The difference is that plastic does genuinely have good uses

I don’t agree that the concept of “winning an argument” should exist, at least in most cases. Arguments should be a cooperative thing, where you’re working together to come to a point that you both agree on. Treating it as something that one person wins and the other loses removes all the learning that could happen.

That said, there are times when one person refuses to cooperate. At that point, I try to learn about their position as much as I can, and if there’s a potential audience like in a comment section, I’ll say my piece then leave.

He ends up playing this

This is from someone who got married in January this year.

The main part of marriage is the commitment to always choose to love your partner. To clarify, I’m using the word ‘love’ here as meaning “want what they want, and always do what’s best for them regardless of the cost to yourself”. You’re promising to always be the first person they can count on, no matter what happens. It’s not a promise to always like them, although that definitely helps and it’s difficult not to when there’s mutual love.

And for those that believe in this, marriage is an example of the love between God and his people.

Sure, the legal part exists, and I’d say it can sometimes be a good thing, but I don’t see that as core to a marriage. Really, if you both agree to be committed to loving each other forever, I’d say you’re married in the way that really matters.

If you know their address, sign them up for a scientology newsletter. It’s borderline impossible to convince them to stop

The usual complaint: American democrats are shit and don’t deserve your vote.

And the usual response: I agree, but what alternative are you suggesting? Not voting, or voting third party in fptp means you’re choosing to have less impact than you otherwise would.

Also, for context: I’m not American, I just have an understanding of current events. I’m not a liberal, I’m very much a leftist, but also a realist.

A. A “good rich person” is fundamentally unstable. When push comes to shove, they will either remain good or remain rich, not both.

B. Good people have principles, so they’re less likely to be willing to bribe public officials, even if they’re doing something good with it.

Done that before pretty much. It’s not hard. Use a bowline or some other loop knot to make a pulley between the loop and the anchor point, then go back and forth until you run out of rope, then tie it off.

Sure, ratchet tie downs are easier and probably get a tighter hold, but rope works fine.

Not my current town, but the town I grew up in.

In short, volcanoes. The town in built next to a lake. The biggest lake in the country. The lake is a caldera crater, from one of the biggest volcanic eruptions ever that we know of. And fun fact, it’s still slightly active, and several hundred years overdue.

I’d honestly rather not sell that sort of thing. The only reason I would is so I could spend my working hours making that and still be able to afford to eat. If that wasn’t an issue, I’d rather give my work away for free.

Panama makes some sense, because of the loch system. Each ship that passes takes a lot of their drinking water, and they don’t need to bomb ships to stop them passing.

I’d say both. Sci fi means there are elements that the story pretends could be possible, which includes time travel (probably not the tardis, but most other methods), space travel, and most alien races probably including one’s like the daleks and cybermen. Fantasy means there are things that the story fully admits are not possible in our world, which covers time lord regeneration.

There’s plenty of other things that are both sci fi and fantasy: star wars, warhammer 40k, and marvel or dc superheroes.

But he did eat a meal, a succulent Chinese meal

can you not have auth left and lib left viewpoints?

Yes, but actually no. The distinction is fundamentally unstable. If the left is constantly questioning power structures, it will inevitably turn to whatever structure the auth left comes up with.

what’s wrong with the definition of left and right on the political compass?

It’s specially economic left/right, which is almost always defined by taxation, government spending, and social welfare. While leftists usually say social welfare is a good thing, it’s not changing the fundamentals of how capitalism works, which is the current dominant power structure that leftists are against.

do auth left not also take issue with the power capitalist businesses have?

Yes, but they usually put something just as bad in its place. You might have heard people saying that the USSR was “state capitalist rather than communist”. This means that the workers and customers had just as little say in how things are run than they would under capitalists, only is was directly with the state rather than individual business owners.

Contestant: “can you use it in a sentence?”

Judge: aussie accent intensifies

It comes from the French revolution, when the people who wanted a better king sat on the right side of the debate room, and people who wanted to get rid of the king sat on the left. From my understanding, right wing is about incremental improvement on what currently exists (optimistically, current right wing isn’t even about this), while left wing is about questioning what exists and redesigning it from the ground up.

Only on the political compass, which uses a definition of left vs right that a lot of leftists disagree with. Really, the entire history of “left wing” politics has been about questioning and dismantling authority. The terms “left wing” and “right wing” come from the French revolution, when the people in favour of simply reforming the monarchy sat on the right side of the room, while the people who wanted to fully dismantling the monarchy sat on the left. A lot of more modern leftist thought is about questioning the power that capitalist businesses have.

You cannot imagine my relief at seeing this

I feel offended, disgusted, and entirely unsurprised. While this is probably the most blatant example of him blaspheming, it’s very far from the first. Even on top of that, him and all the other nationalists that work with him have been dragging God’s name through the mud for ages, really from long before Trump started politics. I can’t say for sure if they believe God exists or not, but they sure aren’t following him.

For context: I’m not American, but I’m very much Christian.

Because we all know that horny is the most rational of all states of humanity