SCOOP
One of the Christian preachers who was assaulted by LGBTQ activists in Texas speaks out
Rich Penkoski says they tackled him to the ground and injured his neck.
The police then told him he can’t be in the park despite him having a ticket to the event, and gave him a trespass warning
@GregAbbott_TX should investigate this immediately
In 1995, 77.1% of global primary energy was provided by fossil fuels.
As of 2024 (the latest data I could find), 76.4% still comes from fossil fuels.
That's a whopping *sarc* 0.7 percentage point drop in 30 years.
Governments have spent TRILLIONS of taxpayer dollars on “green” energy projects, and while growth in renewables has been enormous (particularly solar), it has barely made a dent in the global energy mix (note, these figures are based on the substitution method for fair cross-comparison, so it slightly lowers fossil fuels) because coal, oil, and natural gas consumption continue to increase year after year.
If eco nuts like you actually wanted to “decarbonize” the economy, then a deregulation of and transition to nuclear fission would achieve that far faster.
And then one day, for no reason at all, every single civilization in every corner of the Earth, across all of history, regardless of race, religion, culture, or contact with one another, independently arrived at the exact same conclusion on banning women from institutional power.
I gave her every opportunity to say Americans don’t need Coca-Cola to survive. She wouldn’t do it.
This is who Democrats brought to defend food stamps.
This is actually a great point.
There is no official LDS equivalent of “How to respond to Evangelicals/Catholics,” because the Church is not primarily an apologetics ministry.
That makes sense if you understand the LDS claim.
The claim is not:
“We have the cleverest interpretation of the Bible.”
The claim is:
“Jesus Christ restored His Church, priesthood authority, covenants, ordinances, apostles, prophets, and additional scripture.”
Those are very different things.
Many Evangelical arguments depend on the assumption that Christianity is ultimately a contest over who can interpret a biblical passage most persuasively.
But Latter-day Saints are not saying, “We won the debate, therefore the Church is true.”
We are saying God acted.
He revealed.
He restored.
He called prophets.
He gave authority.
He brought forth scripture.
So when someone says, “Mormons don’t understand the Bible,” that criticism lands with far less force than they think it does.
We love the Bible. We quote the Bible. We teach from the Bible. We believe the Bible.
But our ultimate claim is not that we defeated Protestantism in a Bible debate.
Our claim is that Jesus Christ still speaks, still calls prophets, still gives authority, and still directs His Church.
And if that claim is true, then the endless “but my pastor says this verse means…” arguments are not the foundation of the conversation.
The real question is much bigger:
Did God restore His Church or not?
10 years ago, the Supreme Court illegitimately took the question of what marriage means out of the hands of the American people. They unilaterally imposed a novel view, veritably untested throughout all of history, and imposed it on our society.
What have the results been? Well we have seen some of them. It has resulted in the madness of transgenderism and the buying and selling of babies for inherently sterile same-sex couples.
What other kinds of harms has it done? Well, quite a bit actually. Some very important research here.
Obergefell must end.
J’ai une anecdote à ce sujet :
J’étais dans un bar chic il y a quelques semaines. À la table d’à côté, un touriste américain un peu bruyant et sa femme.
La raison de sa plainte ? Aucune bouteille de champagne à plus de 100 € sur la carte.
Je le conseille et lui explique qu’ici, 80 € pour une bouteille, ce sera un excellent champagne 🍾.
Ils rigolent avec sa femme, on discute et là, le mec est plombier dans le New Jersey, il gagne plus de 120 k$ par an, idem pour sa femme.
Pour un voyage de deux semaines en France, ils ont un budget de 30 k$, vont faire 8 musées différents et que des restaurants gastronomiques…
Le salaire médian aux États-Unis approche les 70 k$, la France stagne autour de 25 k€ depuis des années.
Vous pensez qu’on n’a pas décroché ?
From time to time, I go back to this NBC News report of a wealthy single childless white liberal female college professor in Boston named Lisa who takes in a Haitian refugee couple. She treats the woman as her personal chef and the husband as her handyman.
Lisa gets to live out her secret fantasy of experiencing what the Antebellum South was like. There are many white women like Lisa with their very own slaves.
This is why they’re so mad about today’s SCOTUS decision.
If I don’t like Apple’s price hikes, I can take my business elsewhere. I can buy a Samsung phone or a Dell laptop.
On the other hand, if I don’t approve of the taxes Sen. Sanders enacts… I’m screwed. I pay them at gunpoint or I go to prison.
So maybe sit this one out, Bernie.
Asmongold is right.
Elon Musk isn’t the reason I lock my door at night. Elon Musk isn’t the reason I give away half my paycheck for other people to buy food for free.
67% of violent crimes are committed by 1% of the population.
It’s easy to hate the rich. Do you have the courage to hate the poor?
Stephen A. Smith admits he can’t wrap his head around “how the hell” the Clintons and Obamas left office worth upwards of $100,000,000 after “serving” the American people.
“Clinton was a lawyer in Arkansas, grew up poor, relatively broke. How the hell he and the Clinton Foundation are worth hundreds of millions of dollars beats me.”
“Barack Obama was a community organizer who became the President of the United States. And last time I checked, that salary ain’t over $450,000.”
“How the hell you depart from office, [together] you worth over $200 million?”
Clintons’ net worth before office: ~$1,300,000
Clintons’ net worth today: ~$120,000,000
Obamas’ net worth before office: ~$1,300,000
Obamas’ net worth today: ~$70,000,000
In 2018 I actually met a guy who was a manager working in IT Security and Threat Management at @jpmorgan who was so impressed with me and my resume that he insisted I apply using him as a reference for an open spot on his team. Rejected, no experience, he was later sent a black woman with no degree or coding knowledge and told to train her. I'm not a Leftist but a lot of the 'ownership class' totally did this on purpose and are no longer of value to the nation. They are enemies of it. Libs don't have property rights.
Women don’t have magic psychology intuition powers and are always completely off on anything that isn’t surface level because they cannot for the life of them resort to constructing rational causal chain analysis.
They *feel* like they have these powers, because they build upon their false axioms of *their own feelings* both as the model and barometer. This is like the x plugged into the f(x), and the f(x)s are usually false teleologies and heuristic axioms of pseudo logic.
These f(x)s include:
- Projection: "If I were to do what he is doing it'd be because my feeling a, therefore he's feeling a"
- Pathology: "That makes me feel unsafe, which means I am in fact unsafe"
- Low IQ Insentient Hunter Gatherer Morality: "What feels good is good, what feels bad is bad" which also comes with a secondary appraisal of the faster it feels good the gooder it is.
These are r*tarded per the following:
1. This does not apply a global causality to anything because it relies on how *she* chooses to respond and feel with no regard for differences in this like in maturity, or different teleologies.
Something like a man yelling or getting angry falls under this category, where she "gets scared" because she presumes the only possible reason you would yell or get angry is le ✨out of control✨, because it betrays kindergarten cooperation and play nice ethics, with a sprinkle of blaspheming the Holy Trinity of the mother, the daughter, and the holy vagina. How dare you speak to her as if you're not beneath her, and how dare you insert the slightest bit of discomfort. It's in your best interest to cooperate and play nice, because her mammal brain makes her feel that way.
2. Women eternally conflate ego pathology safety with emotional safety. Ego pathology safety usually just winds up being them reading any negative feeling or discomfort as le "unsafe", even if they're necessary for growth. Children feel unsafe on their first day of school because it's slightly out of their comfort zone. Under eternal female juvenilism, they essentially never go to their first day of school. Born of femtarded worship, hunter gatherer teleology, and of eternal rationalized self-sabotage pathology. Most prominently with a dork like this, what "causes her to be guarded" is likely something that deconstructs her currently constructed self-sabotage self-protection mechanisms. E.g., women who are low self esteem and use sex and control over the supply of it as value will sperg out at the sight of attractive muscular chads because he strips her of that power due to her helplessness to want to have sex with him. It tears away their lies they've told themselves to force confrontation with who they actually are, which is someone they deem as low value, but mostly due to false frames like hunter gatherer utility and id indulgence over super ego alignment. She hates herself for not being her ideal self, and exercising discipline.
3. Feelsie goodsie morality overlooks firstly long term feelsies, but also is fundamental insentience that cuts off access to rationalism. A dork subsumed by this cannot operate outside their own feelings and means to peak pleasure, comfort, and survival. Consequently, they cannot infer a causal chain and wind up resorting to projection as above.
It's all evident in her use of “I feel like” instead of I think, suspect, surmise, posit, especially for such a smarty pants always dealing with hypotheses and spreadsheets.
Always such a delight when the spreadsheet geniuses who demand a source for everything you say resorts to feelsies and vibes for what they say, which further tells you they do not live in the actual world. They LARP empiricism or whatever but once again rely on their feelings and where they're assigned. It feels smart to be le empiricist and OWN you on that, but it also feels good to not be and pretend to have some magic celestial pseudo smartypants psychology vibes powers, hence they're not contradictory.
Pour comprendre pourquoi la gauche déteste la clim, il faut remonter à l'URSS de 1955.
Cette année-là, Khrouchtchev signe un décret au nom magnifique : « Sur l'élimination des excès dans la conception et la construction ». Les architectes qui avaient osé construire de beaux bâtiments sous Staline sont publiquement dénoncés, et certains se voient retirer leur prix Staline. Khrouchtchev les accuse de comprendre l'architecture « de façon trop esthétique », de dépenser « l'argent du peuple en beautés inutiles ». Sa sentence : « l'architecture n'est pas un art, c'est une technique ».
Et là, le détail qui glace le sang : les bâtiments déjà en chantier sont « dépouillés » — l'ornementation prévue est arrachée, grattée à même la façade. On efface la beauté au burin.
Résultat ? La même barre de béton standardisée, du sol au plafond, partout. Identique à Moscou, à Kiev, à Tachkent. Un continent entier rendu interchangeable. Le rêve réalisé : plus aucune singularité, plus aucun individu qui dépasse.
Ce n'était pas une question de budget. C'était métaphysique.
Le beau, le distinct, le confortable — tout ce qui élève un individu au-dessus de la masse — était traité comme une déviation. Un « excès » à éliminer. Parce que dans la tête du collectiviste, l'amélioration individuelle de sa propre condition est une trahison du groupe. Un péché.
Soixante-dix ans plus tard, mêmes gens, même instinct, nouvel objet.
Aujourd'hui, la clim, c'est exactement ça : un individu qui décide, seul, de maîtriser son environnement. De vivre mieux que ce que la nature et l'État lui imposent. C'est de l'émancipation pure. C'est l'homme qui dit « je n'attends pas un plan d'adaptation collectif, je règle mon problème moi-même, maintenant ».
Et c'est précisément ce qu'ils ne supportent pas.
Ils ne sont pas contre la clim pour le climat — on a une électricité décarbonée, l'argument ne tient pas trente secondes. Ils sont contre la clim pour la même raison qu'ils grattaient l'ornement des façades : parce que le confort individuel choisi librement leur est insupportable.
Le confort doit être collectif, rationné, octroyé par l'État — ou il ne doit pas être.
La barre de béton grise ou le ventilateur partagé. Jamais le climatiseur que tu as acheté avec ton argent pour ta famille.
C'est toujours la même guerre. Celle de l'uniforme contre le singulier. Du burin contre l'ornement. Du collectif contre l'individu qui ose vivre mieux.
La clim est juste devenue le dernier symbole d'un combat vieux d'un siècle : as-tu le droit, oui ou non, d'améliorer ta propre vie sans demander la permission ?
Eux ont déjà répondu. En 1955, au burin.
Immodest White women are too braindead to see it:
Your tiny bikinis at the beach, butt-crack leggings at the gym, and sports bras in the grocery store only exist because Christianity built a high-trust society that tames men and shields sluts from consequences.
Try that shit in a Muslim country, Africa, Hindu, or any Third World shithole, you’d be harassed, beaten, or worse within minutes.
Oh wait, you voted in tandem to IMPORT those very same people.
You mock the very faith and men protecting your degeneracy while sawing off the branch you sit on.
Peak entitled, suicidal stupidity.