Although I’m not sure what the state of Louisiana has against yeast in a blood sacrifice.
I would think that’s more not sacrificing something containing yeast alongside blood, not yeasty blood. Since offerings also, you know, fed the priests it would make sense to keep the blood and bread separate.
I want the ten Commandments of the satanists church then as well
No such thing.
The Church of Satan has the Nine Satanic Statements but I think you mean the Seven Tenets of the Satanic Temple? Either way, neither comes in a quantity of ten.
Personally I think it says everything that the Abrahamic version of the Theft of Fire leads to the idea that we should hate and denounce the thief rather than see him as responsible for us being raised above essentially being animals. The serpent in the Garden of Eden is analogous to Prometheus, Mātariśvan, Amirani, Pkharmat, Grandmother Spider, etc.
I also find it interesting that the Theft of Fire is a nearly universal myth (as close as anything gets) - a divine or semi-divine being (often but not always a trickster-type) taking a symbol (often a fire, in the Torah a fruit) representing knowledge against the will of those in power and giving it to man, thus leading to the ability of man to be free to create civilization.
Yahweh/Jehovah
I still love that both of these are renderings of the same four letter word, יהוה, or yodh-he-vav-he. Because written Hebrew has a 22 letter alphabet but doesn’t have vowels (but does include a silent letter for when you stick two distinctly separate vowel sounds together - think the two Os in cooperate).
…and admitting that you know it exists is grounds for you not being allowed on a jury.
But yeah, judges judge the law, juries judge the facts. so the judge can corral how the trial proceeds and explain to the jury what criteria they are supposed to be following and what evidence they are supposed to consider but the jury can decide what it wants and their decision cannot be challenged - which means if they decide that someone is guilty/not guilty for reasons wholly unrelated to what the law actually says then that’s what it is.
It’s why I was surprised that Trump was found guilty on all counts in the NY trial - I was expecting a mistrial due to hung jury before the trial even started because I was expecting at least one hardcore supporter/opponent of Trump who was going to vote based on that regardless of the evidence making it impossible to have a unanimous agreement.
The solution seems simple. Don’t marry and don’t have kids.
Am I allowed to be amused that a bunch of guys looking at the state of family courts deciding the same thing were mocked as a bunch of evil misogynistic incels, and have been for years? Apparently “don’t participate in the system you are worried is going to fuck you over” is not an acceptable choice.
Wouldn’t those be frosted nips since it’s a boob job?
She was an Air Force veteran who took an oath upon enlistment that she would faithfully defend the Constitution of the United States from all enemies, foreign and domestic.
I’m sure from her thoroughly deluded, brain-rotted perspective that’s exactly what she was doing - protecting the Constitution from a domestic enemy seeking to steal the election.
Practically no one sees themselves as the villain of their own story.
A bump stock does not function by a single action of the trigger and does not meet the statutory definition as a result. The ATF rule banning them got struck down because Congress hadn’t authorized the ATF to regulate machine guns beyond that specific statutory definition.
They had several cases along these lines involving several agencies, and I feel like people don’t understand the underlying legal idea - rule making power belongs to Congress. Federal agencies under the executive branch that have rule making powers receive those powers by Congress delegating it to them in a limited fashion through legislation. Those powers extend only so far as the passed legislation delegates them and no further. Even in cases where it seems like it would be useful, or the name of the agency suggests it would be something in their sphere of influence.
However this supreme court said that the magic words ‘bump stock’ wasn’t in the legalisation.
A bump stock doesn’t make a gun automatic fire, therefore a prohibition on modifications to make a gun automatic fire does not include it. It’s a basic “the law says what it says, you don’t get to add things you don’t like and call them close enough” argument. It’s not about the words “bump stock”, but that the law prohibits modifications to make a gun automatic and a bump stock does not make a gun automatic, it merely makes a method for firing a semiautomatic gun faster easier to achieve.
Bump firing is basically using the recoil from a shot to bounce your finger off the trigger and then pull the trigger again, which increases the rate of fire. It’s even less accurate than automatic fire (because of the way the gun has to literally bounce around), and not quite as fast (but pretty close). You can do it without a bump stock, but it’s easier to achieve, more accurate and more comfortable to do with one. The fact that when bump firing you only fire a single round for each function of the trigger makes it not automatic by definition.
The binary triggers mentioned earlier in the thread are basically triggers that will fire both when the trigger is pulled and when it is released, which hypothetically doubles the firing rate of a semiautomatic weapon by not requiring you to release the trigger and pull it again to fire another round. Binary triggers basically come down to an argument of what counts as an “function of the trigger” and whether both pulling and releasing the trigger can count as separate functions of the trigger - if they can then it’s not automatic, if they cannot then it is.
I thought they had on several occasions dropped games from the store because they had DRM. Which DRM titles does GOG still have?
Last game I paid good money for was on GOG. Everything added to my steam account in the last few years has either been part of a humble bundle or a freebie from somewhere.
No, but malpractice insurance was exactly what I was thinking about as a model.
I mean, if it were up to me they would be paid better, required to insure both individually and at a department level against damages to civilian persons and property, and subject to much stricter civilian scrutiny.
They would keep qualified immunity, but with much tighter reigns on the “qualified” part. Immunity only when necessary, with civilian oversight as to when that is. We would toss out the thing where police are not liable for damages done by them, they would be responsible for and expected to insure against it.
The insurance thing is two tiered for a.similar reason - if the damage is deemed necessary for law enforcement purposes by civilian oversight then it would be on the city and the city’s insurance to pay for it, if not then on the officer and the officer’s insurance. This eventually prices bad (but not quite criminally bad) officers out of the job.
This is a cop problem, not a gun problem. All the guns were working, including the shooter’s. The cops saw fit to take their lunch hour instead of working.
This. Specifically it’s a “police do not have a duty to protect” problem, that stems from a series of court cases going back to at least the 80s.
Lemmy does slightly better, but essentially proves that when you have shitty administrators and moderators, the only thing that’s going to be transparent is the quickest and easiest excuse, and when it’s a lie it remains it remains incontestable. You only need to look at threads titled “Lemmy.ml tankie censorship problem” and read the comments to get a sense of the scale of the problem.
Forums are only as good as their moderators. Always have been, always will be. I’d love something akin to Reveddit for Lemmy though.
That’s what it is for my wife. I don’t mind it but she’s not a fan.
https://imgur.com/gallery/gospel-of-supply-side-jesus-bCqRp
I think you’ll enjoy this.
My late stepdad literally was ranting about the evils of Obama wanting to create socialized healthcare (the ACA was before Congress at the time) while filling out the paperwork to apply for Medicare.
Like the Golden Girls or Fresh Prince.
You know an episode of Golden Girls was pulled from Hulu for blackface right? Or the jokes about Dorothy’s rape (there are several of those)?
Or “Wham, Bam, Thank You Mammy” , Maurgerite in general or having the same actor play different characters with different ethnicities that are broadly the same general color (for example Mr. Tanaka and Dr. Chang played by the same actor so apparently the show can’t tell the difference between Japanese and Chinese people?), racist jokes about Chinese food, things Sophia had to say about Cubans, Puerto Ricans and Arabs, Rose in a Native American headdress, Rose pretending to be an exchange student, Blanche defending the Confederate flag… Yeah, there’s a lot problematic about Golden Girls and a lot of it was about race.
I suspect I could spit out a similar list of examples for Fresh Prince if I dug down on it, though it probably would be less about race and more about sex or disability or weight or sexual orientation or some other demographic line that was a common well for comedy back then that is a problematic -ism or -phobia now.
They don’t though. And I went into great detail as to what exactly they do and how it works to explain why they don’t do that.
An automatic weapon fires more than once per operation of the trigger by definition. Any gun that fires once per operation of the trigger is not automatic by definition.
A bump stock doesn’t change that, it makes it easier and more accurate to bump.fire, which is basically using the recoil to bounce your finger off the trigger and back onto it to pull it faster than you otherwise would.
With practice you can bump fire with a regular stock, that doesn’t mean all semiautomatic weapons are actually automatic.
Like the binary trigger thing - eventually that will be challenged in the courts and the argument won’t be over whether or not the words binary trigger are in the law, but whether or not lifting your finger off the trigger counts as a second operation of the trigger or as part of the previous one because that is what would determine if it fires one or two shots per operation of the trigger and thus whether or not it’s legally automatic and whether or not it is controlled as an automatic weapon.
The law doesn’t say what you wish it said, and it isn’t exactly vague.