I’ve found that a lot of it comes down to who can enforce morals without having to sperg out about them.
The autists will meet a girl and will immediately or almost immediately walk them through how they will not allow x, y, z.
The lukewarm dudes just act like normal guys because they don’t know the moral boundaries to enforce.
The actually functioning faithful guys act more like normal guys because they don’t have to go on a theological diatribe any time the topic comes up and can enforce the boundary naturally, and they usually are more successful as a result.
Totally possible. Just figured that with everyone throwing around the term, I could counteract at least some of that considering the term’s connotations. Legally, revenge porn will almost always require the genitalia to be exposed or transparently visible, and since I’ve heard this is a bikini photo, it pretty much immediately takes it out of contention. Most lawyers wouldn’t touch this.
@Luke_Amos2007 From a legal perspective, this is likely not revenge porn. Quite possibly another privacy violation and certainly enough to get it taken down off the platform, but not revenge porn.
@metathomist@Sola_Requiem Completely aside from the actual issue itself, but still important here, legally, this would likely not qualify as revenge porn. Possibly some other privacy complaint, but not revenge porn.
@CopiumPoppies@dracphelan@LaNativePatriot Yeah, legally this is clearly battery. Being in a combat sport does give someone carte blanche to injure. Once you act outside the agreed upon rules, you are liable.
@Peacemaker811@honorablesaint@DefiantBaptist Exactly, please stop telling me not to comment on sin. The Holy Spirit has led me to this. You have no role in telling me what to do. Let it go.
Are you of the opinion that Nala is not a Christian or alternatively of the opinion that Christians cannot sin?
Regardless, this line of logic is not good. One, who are you to determine that I can’t determine what non-Christians wear? Two, if non-Christians walk in the nude, would you have no objection?
@Peacemaker811@honorablesaint@DefiantBaptist This is a bad take. The issue is both. Sin is not merely internal, it is external too. It’s clearly the case that people should stop being immodest and should be called out for it and also that people should be more chaste.
@Peacemaker811@honorablesaint@DefiantBaptist Thats actually the point. It’s not on people’s minds despite it being blatantly obvious that it is happening. And it’s our desire to bring it to the attention of those who aren’t thinking about it because we do not want people to ignore sin (which is loving).
@MattWalshBlog Anecdotally, I had many many college buddies who had no interest in politics at all flock to Fuentes after the death of Charlie Kirk and now ask constantly whether others are watching him. He is filling a hole.
I think the important thing here is what is meant by “cool.”
It seems totally okay to say that Hitler is a fascinating historical figure that clearly piques people’s interest. He’s been highly relevant for nearly 100 years and will continue to be so after.
A majority of people saying that Hitler is cool don’t use it as a way to say that every decision Hitler ever made was great. Some do, but a majority don’t.
But it seems as if every time Hitler is mentioned along with anything that could be remotely construed as positive, a slew of comments will arise about how Hitler is essentially a comic book villain. It gets to the point where it becomes so predictable and wrote that the condemnations lose their force.
It’s because of the response that this issue will continue.
@DrP3rky@NapoleonBonabot It was a combination of this and superb use of artillery, which benefitted Napoleon because he was an artillery man earlier in life. The way he used it was much more mobile than essentially anyone else at the time.