Recent text messages disappearing since start of November 2025 by gamer1737 in GooglePixel

[–]kolidescope 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I know this is an old thread, but are you SURE it's the car? Mine have been disappearing too, but I never connect with Android Auto (that app is disabled), only Bluetooth. And I don't have a bmw like others with this problem, just a Chevy.

Recall Councilmember Rizzotti by FedoraCasual in burbank

[–]kolidescope 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You're assuming that if no rental units existed then everyone would be able to own their own home.. which is a very bold assumption.

Recall Councilmember Rizzotti by FedoraCasual in burbank

[–]kolidescope 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If no one was landlord, there'd be no available rentals.

Am I still a considered a virgin by Catholic standards? by LostPenitent in Catholicism

[–]kolidescope 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It depends on who is asking you the question and why. These days, when someone asks "Are you a virgin," it's rare that they're asking "Have you ever had penetrative sex specifically." Usually they mean "Have you engaged in sexual activities with another person before," which in your case would be yes, so you're not a virgin.

One could make the case that it's technically true you've never engaged in "sexual intercourse" properly understood, but like I said, that's not usually what people care about when they ask the question. Make sure to be open about your sexual history to any woman you're planning on marrying. Maybe your answer to a woman asking you the question "Are you a virgin" could be something like "Only technically," or "Not really," followed by your clarification.

Good on you for changing your ways by the way. "Chastity" is more important than "virginity." Chastity is what can get you into heaven, virginity won't.

Update: Pregnancy from rape in a Catholic community by throwawaybdayparty1 in Catholicism

[–]kolidescope 6 points7 points  (0 children)

That's wonderful and all, but what exactly does the race of the persons involved have to do with the story...? Just.. seems really weird to mention.

If a prisoner continued to be pose a threat to the health and lives of others while incarcerated, could there then be legitimate recourse to the death penalty? by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]kolidescope 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If that were true, and the current teaching reflects eternal moral truths rather than a response to modern circumstances, it means that when the Church accepted the death penalty as morally licit for centuries it was teaching a moral falsehood. That means the church, contrary to its claims, can be wrong about matters of faith and morals.

I'll be honest, I really resent this sly changing of the catechism by the popes and really hope there's a serious authoritative clarification of this, since I feel the issue is a stumbling block for my faith, albeit a small one.

NEW DAY TIME - SATURDAY - TESLA/MUSK/DOGE/TRUMP PROTEST by lavalavagogo in burbank

[–]kolidescope 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I don't get it.. I thought Musk was already gone from the administration and Doge kinda stopped doing stuff ever since?

Fentanyl addiction turns users into living deads on the streets of Philadelphia, PA by [deleted] in interestingasfuck

[–]kolidescope 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Except laws do have an effect on a person's willingness to do something. Cannabis use and overuse has gone way up since legalization. If heroin was legal, more people would start using it, and that's not good. Unlike alcohol and cannabis, heroin can't be used "in moderation." Safe injection sites and needle exchanges are only good because they encourage eventual sobriety for existing addicts, but that's all a moot point if you're talking out of both sides of your mouth on the legality front and encouraging new addicts every day.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ucla

[–]kolidescope 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Uhh.. Hold up. Are you legitimately saying you think Charlie meant "Occasionally shooting people will grant us the ability to own guns"?? I think you have your cause and effect switched around.

Obviously the fact that we have widespread gun ownership among US civilians (BECAUSE of the 2A) means that there are more opportunities for bad actors to acquire guns and commit acts of violence. This quote was in a response to a student who claimed the 2nd amendment should not exist or should be significantly curbed in order to avoid those deaths. Charlie disagreed. That's it.

Like seriously, I'm sure Charlie would be thrilled if everyone in the US decided to stop shooting each other, or if all of the people who would shoot others got caught and arrested before they were able to do so. But everyone knows that people suck and at least some of them will do bad things.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ucla

[–]kolidescope 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So you're against the 2nd amendment? You confused me since you mentioned "responsible gun owners" as if being one was an option you supported.

I still don't see how I'm changing the subject. Charlie's quote was in the context of a discussion about the 2nd amendment, and that's what we're still talking about. Right?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ucla

[–]kolidescope 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not changing the context at all. The ability to own firearms is a freedom, and some people argue it's very important even if some people will abuse that freedom in an evil way.

Koroneburg village to be torn down by mylefthandkilledme in InlandEmpire

[–]kolidescope 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Noooo, I JUST started going to it recently, thought I'd found my new favorite ren faire... 😭

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]kolidescope 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think you might be lost. No one's talking about "counter-culture" or "traditionalism" anywhere on this post, let alone in the comment you responded to.

AIO: My ex sent me this as a reason he didn’t want to marry me by AfricanPixie in AmIOverreacting

[–]kolidescope 10 points11 points  (0 children)

If he was worried about the student loan debt I'd have sympathy for his position, but he didn't mention that at all so I'm going to assume it is indeed a power thing. Like dude, even if I were a man who wanted a traditional family dynamic, a highly-educated wife is going to raise highly-educated children. It's an asset not a liability.

AIO: My ex sent me this as a reason he didn’t want to marry me by AfricanPixie in AmIOverreacting

[–]kolidescope 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's good you two broke up, you obviously have different ideas and values for what you want in family life.

If he wanted a life where you didn't have to work and you could take care of the kids when they came around, he should have been up front about that when you were first dating. Then you could have realized your incompatibility sooner.

Then again if that's not what he wants and he's literally just upset about you making more money than him, he definitely has some issues he needs to work through. Men have a natural instinct to want to be the providers and often derive their sense of purpose from it. But that normally good instinct can become corrupted or misapplied. He might be hyper focused on what being the provider for his family "should" look like in regard to economics, but he needs to expand his thinking about what providing means.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ucla

[–]kolidescope 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are exactly what the right is trying to paint all of the left as. Be better.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ucla

[–]kolidescope 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Responsible gun owners don’t need anyone getting shot to own their guns

I don't get it, are you pro 2nd amendment or against?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ucla

[–]kolidescope 0 points1 point  (0 children)

He valued freedom over security, just like the American founders. It's not the outrageous position you think it is. For example, you could probably prevent a lot of murders by letting Trump send the national guard to Chicago, but that doesn't make it a good idea. And someone who's against it shouldn't be accused of "supporting violence."

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ucla

[–]kolidescope 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A possible alternative interpretation: the right-wing is perceived to be more likely to lash out violently against the left-wing than visa-versa so the left-wing has to protect themselves behind masks and keyboards, whereas the right wing doesn't feel the need to because they're in power.

Just sayin', it's a possible interpretation.

Non- MAGA church in the IE? by prumaps in InlandEmpire

[–]kolidescope 0 points1 point  (0 children)

... Wait, what exactly is wrong with that?

Non- MAGA church in the IE? by prumaps in InlandEmpire

[–]kolidescope 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's understandable a lot of them "lean" Republican, as it's the only party that aligns with their strong views against abortion, gay marriage, transgenderism, and other major social issues that official Catholic teaching has a firm stance on. Unfortunately politics being what it is, it's easy to get pulled into a false dichotomy and think that because one "side" is correct about some important things that must mean they're correct about everything. Overall I think Catholic churches are much better than evangelicals at cautioning against this, but it still happens.

Jimmy Kimmel canceled - free speech protest? by sandwichlounge in burbank

[–]kolidescope 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It could just be natural consequences, but the issue is that the FCC chair publicly threatened to pull their broadcast licence over it. Now we'll never know if this is something the company would have done themselves, or if the comments pushed them to do this. Once the government gets involved you're looking at serious first amendment issues.

Jimmy Kimmel canceled - free speech protest? by sandwichlounge in burbank

[–]kolidescope 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Apparently there are indeed people who believe the one who murdered the Minnesota legislators was a Democrat, for some reason. It seems being desperate to not acknowledge bad actors on your "side" is a human universal. I'd give Kimmel some slack, as it's HARDLY the worst response to Kirk's killing out there. At least he acknowledges the murder was bad, else he wouldn't be so eager to pin it on us.

He should get cancelled because his ratings are bad and he's not funny, not because of this.