CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › Christian Torres3 › Posts

Posts by Christian Torres3

717 posts shown.

Religion PDF: Testing the argument on same-sex communities in Feedback & Suggestions ·
Timothy Martinez6 said:The discussion became pointless a long time ago, and my points regarding testing that argument from the original post haven't been refuted. My apologies if I misunderstood you, but the fact that there isn't a case where siblings want to enter a civil marriage doesn't change the core of my argument one bit...

Take a break from the forums and go read a book for once. Seriously. Read up on the Habsburg dynasty and then maybe you'll realize why bringing up incest is such a weak argument. Hopefully.
Religion PDF: Testing the argument on same-sex communities in Feedback & Suggestions ·
Timothy Martinez6 said:If you were strictly talking about brother/brother or sister/sister, I haven't seen any links like that. I was referring to siblings in general—two people sharing the same mother and/or father, regardless of gender. I specifically know of stories regarding a brother and sister wanting to marry (link)...

Honestly, I think any further discussion here is just a waste of time.
Religion PDF: Testing the argument on same-sex communities in Feedback & Suggestions ·
Timothy Martinez6 said:Personally, I don't know a single couple like that. You might find news stories online about them, sure. But honestly, the number of real-world examples is completely irrelevant. Even if there weren't a single case, we could still debate the principle (like asking, "how would we handle it if such a pair did show up").

Your explanation doesn't fly with me. I'm not interested in appeals to emotion, like disgust; I care about pure logic and consistency.

I wasn't talking about incest itself and its prohibition, but rather the possibility of entering a civil union for people in close blood relation—let's call it an "incestuous marriage." Is there any state that allows that?

As for that main argument against incest or "incestuous marriage," it doesn't even apply to people who physically cannot conceive a child together, so it would be interesting to see what argument is used to prevent marriage in those cases. 🤷

I'll stop here, because this isn't really a discussion about incest. What I'm interested in is testing the consistency of using a specific argument that occasionally surfaces in favor of legalizing same-sex unions. Incest is merely my litmus test for that argument...🙂

Man, I'd love to see a link to some actual news story about a brother/brother or sister/sister wanting to get married. You claim they exist, so go ahead—show me.
Religion PDF: Testing the argument on same-sex communities in Feedback & Suggestions ·
Timothy Martinez6 said:But it absolutely works as a way to debunk certain arguments used to legalize same-sex marriage. Both scenarios fall under the exact same logical trap: "if people live together and love one another, we should allow them to marry." If someone relies on that logic to support same-sex marriage, then their consistency—and the actual validity of their argument—is called into question when it comes to the legalization of incest...

How many real-life examples do you actually have of brothers or sisters wanting to legalize their living situation?

What a f***ing garbage argument.
Is a guy who trashes veteran memorabilia a total psycho? in Feedback & Suggestions ·
wiredangler5 said:Let's be real—what happened in Memphis was a total abuse of power. I'm convinced those cops are trained well enough to handle someone without leaving them bleeding out on the pavement with severe head injuries and just walking away without helping.

From what I can gather from the news, if the reports are right, the officer has been suspended. To me, that pretty much says everything you need to know about his conduct and whether he crossed the line.

Scott, don't jump to conclusions just yet. A cop from the 13th Precinct could tell you that a suspension is just standard procedure while they figure out the facts. As for the incident itself, here are a few details:

- He came up behind him and grabbed Dark by the hair, slamming his head into the wall, after which he hit the sidewalk, knocked himself out instantly, and started bleeding from his nose and mouth... link, statement from Robert Horvat

According to his doctor, there's no way he was slammed into a wall; instead, his chin and lips were injured, and then he fell onto the concrete, causing the actual injuries. link, medical description of the injuries.

Both the cop and Horvat could be lying, but the injuries don't lie. Let's wait until the physical evidence reconstructs the scene. Whoever's at fault should pay for their mistakes.
Sam Diaz2 said:They sent over the contract via fax, then parked three Vatican aircraft carriers right off our coast in the Atlantic and gave us a 24-hour deadline to sign it.... OR 🙄

Nah, they just successfully activated the fifth column ☕
Sam Diaz2 said:It’s about basic culture and being a state governed by law. If you sign a Contract, you stick to it. Period. If you want to change the terms, someone at the head of The Government needs to sit down and negotiate those changes with the other party. You don't just unilaterally decide to flip the script; that’s just breaking the deal.

It's like if you sell me a condo for $100,000, we sign everything, and then suddenly I decide $10,000 was actually plenty and the rest is probably overkill.
As a citizen, you can go out, gather the required number of legal signatures, submit them, and then just wait around during some legally questionable timeframe for Parliament calling a referendum. 😉

That's all well and good, but it doesn't answer my question.

And by the way, Argentina used a presidential decree to scrap their concordat with Vatican City. Yeah, sure, that's a violation of an international treaty—everyone knows it is—but what happened? Absolutely nothing. Zilch. Nada.
loneraven25 said:The Republic of America and Vatican City signed a Catholic pastoral care agreement in Washington, D.C. on December 19, 1996, covering
Catholic believers within the Armed forces and the Law enforcement agencies of the Republic of America.
Following that, via the "Qui Successimus" Vatican decree from the Assembly for the bishop on April 25, 1997, the Military chaplaincy in America was established.

An interview with the American Secretary of Defense, Ante Kotromanović, in the American soldier:

And what on earth does any of that have to do with NATO standards?
loneraven25 said:Here’s the link from Morning:
In addition to the official delegation traveling in four buses and two vans, another 16 buses will be carrying over 1,000 pilgrims who are footing the entire bill for their own travel.

Before we worry about the "official delegation," shouldn't we be asking where all that funding actually went?

So, some people pay while others don't. The Department of Defense money for pilgrimages is being spent—there, problem solved.
loneraven25 said:The employees just pay for the Lourdes trip themselves through monthly installments via bank transfers.

I'll look into it, but I have my doubts. Based on public data, it looks like they might just be chipping in for part of the costs.

2010: The Department of Defense pays a million dollars for 155 pilgrims

According to this procurement plan, way more money goes toward the needs of the Chaplain Corps than toward training soldiers. Just for buying communion wine, they're spending $22533. At an average price of about $17 per liter, that means they're buying roughly 1,350 liters of communion wine.

And they're spending more on promotional materials for the pilgrimage to Lourdes than on teaching our soldiers how to handle sophisticated technology. For a promotional banner for Lourdes 2012, they'll drop $4267, and then there's $10667 for scarves for this pilgrimage and the one to Springfield.
link

So, I highly doubt those payment slips cover everything for Lourdes.
loneraven25 said:And get this—the real kicker—since they are technically employees of the Department of Defense,
every single one of them has their withholdings and taxes calculated directly from those massive salaries.

Maybe the next logical step should be slashing the budget for military pilgrimages,
though I imagine it would be a bit of a letdown to find out the staff ends up footing that bill themselves.

Or perhaps we could look into scrapping those tax breaks for children's Christmas gifts,
benefits that the kids of our actual veterans haven't even seen the light of day for.

Which pilgrimage are we talking about here—Our Lady of Czestochowa or Lourdes? Because the Department of Defense picks up the tab for Lourdes, but I've got no clue about the other one.

The Chaplain Corps in the Department of Defense and the Department of Justice is just a massive waste of money, and by the way, it's all coming straight out of the DoD and DOJ budgets.
R.I.P.D. (2013) Discussion in Movies ·
MiB meets Ghostbusters. Jeff Bridges is the only bright spot in this movie, everything else is just...
After Earth (2013) in Movies ·
Maybe they should’ve just glued some volcanic eruptions onto Will Smith's ears since he’s clearly trying way too hard with that fake "I've got everything under control" facial expression.

The world would honestly be doing us all a massive favor if someone invented a smart bomb designed to wipe out 95% of Hollywood screenwriters. It's pathetic.
So... in Feedback & Suggestions ·
Daniel Ward87 said:Since you didn't actually drop any links to the posts you're calling "trolling," I have no idea how I'm supposed to respond to that.

So you're actually arguing that calling people illiterate morons is just "trolling" and deserves a reward? Seriously? Can I just label the entire right wing as uneducated idiots and expect to get paid 35 cents for it?

The rules for this thread were scrapped ages ago, dammit. I said what I said—just drop the key.
So... in Feedback & Suggestions ·
Daniel Ward87 said:That post is total garbage, I have no idea what you're even talking about.

Go read my second post in this thread so I don't have to repeat myself.
So... in Feedback & Suggestions ·
So, calling someone illiterate or an idiot is just trolling? And all the trolling before and after that doesn't warrant any sanctions? Give the crowd a round of applause. Just keep coddling these goldfish.

Honestly, when I see how non-existent the actual criteria are, you deserve to get screwed over. That goes for me too, if it matters.
So... in Feedback & Suggestions ·
On what grounds does this reported post not deserve a ban:

Any sane person eventually hits a wall and starts wondering who they're actually dealing with. When you look at the quote provided here alongside the people still insisting that Ronald Reagan called someone "low-life cattle," you're left with a simple choice. Are these people:

a) fanatical, obsessed haters of Ronald Reagan;
b) shameless liars;
c) just plain illiterate, and/or
d) total idiots?

By what logic are these people allowed to fly around this forum with total immunity?
Olympus Has Fallen (2013) in Movies ·
Patrick Martin said:No, briskhound2, I'm talking about a plot where North Korea attacks the US in a terrorist-style strike. ☕

Wait, wait, wait, hold up a second. 😕

Weren't you guys literally just in another thread making fun of viral campaigns and how they act like some kind of INNOVATIVE way to introduce a movie?

Now, suddenly, with this movie, everyone's acting like knowing the plot is a requirement.

Funny how that works. ☕

...so yeah, clearly you haven't seen the movie.
Olympus Has Fallen (2013) in Movies ·
Patrick Martin said:And get this: that other flick is pure fantasy. It’s built on letting your imagination run wild. Honestly, that's the whole point. You gotta go into it without any baggage because, hey, it's a fantasy movie.

But this movie right here? This one deserves to be absolutely trashed because it tries way too hard to act like it’s some deep, relevant, serious piece of cinema. It’s just stupid.
It’s like, oh look, an attack on the White House! 😲 Oh man, the White House is under fire, how shocking! 😲
Bottom line? The whole goal behind OHF is just a quick, mindless cash grab. They’re straight-up insulting the audience's intelligence. It's just a massive scam to fleece the sheep.

Oh, give me a break. Is there actually any movie out there whose goal is slow money-making? 🤣
Olympus Has Fallen (2013) in Movies ·
Patrick Martin said:Your point is...?

Don't try to lecture me. I'm not here to write a freaking fan letter to your "masterpiece," which—let's be honest—is basically on the same level as OHF.