Apple Announces Winner of First-Ever Apple Podcasts Award

[Complex757]

Straw meet man. I don't think the poster expressed a comment on the death penalty and you shouldn't just assume he (or she) is in favor of it.

Personally, I believe abortion is murder and so is the death penalty--both wrong.

It's far from a straw man argument. Most people don't realize how hypocritical their stance is on abortion.

 

[IllinoisCorn]

It's far from a straw man argument. Most people don't realize how hypocritical their stance is on abortion.

If you don't know the person's position on the death penalty, it's a straw man--a response to an argument the original poster didn't make.

 

[Mike_Trivisonno]

lol Everyone knows Mysterious Universe is the best podcast in production.

 

[IllinoisCorn]

lol Everyone knows Mysterious Universe is the best podcast in production.

It's pretty good, for sure.

 

[neuropsychguy]

37 republicans just voted against interracial marriage a few weeks ago, where does that fall in the line of “republicans can’t be racist they ended slavery”?

The reasons for "voting against interracial marriage" were many and complex. Boiling their "no" votes to "against interracial marriage" is highly biased, overly simplistic, and problematic at best and wrong at worst. Now, I'm not saying I agree with their "no" vote (I don't agree with the "no" vote) but there are reasonable arguments for not voting for that bill. Some of those reasons are "progressive" or "leftist" (some progressives say the proposed bill treats same-sex and interracial marriages as "second-class"; bill contains unacceptable religious liberty concessions; bill doesn’t codify same-sex marriage at the federal level but only states that states have to recognize legal ones from other states), some are "conservative" (states rights vs. federal rights; bill is not necessary; bill does not contain enough religious liberty concessions).

Implying that the Republicans who voted "no" are racist is not helpful. It's possible that some are. It's possible that some Democrats and Republicans who voted for it are racist. But inferring motives from a vote over a complex political bill is myopic.

Also, as others pointed out, the bill covered a lot more than just interracial marriage. Interracial marriage has broad support in the U.S. with only 9% having negative views of it (https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2017/05/18/2-public-views-on-intermarriage/). 12% of polled Republicans had a negative view of it versus 6% of Democrats but that's also the urban/rural split. Black Americans (18%) are less likely to support it than White Americans (9%). Again, it's complicated and cannot be boiled down to what you wrote.

 

[IllinoisCorn]

The reasons for "voting against interracial marriage" were many and complex. Boiling their "no" votes to "against interracial marriage" is highly biased, overly simplistic, and problematic at best and wrong at worst. Now, I'm not saying I agree with their "no" vote (I don't agree with the "no" vote) but there are reasonable arguments for not voting for that bill. Some of those reasons are "progressive" or "leftist" (some progressives say the proposed bill treats same-sex and interracial marriages as "second-class"; bill contains unacceptable religious liberty concessions), some are "conservative" (states rights vs. federal rights; bill is not necessary; bill does not contain enough religious liberty concessions).

Implying that the Republicans who voted "no" are racist is not helpful. It's possible that some are. It's possible that some Democrats and Republicans who voted for it are racist. But inferring motives from a vote over a complex political bill is myopic.

Also, as others pointed out, the bill covered a lot more than just interracial marriage. Interracial marriage has broad support in the U.S. with only 9% having negative views of it (https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2017/05/18/2-public-views-on-intermarriage/). 12% of polled Republicans had a negative view of it versus 6% of Democrats but that's also the urban/rural split. Black Americans (18%) are less likely to support it than White Americans (9%). Again, it's complicated and cannot be boiled down to what you wrote.

All well said.

We have a complicated Constitutional system and MOST people only read headlines or hear sound bites from like late night talk show hosts.

Most non-lawyers are actually not really qualified to debate this stuff.

 

[wigby]

View attachment 2120667
Pretty sure a “human baby” counts as a child.

Pretty sure an unborn "human baby" is also just a "lump of cells". If you're going to argue semantics, we can play that game all day and get nowhere.

 

[ProfessionalFan]

Pretty sure an unborn "human baby" is also just a "lump of cells". If you're going to argue semantics, we can play that game all day and get nowhere.

In the end, we're all a "lump of cells".

 

[steevn]

The reasons for "voting against interracial marriage" were many and complex. Boiling their "no" votes to "against interracial marriage" is highly biased, overly simplistic, and problematic at best and wrong at worst. Now, I'm not saying I agree with their "no" vote (I don't agree with the "no" vote) but there are reasonable arguments for not voting for that bill. Some of those reasons are "progressive" or "leftist" (some progressives say the proposed bill treats same-sex and interracial marriages as "second-class"; bill contains unacceptable religious liberty concessions), some are "conservative" (states rights vs. federal rights; bill is not necessary; bill does not contain enough religious liberty concessions).

Implying that the Republicans who voted "no" are racist is not helpful. It's possible that some are. It's possible that some Democrats and Republicans who voted for it are racist. But inferring motives from a vote over a complex political bill is myopic.

Also, as others pointed out, the bill covered a lot more than just interracial marriage. Interracial marriage has broad support in the U.S. with only 9% having negative views of it (https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2017/05/18/2-public-views-on-intermarriage/). 12% of polled Republicans had a negative view of it versus 6% of Democrats but that's also the urban/rural split. Black Americans (18%) are less likely to support it than White Americans (9%). Again, it's complicated and cannot be boiled down to what you wrote.

You can throw out percentages of citizens, but the fact is 74% of senate republicans voted against it where 0% of democrats did, that’s a pretty clear sign of where the Republican Party stands currently.

Saying that calling republicans racist isn’t helpful really doesn’t mean anything either, considering 100% of “conservative” media and politicians call democrats socialist nazi virtue signal callers and run multiple ads with guns shooting Nancy Pelosi is far more concerning than what I said.

The bottom line is republicans voted against same sex AND interracial marriage yet here are all the “conservatives” claiming it’s not about race.

It makes zero sense but that is what we have to deal with in America now.

People love to both sides most issues in America, but all that has done is clear the path for the embarrassing way the Republican Party acts. Both sides are not the same.

 

[macdisciple]

Apple is going in the wrong direction, im sorry but how anyone can support ending a child’s life is beyond me. They won because of the politics that’s it

I don’t. I support your right to decide for yourself. No, it’s not the same.

 

[IllinoisCorn]

I don’t. I support your right to decide for yourself. No, it’s not the same.

Yeah, it is. You condone someone's choice to murder. It's fine--just admit you are in favor of others performing infanticide, even if you don't agree with it. The science is clear--to call a fetus a "clump of cells" is to reject the fact this is a baby human in utero, with a heart that beats and a body that feels pain. If you don't agree with this, you just don't agree with science ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[NachoGrande]

Definitely not political. Definitely.

 

[steevn]

Yeah, it is. You condone someone's choice to murder. It's fine--just admit you are in favor of others performing infanticide, even if you don't agree with it. The science is clear--to call a fetus a "clump of cells" is to reject the fact this is a baby human in utero, with a heart that beats and a body that feels pain. If you don't agree with this, you just don't agree with science ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Infanticide means to murder a born child, and no one wants that. Infanticide is not abortion.

The science also states a fetus doesn’t feel pain for at least the first 24-25 weeks, and is still debated that it may be longer.

I know those against abortion aren’t basing anything on facts or science, but if you are so against abortion, you should at least know the facts before trying to defend a stance.

 

[ackmondual]

Does that mean you think that McDonalds should get the best burger award because they are more well know, and sell more hamburgers than much better chains and restaurants?

Heh.. by that logic, Windows and Android are the best because they blow the # of those respective Apple devices out of the water

 

[ackmondual]

“I’m glad I didn’t end up as an abortion.”
Steve Jobs, in Walter Isaacson's biography Steve Jobs, page 254.

~~~

I’ll never forget sitting at the Mexican restaurant on Highway 24 in my hometown in May 2020, reading this section of the book while eating lunch. It’s one of those life moments etched into my mind.

At birth, my name was Marquez Antonio Bowen. My father was listed as ‘unknown.’ I don’t know all that was going on in my mother’s life at the time (it seems nobody does), but it was decided that her mother would raise me—my grandmother—without me knowing the story. So, Marquez Antonio Bowen became Marcus Anthony Nixon. All through childhood, I had no clue that my older ‘sister’ was the one that actually gave birth to me, and I was too young and ignorant to ask why ‘mama’ was 40 years older than I was. No wonder that day as a child riding in the car, when I asked, “Do you remember the exact time I was born?” she responded, “I can’t remember. Ask your sister; she might remember.” The emotions that must have been in her mind at such a child-like question…

She eventually divorced her husband and remarried, so Marquez Antonio Bowen, that became Marcus Anthony Nixon, was now Robert Anthony Walker. That lasted a few years, and then ‘mama’ was murdered when I was 10. I still can visualize my older ‘sister’ arriving in the driveway and collapsing and crying like a baby while someone held her. It was in my mother’s will that if anything ever happened to her, my babysitters would become my parents, and they willingly did that Tuesday night in 1994.

The funeral came and went, and six days after the murder, we had a family meeting… I sat in my new ‘mama’s’ lap, and I found out that my ‘mama’ was not actually my mother. “Who is my mama?” At that point, my ‘sister’ started sobbing and repeating, “Please don’t hate me, please don’t hate me.” I hugged her and told her I didn’t hate her. I asked some questions that had no answers, and I grew up never bringing it up to her again. She loved me, made a hard choice, and I didn’t want to bring up any bad memories. She came to the hospital when my first daughter was born and was so excited. Sadly, she died of a seizure in 2010.

So, when I had a seizure in 2018, I naturally started wondering about my biological history and took a DNA test.You know that disclaimer on Ancestry’s website? “When using our Services, you may discover unexpected facts about yourself, or your family (e.g. you may discover an unknown genetic sibling or parent, surprising facts about your ethnicity, unanticipated genetic test results, or unexpected information in public records). Once discoveries are made, we can’t undo them.” LOL, Yeah, that disclaimer... you might uncover a script that would make a good Hallmark movie, an HLN docudrama, or something in between... oh me, oh my—maybe one day I can say more.

I have had three mothers who love me. My birth mother stayed in my life as an ‘older sister.’ My ‘mama’ raised me like her son though she was 40 years older than me and endured years of domestic abuse while doing the best she could for me. And the day she was murdered, my babysitter lost one of her best friends while getting a new son to raise. I’ve been loved by three women who consider me their son. I have no bitterness but am only filled with thankfulness. If I had any regrets, it would be personal and my personality—I know I am not the best sibling or son nor one to stay in touch as I should. Perhaps I won’t be an extreme introvert in heaven.

Having been that loved, I have no clue what is in a woman’s mind when making a choice such as the one that’s the topic of debate this week. My birth mother gave me to her mother, so clearly, she did not go down the path that is so much in this week’s news.

Whether Joanne Schieble and Abdulfattah Jandali have a child in Wisconsin that gets adopted, becomes Steven Paul Jobs, and changes the technological realm forever, or a young mother in Anderson gives birth to Marquez Antonio that becomes now middle-aged Tony in a little office at a country church south of Anderson, the famousness (or lack thereof) and the worldwide impact (or lack thereof) should make no difference in one’s ethic of life. We’ve all heard, “Don’t get an abortion! Your child might cure cancer!” Well, what if we say, “Don’t get an abortion! Your child might be a blue-collar worker that quietly loves his family, goes to church, loves Jesus, and dies of cancer with only a few people around him.” Whether someone cures cancer and lives long or dies early having accomplished little, does that make their life of any less worth?

You can search my social media history and find zero about politics, Obama, Trump, Biden, COVID, etc. There’s only so much in life you can care about and get outraged at. The older I get, the more I want to get outraged at my own sin and care about Jesus and my wife and kids. I’ll be dead in a few years, and I’m learning to focus on the stuff I can actually impact: my wife, my kids, about a dozen adults in SS, and a few dozen kids in the church youth department.

So, I purposefully stay ignorant of a lot of life’s controversies; there’s a lot in life I don’t know and stay out of. But I do know this: no matter how complicated the situation is, there is grace—common grace and saving grace—for the messiest of situations. Whether someone definitely impacts the world for many people or hopefully makes a small difference in the lives of a few people, one thing is certain…

They’ll never have the possibility if they never had the chance.

For every one of these stories, there are plenty more where things ended up for the worse, including death from lack of access to safe abortions.

 

[yaxomoxay]

Infanticide means to murder a born child,

I am curious here. Born only? So, if I go throwing hard punches to the womb of a woman that is 6 to 9 month pregnant causing an abortion I should go to jail for simple assault only? The fact that she had a viable kid in her womb is no factor in the criminal trial?

 

[svish]

Congratulations to the winner!!

 

[ackmondual]

I am curious here. Born only? So, if I go throwing hard punches to the womb of a woman that is 6 to 9 month pregnant causing an abortion I should go to jail for simple assault only? The fact that she had a viable kid in her womb is no factor in the criminal trial?

IANAL, but I recall it's not the same severity as killing a child (that's been born).

Also, if people want to consider a fetus as a person, then it gets messy b/c then fetuses in the womb can inherit property, money. Men would be on the hook to pay for child support at the moment of conception. Pregnant women could now use the HOV lane. Etc.

 

[neuropsychguy]

Both sides are not the same.

Of course not. The “other” side is “bad”, “my” side is “good”. Isn’t that generally what many people think?

How about instead of criticizing people we disagree with, we work on seeking solutions? That’s exactly what this marriage bill was. A bipartisan effort. It required compromises. That’s how the U.S. Constitution happened as well - compromises. Maybe no one is fully happy with it and not everyone voted in support of it but it passed the Senate and will pass the House.

 

[steevn]

Of course not. The “other” side is “bad”, “my” side is “good”. Isn’t that generally what many people think?

How about instead of criticizing people we disagree with, we work on seeking solutions? That’s exactly what this marriage bill was. A bipartisan effort. It required compromises. That’s how the U.S. Constitution happened as well - compromises. Maybe no one is fully happy with it and not everyone voted in support of it but it passed the Senate and will pass the House.

Yes, this will pass the house with the vast majority of republicans voting against it as well. If this bill were to wait until January, it would have zero chance of passing.

but sure, let’s call this a bipartisan effort when most republicans voted against it and it never would have been brought to a vote if republicans had the majority. As long as we’re clear on where each party stands on the issue.

I don’t know why all the “conservatives” and both sides types are continually calling for the left to “be nice and stop calling names” when you can watch basically every Republican politician call the left monsters who are destroying the country and make ads pretending to shoot/blow up democrats. Maybe put your focus towards those people instead.

 

[Complex757]

If you don't know the person's position on the death penalty, it's a straw man--a response to an argument the original poster didn't make.

Do you know his stance?

So what are you going back and forth about? You're playing more of a straw man than I was and are projecting like crazy.

 

[wigby]

In the end, we're all a "lump of cells".

Yeah but for some reason the government deems certain lumps of cells off limits even though they are in our own bodies. So much for bodily autonomy.

 

[mrochester]

Give the full information. It was a bill about same sex marriage and interracial marriage. The former was and is the item of contention, not the latter. Your post is biased and misleading.

So it’s ok to be a bigot as long as you aren’t racist?

No wonder your country is ****ed, America.

 

[theheadguy]

“I’m glad I didn’t end up as an abortion.”
Steve Jobs, in Walter Isaacson's biography Steve Jobs, page 254.

~~~

I’ll never forget sitting at the Mexican restaurant on Highway 24 in my hometown in May 2020, reading this section of the book while eating lunch. It’s one of those life moments etched into my mind.

At birth, my name was Marquez Antonio Bowen. My father was listed as ‘unknown.’ I don’t know all that was going on in my mother’s life at the time (it seems nobody does), but it was decided that her mother would raise me—my grandmother—without me knowing the story. So, Marquez Antonio Bowen became Marcus Anthony Nixon. All through childhood, I had no clue that my older ‘sister’ was the one that actually gave birth to me, and I was too young and ignorant to ask why ‘mama’ was 40 years older than I was. No wonder that day as a child riding in the car, when I asked, “Do you remember the exact time I was born?” she responded, “I can’t remember. Ask your sister; she might remember.” The emotions that must have been in her mind at such a child-like question…

She eventually divorced her husband and remarried, so Marquez Antonio Bowen, that became Marcus Anthony Nixon, was now Robert Anthony Walker. That lasted a few years, and then ‘mama’ was murdered when I was 10. I still can visualize my older ‘sister’ arriving in the driveway and collapsing and crying like a baby while someone held her. It was in my mother’s will that if anything ever happened to her, my babysitters would become my parents, and they willingly did that Tuesday night in 1994.

The funeral came and went, and six days after the murder, we had a family meeting… I sat in my new ‘mama’s’ lap, and I found out that my ‘mama’ was not actually my mother. “Who is my mama?” At that point, my ‘sister’ started sobbing and repeating, “Please don’t hate me, please don’t hate me.” I hugged her and told her I didn’t hate her. I asked some questions that had no answers, and I grew up never bringing it up to her again. She loved me, made a hard choice, and I didn’t want to bring up any bad memories. She came to the hospital when my first daughter was born and was so excited. Sadly, she died of a seizure in 2010.

So, when I had a seizure in 2018, I naturally started wondering about my biological history and took a DNA test.You know that disclaimer on Ancestry’s website? “When using our Services, you may discover unexpected facts about yourself, or your family (e.g. you may discover an unknown genetic sibling or parent, surprising facts about your ethnicity, unanticipated genetic test results, or unexpected information in public records). Once discoveries are made, we can’t undo them.” LOL, Yeah, that disclaimer... you might uncover a script that would make a good Hallmark movie, an HLN docudrama, or something in between... oh me, oh my—maybe one day I can say more.

I have had three mothers who love me. My birth mother stayed in my life as an ‘older sister.’ My ‘mama’ raised me like her son though she was 40 years older than me and endured years of domestic abuse while doing the best she could for me. And the day she was murdered, my babysitter lost one of her best friends while getting a new son to raise. I’ve been loved by three women who consider me their son. I have no bitterness but am only filled with thankfulness. If I had any regrets, it would be personal and my personality—I know I am not the best sibling or son nor one to stay in touch as I should. Perhaps I won’t be an extreme introvert in heaven.

Having been that loved, I have no clue what is in a woman’s mind when making a choice such as the one that’s the topic of debate this week. My birth mother gave me to her mother, so clearly, she did not go down the path that is so much in this week’s news.

Whether Joanne Schieble and Abdulfattah Jandali have a child in Wisconsin that gets adopted, becomes Steven Paul Jobs, and changes the technological realm forever, or a young mother in Anderson gives birth to Marquez Antonio that becomes now middle-aged Tony in a little office at a country church south of Anderson, the famousness (or lack thereof) and the worldwide impact (or lack thereof) should make no difference in one’s ethic of life. We’ve all heard, “Don’t get an abortion! Your child might cure cancer!” Well, what if we say, “Don’t get an abortion! Your child might be a blue-collar worker that quietly loves his family, goes to church, loves Jesus, and dies of cancer with only a few people around him.” Whether someone cures cancer and lives long or dies early having accomplished little, does that make their life of any less worth?

You can search my social media history and find zero about politics, Obama, Trump, Biden, COVID, etc. There’s only so much in life you can care about and get outraged at. The older I get, the more I want to get outraged at my own sin and care about Jesus and my wife and kids. I’ll be dead in a few years, and I’m learning to focus on the stuff I can actually impact: my wife, my kids, about a dozen adults in SS, and a few dozen kids in the church youth department.

So, I purposefully stay ignorant of a lot of life’s controversies; there’s a lot in life I don’t know and stay out of. But I do know this: no matter how complicated the situation is, there is grace—common grace and saving grace—for the messiest of situations. Whether someone definitely impacts the world for many people or hopefully makes a small difference in the lives of a few people, one thing is certain…

They’ll never have the possibility if they never had the chance.

If more pro-life people would convey their arguments and beliefs as reasonably and maturely as you did, they would find others much more welcome to learning their perspectives and maybe even allowing them to influence their own. Thank you.

 

[ProfessionalFan]

So it’s ok to be a bigot as long as you aren’t racist?

He never said that.