Christians make a distinction between churches and the church. The former is the physical building or even denominations like Lutherans or Roman Catholics. The latter is the group of people that are part of Christianity, across time and denominations. The Universal Church refers to the latter.
Galatians 1:2 "…the churches of Galatia…" vs Colossians 1:24 "…for the sake of his body, that is, the church…"
"Might makes right" will also force cooperation from those who are less fortunate. I'd argue there was almost never "fairness" in human relationships, from stronger warriors getting the best food to kings forcing their will upon their subjects to filthy rich individuals owning the greatest part of the world wealth today.
My point is in no way that this is right. Only that humans are not intrinsically fair.
I've been using this for 1 or 2 years and it makes my life so much easier... I don't understand why Firefox doesn't make this and Multi-account containers an integral part of the browser.
The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate...
That's maybe part of a more general "perceived inability of some Muslims to handle polemics against their religion with grace" (from the article). Searching for "bobblehead Jesus" vs "bobblehead Mohammed" on Amazon is a good example of that.
That seems to imply those billions of people religious are not rational, down to earth.
Theism in itself is a simpler explanation for existence than atheism, and yet many rational people are atheists. Is it because they weighted all the possibilities or because they discarded the option a priori?
We are all way less rational than we would like to believe.
Well I have another iPhone and it's not much better, it's frequent that app install requests will get lost for hours. And there's no obvious way to go look for pending notifications, you need to wait for it to show up again.
Parenting controls still have a long way to go on Apple devices, but still it's miles ahead of other stuff (looking at you Netflix/Disney Plus).
I've been to a company event a couple years ago, for a big Scandinavian tech company, and the main speaker's point was this: The best thing you can do for the environment, better than recycling, cycling instead of driving a car, etc., is having one less child.
So it doesn't seem to be that fringe, unfortunately.
I’m also curious to know. Preview is pretty much the only tool I really miss whenever a switch from Mac to Linux for a while, and it works really well for annotating and basic editing (moving pages around)…
> The panel of experts say Goldreich’s views are irrelevant — that, according to the prize rules, it was strictly awarded for his scientific achievement.
> Yes, but... the International Mathematical Union could reverse... after finding out that the winner was, say, a conspiracy-spouting anti-vaxxer.
It seems that the author undermines his own argument. Opinions outside the field the prize pertain to are either relevant or they are not.
The problem is the definition of "discrimination". Everyone _is_ able to discriminate all the time. I'm free to discriminate between cookie flavors I buy, or discriminate between genders of people I date. What the law forbids is not _serving_ people because of the color of their skin or their sexual preferences.
And that is also not the case of Jack Phillips. He didn't refuse to serve gay people, and IIRC the accusers on the case were regular clients.
He refused to _design_ a custom cake for a gay wedding, which is akin to a Jewish t-shirt designer refusing to design a logo involving a Swastika, or a black transgender baker refusing to bake a cake that says "white lives matter" or "sex is immutable".
This seems much more related to compelled speech than sexual discrimination.