You’re using HTTPS, do you have child porn?

If they’re technically inclined enough to run an installer and log in to google/apple, then they can do it, or you can do it for them.

That said, your case is valid. I just dislike my services dangling out without proper security, unless they’re designed for it, and plex’s auth model rubs me the wrong way.

Why not?

Tailscale.

Do you think about shooting children a lot?

“But we have to determine if he [Will McDonald] was justified in doing what he did"

The kid was coming right at him! /s

How could he be justified in doing what he did (which is shooting his child), he’s not a police officer. Usually only rhey get away with stuff like this.

What about the rest of the 35 charges?

I’ve called the context the religion was formed in absurd (not a judgement because modern culture is absurd), and said the Church of Satan has effectively called them pussies (it has), but have not called the TST or it’s adherent’s stupid.

It’s all pretty stupid IMO, aside from the way they can mount legal challenges.

I was just surprised you said TST was a pretend religion cause the only way they’re effective in challenging laws is being a real religion, like that’s a harsh way to undermine them.

Undermine them? What?

Okay. I’ll accept that I’m undermining them if you show me 1 (one) court case I have lost for the TST by saying they are not a real religion. I’ll wait.

The made up definition to amend that statement having no basis in real law is irrelevant.

The definition was from an earlier comment where I explained it. Not my problem you didn’t pay attention.

You can’t defend TST and believe they’re pretending

I can, and will.

But okay. Let’s say you’re correct. Let’s say you can only challenge laws and institutions like these by sincerely help religious beliefs.

Show me the test to determine if a belief is sincerely held.

It doesn’t matter if your belief is sincerely held or not, the courts have to treat religions equally, which is what the TST is here for.

If you called someone’s religion stupid, that would also count as discrimination, and yet you have no problem doing it.

Well, it doesn’t really matter since my definition of religion is not what the laws use.

So when you say it’s a “pretend religion” you’re basically saying it’s adherents aren’t really religious.

I say it’s a pretend religion because they’re not trying to manipulate their members for power over them and profit, and/or they’re not trying to get them to believe in the supernatural.

This is clearly different from the law’s misunderstanding of what a religion is, as pointed out by yourself:

"Courts actually do care about whether someone truly believes in a religion, because someone’s supposed religious beliefs are often appealed for why someone is a “good person,…”

If you were filing a lawsuit like the one in the article and you professed it was a “pretend religion” your case would be thrown out,

Fortunately for the lawsuit, it wouldn’t because the definition of religion the court uses and mine if different.

Well, they’re not trying to manipulate their members for power over them and profit, and/or they’re not trying to get them to believe in the supernatural, so they’re clearly not a real religion.

I suspect a lot of TST members sincerely believe in the tenants

Good, they are very good tenants to live by, I salute them. I try to do so myself.

To call it pretend like you have is way harsher than anything I’ve said about it, you’re basically saying it’s all a ruse and the adherents are all just knowingly faking it for show,

Why would it be harsh? That’s something you inferred, not something I said.

I personally don’t think pretending to be a religion is a bad thing, it’s a necessary thing. You seem to be projecting a lot of you own opinions onto what I actually said.

which would mean they couldn’t legitimately challenge laws as a religion.

How so? What qualifications do you have to decide which religions are allowed to be recognized under law?

Absurd, sure.

Stupid (and racist, lol) like he says, no.

Yeah well, since the government and society is unfortunately infested by religion, you have two choices: you either do some actual good by pretending to be a religion, or you whine about it online.

One of those actually help people.

I don’t think it’s ironic, I think it’s fighting fire with fire. People see that religion is afforded a lot of leeway that isn’t afforded to other similar organizations, and they want to use that for a good cause of a change.

Man, I love threads about the TST, because there’s always people like you who absolutely shit themselves over any mention of them, and write small novels about how stupid they are.

It’s really all very entertaining.

Wow, you’re so cool and manly!

Tell us more!

It’s E2EE from the sender to your Beeper server, where it’s decrypted, then re-encypted as a Matrix message.

Then it’s not E2E encrypted.

One end is your device, the other end is the other device. It’s only E2E encrypted if it is not decrypted until it reaches the other device.

If you define “fire” as “a tool to oppress people” then sure.

I’m sorry my knowledge of internal politics of a country I don’t live in did not match your expectations.

No problem. I just assumed that since you’re engaging in a debate about it, you know at least the basics about the current political situation.

Is he sending his son links to porn or is he not? You’re not being very cohesive here.

By looking at porn, the programs he installed on his and his sons devices shares it. It’s cohesive, you just need to thing about for more than 1 second.

My bad, my comment required not just reading this article, but having a basic understanding of current events, and that was clearly way too much to expect from you.

There’s no mention of anybody sending porn to anyone

“It sends a report to your accountability partner. My accountability partner right now is Jack, my son. He’s 17. So he and I get a report about all the things that are on our phones, all of our devices, once a week. If anything objectionable comes up, your accountability partner gets an immediate notice.”

So if he looks at anything “objectionable” (meaning porn), it sends it so his underage son.

let alone about reading books to kids in a costume

That part was about the conservative outrage about people in drag reading to kids. I was pointing out how drag is apparently too sexual for kids, but their fathers porn watching habits is not not.