LoudBirb

190732 pts · May 1, 2017


POOFY. BLUSHES TONS. ALWAYS BEEPING.

Your "honesty" sure does look and sound like insecurity and contempt. If she exists, I hope she can find someone who actually respects her in the future.

4 hours ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Sure, but I'm addressing a question about Norwegian non-religious community centers. The person thought they were officially churches or were in some way labeled churches. They are not.

As far as I know, the Satanic Temple doesn't own or operate any buildings in Norway.

4 hours ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Wow... you really go around telling strangers on the internet that your girlfriend "isn't exactly the best and brightest", huh?

8 hours ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

*commonalities not common cities

8 hours ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

They don't need to label them as churches to get the same tax benefits. The government there doesn't make a religious distinction in how they treat their non-profits.

So, no, they don't label them as churches at all.

8 hours ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

But the truth is that Atheism simply means you don't believe in god(s). That's the sum total of its form and meaning.

If you do not believe in god(s) then, regardless of any other beliefs you may hold, you're an Atheist. Congrats!

8 hours ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

That's the only sense of Atheism. That's the literal definition and all it's ever meant.

Any other impressions or baggage you think comes with the label is a projection by a society that's struggling to fit/conform a piece from a different puzzle into its own.

People are used to a religious label carrying with it a whole common *system* of beliefs. They see "Atheism" as such a label and try to apply the same logic. They look for common cities among the louder Atheists to project on others.

9 hours ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

They're not churches, they're just community centers that label themselves as explicitly atheist or non-religious.

Churches traditionally provide a lot of services to a community, from charity to ceremonies (e.g. marriage, birthdays, etc) to community events. These community centers simply provide the same without attaching religious baggage to them.

9 hours ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Exactly.

22 hours ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

If the reincarnation is truly random, then there's absolutely no way for them to guarantee any of that. The story stipulates that it can be tested for, not that there's a way to tell right away who it is no matter the distance.

There are shitloads of people that bear their children at home. Many of them it's because they don't have a hospital to go to near whatever village they live at.

The human breeding farms are useless if you're born in some poor village in middle Africa.

22 hours ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

"Barely" is a real strong fucking word for people seeing their interest rates and loan payments triple or more.

Like, I get the point you're trying to make, but that's an extremely out of touch take. The kind that only someone whose payments didn't triple because they're either lucky or they don't have any loans would have.

Yes, the source of the problem is well beyond the scope of any one administration, but don't minimize the pain people are feeling due to the actions of this one.

1 day ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The Democrat party seems that way because the people that vote in their primaries are, by and large, centrist and conservative Democrats.

For some reason, probably related to the intense nihilism that seems to be popular with the movement, progressives almost never show up to primaries in big numbers.

You're absolutely right to point to Mamdani's campaign as a sign of what could be... but I'd use it as evidence of what happens when people actually get out and vote.

1 day ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

Here: https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/7008/text

"(3) WITHDRAWAL.—The notice under paragraph (1) shall be withdrawn by the Member of Congress who filed it, prior to the close of the expiration of the notice, if the covered individual determines not to sell the covered investment."

Also, even if they weren't allowed to withdraw, not knowing WHY the stock sale is happening still makes the disclosure pointless.

1 day ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

If reincarnation is fully randomized and the reincarnator doesn't keep any of their experience/memories from their previous life, it's honestly not that different from the lottery.

Hell, if anything, it would incentivize billionaires to make the testing easily accessible globally, which means investing in a whole lot of infrastructure AND reducing mother/child poverty/mortality rates.

I.e. If they think there's a non-0 chance they'll be born as an AIDS baby, they're gonna try to eradicate HIV.

1 day ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

This creates an imbalance of information that leaves everyone else at a huge certainty disadvantage relative to congresspeople, because only they truly know whether the publically disclosed signal is real or not.

If even traders can't act with confidence on that legally required disclosure, then it's meaningless. Congresspeople are still free to manipulate the market at a whim and make bank off of it while they rest of us are left out.

Less bank than before? Probably. Still bank, though.

1 day ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

They have to disclose an intent to sell but aren't obligated to actually sell. They just have to file a public withdrawal notice before the 7 days is up.

Meaning they can notify intent to sell, then 7 days later withdraw the sale. All of a sudden, those traders are left holding the bag.

Also, they don't have to disclose WHY they are selling the stock. They could be liquidating assets to fund a different venture, or even simply speculating on their own, and the traders have no idea.

1 day ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Oh, that's funny. My dude posted and deleted two word-salad replies to this (neither with a source on this imaginary recanting), then muted me.

Guess he's mad I called him out for straight making shit up.

1 day ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

You can't compare volume traders with Congress members, though. Volume traders operate in a relatively fair information market.

Congresspeople are, essentially, inside traders. They have access to information that no one else (including volume traders) does. That's why individual congresspeople, particularly those who are part of regulatory committees, keep severely outperforming volume traders.

1 day ago | Likes 20 Dislikes 0

Of course I can. I would've loved to have someone like AOC or Bernie run. I've voted for Bernie in every primary he's run in.

But they didn't run in the primary against Biden. No one of consequence or note did. Have you considered why?

Also, I'm amused how you turned that around on me. I asked you for candidates you think you would've been good, and instead of naming any you accused me of lacking imagination.

Serious question, though: who would *you* imagine in the seat?

1 day ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

They very famously very nearly ran out of time to submit Biden to some of the states to put him on the ballot after the first primary. It was national news. I don't think you fully understand or appreciate the amount of time it takes to run a primary.

Who do you think would've even run against Harris and why do you think they would've bothered when they didn't run against Biden?

1 day ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 3

They didn't skip it, though. They ran the primary and Biden won, then a bunch of talking heads and political consultants pressured him to withdraw because he was going to lose because he was "too old".

There wasn't anywhere near enough time to run *another* primary after that. Even if they'd had enough time, no one would've run against Harris for the exact same reason no one ran against Biden.

1 day ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 3

You can literally check the date on the NYT article and the date on the article about the video. Yes it did.

I checked. There's nothing I'm finding about the NYT recanting on the preliminary report from the Pentagon (because they never recanted).

You made the claim that they did, though, so... you know... prove it. Post your source on the NYT recanting that.

2 days ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

They really should let people give accolades to comments. What a masterpiece. Bravo.

2 days ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Sure, but 66% of Americans either voted for him or didn't vote against him. We, as a country, share the blame.

Even those of us who fought our hardest to keep him out of office must at least accept responsibility for failure. No, it isn't fair. Life rarely is... just ask any of the innocent immigrants in the concentration camps.

2 days ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 2

Sorry... in your hypothetical scenario, you're expecting her to try to extort him for $100k 10 years after the night of the act?

The exact same thing would happen, because she'd still have messaged him to extort him for money.

3 days ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

No it wasn't. Why would you bother lying about something that's so easy to check?

The New York Times article is still up and has not been redacted. I linked it to you. You can click on it and look at it right now.

The missile video also came before the preliminary findings leak.

3 days ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

There's literally video of the Tomahawk hitting. Iran doesn't have any Tomahawks because we only sell those to, like, 2 US allies:

https://www.nbcnews.com/world/iran/iran-school-strike-us-tomahawk-missile-minab-video-munitions-experts-rcna262391

US officials leaked the US military's own preliminary findings to the New York Times. Those findings determined that the US hit the school:

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/11/us/politics/iran-school-missile-strike.html

3 days ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Let's not go down the "We are all domestic terrorists" messaging route. It didn't work out great for the Republicans.

3 days ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Good thing it's way less than 0.1%. And we do the opposite... we basically almost never punish rapists.

3 days ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 6