Will

@alexbronzini It's still here.

I think we need a grand bargain on Woke, where the left agrees that it sucked, and the right agrees to stop acting victimized by it half a decade later

@KTMartin25 So cool

The seminar course I had to take this Summer semester has been on religion and culture. I have never taken a class that has been as impactful as this one. The content has been life changing. The Lord started to prompt me towards a new career path before the semester began and I was unclear on a lot of the "what" and "why." All of that has been answered throughout the course of this seminar and the books Ive had to read. I truly believe that the promptings I received and the content of this course was Divinely Providential. I am so grateful to the Lord for personal revelation and the guidance he has given me over the past 10 ish weeks.

@lahansen12 @ScottHatfieldJr Is Trump in the Utah Republican Party?

@willennial @ScottHatfieldJr Is Trump a leftist?

Hot Take: The Utah Republican Party is not apart of the Republican Party of the US. It has been poisoned by party shifters and wolves in sheep clothing. It’s time the party sought new leaders. It’s time to pluck the disease from its ranks.

@JReubenCIark “Presumably ancient Greek had an equivalent of ‘dad.’” I’m sure did, but that isn’t what Homer chose to use. He used formal/archaic words. So the arguments put forward by Emily Wilson and now Chris Nolan (and implicitly by you)—that Homeric Greek was colloquial—are misinformed

@willennial If I had said Homer did not write in an archaic style, then I would concede I was wrong to say he did not write in an archaic style. But I didn't say that, so I won't. And maybe you should read more carefully and not jump to conclusions.

Hot take but I think he's basically right about this. Presumably ancient Greek had an equivalent of "dad," and if you're making up the dialogue anyway it's not hard to imagine Telemachus using it.

@JReubenCIark We’re talking about the style Homer used and the aesthetic that created. Of course the words aren’t the same. We all know that. But we can still try to preserve his style and the experience it creates. You don’t have to agree. I’m just clarifying what the actual criticism is

@JReubenCIark I just think it’d be great to recognize that contrary to what you claimed in the OP, Homer did write in an archaic style. There’s honor in being able to admit “I see. I got that point wrong. Thanks for the correction.” Guess you’re not willing to offer that. Ok. Your choice.

@JReubenCIark I don’t think inaccurate translation is the issue people have with “Dad.”

@willennial x.com/i/status/20764…

@Shar_Rhar @markt_in_az @TeeplesCY The fact that something is popular does not make it good or right. Thats the bandwagon fallacy.

@markt_in_az @willennial @TeeplesCY Actually, that is our form of government. To decide what levels of taxation are and what they are used for. And the majority want a government provided safety net. Your opinion is the minority.

The reality is that neither the Democrats nor the Republicans fully embrace what the Church teaches, and it is dishonest to pretend otherwise. For example: One side fights for babies in the womb, then cuts programs that feed them once they’re born. Meanwhile American mothers die from pregnancy at the highest rate of any wealthy nation. The other side supports mothers and kids but denies any legal protection to the unborn. Both fall short. As the Church itself has stated, gospel principles can be found in more than one party. So when I vote, I ask two questions. Has this person demonstrated a willingness to live a moral and virtuous life? And can they negotiate with people who disagree to reach outcomes everyone can live together with? I will take a leader who seeks the common good and protects basic rights for all over one who chases absolute victory every time.

@llbuythat @TeeplesCY I don’t feel hatred for anyone, and it was poor of you to allege that I do. Good night.

@willennial @TeeplesCY Maybe re-read the definition I sent you. You are trying awfully hard to characterize something as name calling, which clearly isn’t.

@llbuythat @TeeplesCY What kind of people have hatred? Hateful ones. This isn’t complicated.

@willennial @TeeplesCY Is hatred and hateful the same thing?

@llbuythat @TeeplesCY Exactly. To characterize someone as hateful because they have a different view than you do is not constructive.

@willennial @TeeplesCY I said, “your hatred for one party”.

@llbuythat @TeeplesCY You characterized me as being hateful.

@willennial @TeeplesCY What name did I call you?

@TeeplesCY @Thymeles24 Note that the church does not say both parties are equally good. If we promote that as a church-endorsed position, we are distorting their message.

@Thymeles24 @willennial Your view of government’s job is a political conclusion, not a doctrine. The Church backs neither party, and says good exists in both parties. Nothing in your comment disputes that.

@Shar_Rhar @TeeplesCY i.e., “To disagree with me is unreasonable.” This is bad-faith dialogue.

@willennial @TeeplesCY Trump is most pro war president of our lifetimes. To deny that is unreasonable.

@KimballCall @TeeplesCY Kimball, I followed you based on this tweet.

I'm not sure if you read my essay, Clint, but the timing and content of this makes it sound like you did. If not, forgive me for being presumptuous 😅 I have just a couple thoughts overall. 1. You sound a lot like many conservatives I know including my parents. They dislike politicians who pursue "absolute victory" and prefer those who come across as moral and virtuous. I think those are honorable desires to have, but I question how realistic they are. I'm not aware of any politician in our day and age who I would ever want my children to look up to as a role-model of integrity. The incentive structure for politicians powerfully rewards immorality and punishes virtue. Given that reality, I think it's better to find politicians who will win on the moral issues and the issues I care about. Better for an immoral politician to pass moral legislation that outlasts him than for a moral politician to get nothing done, or worse, lose and allow bad legislation to be passed. That's my calculation at least, but I fully understand and appreciate why you do it the way you do. 2. In my essay, I talk about how conservatives feel like they are on "ideological death ground," meaning they feel like they have no choice but to fight tenaciously, or else their values and way of life will be cast aside in both politics and culture. Because they have this worldview, many of them don't want politicians to enter the game of political strategy with the goal of compromising already high on their priority list. I, personally, don't think that's wrong or immoral. I outlined several instances in American history where similar calculations were made by coalitions we now celebrate. So, even if you're not a conservative who feels like he's on ideological death ground, those who do have valid reasons to feel that way. 3. You say you want politicians who seek "outcomes everyone can live together with?" But what if, on some issues, there is no middle ground? I list some example in my essay, but there are certain issues where there isn't a sensible way to compromise for peace. Doing so will likely be as effective as pre-civil war compromises that only delayed the inevitable. I argue that we should pick a side we want to win, then be peacemakers as we strive to change hearts and minds, rather than seek compromise just for the sake of it. It might be the more difficult road to peace, but it leads to more peace in the long run if we can persuade Americans to return to having shared values. That's why I refuse to vote for someone who's main goal is to compromise, rather than pick a side and boldly defend it. 4. "the common good and protects basic rights" are topics we can't agree on anymore. We don't have enough shared values to agree on policy that matches this description. All sides believe they are doing this, and all sides use language like this. I'm just not sure the middle ground you're looking for truly exists (on some issues, on other issues I think it's certainly there). In short, I'm sharing my perspective on why I think, when it comes to political strategy, we need to judge peacemaking slightly differently than we do when it comes to personal behavior. That's why a politician's morality matters slightly less to me than their ability to accomplish policy outcomes that I think are good for the country. I explain more in the essay I published yesterday.

@Shar_Rhar @TeeplesCY I’m noting that I focused on the issue here, and you chose to make personal attacks instead.

@willennial @TeeplesCY Well that just shows you are not even educated or reasonable.

@BoiseState4Life @TeeplesCY Oh for sure. But that requires actually making a fair comparison. That’s not what was offered above.

@willennial @TeeplesCY Certain aspects are comparable….

@Melmis @TeeplesCY You distorted what I said. It’s perfectly fair for me to correct that.

@willennial @TeeplesCY Oh gee not condescending at all! I make it a rule not to argue with fellow members over petty things and I am coming close to breaking that rule so I will bid you adieu.