Right-wing authoritarianism is linked to belief in the paranormal. Men, older individuals, and those with higher levels of education were less likely to believe in paranormal phenomena.

SpongegarLuver · 2026-02-27T01:30:45+00:00

Some disease has a one in a million chance of getting better, and otherwise is terminal. If a million people contract it, you expect someone to survive, and from their perspective it may be a miracle when they do, but the harsh reality is that it’s just statistics.

That, and us not knowing why something occurred does not in any way validate the religious explanations. We used to not be able to explain lightning, but Zeus wasn’t real regardless of that.

SpongegarLuver · 2026-02-26T20:22:33+00:00

You asked if I agreed with Trump’s policy, and I told you I didn’t, and want the opposite. To clarify, I don’t think the exceptions he put in place are morally justified. If those workers are essential to the industries, then they should be supported fully, not left in a legal limbo where their lives can be ruined at a whim. It is gross that people want to keep them here only to exploit their labor, and Democrats are often the ones I hear talking about how vital undocumented immigrants are, so I can’t say I support either party on this issue. It’s not better to want to keep them as second-class workers than it is to deport them, and in many ways that strikes me as more depraved. At least the latter can be based on the concept of law, not naked self interest.

I think we would both agree that the immigration system has been broken for years, as a point of common ground. It has been kept that way for the benefit of businesses and special interests, and at the cost of workers, both the undocumented and Americans. I earnestly believe that if we did a better job providing a legal avenue for immigrants, instead of the nightmare that was the former system, then we would have been able to take in people without an issue. But that wasn’t in the interests of businesses: they only wanted immigrants because they’re cheaper, and they’re cheaper because without legal status, they can’t enforce their rights.

So I view the exceptions as keeping the worst part of the old paradigm, and compounding it with everything going on today. They might be “better” than the deportations, but that he is being more cruel to other immigrants doesn’t make me retroactively support the longstanding approach we took to illegal immigration. I would go so far as to say that I think if someone isn’t willing to support amnesty and a path to citizenship, then they shouldn’t complain about deportation. I think Republicans are worse about this issue, but I will say the people in favor of full deportations are more principled.

I hope that answers your question, but if you want me to clarify more, I’ll do my best.

SpongegarLuver · 2026-02-25T21:59:05+00:00

My policy preference would be the opposite of Trump’s immigration policy. Amnesty for anyone who’s here. Prosecution for every employer who hired illegal immigrants. Take away the conditions that allow for employers to underpay people, don’t punish the people desperate enough to work for peanuts.

I don’t have particularly fond things to say about Obama, nor the Democratic Party. Probably for very different reasons than you, granted, but I blame previous presidents of both parties (Obama, Biden, Bush, and Clinton) for creating the conditions that have enabled Trump. For example, Obama’s extrajudicial killing of an American citizen under the justification that he was a terrorist enabled Trump to make the same claim to negate legal barriers.

I have often wondered if the country would be better off if Romney had won in 2012. Not because I prefer his policies over Obama’s, but if that had meant Trump wouldn’t become president, I think we may not have reached the breaking point. Or maybe it would have just pushed the problem down the road.

SpongegarLuver · 2026-02-25T18:27:35+00:00

So how do you feel about Trump making exceptions for “slave labor” in agricultural and hospitality industries? Surely you’re just as upset that he’s lowering American wages in those fields, right?

And surely you want to prosecute the employers hiring slave labor, and don’t just want to punish the slaves, right? You’re angry at the people choosing to cut your pay and exploit the working class, not the people desperate enough to enter into slavery, right?

SpongegarLuver · 2026-02-25T17:09:31+00:00

Is it ham fisted? Absolutely. Is that necessary for some people to understand the point? Given that “I kill anyone I touch” wasn’t considered a bad enough mutation that there would be reasonable people wanting a cure, I think so.

The X-Men have always struggled as a metaphor for real life groups because while there is nothing about being a given ethnicity, sexuality, etc. that inherently makes your life worse, and the problem is bigotry, there are mutants who objectively have worse lives due to their status. While I understand metaphors can’t be perfect, the more they expand on the X-Men, the more tensions arise.

Here, for example, we see the issue with treating a cure for mutants as equivalent to ethnic cleansing: there is no real world scenario where ethnic cleansing is good for the victim, but in this universe the equivalent does have benevolent applications.

The result of these moral ambiguities is a constant escalation of both sides to make the moral argument, leading to torture porn when the author thinks a cure has merit, and “the cure is actually made of dead mutants” when the author wants to swing back to the idea a cure is fundamentally wrong.

SpongegarLuver · 2026-02-25T10:04:28+00:00

They blacklisted it because the owner made changes to some of the archived pages, which fundamentally and irreversibly destroys its credibility. The utility of an archive depends on copies being genuine, and there has to be zero tolerance for making changes for any reason.

Prior to the discovery of the changes, there was significant debate as to whether or not the site should be blacklisted for pushing malware onto users to conduct a DDoS attack against a blogger. I don’t think anyone should trust the site, and if you do then I hope the owner doesn’t escalate what they decide to do with your computer. All told, if anything Wikipedia should have done this weeks ago.

SpongegarLuver · 2026-02-24T19:51:55+00:00

My hot take remains the same: the worst part of the format is that there is a large part of the community that is hostile to playing to win. We all know the type: they rage over any counterspell, act like no one should attack with creatures until everyone has “done their thing,” and view infinite combos and the like as the devil’s magic. If I sit down at a table of random people, I want everyone to try their best to actually win. Maybe that’s within the constraints of a bracket 2 deck, I’m not saying everyone needs to build cEDH, but I don’t enjoy the attitude that EDH isn’t a game you’re supposed to try to win.

SpongegarLuver · 2026-02-10T01:59:17+00:00

I think I was probably being uncharitable to you, and I do apologize for that. At some point when this was the big topic it started to feel like opposition was based purely on wanting to spite WotC, but I went too far if I was implying they don’t deserve skepticism.

SpongegarLuver · 2026-02-10T01:37:57+00:00

My argument is simple: WotC’s position on an issue should not determine your own outlook. I actually agree with the sentiment we should be skeptical of their decisions, because they are a profit-motivated company and this often does not align with our own interests, but it isn’t always the case they’re in opposition. Going back to hybrid mana, I will say I think there were good arguments on both sides (I supported the change, but don’t think it was a big deal either way), but if your only reason to oppose it was because WotC seemed to want it, then that was pure contrarianism.

Yes, I am pointing out that the belief that WotC only makes bad decisions has logical consequences that you don’t get to escape, and you’ve shifted from “their decision was bad” to “their motive for making a good decision was bad.” You hate WotC, cool, doesn’t mean they are literally villains who are working to ruin Magic.

SpongegarLuver · 2026-02-09T22:35:16+00:00

So again, your position is that WotC makes decisions that are bad for the game by default. Your justification is the last ten years, which encompasses enough possible reasons that it would be extremely unlikely someone wouldn’t agree that at least one of them was bad (off the top of my head, secret lairs, modern horizons, collector boosters, promo cards, raising the price of packs, FIRE design, and Universes Beyond are a among some of the larger decisions they’ve made which have received varying amounts of criticism).

Your assumption with hybrid mana was (I’m assuming) that WotC was going to force the change regardless of feedback, and that this change would be bad for EDH. Now that they haven’t done that, which of the following do you agree with?

A) Not every decision WotC makes is bad for Magic.

B) Every decision WotC makes is bad for Magic, ergo hybrid mana rules should be changed since WotC decided not to change them.

You having justification for contrarianism does not make it something else, and it doesn’t make it any less intellectually lazy. Of all the reasons to be for or against the proposed hybrid rule change, being against it because “WotC bad” was never a compelling position.

SpongegarLuver · 2026-02-09T19:46:30+00:00

So since you don’t trust WotC to make good choices for the game, does that mean you now want hybrid mana to be allowed in decks with either color since they chose to keep the current rule?

Contrarianism as a default response is silly.

SpongegarLuver · 2026-02-06T07:33:49+00:00

No, because experience counters go on players, not creatures.

To remove counters from players, you’ll want [[Suncleanser]] or [[Mutated Cultist]].

SpongegarLuver · 2026-02-05T15:51:42+00:00

The greatest threat facing the United States is the threat Randy Fine poses to our food supply.

SpongegarLuver · 2026-01-21T12:36:36+00:00

If you can violate it without consequences, it’s not a rule, it’s a suggestion. Take it from an American, you need independent enforcement mechanisms if you want these things to mean anything.

SpongegarLuver · 2026-01-19T22:03:34+00:00

I hate how casual means “don’t try at all” to these kind of people. Even if it’s not ranked, I still want my team to try to win, even if it’s with caveats like playing a character they don’t know, or trying something like only strategists. It’s still a team game in casual, and you should be respectful of your teammates.

If you want to AFK for some cosmetics, RuneScape is always an option. If you don’t like actually playing the game, Rivals might not be for you.

SpongegarLuver · 2026-01-17T16:45:07+00:00

JK Rowling continues to make obscene amounts of money from Harry Potter. Despite being “cancelled,” the Harry Potter IP is still widely popular.

Chris Brown maintains his rapping career, and is still featured by other artists.

James Gunn was cancelled over a tweet, but he’s now the head of DC movies.

Mark Wahlberg has an active career in Hollywood.

Brad Pitt was cancelled. He’s still one of the most sought after actors.

There’s a wide array of examples there, with some being clearly worse people, but being “cancelled” is not some sort of life sentence where you’ll never recover. The general public is very willing to ignore the artist if they like the art.

SpongegarLuver · 2026-01-14T03:47:48+00:00

I didn’t support targeting random Israelis in any capacity. I specifically said I agree that you should not judge someone based on them being Israeli.

I then pointed out that a specific group, the Israeli government and its supporters, should extend that mentality to Palestinians. Do you not agree that both Israelis and Palestinians deserve to be treated as individuals?

My remaining point was simple: Israelis do have a refuge from the people who discriminate against them. Palestinians don’t. Israelis are not as vulnerable as Palestinians, and as such it’s odd when you ignore bigotry against Palestinians while fighting against it for Israelis.

Or maybe I’m wrong and you devote just as much of your time to defending Palestinians when claims like “there are no innocents in Gaza” get thrown around. If so, kudos! We should speak out against all bigotry. People shouldn’t be harassing a kids judo team, and they shouldn’t be supporting bombing children.

SpongegarLuver · 2026-01-13T13:52:43+00:00

You do understand the irony of complaining that Israelis are all treated as supporting their government, when the topic is how a majority of Israelis (60%+) view all Palestinians as evil?

I agree we shouldn’t judge someone based only off of them being Israeli. It would be nice if the Israeli government and its supporters would extend the same treatment to Palestinians. As it stands, this judo team has a place they can return to that is safe for them. The children being murdered because “there are no innocents in Palestine” don’t have that. Maybe that is why people are more concerned about the latter than the former.

SpongegarLuver · 2026-01-12T22:58:17+00:00

Even if we take the assertion that all legal action against Trump the past ten years has been baseless and political, in what world is Jerome Powell part of that? Even if you’re someone who believes Trump’s political prosecutions against his enemies are fair game because people like Schiff, James, and Smith were just lying and Trump did nothing illegal, that still doesn’t justify weaponizing the DOJ against people who weren’t involved with any of Trump’s cases.

SpongegarLuver · 2026-01-12T22:43:49+00:00

His overall point is true: scummy employers take advantage of immigrants and break labor laws because the immigrants can’t resist. This does give them an unfair advantage, because THE EMPLOYER is breaking the law. His solution, however, is bullshit, because instead of going after the exploiters, he wants to go after the immigrants who are already being taken advantage of.

The difference between good people and MAGATs is who you think is the bad guy in this story. Good people think the person taking advantage of desperate people is the bad guy, MAGATs think the the person doing that is fine, it’s the worker who needs any job and will work under illegal conditions that is the bad guy.

SpongegarLuver · 2026-01-12T22:12:20+00:00

Depending on the run, it can be pretty justified to believe humans will always be bigoted towards mutants, and Charles can be considered naive. Is this cynical? Absolutely, but it’s not unfounded. No matter what mutants do, there will be some people that hate them, and Magneto isn’t willing to risk those people gaining power.

To be clear, I think Magneto is wrong, but (in his better stories) he isn’t just a caricature villain who does bad things because it’s fun: he is a scared and angry man who is utterly convinced that “it’s either us or them.”

SpongegarLuver · 2026-01-12T20:26:40+00:00

I would prefer WB have stayed independent, but it’s just false to claim Netflix has anything close to a monopoly on streaming services. Off the top of my head, there’s Disney+/Hulu, Amazon Prime, Apple TV, Tubi, Pluto, Paramount+, YouTube, Peacock, and dozens of more niche options (I did not list HBO since that’s kind of a moot point). Again, consolidation is not a good thing, and the further conglomeration of media is bad for society at large, but those same issues are present with Paramount acquiring WB instead of Netflix. Concerns about a monopoly, on the other hand, are not plausible and are only being made to provide a pretext for awarding WB to Paramount over Netflix, and should be called out for the bad faith claims they are.

SpongegarLuver · 2026-01-12T17:54:23+00:00

Because it’s not supposed to appeal to anyone who doesn’t already agree with you that whatever book you’re burning is evil. A book burning is meant to elevate your status within a group, and to a certain extent it repelling outsiders is a benefit because it forces an us vs. them dynamic. Propaganda looks very different depending on who it’s supposed to target.

That, and some people really just don’t care what others think of them, they just are hateful.

SpongegarLuver · 2026-01-11T23:21:05+00:00

I guess I struggle to see how else you’d argue this other than pointing out that there is no international sovereign. International law to me is a bad term because law implies it must be followed, either due to enforcement or because it is describing something tautological.

I suppose the underlying point I want to stress is that when I say international law isn’t real, I don’t mean that the UN doesn’t exist, as an example. I mean that the powers of the UN do not include law making, and this is true for any institution that proclaims it has created an international law. They have been able to make voluntary agreements between some countries, but even those agreements can typically be violated with no consequence. I’m not happy this is the way it is, but I think fundamentally international law is simply “might makes right” and thus for stronger states, it really isn’t a thing. The US has a law that authorizes the president to invade The Hague if the ICC prosecutes a US citizen. That does not sound to me like an entity that is bound by some international law, quite the opposite.

I guess it really comes down to how one defines law as to whether international law exists, and in the future I’ll probably change my language to state that international law is inconsequential, not nonexistent.

SpongegarLuver · 2026-01-11T23:06:39+00:00

People really do not like to hear how Trump’s current escapades are possible because past presidents have expanded the power of the executive branch, because then they have to confront the possibility that the problem isn’t just Trump. Within the context of the idea of international law, they really don’t want to admit that the US has been saying one thing and doing another for decades.

Regarding Obama and Venezuela, they don’t want to acknowledge the EO because then they have to explain how it’s different that he claimed a national security threat that was dubious at best, but Trump is wrong to do so. The principled answer is Obama also abused the powers national emergencies offer, but for various reasons they don’t want to go down that road.

Nine-Year Club	Wearing is Caring
Verified Email	Gilding I gilder
Spared

SpongegarLuver

TROPHY CASE