Early concepts of heaven were a lot different than how we see it in pop culture. The concept was as vague as “you’re constantly surrounded by God’s love” which to me sounds a lot like you’re subjected to infinite bliss regardless of how the place looks or what agency you have. Existentially scary, but for the person in heaven they would never know.

Send us both to heaven. The last person to leave heaven loses.

It’s true, mostly because the LD 50 for THC is like a kg/kg (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK563174/). It’s so astronomical that you would die from many other issues before thc became a concern. Caffeine actually has a pretty low LD 50 even among many illicit drugs, it’s just more widespread so people aren’t incentivized to take hyper-concentrated doses of it.

If I can think of a reason to not do it, then I should ask why. If the reason isn’t explained to me it’s a much more logical conclusion to believe that the reason is a bad one. Or that the person telling me what to do is a moron. If I disagree with the reason but it’s not a harmful one then we can start determining if whether it’s meaningful enough for me to push back.

If “some moron says” means the thing we’re doing is going to go poorly, that should be brought to attention.

If Elon Musk was someone who asked why and accepted answers he wouldn’t have torn it down. So this post does not reference him.

I think I see the two different arguments we’re speaking past each other about, so I’ll make an analogy. Imagine someone made an argument saying:

"Sorbet is made out of sugar and fruit juice.

The dairy education system: Ice cream is superior because Sorbet isn’t sweet"

And someone comments: “Yes, let’s just ignore the human rights abuses that go into farming the fruit that made the sorbet”

It’s true that sorbet is also made by an exploitative system, similar to how the dairy industry sucks for similar human and animal rights abuses. But the original post (like this one) is not saying sorbet is superior because it is also sweet, nor is it justifying the exploitative fruit farming industry by saying sorbet is able to be sweet like ice cream is sweet. It never denied that ice cream isn’t sweet, in fact, if anything all it did was place sorbet on the same level. It’s simply pointing out how clearly ill-conceived it is to pretend like sorbet hasn’t also demonstrated it’s viability as an economic system.

This analogy is silly, it came off the top of my head, I hope it shows why the argument is a non-sequiter. I think plenty of people are making the leap in logic of imagining the continuing argument as if the OP is saying “communism rules, capitalism drools”, but it just doesn’t.

Also, I’d like to say, pretending that Russia for those 50 years was demonstrating glorious perfect communism is stupid, but that only further helps the argument because it’s pointed to by the US as an example of communism and this post argues that on it’s face that’s a bad argument.

That’s maybe fair, I said that to throw them a bone and show that I’m not concerned with trying to deny anything about Stalinism to make my point.

So this is amazing because you called out my preemptive dismissal, then walked face-first into saying exactly what I preempted.

The only thing this post points out is that people point to Russia as some sort of example of how communism (well, Russia’s form of “communism” which is a whole other thing) doesn’t work economically. This clearly doesn’t make sense because Russia went from agrarian farmers to an industrialized nation considered one of the 2 “great powers” in the world. That doesn’t seem like a failed economic system to me. It does not say “Russia is the greatest country to have ever existed” so your analogy doesn’t work. It just talks about the economics.

Now what this post never mentions is the social system in which they became an economic powerhouse. Not because we’re dismissing or ignoring human rights abuses, but because it literally is not relevant to the argument being made, which is specifically a counter argument to people saying communism doesn’t work economically.

We can see this in this post because you have to waffle around saying “well, no one does it without human rights abuses, if this was a pro-american post I would be arguing the opposite, I actually hate both sides etc.” the reason you have to take such a weird ‘nobody is right’ stance is because there’s not a point that has been made by pointing out that Stalinism was bad.

I don’t understand this point. Or actually, what it’s trying to say at all. This doesn’t refute the fact stated in the post. “It happened in a bad way.” Yeah, I agree, and I would go further to say that it’s easily one of the worst human rights atrocities in history, but I have some bad news about how most of the world developed its wealth. And I got further news for the response that I can already smell cooking none of it is justified.

But the worst news of all: “yes let’s just ignore Stalinism” as a phrase is such a brainded take. I’m still reeling trying to figure out how it factors into this conversation at all.

The psylocibin mushroom specifically grows on cow shit so some of them have to be getting dosed at some point.

What my rabbi mumbles when he’s fucked off that meshuga kush.

What on earth do the birds and the bees have to do with anything? I was given “the talk” but other animals were never mentioned. Is it really the stinging metaphor? Why use two different species?

Minecraft

Any conservative CEO would argue passionately about how difficult job applications build character and show grit and select for the only type of people he wants in that company.

I think the issue is we don’t really have a measurement for intelligence. Qualitatively, I think you are more intelligent if you have the reasoning capabilities to logic yourself out of reactionary feelings like racism, but it’s really hard to measure that.

Be the change you want to see in the world

I’ve been walking on my hands this whole time!

Unfortunately for us, the best times of the year are about half a month in the spring and half a month in the fall

I like to think he made a joke about how women need chocolate on their periods as a cute way of giving her a gift every time she was on her period, assuming she didn’t think he was that stupid, and it just never came up again.

Me twice