🔥 Popular | Latest

Tumblr, Blog, and Http: pokemonperfect: If this kid comes back in like 20 years dressed as a massive buff gyarados I’ll eat my shirt

pokemonperfect: If this kid comes back in like 20 years dressed as a massive buff gyarados I’ll eat my shirt

Save
Apparently, Dude, and Fucking: wha!? Sl BAPU BAPTIST CHUR(H SUS DISGUST MyCHILD Dortyouatti? SaSin!God condemns W all! BRIAN heed to have a talk 0 CHRISTIANS CELEBRATE TH ISLAMIC TEMPUE I didnt die ona Cross for this BS RADICAL righte homoSexvality ar the last 2.000 yearsold. prismatic-bell: the-spoopy-ghost-of-raejin99: prismatic-bell: broken-bits-of-dreams: prismatic-bell: aiko-mori-hates-pedos: artbymoga: Throwback to all these Jesus comics I drew in 2012… Good post OP Good post, OP, and if you ever decide to do another may I please suggest “NOT IN HEBREW IT DOESN’T” as a punchline? So much of the Old Testament is HORRIFICALLY translated from the Tanakh, it drives me batty. WAIT WAIT WHAT DOES IT SAY?????? I NEED TO LIKE,, DESTROY MI MUM FOR BEING REALLY HOMOPHOBIC Okay, so, strictly speaking, the infamous Leviticus 18:22 does say “forbidden.” Here’s the thing: 1) The word translated as “forbidden” is “toevah.” While that translation isn’t … wrong, it’s sort of like saying “McMansion” means “really big house.” There are a lot of connotations in that word. The specific issue with toevah is that we … sort of … don’t know anymore exactly what it meant. Based on context, it seems likely that the word referred to something ritually forbidden. This part of Torah was written not only as a guide for future generations, but also to say “so, look around, see your neighbors? DON’T DO THAT.“ Thus, if we interpret “toevah” to mean something that’s forbidden to do as a ritual before G-d, then the verse says nothing whatsoever about Adam and Steve and their two kids and their dog–it’s saying you shouldn’t have sex with another man in the Temple as a sacrifice. 2) Following the same “this is ritually forbidden” logic of toevah, this verse may also be interpreted as “don’t do sex magic,” which was a thing in. Like. A lot of fucking cultures at the time. 3) Hebrew is a highly gendered language, and the grammatical gender in this verse is really really weird. One of the “men” in this verse is given female grammar. Why? Who fucking knows, man, this isn’t the only grammatical oddity in Torah. (There are also places where G-d is referred to as plural, and also as female.) One suggestion is that this is a way of creating a diminutive–that is, that the verse should be read as “a man should not lie with a boy.” Now, it’s worth noting that modern secular scholarship has concluded the written Torah was written down around the 6th century BCE, and most non-Orthodox Jewish scholars are like “yeah, all things considered, that sounds pretty legit.” Do you know what else was happening around the 6th century BCE? What laypeople tend to mean when they say “ancient Greece” was happening. Do you know what happened a lot in that time period in Greece? Dudes forming relationships with younger boys, like ages 10-15, and using them for sex in exchange for financial gifts, mentorship, etc. While we don’t know just how young some of these younger boys may have been, we do know some were prepubescent. In light of this, and also something I mentioned under the first point–”see your neighbors? DON’T DO THAT,” if this verse is interpreted to say “a man should not lie with a boy,” then it’s pretty clearly “my dudes, my fellows, my lads, don’t be fucking pedophiles.” 4) Because of the grammar I mentioned in #3, it’s also possible that “should not lie with a man as with a woman” is actually referring to a place, not an abstract personhood: a man shouldn’t have sex with another man in a woman’s bed. In the time period, a woman’s bed was sort of like–that was her place, her safe sanctuary. It was also a ritually holy place where babies were made. By having sex in her bed, you’re violating her safe space (and also introducing a man who may not be a male relative, thus forcing her into breaking the laws of modesty). If this verse is read this way, then it should be taken to mean “don’t sexually violate a woman’s safety and modesty.”5) And as an offshoot of #4, this may be a second verse relating to infidelity. Which woman’s bed is any random dude in 600 BCE most likely to have access to? His wife’s. But laws were administered differently based on whether the person they pertained to was slave or free, male or female, and so on–thus, a man committing adultery with a woman would be treated differently than man committing adultery with a man (especially because the latter would carry no chance of an illegitimate pregnancy). So you’ll note, there are a lot of ways to read this verse, and only a one-to-one translation with no cultural awareness produces “being gay is wrong, all of the time”.(You’ll also notice the word “abomination” is nowhere to be found. That’s like … a straight-up fiction created for who only knows what reason.) Apparently tumblr mobile doesn’t want to show @prismatic-bell ’s long and in-depth essay, so here’s the screenshots, because it still shows up on mobile browsers: Much appreciated.
Save
Children, Crying, and Doe: The Root @TheRoot IEROOT Following Betsy DeVos to Schools: Call ICE on Undocumented Children trib.al/pzH2ze6 5:40 PM - 24 May 2018 1,792 Retweets 1,558 Likes sheriff lonely heart @Flamin_Alpaca Follow This is actually illegal. She knows so little about public school that she doesn't realize undocumented children were afforded the right to a free public education (Plyler v. Doe, 1982). Future educators are taught this in our prep programs. Oh wait, Betsy was never a teacher. The Root@TheRoot Betsy DeVos to Schools: Call ICE on Undocumented Children trib.al /pzH2ze6 8:02 AM-26 May 2018 itsatru: welcometonegrotown: last year when i was teaching 11th grade one of my fav students came in crying so i put the class on a filler activity and we just talked. they were doing ICE raids in the city and she was worried her parents wouldnt be there when she got home. then she was worried that ICE may come to the school and take her. we looked the laws up together and printed it out so she could carry the papers with her.  it is illegal for ICE to raid a school and take children. ILLEGAL. i told my student (and eventually the class in like a blanket statement because i had quite a few undocumented students) that if anyone did come i would put my body between ICE and my students and really struggle. honestly my heart broke so much that day - take care of undocumented people in your life because they deserve so much better than this ffs. this woman is so very evil and has a black heart and i hope she rots in prison

itsatru: welcometonegrotown: last year when i was teaching 11th grade one of my fav students came in crying so i put the class on a filler ...

Save
Being Alone, America, and Click: Jason Fuller, Contributor Working to bring about the best in America, both on-line and off. Impeachment Is No Longer Enough; Donald Trump Must Face Justice Impeachment and removal from office are only the first steps; for treason and-if convicted in a court of law-executed. 06/11/2017 10:39 pm ET for America to be redeemed, Donald Trump must be prosecuted Donald Trump has been President of the United States for just shy of six months now. I think that most of us among the electorate knew that his presidency would be a relative disaster, but I am not sure how many among us expected the catastrophe our nation now faces. friendly-neighborhood-patriarch: hominishostilis: abstractandedgyname: siryouarebeingmocked: mississpithy: bogleech: notyourmoderate: angrybell: thinksquad: http://archive.is/5VvI5 Huffpo, everybody. Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this? Or is the HuffPo just publishing outright fantasies? God dammit, I’m now in the position of defending Huffington. I didn’t want to be here. Okay, @angrybell … actually, @ literally everyone who reblogged this uncritically as a tacit endorsement and agreement. Such as @the-critical-feminist that I reblog this from.My first question has to be: are you serious? Don’t read that with a tone, don’t read that as an attack. That’s my first question: Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated? Are you asking a sincere question or is this the sort of rhetoric that doesn’t translate well into text? And, if you are actually asking this question, are ou going to hear the answer or are you going to immediately start concocting your counter-argument because you just know in your heart that anyone who disagrees with you must be wrong, so you start formulating a plan to prove them wrong before you actually hear what they have to say?Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenets and simply believe that the author’s reasoning does not hold up for whatever reasons you have chosen not to state, and you believe their source information is falsified for whatever reason you have chosen not to state, I will move on. After I have given you and yours every conceivable benefit of the doubt and every charitable assumption. Because if the article itself doesn’t convince you, there’s the fact that Donald Trump has broken literally every federal law against corruption and conflict of interest. Not one or two, not most, not all but a few. Literally every single law we have against corruption, from the Constitution to the informal guidelines circulated as a memo from the White House ethics scholars. He’s broken literally every one of those rules. He’s openly traded favors for money and favors for months now. Hell, that Chinese influence-peddler that paid him off for sixteen million dollars should have been enough to get him convicted of treason. Sharing code-word level classified information with a government on the opposite side of an ongoing military conflict isn’t *necessarily* treason, unless the information was part of a share program with an allied nation and wasn’t his to distribute. That’s aiding a foreign aggressor at the expense of a military ally, and that’s treason. Giving aid and comfort to enemies of the nation. Obstruction of justice is pretty clear-cut, that’s an impeachment, except that the justice in question is also a matter of national security, so that’s treason. Again. Defaming the former president? Misdemeanor, impeachable. The way he drags his heels nominating posts in Justice and State could be prosecuted as dereliction of duty. If he has tapes of Comey, he’s on the hook for contempt, if he doesn’t then he’s on the hook for witness tampering. Hell, deleting the covfefe tweet is destroying federal records, which is a misdemeanor, and impeachable. The man doesn’t go a week without bringing on an impeachable offense. Strictly speaking, every time he goes to Mar-A-Lago he’s committing grand larceny by fraud, because he’s taking millions of dollars of American funds for his own benefit, after promising not to do that. There are dozens, hundreds maybe, of impeachable offenses already in this 140 days, “high crimes and misdemeanors”. Actual counts of treason, punishable by death by hanging, is probably only five or six counts. Only five or six counts of high treason by our sitting president. His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And he’s failing that job. Trump’s supporters probably believe he’s done nothing impeachable or treasonous because they spent eight years claiming on no grounds whatsoever that Obama was impeachable and treasonous, just because they didn’t like him. They now probably convince themselves that these facts about Trump are as fake as their Obama theories and they’ve ruined the gravity of these terms for themselves. “ His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And he’s failing that job. “ I like how Bogleech doesn’t know many Trump supporters are former Obama supporters. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/04/us/obama-trump-swing-voters.html https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/10/16/17980820/trump-obama-2016-race-racism-class-economy-2018-midterm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obama-Trump_voters It’s not even a secret. But why am I not surprised bogleech - that intellectual titan - failed to do basic research? And last time I checked, no nation required their politicans to be perfect. Which is what NYM is asking for with that quote; perfection. That’s what ‘above reproach’ means. An impossible standard, considering people “reproach” Trump for feeding fish wrong, for his skin color, for any and every little thing, even if they have to twist reality into a pretzel to do it. In fact, I’ve seen people take pictures of kids in cages from 2014, and blame Trump for it. So this: Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated? Is a question of this: Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this? Seems you missed the part that says “merits this”. Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? (The underlined is in the subtitle, not the headline.) Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenets… Context? Central tenets? Do you not know how highlighting works? You don’t need to know the context, or any other point, when you’re indicating a specific, explicit, and isolated quality. The subtitle called for Trump’s execution, we’re 5 paragraphs in and you haven’t even acknowledged that part yet. Or at all, I’m guessing, because I’m not reading further. You keep talking around it. You accuse others, preemptively, of not hearing the answer and pre-”concocting” a response, and yet you’re waffling on about shit around the one, sole, isolated thing that was indicated in the first place. This isn’t about ignoring context, this is about criticising one thing. Which is a thing people are allowed to do, by the way, just because people criticise one thing, doesn’t mean they’re criticising everything about the everyone involved, and everything said before, adjacent to, and after that one thing, and therefore are required to include all of those things in their consideration and assessment of this one thing. The specific criticism of the indicated quality is the advocation of Trump’s execution. That’s it. No context is needed to understand that this is what was said, especially since that which was said, which is being criticised, is explicit. No amount of, “So, click-bait subtitle that you don’t see until you’ve already clicked on the article link out of the way, here’s what I actually meant when I said I wanted this person tried and executed,” could excuse the use of that language, let alone actually believing in it. It’s like… it’s like if someone makes a typo, someone else is like, “Oh, seems you made a typo,” you’d jump in like, “But what about they’re perfectly reasonable spelling everywhere else? Hm? Forced to ignore contextual perfect spelling I see. They’re lack of typos everywhere else explains this typo, and vindicates it”. You and what’s his face, James, fuckin ReasonAndEmpathy or whatever now, y’all keep saying “but what of the context?” when the criterion of criticism is isolated, atomic, specific, and/or explicit. No amount of context invalidates the very specific, singular words explicitly spoken. “Sure he called for Trump to be executed, but he explains himself.” Fucking and? When did the death sentence become ok? When did that happen? Moderates are ok with the death sentence now? Aight, weird. Man this fucking post aged like fine wine, take a SIP Delicious This was quite a ride
Save
Apparently, Bad, and Children: the "police officers risk their lives to protect us" starter pack Savannah Danielle lol who knew there was something wrong with actually having a car, a nice house and a clean put together family who lives in a safe community while spending your hard earned money on paying your bills rather then expensive sneakers and supporting the authorities of the neighborhood you take pride in Like Reply 11 minutes ago living-for-fiction: unbossed: theflowerfish: saaavx0h: jaime-foxxx: OKAY BUT SOME OFFICERS ACTUALLY DO RISK THEIR FUCKING LIVES. It’s cute how tumblr users are liike “ahhh not all _____ people” but when it’s cops, they’re all awful apparently. Good god.  yes they do and it’s a shame some people don’t recognize or appreciate that! Cops who don’t check and report explicitly bad cops are not good cops. The culture of the blue wall of silence logically makes it so that cops are inherently bad, not good. The good cops who do report their constituents get labeled as rats and get harassed by other cops for snitching or even lose their jobs. The police are nothing more than a glorified gang. Come live in the communities that the police continuously harass, brutalize, and murder then let me know how you feel. Come hang in Philly for a minute, get a taste of how it feels to have the cops hold a magnifying glass over you. Ask my friend who got shot while delivering pizza in Southwest Philly by plainclothes officers who never identified themselves how it felt to have a bullet removed from his face. Or head to Camden where the cops don’t even respond to calls in these communities, and if they do they just show up to beat and arrest the people there. Go to Washington Heights in NYC where they stop and frisk mostly black and Latino men, even though almost 90% of those searches end up with nothing (stats available on NYPD website). Imagine a world where you get stopped and harassed by the police because of where you live or how you look, regardless of whether you’re innocent or not. Then tell me how much you just loooooove the police. Y'all don’t see shit over that white picket fence of yours, do you? The “good cop” going by the book will use violence to evict a homeless family from their car if they’re parked illegally. The “good cop” going by the book will use violence to arrest them, tearing the children from their parents, if they try to sleep in a foreclosed home left empty by the bank as a tax write-off. The “good cop” going by the book will use violence to keep that family from eating food that grocery stores and restaurants throw away in their locked dumpsters. The “good cop” going by the book will use violence to enforce even the most unjust law. And badge lickers will always try to justify the injustice. For the people who missed the point, this post doesn’t say that cops never risk their lives - it’s inviting you to take a good long look at the characteristics of the people they DO protect and risk their lives for, and note that there is a huge disparity in how cops treat people based on race, socioeconomic status, etc. Also I love it when people use “coppin’ is DANGEROUS” to handwave the numerous civil rights violations cops are routinely guilty of in the process of “just following orders”. Plenty of jobs are dangerous. Plenty of jobs are more dangerous than being a cop. But cops seem to be the main ones stomping around demanding endless respect and unquestioning obedience just because their “job is dangerous”.
Save
Bored, Confused, and Crush: biggest-gaudiest-patronuses In 5th grade some boys hid my desk in the boys bathroom. I was confused when I got to school and it was missing, so l just sat on the floor and read my book until the teacher came in and made them put it back. I realize now they were trying to trick me into go into the boys bathroom, but no one actually told me that's where my desk was, and it didn't occur to me to ask. Looking back I realize they had to make the effort to get to school early to move it, and I feel a tiny bit of regret for not reacting more biggest-gaudiest-patronuses In 3rd grade Richard brought his new lacrosse set in for show in tell. the ball went missing during class time and at the end of the day we all had to check our bookbags to look for it. I only glanced in mine (I just wanted to go home), but that evening I found it at the bottom of my bag. I was so scared of being blamed, I threw it into the neighbor's yard and never told anyone I found out 2 years later that my bully Luke put it there to frame me, and he was stil extremely frustrated I hadn't gotten caught. I'm pretty sure Richard got a new ball feral-renaissance-cat I had a crush on a boy I met in Kindergarten and made NO attempts to hide it because the people on TV were always telling each other when they liked each other. Didn't work as well as I'd hope (i.e. didn't work AT ALL and no boy wanted to hang out with me ever after that), but that's not the point Skip ahead to third grade. We had a new kid who was kind of a jerk. One day he asks me if I have a crush and I'm like, "Yeah, [Crushl And?" Dude turns around and yells to my crush "Hey! She has a crush on you!" My crush just kinda sighs and is like, "Yeah. I know. Everyone knows. Thanks." So this guy was hoping to embarrass me in front of everyone but it completely backfired because I lack the social filter necessary to feel ashamed of my base desires darkhumourandfandoms One time in like kindergerden some kid stole my shoe and instead if reacting I just went the whole day barefoot. No one questioned it He got bored of no reaction and just dropped the shoe but by then I was too committed and continued to walk around barefoot lycant-guy22 Some of yall grew up with a low base stat of "fucks given" biggest-gaudiest-patronuses damn right we did Source: biggest-gaudiest-patronuses
Save
Crazy, Pop, and Tumblr: LEARN RUSSIAN TO READ IN 15 MINUTES By PETER STARR NORTHROA AND RAN ESTRADA 、 ★ ESTE ANALE ABRI COMES FROM THIS CRAZY WRITING BUNCH OF ALPHABETS WHICH STOLE THEIR WRITING STYLES FROM THE GREEKS. THAT MAKES IT A KINDA WACKY AND DISJOINTED COUSIN TO OUR LATIN ALPHABET SO RUSSIAN LOOKS ALMOST KINDA LIKE IT COULD BE READ BY AN ENGLISH SPEAKER BUT THEN ALL THESE STRANGE NEW LETTERS POP IN, SO IT'S THIS ALIEN SYSTEM THAT LOOKS LIKE IT COULD BE FAMILIAR, WHICH IN THE END JUST MAKES IT SEEM ALL THE MORE ALIEN. SOME CONSONANTS LOOK THE SAME BUT MEAN TOTALLY DIFFERENT THINGS. AND THEN RUSSIAN ADDS IN LIKE, FIVE EXTRA VOWELS AND 3 CONSONANTS OR SOMETHING CRAZY BECAUSE OF THIS, YOU CAN'T JUST PICK UP A RUSSIAN BOOK AND START TO READ. HOWEVER, ALL YOU GOTTA DO IS LEVEL UP THROUGH THE DIFFERENT LAYERS OF RUSSIAN AND YOU CAN MAKE IT MAD EASY FOR YOURSELF THERE'S NO WEIRD SOUNDS THAT COMBINE LIKE IN ENGLISH, AND ONLY A FEW LETTERS CHANGE SOUNDS FROM TIME TO TIME. ALL THE LETTERS (EXCEPT ONE) ARE THE SAME UPPER CASE AND LOWER CASE SO YOU ONLY NEED TO LEARN EACH LETTER ONCE. ONCE YOU TEACH YOURSELF THE BASIC RULES, YOU'LL FIND THAT T MIGHT EVEN BE EASIER THAN ENGLISH STUFF THAT'S TOTALLH THE SAME SOME RUSSIAN LETTERS ARE EXACTLY THE SAME AS ENGLISH LETTERS AND THAT MAKES A GREAT STARTING POINT FOR YOU TOMKAT F THE LETTER YOU'RE LOOKING AT CAN BE FOUND IN THIS OBSOLETE CELEBRITY COUPLE PORTMANTEAU YOU'RE IN LUCK! THEYRE THE SAME AS USUAL HEADS UP THOUGH! UNLIKE IN ENGLISH, RUSSIAN VOWELS MAKE ONE SOUND CONSISTENTLY. SO THE O MAKES A LONG O SOUND, AS IN 'NO' OR 'GO' AND THE 'A' MAKES THE SOUND YOU HEAR IN 'FATHER OR 'HAHA SO THE WORD ABOVE HAS A RUSSIAN ACCENT AND SOUNDS KINDA LIKE TOME COT THEIR SOUNDS, BUT O AND A CAN GO ROGUE DEPENDING ON F THEYRE STRESSED SYLLABLES OR NOT O CAN BE "AH" LIKE FATHER) AND A CAN BE "EH (LIKE PENCIL) SO TOME COT CAN ALSO BE TAHM-KEHT FOR NOW THOUGH, JUST PRACTICE WITH TOME-COT THAT'LL HELP THE MOST LEVEL 2VOWELS IF YOU SEE SOMETHING THAT LOOKS LIKE AN ALTERED VERSION OF A VOWEL YOU RECOGNIZE, OR A BACKWARDS CONSONANT, IT'S A VOWEL YOU CAN BREAK THEM DOWN INTO TWO SIMPLE GROUPS AND SET 2, WHICH ARE JUST THE SOFT VOWELS PLUS A Y SOFT VOWELS: HARD VWELS FATHER BED YO YOU BLL THAT GUY ON THE END THERE IS THE EXCEPTION TO THE RULE INSTEAD OF MAKING A YEE SOUND, IT SOUNDS LIKE THE I IN BILL I COULD KILL BILL FOR MESSING UP THE SYSTEM. WHAT KIND OF LETTER IS MADE OF TWO LETTERS, ANYWAY? THAT JERK. EVE ALTER HOURE VOWELS THERE ARE SIX MORE VOWEL SOUNDS, AND YOU ONLY NEED TO KNOW ONE MORE LETTER TO BE ABLE TO READ THEM ADDING AFTER A VOWEL IS A LOT LIKE ADDING A Y IN ENGLISH- IT JUST MAKES THE SOUND LONGER. TO PRACTICE, LET'S ADD TO THE CONSONANTS AND VOWELS YOU ALREADY KNOW TATA TAVI TIE TO TO TOM TWEE KEY (BUT STRONGER) lolzandtrollz: Learn To Read Russian

lolzandtrollz: Learn To Read Russian

Save