Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
That always brings us back to Orwell's 1984 - The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
I wouldn't say that, precisely. Perceptions have a basis in reality, but they can easily be distorted by viewing only a very narrow slice of reality - looking at one neighborhood, or exclusively consuming media with a focused agenda, for example. It's like looking into a room through a crack in the door - you don't see the whole picture.
More than what? Sure, it would produce a more moral society that no moral instruction.
Religious instruction is only anathema when the state provides it.
I think its unlikely that the non-establishment rationale behind the first amendment would have been abandoned when it came time to consider state constitutions. If the reasoning was solid, it should apply there too - as it does now.
Yes, back then the scope of legitimate religious differences seemed to be limited to squabbles within the family of Christian denominations. Thats clearly not a sufficient understanding for the protection of human liberty, as we now recognize..
Reality is limited to squiggly lines you find the internet. Do you apply that system to your belief in Christ as well? What do the squiggly lines tell us about God? Are they more reliable than what the writers of the Bible saw, heard and experienced?
So the atheists tell me.
Your reality would appear to be limited to what's fed to you by some rage baiting talking head you found on the internet.
Why do you ignore the same and worse coming from prominent R's? The only reason I can think of is because of a need to make the "other side" out as particularly villainous. In that sense youd be part of the exact problem youre railing against.
How did you come to that conclusion when I've been saying reality is based on what one and many others see, hear and experience? How was reality determined before the squiggly lines on the internet came into existence?
That just means wealthy corporations tore down ordinary people's low income homes in urban areas, and built condos for the rich - a lot of which are unoccupied. Is that really an improvement upon society? It just shifts the problem to another location and depletes affordable housing. It didn't used to be like that.
None of that is true, but if you're intending to dress up as an basic leftist for Halloween, you're off to a good start.
It's not just firsthand. It's based on hours of news and documentary footage and the eyewitness testimony of others I've seen, heard, and read. Like the incident that took place which is the topic of this thread. How do you know that happened? How do you determine that it is reality? Aren't we supposed to only go by what a squiggly line says about it instead?
Ah of course, that makes it tangible lol.
Elaborate.
Building more housing reduces upward pressure on housing prices. Having poor kids grow up in proximity to more affluent, more successful kids helps them do better in the future. Unless you're actually kicking people out of their homes (which often is not the case), gentrification is a good thing. The anti-gentrification propaganda I see typically comes from the low effort wings of the left who prefer to operate off vibes instead of data.Elaborate.
That's basically pure conspiracy theory. That it's all an elaborate manipulation hoax. I can't believe anything that I see and testimony I hear, because it's all fake news. Reality only exists within the data.
But how was reality determined up until that technology existed? Why are you a Christian since there was only observation and perception available to testify to who Jesus is and what he did? If you're going to stick with only modern data technology is reliable in establishing reality, there's a whole lot of stuff you're going to have to give up believing in.
Does gentrification cause displacement?
Its not manipulation at all. Its just a natural combination of corporations chasing revenue plus the way humans tend to reward shocking news with elevated clicks and attention.
What I see being filmed all over the place, is the same as what I experience firsthand but it's all marketing. And that goes for everyone else that sees what they themselves are experiencing happening all over the the country. You can even go to google street views and see how bad it is. But that's all supposed to be bogus. It seems like it would be a lot harder to stage all that, than to put out graph based on who knows what. It's easy to skew data like that by being selective about what's entered. That's where data is factual, but not thorough enough.
But we're talking about what people all over the nation are seeing and experiencing and filming it and talking about it. How do we know what the Civil War was like for example? Pictures, illustrations, and people who experienced it who talked about it. That's how you learn what the realities of the Civil War were. How about slavery and how black people were treated and Jim Crow laws the Civil Rights movement? What about the Jan 6th Capitol Building riot? You know all about these things the same way. Just how much off all of that is one supposed to dismiss as structured content to get people to believe in a false reality?
Again that depends on what the data is and is not based on. What's put in and what's left out. How it's filtered. It doesn't see or experience anything, it just spits out a chart based solely upon what's fed into it.
Yup. Well said, sir. I have nothing further to add, I was just rambling I guess.
