Joe Ferguson forever

They're both important. Do you cheer for the Bills to win or learn? Just for Orlando. Maybe you could just watch the movie. The Handmaid's Tale author, Margaret Atwood, published an article in The Atlanticin 2023, responding to the school board in Madison County, Virginia banning her book from high-school libraries on the grounds of having explicit sexual scenes. She argued that the official reasons for the ban are ridiculous, stating that her book "is much less sexually explicit than the Bible." Limiting what kids can read based on religious views is also a form of totalitarianism and flies against the separation of church and state that the US is founded on. The author stated that despite her book being misunderstood as anti-Christian, The Handmaid's Tale was partially inspired by biblical texts and argues "against totalitarian control and power hoarding cloaked in a supposed religiousness that is mostly based on the earlier scriptures in the Bible." Atwood does have a point. It makes little sense that her book is banned, while movie and TV adaptations that include more explicit scenes are not. Banning her book from libraries only affects those who can't afford to buy books. Atwood also raised the topic of book censorship in the age of social media and streaming platforms. The Handmaid's Tale depicts a dystopian society where the theocratic Christian authoritarian regime of Gilead has taken over the US. The penultimate fifth season of The Handmaid's Tale delves further into June's story. The provocative nature of the subjects discussed in the story may cause discomfort for certain people, especially on the subject of sex, birth control, and women's rights. However, contrary to what is claimed in the official statement on the book ban, sex exists only by mention. There's no direct, on-the-page description of explicit activities. AlthoughThe Handmaid's Tale was written for adults, the book often makes an appearance on high school reading lists. The author has since teamed up with Penguin Random House to create a fire-proofed version to ensure her book cannot be burned.

you argued using the premise of me supporting porn or sexually explicit books for children. I don't and I never said I did. But you "went through it". Wtf does that mean and how does it relate to your straw man argument against something I never said? Huh? Winning an argument and looking for the truth are mutually exclusive? splain... certainly, one can argue an untruthful point. Lawyers do it all the time. But I did not. I communicate just fine. Never had a colleague complain.

You’re an idiot. I really pray you’re not really a teacher. Context of the subject “truth”? We’ll see how the court case goes. I don’t know what the evidence is. The video of him responding to Cruz isn’t in itself convincing. It remains to be proven whether what he said was true.

Nope. Were you debating someone else when you quoted my above comments on China and Russia? “I really doubt China has any interest in being a tag team, military partner with them. I think that thought is silly. “ This is the statement I’m debating with you. China is currently a military partner with Russia. Do you disagree with the WSJ article I linked? Then refute it. Not letting you reframe the argument. Nothing wrong with me. I enjoy debate and winning.

nah, that comes in the evening. been out chipping, putting and hitting bunker shots....all I can do til they fix my back. Cannabis is legal in Va. Just harvested my 4 permitted plants. They did very well. I didn't initiate the banned book discussion but I won it!

nyet. you responded to this "The tightening alliance of Russia and China makes this threat worrisome. They are both provoking potential conflict seemingly in support of their imperialistic goals. Perhaps they believe that together they could win. Or maybe they're just seeing how far they can go without the US responding." no where did I say fighters or ground troops to Europe by China. I talked about imperialistic goals and had mentioned their desire for Taiwan. If Russia gets away with their imperialistic goals in Ukraine and Europe without a successful rebuke, they will be embolden in that effort. That's likely why they are supporting Russia against Ukraine You're arguing against something that wasn't stated therefore you used a ...

You were mildly entertaining. Now you’re not…blocked

You said “tag team” I believe. This isn’t purely economic support but rather military support. I’d characterize that as tag teaming, not that I watch much wrestling. “Interest in being a tag team, military partner with them.”

Except the grand jury already rejected a 3rd cjharge. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/comey-trump-grand-jury-2-criminal-counts-rejects-a-third-heres-what-they-say/

Relevance troll?

More “truth” from maga. Were we expected to believe trump posted it?, Donaldo ? He didn’t https://www.reuters.com/article/fact-check/storm-is-upon-us-tweet-attributed-to-trump-and-shared-online-is-fabricated-idUSL1N353243/ so you’re q, huh? I thought y’all dissolved after your spectacular failures.

Strawman. I’ve never mentioned books on open marriage. There are plenty of banned books that have nothing to do with sex. The sexes.however are a concern of mine. Why do you think a book about subjugation of women like “The Handmaids Tale” should be banned? Plenty of other examples of banned books that are benign and harmless other than to present varied ideas on non sexual subjects. Probably the weakest argument is to claim “.victory “ when none has been achieved.

so the rest was all distraction... and explain the (sic): evoke /ĭ-vōk′/ transitive verb To give rise to; draw forth; produce. "words that evoked a smile; actions that evoked mistrust." To call to mind, as by suggestion, association, or reference. "songs that evoke old memories; a speech that evoked the words of Jefferson." To create anew, especially by means of the imagination. "a novel that accurately evokes the Depression." The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition • More at Wordnik It's not questionable. It, by definition, is true. Perhaps I should also post the definition of "definition" and then you can keep going round in circles. But thank for proving, that a least for some magas here, truth is not important. all hat, no cattle

There's plenty of room for an innocent verdict.

Trump is sabotaging the prosecutor with his public statements about Comey. He had an elaborate plan: Order Justice (Bondi) to prosecute political opponents, fire the US attorney in N Va (a republican) who likely wouldn't prosecute and replace with a loyalist (who has never prosecuted a case!). These all happened in rapid succession. If the courts have integrity, Comey will be cleared. If not, he becomes a political prisoner and MAGA cheers. This case involves testimony to a question from cruz about leaks to the press. It has nothing to do with the subject matter of this video.

https://archive.ph/84UIz perhaps you should give it more thought.

In that case, why wouldn't Patel attempt to prosecute them more vigorously? If they were part of the FBI, proving it would advance the maga "deep state" theme.

A word can evoke different meanings to different people. That's up to the interpreter in much the same way as a piece of art or music can. However, in this case we have a well accepted definition (from Websters): ban 1 of 3 verb ˈban banned; banning; bans Synonyms of ban transitive verb 1 : to prohibit especially by legal means ban discrimination Is smoking banned in all public buildings? also : to prohibit the use, performance, or distribution of ban a book ban a pesticide The fact hat Websters chose to include an example about all public buildings illustrates that a ban is possible only in some. Schools are public buildings. Therefore there can be bans in some schools. additionally, some schools prohibit certain books by legal means. Therefore they ban them. The only pertinent premise that you present towards your conclusion is the logos part. and it is invalid. The rest are semantic red herrings. It's a much more simple argument than you present. Perhaps you can diagram it for us.

“What makes you think” was a question to “doc” but thanks for reminding me where I proved his fraud. He thought I was a neurologist. I’m not. But I have seen demented patients 100s of times your stalking is slightly unsettling. After criticizing the topic, you post in it insufferably

they may not legally need it. practically they do. they won't risk starting ww3 without US approval.

pretty certain commandant patel doesn't list this as a priority after all the other traitors were pardoned.

i know what he was quoted saying. ambiguous as always but initially giving his stamp of approval of NATO shooting down planes in their airspace but saying it would depend on circumstances whether the US gets involved. Did you read something else?

Seems like trump is already in neck deep https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/23/politics/trump-nato-countries-russian-aircraft

I think he’s just pointing out trump’s frequent association with modest girls https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/donald-trump-melania-trump-knauss-first-lady-erections

Isn’t polymarket a betting site? isn’t this discussed in a thread where it’s relevant?