Your video, Gooey Tetris is oddly satisfying, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Exactly, and the title doesn't really do justice to what he's saying.
The question he's exploring is, once you have your financial needs met, why go any further?

In my free time I do usually opt to be entertained. But this guy chooses to be challenged even when there's no pressing need to be. I can see why that's more satisfying in the end.

If your description of the events and reporting are accurate, that's awful.

I must note, however, there is a method used by the right in the U.S. where they claim something outrageous is being ignored by the left, or worse, hidden. Any investigation into those claims has consistently shown that 1) they usually exaggerate the outrageousness of what happened or leave out salient facts that make something normal seem nefarious and 2) completely ignore that it was covered by non right wing news outlets, just wasn't focused on through red colored glasses enough to satisfy them.

I'm not accusing you of doing that, I don't know enough to have an opinion in this case or about Canadian media, I'm just saying that the methodology, used here in the U.S. constantly, has made me fairly suspicious of similar claims like the one you've made above.

Reminds me of a skating joke:

It is the Olympic men's figure skating. Out comes the
Russian competitor, he skates around to some classical music
in a slightly dull costume, performs some excellent leaps
but without any great artistic feel for the music.

The Judges' scores read: Britain 5.8: Russia 5.9: United
States 5.5: Ireland 6.0

Next comes the American competitor in a sparkling stars and
stripes costume, skating to some rock and roll music. He
gets the crowd clapping, but is not technically as good as
the Russian. He slightly misses landing a triple Salchow and
loses the center during a spin. But, artistically, it is a
more satisfying performance.

The Judges' scores read: Britain 5.8: Russia 5.5: United
States 5.9: Ireland 6.0

Finally out comes the Irish competitor wearing a tatty old
donkey jacket, with his skates tied over his wellies. He
reaches the ice, trips straight away and bangs his nose
which starts bleeding. He tries to get up, staggers a few
paces then slips again. He spends his entire 'routine'
getting up then falling over again. Finally he crawls off the
ice a tattered and bleeding mess.

The Judges' scores read: Britain 0.0: Russia 0.0: United
States 0.0: Ireland 6.0

The other 3 judges turn to the Irish judge and demand in
unison, "How the hell can you give that mess 6.0?!"

To which the Irish judge replies "You've gotta remember,
it's damn slippery out there."

You're right, it is 100 percent clear:

Matthew 5:17-18

17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled

In verse 17 Jesus says He has come to fulfill the law. In verse 18 He says nothing shall pass from the law until it is fulfilled. So, if Jesus came to fulfill the law, the only reason we would have to follow the Old Covenant law is if He failed to fulfill it. He came to fulfill it and fulfill it He did by living a perfect life and satisfying all of its requirements. He became the sacrifice for all sin, which is why the sacrificial system was done away with and the veil in the temple was torn asunder. God did away with that system and now everything is through His Son. This is why Jesus is the way, the truth and the life, and no one comes to the Father except through Him. This is also why He said on the cross "it is finished".

Now this doesn't mean that there aren't any commands for us to follow. However, we follow them under the New Covenant and we are justified by our faith rather than our obedience. This is called the law of Christ.

I went pretty in depth with my answer so it's a little bit disappointing to see you breezed right over it. If you study that more closely you'll understand the particulars of the hows and whys.

Why do you think Aesop can bear the weight of objective morality?

Really? Explain why. It's in there, as clear and codified religious law.

I'll give you a synopsis:

God established the law because of sin:

Galatians 3:19

Why then was the Law given? It was added because of transgressions, until the arrival of the seed to whom the promise referred. It was administered through angels by a mediator

The seed it is talking about is Jesus Christ, referred to by this prophecy in Genesis of the coming of the Messiah:

Genesis 3

14The LORD God said to the serpent, "Because you have done this, Cursed are you more than all cattle, And more than every beast of the field; On your belly you will go, And dust you will eat All the days of your life; 15And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, And you shall bruise him on the heel.

Sin came into the world through the transgression of Adam. Because of sin man was separated from God because God is holy and cannot dwell with sin. Because of sin God gave us the law as Paul referred to. Jesus, the new Adam, satisfied all of the moral requirements of the law by living a perfect life. He reestablished the relationship between God and man:

Romans 5

17For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive an abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ! 18Therefore, just as one trespass brought condemnation for all men, so also one act of righteousness brought justification and life for all men. 19For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous

This is what it means when it says He came to fulfill the law. He brought everything full circle back to the way it was before man first sinned. That is why the law is no longer necessary, because we are made right with God not by obeying the law, but through our faith in Jesus Christ.

When Jesus died on the cross He said "It is finished". It is translated from a greek word "tetelestai", which means paid in full. It something a merchant would stamp on a loan document that was paid up. He said that because He fulfilled the law and paid our sin debt on the cross.

This doesn't mean that there aren't any moral requirements for Christians, but they aren't the same as the ones given to the nation of Israel. We are under a New Covenant and the law of Christ:

Luke 22

19And He took the bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, “This is My body, given for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” 20In the same way, after supper He took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood, which is poured out for you.

Galatians 6

Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ.

Christ gave us commands to obey, one of which you mentioned: love your neighbor as yourself. Also, love one another as I have loved you and many others. All of the 10 commandments were reiterated although there is a deeper meaning and interpretation to some of them now. Do not commit adultery now extends to lusting after a women in your heart. Jesus also said that hating someone is murdering them in your heart.

The civil and ceremonial laws of Israel no longer apply exactly because Jesus did fulfill the law.

Treating others like you would have them treat you, the golden rule....what Jesus told you is the most important rule.

When Jesus taught us to treat others as we would have them treat us, it has force because He is morally perfect. We are morally imperfect. We tell people to do things we don't do, and tell people not to do things we do do. Can you name a single human being on whose shoulders we could place objective morals? If you can't then you can see the problem, I hope

Btw, here is a great educational site which is completely free

https://vmcontenders.org/all-courses/

talk about satisfying video. but what is going on here?

I'm pretty sure the stupidest war ever was the War of Jenkins' Ear, which not only was dumb in it's own merit but also spawned two additional wars that killed close to 2 million people.

Basically Britain and a trading company decided that a little war would help to spur trade, so they seized on an 8 year old incident involving the Spanish boarding a ship and cutting off the captain's ear to fan the flames of conflict.

While the casualties of this little conflict were only around 30k dead or wounded, and a paltry 500 ships, it nicely helped kick off the War of Austrian Succession. That fun conflict led to around half a million dead.

Not satisfied, the powers of Europe stewed over the previous two incidents and then decided to really get down and dirty. The Seven Years war was the first really 'global' war, involving every European great power of the time and spanning five continents. Roughly 1.25 million people got to shuffle their mortal coil off the world thanks, in part, to a little trade war over an ear.

Most satisfying video of 2018, already?

Your video, Keyboard in Acetone - satisfying timelapse, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Rationally, no, but my lizard brain sure does.

In reality, I don't want prison to be about revenge, I believe it works much better if it's about rehabilitation, no matter who the prisoner is. Also, I understand that prisoners lives and safety are the responsibility of the jailers (us) and I don't want to pay their survivors for their deaths or injuries.

That said, it is a satisfying fantasy to think about racist murderous cops at the mercy of a gang of pumped up vengeful Crips, but no, I don't really want that.

If it is an absolutely true fact, one would think you could provide supporting evidence, but you never do when asked. Unsupported claims are unverified argument, not accepted fact. I've never claimed you're wrong, but you've failed to prove you're correct repeatedly.

The judge used the sentencing guidelines for murder 2, which was part of the plea agreement, so the results were exactly the same. He may be in federal prison, which IS a much nicer place than the state pen. Is that how it falls short, or is your issue the specific charge no matter the sentence? Would it be better if he was convicted of murder 2 but was only sentenced to 5 years?

Avoid getting caught on camera, totally agree, but don't plead guilty?...he was facing life in State prison with a pretty hostile jury pool on top of up to decades in club fed for civil rights violations.. I think he made a good choice.

Thanks for the answer though...which I gather was "no, this does not satisfy".

I get that it's not the same as an actual murder conviction, I'm just curious if this outcome satisfies the sifter that brings up the 'no cop ever convicted of murdering a black man' argument.

I would feel so satisfied unplugging that pipe. Immense satisfaction just watching it.

Daaaaaaaamn! I ain't been "You're the wizard stoned" in AGES!

Every now and then, I get a little misty-eye'd for the days of yore when ultra-high-grade pot wasn't available at every corner store.

I recall the days of lurking narcs in city parks; being out in the middle of a drought; going to a head shop to buy a bong then getting kicked out 'cuz I asked for it wrong (the magic word was "Tobacco", not "pot", you twat!)

The pot was stemmy, the sellers seedy, and I didn't care because I was hella needy.

But once a year, just 'fore November, would come the time I most remember because it was in those shortening days when I'd hear a rumor of Purple Haze, Ghost Train OG -- I'd be stoned for DAYS! Finally, the good stuff came from coastal plots, a plethora of the finest pots; time to dance and restore my stash: shit, I might even score some HASH!

My friends would come by and we'd all get high, never aware of time passing us by. We laughed, we munched, we floated along with hits from the joints and pulls from the bong. We never imagined dabs or wax, we were satisfied with bud: nothing wrong with those facts.

Now I buy an a gram or two -- Dirty Girl; Gorilla Glue -- and satisfied that my wife's in bed, I once again become a Head. I remember all those days gone by when there was no greater goal than just getting high. I recall them fondly -- if somewhat hazy -- and know that life without pot is just a little too crazy.