🔥 Popular | Latest

Save
goaliesarethebest: whoatetheramen: arrghigiveup: legotheeggo: trees-and-videogames: animentality: itsacpsideblog: ilyagoalvalchuk: nellyemily: I like how everybody is paired off haha #this looks more like an awkward sixth grade slow dance than it does hockey I FINALLY FOUND OUT WHY THIS HAPPENS. You see this all the time when there’s a fight or a scrum and suddenly everyone pairs up with a member of the opposite team and they just sort of …hold each other. Someone on reddit asked about it. And it turns out there’s a logical-ish reason: all of the other players pair off with their man to prevent anyone else entering into the fight … so it’s a form of self policing.  […] The players basically want to prevent 2 on 1, etc. fights and by finding a “hugging” partner so there’s no ganging up on one guy, even on accident. They do it because it’s fair. And it’s kind of cute sometimes. so now we know! it’s fair…and cute. Aw best part is no ones left out at this dance #hockey hugs #more or less #:)))))))) #where’s that one of Karlsson and Mike Green #that one’s priceless =DDD #pure NHL: You need to prevent other player’s from joining in the fight, make sure to hold them back Hockey players, hugging: Got it. : CASINⓥ RAMA, N RTON ROSE RESERVE Y DQ SEAT TOo 13 SNO goaliesarethebest: whoatetheramen: arrghigiveup: legotheeggo: trees-and-videogames: animentality: itsacpsideblog: ilyagoalvalchuk: nellyemily: I like how everybody is paired off haha #this looks more like an awkward sixth grade slow dance than it does hockey I FINALLY FOUND OUT WHY THIS HAPPENS. You see this all the time when there’s a fight or a scrum and suddenly everyone pairs up with a member of the opposite team and they just sort of …hold each other. Someone on reddit asked about it. And it turns out there’s a logical-ish reason: all of the other players pair off with their man to prevent anyone else entering into the fight … so it’s a form of self policing.  […] The players basically want to prevent 2 on 1, etc. fights and by finding a “hugging” partner so there’s no ganging up on one guy, even on accident. They do it because it’s fair. And it’s kind of cute sometimes. so now we know! it’s fair…and cute. Aw best part is no ones left out at this dance #hockey hugs #more or less #:)))))))) #where’s that one of Karlsson and Mike Green #that one’s priceless =DDD #pure NHL: You need to prevent other player’s from joining in the fight, make sure to hold them back Hockey players, hugging: Got it.

goaliesarethebest: whoatetheramen: arrghigiveup: legotheeggo: trees-and-videogames: animentality: itsacpsideblog: ilyagoalvalchuk:...

Save
tsunderepup: randomslasher: pastel-selkie: lesbianshepard: stupid leftists and their belief in *checks notes* the intrinsic value of human life Reblog if you would burn down the statue of liberty to save a life Here’s the thing, though. If you asked a conservative “Would you let the statue of liberty burn to save one life?” they’d probably scoff and say no, it’s a national landmark, a treasure, a piece of too much historical importance to let it be destroyed for the sake of one measly life.  But if you asked, “Would you let the statue of liberty burn in order to save your child? your spouse? someone you loved a great deal?” the tune abruptly changes. At the very least, there’s a hesitation. Even if they deny it, I’m willing to bet that gun to their head, the answer would be “yes.”   The basic problem here is that people have a hard time seeing outside their own sphere of influence, and empathizing beyond the few people who are right in front of them. You’ve got your immediate family, whom you love; your friends, your acquaintances, maybe to a certain degree the people who share a status with you (your religion, your race, etc.)–but beyond that? People aren’t real. They’re theoretical.  But a national monument? That’s real. It stands for something. The value of a non-realized anonymous life that exists completely outside your sphere of influence is clearly worth less than something that represents freedom and prosperity to a whole nation, right? People who think like this lack the compassion to realize that everyone is in someone’s immediate sphere of influence–that everyone is someone’s lover, or brother, or parent. Everyone means the world to someone. And it’s the absolute height of selfishness to assume that their lives don’t have value just because they don’t mean the world to you.  P.S. I would let the statue of liberty burn to save a pigeon.  : anarchy404x 1d You must understand the weird logic of the left. To them life is priceless and should always be prioritised over property. They would literally let the statue of Liberty burn to save one person. Through inaction let one person starve? You monster, you literally murdered them. Reply Vote tsunderepup: randomslasher: pastel-selkie: lesbianshepard: stupid leftists and their belief in *checks notes* the intrinsic value of human life Reblog if you would burn down the statue of liberty to save a life Here’s the thing, though. If you asked a conservative “Would you let the statue of liberty burn to save one life?” they’d probably scoff and say no, it’s a national landmark, a treasure, a piece of too much historical importance to let it be destroyed for the sake of one measly life.  But if you asked, “Would you let the statue of liberty burn in order to save your child? your spouse? someone you loved a great deal?” the tune abruptly changes. At the very least, there’s a hesitation. Even if they deny it, I’m willing to bet that gun to their head, the answer would be “yes.”   The basic problem here is that people have a hard time seeing outside their own sphere of influence, and empathizing beyond the few people who are right in front of them. You’ve got your immediate family, whom you love; your friends, your acquaintances, maybe to a certain degree the people who share a status with you (your religion, your race, etc.)–but beyond that? People aren’t real. They’re theoretical.  But a national monument? That’s real. It stands for something. The value of a non-realized anonymous life that exists completely outside your sphere of influence is clearly worth less than something that represents freedom and prosperity to a whole nation, right? People who think like this lack the compassion to realize that everyone is in someone’s immediate sphere of influence–that everyone is someone’s lover, or brother, or parent. Everyone means the world to someone. And it’s the absolute height of selfishness to assume that their lives don’t have value just because they don’t mean the world to you.  P.S. I would let the statue of liberty burn to save a pigeon. 

tsunderepup: randomslasher: pastel-selkie: lesbianshepard: stupid leftists and their belief in *checks notes* the intrinsic value of hu...

Save