Serak The Preparer

You probably already know this but preloads are now available for anyone who preorders. I don't expect I'll start playing the second the clock hits zero next Wednesday but glad that it is already on my system.

Advantage Aggy.

Hot take: This game was a lot more fun than yesterday's.

That kid's name? Albert Einstein.

Likes adjective.last name. Gives four examples, all with first name.

You're going to have show your work for you conclusion that our treatment of baby killers and serial killers (setting aside "generally really evil people" since that's unclear) encourages repeat behavior. Are serial killings on the rise? What about baby killings? Is there more repeat behavior? Is it traceable to our treatment? Or are you just spouting a hypothesis with no evidence and treating it as fact?

Shit I realized I brain-farted and this DOES include the playoff game. So they were actually 2-0 this year when he was at home plate before game 1. Yes, a real conspiracy @Helobious you easily-duped fool.

This is still wrong. This year Mike Muchlinski has been home plate umpire for 4 Yankees game (counting the playoff game). They are now 2-2 in those four games. Hell, since opening day of 2016, he's only been the home plate umpire for 12 games. The Yankees are 5-7 in those 12 games. You can get the data at Umpscorecard. Here is what it looks like game by game: Any other back peddling you want to do?

No it doesn't. There is no debate, it's crystal clear.

I don't know, they took 5 games to advance past a decent, but not good, Cleveland team. They only scored today in an inning where Framber had two errors on the same play with a guy already on base. I don't think they're playing poorly but I wouldn't say pretty good either.

He hasn't ignored them per se, it's just that he repeats the same TexAgs bullet points of "there are exemptions, hospitals should go ahead and perform the procedure", blaming the provider. Which of course ignores the fact that, at best, this was an easily foreseeable outcome when there is no completely objective measure for "medically necessary" so of course hospitals would advise their doctors to not perform actions which could place them in legal jeopardy. In reality, it is working as intended as the writers of the bill are just shitty people, not all stupid.

Gives me flashbacks to that fucker Edmonds.

My understanding is the she forget to give up the funk when she visited Chocolate City. Hence she is now trailing Dr Funkenstein, who is himself mired in controversy after his debate with Sir Nose D Voidoffunk.

Man this is really gone tank Javier's trade value.

Much like the pitchers in last game, you can say any given ALDS was not spectacular but taken as a whole is pretty incredible.

6 motherfucking run differential over 4 games. It's why I enjoy the hell out of these times. This too shall pass

If nobody got me I know @Vic Mackey and crying Jordan got me.

What favor said they do for us? Do you mean correctly calling a fumble when there was a fumble, correctly not calling targeting when there wasn't targeting, or something else?

Yankee fan in Texas can't quite grasp the difference between "a particular October in New York may be rainy", which is absolutely true, and his statement of "October in NYC is no joke ... Rainy & stuff", which is demonstrably untrue (relative to other months in NYC).

Umm, not sure if you've been following the news lately but I'm not sure that a GDP comparison of Russia and Texas from 2019 is particularly accurate these days...

What about dicks. Asking for ou.

Agreed. But as a thought experiment, if there is a predominant religion that says "all shirts must be blue", then there is a chance that laws / regulations will be passed mandating blue shirts. As someone who likes to wear green shirts I have skin in the game. So it may be accurate to say that atheists / agnostics don't have skin in the game about whether scripture is true or not, but they certainly have skin in the game regarding whether scripture is perceived as true when it is a major cultural force. And given that skin the game, many atheists / agnostics have incentive to understand the scripture, if nothing else to try to influence how it is perceived. Bring this specifically to homosexuality, I believe your view that it is biblically wrong but you don't want to pass laws discriminating against homosexual behavior. I don't share your view, but I believe it. At the same time, while an agnostic, I do have skin in the game about scriptural beliefs / understandings because many Christians who have similar views on Christianity as you do want to discriminate against homosexual or other non-Christian behavior.

Without wading into trying to convince anyone whether any given interpretation of scripture is correct or not (they ain't gonna happen in this thread) I think the bolded statement is not correct. Atheists and agnostics do have skin in the game simply because Christianity has an immense amount of influence on culture and government at all levels. Not even arguing whether that is a good thing or a bad thing, but surely you agree that any given interpretation does impact us all (at least in this earthly life, if not afterlife)?