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 16, 2022:

@skado Where did I say you said "always"? You see, your explanation here perfectly exemplifies why people think you're an apologist. You're fully aware that several billion people would need to abandon a belief in a literal god and adopt a religious belief system that's completely foreign to them to satisfy this plan of yours instead of abandoning religion and adopting a philosophical belief system that seems to make infinitely more sense.

So, illogical atheist wants someone to do some Harry Potter God whiz bang to produce a volume of ...

Moravian comments on Jul 14, 2022:

Have you been sitting out in the sun ?

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 14, 2022:

Sometimes I wonder if he sundowns. He can be perfectly coherent and make logical points at times, and then others is no nonsensical I literally can't figure out what he's trying to say. It's so odd.

It’s not really about whether you consider yourself an atheist or a theist.

ChestRockfield comments on Jul 13, 2022:

Aside from all of the usual objections to your nonsense, there's this: "...serves to enhance their reproductive fitness, or it would not exist..." Nothing about what we think happened in the past guarantees performance or results in the future. There are tons of things humans do, invented, use, ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 13, 2022:

@skado "Tell me something - either a physical or behavioral trait - that has occurred in every time period and in every location where Homo sapiens populations have existed, that does not or did not, either directly or indirectly enhance the reproductive fitness of either individuals or groups." I never made the claim that such a thing existed. "It's true that what did at one time might not always. I haven't claimed otherwise." Yes you have. Repeatedly. You have made the claim that we should not be so quick to dispense with religion because it was necessary and likely or definitely will continue to be in the future. I'm not going to dig through a mountain of mind-numbingly repetitive posts to find examples. Everyone that's been here for a while knows you have, and you have a track record of being disingenuous in your posts and repossess, so I don't think I'll actually get anywhere with you. I mostly post on your stupid shit as a public service for any new members. "if you claim a given evolutionary mechanism is no longer fitness enhancing, you first have to demonstrate that it ever was" No. I don't. I'm not making assertive claims. That's your shtick. I'm simply stating that even if it was beneficial before doesn't mean it still is or will be in the future. There are countless examples to support this. The appendix is a good one. Perhaps the tailbone? Sizes and shapes of appendages, beaks, fur, feathers, literally most things that evolved and were beneficial were no longer beneficial for something in the evolutionary chain. Your big fat ridiculous hard on for religion ignores the fact that religion could very well already be one of those things and certainly could be in the future if not already.

It’s not really about whether you consider yourself an atheist or a theist.

ChestRockfield comments on Jul 13, 2022:

Aside from all of the usual objections to your nonsense, there's this: "...serves to enhance their reproductive fitness, or it would not exist..." Nothing about what we think happened in the past guarantees performance or results in the future. There are tons of things humans do, invented, use, ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 13, 2022:

@skado Whether or not it exists because it helped mankind is independent from your claim that something needs to serve to enhance reproductive fitness, or it would not exist. It also doesn't follow logically that something that *did* enhance reproductive fitness will *continue to* enhance reproductive fitness (I direct your attention to moths for some proof).

For when someone tells you 'but they didn't have rifles that could shoot so many bullets so quickly ...

ChestRockfield comments on Jul 9, 2022:

Yes, I believe 20 rounds in 27 seconds and then a reload of ammo, then 10 more shots in 14 seconds, then an air reload via 1,500 pumps on a hand pump is about the same speed and deadliness as 100 rounds in one minute forty seconds with a 5 second reload time.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 13, 2022:

@Captain_Feelgood Your last response was just calling me a Troll. I knew you had no real response; typical Republican.

Medical ethical questions arising from political bans on abortion Post by Rebecca Solnit ...

Flyingsaucesir comments on Jul 7, 2022:

She's asking the sanctimonious "pro-life" pricks to actually think, to consider a host of real possibilities. This is undoubtedly too much for their poor brains.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 13, 2022:

@nicestuff If I can have a conversation with a reasonable person, I can generally lead them to realizing that the "some restrictions" and "safe legal and rare" positions are illogical and indefensible. Maybe I should work on making it as concise as possible just in case, but it looks like we're going to go to a complete ban in better than half the states and probably a sizable majority of the area of the country, so I don't know how valuable a discussion on the nuances of abortion restrictions would be. I hope women just take it all. Single issue vote until they hold every public office and then appoint every single position. Until then, I already bought some morning after pills which I'm sure will be illegal soon, and I'm trying to recruit women to procure abortion pills for me at my expense so that I'll be able to help as many women as I can. Edited for typo

Agnosticism is another way to prove the statement illogical.

ChestRockfield comments on Jul 13, 2022:

You're conflating 'knowledge' and ' knowledge of'. It is necessarily true that I must have knowledge of the statement "Life begins at conception" in order to formulate a belief on whether that statement is true. But all that is independent of having knowledge or belief of when life begins. It's ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 13, 2022:

@Word So you *do* understand. Why did you get it all wrong in the OP?

Medical ethical questions arising from political bans on abortion Post by Rebecca Solnit ...

Flyingsaucesir comments on Jul 7, 2022:

She's asking the sanctimonious "pro-life" pricks to actually think, to consider a host of real possibilities. This is undoubtedly too much for their poor brains.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 12, 2022:

@Flyingsaucesir @nicestuff I honestly don't understand that middle ground. If it's okay to kill it at 2 months or 5 months, why not 7? If it's okay to increase the time based on *how* the woman got pregnant, why can't the woman *herself* decide if her circumstances warrant a time extension? Why should people who don't have to suffer a pregnancy or sacrifice their body, wants, needs, and financials for it have more say over the obviously arbitrary timeline than she does? Restrictions don't make sense. Nobody *wants* a late term abortion. If they're seeking one, it's probably for a really good reason. And even the one in a million times it may not be (by who's opinion by the way), it's not worth fucking over all the 999,999 other women to prevent it. The fact of the matter is any restriction placed on abortion will get abused by pro-lifers to take access away from a woman who needs it via TRAP laws or those fake abortion clinics that trick young girls.

Medical ethical questions arising from political bans on abortion Post by Rebecca Solnit ...

FreethoughtKaty comments on Jul 7, 2022:

Aidaccess.org mails abortion pills to women anywhere in the world, regardless of local laws. I used them when I lived in Thailand and couldn’t get a Chinese visa straight away and didn’t want to fly to another continent. I saw the founder on Rachel Maddow I think a week ago and 9mg I love that ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 12, 2022:

She is a hero.

[onlysky.

Flyingsaucesir comments on Jul 7, 2022:

This story was posted by @Xenoview yesterday. (Not that there is any harm in posting it again.) Very sad. Some people are too stupid to have children.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 12, 2022:

Well, they don't *have* children. 😝

Is being gay natural?? poll up so vote!!

KateOahu comments on Jul 11, 2022:

Neither. It is genetic. And none of my business.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 12, 2022:

@MsKathleen How so?

Is being gay natural?? poll up so vote!!

BitFlipper comments on Jul 12, 2022:

Looks like a troll to me. But I'll play.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 12, 2022:

Bait with a ridiculous loaded question, and turn off the app until you're a level 5. I see you playa.

Is being gay natural?? poll up so vote!!

BD66 comments on Jul 11, 2022:

Jason Collins and Jarron Collins are identical twins. They have exactly the same genetic makeup. Jason Collins is gay. Jarron Collins is straight. Therefore we cannot conclude that being gay or being straight is 100% genetic. It's a function of both genetics and environment.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 12, 2022:

Can I ask what you mean by 'environment' in this context?

Is being gay natural?? poll up so vote!!

phxbillcee comments on Jul 11, 2022:

Homosexuality, & other variations, are found in many different animal species, including ours. Can't get more "natural" than that. There is a spectrum, especially among humans, of where one falls sexually/gender-wise (I doubt it's a simple bell-curve, but it won't be a strictly either/or). Also, how...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 12, 2022:

@MsKathleen Not interchangeable. You have a square/ rectangle situation. Everything that's genetic is natural, but not everything that's natural is genetic.

Is being gay natural?? poll up so vote!!

KateOahu comments on Jul 11, 2022:

Neither. It is genetic. And none of my business.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 12, 2022:

@MsKathleen 69% of Americans wear corrective lenses, so colloquially, we think not wearing man-made lenses is unnatural? I suppose that means people think eating organic vegetables is unnatural, but fast food, Cheetos, and Coke are totally natural? Shall I start on colors of skin that are not the "majority norm" being unnatural? They might call it unusual or out of the ordinary, but I think it's a hopefully small, bigoted section of society that would use the word 'unnatural'.

Is being gay natural?? poll up so vote!!

KateOahu comments on Jul 11, 2022:

Neither. It is genetic. And none of my business.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 11, 2022:

@MsKathleen Colloquially (or really any other way), 'natural' means occurring in nature, not man-made or synthesized. If something occurs as a result of genetics, I can't think of a scenario in which you *wouldn't* classify that as natural save for an as of yet undefined process in which humans could induce genetic mutations that would *cause* homosexuality, but even then it would just be a human recreation of an already natural process. (That would be like saying that tomatoes grown in your hydroponic garden weren't natural because you planted them and tended them.)

Is being gay natural?? poll up so vote!!

KateOahu comments on Jul 11, 2022:

Neither. It is genetic. And none of my business.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 11, 2022:

@MsKathleen I didn't say the word "unnatural"...

Is being gay natural?? poll up so vote!!

KateOahu comments on Jul 11, 2022:

Neither. It is genetic. And none of my business.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 11, 2022:

Isn't that which is determined by genetics by definition natural?

More disappointed by Biden all the time.

CourtJester comments on Jul 10, 2022:

I love that democrats are stating their disapproval of Biden’s slack jawed, booger eating, idiot capabilities.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 11, 2022:

And they'd all still take him over the piece of shit traitor your party loves. That says a lot.

Keanu Reeves says he is a lover, not a fighter.

ChestRockfield comments on Jul 10, 2022:

Are you thinking of contronym maybe?

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 10, 2022:

@Castlepaloma Speaking strictly about this question you posed, "Is the word lover an oxymoron for fighter" one word can't be an oxymoron, and it makes even less sense to say a single word is an oxymoron *for* another single word. Words or even phrases aren't oxymorons *for* other words or phrases. They are either oxymorons because they contain seemingly contradictory words, or they are not. Again, I think you're thinking of contronym.

2 in one meme

ChestRockfield comments on Jul 9, 2022:

Convicted murderer who escaped 3 weeks ago was killed by police hours after he was ID'd as suspect in killing of family of 5 with their own guns https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/03/us/gonzalo-lopez-texas-manhunt/index.html ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 10, 2022:

@Tejas That's even more weird. No clue.

For when someone tells you 'but they didn't have rifles that could shoot so many bullets so quickly ...

ChestRockfield comments on Jul 9, 2022:

Yes, I believe 20 rounds in 27 seconds and then a reload of ammo, then 10 more shots in 14 seconds, then an air reload via 1,500 pumps on a hand pump is about the same speed and deadliness as 100 rounds in one minute forty seconds with a 5 second reload time.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 10, 2022:

@Captain_Feelgood The intention of the left's argument is that the Second Amendment shouldn't cover weapons like the AR-15 because they are so much more proficient tools for mass murder than anything the founding fathers had ever seen or likely could imagine (otherwise they'd have built them). I mean, it was another 80+ years before the gatling gun was even invented, so they have a reasonable point. I assume your intention of this post and video is to combat that assertion by the left because you specifically stated this could be a response to the very claim I outlined above by stating, "For when someone tells you 'but they didn't have rifles that could shoot so many bullets so quickly back then', you can show them this video." I'm simply saying that while it is true the air rifle featured in the video is impressive, especially for the time period, and could shoot extremely quickly (only a few rounds slower per 30 seconds than a quick semi-auto from today) it's not really comparable in many other ways that are the essence of why new guns are so much different than what the founding fathers knew about. 1,500 pumps on a hand pump would take a ridiculous amount of time. Even if you averaged one per second (which would be hard to maintain) it would take 25 minutes to reload the air chamber. I'm not trying to be an asshole here. I'm making a legitimate point. Do you have an actual response for it other than just calling me a troll?

2 in one meme

ChestRockfield comments on Jul 9, 2022:

Convicted murderer who escaped 3 weeks ago was killed by police hours after he was ID'd as suspect in killing of family of 5 with their own guns https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/03/us/gonzalo-lopez-texas-manhunt/index.html ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 10, 2022:

@Tejas Then I have no clue. This post showed up in my feed, I thought it was stupid, so I posted a reply.

Keanu Reeves says he is a lover, not a fighter.

ChestRockfield comments on Jul 10, 2022:

Are you thinking of contronym maybe?

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 10, 2022:

@Castlepaloma An oxymoron has to be at least two words... https://prowritingaid.com/oxymoron-examples

2 in one meme

ChestRockfield comments on Jul 9, 2022:

Convicted murderer who escaped 3 weeks ago was killed by police hours after he was ID'd as suspect in killing of family of 5 with their own guns https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/03/us/gonzalo-lopez-texas-manhunt/index.html ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 10, 2022:

@Tejas I thought you blocked me. I don't know how I saw this in the first place to even reply...

For when someone tells you 'but they didn't have rifles that could shoot so many bullets so quickly ...

ChestRockfield comments on Jul 9, 2022:

Yes, I believe 20 rounds in 27 seconds and then a reload of ammo, then 10 more shots in 14 seconds, then an air reload via 1,500 pumps on a hand pump is about the same speed and deadliness as 100 rounds in one minute forty seconds with a 5 second reload time.

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 10, 2022:

@Captain_Feelgood I'm not saying anything untrue, nor will I fail to support my claim. Trolls are people who say flagrantly nonsensical things and when you spend time debunking them, they just move on to say more nonsensical shit to have you chasing your tail. The fact of the matter is that you're trying to debunk the claim that old weapons are disimilar enough from new weapons that the 2nd Amendment shouldn't cover them with a video about a rapid fire air rifle. My counterpoint is that the air rifle is quick, but only for a very limited number of shots. I doubt you actually believe these two weapons are at all comparable.

Is this just a dating website?

ChestRockfield comments on Jul 8, 2022:

There is no dating aspect to this website. It's basically just Facebook for Atheists. And just like Facebook, we still have religious apologists, we have extreme views on politics, Trumpers, anti-vaxxers, pretty much everything that makes Facebook awful except Mark Zuckerberg and most/all of your ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 9, 2022:

@jeffyuu Dude, I'm not trying to argue with you. I don't care if you believe me or not. I'm telling you the based on the over four and a half years experience I have on this site that it's not a dating site. You can think whatever you'd like, but I don't know why you'd ask the community then argue with them like you know better.

Is this just a dating website?

ChestRockfield comments on Jul 8, 2022:

There is no dating aspect to this website. It's basically just Facebook for Atheists. And just like Facebook, we still have religious apologists, we have extreme views on politics, Trumpers, anti-vaxxers, pretty much everything that makes Facebook awful except Mark Zuckerberg and most/all of your ...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 9, 2022:

@jeffyuu Oh, I know what it says... I'm here as a result of my coworkers making me a profile because they wanted to find me a gf that wasn't religious. None of us knew then that that's not what goes on here. Sure, you might have an occasional couple form, but that can happen anywhere. If a guy asks a woman out in line at the dry cleaners does that make it a singles bar?

The fragile, echo-chamber lover @William_Mary blocked me from his group because he couldn't handle ...

racocn8 comments on Jul 8, 2022:

I got blocked a long time ago and I don't miss that shit-head one bit. Blaming the Democratic Party is absurd. That would be the last on a long list of others: The FBI, Secret Service, NSA, CIA, DIA, the Pentagon and Natl Guard, DC Mayor and police, DOJ, RNC, Capitol Police, GQP Congressmen, and...

ChestRockfield replies on Jul 8, 2022:

Yeah, I thought it was one of the most ridiculous fuckin' things I've heard from him, and he says some really stupid shit.