Politics

[Wheels]

Trump puts Mexico and Canada on the clock regarding illegal immigration and fentanyl with tariff threats. In less than 24 hours both Sheinbaum and Trudeau respond positively to dealing with the issues. Interesting how simple some foreign policy buy ins can be.

What I read is not completely correct. I will take back this statement as Canada and Mexico didn't agree just acknowledged Trump's message. My bad!

It will be interesting to see how this all plays out.

 

[mdwest]

Liberals in church? How’s that work?

It’s quite easy to see if someone is evil based on their politics. Most obviously seen in their views on social issues. A couple of dead giveaways are being in favor of killing babies and allowing kids (or anyone) to chop off their genitalia

most liberals arent single issue voters.. I dont know of anyone in my church group for example that is pro-choice or pro trans/genitalia chopping...

they are however (by in large... obviously all are not exactly the same) for affirmative action type programs, a market system (as opposed to a free market system), against voucher systems for schools, very pro environment (to the point of being anti "big oil", etc), on board with the global warming thing, arent necessarily "anti-gun" but definitely want more controls in place on firearms (definitely not pro 2A), want more govt involvement in healthcare, want very clear and very defined separation of church and state, buy into the "tax the rich" concept (even though many of the people Im referring to are certainly on the very high end of middle class.. with some of them touching into the truly wealthy side of society), and are big proponents of govt subsidized welfare type programs..

For them, its a sum of the whole equation... they dont personally support abortion.. and wouldnt have one or advocate for one for their kids or anyone they care about... but they also dont support everyone in a house owning an AR15 or a true free market economy.. so... becoming a "republican" or a "conservative" makes as little sense to them as them being a "democrat" or a "liberal" does to you..

the truth is... I bet if any one of us compared our personal belief system line for line against any political partys platform, or against the voting record of any single politician, we'd very likely find out there are some stark differences between ourselves and the party being looked at...

You support what is closest to your beliefs...

Youre never going to find a party that is 100% in line with absolutely everything you stand for or believe in 100% of the time..

 

[Rocked and Loaded]

Yep, the communist state of California won’t stop until they control every aspects of the people’s lives.
Some lakes are completely shut down and others you have to get your boat sanitized and then wait 30 days before you can launch.

I’m not one to defend much of what’s done in California but I think there is some misunderstanding here.

The quagga mussels are a huge problem. They quickly achieve plague proportions and are so efficient at filter feeding that they can quickly consume enough of the micro plankton in an ecosystem that fish start to die off.

Further, in Southern California, there are very few natural lakes. Most are artificial reservoirs which means that water districts have direct authority over many of them (rather than the state) and they are leery of the mussels which can cause infrastructure issues because they breed so rapidly. Recreational use is also low on a water district’s list of priorities.

So, while most lakes I have been to do require spraying or using rental boats, I’ve never seen this required in a natural lake like those in the high sierras or Lake Tahoe (though it’s possible temperature is a factor as well and those lakes freeze up in the winter).

I think a lot of people get mixed up because our lakes, at least in Southern California, are mostly artificial and managed by whoever owns them.

I can’t speak with authority on how lakes are managed further north but I’d be surprised if it wasn’t similar.

 

[Wishfulthinker580]

most liberals arent single issue voters.. I dont know of anyone in my church group for example that is pro-choice or pro trans/genitalia chopping...

they are however (by in large... obviously all are not exactly the same) for affirmative action type programs, a market system (as opposed to a free market system), against voucher systems for schools, very pro environment (to the point of being anti "big oil", etc), on board with the global warming thing, arent necessarily "anti-gun" but definitely want more controls in place on firearms (definitely not pro 2A), want more govt involvement in healthcare, want very clear and very defined separation of church and state, buy into the "tax the rich" concept (even though many of the people Im referring to are certainly on the very high end of middle class.. with some of them touching into the truly wealthy side of society), and are big proponents of govt subsidized welfare type programs..

For them, its a sum of the whole equation... they dont personally support abortion.. and wouldnt have one or advocate for one for their kids or anyone they care about... but they also dont support everyone in a house owning an AR15 or a true free market economy.. so... becoming a "republican" or a "conservative" makes as little sense to them as them being a "democrat" or a "liberal" does to you..

the truth is... I bet if any one of us compared our personal belief system line for line against any political partys platform, or against the voting record of any single politician, we'd very likely find out there are some stark differences between ourselves and the party being looked at...

You support what is closest to your beliefs...

Youre never going to find a party that is 100% in line with absolutely everything you stand for or believe in 100% of the time..

I don’t disagree. All I’m saying is a Christian (or any practicing Jew) flat out shouldn’t support the party that supports those things as a rule. Or be liberal on any other social issue and most other issues. Trump (among others) isn’t as pro life as I would like either but if someone votes democrat then they are complicit.

 

[Hunt anything]

@ Rocked and Loaded, totally understand. Many of the same arguments were made when they found zebra mussels and gobies in the Great Lakes, however many of these arguments turned out to be unfounded. While still a problem just not the end of the world that was predicted. And to a certain extent the introduction of hydrilla to south eastern lakes. They should come up with a solution in due time and not hamstring the users of the waters and still provide their main purpose of supplying water for household use.
Have they found quagga mussels in California?

 

[Hunt anything]

When I talk about the Great Lakes I should quantify that I only talk to sport fishermen and they say that it’s been off the chain. I haven’t talked to any on the water biologist up there in years.

The list of invasive species in the US is staggering and once they’re here it’s next to impossible to get rid of them.

 

[spike.t]

I’m not one to defend much of what’s done in California but I think there is some misunderstanding here.

The quagga mussels are a huge problem. They quickly achieve plague proportions and are so efficient at filter feeding that they can quickly consume enough of the micro plankton in an ecosystem that fish start to die off.

Further, in Southern California, there are very few natural lakes. Most are artificial reservoirs which means that water districts have direct authority over many of them (rather than the state) and they are leery of the mussels which can cause infrastructure issues because they breed so rapidly. Recreational use is also low on a water district’s list of priorities.

So, while most lakes I have been to do require spraying or using rental boats, I’ve never seen this required in a natural lake like those in the high sierras or Lake Tahoe (though it’s possible temperature is a factor as well and those lakes freeze up in the winter).

I think a lot of people get mixed up because our lakes, at least in Southern California, are mostly artificial and managed by whoever owns them.

I can’t speak with authority on how lakes are managed further north but I’d be surprised if it wasn’t similar.

Was wondering if it was something like that

 

[mdwest]

I don’t disagree. All I’m saying is a Christian (or any practicing Jew) flat out shouldn’t support the party that supports those things as a rule. Or be liberal on any other social issue and most other issues. Trump (among others) isn’t as pro life as I would like either but if someone votes democrat then they are complicit.

Theres a pretty decent article that Sean Gasperetti wrote earlier this year about how Christians should navigate disagreements... when I first read it (right at the time the election cycle was really starting to heat up), I thought "this applies to politics as well"...

In a nutshell, Gasperetti says most things we disagree over dont really matter, and we should celebrate our diversity of thought and welcome those sorts of discussions amongst ourselves (level 4 conflicts)..

then there are things that are worth debating (sometimes heatedly), but that we can all still acknowledge that while we are disagreeing, we are all still among the same body and same fundamental belief system (level 3 conflicts)..

Next up are "division" issues.. these are the things that see churches (and political parties) divide over.. we might all still see ourselves as "Christians" (or Republicans.. or Democrats), but we are definitely not in the same fellowship (think "The Squad" vs centrist D's... or "Freedom Caucus" vs centrist R's)... or in Church terms, Baptists vs Catholics vs Lutherans... (Level 2 conflicts)..

And then, lastly there are Level 1 conflicts (to die for type disagreements).. from a faith perspective, to deny certain "truths" clearly demonstrates you are outside of the boundaries of gospel orthodoxy... If you dont believe that "God" is the creator of all things, or that Jesus was the Messiah.. then we clearly do not share the same faith.. From a political perspective, if you desire a monarchy, an oligarchy, or an autocracy, you clearly do not wish the US to be a Constitutional Republic..

How should Christians navigate disagreements?

In a world marked by competing beliefs and perspectives, we Christians also find ourselves engaging in discussions that sometimes lead to disagreements. However, what sets us apart is (or, should be) our commitment to navigating these differences with grace and humility.

reacheverett.cc

Personally I think a number of self proclaimed "Christians" actually are not (sadly).. They dont actively practice their faith.. and dont even realize that some of their beliefs are clear level 1 or 2 issues that would see them separated from their church (or at least their denomination) if they actually understood the tenants that the church stands and where those match up with (or dont) their beliefs, morals, and ethics.. They may truly believe themselves to be "Christians".. they go to a building called a church every now and then.. they can recite most of the 10 commandments from memory, etc.. but beyond that theyve never really bothered to try to understand much more than that.. and merely saying "I believe Jesus was the Messiah" doesnt mean in the depths of their hearts they really believe it (much less understand what that calls them to do, how they are to live, etc..etc..)..

 

[spike.t]

Interviewer shreds this turdburg wannabe......

 

[Red Leg]

Interviewer shreds this turdburg wannabe......

Idealism and idealists are such a sad thing - regardless of the subject.

 

[Wishfulthinker580]

Theres a pretty decent article that Sean Gasperetti wrote earlier this year about how Christians should navigate disagreements... when I first read it (right at the time the election cycle was really starting to heat up), I thought "this applies to politics as well"...

In a nutshell, Gasperetti says most things we disagree over dont really matter, and we should celebrate our diversity of thought and welcome those sorts of discussions amongst ourselves (level 4 conflicts)..

then there are things that are worth debating (sometimes heatedly), but that we can all still acknowledge that while we are disagreeing, we are all still among the same body and same fundamental belief system (level 3 conflicts)..

Next up are "division" issues.. these are the things that see churches (and political parties) divide over.. we might all still see ourselves as "Christians" (or Republicans.. or Democrats), but we are definitely not in the same fellowship (think "The Squad" vs centrist D's... or "Freedom Caucus" vs centrist R's)... or in Church terms, Baptists vs Catholics vs Lutherans... (Level 2 conflicts)..

And then, lastly there are Level 1 conflicts (to die for type disagreements).. from a faith perspective, to deny certain "truths" clearly demonstrates you are outside of the boundaries of gospel orthodoxy... If you dont believe that "God" is the creator of all things, or that Jesus was the Messiah.. then we clearly do not share the same faith.. From a political perspective, if you desire a monarchy, an oligarchy, or an autocracy, you clearly do not wish the US to be a Constitutional Republic..

How should Christians navigate disagreements?

In a world marked by competing beliefs and perspectives, we Christians also find ourselves engaging in discussions that sometimes lead to disagreements. However, what sets us apart is (or, should be) our commitment to navigating these differences with grace and humility.

reacheverett.cc

Personally I think a number of self proclaimed "Christians" actually are not (sadly).. They dont actively practice their faith.. and dont even realize that some of their beliefs are clear level 1 or 2 issues that would see them separated from their church (or at least their denomination) if they actually understood the tenants that the church stands and where those match up with (or dont) their beliefs, morals, and ethics.. They may truly believe themselves to be "Christians".. they go to a building called a church every now and then.. they can recite most of the 10 commandments from memory, etc.. but beyond that theyve never really bothered to try to understand much more than that.. and merely saying "I believe Jesus was the Messiah" doesnt mean in the depths of their hearts they really believe it (much less understand what that calls them to do, how they are to live, etc..etc..)..

Abortion is a level 1 conflict (obviously). If someone votes for someone that is for it (even if they don’t believe in it themselves) they are de facto condoning it. Again, I realize that Trump is pro choice to an extent but you have to start somewhere. There is hope there. That’s not the same thing as voting democrats into power. Choose the best choice. Impossible to do when there’s a D next to their name.

Catholic v Protestant is a level 1 conflict too (in reality and historically). A justifiable one at that as the papists are wrong . That would be a more heated debate than one on abortion.

In fact, quite a few doctrinal issues should be level 1 conflicts since the unrepentant and steadfast belief (after hearing the truth) of even one false teaching is not a good sign…

 

[Brent in Az]

I saw some crackpot on YouTube who was claiming that there was a plot by the Biden administration to send Nukes to the Ukraine. That's way out in left field, as congress would never approve something like that

Does the U.S military have mobile launched Nukes?

 

[Red Leg]

Theres a pretty decent article that Sean Gasperetti wrote earlier this year about how Christians should navigate disagreements... when I first read it (right at the time the election cycle was really starting to heat up), I thought "this applies to politics as well"...

In a nutshell, Gasperetti says most things we disagree over dont really matter, and we should celebrate our diversity of thought and welcome those sorts of discussions amongst ourselves (level 4 conflicts)..

then there are things that are worth debating (sometimes heatedly), but that we can all still acknowledge that while we are disagreeing, we are all still among the same body and same fundamental belief system (level 3 conflicts)..

Next up are "division" issues.. these are the things that see churches (and political parties) divide over.. we might all still see ourselves as "Christians" (or Republicans.. or Democrats), but we are definitely not in the same fellowship (think "The Squad" vs centrist D's... or "Freedom Caucus" vs centrist R's)... or in Church terms, Baptists vs Catholics vs Lutherans... (Level 2 conflicts)..

And then, lastly there are Level 1 conflicts (to die for type disagreements).. from a faith perspective, to deny certain "truths" clearly demonstrates you are outside of the boundaries of gospel orthodoxy... If you dont believe that "God" is the creator of all things, or that Jesus was the Messiah.. then we clearly do not share the same faith.. From a political perspective, if you desire a monarchy, an oligarchy, or an autocracy, you clearly do not wish the US to be a Constitutional Republic..

How should Christians navigate disagreements?

In a world marked by competing beliefs and perspectives, we Christians also find ourselves engaging in discussions that sometimes lead to disagreements. However, what sets us apart is (or, should be) our commitment to navigating these differences with grace and humility.

reacheverett.cc

Personally I think a number of self proclaimed "Christians" actually are not (sadly).. They dont actively practice their faith.. and dont even realize that some of their beliefs are clear level 1 or 2 issues that would see them separated from their church (or at least their denomination) if they actually understood the tenants that the church stands and where those match up with (or dont) their beliefs, morals, and ethics.. They may truly believe themselves to be "Christians".. they go to a building called a church every now and then.. they can recite most of the 10 commandments from memory, etc.. but beyond that theyve never really bothered to try to understand much more than that.. and merely saying "I believe Jesus was the Messiah" doesnt mean in the depths of their hearts they really believe it (much less understand what that calls them to do, how they are to live, etc..etc..)..

Abortion is a level 1 conflict (obviously). If someone votes for someone that is for it (even if they don’t believe in it themselves) they are de facto condoning it. Again, I realize that Trump is pro choice to an extent but you have to start somewhere. There is hope there. That’s not the same thing as voting democrats into power. Choose the best choice. Impossible to do when there’s a D next to their name.

Catholic v Protestant is a level 1 conflict too (in reality and historically). A justifiable one at that as the papists are wrong . That would be a more heated debate than one on abortion.

In fact, quite a few doctrinal issues should be level 1 conflicts since the unrepentant and steadfast belief (after hearing the truth) of even one false teaching is not a good sign…

The only caveat that I would offer is that various parties can have very different interpretations of what constitutes a level whatever issue. On abortion for instance, it is hard to have a bare knuckle debate with someone who thinks it is fine if another party personally opposes abortion in their and their family's lives and simply ignore that position in their own. I am a bit of a deist as much as I am a Calvinist. I truly believe God is omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient. I therefore long ago concluded such a being had very little patience with humankind created dogma - within or without the Christian faith. Whether one is a hard shell Southern Baptist, Episcopalian, Catholic, Baha'i, Jew, or Muslim, I truly could care less as long as no one attempts to inflict a specific doctrine on me. That extends to politics as well.

 

[375 Ruger Fan]

Does the U.S military have mobile launched Nukes?

Do Planes, submarines and/or large trucks count?

 

[Red Leg]

I saw some crackpot on YouTube who was claiming that there was a plot by the Biden administration to send Nukes to the Ukraine. That's way out in left field, as congress would never approve something like that

Does the U.S military have mobile launched Nukes?

No one is going to provide nuclear weapons to Ukraine - though the idea might make ATACMS and Storm Shadows striking airbases and command posts somewhat less threatening. If I were the Russians, I would worry about Ukraine creating their own. Due to their nuclear power plants, they have lots of Plutonium - not the old school uranium the Iranians are playing with. I suspect they could have half a dozen deliverable warheads within six months to a year were they working the issue. They may already be doing so.

 

[Brent in Az]

Do Planes, submarines and/or large trucks count?

I was talking about portable launchers like what they use for SAM'S and the like

 

[Wheels]

Possibly my favorite nominee so far. Hopefully we don't have to hear much from him over the next four years.

 

[barryk]

What I read is not completely correct. I will take back this statement as Canada and Mexico didn't agree just acknowledged Trump's message. My bad!

It will be interesting to see how this all plays out.

I'm betting Mexico and Canada are going to play ball after all their huffing and puffing.

 

[steve white]

When I talk about the Great Lakes I should quantify that I only talk to sport fishermen and they say that it’s been off the chain. I haven’t talked to any on the water biologist up there in years.

The list of invasive species in the US is staggering and once they’re here it’s next to impossible to get rid of them.

And a whole BUNCH of them introduced by the fish and wildlife agencies!!