Let’s be clear, though: judicial review has no enforcement. Compliance is voluntarily, and it can’t undo assassinations and coups.

And impeachment functionally doesn’t exist. It’s been demonstrated that senators will not impeach a president of their party, regardless of whether they agree with the charges.

That’s the whole theme song. I don’t understand this meme.

I shouldn’t bother responding to this, but I have to point out that this weird assumption that scholars of Christianity are all Christian partisans seems pretty similar to people who say that climatologists are all biased in favor of a global warming hoax.

You don’t think anyone goes into studying a field to challenge the orthodoxy? That’s the fastest way to get famous. Even if the rest of your field hates you, you can make an incredibly lucrative career out of being “the outsider”. I literally linked to a collection of experts who agree with you.

If you don’t believe the experts, I guess it’s fine. But it’s weird when people use expertise on a subject as proof of bias to discredit expertise. It’s just such a silly thing to do.

I didn’t say which side I come down on. I just said that there is lots of information with plenty of high quality citations.

I’m really happy that everyone is a winner.

It’s weird how many people in this thread are vaguely debating the validity of the historical research into this question when one person has posted a link to a well cited article on this very very heavily studied subject.

There’s even a link to a well cited article examining the skepticism of the historicity of Jesus: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christ_myth_theory

I don’t feel compelled to argue an interpretation. The facts are well documented and their interpretations by experts available. What anyone chooses to do with these are of no real concern to me.

Oh, I see. Thank you for the clarification.

I think you could argue this before the passage of the Nation State Law of 2018. But now it’s enshrined in law that the state exists to privilege Jews specifically and selectively. That’s really putting it all in black and white.

Also I get asked about why I didn’t criticize China or Russia or Iran etc, and the reasons are simple:

1. I do
2. my tax dollars didn’t support their misdeeds and
3. I’m Jewish, so I have a huge investment in Israel’s actions. They insist that I be judged by their actions, so now I have to get involved. Also, I actually like Israel. I’d like it to be a liberal, multi ethnic democracy and not just another Middle Eastern martial theocracy with a Jewish twist.

Hold on a sec: self determination is always within the context of recognizing the right of self determination of other groups and the basic human rights of everyone involved.

Also, Israel already has millions of Palestinian citizens. And all of these people deserve a say in what the resulting arrangement looks like.

A two state solution is one possibility, but there is no strict requirement that it is the only or best way to serve the needs of those involved.

This meme is bad.

1. if you look closely, you’ll notice that there’s no real joke. Israel and Nazi Germany should date. That’s a shit tier joke. It’s relying on edginess too hope paper over that there’s no real humor.

2. from a political commentary perspective, it’s awful. We have a colonial state founded by people who have experienced a collective tragedy that they then allowed to justify displacement of an indigenous population, followed by decades of alliance with Western imperialism and a slide to the hard right, with lots of delusion and gas lightning. And we have an aggrieved former great power looking to expand over neighbors while killing of undesirable immigrants. Yeah, two genocides. But they’re materially different in terms of approach, and the groups pictured hate each other. It’s like you know there’s atrocities, and you know Jews are involved, and that’s kind of the end of your insight but you really wanted to make a meme anyway.

Find something interesting to say.

Also, free Gaza, release the hostages, lock up Netanyahu and all the rest, etc etc

That’s fascinating.

Well, I guess these things are complicated.

A lot of people have pointed out inherent ideological components of this platform, but I would also suggest that the lean is likely in part from network effects.

How did each of us find our way here? Someone likely mentioned the platform on another social site, or linked a meme, or shared other content.

If the site has lots of left leaning content that gets shared by left leaning people in places where such people gather, it’s going to bais the new arrivals in a similar direction. This is true of most social spaces, I think. And it’s good! I want right wingers to hang out in right wing spaces like Twitter, just like I want them to hang out at their own bars and clubs, away from me.

Which part? I think this is all subjective opinion.

I posted a comment impulsively, then saw that you already gave the same answer better.

I’d like to go a bit deeper.

I don’t think people invented socially controlling practices because they found religion, I think they found religion to frame the invention of socially controlling practices.

Masturbation is a gratifying act that relives pressure to settle into a rigid domestic arrangement that serves to make more workers and soldiers, and create dependents that need fed, and whose well-being would be threatened if a parent became defiant and provoked the ire of elites.

Masturbation is good for the individual at the expense of the nation and its rulers. So it’s inevitable that priests would decry it as an affront against god, as that’s historically been their purpose.

To add to this, I’ve been using GIMP on and off for a decade and I’ve never given any thought to the name. It’s all capitalized. I didn’t think it was a backronym, I thought it was just an acronym.

I’ve used this in professional settings (I used to work in academic molecular bio), and I was very evangelical about it. Especially because we’re not doing high-level artistic work, we just sometimes need something for processing microscope images or making graphics for scientific publications.

I’d say to any and everyone, “You know, you don’t have to pay an annual subscription fee for Photoshop: there’s this free, open-source program called GIMP that does most of what you need and you don’t have to pay a thing! Want me to install it for you?”

I didn’t even think to be embarrassed about the name, and no one ever seemed to care in conversation. As others have said, the bigger impediments are people’s attachment to commercial software and interface challenges. This is just an absolutely silly complaint to make.

This is a great article.

Thanks for this clarification!

Honestly, I don’t recall the details. What I shared was my best recollection. I think what you said sounds reasonable, but I can’t reliably say.

Hi. I’m not a doctor, but I can opine as a biologist.

The transplanted cells have blood vessels, because all cells need a supply of oxygen to avoid expiring. If they didn’t have a supply of blood, they’d quickly turn necrotic.

When you deplete your short term energy stores, the body converts fat molecules within fat cells into sugar, then shuttles those through the body in the blood stream.

The body doesn’t draw on fat stores within the body in a totally even way, so I don’t know how quickly it would draw from the transplanted cells, but it works presumably still burn fat from these cells when needed.

And the reverse is true as well: when excess sugar is available, the body would generate new fat molecules to fill those cells, and if necessary make new fat cells as well.

Okay, but how does that definition not precisely describe a tool?

It sounds like it very much is a tool, in the exact usual sense of the word.