speedy ✝️

5.7K posts

speedy ✝️ banner
speedy ✝️

speedy ✝️

@prettyfastngl

|1 Corinthians 13: 8-12|catholicccccc

Katılım Nisan 2021
191 Takip Edilen89 Takipçiler
Sabitlenmiş Tweet
speedy ✝️
speedy ✝️@prettyfastngl·
Any spelling error is a result of swipe to text, please forgive
English
0
0
2
3.4K
♡ Honey ♡
♡ Honey ♡@rawmilkhoney·
As far as Catholics you guys lost me at praying to saints and the concept of a pope but otherwise I’m rooting for you guys
English
53
5
121
10.7K
speedy ✝️
speedy ✝️@prettyfastngl·
@rawmilkhoney @uncensoredjose Because the prayer of Gods righteous people is efficacious, and who better than those in heaven? Also sainthood isn’t just granted to everyone. It’s a tedious process. If anything it’s the people that think everyone they know who died is in heaven whom are crazier.
English
0
0
2
18
speedy ✝️
speedy ✝️@prettyfastngl·
@rawmilkhoney @uncensoredjose I think this might be because you misunderstand Christianity and what it actually is in its entirety. Through theosis we partake in the divine, saints in heaven are those who are in heaven who have knowledge of that which is going on, on earth. We ask for their intercession ->
English
2
0
7
88
speedy ✝️ retweetledi
Andrew Torba
Andrew Torba@BasedTorba·
Annual reminder to read the Gospel of John today
Andrew Torba tweet media
English
73
653
5.2K
41.6K
speedy ✝️ retweetledi
Christopher Hale
Christopher Hale@ChristopherHale·
NEW: In a remarkable interview set to air on CBS Easter morning, the conservative archbishop who leads Catholics serving in the U.S. military says the Trump-Vance White House's war against Iran is impermissible under Catholic teaching. Asked to respond to Pete Hegseth's claims that God is guiding the military effort, Archbishop Broglio said the war is not “sponsored by the Lord.” substack.com/home/post/p-19…
English
245
3.7K
12.3K
579.8K
speedy ✝️ retweetledi
Lucas Botkin
Lucas Botkin@LucasBotkin·
The “wait for evidence” crowd hates the “pattern recognition” crowd.
English
204
4.6K
30.3K
313.4K
danielle gansky
danielle gansky@DanielleGansky·
People are getting brain damage when they try to come off antidepressants (especially with rapid, doctor directed tapers) The truth is: we still don’t fully understand the long-term effects these drugs have on the brain What we do see, in real life, is life-altering withdrawal and irreversible neurological damage affecting hundreds of thousands of people. Some people take one pill and lose their sexuality, their cognition,their ability to feel love or connection. And for some, it never comes back. #pssd #ssriwithdrawal #antidepressants @PSSDNetwork
The Vigilant Fox 🦊@VigilantFox

Theo Von reveals he was put on antidepressants after “a tough day at school” and has NEVER been able to get off them since. THEO: “That shit makes you feel dead, man.” ROGAN: “So why did you take them in the first place?” THEO: “Cause I was in a bad relationship 20 years ago, and I was having a tough day at school, and they f*cking gave them to me, and then I never got off.” Theo’s experience is not uncommon. A 2019 meta-analysis revealed that 56% of people experience withdrawal symptoms when trying to quit antidepressants. Of those who experienced withdrawal symptoms, nearly half (46%) described them as “severe.” Before you get placed on the antidepressant hamster wheel like Theo Von did, consider trying exercise instead. Large-scale meta-analyses show that physical exercise is about 1.5 times more effective than antidepressants for depression.

English
24
50
249
17.7K
speedy ✝️ retweetledi
hoe_math = PsychoMath
hoe_math = PsychoMath@ItIsHoeMath·
There is no future if we do not do enormous, drastic things immediately. Every time I try to explain this, people say "yeah but you're making me uncomfortable so I'm gonna ignore you." Most people do not deserve to be spared from what's coming.
English
287
812
8.7K
97K
speedy ✝️ retweetledi
Matt Forney
Matt Forney@mattforney·
The Constitution isn't the problem. The problem is judicial review. The early American colonists recognized the problem with unelected, unaccountable judges and other figures being able to conjure law out of thin air, because it was and continues to be a problem in Britain. Their solutions were twofold: 1) Investing ultimate judicial authority in the legislature, which is elected by and thus accountable to the people. In colonial Massachusetts, the legislature also acted as the highest court of appeals, the legacy of which remains in the name of the modern state legislature: the Massachusetts General Court. The New Hampshire General Court functioned similarly. These judicial functions were eventually removed. 2) The Constitution itself. It may surprise Americans that Britain does not have a constitution. They have what is ludicrously called an "unwritten constitution," a body of traditions and statute law that can and is often ignored (see: what Keir Starmer is doing right now). Britain also has the principle of "parliamentary supremacy," the idea that Parliament cannot pass laws that would restrict its future power. This was famously invoked in 2019, when Boris Johnson circumvented the Fixed-Term Parliaments Act 2011 (which mandated a two-thirds majority to dissolve parliament and call a snap election) with the Early Parliamentary General Election Act 2019 (which only required a simple majority). In theory, the monarch acts as a check on tyrannical governments. In reality, this never happens because British monarchs are useless. The King could fire Starmer tomorrow and commission Nigel Farage or Rupert Lowe to replace him. He won't do this because he's a worthless dotard. In fact, the only time this power has been exercised in Commonwealth history was when Australian Governor-General John Kerr (the monarch's representative) fired radical left Prime Minister Gough Whitlam in 1975 for being unable to pass his government's budget. The Constitution was the Founders' solution to this problem. By clearly delineating the government's powers, what it could and couldn't do, they sought to free America from the tyrannies we suffered under British pseudo-democracy. They were also cognizant of the dangers of an empowered, unelected judiciary, which is why they were extremely vague on the role of the Supreme Court, merely establishing it without specifying its powers. Judicial review was invented out of whole cloth by John Marshall, for entirely corrupt and self-serving reasons (forcing James Madison to sustain the employment of a John Adams patronage goon; sound familiar?). This was an injection of British pseudo-democracy into the American system and now the tumor has grown to threaten the entire nation. The Constitution is fine. The judges are the problem. Judicial review must be defenestrated if America is to have a future.
THE WORLD'S GREATEST DAD IN THE WORLD@The_WGD

Nobody under 35 feels any allegiance to the constitution.

English
21
89
504
16.1K
speedy ✝️ retweetledi
FischerKing
FischerKing@FischerKing64·
Under birthright citizenship a Chinese tourist baby born in Los Angeles, who spends a few weeks in the USA getting a social security card and a passport, but who grows up entirely in Beijing is eligible to run for President of the United States. He would need to satisfy the 14 year residency requirement, but he could do that with college, grad school and then working for a while. Meanwhile someone like Elon Musk can never be POTUS no matter how much he contributes to the country.
English
127
565
3.9K
75.8K
speedy ✝️ retweetledi
Abyssal Argonaut
Abyssal Argonaut@divinetrickr·
Birfrigh citizenship is THE issue to chimp over. More than 2A, more than abortion, more than anything With this comes the death of nation literally nothing else even matters anymore End the court, purge the congress, with this issue the republic is dead
English
18
154
1.6K
22.6K
speedy ✝️ retweetledi
Christian Collins
Christian Collins@CollinsforTX·
Democrat Congresswoman Delia Ramirez: "I'm a proud Guatemalan before I'm an American." I'd say this is a perfect example of why we must end birthright citizenship.
English
3.1K
17.7K
50K
883.9K
speedy ✝️
speedy ✝️@prettyfastngl·
@fettpet @TRHLofficial This doesn’t solve this issue. If struck down that means all those that are granted citizen ship by doing this, that their kids would be granted citizenship. All of the Chinese kids born in the ccp would be granted citizenship.
English
0
0
0
18
Fettpett
Fettpett@fettpet·
@TRHLofficial If they do, the only solution is a Constitutional Amendment that defines citizenship as those with ties to another citizen, instead of just anyone
English
11
3
118
5.8K
The Redheaded libertarian
The Redheaded libertarian@TRHLofficial·
SCOTUS may rule that birthright citizenship is constitutional, using precedent and a loose interpretation of an earlier ruling, so we may need to approach the issue of one million Chinese communists voting in our elections in the future differently. As it holds, they can’t even be denaturalized. There would definitively and permanently be no solution and creating citizens of those who dilute our values is republic ending. What we can do now, is aggressively and publicly enforce FARA, the Espionage Act, and related statutes against anyone (citizen or not) acting under CCP direction. Prosecute espionage, influence ops, and undisclosed CCP ties. That’s really it though. If it’s ruled constitutional for anyone infiltrate and dismantle our republic, all we can do is try to disincentivize it. How utterly demoralizing.
English
387
676
4.6K
86.7K
Abud Bakri MD
Abud Bakri MD@AbudBakri·
Babies have Norwood 5+ hairlines and small thymuses, just like old men Thymus grows until puberty... then rapid shrinks Most men have a stable hairline once the thymus has finished involuting around 40.... same genetic regulator: FOXN1 is your hairline a proxy for thymus status?
Abud Bakri MD tweet media
Abud Bakri MD@AbudBakri

It’s strange how thymus size by age overlays nicely to hairline in men You can almost see the Norwood decay at each part of the graph Babies born with terrible hair lines… then peak right before puberty… and then a slow (fast in some) decay

English
30
12
400
94.6K
speedy ✝️ retweetledi
Nayib Bukele
Nayib Bukele@nayibbukele·
If you don’t impeach the corrupt judges, you CANNOT fix the country. They will form a cartel (a judicial dictatorship) and block all reforms, protecting the systemic corruption that put them in their seats.
Elon Musk@elonmusk

The only way to restore rule of the people in America is to impeach judges. No one is above the law, including judges. That is what it took to fix El Salvador. Same applies to America.

English
3.9K
49K
158.4K
41.2M
speedy ✝️ retweetledi
Liz Wheeler
Liz Wheeler@Liz_Wheeler·
In the next decade, over 1M Chinese communists will be able to vote in American elections. You heard me. Thanks to birth tourism, Chinese billionaires are paying surrogates to birth their children on U.S. soil so the babies are American citizens. The children are taken back to China after birth, raised as communists, then when they’re 18, they’re allowed to vote in U.S. elections. THAT is why birthright citizenship must end. 1M votes swings any election. Soon the Chinese communists will “legally” control our elections. Unless we end birthright citizenship.
English
1.2K
9.8K
24.1K
465.2K
speedy ✝️ retweetledi
wyatt
wyatt@gorilla_rape·
uh no if we lose on this the supreme court loses permanent legitimacy and literally destroys the nation AS A LEGAL IDEA and hands citizenship to everyone on the planet
Batya Ungar-Sargon@bungarsargon

I think Trump is right about Birthright Citizenship and the 14th Amendment, but even if he loses this case, he broke a massive taboo and set a new standard for future presidents and legislators. Today is a great day for our nation and a historic one, regardless of the outcome.

English
63
314
4K
79.9K