urquan
Hold! What you are doing to us is wrong! Why do you do this thing?
No bio...
User ID: 226
urquan
Hold! What you are doing to us is wrong! Why do you do this thing?
3d ago
Well now it’s me that was confused because I was thinking of those 20oz bottles when I talked about vending machine and pizza parlor sodas. I guess I’ve vaguely seen soda bottles between them and the 2-liters in size, but I don’t know if I’ve ever bought one.
The unit conversions are getting to me now, lol. I’m not certain why the US denominates small soda bottles and cans in fluid ounces and large ones in liters.
urquan
Hold! What you are doing to us is wrong! Why do you do this thing?
3d ago
Yup, they trip you up in that way. "That's way too much soda for one sitting!" "Well read the label, it has OVER THREE servings in it!"
Yeah, those are bought sometimes, but not as commonly as 12 oz ≈ 355 ml cans. But the smaller bottles are common at businesses or vending machines, where it's tacky or unexpected to buy a can rather than a bottle. So for instance a pizza parlor might offer a choice between a 2-liter or a 1.25 liter. (Also, 12 fluid ounces is much less than 1.25 liters.)
I've never been a fan of the 2-liter bottles because you have to use them quickly or they go flat, but they're bought commonly for parties, cookouts, as a way to get a lot of soda for several people at once.
Interestingly enough cans closer to the 500 ml can size in the US are associated mostly with energy drinks, only rarely soda. And of course there's the Arizona tallboy with 23 oz ≈ 680 ml, but you wouldn't buy a soda in that size.
urquan
Hold! What you are doing to us is wrong! Why do you do this thing?
4d ago
I know conservatives who hate cops (or at least think they’re buffoons). But conservatives who go, “we gotta get this big government under control!” and then lick boots completely bewilder me.
urquan
Hold! What you are doing to us is wrong! Why do you do this thing?
5d ago
“Pastoral insensitivity?”
urquan
Hold! What you are doing to us is wrong! Why do you do this thing?
5d ago
More than 50% of the United States and nearly 50% of France voted for Donald Trump or Marine Le Pen, whose views are not so far away from those of Mohammad Ben Abbas’.
Excuse me, what? Do you really believe this?
And notably the Eastern church is the only one that the Catholics (at least now) consider a real, proper church on a near-peer level. But I don't think it's representative and certainly SSPX isn't on that level.
On a near-peer level, that's true, because they're both Chalcedonian. But there are more than one eastern churches.
The "real, proper church" thing (I assume you're referring to the "Church" vs "ecclesial community" split) has to do with the sacramental priesthood and episcopacy rather than doctrine specifically, and generally most of the Eastern churches are considered to be on the same side of that line. Eastern Orthodoxy, Oriental Orthodoxy, the Church of the East, despite their Christological differences, all have a general sense that priests are performing a liturgical sacrifice of the Eucharist to God, which is the requirement Catholicism sets for being a "Church-Church."
Anglicanism is in an interesting category because there are priests and bishops, and the Eastern Churches are relatively warm to them on that basis, but the longstanding view of Catholicism is that Anglican orders are null and void because the Church of England, especially in the 15-1800s, relativized its understanding of what the priesthood was to more of a ministry in the Protestant sense than a sacrificial office, while the Eucharistic sacrifice was described as a "sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving" (added to the first BCP communion rite by Cranmer). Both of these I know are described by modern Anglicans (except Anglo-Catholics, who've always jumped through hoops to try and make Anglican theology more Catholic than it ever was) as explicit steps of separation from Catholic theology and alignment with the continental reformation.
There's an alternate universe perhaps where Edward's minority didn't give Cranmer an in to push his agenda, or Elizabeth had a desire to impose more of her own liturgical conservatism and insisted on maintaining sacrificial priesthood as a pillar of the English establishment, and in that universe the Church of England would probably be called a "Church" by Catholic doctrine. Henry VIII was extremely Catholic in theology, and if his six articles had survived the test of time, the world may well be quite different.
Historians who study the history of Anglican sacramental theology agree fairly strongly that the CoE genuinely developed a different understanding of these elements, and so I think Apostolicae curae was a solid interpretation, even if the subsequent "we're not going to call protestant churches "churches" thing just annoyed people.
The main reason SSPX isn't on the same level is they don't want to be -- they want the "we are doing things without the Pope because the Pope is doing heretical things" without the "we are the True Church" baggage, which is obviously rather unstable. Technically speaking, the SSPX also doesn't have "lay members" or even "parishes" -- they have chapels and "people who come to mass here."
If they were to start appointing metropolitan bishops and naming a patriarch, both their self-understanding and the way in which mainstream Catholic doctrine sees them would change dramatically. The Old Catholic Churches are considered to be "Churches," though the woman-bishop thing is a problem. I should also note that the Polish National Catholic Church in the US, formed because of some ethnic tensions between Polish Catholics who felt excluded by other Catholic ethnicities -- the cardinals' desire to elect the Polish Wojtyła as Pope to connect with Polish Catholics didn't come from nowhere -- is considered a Church as well, and they also have a problem with the Old Catholics' woman thing.
urquan
Hold! What you are doing to us is wrong! Why do you do this thing?
5d ago
That is a pretty major level of chutzpah. Have they considered getting angry about the filioque or nailing some theses about Vatican II to a church door?
urquan
Hold! What you are doing to us is wrong! Why do you do this thing?
5d ago
Well, the old school way in which both sides of the east-west schism saw each other was very much, "we are the Church, those schismatics are Not!The!Church."
Things have gotten more relaxed, especially on the Catholic side, but the formal view of Catholicism is "Catholicism is the True Church and the Orthodox should be in communion with us" and the formal view of Orthodoxy, which is much more muddled, is fairly close in most circles to "The Pope is a heretic and a schismatic who altered the creed that Must Not Be Altered and we are the True Church which holds to the true doctrine of the ecumenical councils."
I could sort of guess at a logic for penance, although I have zero confidence that I could predict Rome’s reasoning. But the rules for the validity of sacramental marriage have never made much sense to me. Rome recognizes the marriage of two baptized Protestants as sacramental, right? So why do the extra rules for Catholics affect the validity of the marriage instead of just its lawfulness?
The reasoning is that the function of penance, in addition to being a sacrament of God's forgiveness, is also about re-uniting someone who's 'excommunicated' from the Church, which mortal sin brings about, into communion. Committing a sin (except one of the really bad ones) isn't an "excommunication" in the legal sense, but it does mean that taking communion without absolution would be another mortal sin. The point is that a priest who's schismatic or cannot licitly confect the Eucharist (which is a statement of unity with the Church as well as with God) cannot admit people to the table that he can't legally prepare. The legal term is "faculty," which is something that the Pope delegates through the hierarchy. The view is that giving absolution to people is an act of "binding and loosing" delegated by Christ to Peter first and then to the other apostles, along with the keys to the kingdom of heaven, and therefore that the Pope as the successor of Peter is the ultimate arbiter of sins being forgiven.
Of course, I should be clear that while penance is the main way in which Catholicism promises to re-unite sinners with God, it's not necessarily the only way (just the only way in which it can be done formally in order to admit people to communion). If you confess your sins accurately to a priest and do your penance, God promises forgiveness, even if you're not sure how bad you feel about your sins or if your only reason is that you're afraid of the possibility of Hell or you just don't want to be seen by Betty from the parish council asking for a blessing from Father instead of taking communion. God meets people at whatever motive gets them into the confessional.
However, my understanding is that canon law says that even a schismatic priest can provide absolution if someone is dying, because the principle of giving people an avenue for sacramental forgiveness before God is more important in that case than Church law. But someone in danger of death, if there's no priest available, can also make an "act of perfect contrition", which is essentially a personal prayer of repentence for your sins based on love for God in his goodness, and not any self-interested reason, which is obviously a high bar.
I think you could say a lot of the Protestant sinner's prayers are essentially a means of aiming to state perfect contrition -- "Lord, I admit I am a sinner. I need and want Your forgiveness. Your mercy and grace is a gift You offer to me because of Your great love, not based on anything I have done," which is a segment of a sinner's prayer I found in 5 minutes on Google, is not too shabby as a statement of perfect contrition, especially because it talks about the love of God as the ultimate source of divine grace. Ultimately Catholicism doesn't make judgments about who's contrition is perfect and whose is self-interested, because parish priest #3462 can't read minds, so the confessional procedure is the way in which it promises people can both receive God's forgiveness and be re-admitted to the table.
In terms of marriage, the point is that going to a Catholic priest who's not in communion to validate your marriage as a Catholic is an explicit step of having a marriage outside the Catholic Church. Catholics who have Protestant or "we got married in Vegas" weddings also fall under that. Protestants and non-Christians aren't held to the same standard, because they aren't Catholic. Catholics are required to marry under the requirements of canon law, like how a state can declare an unlicensed marriage void because they set the law. Protestants aren't bound because they were never subject to the canon law in the first place; California can't declare your marriage invalid because you got married in Vegas.
Well, no one's been the Republican nominee since Romney other than Trump, who has a unique gravitational pull over the Republican party but is deeply divisive. He also won more than a few moderates in 2024 -- enough to swing the election in some key constituencies.
I would also note that the Obama attack energy against Romney can be attributed to the way Republicans reacted to Obama's first term -- if anyone in politics has been demonized unfairly, it's Barack Obama. I disagreed with him on things, but Republicans treated him like the coming of the antichrist. Both McCain and Obama ran remarkably clean campaigns, although I think McCain would have made a better president. (Far better than Romney, as well.)
I think the real thing here is not that the GOP doesn't want to seek moderate votes, but that Trump uniquely energizes both his supporters and his enemies. I think it'll be good for American politics that he's a term-limited old man who won't be with us for all that much longer (natural causes, of course -- he's 80), because he has too much of a gravity well for his actual competence at governing to justify.
urquan
Hold! What you are doing to us is wrong! Why do you do this thing?
7d ago
I believe she's sincere. 2rafa's view generally is very strongly opposed to immigration and she's even made commentary in the past about how Catholic and German immigration into the United States fundamentally changed the nature of the country. I also believe she lives in the UK (London?) now because she believes the US is a lost cause due to immigration.
I admit it's very interesting for a Jewish lady to have such a strong attachment to Anglo-Saxons (of course if we go too deep on this we'll get down our own "migration into the country fundamentally changed the nature of society" story) that she'd go to bat for them against the Germans or the Italians, but nevertheless hers is a unique stance and I find it interesting even when I think she's wrong.
urquan
Hold! What you are doing to us is wrong! Why do you do this thing?
7d ago
I’m sure hereandgone will enjoy Father’s homily this weekend about how the Irish tricolor is cringe and non-Christian, and the Irish really should stop trying to preserve Irish Gaelic because heritage and language are not worth propagating. Leave the culture to the religious orders and the priests, please.
As we all know, Catholic cultures are completely apologetic and nonplussed about their heritage, culture, and language.
This is sarcastic, for the mods’ sake. But your position is very silly.
urquan
Hold! What you are doing to us is wrong! Why do you do this thing?
7d ago
Given her record since joining the Court I'm actually shocked that she was shortlisted.
But Thomas was put on the court to swap Thurgood Marshall for another black man, and he's based as all hell.
urquan
Hold! What you are doing to us is wrong! Why do you do this thing?
7d ago
I think perhaps Title IX could be read to require segregating sports by biological gender, but if the Court's going to take up a Title IX case I'd much rather they just strike it down.
urquan
Hold! What you are doing to us is wrong! Why do you do this thing?
8d ago
This feels like a bizarro world a little bit. I'm used to discussions of women's orgasm being about the orgasm gap and how bad it is that men orgasm more frequently than women, so seeing a gynecologist who specializes in the subject being criticized by a woman author is... rather strange. Does this say something about the left's oppression stack? Are rich women's orgasms not considered feminist any more?
What is interesting to me, and I'm not sure if this is a coincidence, is that so many trans women start off looking like nerdy and loser guys -- these guys seem like they would be vulnerable to becoming incel in the first place.
Yeah, I have some acquaintances like that. Sometimes people will show me their transition glow-up pics and say things like, "I used to be a fat ugly dude, now I'm a pretty girl," and while they often do look much better than they did before, it often strikes me that they lost weight and started to put effort into their appearance, and I sometimes wonder if it's like veganism, where lifestyle improvements that come from paying attention to what you eat and working on a balanced diet are attributed to the vegan lifestyle specifically.
The downside is that I also have some acquaintances that seem to struggle with broader body image issues (my belly pooch makes me fat, my forehead is too big, my butt is too small) and I wonder sometimes if the gender dysphoria is related to more complex body dysmorphia that goes unaddressed because transition becomes the panacea for body image issues.
That said, on the ftm side, this is complicated by the relationship between being overweight and PCOS syndrome, which describes an increase in testosterone that can cause male-pattern physical changes like hirsutism and sometimes even increased libido. A friend of mine believes that some young women with PCOS begin to identify with the male-pattern traits and transitioning becomes a way to 'embrace' them.
For transmen, they have the typical difficulties.
The typical difficulties?
urquan
Hold! What you are doing to us is wrong! Why do you do this thing?
8d ago
My girlfriend's been telling me about them. What are you hearing?
urquan
Hold! What you are doing to us is wrong! Why do you do this thing?
8d ago
One can argue whether such history embodies a real rule of Constitutional interpretation, ie. that a document should not be interpreted to forbid what its contemporary supporters were doing, but it's not entirely wacky.
I would hope not. It took like 5 minutes for the Federalists under the Adams administration to outlaw scandalous criticism of the President, which of course is a proud American tradition.
urquan
Hold! What you are doing to us is wrong! Why do you do this thing?
8d ago
McNeely holds that a blood draw is perfectly valid as a subject of a warrant.
Obviously there's evidence you can get from a blood draw for certain crimes that are extremely important and also potentially exculpatory, and I don't see the reason why a blood draw would be in itself unreasonable.
urquan
Hold! What you are doing to us is wrong! Why do you do this thing?
8d ago
East Asian.
urquan
Hold! What you are doing to us is wrong! Why do you do this thing?
10d ago
I think pure orientations are more common than zoomer self-reports would indicate, but rarer than naive 5% statistics would indicate. And like most things there seems to be a spectrum.
That said, genital preference seems to be the strongest binary, with exceptions, which is important because hormones and self-care can change your secondary sex characteristics to a degree but not your junk. I’m familiar with the GAMPs, roughly ‘straight’ men with low genital preference and quite adjacent to your referenced femboy enjoyers, but I’m not familiar with women having a similar phenomenon (though given how situational women’s attraction is, who knows, and there are obvious… anatomical considerations that are relevant in that case).
urquan
Hold! What you are doing to us is wrong! Why do you do this thing?
10d ago
The clearest examples I can find are people who have absolutely zero social deficits or mental health issues they just seem to have identification with the opposite sex. It doesn't seem unreasonable that a weird misfiring of biology could create this (rarely) and that in a permissive social environment these people would be allowed to exist.
I’ve met a few with pretty good mental health but the vast majority of transgender people I’ve met complain of mental health issues of some kind, even if “just” anxiety and/or mood issues, I have a friend who’s transgender, bipolar (but seems to be doing better with treatment), and extremely online and shy.
I guess the difficulty is, how do you differentiate between people who both have an identification with the opposite sex and have mental health issues, and people who have mental health issues alongside identity instability with which the gender identity issues are fellow travelers? I’m sure you have a clinical perspective, but this is also a philosophical question as to what constitutes “pure trans identification” with regards to gender ID, especially since gender dysphoria can come with acute mental suffering.
urquan
Hold! What you are doing to us is wrong! Why do you do this thing?
10d ago
a lesbian could be attracted to the feminine energy and vibe of a small, cute femboy, or a gay man to a buff butch, and feel conflicted about calling themselves bi because it feels more like an exception to the rule.
How would you describe them?
Yeah, the mini size. There used to be cans about the same diameter as standard cans but shorter, but they replaced those with the mini ones. I’ll be honest in saying that those are much closer to a serving of soda for me. Without ice I just get sick of the syrupy sweet well before I could finish sipping a 355ml can.
More options
Context Copy link