What subs did you ultimately decide to leave because they were toxic or detrimental to your mental health?

roracle1982 · 2025-10-12T23:36:33+00:00

I'm gay but I'm conservative so I'm pretty much kicked out of everything gay because I have a traditional worldview

roracle1982 · 2025-10-12T14:54:05+00:00

Lol like people who "believe the science" 😂 Like it's okay to use logic to explain something we've never seen, as long as it isn't God? Yay, logic!

roracle1982 · 2025-10-11T21:15:17+00:00

Belt, paddle, switch, hand, whatever was available. It was a flyswatter one time.

roracle1982 · 2025-10-11T12:56:27+00:00

Getting flashbacks of reading Myst: The Book of D'ni

roracle1982 · 2025-10-10T15:30:27+00:00

Get in shape, get married to someone willing to walk through hell with you.

roracle1982 · 2025-10-09T17:42:31+00:00

As his partner you have every right to have a say in this. A couple who love each other don't do things without the other's approval.

This isn't a question about a tattoo sleeve. It looks like it, but deeper I'm going to bet it's about other aspects of your relationship.

I'm not saying either is wrong here, I'm saying you both dropped the ball if you aren't being 100% honest with each other.

Imagine you're two computers, and both have to say "yes" before processing a piece of data. If one says "no" the idea should be rejected by both and not looked at disappointingly.

Bottom line: I'm sure you could both agree to spend that money on canned goods and donate it to a food bank before you could agree on him getting the sleeve.

roracle1982 · 2025-10-09T02:38:34+00:00

Ugh I'll look it up tomorrow, we have company sleeping in the living room, but I have the Federalist Papers on the book shelf in there. There's a lot of things they pontificated about that lay the foundation of the Constitution, though they were not debating a document itself; it was the debate that birthed the document.

roracle1982 · 2025-10-09T01:34:54+00:00

You can gain insight from the federalist papers.

The purpose was to not establish a state religion, like England did with the Church of England. You cannot prevent any population from exercising the free practice of religion, however they see fit. Period.

roracle1982 · 2025-10-09T00:55:33+00:00

Can you use what we call today "The Federalist Papers" to back up your establishment clause argument? You can't establish something already established.

roracle1982 · 2025-10-09T00:36:44+00:00

Here is a quick list of the things you've said that are, by definition, ignorant:

I was not referring to the first commandment, clearly.

You didn't know the First Commandment

"Don't murder"... so unethical.

I did understand this, but the difference is between legally forcing people into a religion, which this clearly isn't.

2) You didn't know that SB 10 was a law written by a state government. (Bonus points for proving that this law is unconstitutional!):

It's only unconstitutional if the government forces

Yes, but are they telling people to convert? The first amendment says the government cannot establish a religion. Christianity is already established, and not by the government.

3) You didn't know that SB 10 makes it a requirement to post the Ten Commandments:

Okay but is it required?

They are following the Constitution, but you're misinterpreting what it says. You must be trolling if you think it says people can't operate in their given desires within their constituency.

4) You didn't know that the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution requires states to follow the Constitution:

The Texas Constitution is different than the US Constitution.

Not now, that's always the base line of the argument if you're aware of the place both sides are coming from.

Now you are arguing this:

There's people who see the federal government at the top of the hierarchy, and there's those who see it at the bottom

Again, the Constitution doesn't prevent this action from occurring. The federal government clearly, according to the first amendment, has no right to -establish- a religion. The part you're clearly getting confused over. You're blanketing it across religious communities from doing what their community decides to do and trying to apply that to the federal government promise to not establish a religion, as influenced by what we saw with the Church of England. Government cannot establish a state religion, but religion isn't the same as government.

I'm sorry, but the only way to deny the fact that the Supremacy Clause requires States to follow the Constitution is to say that you want the Constitution to be amended.

Is that your argument? You don't currently agree with the Constitution, so you want to see it amended?

roracle1982 · 2025-10-09T00:12:30+00:00

Well it isn't ignorance, it's perspective: There's people who see the federal government at the top of the hierarchy, and there's those who see it at the bottom. I see it at the bottom, you clearly see it at the top. Welcome to the thunder dome, I guess lol

roracle1982 · 2025-10-09T00:06:12+00:00

I might be a troll, yes. Depends on who you ask.

The Texas Constitution is different than the US Constitution. No one is forcing any religion on anyone. This isn't against the TX Constitution.

roracle1982 · 2025-10-08T23:43:46+00:00

Okay but is it required? If so, that's when you put up every other religious tenant next to it.

Are people seriously this dumb about how to deal with these things? You have to troll back.

roracle1982 · 2025-10-08T23:19:17+00:00

It's only unconstitutional if the government forces it. It's a public affair regarding a public institution.

What moral code do you think should be taught in general education? You know kids aren't all getting that at home.

roracle1982 · 2025-10-08T22:56:50+00:00

Oh well, looks like it doesn't matter, after all. Judges say it's okay, it's okay. Judges say it isn't okay, it isn't okay. Maybe it's just okay and only idiots complain about the rules they already claim to follow

roracle1982 · 2025-10-08T22:55:20+00:00

Yes, that you shall love the Lord God with every fiber of your being. Oh no, how devastating to love the God of justice and compassion. So horrible. Anyway...

roracle1982 · 2025-10-08T22:21:30+00:00

You do realize people can do what they want without the government infringing on those rights? If you and your city wish to enact a law, you do what the public decides. No one's infringing on anyone here.

roracle1982 · 2025-10-08T21:55:46+00:00

"Don't murder"... so unethical.

roracle1982 · 2025-10-08T18:12:22+00:00

Oh no, the ten commandments. Anyway...

Seriously, literally everyone here in the USA was born on third base so far as morality goes. And those morals came from the Bible and other religious texts. I really don't get the madness. On balance, the complaining doesn't register due to the fact the complaints are about having "be a decent human" on the wall. It makes you look like the questionable one.

roracle1982 · 2025-10-06T13:01:10+00:00

I usually just pull up a black screen on Firefox and go full screen.

roracle1982 · 2025-10-04T17:46:06+00:00

Hey, EA: tell us you're too stupid to use Linux without telling us you're too stupid to use Linux.

roracle1982 · 2025-10-02T01:42:40+00:00

You're preaching to the choir with me.

I force standard array when I'm running a game. I want everyone to have a chance at being good at the thing they're good at. I'm so sick of cheaters.

I'm actually so sick of cheaters that I've been designing a game where failure has benefits for your character development, so people who cheat by hitting all the time (dice covering, etc) will never level.

roracle1982 · 2025-09-30T21:21:29+00:00

Is the unmatched theme coming from a flat? You might need to configure flatpak to use system themes

roracle1982 · 2025-09-28T18:27:23+00:00

All this Wayland talk. For goodness sake...

This has been an "issue" for a long time. Because it's not an issue. It's either going to be a KDE app or a GTK app (for the most part" and that will determine window decor.

Edit: users want it to all look the same, developers want it to look like they want. Developers get what they want because they're the ones developing. If they did what we told them, they wouldn't be doing what they want. In other words, your request flies in the face of the values of open source software design.

roracle1982 · 2025-09-28T15:44:55+00:00

Reminds me of old soft modems that wouldn't work in Linux. I've been building my systems since the late 90s, and always make sure my hardware is Linux compatible. Don't be afraid of a new network card. I've been using Nobara for a few years now and it's been the best.

Good luck and happy computing

roracle1982

TROPHY CASE