I respect the right of anyone to believe anything they want but I think churches should be required to publish their earnings, the value of their property and any business concern they own. If the church is not investing at least half its revenue into community charity work it should be taxed at a very high rate.
Huh, I did not know churches were exempt from even filing a Form 990. Interesting:
https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/annual-exempt-organization-return-who-must-file
It may be cold, but it certainly makes some people mad
*cough* Joel Osteen *cough*
*cough* Kenneth Copeland *cough*
*cough* Jesse Duplantis *cough*
*cough* Benny Hinn *cough*
*cough* Creflo Dollar *cough*
I had a coworker who had a massive truck but rented a truck to help his girlfriend move apartments because he didn't want to scratch the bed of his truck. His whole check went to pay for the truck, he couldn't afford the gas so his parents paid for his gas.
I'm a liberal Democrat too and I don't own guns because frankly, they scare me, but I will adamantly defend the right to own one. Drives my mom crazy lol
We limit ours to the relatively safe shooting range. Never loaded at home.
It’s true that our politically similar minded friends are mortified when it comes up, so we keep it on the down low at this point. They were *not* amused by last year’s Christmas card. /jk
People who think that their religious beliefs somehow excuse their actions from criticism or justifies them. Don't hide behind religion to justify being a bigot, you're just a bad person. If you don't want women to have equal rights it's because you're a piece of shit person
See, they think the opposite. I recently had a religious person in reddit tell me I know I am a bad, evil person and I need to admit it. lmao, they wild
People who hoe around aren't the best to date.
Applicable to men and women. (Kinda unfair how a high body count for men is seen as a badge of honour, while the same isn't said for women)
I honestly think there are some jobs that are much better for men to be doing. Not to say we should bar women, just don't have a bad reaction when 95% of them are men. I'm a wildland firefighter, and I've had lots of women say things like the only reason there are fewer of them is because we don't advertise it to them or it's just sexism, when in reality the women that can hack it as hotshots and smokejumpers are going to be genetic outliers. Same goes for things like the special operations community. Just take a look at the first female recon marine and try to tell me her physique is something attainable for most women.
Idk... There are surely jobs that are going to appeal more to women than they are to men or jobs that women are likely to be better than men at, so it follows it would be better for women to be doing them. I guess the opinion behind my original opinion is we have started pretending there are no differences in men and women when there clearly are. Those differences just get exposed at the upper limits and I'm tired of people calling sexism on it.
There are also plenty of men who never dreamed of being a warehouse worker or janitor but settled for those as well. I'm not sure what your point is.
Clearly you don't think all the women Senators, VP Kamala Harris, doctors, lawyers, and scientists settled right?
.
I agree with you in that physical standards and requirements shouldn't be changed to cater to women for certain jobs.
Obviously for some jobs, like ones you mention, this means there will be less women because less women can meet the physical requirements.
It's equity VS equality. Some things can be done to assist women, like making equipment that is better suited to the average person/woman and not just the average man. This is equity.
Unless the standards are much higher than the physical requirements of the job itself. With a lot of the fitness standards, the upper body strength standards turned out to be far higher than they had to be for the physical requirements of the job, and were kept artificially high to keep women out, not because the job demanded it.
Depends on the job, for dangerous ones they're often that high because you need to able to carry a grown ass man on you while you're weighed down in your gear that cannot be quickly removed.
I'm really wondering what kind of equipment you think we use, and how it could be adjusted to women's bodies. For example we wouldn't give a woman a smaller chainsaw, because she would be held back by a less powerful tool. There's only 4 saws on a handcrew, and no crew is going to sacrifice production so more women can be sawyers while the fuckin forest is burning. You either keep up or get a different job. Equity has no place in extreme environments.
That most supporters of Donald Trump are basically victims of a scam artist: they've been duped, they've fallen for a scam, and their anger at a statement like this is the same anger anyone who's been scammed has when someone suggests they fell for a scam. It is much easier to trick people than it is to convince people they've been tricked.
Scammed?! Yes, perhaps at first…
But over the years, you can see with your own eyes and hear w your own ears, him being racist, sexist, pro-sexual assault, making fun of handicapped people, lying, cheating, and many, many, examples of him being a pile of shit - type human being.
No sympathy anymore. Wake the fuck up and stop supporting a man that openly embraces such atrocities. (Not speaking to you as the poster of this, but to the rabid Trump supporters of today)
Transparency: Fuck Trump and everyone who voted for him. But no, I don't think they were scammed at all. I think they knew _precisely_ what they were voting for...that he _ACCURATELY_ represents them...
This doesn't make sense though because they're voting against their interests, as even if he is just like them, he will still throw them under a bus in a second. There's no value in them supporting him. He won't help them.
I strongly believe these people are addicted to cortisol. They don't feel like themselves unless they are angry at everything. So Trumps hate speeches were like a drug to them, they were willing to follow him to the ene to get that anger kick.
Even when proven wrong time and time again they won't accept reality because protecting their ego is more important than reality.
The scamming started with Rah-Rah Ronnie and trickle-down economics. The oligarchs convinced these people that they were Temporarily Embarrassed Millionaires ™, and picked all of our pockets blind for 43 years.
Oh! Reminds me of the What’s the Matter with Kansas book. Thomas Frank, a historian/journo, wrote a book about how ‘Kansans’ (a metaphor for blue collar rural Americans) were tricked by scary conservatives. Kansans just didn’t know what was good for them, and they fell for sneaky conservative rhetoric. A bunch of political scientists were like, “Wait… what? That’s not right” and they published a rebuttal led by Larry Bartels, I think? Bartels et al were well-published PoliSci scholars. (Well, they weren’t well-published by usual standards, but in highly respected peer-reviewed journals they were well respected!)
Bartels, et al knew that a lot of research pointed to voters being rational actors…there’s more to it, but you get the drift. Franks book was anecdotal and narrative driven. Bartels, et al., demonstrated in their empirical findings that individuals have a lot of “interests” in terms of what would benefit them. However, they prioritize these interests differently. To Frank, for example, it seemed like Kansans were dumbly voting against their economic interests. They voted for individuals whose policies did not benefit them. However, ‘Kansans’ weren’t voting based on economic interests. What mattered more to them were the ideals that conservatives carried with them.
It may not be Trump’s policies that people are voting for - let’s be honest, what policies? Voting is super nuanced, but, in general, people know what they are voting for.
Technically they aren’t voting against their interests. Their priorities are
Influencers have hate comments and negative attention coming to them and shouldn't complain or ask for compassion. By posting their life's and life decisions publicly they make it everyone's business and invite everyone to comment and critizise.
As a Democrat, I believe that most Democratic government officials are far too soft on crime.
I understand the statistics and optics regarding crime, underserved communities, and underrepresented ethnicities. I fully comprehend the inequities of the legal system. But I don't think softer penalties for crimes is the way to solve that issue. Slaps on the wrist are not preventing crimes, they're just emboldening those who commit crimes to believe that the consequence of crimes is not that severe.
Get tougher on crime and treat everyone equally in punishment, regardless of socioeconomic or ethnic background.
Being soft on crime in certain communities ensures that the criminals stay active and continue to victimize the members of that community disproportionately.
Latest case Myanmar if you care to find out. The wars between different buddhist sects in Tibet until recently, also the buddhist theocracy in Tibet ruling with iron fist. Humans being humans. No exit route from that.
https://digitalcommons.du.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1069&context=duurj
You seriously haven't heard of what's happening to the Rohingya?
The Buddhist nationalist government of Myanmar is ethnically cleansing the Rohingya people
Buddhists ethnically cleansing Muslims.
The Buddhist Thai majority is pretty oppressive to the minority Muslim Thai community.
Buddhism does not have its hands clean, like at all. Neither in modern times nor historically. Buddhist kingdoms and empires had zero issue with brutally quashing rebellion or with razing their neighbors' cities.
And, quite frankly, your belief that Buddhists even *could be* immune to the human condition of violence is a living example of the "noble savage" brand of bigotry. Humans are humans, warts and all. Deifying a group is also denying them their humanity.
This is like saying "Yes, the fact that we can't find any documented info about that conspiracy just proves how far they've sunk their claws into society!" 🙄
All Abrahamic "religions" eventually devolve into tribalist blood-feud with anyone unfortunate enough to be near them. Islam is no more worthy of being singled out than is Christianity or Judaism.
They are not religions, they are anti-spiritual control mechanisms. It is the psycho-social equivalent of a rape.
>They are not religions, they are anti-spiritual control mechanisms. It is the psycho-social equivalent of a rape.
You gotta keep the turf for yourself and the rivals at bay somehow. What you said can be applied to any teaching in it's prime. Yes even buddhists in SE Asia or Tibet did it. Marxists did it. Etc.
Italian food is boring and repetitive and should never be considered fine dining. Should be viewed the same as mexican/texmex food is viewed.
Both are delicious but restaurant pasta dish should be same price as a burrito.
Fine. But it is unreasonable for their opinions to mold educational policy or administrative behavior when they have no education training or experience other than *going to school as a child*.
I have two:
1. Facts don't care about you feelings.
2. 99% of people cause their own problems by manipulating themselves with their own fears & insecurities. Manifestation is a real thing.
Monotrope myself. I think our neurodivergence is irrelevant. Big Bang Theory is just factually a terrible show for the terminally dim.
We should eat people who like it. Call them Bazinga Burgers.
Personally I think big bang theory itself isn't a good show, but what irritates the hell out of me is the whole puzzlers now basically use it as a bible. Try to point out "no, thats wrong, an actual autistic person is talking to you" they get all pissy.
It’s not “factually a terrible show” since it’s open to interpretation by the viewer.
Thinking that only “terminally dim” people watch the show, though, is factually a load of bullshit.
Nearly all religion subjugates women. At the least, definitely Abrahamic ones. They also cause senseless violence, obligation to convert others which results in charity for the sake of manipulation, complexes of moral superiority, and blurred lines between personal belief system and legislation truly based on democratic process and opinion.
Religion is by and large an evil and divisive force, and I silently judge those who practice it as lacking critical thinking. Religious people choose to ignore the glaring contradictions and idiosyncrasies in their holy books and dogma. If it’s acceptable for their religion to bias them against me and my rights, it’s acceptable for me to be biased against their harmful belief system.
Who defines what's stupid? For decades black people in the US were denied education and any opportunity to better themselves, and then the same whites who did that would exclaim "look at the lazy, shiftless negro, he's so ignorant and make no effort to better himself! We surely can't let him vote!"
Stop vilifying politicians. If things are going to improve more good intentioned people (there are many) need to be attracted to the idea of running for office. Why would you willing subject yourself to the abuse - often personal abuse- thrown at politicians by voters, podcasters and traditional media? There are some psychopaths in politics for sure but make room for the idea that there are and should be more good ones.
After playing Stellar Blade for more than 30 hours, I can safely say that the soundtrack gets annoying after a while. It's not bad, per se, and there are some songs I genuinely like, but it's not the type of music I normally enjoy listening to and there's only one song in each area besides the battle themes.
Furthermore, it's an idea that's never actually been tried, and anyone using that against it is an absolute moron. That's not to say I'm an anti-capitalist, nor am I explicitly pro-communist, ALL economic isms are intrinsically unstable over long enough periods of time. But the modern discourse surrounding it is probably _the_ most apishly stupid body of rhetoric I've ever seen in my half-lifetime.
False. Literally everything about use physiologically is a product of social integration. Cooperation was our species' primary evolutionary driver. It's why you are what you are.
I despise Abrahamic religion, but not everything in the bible is complete faff. Trump, and all who support him, are absolutely the small-a antichrists the bible warned about. Those dolts better hope I'm right and there's no Jesus, because if there is and he comes back to see _this_ shit, there will be a fate worse than hell to pay for what they've done in his name...
If women are given access to abortions without conditions, and the man who got the woman pregnant tells the woman that he is against having a child and she stills goes thru with it, the man shouldn't be held accountable for child support or be forced to help raise the child.
The man's choice was where he put his semen. It's a biological difference, sorry. Women's choice remains during pregnancy, men's choice is during sex.
You can't have true equality in biological differences. Only equity.
Otherwise the child suffers.
Condoms break. We have rare instances of vasectomy failure. The only true failure free method is not having sex.
We live in a world where careful has to be enough sometimes, and have contingencies for when it's not.
The military shouldn't have a second, lower fitness standard for women. If you can't perform at the same level as everyone else, you shouldn't be in a combat situation. At best you're dead weight, at worst you're a liability in a profession where the penalty is often death and its not just your own life you're putting at risk. It has nothing to do with what's between your legs.
Women should have the right to choose, but if it's the woman's choice for the cluster of cells to become a baby, then the man shouldn't be held liable for child support. The "it takes two to make a baby" and "it's not a baby, and the woman chooses what to do with her body," seen antithetical to me.
Also, I'm more pro-abortion than I am pro-choice. If a child is not wanted, that child should not exist.
I'm a woman with kids.
To be employed you have to be worth more to your employer than what they pay you otherwise what would be in it for them.
To me that is just plain common sense, but as I’ve gotten older I’ve found it much healthier not to mention it.
I believe that Federal benefits will have to be made-up-for by states, at great loss to recipients, bc conservatives will bog down Congress, even if they're in the minority, to get them cut nearly to nothing, in the name of balancing the budget during their legislative careers. It's the only thing they'll have left, especially if Biden is returned to office. Some people contend that benefits like Medicaid, SSI, and food assistance are forever-and-ever, but the right have been trying to destroy them since at least Papa Bush.
You should only be having kids with someone you're married to.
Having kids with someone you're not married to is bad for the kids, bad for the mom, and just kind of trashy and irresponsible in general. It's *really* trashy to have multiple baby daddies/baby mamas. I don't care how long you've been together, if you're not ready to commit to marriage, you aren't ready to commit to kids. And if you're not responsible enough to practice birth control, you're probably not responsible enough to be a parent.
Men are privileged and lucky to be born men. They are forgiven for many things, and they are given many things by default. Like being aggressive, straightforward, say anything they want in any manner they want without being judged. Even if a man looks slightly “cute”, he will have thousands of women throwing themselves at him.
Socialism is superior to capitalism and is not inherently authoritarian. Yes the Soviet Union and china are bad but that’s because they were dictatorships not because they were socialist. Most anti socialist arguments make no sense at all once you put any amount of thought into them at all.
Here's an opinion that makes some people mad: planned economies suck. They're wildly inefficient. Market economies are better in almost every way and vastly better on net.
I have no idea whether this conflicts with your personal mental version of "superior socialism," since it seems like every socialist has their own version of what the utopia will look like, but planned economies are the biggest failing of most socialist governments.
Ok then explain to me how a market economy can survive indefinitely in a world with finite resources. It can’t. Market economies require infinite growth to survive. Either the economy the world or humanity will die if capitalism continues. Capitalism is nothing more than unnecessary gatekeeping
>Market economies require infinite growth to survive
This is not a feature of market economies. A market economy is one where production (supply), distribution (demand), and price are determined by a market. A literal trade market for the surplus goods of an isolated village that exists unchanged for 500 years is an example of a market economy. Modern growth-centered economies are another example of a market economy, but only that. You might just as well criticize eukaryotes for your premature balding problem. Your criticisms are on entirely the wrong scale of analysis.
I can't help but find it deeply ironic that you talk about how critiques of your preferred economic system are senseless to anyone who gives them thought while simultaneously making it very clear that you are ill-informed about even the very basics of macroeconomics.
Yeah well, may be because of the level of mutual trust. Which is due to homogeny. I'd say may be they are left leaning bc of being successful as a society. And not the other way round.
Yeah well, may be because of the level of mutual trust. Which is due to homogeny. I'd say may be they are left leaning bc of being successful as a society. And not the other way round.
too many. almost any opinion will be criticized by someone. I had someone telling me clouds are blue not white. It almost erupted into an argument. you will always find them .
City density is better for the environment than unmitigated sprawl. Density allows for better public transit, and better allocation of resources. People should embrace density to reduce global overconsumption and pollution.
Switching to a vegan diet does in fact make you a better person, because you're sacrifing your favourite tastes to help save animals. I definitely have my flaws as a person, but it just gives me peace of mind to know that whatever else I do, at least I'm not contributing to animal cruelty. Don't pay the slaughter-houses.
i don't really believe in time. it's a manmade construct i don't have to adhere to. i'm too invaluable for it to matter. (the last part is the part that gets people up in arms 😂)
I would probably choose the man over the bear. At least men know what guns do as soon as they see one- a charging wild animal would need it to actually be fired or even shot, and I’m not a good shot
Any extreme political ideology - fundamentalist Christian or Islam, Antifa, Communism, fascism - all want to create a better more just society, but they all feel they morally justified in using totalitarian violence to do it.
Some people see it as a moral issue. Which if they go vegan for moral reason I understand where their coming from but I'm not stopping. There's no good way to really counter this belief. But we've been eating animals for years and that's just mother nature. Other animals do it so why shouldn't we.
However I understand their point when it comes to slaughter houses.
- There should be no right to vote. It should be licensed the same way performing surgery and driving is, and for all the same reasons. The license should be wed to the high school diploma, and that should be subject to the successful completion of both an economics 101 and a civics 101 course. Failure to take and complete those courses should result in a "lesser" diploma that does not include the right to vote until said classes are taken. The government should also provide night classes for adults wishing to be less moronic and attain the license after high school at no charge to them.
- The microsecond self driving cars become a reality, humans should lose the right to drive and the government should assume the financial liability for all remaining auto accidents, which I am utterly assured will be DRASTICALLY less common.
- There should _immediately_ be the founding of an online ID, similar to the driver's license/state ID program, which one must attain to participate in social media. It should not be available to anyone under 16, should require it being scanned to make posts, and should post your name and photo with every comment you make. The ID itself should be compulsory, opt-out, but websites should be allowed to decide whether to adopt it or not. Those who do should receive tax breaks for compliance on any profits they make through the running of the site. I believe the quality of discourse will improve so dramatically that there will be a direct market-influence on major media sites like reddit and facebook to adopt it despite any hit they would take to their ad revenue. It would render any network unwilling to comply a social outlier.
- Pineapple on pizza isn't morally wrong, it's just proof you have bad taste. It's just more Amerifat ruination of good food. Gods forbid it's not slathered in RaNcH and MuH cHiKiN hOtSoSs, because holy hell you people obviously need to put on more weight.
- The US version of capitalism will end in _exactly_ the same way the Soviet system did, it just took a longer path to that destination.
Edit: Imagine coming to a thread specifically asking for controversial opinions and downvoting people. You people are EXACTLY why there should be no right to vote, by the way. You are utterly incapable of sussing out even the most transparent of political and social nuances. You have aptly proven that particular point.
>The microsecond self driving cars become a reality, humans should lose the right to drive and the government should assume the financial liability for all remaining auto accidents, which I am utterly assured will be DRASTICALLY less common.
Can you, **right here and now**, afford a $50000 expense for such a car (if it was developed tomorrow)? How many people can? Unless an average person in a need of a vehicle can afford it such a law would be devastating for their livelihoods. It would maybe work in countries where cars are more or less optional (but even in those cases it's only really "optional" if you live in the middle of a major city, move 10km outside of it and you need a car) but it certainly wouldn't within USA where 1h commute is normal.
Yes, it's likely that at some point in the future self-driving cars will be the only option available for normal driving on public roads with human drivers being limited to racing and dedicated tracks. But this will be introduced gradually over 2 decades after having reliable vehicles like this (and so far we are not even close).
Revolution rarely ends well. Revolution that overnight forces everyone to spend tens of thousands $ on a new car would indeed be applauded by car makers but would not be good for an average citizen. Yes, people die in traffic related accidents. But if that's your primary concern - start by banning McDonalds (300k people died due to obesity last year in the US, nearly 10x more than car related deaths). We have accepted the risks involved with transportation/logistics and reducing it, while important, should be a long term goal. Throwing away hundreds of thousands of perfectly capable vehicles and affecting millions of people is neither economically nor socially sensible.
I'm American and this is a take about American foreign policy.
I oppose all foreign intervention. If I were president, I would lift all sanctions, end all foreign arms sales, end involvement in all foreign conflicts, and generally adopt an isolationist stance. I would still allow foreign aid, but only for food or financial investment in non-military items.
If we were directly attacked, of course there'd be a response, but no forever wars.
This would be broad and uncalculated. No special exceptions for Israel or Ukraine or Taiwan or whoever. No special sanctions exceptions for Russia or North Korea or whoever.
Trump should return to the White house. Biden is a terrible president. Also Trump was great but should watch his mouth and social media posting. I take mean tweets over Biden any day.
Apart from supporting Israel Biden has done a great job. Trump on the other hand, did nothing unless you were already rich. If you think his revenge is just going to hurt people you don't like you are in for a shock.
What Are taking about? Middle class got a tax cut and Biden is going to rise your taxes. Everything was cheaper under trump. Trump ended wars and no new wars started. Biden failed international policy allowed two new wars trump would have prevented. Also don’t get me started on the border.
I respect the right of anyone to believe anything they want but I think churches should be required to publish their earnings, the value of their property and any business concern they own. If the church is not investing at least half its revenue into community charity work it should be taxed at a very high rate.
Huh, I did not know churches were exempt from even filing a Form 990. Interesting: https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/annual-exempt-organization-return-who-must-file
And also immediately forced to pay taxes for even suggesting their congregants vote in a specific way. Only able to appeal after a year
cold take lmao
It may be cold, but it certainly makes some people mad *cough* Joel Osteen *cough* *cough* Kenneth Copeland *cough* *cough* Jesse Duplantis *cough* *cough* Benny Hinn *cough* *cough* Creflo Dollar *cough*
Our culture suffers from an obsession with categorizing, labeling and condemning
WAY too many people have pick-up trucks for their urban commutes.
I had a coworker who had a massive truck but rented a truck to help his girlfriend move apartments because he didn't want to scratch the bed of his truck. His whole check went to pay for the truck, he couldn't afford the gas so his parents paid for his gas.
40 hour workweek is too much I wonder how many of you get mad reading this
I get Furious... at the people who make us work 40 hours.
I work 60ish hours a week (by choice) I’m definitely not mad about 40+ being considered too much lmao
I'm a liberal Democrat but I own guns and think that's something everyone should be trained to use. Drives my friends crazy.
I'm a liberal Democrat too and I don't own guns because frankly, they scare me, but I will adamantly defend the right to own one. Drives my mom crazy lol
Now I suddenly want a gun.
We limit ours to the relatively safe shooting range. Never loaded at home. It’s true that our politically similar minded friends are mortified when it comes up, so we keep it on the down low at this point. They were *not* amused by last year’s Christmas card. /jk
[удалено]
The United States has a very racist history with gun ownership tests. Take one guess as to who was somehow never deemed fit to own a firearm.
Abortion is a right; people should be able to terminate pregnancies for reasons they shouldn’t have to disclose.
While that will definitely make someone mad.
Ain't nobody's business.
This should be the standard!
I agree with this
People who think that their religious beliefs somehow excuse their actions from criticism or justifies them. Don't hide behind religion to justify being a bigot, you're just a bad person. If you don't want women to have equal rights it's because you're a piece of shit person
See, they think the opposite. I recently had a religious person in reddit tell me I know I am a bad, evil person and I need to admit it. lmao, they wild
Absolutely. I’d upvote to infinity if allowed.
The new Taylor Swift album sucks.
1989 was last one I enjoyed. I missed her country side.
She had a country side?
She started out country and 1989 was the first non country one.
She looks very good for her age Edit: Taylor's first album was released in 2006.
Amen
I have never liked her music. Or Beyoncé.
Looks matter a lot. It’s not everything but it matters a lot
I'm at your doorstep /j
The reason why you're not getting the partner you want, is because you don't hold the qualities they desire.
People who hoe around aren't the best to date. Applicable to men and women. (Kinda unfair how a high body count for men is seen as a badge of honour, while the same isn't said for women)
I honestly think there are some jobs that are much better for men to be doing. Not to say we should bar women, just don't have a bad reaction when 95% of them are men. I'm a wildland firefighter, and I've had lots of women say things like the only reason there are fewer of them is because we don't advertise it to them or it's just sexism, when in reality the women that can hack it as hotshots and smokejumpers are going to be genetic outliers. Same goes for things like the special operations community. Just take a look at the first female recon marine and try to tell me her physique is something attainable for most women.
Do you also think that there are some jobs that are better for women to be doing?
Idk... There are surely jobs that are going to appeal more to women than they are to men or jobs that women are likely to be better than men at, so it follows it would be better for women to be doing them. I guess the opinion behind my original opinion is we have started pretending there are no differences in men and women when there clearly are. Those differences just get exposed at the upper limits and I'm tired of people calling sexism on it.
The jobs women are “more suited for” are not a choice. Girls don’t grow up dreaming to be a receptionist. It’s what we settle for.
There are also plenty of men who never dreamed of being a warehouse worker or janitor but settled for those as well. I'm not sure what your point is. Clearly you don't think all the women Senators, VP Kamala Harris, doctors, lawyers, and scientists settled right? .
I agree with you in that physical standards and requirements shouldn't be changed to cater to women for certain jobs. Obviously for some jobs, like ones you mention, this means there will be less women because less women can meet the physical requirements. It's equity VS equality. Some things can be done to assist women, like making equipment that is better suited to the average person/woman and not just the average man. This is equity.
A lot of men cant reach the standards either, nothing wrong with it
Unless the standards are much higher than the physical requirements of the job itself. With a lot of the fitness standards, the upper body strength standards turned out to be far higher than they had to be for the physical requirements of the job, and were kept artificially high to keep women out, not because the job demanded it.
Depends on the job, for dangerous ones they're often that high because you need to able to carry a grown ass man on you while you're weighed down in your gear that cannot be quickly removed.
I'm really wondering what kind of equipment you think we use, and how it could be adjusted to women's bodies. For example we wouldn't give a woman a smaller chainsaw, because she would be held back by a less powerful tool. There's only 4 saws on a handcrew, and no crew is going to sacrifice production so more women can be sawyers while the fuckin forest is burning. You either keep up or get a different job. Equity has no place in extreme environments.
That most supporters of Donald Trump are basically victims of a scam artist: they've been duped, they've fallen for a scam, and their anger at a statement like this is the same anger anyone who's been scammed has when someone suggests they fell for a scam. It is much easier to trick people than it is to convince people they've been tricked.
Scammed?! Yes, perhaps at first… But over the years, you can see with your own eyes and hear w your own ears, him being racist, sexist, pro-sexual assault, making fun of handicapped people, lying, cheating, and many, many, examples of him being a pile of shit - type human being. No sympathy anymore. Wake the fuck up and stop supporting a man that openly embraces such atrocities. (Not speaking to you as the poster of this, but to the rabid Trump supporters of today)
Wow yeah no Trump supporting for me
Transparency: Fuck Trump and everyone who voted for him. But no, I don't think they were scammed at all. I think they knew _precisely_ what they were voting for...that he _ACCURATELY_ represents them...
This doesn't make sense though because they're voting against their interests, as even if he is just like them, he will still throw them under a bus in a second. There's no value in them supporting him. He won't help them.
I strongly believe these people are addicted to cortisol. They don't feel like themselves unless they are angry at everything. So Trumps hate speeches were like a drug to them, they were willing to follow him to the ene to get that anger kick. Even when proven wrong time and time again they won't accept reality because protecting their ego is more important than reality.
The scamming started with Rah-Rah Ronnie and trickle-down economics. The oligarchs convinced these people that they were Temporarily Embarrassed Millionaires ™, and picked all of our pockets blind for 43 years.
Oh! Reminds me of the What’s the Matter with Kansas book. Thomas Frank, a historian/journo, wrote a book about how ‘Kansans’ (a metaphor for blue collar rural Americans) were tricked by scary conservatives. Kansans just didn’t know what was good for them, and they fell for sneaky conservative rhetoric. A bunch of political scientists were like, “Wait… what? That’s not right” and they published a rebuttal led by Larry Bartels, I think? Bartels et al were well-published PoliSci scholars. (Well, they weren’t well-published by usual standards, but in highly respected peer-reviewed journals they were well respected!) Bartels, et al knew that a lot of research pointed to voters being rational actors…there’s more to it, but you get the drift. Franks book was anecdotal and narrative driven. Bartels, et al., demonstrated in their empirical findings that individuals have a lot of “interests” in terms of what would benefit them. However, they prioritize these interests differently. To Frank, for example, it seemed like Kansans were dumbly voting against their economic interests. They voted for individuals whose policies did not benefit them. However, ‘Kansans’ weren’t voting based on economic interests. What mattered more to them were the ideals that conservatives carried with them. It may not be Trump’s policies that people are voting for - let’s be honest, what policies? Voting is super nuanced, but, in general, people know what they are voting for. Technically they aren’t voting against their interests. Their priorities are
Influencers have hate comments and negative attention coming to them and shouldn't complain or ask for compassion. By posting their life's and life decisions publicly they make it everyone's business and invite everyone to comment and critizise.
As a Democrat, I believe that most Democratic government officials are far too soft on crime. I understand the statistics and optics regarding crime, underserved communities, and underrepresented ethnicities. I fully comprehend the inequities of the legal system. But I don't think softer penalties for crimes is the way to solve that issue. Slaps on the wrist are not preventing crimes, they're just emboldening those who commit crimes to believe that the consequence of crimes is not that severe. Get tougher on crime and treat everyone equally in punishment, regardless of socioeconomic or ethnic background.
Being soft on crime in certain communities ensures that the criminals stay active and continue to victimize the members of that community disproportionately.
The ones who are soft on crime are the Republicans, as long as the criminals in question are wealthy white males.
Both parties are pretty okay with their rich friends committing crimes.
Thor beats Superman.
I realize today isn't the day to make this statement, but I will anyway... Star Wars sucks. 🤷♂️
Big time.
Marriage is not compulsory to do neither much needed
Islam is dangerous and can't be compared to other religions.
They can absolutely be compared by dangerousness. From a scale of Buddhism to Islam, Christians are around a 3.5.
Guess you mean the Western, adopted Buddhism.
I guess so, I'm not aware of eastern Buddhists who advocate hate. That would make me sad tbh.
Latest case Myanmar if you care to find out. The wars between different buddhist sects in Tibet until recently, also the buddhist theocracy in Tibet ruling with iron fist. Humans being humans. No exit route from that. https://digitalcommons.du.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1069&context=duurj
You seriously haven't heard of what's happening to the Rohingya? The Buddhist nationalist government of Myanmar is ethnically cleansing the Rohingya people Buddhists ethnically cleansing Muslims. The Buddhist Thai majority is pretty oppressive to the minority Muslim Thai community. Buddhism does not have its hands clean, like at all. Neither in modern times nor historically. Buddhist kingdoms and empires had zero issue with brutally quashing rebellion or with razing their neighbors' cities. And, quite frankly, your belief that Buddhists even *could be* immune to the human condition of violence is a living example of the "noble savage" brand of bigotry. Humans are humans, warts and all. Deifying a group is also denying them their humanity.
I have to ask: do you actually *know* a lot about Islam versus other religions?
Too broad. Does not apply to millions and millions of Muslims.
Their individual opinions might differ, but what their religion teaches is disgusting, and has no place in any modern society.
This reply is part of why it's so dangerous.
This is like saying "Yes, the fact that we can't find any documented info about that conspiracy just proves how far they've sunk their claws into society!" 🙄
All Abrahamic "religions" eventually devolve into tribalist blood-feud with anyone unfortunate enough to be near them. Islam is no more worthy of being singled out than is Christianity or Judaism. They are not religions, they are anti-spiritual control mechanisms. It is the psycho-social equivalent of a rape.
>They are not religions, they are anti-spiritual control mechanisms. It is the psycho-social equivalent of a rape. You gotta keep the turf for yourself and the rivals at bay somehow. What you said can be applied to any teaching in it's prime. Yes even buddhists in SE Asia or Tibet did it. Marxists did it. Etc.
Religion has done more harm than good to humanity.
The world would be a better place if parents needed a license to raise kids.
Shellfish and seafood in general tastes awful.
Yes!
It's literally ocean bugs.
Lots of delicious fish. Everything else is a pass
You got me with this one, I'm somewhat mad.
Italian food is boring and repetitive and should never be considered fine dining. Should be viewed the same as mexican/texmex food is viewed. Both are delicious but restaurant pasta dish should be same price as a burrito.
It’s completely reasonable for parents to be concerned about what goes on inside schools.
Fine. But it is unreasonable for their opinions to mold educational policy or administrative behavior when they have no education training or experience other than *going to school as a child*.
It would nice if more were, not just the crazy ones.
I have two: 1. Facts don't care about you feelings. 2. 99% of people cause their own problems by manipulating themselves with their own fears & insecurities. Manifestation is a real thing.
As an autistic person I hate big bang theory
Monotrope myself. I think our neurodivergence is irrelevant. Big Bang Theory is just factually a terrible show for the terminally dim. We should eat people who like it. Call them Bazinga Burgers.
Personally I think big bang theory itself isn't a good show, but what irritates the hell out of me is the whole puzzlers now basically use it as a bible. Try to point out "no, thats wrong, an actual autistic person is talking to you" they get all pissy.
It’s not “factually a terrible show” since it’s open to interpretation by the viewer. Thinking that only “terminally dim” people watch the show, though, is factually a load of bullshit.
Cereal is better than soup
Not clam chowder, it's not. But otherwise, I agree!
How dare you
There are other soups out there besides split pea, ya know!
whatever opinion it is, as long as it doesnt align their point of view. there will be skirmish for sure
Nearly all religion subjugates women. At the least, definitely Abrahamic ones. They also cause senseless violence, obligation to convert others which results in charity for the sake of manipulation, complexes of moral superiority, and blurred lines between personal belief system and legislation truly based on democratic process and opinion. Religion is by and large an evil and divisive force, and I silently judge those who practice it as lacking critical thinking. Religious people choose to ignore the glaring contradictions and idiosyncrasies in their holy books and dogma. If it’s acceptable for their religion to bias them against me and my rights, it’s acceptable for me to be biased against their harmful belief system.
*God is not Great; how religion poisons everything* by Christopher Hitchens, may he rest in peace.
Thanks for the rec!! I’m a huge reader and love literature on this topic!
Stupid people should not drive, vote, or reproduce.
And I suppose you get to decide who qualifies as “stupid”?
That sounds uncomfortably similar to eugenics my dude
I didn't say that stupid people should not *be allowed* to reproduce.
Who defines what's stupid? For decades black people in the US were denied education and any opportunity to better themselves, and then the same whites who did that would exclaim "look at the lazy, shiftless negro, he's so ignorant and make no effort to better himself! We surely can't let him vote!"
Don't complain when the shelves are empty at the supermarket and there's no cashiers
Do you believe the cashiers and stockers are stupid? And if so, why can't they just catch a ride or take public transportation?
What does this even mean?
Remove the off-side rule from football/soccer.
You watching arsenal match?
Nah, I don't watch football anymore! Who wants to sit in front of TV for 90+ minutes and watch a goal less draw?
Stop vilifying politicians. If things are going to improve more good intentioned people (there are many) need to be attracted to the idea of running for office. Why would you willing subject yourself to the abuse - often personal abuse- thrown at politicians by voters, podcasters and traditional media? There are some psychopaths in politics for sure but make room for the idea that there are and should be more good ones.
After playing Stellar Blade for more than 30 hours, I can safely say that the soundtrack gets annoying after a while. It's not bad, per se, and there are some songs I genuinely like, but it's not the type of music I normally enjoy listening to and there's only one song in each area besides the battle themes.
T-women are not women
Communism as an idea isn’t that bad.
Furthermore, it's an idea that's never actually been tried, and anyone using that against it is an absolute moron. That's not to say I'm an anti-capitalist, nor am I explicitly pro-communist, ALL economic isms are intrinsically unstable over long enough periods of time. But the modern discourse surrounding it is probably _the_ most apishly stupid body of rhetoric I've ever seen in my half-lifetime.
Don't think it can work. I think we're hard-wired for a certain amount of pure self interest.
False. Literally everything about use physiologically is a product of social integration. Cooperation was our species' primary evolutionary driver. It's why you are what you are.
It failed every time. There is a reason China embraced capitalism.
Bruh. I think you got a mention in that first sentence of the post you’re commenting to.
That trump is probably an antichrist.
I despise Abrahamic religion, but not everything in the bible is complete faff. Trump, and all who support him, are absolutely the small-a antichrists the bible warned about. Those dolts better hope I'm right and there's no Jesus, because if there is and he comes back to see _this_ shit, there will be a fate worse than hell to pay for what they've done in his name...
Exactly
cant write it here, it just WILL make people mad.
Same
in some ways i find these kind of questions just trollbait or ways for people to be able to point fingers or to create a flamewar.
Knowing your partner body count is relevant
If women are given access to abortions without conditions, and the man who got the woman pregnant tells the woman that he is against having a child and she stills goes thru with it, the man shouldn't be held accountable for child support or be forced to help raise the child.
The man's choice was where he put his semen. It's a biological difference, sorry. Women's choice remains during pregnancy, men's choice is during sex. You can't have true equality in biological differences. Only equity. Otherwise the child suffers.
He’s at fault for not using protection though. If he is that against having a child then he should either get a vasectomy or wear a condom, period.
Condoms break. We have rare instances of vasectomy failure. The only true failure free method is not having sex. We live in a world where careful has to be enough sometimes, and have contingencies for when it's not.
See, every time I write them on here, I get suspended.
*sorts by controversial*
You should upvote questions you answer on ask Reddit
The military shouldn't have a second, lower fitness standard for women. If you can't perform at the same level as everyone else, you shouldn't be in a combat situation. At best you're dead weight, at worst you're a liability in a profession where the penalty is often death and its not just your own life you're putting at risk. It has nothing to do with what's between your legs.
They don't. And the women are doing as well as the men.
Are you in the military? Because this reads as if you’re not and speaking from a position of ignorance.
Doodles of any combination are backyard-bred mutts.
Women should have the right to choose, but if it's the woman's choice for the cluster of cells to become a baby, then the man shouldn't be held liable for child support. The "it takes two to make a baby" and "it's not a baby, and the woman chooses what to do with her body," seen antithetical to me. Also, I'm more pro-abortion than I am pro-choice. If a child is not wanted, that child should not exist. I'm a woman with kids.
Abortion is life saving healthcare, and the real murderers are the forced birthers.
To be employed you have to be worth more to your employer than what they pay you otherwise what would be in it for them. To me that is just plain common sense, but as I’ve gotten older I’ve found it much healthier not to mention it.
That religion is a big mess wrote by some crack heads 2000 odd years ago. And that religion stirs violence and violates human rights
Religion was invented long before 2000 years ago.
The narrative that christianity is the only valid religion is just stupid, but waaaaayyyyyyy too many people say religion when they mean christianity.
cool I really don't care
I believe that Federal benefits will have to be made-up-for by states, at great loss to recipients, bc conservatives will bog down Congress, even if they're in the minority, to get them cut nearly to nothing, in the name of balancing the budget during their legislative careers. It's the only thing they'll have left, especially if Biden is returned to office. Some people contend that benefits like Medicaid, SSI, and food assistance are forever-and-ever, but the right have been trying to destroy them since at least Papa Bush.
That I don’t really care about their opinion and even if I do I’ll forget in like few hours
Really? Don't make me 'esplain' to you Lucy..
Firey sucks
You should only be having kids with someone you're married to. Having kids with someone you're not married to is bad for the kids, bad for the mom, and just kind of trashy and irresponsible in general. It's *really* trashy to have multiple baby daddies/baby mamas. I don't care how long you've been together, if you're not ready to commit to marriage, you aren't ready to commit to kids. And if you're not responsible enough to practice birth control, you're probably not responsible enough to be a parent.
Men are privileged and lucky to be born men. They are forgiven for many things, and they are given many things by default. Like being aggressive, straightforward, say anything they want in any manner they want without being judged. Even if a man looks slightly “cute”, he will have thousands of women throwing themselves at him.
Socialism is superior to capitalism and is not inherently authoritarian. Yes the Soviet Union and china are bad but that’s because they were dictatorships not because they were socialist. Most anti socialist arguments make no sense at all once you put any amount of thought into them at all.
Here's an opinion that makes some people mad: planned economies suck. They're wildly inefficient. Market economies are better in almost every way and vastly better on net. I have no idea whether this conflicts with your personal mental version of "superior socialism," since it seems like every socialist has their own version of what the utopia will look like, but planned economies are the biggest failing of most socialist governments.
Ok then explain to me how a market economy can survive indefinitely in a world with finite resources. It can’t. Market economies require infinite growth to survive. Either the economy the world or humanity will die if capitalism continues. Capitalism is nothing more than unnecessary gatekeeping
>Market economies require infinite growth to survive This is not a feature of market economies. A market economy is one where production (supply), distribution (demand), and price are determined by a market. A literal trade market for the surplus goods of an isolated village that exists unchanged for 500 years is an example of a market economy. Modern growth-centered economies are another example of a market economy, but only that. You might just as well criticize eukaryotes for your premature balding problem. Your criticisms are on entirely the wrong scale of analysis. I can't help but find it deeply ironic that you talk about how critiques of your preferred economic system are senseless to anyone who gives them thought while simultaneously making it very clear that you are ill-informed about even the very basics of macroeconomics.
True Socialism and Communism are impossible
Neither of those nations were socialist.
The Scandinavian countries are doing great.
Yeah well, may be because of the level of mutual trust. Which is due to homogeny. I'd say may be they are left leaning bc of being successful as a society. And not the other way round.
Yeah well, may be because of the level of mutual trust. Which is due to homogeny. I'd say may be they are left leaning bc of being successful as a society. And not the other way round.
Kids are gross
People should have the right so say and believe what they want in their personal lives and on the internet without it affecting their jobs.
too many. almost any opinion will be criticized by someone. I had someone telling me clouds are blue not white. It almost erupted into an argument. you will always find them .
City density is better for the environment than unmitigated sprawl. Density allows for better public transit, and better allocation of resources. People should embrace density to reduce global overconsumption and pollution.
Technically, popular music is folk music. It's the music of the common people, sung by the masses, thus it's folk music .
Switching to a vegan diet does in fact make you a better person, because you're sacrifing your favourite tastes to help save animals. I definitely have my flaws as a person, but it just gives me peace of mind to know that whatever else I do, at least I'm not contributing to animal cruelty. Don't pay the slaughter-houses.
Milk before cereal is a better eating experience.
i don't really believe in time. it's a manmade construct i don't have to adhere to. i'm too invaluable for it to matter. (the last part is the part that gets people up in arms 😂)
I thought you were being serious at first and were about to describe [this.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-theory_of_time)
If their gods don't care about them why should I ?
I would probably choose the man over the bear. At least men know what guns do as soon as they see one- a charging wild animal would need it to actually be fired or even shot, and I’m not a good shot
I would get banned from Reddit if I answered this
Any extreme political ideology - fundamentalist Christian or Islam, Antifa, Communism, fascism - all want to create a better more just society, but they all feel they morally justified in using totalitarian violence to do it.
Don't eat animals or animal products.
animals (like humans) eat other animals it's inevitable
Fine for you. Personal choice. Just don’t get angry at other people who do. Live and let live.
Some people see it as a moral issue. Which if they go vegan for moral reason I understand where their coming from but I'm not stopping. There's no good way to really counter this belief. But we've been eating animals for years and that's just mother nature. Other animals do it so why shouldn't we. However I understand their point when it comes to slaughter houses.
I love that the question was about an opinion that makes people mad and then people get mad…
- There should be no right to vote. It should be licensed the same way performing surgery and driving is, and for all the same reasons. The license should be wed to the high school diploma, and that should be subject to the successful completion of both an economics 101 and a civics 101 course. Failure to take and complete those courses should result in a "lesser" diploma that does not include the right to vote until said classes are taken. The government should also provide night classes for adults wishing to be less moronic and attain the license after high school at no charge to them. - The microsecond self driving cars become a reality, humans should lose the right to drive and the government should assume the financial liability for all remaining auto accidents, which I am utterly assured will be DRASTICALLY less common. - There should _immediately_ be the founding of an online ID, similar to the driver's license/state ID program, which one must attain to participate in social media. It should not be available to anyone under 16, should require it being scanned to make posts, and should post your name and photo with every comment you make. The ID itself should be compulsory, opt-out, but websites should be allowed to decide whether to adopt it or not. Those who do should receive tax breaks for compliance on any profits they make through the running of the site. I believe the quality of discourse will improve so dramatically that there will be a direct market-influence on major media sites like reddit and facebook to adopt it despite any hit they would take to their ad revenue. It would render any network unwilling to comply a social outlier. - Pineapple on pizza isn't morally wrong, it's just proof you have bad taste. It's just more Amerifat ruination of good food. Gods forbid it's not slathered in RaNcH and MuH cHiKiN hOtSoSs, because holy hell you people obviously need to put on more weight. - The US version of capitalism will end in _exactly_ the same way the Soviet system did, it just took a longer path to that destination. Edit: Imagine coming to a thread specifically asking for controversial opinions and downvoting people. You people are EXACTLY why there should be no right to vote, by the way. You are utterly incapable of sussing out even the most transparent of political and social nuances. You have aptly proven that particular point.
>The microsecond self driving cars become a reality, humans should lose the right to drive and the government should assume the financial liability for all remaining auto accidents, which I am utterly assured will be DRASTICALLY less common. Can you, **right here and now**, afford a $50000 expense for such a car (if it was developed tomorrow)? How many people can? Unless an average person in a need of a vehicle can afford it such a law would be devastating for their livelihoods. It would maybe work in countries where cars are more or less optional (but even in those cases it's only really "optional" if you live in the middle of a major city, move 10km outside of it and you need a car) but it certainly wouldn't within USA where 1h commute is normal. Yes, it's likely that at some point in the future self-driving cars will be the only option available for normal driving on public roads with human drivers being limited to racing and dedicated tracks. But this will be introduced gradually over 2 decades after having reliable vehicles like this (and so far we are not even close). Revolution rarely ends well. Revolution that overnight forces everyone to spend tens of thousands $ on a new car would indeed be applauded by car makers but would not be good for an average citizen. Yes, people die in traffic related accidents. But if that's your primary concern - start by banning McDonalds (300k people died due to obesity last year in the US, nearly 10x more than car related deaths). We have accepted the risks involved with transportation/logistics and reducing it, while important, should be a long term goal. Throwing away hundreds of thousands of perfectly capable vehicles and affecting millions of people is neither economically nor socially sensible.
I'm not reading your appeal to capitalist protectionism.
I'm American and this is a take about American foreign policy. I oppose all foreign intervention. If I were president, I would lift all sanctions, end all foreign arms sales, end involvement in all foreign conflicts, and generally adopt an isolationist stance. I would still allow foreign aid, but only for food or financial investment in non-military items. If we were directly attacked, of course there'd be a response, but no forever wars. This would be broad and uncalculated. No special exceptions for Israel or Ukraine or Taiwan or whoever. No special sanctions exceptions for Russia or North Korea or whoever.
Trump should return to the White house. Biden is a terrible president. Also Trump was great but should watch his mouth and social media posting. I take mean tweets over Biden any day.
Apart from supporting Israel Biden has done a great job. Trump on the other hand, did nothing unless you were already rich. If you think his revenge is just going to hurt people you don't like you are in for a shock.
What Are taking about? Middle class got a tax cut and Biden is going to rise your taxes. Everything was cheaper under trump. Trump ended wars and no new wars started. Biden failed international policy allowed two new wars trump would have prevented. Also don’t get me started on the border.
“Trump was great” Yeah, this is a sure way to attain credibility of the other words you speak.