I want Vance to convert to being a decent human
I want him to convert to a prisoner.
That’s impossible.
I think the most likely outcome is that she actually “converts”.
pretext for divorce so he can marry kirk’s widow.
god damn this is a gross reality.
JD Vance had Charlie Kirk killed to fuck his wife
Tbh just dance vance is more of a watch from the corner chair sort of guy
Religion is the most destructive human invention.
You should be able to hold yourself to beliefs you openly choose to impose on yourself, and help others who choose similarly without external coercion, but the moment choice is absent or removed, its legitimacy evaporates.
It can be an effective for social cohesion in juvenile societies, but has a use-by date that rivals raw milk.
Religion was necessary to get us to this point, so I don’t know how you can call it a destructive invention unless you’re arguing that civilization was a mistake. Its use-by date was in the thousands of years, it was very useful as a technology to organize society for a very long time. It has lost its usefulness, and become backwards compared to newer technologies, but it was a great idea.
Religion was necessary to get us to this point,
this is the skycake theory right?
because otherwise I’m dubious
Kind of, but religious law wasn’t just about the afterlife. People believed their gods would punish them in this life if they didn’t follow religious law, and that their gods would reward them in this life if they were obedient and followed all the right rules. It helped that the punishment of the gods would be literally carried out by soldiers or executioners. Religious law was also government law.
The skycake was a later development. In the early days, the law of the gods was the law of the land.
so we got religion, therefore civilization?
I don’t buy it.
I think we got civilization despite religion. Religion has been fighting progress all along.
Religion was how we organized civilization beyond blood relations. Religious law was the first law.
You got a source for that claim? Also by your logic slavery or monarchy got us where we are; just because something has historical relevance doesn’t make it good or acceptable in present or future society.
I’m not really sure what you want as a source. The only civilizations in human history that developed beyond the gens/clan/tribe had some kind of religious law, so there’s numerous field examples of this phenomenon. I supposed it could just be a coincidence that it happened over and over, and that there aren’t counterexamples? That actually seems like the more extraordinary claim.
This is all value neutral, by the way. I am not saying religion, or slavery, or feudalism, or capitalism are good. I’m only saying that they were stages of historical development that lead us to this point. If history could develop a different way, there’s no way to really test for it. Maybe we’ll find aliens some day that never went through a religious phase of historical development?
humans existed for hundreds of thousands of years before recorded history; I think your hypothesis really applies to the previous 4000 years, and not so much on the lack of counterexamples.
it’s all skycake.
Yes, and it was the invention of religion in the previous 4000 years that allowed humans really take off as a planetary species. That only reinforces my point - hundreds of thousands of years as hunter gatherers with very little change, then only a few thousand years later and we’ve basically conquered the world. Religion doesn’t have to be real to be a useful tool for organizing civilization.
It’s all made up, but it was a useful fiction when we were still in the nascent stages of historical development.
Just because it was the first laws/human organization, doesn’t mean it has a place in today’s society.
I consider religion to be the most destructive human invention because most of the destructive actions performed by humans are inspired, influenced, or justified by it.
Destruction isn’t inherently a bad thing in moderation, but no one can legitimately claim religion has a track record of moderation.
I think fire has religion beat. People stopped burning witches, but they still burn people for entirely secular reasons.
Also, you know, forging blades, firing guns, running combustion engines, etc. Fire enabled war on a scale religion could never match, and as religion wanes fire remains supreme.
What a thoroughly fascinating non sequitur.
Fire was a discovery, not an invention.
The technology to create fire is absolutely an invention. Let me guess, you don’t think electricity, nuclear fission, or antibiotics are inventions either? They exist in nature, after all, so they’re merely discoveries. 🙄
So flint is an invention. Or rubbing sticks together.
Cultivation of fire and intentional use of fire are certainly technologies.
Politics as celebrity gossip, and I have to see it to stay informed about the kind of flame wars being stirred
Fucking exhausting trying to keep up with how opinions are being framed; so that I’m not caught off guard by the next “outrage” that can have a real effect on actual policy
I want HIM to convert to Christianity
Best comment I’ve seen in a long time.
Usha knew she was a king a shitshow and is paying the iron price.
ew. I never force my religion on anyone
I’m not religious, even easier
cool.
Unhinged theory: he’s going to divorce and deport his “unamerican” wife and then marry Charlie Kirk’s widow for the PR on a 2028 presidential run.
That’s the most hinged JD Vance theory I’ve ever heard, only one problem: isn’t Vance ostensibly Catholic? Divorce is a problem, which is going to be more of a problem for her than for him
She’ll conveniently fall down the stairs, just like Orange’s ex-wife.
Cute, you actually think he the American bishops care?
His party will cheer him and say she didn’t count as an “illegal”…
Conservatives don’t give a fuck about their supposed morals when it’s personally beneficial for them.
It’s not a divorce if one of the parties just dies
Exactly.
And the conservative base is gonna love it, too! Godly values and all that…
God loves divorce!
That’s about as unhinged as holding a door open for an elderly person.
Pro life tip: if it comes off its hinges, you’re probably holding the door open too enthusiastically.
I wouldn’t be surprised in the slightest.
100!
That is a very big number.
Unexpected factorials!
That whole speech was just weird. He starts out by saying that he’s always been somewhat “agnostic”, which is why he and his wife get along so well, because they can both just talk about this stuff, openly with each other.
And then he says, “That’s why we decided to raise our kids Christian”…and I was like, wut? Mutherfucker, that’s not what being “openly agnostic” implies, at all. That doesn’t even make logically consistent sense.
And then he concludes that he’s always hoped his wife would convert to Christianity too? JFC. Nothing he says is for real. Anyone listening to this asshole talk, and can find a way to nod along to it, is not actually listening to what he’s saying.
Anyone listening to this asshole talk, and can find a way to nod along to it, is not actually listening to what he’s saying.
56% of our population is at least partially illiterate; reading level 2 or below.
Is this just getting a pretext ready so that he can divorce her and hook up with Charlie Kirk’s widow and have it be considered moral in the eyes of MAGA?
Chances after he said it the first time: 95%
Chances after he said it again, in such close succession to the first time: ♾️
Erika Vance in 57 WEEKS 03 DAYS 07 HOURS 36 MINUTES
What if she starts praying to Jesus as an avatar of Vishnu? Would that meet the threshold?
Given how few “christens” are Christian, she only needs to state once that she is christian. She needs to make no actual changes, attend church, read the bible, nor pray. Heaven forbid she do something like feed the hungry, help the needy, or give her wealth to improve lives for her fellow humans.
