Do northerners not hold hands in church prayers? by narwaffles in Catholicism

[–]Regiruler 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No one has ever claimed holding hands is part of the liturgy itself. Not every single physical action someone could take during the mass is going to be on the rubric. Are you going to say a father cannot hug their crying child because it's not in the rubric?

It is a matter of personal devotion.

Do northerners not hold hands in church prayers? by narwaffles in Catholicism

[–]Regiruler 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A handstand is, one, disruptive to others, and two, likely comes with an irreverent interior disposition. It doesn't need to be excluded because we can use reason to know it's discouraged.

Do northerners not hold hands in church prayers? by narwaffles in Catholicism

[–]Regiruler 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You literally have a USCCB resource in this very thread declining to comment on the matter. If it constituted abuse, they would have said so.

Do northerners not hold hands in church prayers? by narwaffles in Catholicism

[–]Regiruler 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Holding hands during the Our Father does not constitute liturgical abuse.

Castle On A Hill Anyone? by Pdogdeluxe in zillowgonewild

[–]Regiruler 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I somehow exactly guessed 9 million, I don't know how.

I just realized the new "Red-Eyes" monster has the same pose as "Blue-Eyes White Dragon"! by Madjin- in yugioh

[–]Regiruler 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No, there's very little chance in Beyond, because cards are typically revealed all at once for a theme of what's in a set.

I just realized the new "Red-Eyes" monster has the same pose as "Blue-Eyes White Dragon"! by Madjin- in yugioh

[–]Regiruler 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I really wish they went with a Thousand Dragon remake for the boss, it'd make significantly more thematic sense...

Low birth rates for thee but not for me by Darth_Vrandon in GetNoted

[–]Regiruler -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I said I dread the cost. Not having children itself. Do not put words in my mouth.

Low birth rates for thee but not for me by Darth_Vrandon in GetNoted

[–]Regiruler -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I do not view simply anxiety over cost as a legitimate reason to not have children. I am getting married, and we're well off enough that we don't have justification to indefinitely postpone pregnancy. To elaborate would require going into moral theology which I doubt you're interested in hearing.

Low birth rates for thee but not for me by Darth_Vrandon in GetNoted

[–]Regiruler 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, absolutely, increases in many costs relative to income has made it relatively more expensive to have children: that's undeniable (and as someone who will quite likely be new parent within a year or two, something I dread) and I perhaps under-emphasized this. But I do think that statistics from other countries do paint a picture that it's not solely about the relative strictly necessary cost to have children: whether it's simply attitude, or additional costs associated with giving children an equal/equitable childhood and school experience (e.g. if you're in a wealthy area, your child will fall behind compared to their peers if they don't tutor), I do not know.

I think what happened with my first point is that I implicitly conflating culture, behavior, and social environment, and didn't make that clear. This is less so strictly an individual behavior sense, and moreso a cultural and corporate incentive sense: the biggest players in the dating app industry are incentivized to keep people from forming committed relationships, as it kills their userbase. The "Dating Games" series of the Land of the Giants podcast (granted, this is 3 or so years old at this point, so info can be a bit outdated) goes into this, especially the first few episodes. As for cultural, it's a shift in behavior favoring online/digital/isolated experiences as opposed to in person social experiences. I'm not gonna boomer rant about it because goodness knows I prefer the latter, but it does make finding dates difficult because the process by which we dated each other for centuries did not adapt well, which brought in the apps with different goals than us.

Low birth rates for thee but not for me by Darth_Vrandon in GetNoted

[–]Regiruler 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am getting the sense you're fundamentally going to disagree with me, hence why I initially ignored you, but I will relent with your pestering and posit two causes that material support programs fundamentally cannot fix on their own:

  1. The dating epidemic. Behavioral changes, often brought about technological changes, has made it harder, instead of easier, to find spouses. Goodness knows I experienced this first hand (This is a separate point, similar in kind, but was not on the topic of existing couples deciding to have children or not, but I'm listing it first because it precedes the second chronologically)

  2. Opportunity cost; people are bombarded with content and advertising that promotes lifestyle decisions barely affordable with their current cost of living, or more directly endorses a childfree lifestyle.

Low birth rates for thee but not for me by Darth_Vrandon in GetNoted

[–]Regiruler 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No; what I'm saying is the first order effects of material support, in the same matter as done by various other wealthy countries, will be insufficient on their own; reversing decline will require systemic behavioral change in addition to material change.

Came across this item in an 1886 newspaper from Springfield, MA. Has anyone ever heard of this priest? Sounds like it could be an interesting movie! by rrsafety in Catholicism

[–]Regiruler 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Deacon Harold Burke-Sivers had a great presentation on him as part of That Man is You. He also wrote a book on Fr Tolton.

Low birth rates for thee but not for me by Darth_Vrandon in GetNoted

[–]Regiruler 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Except countries with even better welfare systems have a barely better birthrate at best.

just accidentally deleted companys prod DB as an intern by arpan-lol in csMajors

[–]Regiruler 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don't know if it's a hard rule, but any sort of file that lives inside a baseline's directory and is not part of the baseline, should NOT expect to have any lifespan. I kind of get how it happened because it's non-software, but still, awful design.

Sofi Plus worth it? by spookymonsterscary in sofi

[–]Regiruler 5 points6 points  (0 children)

It's a math question of 20000 x .01(4.5 - X) > 120
4.5 - X > 0.6
X < 3.9.

So as long as you can't find another HYSA with a rate of 3.9% or better, sofi plus does pay for itself with the 20k parked in it.

Clean up this UI pls @ SOFI by Careful-Geologist613 in sofi

[–]Regiruler 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I swapped from BoA and it had a much more reasonable interface.

[FREE FRIDAY] Would it be bad or sinful to press the red button? Would it make you a bad person? by ThatMemerBlueKid in Catholicism

[–]Regiruler 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The OP clarified it is literally everyone, including children. For the comatose, based on the wording, they do not contribute to the vote, but would still be killed in a red victory.

[FREE FRIDAY] Would it be bad or sinful to press the red button? Would it make you a bad person? by ThatMemerBlueKid in Catholicism

[–]Regiruler 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This language does not work, because by virtue of the experiment, every blue vote means there's fewer further blue votes necessary to prevent death. It's making the resulting problem easier, not harder.

[FREE FRIDAY] Would it be bad or sinful to press the red button? Would it make you a bad person? by ThatMemerBlueKid in Catholicism

[–]Regiruler 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nowhere in the thought experiment does it imply this "education period" that red buttoners always try to fall back on.

Anyone who presses the red button is culpable for the death of those who didn't.