WeirdGoesPro

Ignoring your insults towards me, I ask you this question:

Was the fertilizer company responsible for the Oklahoma City bombing because their product was used in a way it wasn’t intended for? After the tragedy, improved monitoring systems were created to track people who were buying industrial amounts of fertilizer without a clear need for using it in agriculture, but before the bombing, they did not think it would be used in that way and there were no safeguards in place.

In my opinion, that’s where we are with U-Haul. Their product has been used in a terrible way that it wasn’t designed for—what they do next will be the thing I judge them for.

I get why you’re outraged, but I don’t think your assumption that the other poster is shilling for u-haul is well founded. As far as I know (from the last time I rented a U-Haul years before this administration), they don’t ask you what you intend to use it for. It is a tool with an obvious purpose—moving your stuff from one location to another.

They also make you sign paperwork saying that people will not ride in the back, so they had reasonable safety in mind within the intended purpose of the unit and the anticipated risk factors within that use case.

It is a good point that they should probably change their policies to log the intended use now that they know their trucks have been used in this way, but it isn’t reasonable to think that they should have anticipated that their moving trucks would have been used by ICE before it happened.

Makes sense to me—Ubuntu forcing users to grab snap packages, and Canonical thinks it’s cute.

Uh…I didn’t. I am a supporter of maximizing individual freedom and vote for the person who seems most in line with that, but I also feel that none of the options are bold enough. I think that if healthcare, housing, and education are considered human rights, then the bullshit grind of living gets reduced to a reasonable level and people can pursue their full potential.

Yes.

Devil horns, Moloch ears, rock ‘n’ roll, hook ‘em horns, or sign language? Find out next time on “What Will Christians Assume Next?”

Ghost Blog. Open source, flexible, loads of potential uses, works every time.

But responding to malice in kind is not always the right option. It is usually only the correct choice when the malicious person has no potential to change. Responding to a badly behaved teen with poor treatment only exacerbates the problem. On the other hand, responding to an oligarch with firm resistance would be the right choice.

The oligarch wants to be treated harshly because that is their core value by which they think the world operates, while the teen is often acting in a defensive posture to avoid harm to themselves and would respond to a more gentle hand.

Your observation is correct, but your conclusion is wrong. “Treat others as they want to be treated.” Different people have different needs.

That’s how a lot of eye witness accounts go, and the writers of the Bible aren’t even eye witnesses. It’s no wonder that everybody has a totally different version of events.

I’m not a Christian, but I think you’re misunderstanding how “holy” texts are supposed to work. They aren’t designed to be a riveting story, or even to make any sense in order. They’ve been translated so many times that they are a labyrinth of words compared to whatever the original intent was. The only way they function now is like sifting through word salad to find the occasional insightful line that resonates with you.

That isn’t necessarily bad—it can actually make the kernels of wisdom more impactful when you’ve been using your interpretive brain to get through the rest of it—but the problem lies in people finding meaning or justification in the horrible bits.

I actually think Jewish scholars have the right idea in a way: they treat the Torah as a story, a mathematical puzzle, and a secret code all at the same time. The wisdom is in the interpretation, not the literalness of it. People are supposed to question it because there is no predefined truth to swallow from it.

It is loosely based on a true story too. Paul Thomas Anderson is friends with the now grown male protagonist.