Is anyone else less invested in this season than normal?

[BullBuchanan]

1 minute ago, JoshAllenHasBigHands said:

How will I ever recover. 

Maybe try reading up on what the word "requirement" means?

Edited September 2, 2020 by BullBuchanan

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, JoshAllenHasBigHands said:

Whoa. Sick burn from the guy that cannot understand the verb, “to disrupt.” How will I ever recover. 

 

He is right though. They talk about disrupting the requirement. That is literally what it says.

[Hampton Josh fan]

How could anyone be less invested in a season that has our team playing in a position of strength.?  In addition,  the entertainment value of NFL football is as good as it gets in this shut down environment. The better question is how could anyone throw cold water on something as anticipated as this?.

[JoshAllenHasBigHands]

1 minute ago, GunnerBill said:

 

He is right though. They talk about disrupting the requirement. That is literally what it says.

Sort of. For super random reasons, which I wont go into here, Ive read alot more critical race theory than the average suburban white guy. Undermining the nuclear family is a core tenant of many critical race/***** theorists—it being a white heteronormative tradition. BLM isnt outright saying it, but are instead paying tribute to the idea. Its a bit of a “wink wink.”  Left out in the Mission Statement is part two, which is the belief that by “disrupting” you simultaneously undermine and destroy. 

[Augie]

5 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

He is right though. They talk about disrupting the requirement. That is literally what it says.

 

It never was “required” though, as evidenced by the real world. The question remains, is an intact nuclear family going to almost always give future generations a better opportunity to succeed? I would agree with Marcellus and says yes. Nuclear family should be a priority and not so quickly abandoned. This sounds a bit like giving up and saying “we’ll find another way.”  

 

 

.

Edited September 3, 2020 by Augie

[GunnerBill]

Just now, Augie said:

 

It never was “required”, as evidenced by the real world. The question remains, is an intact nuclear family going to almost always give future generations a better opportunity to succeed? I would agree with Marcellus and say yes. Nuclear family should be a priority and not so quickly abandoned. This sounds a bit like giving up and saying “we’ll find another way.”  

 

Personally I'd say it doesn't matter a damn, but regardless what @BullBuchanan says is an accurate representation of the words in the mission statement.  

[JoPoy88]

52 minutes ago, TwistofFate said:

 

China, Russia, Mexico.....our own tyrannical government...take your pick.  Military is the wall between you speaking Chinese or you being allowed to say what you want.  Try going to China and typing some of the stuff you have in this thread, even the UK for that matter...you'd be in jail already.

ah yes because China’s really known for their wars of conquest in recent times (or most of their 5,000 year history, for that matter.) See the blue line BS in the avatar=fully indoctrinated. Never fails.
 

i’d advise you to read a history book or two but I know not to bother.

[GunnerBill]

6 minutes ago, JoshAllenHasBigHands said:

Sort of. For super random reasons, which I wont go into here, Ive read alot more critical race theory than the average suburban white guy. Undermining the nuclear family is a core tenant of many critical race/***** theorists—it being a white heteronormative tradition. BLM isnt outright saying it, but are instead paying tribute to the idea. Its a bit of a “wink wink.”  Left out in the Mission Statement is part two, which is the belief that by “disrupting” you simultaneously undermine and destroy. 

 

As someone who has been on the receiving end of a heteronormative tradition or two myself I have some sympathy with the argument that they need some disruption. 

[BullBuchanan]

10 minutes ago, JoshAllenHasBigHands said:

Sort of. For super random reasons, which I wont go into here, Ive read alot more critical race theory than the average suburban white guy. Undermining the nuclear family is a core tenant of many critical race/***** theorists—it being a white heteronormative tradition. BLM isnt outright saying it, but are instead paying tribute to the idea. Its a bit of a “wink wink.”  Left out in the Mission Statement is part two, which is the belief that by “disrupting” you simultaneously undermine and destroy. 

So, I read a line and state that the words mean what they mean and back it up with the context of the rest of the document.

You reject all of that and say I don't know what words mean, because you have a conspiracy theory that you and the sandwich avatar guy are pushing. 

Occam's razor? 

Edited September 2, 2020 by BullBuchanan

[BullBuchanan]

20 minutes ago, Augie said:

 

It never was “required” though, as evidenced by the real world. 

.

It wasn't? Could gay people get married or adopt children in 2005? Does society look down on unmarried parents or single parents?

The "requirement" in question is the accepted social norm.

here it is:

"We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable."
 

Their claim is that that western culture states that a family is a mom, a dad, and a kid. Other cultures, like those in the east and native Americans have extended families with multiple generations living under one roof. Some cultures have children raised by neighbors or villagers. They are saying that they reject the notion that to be a family you need one Dad, one mom and a child. How do they do that? "by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another"

It's a statement and an example. That's really it. 

Edited September 2, 2020 by BullBuchanan

[MJS]

55 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

People keep having meltdowns. 

And apparently they think people care what they believe...

 

Or even worse, they believe they can convince others to believe like them!

[JoshAllenHasBigHands]

15 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

So, I read a line and state that the words mean what they mean and back it up with the context of the rest of the document.

You reject all of that and say I don't know what words mean, because you have a conspiracy theory that you and the sandwich avatar guy are pushing. 

Occam's razor? 

I bet you similarly believed Lenin when he said it was about “freedom” and “equality.” 
 

Seriously, you literally just need to google “critical race theory” and “the nuclear family.” This isnt a secret. 
 

Also, you misused “occam’s razor.” 

[BullBuchanan]

11 minutes ago, JoshAllenHasBigHands said:

I bet you similarly believed Lenin when he said it was about “freedom” and “equality.” 
 

Seriously, you literally just need to google “critical race theory” and “the nuclear family.” This isnt a secret. 
 

Also, you misused “occam’s razor.” 

I did not.

I don't care about your psuedoscience.

Edit: Ah, It's an OAN conspiracy theory. That's why this is all on the tip of the extreme right's tongues after going unknown for 40 years.
 

Edited September 2, 2020 by BullBuchanan

[JoshAllenHasBigHands]

4 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

I did not.

I don't care about your psuedoscience.
 

Wow that was crazy. Just, from top to bottom, so crazy. 

[Warcodered]

54 minutes ago, Augie said:

 

It never was “required” though, as evidenced by the real world. The question remains, is an intact nuclear family going to almost always give future generations a better opportunity to succeed? I would agree with Marcellus and say yes. Nuclear family should be a priority and not so quickly abandoned. This sounds a bit like giving up and saying “we’ll find another way.”  

 

 

.

I'd say it's more about a stable environment than any specific grouping of people.

[TwistofFate]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

He'd be in jail in the UK? Please explain that to me? 

 

1 hour ago, BullBuchanan said:

I would be in jail in the UK for typing the things I have? I think not.

Are we actively in wars or have we been in the last 100 years with China, Russia or Mexico?
They were all allies in WW2.

Is Mexico is trying to take my freedom to challenge your assertions on the internet?

When has the military protected us against our own tyrannical government?

 

 

The Communications Act 2003 defines illegal communication as “using public electronic communications network in order to cause annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety”. Breaking the law carries a six-month prison term or fine of up to £5,000.

 

Now in a society that doesn't truly have free speech, this would be used to silence you, and it has in the UK.  The liberal powers that be, consider anything they don't agree with as hate speech.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/arrests-offensive-facebook-and-twitter-posts-soar-london-a7064246.html

Edited September 2, 2020 by TwistofFate

[BullBuchanan]

2 minutes ago, TwistofFate said:

 

 

The Communications Act 2003 defines illegal communication as “using public electronic communications network in order to cause annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety”. Breaking the law carries a six-month prison term or fine of up to £5,000.

 

Now in a society that doesn't truly have free speech, this would be used to silence you, and it has in the UK.  The liberal powers that be, consider anything they don't agree with as hate speech.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/arrests-offensive-facebook-and-twitter-posts-soar-london-a7064246.html

You should really try re-reading that.

[GunnerBill]

5 minutes ago, TwistofFate said:

 

 

The Communications Act 2003 defines illegal communication as “using public electronic communications network in order to cause annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety”. Breaking the law carries a six-month prison term or fine of up to £5,000.

 

Now in a society that doesn't truly have free speech, this would be used to silence you, and it has in the UK.  The liberal powers that be, consider anything they don't agree with as hate speech.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/arrests-offensive-facebook-and-twitter-posts-soar-london-a7064246.html

 

Haha. Believe me when I tell you I know what the Communications Act says and is used for. I used to hold policy responsiblity for it. Maybe I am the "liberal powers that be"? That would be interesting. 

 

It is used not to silence anything that is not agreed with. It is used to charge people using electronic means to make death threats and threats of physical violence. If you really think the authorities here in the UK are running around shutting down legitimate expression via the communications act then I can assure you 100% that you are most definitely wrong. 

Edited September 2, 2020 by GunnerBill

[SoTier]

22 hours ago, TwistofFate said:

This BLM BS has me not wanting to watch any football at all.  The only games I plan on watching this year are the two Jet games, which I'm obligated to because of very close friends, and the Super Bowl if we get there. 

 

Aside from that, I'm out on this season and have zero respect for the commissioner and the league for supporting such BS and funneling it down my throat.  No thanks. 

 

Why are you even bothering with those three live games???  Why don't you just go play Madden where virtual players don't have lives outside of your play station?

[BullBuchanan]

Just now, GunnerBill said:

 

Haha. Believe me when I tell you I know what the Communications Act says and is used for. I used to hold policy responsible for it. Maybe I am the "liberal powers that be"? That would be interesting. 

 

It is used not to silence anything that is not agreed with. It is used to charge people using electronic means to make death threats and threats of physical violence. If you really think the authorities here in the UK are running around shutting down legitimate expression via the communications act then I can assure you 100% that you are most definitely wrong. 

Also things which are not protected under our country's "free speech"