About 10% of chicken processors still chlorinate their chicken here; that's more of an Australian thing now. It's irrelevant, though, because it does nothing to the chicken besides kill bacteria, which has been the stance of the USDA and the European Food Safety Authority for years. The only reason Europe doesn't do it is because they're afraid it will "promote poor hygiene practices in processing plants"
@kangminlee I mean what do you want me to do? Run it on my news network? Any politician in the UK who wants to seek the prosecution of anyone involved in covering it up has my support, but my support means nothing because I'm in the US.
So you're upset that Americans, who live in America, and do not live in the UK, were more interested in pressuring our own government to release files that their government kept, related to a global child sex trafficking ring that our intelligence apparatus was likely apart of, and that many of our politicians and billionaires likely were clients of, instead of pushing for the release of files they probably didn't know existed over in the UK?
What the fuck are you talking about my guy?
I'm anti-pornography, but not the expense of free speech. The market has provided an unbelievably effective set of tools to address this, but these lazy Karens don't want to have to take 5 minutes to learn anything.
As a mom to three little kids, I’m furious that one of the most powerful industries in America has had virtually unlimited access to our children for years.
The porn industry profits from addiction, exploits women, and steals innocence, while parents are told to just “monitor screen time.”
That’s why I signed on to @approject’s coalition letter calling for federal action and supporting @SenatorBanks SAFE for Kids Act.
Protecting children shouldn’t depend on their ZIP code.
Congress must stop siding with pornographers and start standing with families.
@clareanneath "I'm lazy, I want the government to do it for me." The amount of money companies have invested in developing parental controls, just so you could ignore them entirely is insane.
@Telegraph What, is that supposed to be some sort of 'gotcha' or something? Are you suggesting that just because white supremacist organizations want to deport migrants, that everyone else shouldn't want to?
1.) You can't. The prohibition of anything that has mainstream demand has proven this fact time and time again. This fails because it doesn't actually address the demand. People who want to leave their marriages will just separate and live apart, and avoid a legal divorce.
2.) You correct it by addressing the demand. The Epistles didn't say to change the laws of Rome; it set forth rules that we as Christians were to abide by despite the laws of Rome. You can't expect secular non-Christians to hallow the sacred vows of marriage as Christians do. If you want people to treat marriage more seriously, you have to correct the culture and community. Make more Christians.
3.) You can try to carve out legal marriage as a part of the legal system Christians have majority sway over, but you will never succeed. Marriage is practiced in this country by more than just Christians. There's not enough of us to dominate that section of US law. I'd argue that keeping it as a legal institution has contributed to the problem in the first place, because it entices people to get married for the wrong reasons. It worked for a very long time because Christianity was much stronger in times past, and even non-Christians tended to operate on Christian ethics. That is not the case anymore.
4.) The government being a "safety net" is highly subjective. To me, its sole purpose is to arbitrate disputes and run a military. Even if you are someone who sees the scope of the government "safety net" more broadly, the government doesn't dictate morality to the people; the people dictate morality to the government. Your elected representatives, laws, and politics are a reflection of the entire body of the people (albeit not always a perfect reflection). If you had the level of support needed to change the laws on no-fault marriages, there likely would be no need to change the laws in the first place. Or the need wouldn't be so dire.
The laws of this country don't need healing; the people do.
@fwprism I need more context. If I were to give my best faith interpretation, I would suspect he's talking about the 2% of the population who are blue-collar criminals, not the poor. Either way, he's wrong.
Yes, this is a nearly global phenomenon. In the early 20th century, leftist politicians figured out that if you cater to the poor and generate a dependence on the state, you can create a quasi-permanent voter base. They scaled this concept globally by importing migrants from third-world countries. The cheaper labor creates an incentive for corporations to support their political agenda, and the threat of being sent back to their third-world countries of origin creates a dependable voter base, and often even a violent criminal intimidation system to threaten opposition with.
@AlinejadMasih@marthamaccallum The regime will not fall without a revolution or the deployment of US ground forces. We're not deploying ground forces, sorry. I'd like to see the Iranian people free, but not at the expense of American blood.
@BorisTrump6@AlinejadMasih@marthamaccallum Bad take. The deal was a good deal, but even if you could argue that it was a bad deal to begin with, the Taliban broke four of the five points before the withdrawal, and Biden let them do it.