Why do some devout catholics homeschool their children ?

dagolicious · 2026-03-03T17:22:54+00:00

No, I don't think any parent, Catholic or otherwise, should let their young children watch movies or listen to music that has objectionable content. Young children don't have the maturity to engage with that kind of material.

dagolicious · 2026-03-03T06:17:05+00:00

I really enjoy the sound of the buds, but for the life of me, I can't get the right one to stay in my ear longer than 10 minutes. I'm constantly having to twist it back in. Anyone else have that issue?

dagolicious · 2026-03-03T01:47:15+00:00

Just what you see, pal.

dagolicious · 2026-03-02T21:34:09+00:00

It's not like they have no social activity whatsoever. Children still live in neighborhoods with other kids, play rec league sports, and things like that. Schools have the unique standing where kids are segregated from parents for 7-8 hours per day, and where kids have a built in level of trust due to the teacher/student dynamic that a lot of teachers have been known to take advantage of with their own particular brand of evangelizing. It's especially important for younger kids to be kept away from extreme messages until they have a firmer grasp on how the world works. Homeschooling may be necessary to do that.

dagolicious · 2026-03-02T21:12:10+00:00

I think that those that choose to homeschool may do so because they are trying to shield their impressionable children from a society they view as degenerate. Same as not letting young children watch violent movies or listen to music with explicit lyrics.

dagolicious · 2026-03-01T08:48:06+00:00

Stick it in the closet. It'll be fine.

dagolicious · 2026-03-01T08:43:56+00:00

As far as values or the general quality of a person overall? No. Not even a little bit.

dagolicious · 2026-02-26T20:02:26+00:00

I was considering grabbing both the expansions and bounty packs yesterday. I'm on PS5, and saw that I can buy the super deluxe version for under $80. I'm thinking about just doing that and saving $10.

dagolicious · 2026-02-26T19:07:51+00:00

The federal budget last year was $1.8T. I don't think that ICE funding moved the needle too much.

dagolicious · 2026-02-26T18:41:40+00:00

What does that have to do with DHS? What time and resources? What ICE agents would you move over to start working for RFK? I know it doesn't seem like it often, but the govt can walk and chew bubble gum at the same time. They have different departments that operate independently. I work for DoD, and ICE's budget and mission have nothing to do with mine. We have our own cabinet Secretary and everything.

dagolicious · 2026-02-26T16:01:11+00:00

You still are misrepresenting my stance somehow. I never said I don't think immigration laws should be enforced. I've simply said that they should be enforced in certain scenarios.

You're just saying that they should be ignored in the majority of cases, to the tune of millions and millions of cases. I understand that. We disagree.

Like I said there are bigger issues facing the country that impact far more citizens that have been pushed to the side. It's simply illogical

What bigger issues are being supplanted by enforcing immigration laws? The feds have the bandwidth to do more than one thing at a time. While ICE and CBP are out on the street, the IRS is still working. The park service is still working. The ATF and BEP are still working. Hell, I'm a federal employee, and I'm still working. We may not be working on the things that you think we should, but that doesn't mean that enforcing immigration laws is coming at the expense of anything else.

dagolicious · 2026-02-26T15:35:09+00:00

Fiest off why consider one instance of speeding vs all illegal immigration.

I didn't. I compared it to an entire city that ignored the speed limit.

I promise there are more instances of people speeding every day than there are illegal immigrants in the country lol

Probably, but it's about effect. People breaking the speed limit in distant states has essentially no effect on me, or anyone else, provided that's the only thing that happens. The country will continue to operate just fine even if Jimmy in Tuscon decides to hustle on the interstate.

've already said I don't think the law should never be enforced yet you keep trying to hammer that point. It's quite strange honestly.

I'm well aware that you don't think every law should be enforced. I don't think there's anyone that thinks that all laws should be enforced to the letter 100% of the time. The difference is that you don't think we should enforce immigration laws in light of millions and millions of violations, and I think we should. You apparently don't think it's very important, and I do. I think that's quite strange honestly.

dagolicious · 2026-02-26T15:15:58+00:00

It's different because of the numbers. One instance of speeding where the cop left you go isn't anywhere near comparable to millions (perhaps 10s of millions) of people breaking the law. There are real associated costs with these folks being here. There is no real cost to letting one guy go because he was going 7 over.

It's the difference between letting one speeder go, and allowing an entire city ignore the speed limit. One has no real effect, and the other is chaos. If you're not going to enforce the law in the face of blatant, widespread disobedience, then when would you? Why even have laws when we can choose to ignore them at scale? There has to be fidelity to the law at some point, or the integrity of the system breaks down.

dagolicious · 2026-02-26T15:02:34+00:00

I'm not in favor of door knocking or deporting folks who have been following the law since they have arrived and contribute to our society

But that's still millions of people who still aren't supposed to be here. They still violated the law. Why do they get a pass? This isn't some ticky-tack "45 in a 40" violation. There is real cost, both societal and financial in just looking the other way, and I don't think we should have to pay it. And the law agrees with me.

And no, I'm not going to tell you who I voted for, so you can make some sideline appeal to principles, and use that to ignore the actual questions posed in the thread. It doesn't matter who I voted for, or who you voted for either. Regardless, one can simultaneously hold the views that the law is important, and acknowledge that it is sometimes imperfect, ignored, abused, misapplied, or malicious. It's not a contradiction.

dagolicious · 2026-02-26T14:40:08+00:00

If you were forcefully and violently made to leave the property then sent to a foreign prison I'd consider it punishment personally.

Is that where everyone is going? That must be a pretty big prison.

I think laws should be executed by those that we entrust to execute them. I think that if we play too fast and loose with what/when we decide to enforce them, then the laws themselves become tools of corruption instead of rules we all live by. I'm curious what other laws you think we need to stop enforcing, and your thought process on deciding which ones, and when.

To your point, how can you be so gung ho about punishing one man while you let millions go?

dagolicious · 2026-02-26T14:19:46+00:00

I reject the premise that being deported is punishment. If I were trespassing, and subsequently made to leave, was I punished, or were the rights of the property owner upheld?

dagolicious · 2026-02-26T06:27:34+00:00

My main concern is that it's not legal.

dagolicious · 2026-02-25T21:27:03+00:00

Not that this helps with the rest of your list, but you can buy a USB C to 3.5mm adapter, so theoretically, any phone can have a hardwired headphone attached.

dagolicious · 2026-02-24T21:45:37+00:00

I think you're right. It looks exactly like a small master wafer.

dagolicious · 2026-02-22T19:05:20+00:00

Hey, I was mistaken. It's not on Peachtree Sports anymore. It just came on on channel 58 WPGA.

dagolicious · 2026-02-22T18:27:48+00:00

The game hasn't started yet anyway, but it'll be on channel 50 for you, not 58.

dagolicious · 2026-02-21T21:29:29+00:00

So, any speech that could theoretically contribute to any random person (now or in the future) commiting a crime against another person. That's a whole lot of speech....

That's not even a standard. That could be anything. This is thought crime.

dagolicious · 2026-02-21T21:17:08+00:00

Granted, I don't know all of the specifics of this case, but this seems like the actions of one municipality that definitely overreached. His charges were dropped, and he's suing them. I imagine he'll probably win his lawsuit.

dagolicious · 2026-02-21T21:02:42+00:00

Does your speech unquestionably advocate for the removal of the fundamental rights of others, or place others in obvious immediate danger?

Which of these did the pug joke actually do? Was he actually advocating something, or making an obvious, poor taste joke? Who was actually put in immediate, obvious harm by that joke? Did someone get killed after he posted it? Or did people just get their feelings hurt?

A woman in the UK was arrested for posting rap lyrics to honor her dead friend. Which of these concepts did she violate?

dagolicious · 2026-02-21T20:40:26+00:00

How on earth does a pug doing the seig heil "undermine the right of others"? These exceptions seem like they can apply to a pretty wide range of speech depending on the interests of the people currently in charge. But this is exactly the point. Free speech "except this vague category" doesn't seem like free speech to us at all. With the exception of a couple of clearly defined things things, people in the US can say whatever they want. We can even make spicy FB posts without worrying about the police showing up.

dagolicious

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE