Curiosity

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 929 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Entitlement central #2118367
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Jackk what a shill comment to make. Republicans don’t “keep people in debt” – people keep themselves in debt. What the Republicans won’t do is force you to pay off my debt.

    in reply to: Will Trump ever go to jail? #2117239
    Curiosity
    Participant

    mdd1, do you understand the difference between “storming one of the seats of the US government in order to illegally transfer power to someone to whom it does not belong,” and walking slowly and calmly into a building after being waved in by security?
    Just look at the comments from Biden’s own prosecutor Michael Sherwin, who explains the real reason for jailing protestors was to create “shock and awe” as a deterrent before the inauguration. Look at people like Anthony Griffith, who did nothing more than walk calmly into an empty hallway to take photos and got 7 years in prison. Meanwhile you’ve got murderers and gang members released from blue state prisons “due to Covid.” If it wasn’t so outrageous it would be laughable.

    in reply to: Will Trump ever go to jail? #2117116
    Curiosity
    Participant

    @huju, the answer is self evident. if Trump is a movement and not an individual, then the political persecution, disproportionate punishment, and jailing of the people who are at the grass roots of this movement has already begun. Just look at the non-violent trespassers from the January 6th protest still languishing in prison with no charges many months later, while the hundreds of violent BLM looters and arsonists are walking around freely. It should be undesirable for even you to have Trump, the man, personally sit in prison, because the only consequence of such an event will be additional, significant edging towards a civil war, which the Left will surely lose.

    in reply to: Will Trump ever go to jail? #2116960
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Funny to see the CR leftists coming out of the woodwork to drool all over themselves in this thread, fantasizing about Trump going to prison. You are so stuck in your TDS that you fail to realize that Trump isn’t a person, it’s a movement to get rid of anti-American globalist elites in power, corrupt life-long politicians who enrich themselves on the public’s dime, and unelected deep-state bureaucrats who think they can create and enforce new laws like emperors. It also works to reinstate some semblance of morality, self-respect, and personal responsibility into the social fabric of America. It’s too bad the Left embraces the opposite of all these things.

    in reply to: Gun Control #2106313
    Curiosity
    Participant

    People who want to ban guns have faith in the government to not abuse their authority and to protect them from bad actors (who will inevitably possess smuggled guns despite any law written on a piece of paper). People who don’t want to ban guns think the first group of people are ignorant of the rich world history of corruption amongst the ruling class (see unconstitutional blue state covid lockdowns for recent example) and failure of police to save the day (“when seconds count, police are minutes away.” Also, see lazy Uvalde police response.) Freedom has a price that some are too cowardly to pay.

    in reply to: Nuclear NYC #2106310
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Not useless considering Biden is basically about to hand Iran nukes on a silver platter.

    in reply to: Republicans vs. democrats #2106308
    Curiosity
    Participant

    People are dumb.

    in reply to: Obstructionist Senate #2053024
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Republicans are not good, but Democrats are pure evil. American politics is a big fat distraction. Israeli politics is important but just depressing – Why I don’t read YWN much anymore.

    in reply to: Trump 2024? #2031084
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Voting for Democrats on the federal level is highly antithetical to Torah values.

    in reply to: We trust you but we don’t trust the people around you. #1978932
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Listening to your parents is a deoraysa. Davening shachris with a minyan is a derabanan. Do the bigger mitzvah.

    in reply to: Review of “Use of Force” & “Lethal Use of Force” Laws #1976232
    Curiosity
    Participant

    @Redleg – I don’t know if your intention is to clarify or to advocate for “duty to retreat”. In the moment, the fight, freeze or flight instinct will take over, and people will do what their brains are instinctively hardwired to do. Having a “duty to retreat” law only serves to put a legal burden on victims of violent crime after the fact.

    But yes, I didn’t capture all the ins and outs of all these laws, as they are super complex, to the point of requiring a degree in criminal law to know what to do in any given situation. I’m not a lawyer.

    in reply to: Gog Umagog #1945294
    Curiosity
    Participant

    ילקוט שמעוני, ישעיה, סימן תצט,
    ד”ה אמר ר’ יצחק
    See above… Also brought down by the Mordechi – I forgot in which masechta. Pretty clear it will be the Persians who destroy the world while in conflict with the Arabs (Saudi Arabia/UAE?).

    in reply to: Stop being weak pathetic losers #1936523
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Yaakov only opposed ShImon and Levi’s action because it almost got them in trouble with local populous, he didn’t object to them in principle. Chushim ben Dan was commended for his actions by Chazal… certainly not reprimanded or criticized.

    in reply to: Stop being weak pathetic losers #1934846
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Whaddya mean Country Yossi was wrong? Didn’t Chushim ben Dan lop Eisav’s off for dissing his grandfather? Didn’t Shimon and Levi massacre an entire city for messing with their sister?

    in reply to: Stop being weak pathetic losers #1934270
    Curiosity
    Participant

    ZR1. You’re making 2 fundamental mistakes.

    #1 – you’re applying the well known (and often misunderstood) halacha for when the whole klal should fight in a national war to an individual private person who is being attacked by a random thug. This is not the same thing, and nobody here is talking about starting an organized paramilitary force. The gemara also says you should teach your children to swim so that they won’t drown. According to your view, they should just do teshuva instead of learning to swim because the water is only doing Hashem’s bidding after all.

    And #2 – you’re imagining that everyone is Rav Shimon bar Yochai who has zero room in his world view for hishtadlus.

    in reply to: Stop being weak pathetic losers #1934123
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Ujm we are in golus – which is exactly why we have to circle the wagons and have each other’s backs. To survive golus we need to provide a united front, and not just timidly sot there with your hands up like a little sheepie while your Jewish neighbor gets his skull bashed in by a thug.

    in reply to: Summarize Donald Trump #1933740
    Curiosity
    Participant

    He brought to light the biggest pandemic in history – millions of undiagnosed cases of the severe mental and spiritual degenerative disease known as Leftism.

    in reply to: NON CORONA TOPIC: Why would anyone voted Biden #1905146
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Rabbi of Crawley. You’re 100% correct. No reason to vote for Joe the creepy geezer. Anyone telling you otherwise is wacked out on leftist koolaid.

    in reply to: Leftest are reshoem? #1899515
    Curiosity
    Participant

    As one who has personally observed a few leftists in their natural habitat, I’ve documented two distinct types.

    The first, a naturally insulated genotype, whether by circumstance or by result of intentional intellectual self-segregation, exhibiting an infantile insecurity in their own belief system, which manifests as an abrasive and oft hostile xenophobic tendency towards other-minded individuals, is typically atheistic out of pure ignorance of all theism. They do not bother themselves with socially acceptable norms for “morality”, as they have no regard for social acceptance outside of their insular social puddle of amorality.

    The second, typically a former centrist, right leaning, or apolitical breed, too distract by their own virtue signaling to focus on morality and reality, do everything in their power to fit in with their newly found leftist circles, lest they be perceived as a centrist/right leaning thinker and be cannibalized by their new peers. Driven by a bitter resentment towards anything associated with their former philosophical belief system, they self-ostracized from their prior social circles either fully or partially (the reason for their partial withdrawal typically being due to a subconscious nagging guilt, or to not lose their financial dependence on said prior social circle). Despite having no logical connection to the cause of the trauma inflicted within the prior circle, any philosophical agreement is a painful association, in a PTSD sort of manifestation, and must be dissociated from fully. This breed is concerned with morals, but is willing to live with the cognitive dissonance to support their self-ostracization, viewing it as a justifiable means to an end. Traditional definitions of right and wrong and morality at large are not viewed with the widely accepted centrality-to-life, but as an auxiliary factor that must be sacrificed for the subject’s own mental health, as they are simply doing what they can to survive their own past emotional trauma.

    It is standard for both of these categories to lash out at anyone seeking to define them as unoriginal or fitting into a mold, despite them being unoriginal, and fitting into a mold better than a bunt pan pound cake, sans frosting. It is also expected for them to refuse all logical arguments regarding theism and to lash out emotionally when confronted with logic. Somehow they self define as spiritual but not religious, and not believing in any known God, despite not typically spending any serious amount of time studying Theology with any serious level of breadth and depth. They take their lattes with soy, and pumps of various chemically processed foreign flavoring agents.

    in reply to: Defunding Police #1869585
    Curiosity
    Participant

    There hasn’t been any indication that the left wing politicians are simply pandering or speaking in hyperbole, to the extent that everyone is conjecturing and guessing. Nobody seems to confidently know what they mean, but a lot of people seem to be self-appointed official spokespersons for the hoards of proponents for this abolish/defund/restructure police idea.

    in reply to: Empirical data: Does systemic racism exist? #1869206
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Don’t confuse systemic and systematic. It is blatantly clear that there are no systematically racist policies against black. If anything, policies lean against whites (racial quotas, affirmative action, etc.). Systemic racism in policing is debatable, but all the statistics show no evidence of this. Anecdotes are for making a sale, not for drafting a policy.

    in reply to: Empirical data: Does systemic racism exist? #1869197
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Dear N0mesorah,
    Just stating the facts I’ve observed. Clearly, your feelings trump these facts, in your opinion – providing further anecdotal evidence to my point.

    in reply to: Empirical data: Does systemic racism exist? #1869132
    Curiosity
    Participant

    It should be abundantly clear that only feelings matter. If that weren’t true, looting of innocent people wouldn’t be condoned, there would be no senseless calls to abolish police departments, #BLM would focus on black-on-black violence which accounts for the vast majority of violence-related deaths in the black community, and people would stop pretending that a drug addicted violent criminal is some sort of saint to be idolized.

    in reply to: Suppression of Looters and Rioters #1866217
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Unless they have really good insurance policies, store owners should stand in front of their stores bearing arms. These looters are opportunists. They won’t lay down their lives to steal a flat screen.

    in reply to: Refund For Seminaries Due To COVID-19 #1855793
    Curiosity
    Participant

    The Jewish school administrators and staff have to understand that it’s not just their institutions that are suffering – many of the parents and benefactors who used to pay them tuition and donations have also lost their jobs or huge percentages of their finances. It’s sad that this has happened, but private schools are not entitled to money for services not granted just like the parents are not entitled to salaries from the employers that furloughed them. Why shouldn’t teachers and administrators file for unemployment just like everyone else? They should offer refunds to families who request them, as those families also have to put food on the table.

    in reply to: We need a plan for the covid19 virus #1839731
    Curiosity
    Participant

    I can’t believe that even through all of this, some sick-in-the-head people are still so obsessed and demented that they’re putting so much of their time and focus into weaponizing this against the President. This has nothing to do with him. Pull your head out of the sand and go seek professional help.

    in reply to: New York State is Denying Access to Education to Anti-Vaxer Students #1765933
    Curiosity
    Participant

    There is no such thing an anti-vax child. Only anti-vax parents.

    in reply to: Kaliv vs other chassidus #1722618
    Curiosity
    Participant

    I think malchus is different – first of all because of yichus, which isn’t shayach here since the new Rebbe was adopted, from what people are saying. And second because you can’t really compare a 13 year old from the days of Tanach to a 13 year old today.

    As to other chasidus promoting a 13 or 16 year old – How did people react to such an appointment? It’s incredibly hard to people actually came to a 13 year old for personal advice and with serious shaylas about life events? Were they just figureheads?

    in reply to: Waiter’s finger was in my my soup! #1713526
    Curiosity
    Participant

    If your unwashed finger touches a boiling hot soup before you eat it, is it kosher? If a human tongue touches your boiling hot soup before you eat it, is it kosher?

    in reply to: Whats Baltimore like nowadays.Still OOT or suitable for intown fam #1705804
    Curiosity
    Participant

    What makes a community “suitable for in-town family”?

    in reply to: Halachically okay to be liberal? #1698989
    Curiosity
    Participant

    The Catholic pope is viewed as a liberal.

    in reply to: Halachically okay to be liberal? #1698771
    Curiosity
    Participant

    CTL, Neville,
    You guys can play lawyer and wiggle and squirm regarding what your personal definition of “liberal” is and how you take personal exception to the generally accepted definition of the term, but you are just playing semantics. When the OP used the word “liberal,” he/she didn’t specify exclusions to specific platform ideals. Therefore, it is only fair to assume he means “liberal” in the publicly used colloquial sense, which is being far left of center on everything, not in your personal sphere of influence’s highly unusual definition.

    in reply to: Halachically okay to be liberal? #1697584
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Many liberal ideals (toeiva “marriage”, abortion, etc…) run against halacha. If you believe these ideals are valid and good despite being against halacha then you are kofer against the Torah, against Chazal, and against the omniscience of God to be the arbiter of what is truly valid and good. Being a kofer is against halacha – thus being a liberal, as defined colloquially, is against halacha.

    in reply to: GAN DY: Should beis medresh bocherim have dorm counselors? #1696850
    Curiosity
    Participant

    “should they have dorm counselors who can be not much older then them, and sometimes VERY immature and baybyish.”

    No. They should have mature, responsible, dorm counselors instead.

    in reply to: Answers for the tuition crisis #1687651
    Curiosity
    Participant

    DY. The idea is that schools give out vouchers to school employees for things like food, clothing, gas, etc that are paid for with whatever tuition money is gathered. Then the school employee takes that voucher to do their shopping at the jewish owned venue. The Jewish owned vendor then gives heavy discounts to these school employees when they pay with a voucher.

    So, for example, a voucher “worth” $2.00 costs the school $1.50. The teacher takes the $2.00 voucher to Pomegranate and buys a $2 loaf of bread that costs Pomegranate $1.00. So: Pomegranate makes a $0.50 profit (from the $1.50 actual value of the voucher minus their $1.00 cost), but makes it up in volume from all the school employees who now have to shop there. The teachers are paid in cash-value instead of cash for things they will otherwise spend cash on anyway. And the schools can lower tuition costs because they can save on employee overhead. It’s a win-win-win. Except the minor inconvenience of teachers having to get paid in vouchers instead of cash. But if you make it in the form of a flexible spending card, instead of paper vouchers it would be more secure and less inconvenient. You could also make it only part of their payment instead of all of it, because having cash is important for things like mortgages which cant be paid by card. You could also let teachers control how much they get paid in vouchers and create an incentive by inflating the fictional worth of the voucher to $2.10 instead of $2. Even though it’s actually only worth $1.50 in real money, but that would be dependent on negotiation between the vendors and the schools…

    in reply to: Answers for the tuition crisis #1687534
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Why don’t we institute some sort of voucher system where teachers and school employees get vouchers to free or heavily discounted goods and services from Jewish owned vendors and venues. This additional compensation substitute will reduce the income requirements for families of school employees, thereby reducing their need for financial compensation. Then the schools can pay them less and lower tuition for everyone. It’s kind of like communism, but for a good cause and not gov’t controlled.

    in reply to: Guns #1685601
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Ubiq, come back and talk to us about your virtue-signaling, righteous high-horse, brain-dead liberal mishugas once masked thugs kick your door in at 3AM with your wife and
    young kids at home. Until then, you’re entitled to wear whatever rose-colored glasses you want, but just realize that to those of us who understand the need for gun ownership, the opinion you preach from that omniscient throne of yours is complacent, brainless, and outright dangerous. Please leave my right for self perseveration alone. Thank you.

    Curiosity
    Participant

    The classic answer has been provided by “Heargod”, above, but it doesn’t address why frum Jews of many circles avoid contemporary styles for what is considered respectable and nice, and rather stick to a homogeneous and outdated style. Also, there are plenty of ways to dress nicely without looking exactly the same as everyone else. But there are other reasons for this, including refusal to conform/blend with a non-Jewish society, and purposefully avoiding creating an environment where people feel like they need to “keep up with the Shwartzes”.

    in reply to: Guns #1682705
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Ubiq., please show me where I said guns should not be well regulated? This is your assertion which you slyly attribute to me – not my opinion…. Dishonest debate tactic #1.

    Calling an argument a “talking point” without directly addressing its content is dishonest debate tactic #2.

    Linking someone’s original opinions to a famous figure who may not be viewed as a fair, unbiased person by others (Hannity) is dishonest tactic #3. I do not listen to his show.

    Regardless of how much you think you know about me or my position, you clearly know very little, since you have to rely on manipulative tactics and baseless assertions to get your viewpoint across. This is why debating with you is highly unpleasant.

    in reply to: Guns #1682624
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Ubiq. I hope you don’t prescribe cocaine and heroin to your patients. I clearly wasn’t talking about the useful drugs you mentioned. Additionally, getting high and addicted to drugs is not a use that is beneficial to society or to individuals. If you believe otherwise, you should consider giving back whatever medical license you have. Your usage of intellectually dishonest debate tactics make conversing with you highly unpleasant. Good night.

    in reply to: Guns #1681788
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Ubiq – You totally missed the point of the explosives conversation. Your 1st question is irrelevant to my conversation with M.

    Also, M was talking about legalizing already illegal recreational drugs, not about pharmaceuticals. You missed the point there, too. Before you pluck half a sentence of what I wrote out of context and start attacking me for “dodging,” please try to follow the logic of the conversation.

    Let me try to connect the dots for you:
    Step #1) It is already illegal to be in possession of a firearm during a crime, to smuggle guns across the border, to carry guns in certain locations, and for felons to purchase guns. Making ownership of guns illegal for everyone doesn’t take guns out of the hands of people who already illegally own and traffic them, but it will prevent law-abiding citizens from owning them and using them for legal uses such as self-defense, hunting, sport, and security.

    Step #2) Many potentially harmful drugs are currently illegal to own for anyone other than medical entities. Making them legal means anyone can now buy cocaine and meth at his/her local Wal-Mart. Yes, those who deal drugs illegally will do so despite the current law, but the law-abiding part of society who isn’t currently interested or addicted to drugs would be severely harmed by having free access to legal temptations which can destroy lives. There is no benefit to society since there is no productive use for these things OUTSIDE of the medical realm, in which it is already legal. Therefore, this is a poor comparison to guns.

    in reply to: Guns #1681516
    Curiosity
    Participant

    M – the obvious fallacy in your comparison is that there are perfectly legitimate and productive uses for legally purchased firearms, but there are no legitimate, productive uses for heroin and cocaine.

    in reply to: Guns #1681294
    Curiosity
    Participant

    M – to answer your question, I personally believe there are auxiliary psychosocial issues in American culture not directly related to firearms which contribute towards a culture that tends towards violence. This includes things like substance abuse, fatherlessness, and the glorification of gratuitous violence. I think if you study the trends of these factors you will find a correlation with violence. If you curb these trends you will also curb all forms of violence, including violence involving guns.

    I don’t think an obligatory psychological evaluation for firearm purchases will prevent gun violence. This is because in order to prevent an individual psychologist from violating the rights of others, the test will have to be standardized and not subjective. Once it’s standardized, people can just learn to answer the questions correctly. Also, psychologists aren’t mind readers.

    One thing you might find interesting is that license-to-carry holders in Texas are extremely less likely to commit a violent crime than those who are not licensed, and psychological evaluations are not a prerequisite for licensure here.

    in reply to: Guns #1681280
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Correction to my first post:
    “Would you similarly suggest that violence *including* suicide bombings is high in some Muslim countries because fertilizer and other explosive components are prevalent and easily accessible?”
    My point is that there would be violence in these places whether or not explosive components are accessible.

    in reply to: Guns #1681211
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Luna.. You do realize that “larger guns” and “smaller guns” legally available to the public both shoot at the exact same rate right? No offense to you, but it’s hilarious how people with admittedly zero knowledge of firearms think they can and should provide an opinion on which firearms should and shouldn’t be legal.

    in reply to: Guns #1681191
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Statistically speaking, guns are used in more crime prevention incidents per year than in committing of a crime. This is a fact according to the majority of studies except a single statistical outlier study that is frequently quoted by anti-gun groups.

    Classifying violence based on the instrument of choice used by perpetrators of a violent act rather than based on the psychosocial factors that cause high levels of violence is nonsensical. Would you similarly suggest that violence in the form of suicide bombings is high in some Muslim countries because fertilizer and other explosive components are prevalent and easily accessible? I would hope not.

    in reply to: Darchei Binah Sem Girls Coming For Shabbos #1660024
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Not only will they wash all your dishes, they’ll also be dropping off all the food at your house on Friday afternoon. You don’t even need to prepare!

    in reply to: Voting Democrat #1644511
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Jackk,
    Not sure why you are quoting something someone else wrote in response to me, but to respond to you:

    The fallacy that Democratic politicians are anything other than a Hivemind that defaults to the most extreme left wing voice among them that is still publicly palatable is clearly evident. As Exhibit A , just look at how they vote in unified blocks on things that any rationally thinking group of moderate individuals would expectedly have differing opinions on. The Kavanaugh hearing is the most recent example to come to mind.

    I think Democratic voters are diverse in thought, but unfortunately the politicians don’t represent them. Just look at how your party’s sweetheart, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s rhetoric shifted once she got into office. Before the elections she promised she would move mountains and revolutionize the Dem party towards Marxism, and now she says her main priority is to support the establishment Democrats.

    in reply to: Voting Democrat #1644502
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Ubiquitin,
    Your response is nonsensical.
    “But that isnt what the op replied , he doubled down.”

    No. Actually the OP wrote:

    “Democrats might *claim* that they support Israel’s right to exist, but…”

    “The democrat *rhetoric* is not that. That is not the real position …”

    “If they wanted affordable housing, they wouldn’t punish us with high property taxes…”

    Everything the that the OP wrote indicated that he/she was specifically addressing the anti-Torah values of the Dem’s verbal rhetoric, political action, and de facto policy, not their written platform. Your argument that they *claim* to support our causes in their written platform, even though they clearly and persistently act against our interests actually counts against them because not only do they actively vote for policies antithetical to the Torah, but they also publicly lie about.

    Hannity is a shill. Please don’t assert that I can’t form my own opinion.

    in reply to: Voting Democrat #1643955
    Curiosity
    Participant

    Ubiquitin – you seem caught up with your hyperliteral interpretation of the words “party platform” in the OP. Everyone else here had enough reading comprehension skills to realize that the OP didn’t literally refer to the Democratic party’s published platform on their website. The PR material they publish is completely separate to their actual agenda and the de facto policies they pursue through political action. I guess simply writing that they are for Israel or for middle class is enough to convince voters like you, and that is why they do it. No offense.

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 929 total)