1:00 Predators
7:00 Politics is not everyone's cup of tea.
8:00 Chad repeats himself.
9:00 Problems and solutions
10:00 Accused of Holocaust Denial
11:00 Neither affirming nor denying
12:00 Even Allah is Zionist.
13:00 Holocaust Denial is a way for spiteful people to call you a Nazi if you question US foreign policy in the Middle East.
14:00 There is no escape from politics.
15:00 American wives have deprived American husbands of their First Amendment rights.
AI Overview:
Threats of divorce over voting for Donald Trump are a reported, recurring phenomenon in the United States, particularly noted during the 2016, 2020, and 2024 election cycles. The decision is often driven by a partner feeling that the vote represents a betrayal of personal values, safety, or the rights of women and children.Here is an overview of this trend, based on reported cases and social media:The "Last Straw": In many documented cases, the threat of divorce is not about a single policy disagreement but represents the climax of existing marital tension, with one partner viewing the vote as a violation of fundamental moral beliefs."You Are Who You Vote For": Some partners argue that voting for Trump is a deal-breaker because they identify the vote with negative characteristics they believe he possesses.Betrayal and Fear: Many women in these situations report feeling that their husbands are voting against their own best interests, bodily autonomy, or the future of their children.Documented Incidents:In 2016, a woman threatened to divorce her husband and move to Canada if he voted for Trump.A 73-year-old woman separated from her husband of 22 years after he planned to vote for Trump, describing it as a "betrayal".In 2024, reports surfaced of women filing for divorce after discovering their husbands voted for Trump, citing a lack of remorse and feeling like they were married to a "stranger".Political Divorce Trend: Divorce lawyers have observed a rise in inquiries and filings following major elections, particularly when polarization is high.Contextual FactorsWhile some couples separate, others attempt to navigate these differences by:Setting boundaries, such as making politics "off-limits" in conversation.Focusing on non-political shared values and activities.Seeking counseling to address the underlying relationship issues that the political argument has brought to the surface.The intense polarization has caused some to reassess their relationships, with some concluding that such a fundamental disagreement is irreconcilable.
16:00 The role of Christian Nationalism is to trick Americans into passing a Christians Amendment and abolish the First Amendment.
17:00 Talking endlessly about nothing just to hear certain words to know we are not alone
18:00 Abolishing no fault divorce
SCOTT joins.
20:00 TLC not daring to say what they mean.
21:00 It is exhausting talking and thinking about politics
22:00 Mid-term elections
23:00 TLC
24:00 Prioritising
25:00 Should we ignore politics?
Michael Jordan
26:00 The elders at family gatherings used to discuss politics.
27:00 I would go mad if I was unable to discuss politics so I feel sorry for people who dare not.
28:00 Not saying anything until we know the answer
30:00 The ruling classes are fighting each other.
America has nuclear weapons.
31:00 Minnesota shootings
33:00 Tucker Carlson
They want a riot.
34:00 Law and order v compassion and rights is the male/female divide?
35:00 Party system
36:00 Jury duty is the most shirked duty.
37:00 Kicking the can down the road and not even tackling problems that take more than one term of office to solve
Monarchy
38:00 North Korea
39:00 The Deep State
40:00 The operation of representative democracy is a problem in itself.
Consultation
41:00 Why can't our ruling classes just give the appearance of not being evil, stupid or mad?
42:00 Monopolies, oligopolies and corrupt cartels
43:00 The Book of Judges came before the Book of Kings
44:00 Federalist supremacy v states rights
45:00 Significant cultural differences in the different states of America
46:00 Secession
47:00 Hate speech
48:00 I am not even Muslim.
49:00 Secular Koranism
50:00 Most people have not read the scripture of their own religion.
51:00 There were only four rightly-guided Caliphs in the entire 1400 years of Islam.
53:00 Genuine consultation
Anti-trust laws
55:00 Second Amendment
TLC
56:00 Long form conversations
58:00 TLC
Putting your brain in a different gear when discussing politics
59:00 A nuanced position on ICE
1:00:00 Stolen election 2020
1:01:00 The stupendous fraud of potential US Vice President Tim Walz
1:02:00 Love thy neighbour
1:04:00 Needing to talk about politics
1:06:00 Chad said we need to be more antisocial online than we are in real life.
1:06:00 Jordan Peterson
1:07:00 Gotcha questions
1:08:00 Nicodemus
1:09:00 An easy to believe religion is necessary for men to act with confidence and conviction
1:10:00 Marriage
1:11:00 Before Trump becomes king
1:13:00 Calling Christianity evil
1:14:00 The policies of Sodom and Gomorrah
1:15:00 Laws come from the top and people deserve the government they get.
1:16:00 Suffering is punishment for sin.
1:17:00 Jordan Peterson
1:18:00 Divide and rule
1:19:00 Sodom and Gomorrah
1:20:00 Weaponised words
1:21:00 "I called you it first, so I win."
1:24:00 Crabs in a bucket
1:25:00 Truth, Logic and Morality
1:26:00 Good is what God commands, evil what He forbids.
Deuteronomy 28
1:27:00 Liberalism is not viable.
1:28:00 The First Amendment is supported by quran.com/2/2/56
The divine draftsmanship of the Koran which contemplates the exception as soon as it states the rule
1:29:00 Nazis were Zionist.
AI Overview
In April 2016, former Mayor of London Ken Livingstone became embroiled in a major antisemitism row within the UK Labour Party after claiming that Adolf Hitler supported Zionism in 1932 before "going mad" and killing six million Jews.In his defense, Livingstone invoked a controversial 2015 statement by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu regarding the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini.Livingstone’s Claims: Livingstone argued that Hitler's early policy was to deport German Jews to Palestine (referencing the Haavara Agreement), which he characterized as "supporting Zionism".The Mufti Connection: To support his argument, Livingstone cited a 2015 speech by Netanyahu, where the Israeli Prime Minister claimed that in a 1941 meeting, the Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, persuaded Hitler to adopt the "Final Solution" (extermination) rather than just expelling the Jews.The Controversy: Livingstone argued that if Netanyahu made these claims about the Mufti, his own comments were merely "historical fact".Reaction: Livingstone's comments were widely condemned by many within the Labour Party, as well as Jewish groups, who viewed them as a revisionist attempt to minimize the Holocaust. He was suspended from the Labour Party in 2016 and eventually resigned in 2018.Netanyahu's original comments about the Mufti were also heavily criticized by historians, who clarified that the Nazis had already decided on the extermination of Jews before the meeting with al-Husseini.
1:31:00 My filters of Truth, Logic and Morality
1:32:00 Preserving the Union with Secular Koranism with the characteristics of each US state
1:33:00 ADHD
1:35:00 The point of political discussions is to know which side you're on.
1:36:00 Have American wives deprived their husbands of the First Amendment?
1:39:00 The problem can be solved by abolishing no fault divorce.
No comments:
Post a Comment