zapatos

Catholicism https://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/environment/environmental-justice-program/upload/Environmental-Primer.pdf Some statements made over the years... “Created things belong not to the few, but to the entire human family.” “The Church is likewise conscious of the responsibility which all of us have for our world, for the whole of creation, which we must love and protect. There is much that we can do to benefit the poor, the needy and those who suffer, and to favor justice, promote reconciliation and build peace.” “Our mistreatment of the natural world diminishes our own dignity and sacred- ness, not only because we are destroying resources that future generations of hu- mans need, but because we are engaging in actions that contradict what it means to be human. Our tradition calls us to protect the life and dignity of the human person, and it is increasingly clear that this task cannot be separated from the care and de- fense of all creation.” “[T]his concern and commitment for the environment should be situat- ed within the larger framework of the great challenges now facing man- kind. If we wish to build true peace, how can we separate, or even set at odds, the protection of the environment and the protection of human life, including the life of the unborn? It is in man’s respect for himself that his sense of responsibility for creation is shown.” “How can we forget, for that matter the struggle for access to natural resources is one of the causes of a number of conflicts, not the least in Africa, as well as a continuing threat elsewhere? For this reason too, I forcefully repeat that to cultivate peace, one must protect creation!” “The protection of the environment, of resources and of the climate obliges all international leaders to act justly and to show a readiness to work in good faith, respecting the law and promoting solidarity with the weakest regions of the planet.” “Care for the environment represents a challenge for all of hu- manity. It is a matter of a common and universal duty, that of respecting a common good, destined for all, by preventing any- one from using ‘with impunity the different categories of beings, whether living or inanimate—animals, plants, the natural ele- ments—simply as one wishes, according to one’s own economic needs.’ It is a responsibility that must mature on the basis of the global dimension of the present ecological crisis and the conse- quent necessity to meet it on a worldwide level, since all beings are interdependent in the universal order established by the Crea- tor. ‘One must take into account the nature of each being and of its mutual connection in an ordered system, which is precisely the ‘cosmos’”. And Islam... Muslims are allowed to make use of what nature provides but they must avoid waste and excess. Shari'ah law protects animals from cruelty, defends forests and limits urbanisation. Muslim leaders, representing all the major groups of Muslims, drew up a Seven Year Plan in 2009. The aim was to improve the environment. Actions include limiting the use of new resources, encouraging recycling, and developing guidance for business on how best to protect the environment from exploitation. By helping people to focus on God and not on distorted values linked with money and possessions, Muslims hope to re-establish harmony in the world between people and with nature. Sunni Muslims have created haram zones where people have to respect natural resources and not exploit anything that is there. They have also created animal reserves to protect wildlife and forests. These actions aim to re-stabilish nature as Allah wants it to be. https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/guides/zvygjxs/revision/4

😁 “…the Emperors of Blefuscu did frequently expostulate by their ambassadors, accusing us of making a Schism in Religion, by offending against a fundamental Doctrine of our great Prophet Lustrog, in the fifty-fourth Chapter of the Brundecal, (which is their Alcoran). This, however, is thought to be a meer[sic] Strain upon the Text: For the Words are these; That all true believes shall break their Eggs at the convenient End; and which is the convenient End, seems, in my humble Opinion, to be left to every Man’s Conscience, or at least in the Power of the chief Magistrate to determine.” -Gulliver

If highly advanced civilization were found to exist other than the solar system what would its effect be on humanity?

Without a doubt it would result in an increase in gun sales in the US.

Probably one group of earthlings would want to welcome them to the team while another group of earthlings would insist on ensuring parity first by seeing if their space rocks are bigger than ours.

I imagine it would bring people together to some extent. We tend to group ourselves based on similarity, which means humanity is quite fractured. By country, race, politics, or which end of a soft boiled egg should be cracked open prior to consuming. If others were found to exist, suddenly we have a new group to belong to; Earthlings!

Give me a fucking break. When have I ever presented my case like that?

I realize that and also know you well enough to not think you are a troll or anti-LGBTQ. The real-life potential structural stress for my home is for an earthquake, lightening strike and tornado to hit while my house is on fire. As that is outside the realm of a reasonable expectation, the building codes don't reflect that. Yes, I know that. I also know that the "World's top male decathlete" did not transition from male to female. When Caitlyn transitioned she couldn't have competed with a group of 17 year old kids much less in the Olympic Decathlon. She may also have a perspective on how to win a Republican run for governor.

Agreed. But if you want to predict and protect, and you suggest someone like Tyson or Bolt will be competing against your daughters, it is hard to tell the difference between the serious debater and the troll.

My mistake as I didn't realize the 6/3 210 vs 5/6 125 was a real-life example. However I do feel the Mike Tyson and Usain Bolt examples were over the top. As you stated XY was 'clearly biologically male' I assumed that meant all XY people. Little is out of the realm of the possible. But unless you have an example of that it drags us off course rather than dealing with real life. On another note, my aunt Cathy does think it is fair. We can probably toss out the opinions of those two though as it isn't really germane. Good. If you can get rid of everyone like me you can develop the rules in an echo chamber.

As chromosome testing has been shown to be inconclusive in identifying maleness, do you have a proposal for what we do until that issue can be resolved?

Unfortunately made-up scenarios are also the go-to boogeyman for those with an agenda. Therefore it is important to attempt to have the made-up scenarios correspond to real-life as much as possible. If you use extreme examples like have been used more than once in this thread you can be seen as fear-mongering rather than honestly discussing.

As I'm researching this topic I ran across a story about Hanne Gaby Odiele, an XY model. It highlighted to me the difficulty of definitively declaring someone 'male' or 'female'. https://nationalpost.com/news/0125-na-intersex

Do you believe we should have a chromosome test, similar to drug testing, in order to ensure compliance? If not, how would you screen out transgender athletes?

Completely meaningless statement.

So XX and XY is where your focus is in this discussion? Is it safe to say you haven't necessarily made up your mind on competition wrt people with atypical chromosomes?

There has been much talk surrounding this so just to be clear, for the sake of this discussion how are you defining biological males and biological females?

Q. What is the first thing a man does after ejaculation? A. Clear cache.

You've just substituted one ambiguous reason ('because we'll never understand the world') for another ('because there is no universal truth'). Why must we do anything at all, including believing in a god, just because we don't understand something or cannot agree on something else? You are completely leaving out reason. You could just as well say "it's not silly to chew gum because math will never be a well-liked subject for 8 year old children".

I don't see how one follows the other. Why believe in god just because we'll never understand the world? Why not believe in fairies, or meditation, or Tex Mex cooking instead? Or perhaps we should take up pilates because we will never really understand the world. What exactly is the reason to believe in god given that we'll not understand the world? Seems to me you are just searching for any conceivable reason to believe in god.

It would still apply to all companies who deselect candidates who vote against democracy. Unfortunately in the US corporations are not seen differently than individuals.

They didn't say they weren't funding both parties. They said they weren't funding those individuals who did NOT support democracy. Seems Toyota's decision is right in line with the standard explanation of supporting democracy in the round. What about individuals? Should they be able to tip their hat one way, or does the "unfairness" only apply to corporations?

And just to be safe, he should get inside the box himself so that he can properly monitor the situation.

Hmm. Did you happen to call them 'dumb aholes' in your post? Because that could certainly get someone to downvote you.

???