And who have just relocated their best hostages to within Putin’s power. Yes, bring your nine children and wife along to Russia–now stay in rank on the front line, or maybe your oldest gets to come serve in your place (earlier than they would have anyway)!

So I think that you’re missing that this “controversy” started before this year’s Olympics began. In 2023, a boxing organization (IBA) based out of Russia flagged Khelif as not passing eligibility after she defeated a previously undefeated Russian boxer. Khelif’s disqualification meant the Russian woman kept her undefeated title. I’m lazy & going to copy from Wikipedia here:

The Washington Post stated, “It remains unclear what standards Khelif and Lin Yu Ting failed [in 2023] to lead to the disqualifications”, further writing, “There never has been evidence that […] Khelif […] had XY chromosomes or elevated levels of testosterone.” The IBA did not reveal the testing methodology, stating the “specifics remain confidential”. At the time, Khelif said the ruling meant having “characteristics that mean I can’t box with women”, but said she was the victim of a “big conspiracy” regarding the disqualification. She initially appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport but the appeal was terminated since Khelif couldn’t pay the procedural costs. After the appeal, Khelif organised her own independent tests in order to clear her name and return to boxing.

Alright back to my own words here. So the article goes on to say that in July of this year, the IBA said Khelif failed the test, but would not release the specifics about why exactly. The IOC said the ruling was “arbitrary” and “without due process”. That is the background that sets the stage for what happened when the Italian quit this year at the Olympics and everyone subsequently lost their shit.

Here’s the Wikipedia article, though feel free to check out other reputable sites for more detail: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imane_Khelif?wprov=sfla1

Yeah, there’s a gulf of difference between wanting a problem to disappear vs relishing the incredibly detailed idea of pain and suffering of another human being. One’s like putting down a rabid dog, the other is just pain for pains sake.

Closer, but also, everyone was sick of the Republican bullshit as Bush was on his way out and the economy was collapsing. McCain had a really hard sell.

Ooh, remember the cordless landline phones? I’d always see how far from home I could walk before they’d cut out

As someone working at a college–yup. A lot of students don’t know how to log out, or find save files. Where would they have learned it, though? You never log out of mobile devices.

Wait till they demand contractor rates!

I can appreciate that approach. But the biggest problems I have are when they nest in the railing of my little wooden deck. Every year it’s the same fight. So I’m a little leery of using fire.

Lol, not while I’m holding the bottle.

But seriously, where are the drones made specifically to spray stuff on wasp nests? I wouldn’t feel the need to use the foaming, bad stuff that hurts the bees if I could try a robot applying something like this. Or at least if it sprayed foam, it could be in significantly smaller amounts, much closer the the nest of trouble.

Because future generations have to safehold and not misuse extremely destructive knowledge. We have a world where North Korea has nuclear weapons, but do they have the ethics to use them responsibly, understanding their full potential? Do the other countries with nuclear bombs have that ethical responsibility, especially over generations? Cuz that big red button is going to be around for a while.

And that skipping KILLED the batteries.

Mental health is a squishier standard. Let’s say I had depression and decided to talk to someone about it, get the help I needed to become mentally healthy again. Should that necessarily be penalized if I want to go buy a gun to go out to the range or hunting with my buddies? Should seeking help disqualify someone entirely? Does that prevent people from getting help they think they might need, stigmatizing an already stigmatized practice?

Meanwhile, if Dave down the hill has a record, he’s already shown he was willing to do an illegal thing, whether or not the record is fair. If he already has reports against him for domestic disturbances, that’s pretty cut and dry violent behavior that ought not be allowed to intensify.

I’m not saying mental checks aren’t a good idea or aren’t worth it. I’m saying that they’re a harder sell because a) they take more nuance to formulate well and b) the propaganda machine will have an easier time telling people how those checks are overreach.

Ahh, the ol’ Alberto Gonzales effect.

I had a young woman, maybe 17 last semester, turn in a paper --it was a 12 page research/argumentative paper about why gender complementarianism (ie woman and men have different, distinct roles with men at the top). She’s a good student, a good writer, but literally she’s heard this set of morals from the pulpit her whole life… So like… Yeah. I read another young man’s paper where his takeaway from 12 Years a Slave was “wow, not all slave owners were abusive monsters–some were pretty kind and treated their slaves like family.” The kids are as alright as the rest of us are.

Yeah, Brits barely even noticed or cared about the results of the 2016 election.

But see, if someone admits that their parents/grandparents/etc were flawed, then they might come to the realization that they need to examine the ideas they grew up with, maybe change some. Maybe they themselves have behaved problematicly based on things they were taught. And what if that person starts questioning their faith/faith community’s behavior as part of this introspection? What if questioning makes a person feel as though they’re not “honoring their father and their mother”?

I’m 100% for that introspection and personal honestly, but I can see where a lot of people will be too scared of the work. More will be more scared of the “evil” of critical thought and nuance.

I’m sure there are plenty of podcasts that cover this group and happening. This is the one I like.

They are doing the same playbook. The longer I’m an adult, the less inclined I am to defend parents’ rights so strongly. Children are people, not property.

Yup, I’m sure their grandchildren will get all the warm fuzzies growing up in a confined bunker with picture book after picture book of the blue skies, green landscapes, and animals that their grandparents helped destroy.