Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Greybeard

Members
  • Posts

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Greybeard

  1. Actually, I would argue that LGBQT pride (whether in a parade or in wearing a pin/jersey etc.) is EXACTLY about promoting and accepting the LGBQT lifestyle. What Reimer said (and wrote) was saying that " I am choosing not to endorse something that is personal to my personal convictions which are based on the Bible" while also saying "I strongly believe every person has value and worth (including LBBQT)". Basically he is saying that he feels that he is being pressured to endorse/promote/aceept something that he finds his personal perilous values opposed to. This gets back to the whole tolerance/intolerance thing. Tolerance used to mean to put up with something you disagreed with. The word tolerance has now been hijacked (as many words have been nowadays - thus the rash of Websters etc "redefining" words to go along with the current social justice overlords). Now it means to require to celebrate, promote, accept whole-heartedly. There is no longer any room to disagree on moral or religious grounds. Thus those who demand tolerance are in fact themselves intolerant of any who disagree with them. GB
  2. Ironic in the extreme... given that "wolves" in the bible are literally those who attempt to bring sin and the world's culture into the church. GB
  3. How tolerant of you. Interesting that those who demand tolerance with the most shrill voices are in fact completely intolerant themselves. GB
  4. If you are going to get a portable one, make sure it is a dual hose type. Think of it this way: Single hose: exhaust ONLY... So unit draws air from the room, a portion of that drawn air is cooled and sent back into the room. Another portion of that drawn air has heat "dumped" into it, then it goes into the exhaust hose and is sent outside. What you are effectively doing is one good thing, two bad things. Good=the room gets somewhat cooler. Bad=first, that exhausted air (drawn from the room) has to come from somewhere, so you are drawing warm air from somewhere else in your house into the room you are trying to cool. This air has to come from somewhere... if your house is leaking it comes from outside via cracks, if your house is tight it will get pulled in through combustion air sources (pipes means to supply combustion air to furnaces, gas fireplaces, hot water tanks etc. Second, you are also pulling some of your "just-cooled" air into the air intake... a portion is re-cooled, but a portion also exhausted with heat dumped into it. Think of it as an inflow into the unit, being split into two exhaust flows... one is cooled and sent back into the room, the other gets heat dumped into it and is sent outside. Because the cool exhaust is less than the overall intake, the unit is always pulling more air into it than is actually coming back out the cold air vents into the room. This is why single hose portable air conditioners are extremely inefficient and costly to run. Because of the exhaust side (hot) only being outgoing from the house, and there effectively being this melding of the hot and cold sides of the unit. Dual hose: Unit pulls air from the room, cools it, and dumps it back into the room. The hot side pulls already warm air from outside through one hose, dumps heat into it, and then exhausts it. Thus the hot/cold sides of the unit are separate. Far more efficient, because you are not pulling air from inside the house to exhaust, nor are you exhausting your just-cooled air. The dual hose unit effectively splits the hot and cold sides completely. You can think of a dual hose unit as a window unit, with the unit moved into the room, but the hotside still connected to the outside via two hoses. These units are more expensive to buy, but significantly cheaper to run and more effective at cooling a room/area. GB
  5. I have extreme concern about this. And I had what I thought was extreme concern when MAID was introduced back in 2015... now my concern is ramped up. This is a very slippery slope to be on, and often it doesn't even require the LAW to be changed, but simply the interpretation of the LAW. Judicial activism, anyone? My wife has many Dutch relatives. The Netherlands has had euthanasia laws for decades. Originally the rules were very "tight"... many checks and balances. Over the years higher court rulings have moved the goal posts as it were. So originally, you could only use this if you were terminally ill, a panel of doctors agreed you were in great suffering, and you were declared of a sound mind prior to making a request like this. Not so much anymore. There was a recent case that made the news wherein a family held down their mother/grandmother (who had significant dementia, but not sufficient to not realize what was happening and who was involved) while doctors euthanized her, while she was pleading for her life. Dutch relatives who have visited here in Canada are quite open about family discussions around whether elderly family members should be euthanized, and sometimes the motives can be rather selfish, as you can imagine (sometimes said in a joking way, but one wonders how much of it is really a joke). You all do realize that within three months of the 2015 law being passed, there was already papers being issued by think-tanks about how this law could be used in time to "fix" the extraordinary cost that the elderly are to medical system and budgets... and without "fixing" this, those costs will just rise. Ultimately, I think we as a society have reached a point where life means very little to us (MAID laws are just one example of this). People have largely lost their moral compasses, and I'm reasonably certain that a significant number of Canadians would be entirely OK with offing seniors when they become too expensive to care for... and over time the number of people who find this acceptable will just grow. This move to add mental distress and depression as a valid reason for MAID is just one more step in normalizing this within society. The only thing remaining to take the step to offing people without their consent is to demonize them sufficiently so that the majority of society feels OK about it. Twist and warp the moral fiber a little more, ramp up the fear around climate change some more (no more babies, plus off those seniors), ballooning fiscal deficits, and it becomes almost a given. You might say it will never happen... but you should talk to someone from the Netherlands. It basically already has over there. GB
×
×
  • Create New...