We explore real-life reformation here in this informed, online community.
If Pharma made airplanes there would be airplane crashes every single day and Pharma would blame the people who never fly.
Sudden Aviation Death Syndrome (SADS) would be the label used to describe those killed in the daily airplane crashes which would always be considered a coincidence.
The CDC would strongly recommend that all children fly 90 times before their 18th birthday and blue states would require proof of said flights to attend school; even if you have been in a previous crash there would be no exemptions to the mandated 90 flights.
Anderson Cooper would vilify anyone who took fewer than five flights a year.
The National Transportation Safety Board would assure us that planes have always crashed every day — it was just better awareness that made people think things had gotten worse — while doing absolutely nothing to improve airline safety.
Academics would conduct elaborate studies on “overcoming airplane crash hesitancy.”
The mainstream media would feature endless commercials for medications to treat burns and lost limbs from airplane crashes, complete with singing and dancing spokespeople who are always smiling.
Pharma would make record earnings every year because more crashes mean they need to make more planes!
Wall Street would applaud their visionary business model.
(Nota bene for anyone who thinks that this analogy is facetious: 300 children now develop autism in the United States every day, which is more than the seating capacity of the average domestic airplane flight.)
Dr. Toby Rogers
Precious in the sight of the LORD Is the death of His godly ones.
Psalm 116:15
Rod Dreher asks, "I don’t understand why the government doesn’t deploy the army and shoot rioters until they stop. Philippe Lemoine, a Frenchman, says it’s not that simple."
Excerpt:
"We have let things rot for so long that, at this point, relying primarily on force to restore order would require a degree of violence far greater than what people realize and what is politically feasible.
It's possible to contain a riot using only moderate force when the number of police officers is high relative to the number of rioters, but when riots are so widespread and involve so many people because you have allowed this kind of things to happen for so long, that's just not possible and you have to use extreme violence to make up for the lack of manpower.
I know people on the Internet will say that it doesn't matter and that we should just do it, but the reality is that most of the people in charge are not prepared to use that kind of force and neither would most ordinary people if they saw ...
Even Marine Le Pen’s recent statements track this line: personal Islamic practice is compatible with the Republic; replacing French law with Sharia is not. French Muslims who are simply citizens practicing their "religious faith" “have no reason to worry” about a Le Pen election victory.
But can one be a practicing Muslim without demanding and practicing Sharia?
