kimmy

He was pretty rough on pigs as well. -k

I found that passage difficult to read and couldn't make heads or tales of it. Clearly he's referencing the OT law regarding what happens to rebellious children, but I didn't get what it had to do with this situation. As we've probably all heard, the Pharisees were jerkwad rules-lawyers who often tried to trip up Jesus in the letter of the law. The story where he challenges any man who is without sin to "throw the first stone" at the adulteress is the best known example. As you'll recall, the adulteress didn't get hit with any stones that day. Here's an explanation of why Jesus accused the Pharisees of being hypocrites: The point of the story is, the Pharisees come up to Jesus and tell him that his disciples are sinning by eating without washing their hands first. Jesus counters by telling them their traditions are a load of crap, because they use their tradition as an excuse for withholding the money that they're supposed to be using to care for their elderly parents. And to accent that point he mentions the Commandment to honor thy father and thy mother, and the law in Leviticus regarding stoning rebellious children. So these mooks the Pharisees are there badgering him for disrespecting "their traditions", in this case washing of hands before eating. And Jesus turns the tables on them by blasting them for disrespecting a much more important rule, one given direct to Moses on stone slabs. The Pharisees leave after that verbal beatdown, and Jesus explains to everybody that stays behind that what you eat doesn't make you unclean*, what's in your heart makes you unclean. And he explains that while the Pharisees might live by the letter of the law, their hearts are a long way from God. So no, I don't think Jesus would have had the girl stoned to death. I think he would have said that eating with dirty hands doesn't make you unclean, and a t-shirt doesn't make you unclean either. Not even if it was made of mixed fibers. -k * and that's why Christians are allowed to eat bacon!

The OT talks about a lot of other things that just aren't observed in modern Christianity too. I joked earlier that if he was a real Bible believer he would have had the townspeople stone his kid to death. The OT says that. But we don't actually see Christians doing that anywhere. If belief in the laws of the Old Testament were a feature of modern Christianity, wouldn't we see a lot more burnt offerings, stonings of people, smashing and burning of graven images, and so-on? I mean, if what you're saying is true, why isn't this happening? There are somewhere in the hundreds of millions of American Christians, and all you have to support the notion that this is a "thing" is one guy who barbequed his dog. A pretty weak case, don't you think? -k

I think everybody who has read my opinions for the past many years on this forum would agree that I'm not one to make excuses for Christians or for any other religion. But this really does seem like an isolated kook. Surely if this weren't an isolated incident we'd hear of this sort of thing more often? I don't see this as a "no true Scotsman" defense. I'm not suggesting that the guy wasn't really a Christian, I'm just suggesting that he's a nut and that the slaughter of his dog can't be blamed on any Christian teaching. If we were talking about something like faith-healing, or Muslims and terrorism, or so on, then that's a very different story, because there's a strong case to be made that religion does play a role. But this... a sample size of ONE, out of American Christians who number in the hundreds of millions, I think that's about as isolated as an isolated incident can get. -k

There's a distinction between "Christian believes" and something that any given Christian believes. That this Christian guy believed kililng his dog would atone for sins doesn't make animal sacrifice a Christian belief, any more than a Christian believing in UFOs would make UFOs a Christian belief. It would be a much more interesting argument if you picked something like "faith healing", where instead of one crazed kook the sample size is much larger. -k

If a Buddhist drove his car off a cliff while eating fish tacos and drinking tequila and screaming about Donald Trump, would you see any logical reason to link that action to Buddhism? -k

I really haven't heard of any Christians committing animal sacrifices lately. This clearly isn't a widely held Christian belief, or even a belief held by fringe-movement Christians. -k

Nothing in the Bible supports punishing a child by killing her pet. She should have been taken to the city gates and stoned to death by the townsfolk (Deut. 21:18-21). -k

The piece of text you're referring to quite clearly says that *some* scientists see the majesty of the universe as evidence of a Creator. It's certainly not an official position of the organization or any sort of consensus among scientists of the NAS or any other organization or the scientific community as a whole. Your ongoing efforts to misrepresent it as such are a sign of either dishonesty, desperation, disability, or perhaps delusion. -k

I think the real conflict there isn't Dany vs the slavers, but rather Dany vs Tyrion. The deal he struck goes against everything she stands for, and I expect she'll flip her shit when she finds out what he's done. I think I disagree with you here. Lady Tyrell got into this business to make her grand-daughter the Queen. I don't think she's going to be satisfied with just getting her out of King's Landing alive. If she gets her armies into King's Landing unopposed, I doubt she's planning on having them leave until Cersei's done for. She can probably use Margaery to get Tommen on board. Kevan Lannister isn't overly impressed with Cersei, and I doubt he'd stick his neck out too far to protect Cersei. And I'm skeptical the City Guard could stand up to the Tyrell forces regardless. The City Guard might have been pretty tough in stabbing a modest contingent of Stark soldiers in the backs, but I doubt they're equipped to deal with the full force of what's now the richest house in Westeros and one of the two that hasn't been depleted by war. If Olenna gets her army inside the city gates, she's probably not going to take them out until she gets things sorted out to her liking. She knows darned well that Cersei is the one who set up Margaery and Loras, and she's not going to forget it. Of course, I doubt Cersei is naive to any of this, and I'm sure she must have some plans of her own. I wonder if Jaime will end up acting as a peacemaker or mediator or voice of reason between the two. I wrote earlier, and I still believe, that Ramsay is going to get it. Hubris is the kiss of death on this show, and deciding to shank his dad and run the show himself was the ultimate act of hubris. He might be cunning and ruthless but he has no idea how to do politics or diplomacy. He and that Karstark goon will find themselves alone and overmatched. What if the humans never get united and can't focus on the real threat until it's too late? What if they're so busy fighting among themselves that they never fight the real enemy? What if that's the real meaning of the show? The triviality and futility of petty human vanities and squabbles in the face of unfeeling, impersonal, eternal forces that simply don't care about any of it? Orson STHMATH the beetles! -k

Eventful episode! I loved the final scene in terms of visual spectacle and artistic execution. She's lucky it worked, though... what if nothing caught fire? What if somebody put a sickle in her neck before they died? Nonetheless, it was still pretty cool. I gather this means she now has not just one Khalassar, but all of them. Plus 3 dragons. Plus two of the 3 smartest guys in the known world on her advisor team (the third being Littlefinger, of course.) I assume from here, she takes her plus-sized horde west to smack the crap out of the two enemy cities in Slaver's Bay, then sets about getting some boats. Meanwhile! Jon and Sansa reuniting was great. I don't think we've seen any of the Starks together since season 1. Sansa will light a fire under Jon. Also! The reunion of Yara and Theon. zzzzzzzzzz Osha getting shanked was a bit of a downer. That she was planning to kill Ramsey doesn't confirm or deny that Greatjon Umber's son (Littlejon? Mediumjon?) was in on the plot. We still don't actually know for sure that the Rickon we saw is the real Rickon... the last time we saw him he was a toddler and now he looks old enough to shave. The long-awaited return of ... Robyn Arryn! That kid sure got tall since season 4. uh, that is to say, the long awaited return of Petyr Baelish! And he is taking off the gloves to go after Ramsay as well! Allegedly. I wonder what his angle is this time? And we see Lady Tyrell and the Wonder Twins get together to handle this Faith Militant situation. I am pretty interested in seeing how this develops. I'm sure Jaime's intentions are what he says, but I doubt either Cersei or Lady Tyrell are as straightforward. If this season were a hand of Texas Hold 'Em, I think the first 3 episodes were the deal and wagering, and this episode was the flop. With many more cards now on the table, we can see the main conflicts for the remainder of the season are going to be the battle for King's Landing and the battle for Winterfell. -k

I think that final image of the three of them hanging side by side would make a great motivational poster. Anybody got a good caption for it? Recycled graphics seem like the perfect emblem for a story arc that is continually treading water. I felt like the joke long outwore its welcome. I enjoy Tyrion doing his thing, but I felt like this went on way too long with no payoff. Remember Tyrion telling Jaime about Orson the retarded cousin who smashed beetles? That was a good scene. It seemed pointless at the time, but after thinking about it for a bit I realized that that was actually George R.R. Martin talking, explaining what the show is really about. That was a scene I'm glad made it to the TV. This one, I felt like they could have left on the cutting room floor and not much would have been lost. Slick called it. I am concerned we're going to get more Ramsay season 3 type stuff. Also concerned that this will send Jon into several episodes of fretful dithering. "If I attack, he'll kill my brother! But if I don't attack, he'll torture my brother! I don't know what to do!" I assume his duty to the Watch ended when his first life ended. How many lives is he supposed to give up for them? Maybe he'll take some vacation time in South Seas, chill with spider-monkeys on a beach, smoke some herb, get things figured out. Ser Davos will give him a pep talk. Perhaps Maester Aemon and Melisandre as well. But Jon will find himself unmotivated. Eventually, a crow will reach Castle Black, carrying a message from Ramsay. The message will say, essentially, "I have your brother! I'm going to mess him up like I did to Theon. Come at me, bro!" Jon will be furious! He will team up with Mighty Redbeard the Wildling and raise a massive army that will march on Winterfell, and will arrive there sometime in season 9. Are the Faceless Men immortal? hmm. Anyway, cool that she's moved on to the next stage of her training. Watching her getting her face beaten in every episode was getting tiresome. It was somewhat satisfying to watch A Girl punch Another Girl right in the fricken face. She was giving her list, and deliberately left Meryn Trant off, and Other Girl didn't catch on. I assume that was the key moment when she showed that she could stop being Arya Stark to become somebody else. I would assume Lady Tyrell will take whichever course of action leads to Margery and Loras getting out of jail with their heads still attached. I could picture her lending Cersei a sufficiently large military contingent to make short work of the cultists, then keeping her forces in King's Landing-- perhaps with Tommen and Margery's blessing-- to "ensure stability" and effectively also pull the rug out from under Cersei. The Bran time travel scenes are exciting because it feels like we're about to learn some big pieces of the story that have been hidden to this point. What does Bran find when he finally gets into the tower? I bet it's Lianna Stark with a baby... I believe the books strongly hint that the Hound survived. If I recall the fan theory, there's a scene at a monastery in which a hulkingly large, silent grave-digger is mentioned. There's apparently circumstantial evidence to suggest it's Sandor. I would cry tears of joy if he did return. I loved that guy. The scene in which he discusses his enthusiasm for chicken with the Lannister henchman is among my very favorite scenes in the whole 5.2 seasons of the show. -k

Is there any circumstances under which the party elite could yank it away from him at this point? It seems like a done deal. -k

I'm not talking about his accent, I'm talking about what he says. -k

I wonder how much of that is real and how much is created for the cameras. When he goes home at night and is home with his wife, does he continue to talk like a cartoon character, or does he start acting like a normal person? -k

Walder will probably be told that traitors killed his daughter along with Roose, and might never learn that he had a grandson. -k

One of the things that came to light in the aftermath of the New Year's Eve debacle is that a large number of the "refugees" entering Germany aren't from Syria at all, they're North Africans who aren't fleeing anything but rather abusing the refugee claim system because they want a better lifestyle. Germany rejects over 97% of refugee claims from these lifestyle tourists, who keep living in Germany anyway, because the authorities apparently have no idea how to send them back. -k

Who's friend? -k

Lots of characters are long-lost. At least with Sandor we can assume he's just plain dead if we never see him again. Other characters have just vanished with no further news for years. -Gendry -Thyros, Ser Beric, and the other "Brothers without Banners." -Blackfish Tully -Walder Frey -Rickon and Oona -Arya's wolf Nymeria Personally I wouldn't be surprised if Nymeria returns at some point, if Arya ever returns to Westeros. I would also like to see Walder Frey's head get smashed in, hopefully by Blackfish. Remember Bran's story about the "Rat Cook" in season 3, about how the gods had cursed the man who betrayed the guests under his roof? And they immediately cut to a scene of Walder Frey? That has to have been some of the least subtle foreshadowing ever put on film, yet we haven't heard anything further on that front in over 2 years. I won't feel like we've had closure until that guy is wrecked. -k

Einstein's "cosmological constant" was something he incorporated into his model to explain why the universe was seemingly stationary. Edwin Hubble's discovery that the universe wasn't stationary rendered the "cosmological constant" completely unnecessary and was simply dropped from the model. As always, science is superceded... by better science. -k

Putting forth some random guy's claim to the throne with no backing and no proof of his real parentage sounds like a great way for Littlefinger's head to end up on the spike next to Ned's. -k

Are the people who complain that the census is an invasion of their privacy usually the same people who support mass surveillance programs to fight terrorism? -k

It was also somewhat representative of Ned betraying his values, as was bribing the city guard. His attempted coup was the "right" thing, and yet he was willing to do some "wrong" things to make it happen. He was conflicted over it. I personally don't think Gendry will be back. I can't see what Littlefinger would gain from it. Littlefinger might be one of just a few living people who even know Gendry's true identity. (The Red Witch being another... is there anybody else?) Littlefinger would have to stick his neck out a LOOOONG way to push Gendry's claim to the thrown, and that's not Littlefinger's style. Littlefinger never puts skin in the game because he has mastered the art of playing without any skin in the game. And what would he gain from it, anyway? I just can't picture how Littlefinger would profit from it. -k

There are professionals whose full-time job is managing forest-fire preparedness. I'm sure the idea of creating "a plan~~~!" is not as revolutionary as you imagine it to be. Now... how did this happen when there are professionals whose job is to make sure this kind of thing doesn't happen? Who knows. Maybe they misjudged the severity of the situation. Maybe they were unprepared for fires this early in the year. Maybe they just didn't have adequate resources. Maybe they just flat out screwed up. But the idea that this situation must have happened because nobody ever thought of making a plan is just silly. -k

Perhaps an attempt to comment on the articles you've linked to would help promote discussion, Spanky. -k