Perhaps he lives in some 3rd world country and just converted the prices to their dollar equivalent.
Jedi: Fallen Order is a souls-like set in the Star Wars universe. Frequently goes on sale for under 10 bucks these days.
I'd love to ride motorcycles with Deacon and Boozer from Days Gone and I don't even ride motorcycles IRL
Hmm ich weiß nicht, der größte Unterschied zwischen Israel und den Nazis ist im Prinzip, dass sie sie Palästinenser ihr Konzentrationslager selbst verwalten lassen. Ethnische Säuberungen und gezielte Ermordungen finden halt trotzdem statt, wenn auch vielleicht nicht im gleichen Stil.
Aber der Großteil der Toten bei den Nazis kam ja auch erst zum Kriegsende. Davor waren es ja auch “nur” Arbeits- und Haftlager und man hat weltweit ein paar Augen zugekniffen.
Yes, unlike you, who is showing great empathy and totally not relying on the concept of pain and punishment by posting a derisive response attacking my character without responding to any of the arguments I made.
Basically, all you have said is “you are bad, therefore you should feel bad.”
I’m sorry that my comment has made you upset, but you haven’t given any clear indication of what was wrong with it, so I’m afraid I can’t help you feel better about it, and instead I can only assume that your being upset has nothing to do with the comment you’re responding to, but is instead just a reactionary expression of your ongoing displeasure about a lengthy discussion we had the other day about a city in Tennessee explicitly mentioning homosexuality in their law about public decency.
Also, I’d like to point out that empathy isn’t the same as sympathy. Empathy is simply the capacity to understand another person’s point of view, it doesn’t require agreeing with it.
Where could you possibly have gotten that I think everyone is perfect and that a god created us that way?
Well, you said Christianity is terrible because in order to be a Christian you must believe you’re a terrible person and can never be good (which is incorrect BTW, but we’ll save that for later).
So since you said that this was a terrible belief, and you didn’t provide any alternative, I simply took the opposite stance and showed how that isn’t any better. Also, I didn’t say that this is what you were arguing for, I very clearly asked you what your preferred alternative was.
Religion, and Christianity in particular, is a terrible belief system and it causes cognitive dissonance and psychosis. Christianity creates pain and suffering and turns otherwise good people into monsters. You've not refuted that at all.
And you haven’t proven that this is the case either, or do you happen to have any studies that show that mental illness is more prevalent in Christians than in atheists, or at least the population as a whole? Otherwise I assume you’re just working with anecdotal evidence, such as having been raised by Christian parents whom you consider psychotic. Unfortunately, that’s not enough evidence to condemn all of the approx. 2.4 billion people in the world who consider themselves Christian. Even if, say, all of the Christians in the United States were demonstrably psychotic, that wouldn’t be enough evidence to condemn Christianity as a whole (although it would at least warrant suspicion that the two may be linked).
Now, as far as misrepresenting Christian beliefs goes, you said that Christians believe that people can never be good and therefore must always feel terrible about themselves. That’s not the case. It’s rather that people can never be perfect and therefore should always strive to improve. Do you see the difference? One interpretation says “you’ll never come anywhere close to God’s perfection so you might as well give up and not even try”, the other says “you may not ever reach perfection, but you’ll certainly come closer to it if you keep trying.”
Responds to a factual comment that happens to criticize women by making a completely irrelevant accusation of it being "nonsensical" and "low grade shit".
"guys I'm totally not upset"
The only one's time I'm wasting is my own, it's your choice whether to continue to respond to me or not.
That is provably false.
This you?
Women fought for equal rights - for being allowed to do the same things men were, without restriction. Have careers, live their own lives, be equal before the law, not be relegated to the role of housewife/childbearer by default and without being given a choice.
https://feddit.de/comment/5069083
That's essentially what I said in my initial comment, nothing else. I didn't say they ought to go back to the stove or anything stupid like that. Just that having to go to work to provide shareholder value is part and parcel of making that choice. Men have to do it too.
Well, by that reasoning I can also criticize women without being a troll or a misogynist.
No, I thanked you for explaining it without name calling or insults. But then you felt the need to go right back to calling it baseless and unintelligent, thereby erasing any progress that was made.
You already admitted that what I said was true, why go back to insulting me for saying it, when I made you an offer of truce by accepting that it was uncalled for?
If you aren’t upset, why spend all this time and effort trying to make me regret what I said instead of simply proving me wrong?
If what I said was baseless and nonsensical, it would be easier and more effective to just disprove it rather than coming up with more and more insults to my intelligence instead.
Other people have at least managed to point out that they found it inappropriate because the OP wasn’t blaming men for her situation, to which I have agreed. Yet here you are still heaping abuse over my head and trying to convince me you’re not upset.
Sorry, but I’m not buying it.
Why do you think you upset anyone?
Because if I didn’t, there’d be no point in so many people spending the time and effort they did to make sure I regret posting that.
Yet no one has managed to prove me wrong, at best they’ve managed to convince me it was inappropriate because the woman in the OP wasn’t blaming the patriarchy for her situation.
But I’m sure you could have articulated that if you had wanted to, you just didn’t because it’s easier to insult people you disagree with than to have an actual argument with them.
In that case, is beef jerky just meat-based chips (crisps for the anglophiles)?
Ah, wir machen das eine teurer um das andere billiger zu machen.
Danke, genau darauf wollte ich hinaus. Es gibt keine Steuer, die tatsächlich Geld spart, es läuft immer auf Umverteilung hinaus. Und am Ende wird dann meistens doch irgendwie beides teurer, und keiner weiß, warum.
“I called your argument shit because it IS shit.”
Yeah, sorry, I don’t buy that. That’s like telling a battered woman you beat her because she deserved it.
You’re just excusing your own verbal abuse on the grounds that it was necessary because what I said has upset you, but you’re unable to articulate why.
No, I do understand that nuance, and I appreciate your ability to explain it without resorting to name calling or insults.
You and others are upset not because what I said wasn’t true (it was), but because it’s something you’d rather not talk or even think about. Okay. Point taken. She did indeed not blame men for her situation, at least not directly, I will admit that. Although I’m sure there’s already a feminist somewhere waiting to explain to me how shareholder value is a tool of the patriarchy that was designed for no other purpose than to oppress women.
Naja, beide besteuern sich im Prinzip aufgrund der gesundheitlichen Langzeitprobleme bereits selbst.
