winsor

If you did the tiniest bit of research, you'd find that nothing that you claim has any solid basis. You speak of "The Bible" as though it is monolithic - a contention that is patently false. 'The Book' originally referred to Devarim ('Deuteronomy) until Ezra the Scribe attached the four prequel texts, Bereshit, Shemoth, Vayiqura and Bamidbar at the end of the Babylonian exile to give us the Torah. Over rather a long time a variety of books were added, becoming Nevi'im and Ketuvim, which round out the Hebrew Scriptures. Now we get to the addenda generated on a different continent, in different languages, by people with no understanding of family traditions. Since we hold the copyright on the original, the 'New' and 'Old' nomenclature is inappropriate. 'Scarlett' was similarly touted as the further adventures of the 'Gone with the Wind' saga, though unauthorized, by a different author with different agenda. The first four of these books use the Tanakh as a claim to legitimacy, and were written for a Roman audience. They reference Isaiah to claim messianic status - Matthew and Luke even start of with paternal lineage to verify the lineage of being the first born of the House of David, which doesn't fly without having a perfectly normal family tree. The hero of the story is given a Roman name (there is no 'j' in Hebrew or Aramaic) and his family is blamed for his being executed in accordance with Roman law (nothing suspicious about that...). Even a passing evaluation of the claims made over the centuries by 'Christian' sources show all of them to be politically motivated tripe. Credo quia absurdum is the basis of the whole system of belief (don't feel alone, Islam, LDS, Scientology et al. every bit as bad). One is tasked to 'respect' all religions, which I suppose is good advice. One should similarly respect Brown Bears in that failing to take into consideration their basic nature has historically resulted in people being made dead in short order. Many a Rabbi, when asked if, say, Adam was 'created' knowing how to keep track of the date, the significance of his age, and so forth might roll their eyes and say "Bubbie, it's Bronze Age family lore - don't read too much into it. It gives us the basis of our calendar, so take it for what it's worth." The Children of Israel are one big, dysfunctional family. The universal religions that use the Tanakh as a basis consist of wannabes whose perception of the underpinnings of their faith is born of consummate ignorance. As you were, Winsor

Apparently atheist.

You attribute much to one of my cousins that is both unsupported and nonsensical.

"In the beginning God created man. Man, being a gentleman, returned the favor." Clarence Darrow

Seppuku would be the honorable option.

A wild guess says you weren't Infantry.

I suppose you're right. One side of the aisle gets to wave the banner saying "We suck less!" All things being equal, I need to be reminded which one that is.

Which one in particular?

Peace through superior firepower is the only option available to Ukraine. The Russian - Ukrainian Friendship Treaty is still in effect, so a negotiated peace is pretty well covered. You are perhaps recommending that Ukraine do the same thing and expect different results? That's precious.

The closest I get to 'diversity' is "Equal rights, equal responsibilities - no more and no less." James Webb's discussion of women in combat applies nicely. He was fine with it until they began to lower the physical training standards so women had a better shot. He pointed out that training by touch football rules is all well and good until you go up against the Green Bay Packers. If I take a round through the pelvis, a woman who can throw me over her shoulder and get me out of harm's way has my vote, and a guy who can't get me out of the line of fire is undeserving of a participation medal. If a woman can shoot the eyebrows off a fruit fly at 800 meters and is cool with life in the field, I'm happy to have her in my squad. From a practical standpoint, I'd prefer she have an IUD or birth control implants so her fire team doesn't have to deal with pregnancy issues. Statistically speaking, sailors and soldiers who serve together tend to wind up with pregnancies if there is no intervention. For some reason telling them not to have sex doesn't work 100%. I still find it offensive that the women that stepped up to the plate and did an outstanding job of producing war materiel ('Rosie the Riveter' et al.) were sent packing after the war so that men could take their place. This flies in the face of my concept of equality. Despite the denial now at work, biological realities are realities, not abstract constructs. I thought PMS was make believe until I witnessed it up close and personal. It's not good or bad per se, it's just a factor to be considered in some cases, and some women need a sick day at least once a month as a result. Female impersonators are spared these particulars. I have exactly the same right to try out to play in the NBA as did, say, Michael Jordan. Lucky for the NBA, they are allowed to discriminate against people who are singularly unsuited to playing basketball such as me. There is a big difference between legitimate discrimination and illegal discrimination. I am also fine with not qualifying for NAMBLA, since the North American Marlon Brando Look Alikes should be limited to people with a passing resemblance to Marlon Brando. BSBD, Winsor

Beat Serbia by a long shot.

I lived there.

So's Thalidomide. When taking any medication there is a balance between therapeutic and side effects. Since there is religious zeal associated with COVID-19 and its treatments, it's hard to get a handle on the benefit to detriment ratio. The adverse effect tracking process for the mRNA therapies was truly execrable. I am quite familiar with fatalities that resulted directly from Moderna and Pfizer inoculation, none of which were listed as adverse effects. I guess the thought was that they were going to die eventually anyway, so at least they died vaccinated. Though I take medications when appropriate, working in the industry for a few decades instills a healthy level of skepticism. A redefinition of "vaccine" was necessary to include mRNA therapies, since they fit into the category of 'other' on the basis of the longstanding definition of the term. A paper authored by parties with MD and PhD credentials is not automatically valid; I have seen one dissertation that refuted a previous dissertation line and verse, and both authors are now addressed as 'Doctor.' I have been stunned by how weak is the grasp of Probability and Statistics by some researchers whose profession is the study of Stochastic Processes, and that is more typical than I would have guessed. There are very good medications that never get approved, some are approved and are never marketed, some are remarkably effective but are not profitable enough and cease to be made, and others never should have been approved in the first place. The mRNA therapies induce the production of thrombotic, cytotoxic spike proteins. If these stay localized in the deltoid (which they sometimes do), their effects are reasonably predictable. When they circulate throughout the body, all bets are off. You pays your money and your takes your chances. BSBD, Winsor

Masochist: "Whip me, beat me!" Sadist: "No."

You do realize that the movie was based on the nonexistence of adiabatic lapse rate?

I'd almost say let him skip to the Bahamas or Russia or something if they could invoke the insurrection clause of the 14th amendment. As it stands he could both be convicted and reelected. The only three things that would bar him from office are impeachment, the 14th amendment or death. Him choking on a chicken bone would be the most expeditious but it's bad manners to force the issue, impeachment has been tried, and the 14th amendment is all that's left. Barring him from office, and striking a plea bargain deal where he pleads guilty but sentence is stayed so long as he never again sets foot on US soil. This is a win-win for everyone except for whoever takes him in. One could only hope.

QED

Gee, if that isn't a PA I don't know what is. The people who saw Till as being an animal that needed to be put down were the problem, and Till should have been made acutely aware that he would not be afforded basic human rights. That you attribute such sentiments to me is projection at best.

Not hardly. The people from that area who knew how to stay invisible survived. He unwittingly drew the slightest bit of attention and died. It's like your basic zombie movie plot.

Nope. My point is that the family who sent him to Mississippi and the family members with whom he stayed there were fully aware of just how dangerous were the people who killed him, and they failed to make that clear. He was unaware of how dangerous it was to be friendly with a white woman, and he was murdered as a result. "Perpetuating the evil?". You're projecting.

If you have to use personal attacks instead of addressing issues of concern, you have nothing.

Get specific. The interviews I referenced were on a PBS documentary (NOVA?). The woman who claimed untoward behavior by Till EXAGGERATED, there is nothing to suggest that Till didn't harmlessly flirt. In the same sense that a child playing with an unexploded cluster bomblet likely wouldn't if the gravity of doing so was made clear, Emmett Till likely would have avoided drawing the attention of the woman who later accused him of whatever exaggeration she conveyed. I think this thread is a prime example of saying one thing and hearing something else. BSBD, Winsor

Such as? 'Him' who?

A little trick I picked up in Moscow: when there appears to be no comprehension because we're speaking different languages or something, say it slower and louder. About the closest I can get here is to go to caps, and I'd rather not. It's also tough to follow the drift here with half of it being killfiled. The short form is that if someone is sent into a minefield without being properly warned, it is the responsibility of the people who should have warned said individual, not to mention the people whose mines they are. To characterize that as "victim blaming" is silly. I have been informed that Emmett Till's murder was the result of racism (you figure?). I can't properly respond to that without waxing facetious/sarcastic, which appears to be beyond the grasp of some folks here (though they may feign ignorance as a matter of rhetoric). The bottom line is that Emmett Till was sent into a minefield/viper's den/whatever without being properly warned and came to grief. It was OF COURSE 100% the fault of the evil racist bastards who abducted, tortured and killed him - but it would have improved his odds if the people who sent him there and the people with whom he stayed had made crystal clear to him what dangers lurked, which they knew all too well. If my kid wants to point out that the apostrophe on the colors saying " Pagan's" makes it plural rather than possessive, I let him know that these guys are easily confused and get violent when they're confused, so it's best to let it drop. If he had done so and he and I got maimed or killed it would not be his fault, it would be the Pagan's for being vicious morons and mine for failing to warn him. Anyone who thinks that's victim blaming isn't giving it a lot of thought. BSBD, Winsor

I contend that being in a different environment can have different rules, and one should heed warnings regarding these differences. Going to Alaska, one should understand that the fauna there are not Walt Disney creations and you're not in suburbia. Perhaps it should have been made crystal clear to Emmett Till that the white people that lived near his cousins were vicious, murdering morons, and that they should be treated like the rabid assholes that they were. Unfortunately, the warnings he got didn't convey quite how dangerous these people were. Lara Logan getting gang raped while covering a demonstration in Cairo is an example of how simply being there put her in danger, and failing to make herself look massively unattractive was enough to trigger the attack. Or something like that, I don't understand rapists or murderers - maybe a donkey would have faced the same risks You'd go further in your disagreement with one point or another if you didn't go right to ad hominem. BSBD, Winsor