honeyforasalteyfish

Well I suppose my point is I should learn to respond well to such things. That does include communicating in ways people understand. However language is fluid. Slang becoming actual words is a good example. The need for a thesouaras is another, because so many words have similar meanings. I believe the only term for that is a synonym, but I should consult my thesouaras on that conclusion. Then of course there are homonyms such as the word objective. Objective may imply impartial nature about a person making it an adjective, or it may imply a goal in mind making it a noun. In everyday communication, however dialects develop everywhere. People frequently slip into them without even noticing it even educated people. Scientists I have noticed frequently slip into the scientific meaning of words when constructing metaphors. I have also noticed them slipping into a more laymen intention with words with a different scientific definition. I suppose I should work vigorously on my communication skills so as not to unintentionally obfuscate. I would rather do it quite intentionally. So as not to engage in certain conversations I know will not be fun for me, and have little real value. An understanding of the nuances of everyday language, and all its forms would be incredibly helpful to anyone. One can more easily recognize intentions this way, and avoid conflict that leads nowhere while still making a point. I believe parables, and proverbs are examples of this as really they are nothing more than metaphors. A coherent ability to construct good metaphors can help one communicate in all aspects of life. An example of this would be scientific terminology. Frequently a term in science is nothing more than a placeholder, or a metaphor for something. You also see scientific terms applied as homnyms to various formes of observed phenomena. I should learn to sharpen it, and know which connotations and denotations to words I am using to express an idea. Also knowing your audience is also important in how language is used, and I frequently find myself using terms in everyday life that are meant for other audiences. Of course this is all relatable to the letter in the op. I saw multiple meanings, and intentions implied in the response that would not normally be suspected in other contexts. I should learn the ability to respond this way. As overtly responding to venom with overt venom is likely to result in a type of grudge conflict, and I would frankly rather not deal with such things. Of course I could simply never use language, but that would make it difficult to acquire the things I need to live.

Trump wants to ban Muslims. I disagree. I do think an ideology test should be imposed on any immigrant. Basically asking if you accept separation of church, and state, free speech, and that is probably as far as I would take it. I have said trump is race baiting, and I do believe that. However I thought it was just him shamelessly trying to garner votes. Yet for all the rhetoric this one possibly puzzles me the most. "If I were president I would let any polish immigrant in without a visa." Now I know a lot of polish people. They tend to be good people, but so are the Mexicans, and Muslims I tend to know. Though there are exceptions to all of that. Now I had thought Trump was just shamelessly race baiting to garner votes, but this latest comments leaves me puzzled about that. Are the polish a bigger voting block then the Hispanics he is pissing off? Sure a lot of Americans are pissy about illegal immigration, but wouldn't that extend to undocumented polish immigrants as well? I think our immigration policy is in shambles any ways, but this makes no sense to me. I mean doesn't the whole immigration argument go out the window after this statement, and one can no longer deny trump is racist, or at the very least pandering to those who are? If it's the first He shouldn't be president. If it's the second well he still probably shouldn't, but other politicians have done similar things. The problem with the second argument is what does it say about trumps opinions on America if he is gambling his presidency on that person being a large enough voter block?

Don't fake, that you don't wish to partake.

Millenials are are polarized as hell. Drives me insane because I am sandwiched between uber conservative, and liberal groups of friends. So now I express myself in memes. Promised I would never do that. I lied to myself again. The only thing millenials tend to agree on politically is corporations suck, but they have diametrically opposing views on the reason they have to much power in this country. Also what should be done about it. Most millenial liberals I know hate corporations, and believe a type of European democratic socialism is in order. Most conservative millenials also things they suck, but think free market competition is the answer to robbing them of their monopolies. These types tend to blame government interference for the current state of conglomerate monopolization. Its the same problem, with dichotomous views on how to solve it. Like it, or not the 08 recession defines most millenial politics, but not everyone has reached the same conclusions. Another thing about millenials is a lot of us will ditch previously held political ideologies extremely quickly if we do not see the results we want quick enough. This is a frequent complaint about millenials in the work place. Because we will ditch an employer in a heartbeat if we feel like we have a better offer. Most of us feel no compunction to do otherwise. As we feel no loyalty with these employers, or politicians would be reciprorcated. So we move on quickly, because we saw people get burned by sticking around for life. So now we ditch things quickly if we feel there are better options elsewhere.

http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/2015/06/23/nationwide-poll-of-us-muslims-shows-thousands-support-shariah-jihad/ Here some statistics. Subject to error, but otherwise we are confined to purely perception arguments. Some more stats on it. Islam/Muslim statistics on violence, rape, terror, sharia, and Isis Most European Muslims want sharia | Dispatch International Yes, yes I know sharia the old talking point. However I would doubt you could find similar stats on the enforcement of Leviticus laws among Christians. Although some of them they have clung to "spirit" interpretations of the original letter of the law. Forcing my beliefs down others throats violates my own, but allowing others to sabotage my way of life also violates it. I am not talking about money, but about secular principles of the enlightenment.

Religous dogma is frequently in compatible with those three enshrined tennants One cannot be the thought police, though plenty try. I say they should be required to assimilate onto entry in the country. I was not propose regime change constantly, and forcing this elsewhere. Prevention is the best means of safety. These things are already happening in Europe where radical Islam is being forced down others throats. Europe followed apeasement strategy by allowing separate non secular laws. Well it didn't allow them to live peacefully, and now it's worse. We can talk about extending those three enshrined rights to everyone, but it only works if they accept the premise. If we want to go with the soviergenty of nations argument well...... Them assimilation of certain values upon immigration to a new country is not an unreasonable expectation. Frequently however many Muslims have been demanding exemption from secular laws based off their belief in sharia law takes precidence. Not only that, but they have been attempting to force it on non Muslims in countries they have immigrated too. The Denmark cartoons are a good example of that. Some Christians attempt it as well, but Islam is the worst perpetrator of it right now. Its complicated obeying the spirit, and letter of those values. However I do not think people who do not assimilate those three should be allowed entry into the states.

I found the below article interesting. The Emotional Psychology of a Two-Party System - The Atlantic Plenty of things are "ruining" this country. Not all of them liberal. I always hear this is going to be a political revolution. Still stuck with the same old political dichotomy.

Because yes I sing it when it's on the radio. Because I am Ironman!!! Because I know I can't dance, and I don't care!! Because damn right I like to embarrass myself in a car. Because I have been here before.

Put out a chain in the Mediterranean. Oh yes trump race baits, and I have said that before. There shouldn't be any black communities, or any white ones for that matter. Not if we are going to truly overcome all of this. Seggregation wether legal, or otherwise psychologically promotes tribalism a.k.a racism among all human beings.

Is my hangover showing today?

Is it Friday yet?

I love puns this is a thread were you must speak in puns. I will start. Happy birthday I Ivan pavlov, I am sure his name rings a bell.

I didn't say it was happening in the U.S., and nothing. Well it does, but it would be more foreign policy than domestic issues. Don't pretend it doesn't frequently happen elsewhere. I am not saying America is perfect it isn't, but that doesn't mean I have to apologize to theocratic states. I would quite literally rather lose my head. I do approve of an ideology test, but probably not the one trump is thinking of. If you are insinuating I was off topic ok. But you know I am not a ra ra keep the immigrants out person. I never have been, or at least I would think you would know that. If you don't that is not me. The only ideological test that should be imposed in my opinion are 1. Free speech 2. Sepperation of church and state I would impose it on anyone coming here. The rest I welcome. I do not think all things are equal, and I will not pretend I do. Because I am quite proud of secular enlightenment values. Even if those are probably not the most representative values of the nation. They where the principle on which it was founded. Also if you are implying I am off topic perhaps I missed the response to the post I was quoting? I have my opinions on such things, and that includes the faux denial of extremism. That doesn't make it a majority, but a significant enough minority can cause problems for everyone. All of this most likely puts me on an island. Been there before, I like the coconuts. As I said I am used to being on ideological islands. As I have no ideology, and I try not to pick a trench. It doesn't make my judgment perfect far from it, but it does make it mine. Yes so I have an opinion, and yes everybody has one. I have my values, and when others conflict with them such as Islamic theocracies I feel no need to apologize about that. I must stress the word that. It is no secret to any one who knows me I do not value religion, and honestly I think some current Islamic extremists are the perfect example of why I am secular. I love many deeply religious people, but that doesn't mean I don't see problems with religion. For that matter I see no problem criticizing it. I see little compunction about criticizing Christian zealots, so I fail to see the logic in defending zealots of other denominations.

I am an atheist. Agnostic Athesit to be specific. Which is a fancy way of me saying I try not to gamble. I have seen seen countless interpretations of Adam, and Eve. Even thought of a few of my own. The problem is nobody knows. I have a problem with guessing. Faith if you want to call it that. I prefer wrestling with the empirical, because it makes me feel as if I am actually doing something. I used to be a huge meaning of life guy. I would spend countless hours thinking about it. After years I simply realized I would never know in this life. So I stopped worrying about it, and I try to focus on what I can know/effect. You can call me a coward for that, but it helps me maintain focus on what I want in life. Rather than worry about what is beyond my control. Everybodies different though, and I think that is a good thing.

Can I actually answer this in a question? No I can't so I am going to break the rules. I don't know what your intentions were with this question, but let me attempt an honest answer. Limited resources. Most people do not want to fight, but most people want to live. So they fight to live. I am the same way, and I recognize that. Sometimes I wish it would all go away. That it's just not worth it to continue in a world like this. I used to wish for death. Only so I wouldn't have to be exposed to it anymore. Blissful peace where the incredible problems of this world, were not my problem. I just wanted it to stop, the hatred, the violence, the misery, and the suffering. I hated myself because there was nothing I could do, and I was so far from perfect. I never thought I would make it as far as I have, and I still have a chance to go further. I am trying to get better at picking my battles, because there are so many to fight, and I wish I could be invincible and fight them all. I don't accept this world, and I never will. Not as long as I live. That's ok though. Because there are incredible moments worth having in it, and I might leave it a little better than I found it. Someday that might help make it the way I think it should be, and that is enough for me. I am going to die anyways, might as well do something about it while I am here. Did I just break the rules again?