I LOVE THIS ONE because after Noveria Ash tells Shep to talk to Liara about her mom but now Ash is close enough to Liara to talk to her herself https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3z21pFn5JQg
#remember that time #a
turian dockworker adopted a human teenage refugee #and when the Reapers came #he found her and showed her where to hide to
keep safe #and they both survived #and then the Alliance rescued them after the
Battle for Earth #and then he sort of
actually did adopt her #and they both
lived long and happy lives #yeah that
was my favorite part
i know the thor fandom likes to paint loki as the bitchy fashion sibling because it’s so easy but let’s look at the FACTS here ladies….thor:
1.had a godmode reveal in his first movie that involved him transforming into a cool outfit like an anime magical girl
2. took time to blow-dry his hair on the avengers plane while everyone was fighting each other
3. was and continues to be the first one to call loki out on his clothing & grooming choices (”you dress like a witch” “your helmet looks like a cow” “looks a little less greasy than i remember him” etc)
4. wore that slutty poncho in the dark world for no reason
5. the age of ultron outfit. u know the one. with the blazer…and the ponytail
6. dragged hulk’s interior decor for filth in ragnarok
7. cried while getting a haircut like he was a 18-year-old girl receiving a traumatic makeover on america’s text top model
if you call someone to witness and they refused to show up, you are legally entitled to stand outside their house and scream, but only every third day
you can sell your son into slavery once or twice, but after the third time he doesn’t have to put up with that shit anymore
no wailing allowed at funerals
also you can only have ONE funeral per person, don’t get greedy
if your neighbor’s tree has a branch hanging into your yard, you can legally cut down the entire fucking tree
however, if some of your neighbor’s fruit from his dumb tree falls into your yard, he can legally come into your yard to snoop around get it
if you call someone to witness and they’re too sick or old to get to court themselves, you have to provide a cart for them to come in, but it doesn’t have to be, like, a nice cart if you don’t want it to
they are indeed real! they’re from the twelve tables, a roman law text so old that it’s hard for even people who are well-versed in latin to read by the text is archaic (also half of it is missing but whatever)
while we’re on the subject, here are some more good ones that i forgot to put in:
the penalty for writing a song slandering someone (it’s very specific on the song bit) is getting clubbed to death
if you hurt someone (or if you just sort of inconvenience them) through magic arts, the penalty for that is also death
however if you maim someone’s limb through normal limb-maiming processes you just sort of have to figure things out between yourselves
if there’s a road right next to your property, feel free to build a fence around it to prevent people from driving into it, but if you don’t build your own fence then tough shit
if you waste all your money you can legally be prevented from wasting even more of your money
if you’re a woman and you live with a man for a year, that technically makes you married, unless you spend three successive nights at somewhere other than his house, in which case you’re not married i guess
There are lots – billions – of religious people who don’t think ‘God is real the way poetry is real’ or ‘God is real the way love is real’, they think that the universe was created by a specific entity with thoughts, intentions, and desires, and which sometimes acts in the world, and which has expectations about our conduct which were communicated through historical prophets. Many of them think you can directly communicate with God through prayer.
There are lots – billions – of religious people who think that humans have immortal souls, which survive the destruction of our bodies and which have an eternal fate of some kind.
Call those type-1s. They have a belief about the supernatural. They think their belief is true, and tells us things.
These are claims about the world. They’re not claims about lenses we can use to see the world; they’re not claims about what makes us empowered and happy to believe; they are statements about what is actually true. If you say to these people ‘oh, you mean you find it fulfilling and empowering to think of yourself as having an immortal soul’, they’ll say “uh, no, I mean that humans have an immortal soul”.
This is true of some religious people on tumblr/participating in this argument, but a lot of religious people on tumblr are a different kind of religious, one which is more common now than it has been historically. They are more likely to agree with claims like “God is how we find ourselves in the world” or “God is whatever you find when you’re looking for God” or “God is love”.
Call this type-2.
There are also, separately, a bunch of people whose attitude about God is “people who have believed in God have gotten something really powerful out of this, or they wouldn’t do it. What is that? Can I inhabit that state and get a good description of what the powerful thing they’re getting out of it is?”
Call these ones type-3.
So now that we’ve described our groups, here are some fights they have!
Atheists: “Okay, it looks like there is no entity with thoughts, intentions and desires that created the world. Also, those historical prophets were recording their own beliefs/interests, they didn’t have any access to what a god thought.”
Religious people-type-1: “We disagree. God exists, and we have a lot of information about what specifically he wants, and he wants this.”/ “We disagree. Souls exist, and…”/ “We disagree. Eight different gods exist, and…”
Religious people-type-2: “You’re treating this like it’s an answerable question, when it isn’t. And then you’re acting like you have the one right answer, you dick.”
Religious people-type-3: “yes, yes, we know, but God is doing something, and that’s really interesting, and you’re missing out on a huge part of the human experience if you’re not trying to inhabit the perspective associated with faith in God”.
Atheist: “…fine, but God doesn’t exist. Like, actually, if you go and check for Jews in Egypt there weren’t any, and this is true for every revealed religion, they make claims that are factually false, and you’re talking about something other than that, but there are still people murdering gays because of that, so I want to talk about that!”
Religious-people-type-1: “You’re equivocating between ‘this belief causes people to behave badly’ and ‘this belief is false’. God exists, and also people do bad things in their mistaken understanding of what God wants. It’s bad that they’re doing the bad things, but we have to find a way to address that other than claiming God doesn’t exist, because as a fact about the world, God exists and cares how we act.”
Religious-people-type-2: “if you’re trying to think about God by checking for archaeological evidence of Jews in Egypt you’re completely misunderstanding how to think about God. God isn’t the sort of thing that even in theory would be disprovable by looking at evidence. And also you are still being a colossal dick. I’m not murdering people over my beliefs, so why do you even care what I believe? My beliefs are mine, they’re private, and they’re a huge part of who I am.”
Religious-people-type-3: “People who are religious are happier; that’s a true fact about religion. People who are religious have tighter-knit communities; that’s a true fact about religion. People who are religious have more kids; that’s a true and important fact about religion which will affect whether the next generation is religious. You’re focusing on the false claims but missing the true ones, and the true ones matter!”
Anyway the current argument on tumblr is unproductive because all of these people are talking at each other without much clarity about what they believe and which people they’re directing their arguments at. And I think a lot of people think that “God isn’t an answerable question” is a concession everyone should be willing to make instead of one specific opinion about religion which you could hold.
This.
When I say I am an atheist, I’m saying something that’s compatible with 2 and 3, but I’m also saying “if you believe 2 or 3, I don’t understand why you consider yourself a theist. That seems weirdly imprecise.”
I can and have gotten a lot out of the kind of Christian practice that goes like “Jesus is this being that is maximally compassionate. He wants you to try to be, knows you will fall short, and doesn’t mind as long as you tried because he’s… well… maximally compassionate. We get together every Sunday and remind one another to try to imitate Mr. Maximally Compassionate as much as we can, and to try to push ourselves to do it more than we usually do and thereby become morally good through practice.”
However, I am uneasy about calling myself “a Christian” because I do not believe Mr. Maximally Compassionate existed. I think he’s a template, used as a reminder to be moralLy good and an inspiration to be more morally good than you currently are.
And an imperfect one at that.
I’m an atheist, someone who used to be type 1, and really don’t understand why type 2′s and types 3′s keep wanting to use the name of the religion that type 1s originally used.
if you say ‘i’m spiritual but not religious/ i’m animist/ whatever’ then fine, but acting like christianity/ islam was never about type 1 stuff, and suggesting it ever was is a strawman from lazy unsophisticated atheists who don’t know what they’re talking about and that’s not an interesting or important question anyway is disingenuous and frankly infuriating as someone who used to be type 1, knows a LOT of type 1s, and tbh thinks type 1 is probably more common than type 2 or 3 at least when it comes to abrahamic religions and maybe even in general, but if it’s not an actual majority is still a HUGELY relevant chunk and not a tiny minority.
Also, i’m someone who cares about the truth. Like, i care about things like ‘people are killing gays because they think god told them to’, but i ALSO care about the truth, and whether or not the actual type 1 claims are true. If there was a religion that had adherents who ALL behaved morally and were super nice and caused no problems, but they also said that ‘you have an imortal soul and dying is not a big deal and some people who die will go to heaven and some will go to hell’ that’s something that i actually care about whether it’s true or not. Whether when i die i go to heaven, hell or oblivion is kind of a big deal to me, i don’t know about you guys.
Yeah, that. I feel like type 2s and 3s want atheists to stop talking about type 1s but I don’t know why that would be required.
Endorsed. I’m even going to go a bit further and state that type 1′s make up the overwhelming (as in, >99%) majority of the religious, and so I’m a little tired of being treated like an unsophisticated /r/atheism philistine for pointing this out and treating it as a baseline in discussions.
It’s usually the type 2′s that are doing this. Type 1′s and I just have a fundamental disagreement about the facts-of-the-world. I think the evidence is clearly on my side, but they don’t… and that’s about as far as most discussions get. They are, at least, usually upfront about the material differences between our positions. Type 3′s, you guys are an odd bunch, and I think you really should call yourselves atheists, but you don’t usually give me grief and so I return the favor. As long as you’re not hurting anyone, you do you.
But it’s the type 2′s who are really condescending toward atheists, which especially bugs me because most of the time their arguments are muddy and confused. They are very slippery and won’t state plainly what they believe, leaving me with no way to actually examine and invalidate their claims, which they then take to mean I’m just a STEM-lord who can be brushed off because I don’t understand Kant or whatever. Hey guys, “communicating badly and then acting smug when you’re misunderstood is not cleverness”.
So, as a type-2 and type-3 believer, your reblog here just gave me a big clue as to why such people wander into your debates and get mad at you:
You assume type 1s are 99% of religious people but they’re really not.
But more to the point, type 1s like to assume that they are and should be 99% of religious people.
And it’s erroneous as heck according to the vast majority of demographic data, but it’s also, specifically, a power play in support of religious fundamentalism, against the rest of us. It’s the claim that they have the only ‘real’ way to believe. And when you accept their claim unchallenged, you are unwittingly supporting that power play.
Can you see now why we’d be against that, and very tired of it?
Anyway, already having typed this response, I see your tags say you’re tired of this, and that’s fine, I don’t know that I’ve got the spoons to really engage at length. But I thought you might want to know that, like, if you’re running into people saying “you sound like a fundamentalist”, and it’s confusing to you, what they’re saying is, “you’re accepting as basis an unsupported statement that the fundamentalists are using to try and trample us, please stop helping.”
*Even leaving aside Christian denominations which do so, and Christians who exist in type 1 denominations as a type 2 or 3 adherent, there are several religions that explicitly encourage type 2 and type 3 practice and belief. Buddhism, Judaism and Neopaganism are among those. That’s at least twelve million Americans. And it’s not a new movement in Judaism either; the Talmud deals with this stuff and there are tons of Jewish in-jokes about how Jews often wind up basically being atheists. This is not new, and the cultural erasure of it by fundies isn’t new, either.
This is his Jokers first day on the job, and he’s being such a good boy.
Donald W. Cook is a Los Angeles attorney with decades of experience bringing lawsuits over police dog bites — and mostly losing. He blames what he calls “The Rin Tin Tin Effect” — juries think of police dogs as noble, and have trouble visualizing how violent they can be during an arrest.
“[Police] use terms like ‘apprehend’ and ‘restrain,’ to try to portray it as a very antiseptic event,” Cook says. “But you look at the video and the dog is chewing away on his leg and mutilating him.”
Cook says the proliferation of smart phones and body cameras is capturing a reality that used to be lost on juries. “If it’s a good video,” he says, “it makes a case much easier to prevail on.”
The new generation of videos is capturing scenes of K9 arrests that are bloodier and more violent than imagined by the public. An NPR examination of police videos shows some officers using biting dogs against people who show minimal threat to officers, and a degree of violence that would be unacceptable if inflicted directly by the officers.
…
In fact, in many videos, the release of a dog appears to escalate the violence of an arrest.
“You just look at the dog as the source of pain and you do everything you can to address that pain,” says Seth Stoughton. He’s a former police officer, now an Assistant Professor of Law at the University of South Carolina who studies police use of force. “Those shouted commands — you’ll deal with that later, when the pain stops.”
And yet suspects who kick and try to shake the dog off are often accused of resisting arrest.
i don’t care what this dog in particular is being trained to do. furthering the idea that police dogs are somehow cute or good directly contributes to injustice and the perceived acceptability of police violence
My aunt rescues and rehabilitates german shepherds, and the vast majority are failed police dogs. The rehab process for these dogs is intense. They are trained to be hyper vigilant and to resort to violence. They are often is worse condition than formerly abused animals.
I spent a summer training one of these balls of anxiety. She was too fast and strong for my aunt to train her, so I did it. The biggest hurdle was getting her out of the mindset that biting someone gets her a treat. I had to let her bite my arm, forcible break the hold, and kennel her all without giving her a response because these dogs are trained to equate someone screaming at them as Go Time.
By letting her attack me and showing her that I was stronger than her and then not allowing her to play with the other dogs was what finally got her to stop attacking whenever she heard a loud noise or was surprised or just felt like it.
She still had to be homed in a gun-free, pet-free, child-free home because of the sheer anxiety she was bred for. These dogs are not cute, they are horribly mistreated.
just as an fyi long island iced teas do not taste like iced tea
just moving along like everyone else 