Anything is a normal thing for it to say, it will say basically whatever you want

Oh we’re speeding up the problems alright

We did that to quite s large degree even before we were modern humans, 2-400kya

I think bilingual in the linguistic sense is more if you grow up using both languages a lot in early childhood, and especially if you use both in the home, and not so much about the final fluency. I do this kind of rapid switching between Dutch and English because I grew up speaking Dutch at home in an English speaking country. But I wouldn’t say my Dutch is really perfect, I am missing quite a lot of vocabulary after decades in an English country and I don’t know a lot of formal/polite speech. But I can easily relate to how they are mixing the languages, it is quite natural. I also find it disorienting to switch to languages I learnt later in life, even one I learnt to a very high level, and I don’t often mix at all with that one.

This is how bilinguals of any languages speak so it’s not surprising. I read some study a while ago that said that if you have more than one native language it kind of works in your brain as if you have just one language, but it has all the stuff in it from both languages, which is why it’s so easy to switch. I’m sure you know that some things are easier to express nicely in some languages, or don’t translate easily, so it’s quite useful to do this.

Yeah, that’s very true. But they’ll do the bad thing it even if there’s a referendum on it.

Most Nazis just went back to normal German society, only a few sacrificial ones were hunted down.

Sure, but it really is extremely isolated. There are some tiny towns a bit over 100 km away and then it’s thousands of km to anywhere else. Volcanos rarely endanger more than 40 km around them.

You started this discussion saying “it’s reasonable” but you’re unwilling to give any reasons beyond “I believe it is sinful”. Instead of engaging with any of the positions I put forward, you went on a tangent about crack without saying why it is at all similar or why it would be morally wrong even if it were. I don’t believe you’re stupid enough to think that that really carries any logical weight as an argument, so yeah, the only remaining conclusion I can make is that it’s bigotry instead.

deleted by creator

It is stocked in normal supermarkets in France and Switzerland (at least, surely others too).

I mean, cool, if you want to outright affirm that you are a bigot that is your prerogative. But evoking the spectre of addiction to hard drugs to denigrate sex workers is a shitty thing to do, and it would lead one to believe you’re not being honest when you claim you think the world is big enough for you and them both.

Counterpoint: Brexit

I’m sure many people can handle their crack better than me

Way to tell on yourself ;)

for best results, sexual activities, love and commitment should go hand in hand

This is fine, I agree with it as written, but I dispute that “commitment” has very much to do with sexuality, except sort of tangentially, in that people are often bad at managing their feelings around it, or simply have extremely strong feelings which are hard to manage. It’s true that if something affects you emotionally to the degree that it has negative impacts on your partner, you shouldn’t do that thing, but that would apply to any stressful job where you took your stress out on your loved ones.

you shouldn’t make money out of something so intimate and important as if it were nothing

This on the other hand is the kind of thing that religious people say when they don’t want to admit that they see women (and let’s be real, it’s always women we’re talking about) as property.

Of course you can date or not date anyone for whatever reason, nobody can make you. So indeed, the world is big enough for that.

admitting it is too much so you have to fight strawmen

This is exactly what you are doing with the second statement. If you were to honestly dissect why you think that “making money out of it” would mean that “it were nothing” you would be able to see that too. It implies that someone doing OF somehow lessens the commitment to their partner. Robbing him of something you see as rightfully his. It is this deeply engrained patriarchal mentality which is in the end responsible for most of the emotional issues.

And sure, if you can’t handle it, that’s ok, many people can’t. We all have things that are hard for us. But it’s better not to lie to yourself about where those feelings come from.

It’s because they are secretly proud of their past

Yeah? What would be reasonable about it? Of course, it’s very common, but that doesn’t mean it’s reasonable. I think if you break it down, all those objections reduce to “my partner is my property”.

It’s almost like there’s a spectrum

207 as opposed to 230-250 for the oils people typically recommend (rice bran, peanut, refined sunflower, ghee…) and 270 for avocado. Sounds lower to me.

Edit: oh you were talking specifically about canola. Well, since they put mustard oil (basically the same thing) at 240 later, I’m not sure about that number, but yeah maybe specifically canola is also not great.

The chart at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoke_point would disagree