Sunday School

Sunday School 27th June 2021

This topic contains 42 replies, has 7 voices, and was last updated by  jakelafort 3 weeks ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 43 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #38159

    Davis
    Moderator

    110ºF – too much. Hit 104ºF (about 40ºC ) once in Malta and spent most of the week in an air conditioned bar. About 74ºF in Dublin today. I don’t want more than that.

    When I was having those kidney problems a couple years ago, it hit 42º in Madrid and I had to go to the hospital for three days because my body/circulation-system simply couldn’t handle the heat. The kidney ward of the hospital was completely full. Another fall out per climate change. Madrid summers have always been dry and hot but 42º in insane (when passing a bus shelter the thermometer said 50º meaning you’d roast inside it).

    • This reply was modified 3 weeks, 5 days ago by  Davis.
    #38160

    #38162

    Autumn
    Participant

    We had that one cold day three years ago, so yeah, so much for global warming. It’s just like that one guy who died because of his seatbelt. I think his name was Jim. So much for seatbelts being safe.

    This post brought to you by DataSelect. One point is all it takes to make your dreams a reality.

    #38172

    jakelafort
    Participant

    The social media article is indeed a good’n.

    A crisis that few would identify as such in part because they continue to be misled into believing the BS about a free marketplace of ideas. There are many contraindications of the mythology of the free market analogy but so many of us have beliefs that are impervious to evidence that ought to make us question our assumptions/beliefs.

    Damn the torpedoes. Full speed ahead. We are human.

    #38173

    Davis
    Moderator

    Indeed Jake,

    Many free market theories are based on the idea that entities will make rational choices in their best interest. Analysing business decisions shows this is frequently not the case. People do all sorts of vainglorious, petty stupid shit in the business world (or follow hollow business or marketing techniques not backed up by evidence) and are terribly unaware of the level of risk involved in the decisions they make.

    Anyhoo…I’m sure you all know that. In the “free market places of ideas” I would say its a whole lot worse. At least in the business world a substantial portion of agents are at least moderately educated. In the free market places of ideas, a pitiful percentage of people are verse in actual critical thinking skills and a minority have bare bones reasoning skills. None of us here are excluded, as depending on the specific topic some of us are easily misled on at least a few topics (for a multitude of reasons and there are no exceptions). Social media actually decreases our capacity for critical thinking and encourages the quick spread of toxic brain viruses. If there is ever a reason for a country that doesn’t have hate-speech laws, to, at the very least, introduce stricter anti-harassment laws when it comes to hate…now is the time.

    • This reply was modified 3 weeks, 3 days ago by  Davis.
    #38175

    jakelafort
    Participant

    Davis wrote…None of us here are excluded, as depending on the specific topic some of us are easily misled on at least a few topics (for a multitude of reasons and there are no exceptions).

    You are quite correct. In training ourselves to be critical i think those who have studied philosophy in a serious manner have an advantage. It is so frustrating to converse with people who are intransigent in positing beliefs or principles that are unshakeable in spite of valid arguments and outstanding evidence. But most of us keep trying even though we realize it is a fool’s errand. Seeing one’s own blind spot is always at issue. Doctor’s see doctors for medical issues and attorneys see attorneys for legal issues. At least this is an area in which there is a consensus that objectivity over one’s views of oneself is difficult at best.

    #38176

    Here is a video I had up on the old TA site.

    #38177

    SCOTUS siding with Pa. high schooler on Snapchat rant is a bigger free speech victory…..or is it just a dose of common sense. Did it really have to get as far as SCOTUS?

    #38178

    Autumn
    Participant

    In 1998, an African American parent in Arizona filed suit to block her child’s school from assigning Mark Twain’s classic novel The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and a short story by William Faulkner, “A Rose for Emily.” Both works used the N-word, the parent noted, and Black students would suffer psychological injuries in reading them.

    It’s a strange comparison to make. Class curricula regularly curate a limited amount of content, as do libraries, stores and number of other organizations and institutions. That’s not to say all reasons for selecting what is and isn’t in are equal or good. It’s not not equivalent to the main story, or even all that comparable.

    In the above, it’s an example of a school doing what schools do: making selections for course work. But in the story, they’re levying consequences for something a student said outside of school, and that is considerable overreach. I am surprised the board would have wanted to continue with the case that far.

    #38179

    Davis
    Moderator

    You might be surprised to hear this from me, but I find this case slightly less clear cut than others. It’s not as though she was mouthing off about her dislike for doritos. She was mouthing off about the voluntary social activity which she was participating in. And she attacked the voluntary social organisation she was a part of in an unnecessarily damaging way. I don’t know any other type of voluntary/social organisation that wouldn’t have mechanisms in place to protect themselves from people who are unnecessarily damaging the organisation in a profane and disrespectful way. If the video was calm and rational and spelt out her grievances with people then it would have been a different story (and even then that would get you fired or booted out of many companies or social organisations). I would think a one year suspension wasn’t that harsh considering she was unrelenting in her defence of the activity. It is not as though the government is attacking her for her political or personal beliefs. A community football team, a charity, a theatre group, a small company, a large company would all sanction a member/employee who did this. And I would be fairly shocked if an employee of a government department did something like this an wasn’t sanctioned. I’m not sure why a school should be different from a government department. This is perhaps an overly broad interpretation of the amendment? I think this isn’t the first time free speech has been over-broadly interpreted in the USA. For example unlimited financial donations from companies to politicians are allowed because of the free speech amendment. This is absolutely disastrous for American democracy and I don’t see how a company being limited to doling out only 1 million in cash to a politician is limiting their free speech.

    #38180

    Autumn
    Participant

     A community football team, a charity, a theatre group, a small company, a large company would all sanction a member/employee who did this.

    But at the end of the day, this is a public school, not any of the above. It’s not a voluntary organization. While the specific activity was extra curricular, schools shouldn’t be able to decided who gets to participate in which programs based on whether they like or respect what students say outside of school. The message didn’t constitute bullying, harassment, nor any sort of threat. It didn’t contain anything defamatory. It didn’t contain any bona fide reason that warranted the school taking punitive action, even if minor.

    To be honest, if a large company did sanction an employee for Snap Chatting “Fuck work, fuck communications and marketing, fuck everything” and that employee appealed the sanction, I would expect the employee to win if they followed through with the complaint.

    #38181

    Davis
    Moderator

    If an employee snap chatted fucking shit fuck fucking Bob’s auto parts,  and fucking bullshit garage that is slow to get cars out on time and fuck my colleague John who is a dipshit who was given his job for no good reason and fuck the fucking repair industry in general…

    I would be fairly surprised if they were dismissed and managed to win an unfair dismissal. At least in most jurisdictions. I may be wrong…but this is not far from what she did and said. If you were the leader of a community play house and one of the actors went on youtube and in a profanely laden ran disrespected your organisation and trashed fellow members of the organisation and damaged your reputation and was completely unappologetic about it…I would be surprised if you just went “well…that’s freedom of speech for you”. That’s not what freedom of speech is about. There is a social price for pointlessly being an douche and making a social problem worse. If I’m wrong and you or anyone would just let that (and all future examples slide) then I am amazed with your patience and willingness to risk your own organisation over it. That is deep commitment to a free speech free for all.

    • This reply was modified 3 weeks, 2 days ago by  Davis.
    #38183

    Autumn
    Participant

    The case involved Brandi Levy, who was removed from the junior varisty cheerleading team at Mahanoy Area High School in 2017 after she posted a “snap” on Snapchat with a photo of her and a friend with their middle fingers extended accompanied by the text “fuck school fuck softball fuck cheer fuck everything.” The snap was created and posted on a Saturday while the two friends were at a local convenience store. The school district in this case was asking the court to grant the same authority schools currently have to curb and punish speech within school buildings to students’ off-campus speech.

    https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/supreme-court-rules-protect-students-full-free-speech-rights

    #38184

    Davis
    Moderator

    Yes. I’m sorry. I had read a long article on the story claiming that she had also trashed another teammate and the team itself. But now I cannot find that article or any other article that says is. So yeah I was wrong. Apologised. Based solely on the snap (and the ambiguous nature of “fuck cheer” and nothing else I would be in favour of her being reinstated. If she had said “fuck my cheer leading team” and her fairly unapologetic attitude afterwards (I was like…angry) I wouldn’t see a one year suspension as overboard (just as if you said “fuck John’s auto-parts” where you work or “Fuck the United Way” where I volunteer would obviously lead to, at the very least, some consequence.

    • This reply was modified 3 weeks, 2 days ago by  Davis.
    • This reply was modified 3 weeks, 2 days ago by  Davis.
    #38187

    TheEncogitationer
    Participant

    Reg,

    I suspect there may be another reason why the Catholic Church doesn’t want to give Communion to Sleepy, Creepy, Crazy, Cranky, Tankie, Corn-Pop, Lunch-Bucket, Basement-Bunker, Shotgun Joe (a.k.a. S.C.C.C.T.C-P.L-B.B-B.S. Joe.)

    I don’t think it’s differing views on abortion because, IIRC, the Roman Catholic Church doesn’t offer eulogies, funerals, or gravesites for embryos.  And judging from the horrible stories from both Ireland and Canada, The Roman Catholic Church also has no regard for fully-developed, viable young human beings.  In their cup of cups, The Roman Catholic Church doesn’t really believe in it’s own proclamations on “the value of human life.”

    So what’s the reason to deny Communion?  Well, to administer the Eucharist to S.C.C.C.T.C-P.L-B.B-B.S. Joe, the Church would need a Holy Cuisinart for processing the Eucharist with Pablum so as to help it down his tummy tum-tum.  They may also need to provide a lock of hair from one of the Sisters for him to sniff as added incentive.

    And the Church would have to provide The Holy Cuisinart and a lock of hair at every Catholic Church, in case S.C.C.C.T.C-P.L-B.S. Joe showed up while travelling.  Between the expense of providing this at every Church and declining Church membership and donations, that comes up to a serious liability for the Church.

    Perhaps the Church could justify the added expense by offering the services of The Holy Cuisinart to others just as addled as S.C.C.C.T.C-P.L-B.S. Joe, such as Former Big Papa Benedict or The Catholic League’s Bill Donahue or House Speaker Nancy Lugosi, oh, and Present Big Papa Francis The Cuddly One, but even then that’s a risky investment.

    Ah, life is trade-offs. 😁

    • This reply was modified 3 weeks, 2 days ago by  TheEncogitationer. Reason: Including present company at The Vatican
Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 43 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.