583 posts shown.
Justin Baker6 said:She claims she's "in touch with reality" or whatever. Honestly, she's just bouncing from one crazy idea to the next.
They're killing my threads everywhere.
Jessica Miller51 said:Why don't you start over at Fermilab? They've got plenty of anti-matter there, and they've even managed to photograph it. 🙄
Justin Baker6 said:When that idiot heard a phone ring for the first time... the very first thing he did was howl like a dog caught in a thunderstorm.
Justin Baker6 said:Why would anyone wait on time when they've got a compressor? Did you even bother reading what this topic is actually about?
Sam Martinez9 said:The population in Canada isn't a monolith either; it’s certainly not true that everyone wants the same thing.
But here's the rub: what the people want doesn't always matter. What matters is choosing what is actually good for them—and "good" means staying in sync with the times and historical shifts.
I know, I know—democracy is supposed to be rule by the people, and we like to tell ourselves the public is smart enough to know what’s best for them... but that’s rarely how it works in practice. That's why during election cycles, politicians from every corner of the spectrum work overtime to convince the public that their specific platform is the only path forward. All too often, the people end up making the wrong choice.
Sam Martinez9 said:"Nobody"? Really? In the world of politics, "nobody" is a word that effectively doesn't exist. Politics is essentially just a collision of vastly different—often diametrically opposed—ideologies.
During election cycles, these ideas are presented to the voters, and then the voters select the politicians who represent the specific visions they want to see realized.
That is the essence of politics.
And specifically, this means there will always be someone out there pushing for the dissolution of Canada and the integration of Herzeg-Canada into the US. Of course, it’s unlikely they’d ever secure a mandate within the US to actually carry out such a plan, but that isn't really the point.
silverwolf98 said:But what if there isn't actually a path to follow, or some predefined road you're supposed to trek down?
Betty Patel172 said:Perhaps like a kamikaze pilot, or those who plant explosives around themselves in pursuit of an ideology—someone marching toward their own end because they believe, however misguidedly, that it is the only righteous path.
Steven Stewart3 said:If you ask me, RHP is basically bhakti yoga—it’s all about those religions and their devoted followers. Everything else? That falls squarely under LHP. Take Kundalini or Raja yoga, for example; those are classic LHP examples. It’s basically any path where you're just "laying your head on the stump" and letting things happen.
Joseph Bailey41 said:Which feels like a pretty basic, almost cliché dilemma. Of course, everyone has their own reasons for why they do or don't do certain things. It isn't actually that hard to grasp. That is, unless you let emotions take over and start screaming, "Your reasons have to be identical to mine because we slept together once (or ten times), which means we are ONE, so your Eros, if it isn't directed exclusively at ME, is causing me pain."
It's not that I'm actively pushing for any kind of polygamous setup—that just adds more layers of complication, and most people can barely handle the emotional rollercoaster of a standard relationship as it is. I'm advocating for simplicity. People either enjoy being together, or they don't. If they don't, then what's the point? If they do, then surely they should be able to reach an agreement on the fundamental stuff just to maintain a baseline level of comfort, not to mention peace of mind. Honestly, everyone knows (or at least should know) how much attention, sex, intellectual stimulation, or emotional drama they need, and whether they want to get that from one person or several. Likewise, everyone knows how much they are capable of giving. Infidelity is a clear sign that there's been some sort of incompatibility, an imbalance, a failure to communicate desires and needs, or a reluctance to meet someone else's needs... basically, it means the relationship is exhausted, or perhaps it was never truly healthy to begin with, usually due to the immaturity of one or both partners.
In other words, it's a perfect sign—a transcendental revelation that it's time for everyone to go their separate ways. And what could be better than that? Two people cannot be ONE... they are always two distinct, separate individuals, not Siamese twins sharing a single heart or set of lungs. To let hormones blind you so much that you think another being is an integral part of yourself, or that their expression of Eros somehow directly hits YOU... it's just silly. An infant can't survive without its mother, so anyone would feel for its crying. A teenager experiencing their first heartbreak will feel it deeply because their still-developing brain perceives that rejection as being the same as being denied nourishment. But an adult... man.😁