Leaderboard

We need something to get us out of all of this gloom..

This one is a real treasure.. heh. Half (drunk?) clueless (expletive beginning with B) looking for God in all of this mess.. heh. I have grown to love and appreciate Cheryl.

I think this one was earlier.

Thank you dear Oldiesman..I enjoy your Saturday Night. here is my new Saturday night.

If their pro-abortion stance would be problematic for today’s movement, their John-Birchy flat-earthiness might just be enough for a second look and possible seat at the theocratic table.

Pro-choice? Hardly. It was never about a choice. Pro-abortion is a more mathematically accurate and scientifically precise description. Abortion was merely a rational and practical method deployed to mitigate risk of reputational and financial loss.

Will that work?

Out of respect: You posted this in atheism. You do NOT want to know what I think of Charlie Kirk. So I will move it and I will ask that we refrain from referring to the killer's motive as "demonic," which (under the umbrella of the atheism forum) is a lazy scapegoating that robs a homicidal a-hole of responsibility for his despicable act. And I will ask that we refrain from politics, which is impossible in a conversation about Charlie Kirk (which is why I feel compelled to change the name of the thread). So henceforth, this thread is narrowed to the following: Do we agree? [moving to doctrinal).

My opinion is that using AI-generated answers instead of researching things on your own, or to do your own thinking for you, is bad for your mental health. I've seen obviously incorrect answers about things that were relatively straightforward. About things that aren't, the odds are far worse for the answer to be correct. An answer is only as good as the information the AI uses to compose the answer, and the AI can't tell the difference between tinfoil hat conspiracies and legitimate science.