It already has fields for personal information, though, and they’re every bit as sensitive as your birthdate. realName, emailAddress, location, and timezone are already in there. The important part is that they’re all optional, and you don’t have to fill them in at all, or can fill them in with fake data. The system still serves you, not some outside party.

But the timing of it does have a lot of people freaking out about it.

I did not give you any citation, I referred to an entire book.

Do you seriously want to check 2000 bible verses? Unfortunately I can’t find an exhaustive list online, but here are 100: https://www.openbible.info/topics/helping_the_needy

Maybe I’m remembering it in a more condensed form, but Amos mentions mistreatment of the poor several times as reason for the punishment. But what stuck out to me is that all the religious services, songs, offerings etc become worthless in light of their sins, and that it’s the country as a whole that’s held accountable for this. Conservatives sometimes justify their inhuman policies by claiming it’s an individual responsibility to help the poor, and not something for the government to concern itself with, but here it’s the country as a whole that’s held responsible for it.

And it’s not just about selling the poor into slavery, it also mentions taxing the poor, justice for the poor, and corruption. I recall there being explicit mention of feeding widows and orphans, but I can’t find that right now.

Someone counted it. Apparently it’s over 2000 times for helping the poor, and a maximum of 5 times “gay is bad” and in several of those that interpretation is questionable. Zero condemnations of abortions.

The book of Amos starts with God saying he doesn’t want Israel’s prayers and sacrifices because they don’t take care of the poor. It is the primary theme across the entire bible.

I’m not denying there are some questionable parts, but nothing in there is repeated as often as this. Well, maybe praising God.

I don’t know where you got that naive quote, but I completely disagree with that. Theocracy corrupts both religion and politics, and it’s important that people see that. They lie and pervert, and that needs to be exposed.

And one vital step in that is to expose their lies, undermine the base they have mislead into supporting them. Don’t allow them to keep that.

He’s right, though. Nothing about what they’re doing is even remotely Christian. They’ve been claiming abortion as their central tenet of Christianity, but the bible doesn’t condemn that even once. The bible does tell us thousands of times to help the poor, feed the hungry, etc., but they are strongly against that and see the poor as deserving of that poverty. There are dozens of aspects where they go out of their way to miss the point of Christianity and preach the polar opposite.

They only hijack Christianity as a conservative identity to rally around in order to bind voters to their fundamentally anti-christian cause. Religion to them is a tool for social control, not about honest faith.

And repeating that is important to free believers who fell for their lies. If you allow them to own the label “christian”, you allow them to continue to fool people into supporting them. We have to unmask them, show them for who they really are.

If you don’t like criticism, don’t run the most corrupt Supreme Court ever.

It’s true. Plenty of cis women have been harassed by men in women’s bathrooms because the man thought they were trans. How is that acceptable, but using the bathroom for its intended purpose is not?

I think January 6 makes his current term illegal.

Touché.

What, don’t you want a boot process that offers a different surprise every day?

I would replace “dramatic” with “predictable”. Everybody knew it was bullshit. It was like tulip mania, but without actual tulips.

That’s exactly what I’m saying: more options to be safer.

Choosing between no men or all men is certainly better than having no choice at all, but being able to filter out just the creeps would be even better.

And yes, that does mean you need to detect who the creeps are, but sexual harassment is already happening, and it would be good to use that information to stop it from happening.

I think this rule a massive improvement, but I also think it’s very restrictive. Women can only choose to avoid all men, rather than just the creeps. So female drivers who need more passengers might feel forced to accept all men, and female passengers who can’t find a ride, might be forced to accept a ride from any male driver. Which might still be a creep.

I think it’s better to weed out the creeps. I think that’s ultimately better for everybody. Make it harder for creeps to get a ride or passenger, instead of making it harder for women.

Maybe both should be an option.

Quite the opposite.

I wouldn’t mind if they’d implemented this the opposite way: if a woman, driver or passenger, encounters a creep, they could report that in the app and then the creep would automatically be banned from riding with women. That way decent men aren’t affected and women keep more choice in drivers/passengers, and only the creeps are singled out.

I’m pretty sure it’s much, much worse than you think. In fact, I’m fairly sure it’s much worse than I think. Men don’t experience it, women are reluctant to talk about it because some men react aggressively to claims that men react aggressively.

Note the words “in vain”.

I’m a Christian, and I assure you that this is nonsense. I distinctly remember the name Yahweh being used in sermons. Maybe there are branches of Christianity where that’s a thing, but it’s definitely not universal.

“Using God’s name in vain” is generally taken to be about blasphemous cursing, not about using God’s name at all.

It’s not just the thumbnail. The photo is in the article, captioned “More Americans than ever are turning to 401(k) withdrawals to make ends meet”.

I don’t think Kasparov was ever naturalised to American, was he? It’s a weirdly misplaced photo.