What's new
Frozen in Carbonite

Welcome to FiC! Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Artificial Insemination and Lesbian Couples in France.

My grandparents were Italian too. Now, we have seen the light. :)
Oddly, my grandfather's hometown has a monastery in it of monks from a French order. Carthusians. Of course it was a French order of monks founded by a German from Cologne.

(Serra San Bruno is the town)
 
Alt-light youtuber Sargon of Akkad's real name. Not doxing because he's appeared publicly under it.

The fuck is "alt-light"??? Is that the new "they're against me so they must be nazi sympathisers" term?

Ah, people talking in front of a camera with some fancy-looking backdrop.

He's, uh, done more than that. A lot more. Spoke on Articles 11 and 13 at the EU, been to several public debates, several at colleges, campaigned for UKIP....
 
He's, uh, done more than that. A lot more. Spoke on Articles 11 and 13 at the EU, been to several public debates, several at colleges, campaigned for UKIP....
So, a, what, fifth-division player at best? I mean, having had some public talks doesn't make you relevant, else I'd be super-relevant. ^_^;
 
The fuck is "alt-light"??? Is that the new "they're against me so they must be nazi sympathisers" term?



He's, uh, done more than that. A lot more. Spoke on Articles 11 and 13 at the EU, been to several public debates, several at colleges, campaigned for UKIP....
It's what the actual Alt Right calls people who aren't part of their movement but who's work leads people to the Alt-Right.

Edit: As I recall they call Tommy Robinson and the Proudboys the same, because they figure they can use that focus on "tradition" and "western civilization" to get people into the full white nationalism. It's basically the altright version of the soviets calling someone a useful idiot.
 
It's what the actual Alt Right calls people who aren't part of their movement but who's work leads people to the Alt-Right.
Is that a serious answer? I mean, alt-light wasn't a typo but a legit term ?
 
Is that a serious answer? I mean, alt-light wasn't a typo but a legit term ?
Yep. I clarified a bit more in an edit.
It also gets used as an insult for alt-righters who aren't considered racist enough.
 
Yep. I clarified a bit more in an edit.
It also gets used as an insult for alt-righters who aren't considered racist enough.
Ah well… I guess I shouldn't be surprised…
 
  • Like
Reactions: EiC
Ok, see, this is how I know you aren't actually Carl Benjamin. I mean, trying to impersonate someone that has spoken out against laws that appear to discriminate in general by... praising an unjust law that discriminates is not a good idea. Like, you've gotten the manner of speaking right but the actual things you're pushing aren't the positions he says he holds.
Actually, it's more likely that he isn't Benjamin based on simple probability theory, the chances of him finding this place are so remote and tiny, that it is likely more likely that you'd have real Carl Benjamin fucking up and sounding like he supports homophobic policy, then for him to find this place.
Sort of like cuckservative.
People like that and their left wing counterparts, IE CTH are morons and hurt their chances more so then the rhetoric actually flung by the other side.
 
Actually, it's more likely that he isn't Benjamin based on simple probability theory, the chances of him finding this place are so remote and tiny, that it is likely more likely that you'd have real Carl Benjamin fucking up and sounding like he supports homophobic policy, then for him to find this place.

People like that and their left wing counterparts, IE CTH are morons and hurt their chances more so then the rhetoric actually flung by the other side.
I'm a leftist by American standards. I support a national healthcare system. I support Net Neutrality. I want to regulate the shit out of the energy industry. I want Abortion Rights enshrined in the Constitution and real science (evolution, climate change, etc...) required to be taught with no religious exemptions and no homeschooling permitted unless it requires inspection to ensure it isn't religious bullshit.

I have never looked at CTH at any point. And the Young Turks annoy the hell out of me.
 
I support Net Neutrality

Not a left leaning thing in the US.

I want Abortion Rights enshrined in the Constitution

There is literally no point in that, the constitution already covers it.

and real science (evolution, climate change, etc...) required to be taught with no religious exemptions

Already a thing.

and no homeschooling permitted unless it requires inspection to ensure it isn't religious bullshit.

Already a thing.

It's almost like you don't know dick all about the USA's laws.
 
Not a left leaning thing in the US.



There is literally no point in that, the constitution already covers it.



Already a thing.



Already a thing.

It's almost like you don't know dick all about the USA's laws.
1. Tell the Republicans that.

2. No it isn't. It's only held to be such by the SCOTUS, so one more RBot on the court could remove it, and the party has openly declared that this is their intent. (Incidentally I don't consider any Trump appointed judge to be legitimate because he said he'd be using that as a litmus test, so they've therefore already stated their decision on a case they haven't heard)

3. https://www.google.com/amp/s/io9.gi...public-schools-teach-creationi-1515717148/amp
Nope, you're wrong here too.

4. Heheh, https://www.thehomeschoolmom.com/homeschool-lesson-plans/creationism/

https://www.christianbook.com/page/...n-and-creation/creationist-science-curriculum

https://answersingenesis.org/store/curriculum/

https://kristiclover.com/teaching-creation/amp/

Hell, I could literally fill entire pages with links to creationist homeschool programs.

And, perhaps you should actually take some law courses before claiming other folks don't know anything about it.
 
1. Tell the Republicans that.

Don't need too, other repubs are already doing that.

2. No it isn't. It's only held to be such by the SCOTUS, so one more RBot on the court could remove it, and the party has openly declared that this is their intent. (Incidentally I don't consider any Trump appointed judge to be legitimate because he said he'd be using that as a litmus test, so they've therefore already stated their decision on a case they haven't heard)

The first judge he appointed agreed with the previous decision.


It's almost like you said this:
and real science (evolution, climate change, etc...) required to be taught with no religious exemptions

And not "no creationism period taught in schools" which is, frankly, not possible to do without ripping apart classes on theology and stomping on the freedom of religion in cases of catholic schools.


The first seems to be offering the things in an objective sense, not "this is what is true" but a "this is what some believe" sense.

The second link outright doesn't work properly.

The third isn't an approved curriculum(do remember that the kids still need to get a GED).

And the last seems to be the same as the one above.
 
Don't need too, other repubs are already doing that.



The first judge he appointed agreed with the previous decision.



It's almost like you said this:


And not "no creationism period taught in schools" which is, frankly, not possible to do without ripping apart classes on theology and stomping on the freedom of religion in cases of catholic schools.



The first seems to be offering the things in an objective sense, not "this is what is true" but a "this is what some believe" sense.

The second link outright doesn't work properly.

The third isn't an approved curriculum(do remember that the kids still need to get a GED).

And the last seems to be the same as the one above.
Yet people still use these. And ruin their children's chances to be anything better than themselves. Biblical Creation being taught in a religion class is not what that map is about and you know it. It has no place in a Science or Religion course.
 
Yet people still use these. And ruin their children's chances to be anything better than themselves. Biblical Creation being taught in a religion class is not what that map is about and you know it. It has no place in a Science or Religion course.
It has no place in a Science or Religion course.
or Religion course.
giphy.gif


Yet people still use these.

Do you expect every state to hire a few thousand inspectors, force their way into people's homes(breaking amendment 4), and carry the children away unless their criteria are met?

Also your map is very clearly missing some, as at least one school in delaware is supposed to teach creation myths in science class.

No, we don't know why either. Nor did the teacher.

Or the parents.

On second thought it was probably removed.
 
giphy.gif




Do you expect every state to hire a few thousand inspectors, force their way into people's homes(breaking amendment 4), and carry the children away unless their criteria are met?

Also your map is very clearly missing some, as at least one school in delaware is supposed to teach creation myths in science class.

No, we don't know why either. Nor did the teacher.

Or the parents.

On second thought it was probably removed.
Typo. Goddamit was trying to say Science or History
 
... Creation myths should totally be taught in history, they've influenced so much of human interaction...
They should be taught as myths. As in not facts. At no point should it be implied in any sort of educational context that they are in any way historical fact.
 
... Creation myths should totally be taught in history, they've influenced so much of human interaction...
As long as it is made clear that it is a myth, and not a fact, sure.
 
Ok, see, this is how I know you aren't actually Carl Benjamin. I mean, trying to impersonate someone that has spoken out against laws that appear to discriminate in general by... praising an unjust law that discriminates is not a good idea. Like, you've gotten the manner of speaking right but the actual things you're pushing aren't the positions he says he holds.
It's just shitposting man. Don't take it seriously.


Alt-light youtuber Sargon of Akkad's real name.
I am not alt-light.

The fuck is "alt-light"??? Is that the new "they're against me so they must be nazi sympathisers" term?



He's, uh, done more than that. A lot more. Spoke on Articles 11 and 13 at the EU, been to several public debates, several at colleges, campaigned for UKIP....
That's exactly what it is. If Ravan knew anything about me he wouldn't lump me in with my ideological enemies.
 
As long as it is made clear that it is a myth, and not a fact, sure.
They should be taught as myths. As in not facts. At no point should it be implied in any sort of educational context that they are in any way historical fact.
Considering the bible is one of these supposed Creation Myths, and I'm a pretty adamant Christian, I believe it's alright for people to teach at schools that it is completely possible God created the world without calling it a "myth", because a "myth" implies it's not possible at all.

In fact, I believe The Big Bang was a simple case of "Let there be Light: And God created the heavens".
 
Considering the bible is one of these supposed Creation Myths, and I'm a pretty adamant Christian, I believe it's alright for people to teach at schools that it is completely possible God created the world without calling it a "myth", because a "myth" implies it's not possible at all.

In fact, I believe The Big Bang was a simple case of "Let there be Light: And God created the heavens".
As long as it is made clear than the Bible is a fiction work, written by men for men, sure, why not.
 
As long as it is made clear than the Bible is a fiction work, written by men for men, sure, why not.
That sounds pretty much like saying it's a myth.

Also, that's pretty anti-Christian, which I do not appreciate.
 
Considering the bible is one of these supposed Creation Myths, and I'm a pretty adamant Christian, I believe it's alright for people to teach at schools that it is completely possible God created the world without calling it a "myth", because a "myth" implies it's not possible at all.

In fact, I believe The Big Bang was a simple case of "Let there be Light: And God created the heavens".
That's not how it works. Science doesn't know anything before the Big Bang, so science doesn't discuss it in schools. But we do know that life reached its current form over millions of years of evolution via mutation and natural selection AFTER billions of years had passed since the big bang, rather than being creared in more or less their current forms. So, I have no issue with Catholic style "theistic evolution" (God wrote the program and the big bang was Him hitting "execute"), but if you want to argue for Biblical Literalism and/or Young Earth, then it does not belong in schools.

And yes, there's even a difference between Biblical Inerrancy and Biblical Literalism.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom