Yeah, and I’m positing that the probability he did not have a penis is at least 0.5%.

The Bible is not accurate regarding Jesus’ early life.

I don’t think it’s wrong to exercise an iota of skepticism.

Was Luke there at the circumcision? What was his source?

Wouldn’t Jesus being trans and Luke being misinformed (or actually trying to avoid outting him) explain why there isn’t really any testimony about Jesus’s life during puberty? It was an incredibly misogynistic era right? Is it inconceivable for a person without a penis to try to pass as a man in that era?

If a person can better appreciate Jesus by understanding him as a trans-man should a christian tell them they’re wrong? Does it put them in spiritual jeopardy? Is it dishonest to say “maybe”? I don’t think so.

Jesus on the other hand 100% had a dick. […] Jesus was 100% biologically male.

Oh did they find his body?

Wouldn’t it be more reasonable to conclude that the probability of Jesus being biologically male equals the human average of males being biologically male? Ie 99.5%.

Couldn’t his radical compassion for outcasts and the downtrodden be related to personal struggles growing up with gender dysphoria?

If you believe he was conceived in a virgin, wouldn’t it be MORE likely that he had XX chromosomes?

At least there are no centrists in here claiming it’s 3.5

I think its like any other utility (water or electricity or methane) except that you pay for the generation separately. So imagine that for electricity you pay a service fee to the grid operator to keep your connection capable of a certain amperage, and you separately pay the hydroelectric dam for the power you use.

ISPs are the grid operator saying, yes you pay for 200 amp service but you’ve already bought enough power this month. Don’t run your AC for the rest of the month.

It’s not, but it seems Argentina doesn’t think people should be allowed to own their phones.

I’ve never heard anyone with first hand experience complain about living in North Korea. They literally can’t complain.

Dead Harambe timeline

Ha guess why I’m on lemmy right now.

I understand your anger and agree that anti-vaxxers are stupid. I believe public health education should be part of the school system.

I also agree that it’s responsible for a society to impose reasonable restrictions on members that endanger it.

I think people do have an ethical obligation to take reasonable precautions avoid potentially exposing others to pathogens. Vaccination is an example of reasonable precaution. People have the right to bodily autonomy, do not vaccinate them against their wishes.

I do not support the firing of workers for refusing vaccinations if they can do their job remotely. People shouldn’t have to decide between their religious beliefs and employment if their employment doesn’t bring them into contact with others. (Imo anti-vaxx is essentially a religion, this may say more about my beliefs regarding religion than about anti-vaxx sentiment).

By all means exclude the unvaccinated from places where they can be reasonably understood to endanger the public, or others that have a similar right to be there.

Any idiot can build a bridge that stands, but it takes an engineer to build a bridge that barely stands.

Oof.

In the defense of engineers, they are usually trying to optimize around a few more variables than ability to stand. Cost is a big one.

If a car has a warranty of 10 years, it will last 11 years.

…If it’s well engineered.

I’ve had lots of led bulbs die. I think it’s because I bought them at the dollar store.

I just said that evidence can be collected and interpreted to make reliable predictions. Isn’t that what science is?

I’m not the person you’re replying to, nor an expert but wouldn’t they be things like:

1. There is a reality which behaves according to certain principles within time.

2. Humans experience reality through flawed faculties, but experiences can be aggregated in ways which reduce or eliminate the impact of those flaws.

3. The more thoroughly those flaws are eliminated from the aggregate, the more reliably predictions can be made about the principles that govern reality.

(…) and would accomplish . . . what exactly?

It would move China’s adversary further from its shores. Just like how America doesn’t like Cuba being right there, with its rival politico- economic system, China doesn’t like Taiwan being right there with its rival politico- economic system.

China wants TSMC

I agree that they want TSMC, but I think Taiwan’s semi conductor disablement plan has more to do with guaranteeing international support for Taiwan than reducing the incentives for Chinese annexation of Taiwan.

What I mean is that Beijing can’t say to the world “this is an internal disagreement that doesn’t concern you” because if TSMC goes up in smoke the global economy is going to bottom out, it concerns everybody’s economy. The fact that Beijing can’t just seamlessly assume control of Taiwan means that the international community will not support that ambition. It’s like Real Politik, but with semiconductors.

Ironically USA initiatives to protect itself from the vulnerability of Taiwan by (re?)patriating chip production will be bad for Taiwan’s security… if they ever actually manage to rival TSMC’s Taiwanese production. I say this because it will demote the conflict from one of global interest to just regional interest.

But that’s all just my arm chair speculation, I don’t actually have any idea what I’m talking about.

Lol, yeah they’ve just learned to pretend to be too avoid being everyone’s tech support.

It’s why I tell everyone to get a mac: I don’t know anything about them.

I don’t think Google can be blamed too much for presenting an article from a relevant, generally trustworthy site, that has the search query as the article title.

The last time I donated blood (quite recently) I was asked if I had had a new sex partner or more than one sex partner the last 3 months.

I was asked if I had had sex with anyone within the last year that had previously had/ tested positive for hiv/aids.

I was asked if I had taken any hiv/aids preventers.

Is it the follow-up questions to these initial screening questions that are homophobic?

Are they?

Canadian Blood Services (CBS) says it plans to introduce the new behaviour-based questionnaire approach “no later” than Sept. 30. It will apply to both blood and plasma donations, outside of Quebec.

It will mean that when all donors are screened before rolling up their sleeves, they’ll be asked whether they have recently engaged in anal sex in the context of new or multiple sexual partners within the last few months. If they have, they would not be able to donate until they had gone three months without engaging in that activity.

I thought that change (2022) was the end of the discussion.

In Canada we donate blood for free, then they sell it to America.