@FunCartel that’s not true at all if you look at some of the threads like the appearance thread, or even the open minded thread, you’re getting a better understanding of how people think and how it applies into the world of cuddling.
Some of the other threads which I enjoy, such as the cooking or music thread one might argue that they don’t have anything to do with cuddling either however they give you an idea of what the person likes, which could potentially be something useful or helpful when meeting someone.
@lonelytauros You are getting something out of it, but ultimately nothing really changes. You are listening to the opinions of strangers just like this thread. I could say the same thing about this thread—I learn how some think about this issue. But ultimately, nothing really changes because it is strangers’ opinions. After all you came on the thread and said that much—it doesn’t matter what we say SCOTUS will do what they do anyways. The same could be said about any thread because we are all strangers in a cyber void,
Your second paragraph above lays claim that you learn something from the cooking and music threads about what someone likes. Isn’t that the same on this thread? Seems to me @dave31415 and @GreatHornedOwl enjoy stimulating intellectual conversation about issues of the day. Boom, you learned something about them.
Just because this thread doesn’t fit into your perspective of what is a “useful” or “relevant” thread doesn’t mean it isn’t. I could say the music threads have never changed my taste in music so it’s useless or pointless but I would never point that out in the thread. The takeaway is let it be. You have mentioned some threads that I have found tedious but I do not crash them and say they do not matter at all. In the grand scheme of things none of them do to someone not interested in the community. And to say as you did above that “that’s not true at all” is a falsehood because it is my opinion. You offered yours on this thread and I offered mine. The entire forum in many ways can be boiled down to just opinions that don’t matter and are only given currency by an individual. This is why you should respect the threads you think are pointless because there will always be someone that thinks your favorite threads are as well.
@FunCartel I never said this thread was pointless, useless or irrelevant. I’m just pointing out the authors last paragraph, which is this, “Unfortunately, there is probably nothing that anybody can do to influence the court's decision.”
As far as other threads are concerned the music on for example, I would never expect it to change your taste or anyone’s taste in music. It’s just a thread sharing what other people listen to people may or may not like the music on there and that’s fine.
I’m just pointing out the authors last paragraph, which is this, “Unfortunately, there is probably nothing that anybody can do to influence the court's decision.”
No, you injected that thought into your initial post. What was being discussed was open door vs. guardrails and there are major issues with both. SCOTUS has never really been a place where people could influence them and SCOTUS does not make policy of laws. They simply rule on if a law has been broken or if a law is constitutional or not. But the issues we were discussing are being discussed in Congress even as we speak from all different angles.
@FunCartel so things that are being discussed in Congress right now are going to be influenced by who…you? The people? Or would it be the lobbyists or the bankers the people that have money and real power and influence?
@lonelytauros - I frequently write to my congressman and senators, and I like to believe that if enough other people write, we may have some influence. Yes, they are influenced by the powerful, but they are also interested in votes.
I haven't written regarding this issue, because I am completely uncertain what I would like to see them do.
@GreatHornedOwl
I will be surprised if it isn't significantly changed in some unpredictable way
What do you mean by changed? The interpretation or the law? SCOTUS can't change the law, and I'm not sure how they would significantly change its interpretation as Constitutional. There's only two sides with the case, and SCOTUS can only rule on the dispute one way or another based on arguments. They could maybe say some parts of it are unconstitutional, or say that some interpretations are the only constitutional ones (which leaves implementation to the Executive Branch if they're not acting unconstitutional, and if someone thinks they are, that may have to make a new case at SCOTUS).
If you think SCOTUS can change the law, I'm not how you're seeing that, even figuratively.
PS: It's really irritating that there's no Reply or react buttons here. A reply button could automatically name-attach the person being replied to (and prevent a huge mass of misreads and miscommunications that have infested this forum for years), a react button can use a set of emojis from the browser or app's operating system (keep things safe and secure) or at least within a general universal limited Unicode character set.
@deefine - If SCOTUS rules that any part of a law is unconstitutional, that most certainly changes the law. When SCOTUS rules that an entire law is unconstitutional, they reduce that law to have no effective meaning at all. SCOTUS can also change the generally understood meaning of a law by further defining what the law means.