anatess2

Bonus points for a $20 word.

Conservatives working to loosen anti-pollution regulations are like people who don't want government mandated facemasks... they don't believe the pollution reduction rendered by the regulation is significant enough or even existent to warrant the restriction.
And environmentalists use the same argument as mask-karens... if you don't approve of the regulation you must not care about the environment!  It's so stupid it's not even worth a first-grade exercise in dialectics.

Conservatives working to loosen anti-pollution regulations are like people who don't want government mandated facemasks... they don't believe the pollution reduction rendered by the regulation is significant enough or even existent to warrant the restriction.
And environmentalists use the same argument as mask-karens... if you don't approve of the regulation you must not care about the environment!  It's so stupid it's not even worth a first-grade exercise in dialectics.

Conservatives working to loosen anti-pollution regulations are like people who don't want government mandated facemasks... they don't believe the pollution reduction rendered by the regulation is significant enough or even existent to warrant the restriction.
And environmentalists use the same argument as mask-karens... if you don't approve of the regulation you must not care about the environment!  It's so stupid it's not even worth a first-grade exercise in dialectics.

Well... Luther is basically Uzzah.  He had good intentions but because he did not bring his intentions to fruition within God's order was plagued by his conscience as he witnessed until his dying breath the unintended chaos - political, cultural, and religious - he caused.  @Carborendum might agree with me that Luther is like Sanderson's Lord Ruler, trying to steady the ark using his own wisdom by trying to bend the heavens to his will and harvesting ash and soot and blood instead as he stumbles from irascible foible to foible.
The days of Luther is pretty much reflected in today's progressive movement... using theses instead of tweets.

Meh.  There are LAWS behind Civil Forfeiture which is different from State to State which "googling civil asset forfeiture" is gonna just be a "don't believe anything you see on the internet". 
Cops can't just take your stuff without just cause, otherwise it's an abuse of power and you can sue them.  But, as I mentioned above, some States codified forfeiture of an asset deemed harmful without a criminal conviction.  For example, in Jackson County, Missouri, the County Police Department can take your meth lab complete with all the cash you made out of it stashed in the lab closet without the need for a Criminal Conviction.  The only requirement for seizure is that... they provide proof that the property is a meth lab.  This goes hand-in-hand with the Jackson County law wherein meth addicts are not criminally convicted and sent to jail, rather, they are given the opportunity to enroll in government-mandated rehab instead.  So, a meth addict who owns a meth lab will have that meth lab seized even if the meth addict did not get a criminal conviction.
There are other ways the government can take your assets without a Criminal Conviction - the most common is Eminent Domain.

Meh.  There are LAWS behind Civil Forfeiture which is different from State to State which "googling civil asset forfeiture" is gonna just be a "don't believe anything you see on the internet". 
Cops can't just take your stuff without just cause, otherwise it's an abuse of power and you can sue them.  But, as I mentioned above, some States codified forfeiture of an asset deemed harmful without a criminal conviction.  For example, in Jackson County, Missouri, the County Police Department can take your meth lab complete with all the cash you made out of it stashed in the lab closet without the need for a Criminal Conviction.  The only requirement for seizure is that... they provide proof that the property is a meth lab.  This goes hand-in-hand with the Jackson County law wherein meth addicts are not criminally convicted and sent to jail, rather, they are given the opportunity to enroll in government-mandated rehab instead.  So, a meth addict who owns a meth lab will have that meth lab seized even if the meth addict did not get a criminal conviction.
There are other ways the government can take your assets without a Criminal Conviction - the most common is Eminent Domain.

The time stamp on this says 56 minutes.  I thought that whole interview was over an hour because it was still going on when I bowed off... in any case, I listened to the first few minutes and it is the right interview, so hopefully it is not an edited version.
https://samharris.org/podcasts/what-is-true/

Still my friend.  I have this principle that if I can handle it (or, in this case, my husband can handle it), I try to keep friends even when they do bad things to me so we can continue to be an influence, hopefully it will help so they can stop doing bad things.   Yeah, it requires a dose of naivete but I like to think we're made of tuff leather.

Just one glaring problem with masks vs concealed guns, everyone will know you aren't wearing a mask!   lol 🤓
Most if not all of the older sisters and many of the older men in our ward won't be attending church until everyone is wearing masks, or they will sit as far away from and behind the non masked members and likely leave early after taking the sacrament. I have no problem with staying home from church until this is over, even if it takes another year or two, letting the younger folks do all the socializing if I don't like the mask situation at church. If I get the virus it is highly unlikely that I will survive. Catching it and dying doesn't worry me at all. I would prefer that there had never been any kind of a shutdown. But my wife has asked me to do everything I can to avoid getting it, so, for her, I will stay home until the odds are close to zero of my contracting C-19. Of course by that time there will probably be some new killer virus, or two or three, out in the wild. 

So, @Anddenex... there was this time in Sam Harris' podcast where he interviewed Jordan Peterson.  I was kinda excited to listen to this podcast between Harris, the atheist, and Peterson, the believer.  I expected them to hash out their philosophical positions on the presence or absence of a God.  Well... an hour into the podcast and all they've done is debate over "What is truth?".  I was disappointed, bored, and thought I wasted my one hour (I checked out before their discussion was over)... until you made me think of that again with this thread.  Maybe I'll revisit that discussion and listen more closely to their views on what is true.

I see well I didn't mean to get involved in your discussion, I only responded because you tagged me. However, I was serious when I said have a blessed day. We are on the same side more often than we are not☺

I obviously disagree with you about masks, but we do have one point we share a common belief about. I don't believe it should be mandated by the government either. Government mandates are impossible to properly enforce, usually grossly oversimplify the problem, and lead to further lawlessness when people realize the can get away in mass with breaking the mandate (see the failure of Prohibition).

The espousement was the MARITAL COVENANT and the beginning of the CULTURAL MARITAL CEREMONY.
 
IT MATTERS in the same way that a perfect Christ had to be baptized - TO FULFILL ALL RIGHTEOUSNESS.
 
 

Will they fit in a priority mail box?  😅

Here's the doppelganger of Brad Pitt, the concubine of Angelina Jolie... oh, wait... 

This guy gets it.
I watch YoungRippa for his expertise on comicbooks but this political rant is on the money.  He's an ultra-libertarian.  As in - "we don't need national borders, we need private property borders and you build a wall on your own property" kind of libertarian.  He's also a fan of Malcolm X over MLK.
 

I'm quoting just this because everything else you stated was great, except this one - it's not as great.
I loved Blaire White's twitter post (that is not LDS-wording approved so I'm not gonna link it) that basically says (paraphrased), "I think a lot of folks assume they are mocked for their beliefs when in reality they are just unlikeable".
It is never a good thing to be so prideful to think that you're so good that the awkward/negative/dismissive/hostile people are so bad.  It is always best to use these criticisms to check yourself and either accept the criticism as valid or dismiss them as invalid without needing to disparage their character.  You can't really love anyone while disparaging them.

Here's the doppelganger of Brad Pitt, the concubine of Angelina Jolie... oh, wait... 

Here's the doppelganger of Brad Pitt, the concubine of Angelina Jolie... oh, wait... 

The doppelganger of Goldie Hawn, Kurt Russel's concubine (21st-century version).

I'm going to have to correct you're grammar.
"I ain't got no 15' diameter..."

I don't got no problem with her grammar.

Words of wisdom. Applies in family relationships, perhaps as much as or more than anywhere else.

I'm quoting just this because everything else you stated was great, except this one - it's not as great.
I loved Blaire White's twitter post (that is not LDS-wording approved so I'm not gonna link it) that basically says (paraphrased), "I think a lot of folks assume they are mocked for their beliefs when in reality they are just unlikeable".
It is never a good thing to be so prideful to think that you're so good that the awkward/negative/dismissive/hostile people are so bad.  It is always best to use these criticisms to check yourself and either accept the criticism as valid or dismiss them as invalid without needing to disparage their character.  You can't really love anyone while disparaging them.