CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › placidmaker98 › Posts

Posts by placidmaker98

4 posts shown.

I was thinking about this after seeing some news about upcoming leadership changes in the big Hollywood institutions. It feels like every time a major awards body or a massive industry organization makes a decision about who’s running the show, there’s this massive debate about whether they are actually evolving or just keeping things exactly the same to maintain the status quo.

Don't get me wrong, stability is important. When you're looking toward a massive milestone like a centennial, you want people who know where the bodies are buried and how the machinery actually functions. But I can't help but wonder if the same hands on the wheel for too long eventually leads to a lack of fresh perspectives. We see it in every industry, really—the tension between honoring tradition and actually staying relevant to a changing audience.

Sometimes it feels like these organizations are just playing defense, trying to protect their legacy rather than pushing the medium forward. Does anyone else feel like the "incumbent" mindset is becoming a bit of a hurdle for cultural evolution, or do we actually need that continuity right now?
The NU2 uprising: Starčević loyalists are back in Close to Politics ·
Steven Allen9 said:There’s no question about it—Tomašić actually acts like a real representative in the US Congress. She’s out there fighting those weird social trends everyone else ignores, even if it means taking a hit personally.
Even though I don't line up with her politics, I still back her because I'm a staunch libertarian.
Then you've got Lesar in the mix too. That gives us two people who are genuinely dedicated to the people. Like, literally.
Tomašićka doesn't have some fancy house, she isn't living off government perks, and she has zero ties to the Republican Party. She’s got everything it takes to get into the US Congress. Go get 'em, Rose!

I find myself in total agreement with you (though I lean more toward the conservative side 🙂 ). She has all the right qualities to be a member of Congress, and honestly, we need someone like that. The issue, however, is that she likely won't even make it to the Capitol—and if she does, that will be the absolute peak of her career. We simply aren't thinking clearly enough. We’ll end up voting Republican because they represent the "establishment" party, or we'll vote Democratic just to spite the Republicans. Exceptions are rare for a reason.
It’s as if no other parties exist besides the Republican Party and the Democratic Party. People, please—wake up.
I know a guy from my local parish who, when I asked who he was voting for, told me: why should I bother going to the polls when nobody pays me to show up? That's the mindset we're dealing with.
Faith and hope: a necessity or a delusion? in Spirituality ·
Anthony Perez9 said:Well placidmaker98, everything's laid out right there in the Catechism. 🙂

And just what exactly does it say in that Catechism? I'm truly curious—do you actually grasp the weight of your own words?
Faith and hope: a necessity or a delusion? in Spirituality ·
Anthony Perez9 said:Look, as an atheist, I don't believe in God and I'm not expecting a single thing from Him. Honestly, the whole concept is totally foreign to me. I’m perfectly fine with using the term to describe something beyond our limited human comprehension—like the sheer scale of reality, the awe of an infinite universe, or even that > "God" concept.

So, atheism isn't really believing that God doesn't exist.

A theist actually believes God is going to step in, help them out, grant wishes, or grant immortality.
It’s basically the difference between worshippers and everyone else—those who don't pray to or believe in a deity, whatever that may be. ☕

Belief is usually boxed in by rigid dogma. Every phrase and word has been strictly mapped out by theologians long ago. There's no room for actual curiosity, exploration, or keeping your eyes open; it's just repeating mental scripts handed down from the past. That’s a death sentence for any kind of genuine spirituality.

That is completely incorrect. While faith can be framed by dogma, there is still plenty of room for creativity, inquiry, or whatever you choose to pursue. Furthermore, I fail to see why you assume belief is nothing more than repeating canned phrases. I just don't follow that logic.😕