Something can be completely unacceptable and complicated - there’s more to parse than just “is this moral?”.

What about the straight men who are so hot tons of gay men would want to fuck them?

Yeah, though of course some people piss their lives away sending all their money to televangelists or whatever. Seems like it does come back to Scientology being a more monolithic organization, rather than anything to do with their particular tenets.

Christian and Muslim religious authorities have done a lot of messed up shit too. Is the issue that Scientology is small enough and organized enough be considered a more singular entity than broad mainstream religions?

Problem is she thinks every woman has to.

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

On the other hand, the Israelites were also strangers in Canaan, and it didn’t work out so well for the locals.

Who is she hoping to convince

Peach yogurt?

Absolutely, having the world treat them as men must have some influence on their development. But does it have influence in a way that we can classify as male privilege?

but it is in line with what chimamanda ngoche adizie got flack for: they can’t really know male privilege having lived such a tormented early existence

In a campaign between two anti-choice candidates, it can make sense to help the least shitty option win, right?

Not that it justifies his dismissive tone.

Just started playing Ogre Battle 64 on Wii U. Interesting game! Discovered the hard way that characters you don’t revive same-mission might become zombies...

I do wish the parties were slightly smarter (especially in spreading out status ailments).

Am I the only one bothered by the extreme medical malpractice?

She’d love to watch it on a tasty plasma.

We decided not to have children. I really appreciate that other people do and we will always have friends that have children that we are close to but It was a choice I made very early.

Huh? Who do you think has the power to change election rules mid-election?

My point isn’t that some other action would have been better, but that there were more than two options, and that part of the calculation for choosing that one was the complete inability of the Japanese to retaliate. If they had the ability to nuke Chicago and New York, I’m sure the US would have found another…

From what I understand of the bigger picture, Russia would have invaded if we didn’t and Japan didn’t surrender. Even if that wasn’t a factor, I don’t think Japan had the resources to re-arm without steel imports, which could easily be blocked since their navy was in tatters.

There is an argument to be made that…

No. I’m saying that the fact that we nuked them and wouldn’t have if they could have retaliated is a good reason for every other country on Earth to seek to develop/obtain nuclear weapons.