You cannot see an "ought" within your observation of facts without bringing knowledge of that "ought" to your observation of the facts.

Life is full of miracles. The common ones they will deny because they are common, the rare ones they will deny because they haven’t seen it themselves. Cast not pearls before swine.

The doctrine of imposed, eternal damnation after an arbitrary time-limit is unbiblical and antithetical to Who God Is. God Is Love, He ceaselessly pursues perfect Love for all of His creatures.

In honor and remeberence of 9-10 and 9-11 I would like to present the left with the following notification. All of your "cards," eg., race card, gender card, Islamophobic card, trans card, gay card, non-binary card, and all other cards you may have invented by the time this notification is received, have now been permanently and irrevocably cancelled. We quite literally don't care what you call us anymore.

MUST READ: Detransitioner @jaderants tells her story & reflects on the life that she wish she could've experienced without hormone blockers. Read Jade's story: iwf.org/identity-crisis-stor…

I always understood why the Second Amendment was constitutionally protected. What I never really understood was why people called it a natural right. Then I moved from New York to Florida. I didn’t own a gun yet. One afternoon I was loading things into the trunk of my car outside a HomeGoods when a man approached me. “Excuse me.” He must have thought he’d startled me, because he immediately added, “Don’t worry. I’m not going to get close.” I laughed. “I’m a New Yorker. I’m used to close. How can I help you?” He started telling me that he needed money for gas. At some point while he was talking, I got into my car. And sitting there, with the conversation still unfolding, I suddenly realized something: He didn’t know whether I had a gun. Not somewhere at home. Not hypothetically. For all he knew, I could have had one right there in the car, tucked under the steering wheel or within reach. I didn’t. But he couldn’t know that. Schrödinger’s gun. And in that instant, before I even knew whether his story was true, something changed in the space between us. I thought about New York. I thought about my friend who had been murdered in his own apartment during a burglary gone wrong. Would those men have gone into his apartment if they had believed he might be armed? I don’t know. I thought about the time I was mugged at gunpoint, with a gun pressed against my temple. Would that man have approached me with the same confidence if he had believed there was even a possibility that I could defend myself? I don’t know that either. But sitting there in that Florida parking lot, listening to this stranger talk, I suddenly understood deterrence in a way I never had before. Not as military theory. Not as constitutional law. As something intimate. My body. My life. The few feet between one person and another. For years I had thought about guns primarily as objects: who had one, who shouldn’t have one, what laws should govern them. Suddenly I understood the question from the other direction. What changes when another person cannot simply assume that I am defenseless? I felt taller. Not because I had a gun. I didn’t. But because, for the first time, I understood that someone approaching me could not automatically assume that being physically stronger meant having power over me. There was uncertainty. There was a boundary around my body that had to be taken seriously. Then his story began to fall apart. I told him I didn’t have cash, but offered to help another way. I could put some gas in his car. He took off. So apparently, yes, it was a scam. But by then I had already understood something much larger than the scam. The phrase natural right finally made sense to me. The Constitution had not given me ownership of my body. It had not given me my life. It had not invented my right to protect either one. Those things came first. What I understood that afternoon was the thing underneath them. I had once been completely helpless while another human being held a gun against my temple. Years later, without a gun in my possession at all, I understood what it meant for the person approaching me not to know whether I was helpless. That uncertainty changed the space between us. And that was the moment I finally understood the natural right behind the Second Amendment: My life is mine, and the right to defend it has to exist before anyone gives me permission to do so.

i am too retarded to accept Grace. i have lost sight of the Way. i can no longer call myself a Christian. my flesh is winning.

Evenin

There are things which you can only see inside yourself, not outside yourself. The proof, the evidence, must come to be inside you, for you to have evidence of it.

I did the thing where people have grok make an image based on their x account. I'm surprised that it didn't depict me calling someone retarded. I should be more gentle.

One of these is not like the others 🤔

God's Love is the Principal Existence of Priority.

If you had trusted the settled science of the day, here is how it would have gone. 1890s: you dose the baby with Bayer's new cough syrup, the non-addictive alternative to morphine, marketed for children. It was heroin. They named it after the German for heroic. 1900s: you rub calomel teething powder on your infant's gums. It is a mercury compound, and it leaves a generation with pink disease. Swollen, peeling hands and feet, screaming for months, and some of them died. 1910s: you cook in Crisco, launched by a soap and candle company, because cottonseed oil is modern and lard is what your mother used. The process that made it solid produced trans fat, banned outright a century later. 1920s: you drink Radithor, certified radioactive water, on prescription. Eben Byers took fourteen hundred bottles for his vitality. His jaw was removed in pieces and he was buried in a lead coffin. 1930s: a chemist dissolves a new sulfa drug in diethylene glycol, which is antifreeze. It kills 107 people, mostly children, and only then does America give the FDA power to demand safety testing. 1940s: your doctor lights a Camel in the surgery. More doctors smoke them than any other brand, and the advert runs in the Journal of the American Medical Association, which sold him the page. 1950s: DDT is sprayed over your kitchen, your garden and your children at school. The man who found its insecticidal properties has already been given a Nobel Prize. 1960s: your wife takes thalidomide for morning sickness because it is remarkably safe. More than ten thousand children are born with missing and shortened limbs. 1970s: the country puts down the butter and picks up the margarine, on the instruction of the American Heart Association. The fat everybody switched to was banned in 2015 as unsafe at any level. 1980s: the fat comes out of everything and sugar goes back in to make it edible. Obesity begins a climb it has never come off. 1990s: your father is prescribed OxyContin, because fewer than one per cent get addicted. The company later pleads guilty to criminal misbranding, and the overdose count runs into hundreds of thousands. 2000s: you take Vioxx for your knee. It is pulled in 2004, and the FDA's own safety officer estimates tens of thousands of excess heart attacks. Not one of those was fringe. Every one had a professional body, a literature and a man in a white coat standing behind it. Nobody who followed that advice was stupid. They were obedient, to the most qualified people available. Settled is a word about money. It means the questions stopped being funded, so they stopped being asked. So which of today's instructions will your grandchildren read out in disbelief. The oil washed in hexane and built into every cell you own. The statin that blocks the pathway making your hormones, to prevent one heart attack per hundred people. The injection where a third of the loss is muscle. The infant formula built out of vegetable oil. All settled. None of it funded to be otherwise.

Institutional Magical Thinking: Definition: Institutional Magical Thinking is the error of treating the expected or “supposed-to” responses of other people, groups, or institutions as if they were reliable material causes rather than contingent, voluntary acts. An action is experienced as producing a desired outcome when the only actual pathway to that outcome is the optional mediation of another agent who remains free to refuse, delay, reinterpret, or simply ignore the expectation. Core Mechanism: The thinker collapses “they ought to,” “the system is designed so that they will,” or “this is what the role requires” into a near-causal certainty. Rules, roles, procedures, and stated agreements are quietly reified—treated as possessing independent causal power of their own—rather than remaining continuously dependent on the choices of the people currently occupying those positions. The optionality of human response is backgrounded or forgotten. This is distinct from ordinary strategic calculation or manipulation. Those still recognize the other party’s agency and attempt to influence it. Institutional Magical Thinking erases that agency: once the correct form has been observed, the expected response is felt to follow almost automatically. Illustrative Cases: - Completing the informal criteria of a verbal promotion agreement and experiencing the work itself as having already secured the outcome. - Submitting a correctly formatted petition, complaint, or formal appeal and treating the act of filing as having activated a response mechanism. - Participating in institutional processes (voting, following published procedures, meeting the letter of a policy) and expecting the system to deliver the “supposed” result as though the procedure itself compelled it. - More broadly, any situation in which correct performance of the prescribed social or bureaucratic form is felt to possess causal force independent of the ongoing willingness of the people inside the system. What It Is Not: It is not cynicism, conspiracy thinking, or simple distrust. Those assume the system is actively hostile or secretly controlled. Institutional Magical Thinking is more subtle: it assumes the system will function as advertised once the proper steps are taken, overlooking that every institutional outcome still requires the free cooperation of the agents involved. Why the Concept Matters: Large-scale social systems depend on norms, procedures, and roles that feel reliable precisely because they usually work. Institutional Magical Thinking arises when that reliability is misread as automatic. Recognizing the distinction restores a clearer view of agency: institutions do not act; people in positions do. The forms we follow remain powerful only for as long as those people continue to choose to honor them.

August 11, 2020. 21-year-old Australian mother of three was choked and arrested for not masking. She had a doctor's mask exemption. She was charged with assaulting an officer. Experts knew masks did not work. Their lies were tyrannical. Not for public health. For power.

You cannot see an "ought" relating to the facts observed, unless you bring knowledge of that "ought" to your observation of the facts.