82, born April 1st. Life has been a joke, that’s for sure.

Greenland, the cowards that ran to Iran after being attacked!

But he has all the money! He has the highest score! He should be the winner!

and the judiciary, the GOP been stacking that for 50 years, put the crown on last time trump was in office.

camancho, aside from being a moron, actually cared about people, and really wanted things to get better.

Yeah, this is the greater problem, fatbergs as they call them. It just destroys infrastructure.

Well yes, it goes without saying that if you have a specific autoimmune disease to something, it will be bad, regardless of their general tolerability

https://www.aliexpress.us/item/3256804157886930.html?algo_exp_id=52331449-5d8e-475f-bcc9-64de1f0c254a-14&pdp_ext_f={"order"%3A"99"%2C"eval"%3A"1"}&pdp_npi=4%40dis!USD!5.30!5.30!!!5.30!5.30!%402101e07217434473126006697ede4c!12000028838260037!sea!US!0!ABX&curPageLogUid=JGQWCDoAnypq&utparam-url=scene%3Asearch|query_from%3A

I mean, it was the early 80s

Larceny

Huh? Leela! Leela. So it’s you I’ve been attracted to. Oh, God, I’ve never been so happy to be beaten up by a woman.

Your comment is that people can believe things are moral, that lead you to do horrible things, because relativistic morals make you susceptible to misinformation. You then say this isn’t a good operating procedure because of this susceptibility, thus your morals can be twisted to justify horrible things, like killing people out of a sense of righteousness. Then you say that if your moral baseline isn’t an unshakable belief, an axiom, based on empathy, you can’t understand what the person believes.

The first part is true. However, how you present that last two sentences make it look like you are saying this is not good, and that having adamant morals, founded on empathy, is your understanding of a moral standing, and a better way of operating than relativistic models, which can be manipulated by bad input, and produce bad output.

Would you say this is a correct interpretation?

do you not think that people can’t come to conclusions you would feel are terrible and still hold them as unshakable morals they derived from empathy? Do you think empathy is not subjective?

I think they worded this poorly. I believe their argument was more that someone can believe that morals are constructs, and relative, but you can also believe that you should try and move people to construct morals based on your own.

Don’t lie to them, now. We all know they need to get it tattooed

correct, a lot of “traditional” methods people think are possibly ancient, are like 150 years old. Some areas are culturally diverse to the point where they are basically a completely different culture, in comparison.

Yeah, Italian chef friend of mine once said that you use garlic, or onions, rarely both, in authentic italian food. Unless you are from one of the many places where they always use both.