"Respect the past" is a pretty broad statement, don't you think?
What do you mean? Respect your grandfather's wisdom? Study history? Or worship 5 dudes with a wig who owned slaves and cry when the national anthem is on?
As I said, acknowledging the importance of history and recognizing its role in today's context is one thing. Worshipping individuals from the past as if they were the only ones responsible to make large scale events happen, and taking pride in what they did hundreds of years ago, is silly.
So there are distinctions to be made when you talk about respecting the past, because there are many, many, irrespectable things that humans did in the past.
I get the feeling this processing plant won't be burning down anytime soon.
On May 26th, Aspire Food Group announced that it has completed construction of its alternative protein manufacturing facility. London, Ontario is now home to the world’s largest cricket production facility.
Aspire’s new plant will reportedly produce 9000 metric tons of crickets every year for human and pet consumption.
Again, you’re too emotional about this. I get it. You’re young, and it’s an emotional subject, but nobody is “worshiping“ them, and they did other things besides just own slaves. Some of which led to the situation where more enlightened men could free the slaves. Surely you see that.
I mean, nobody is saying “ those founding fathers, sooooo fucking cool that they owned slaves!”.
Tomato, Tomato. There is subtlety. Respectful words please.
Similarly, expect respect when your colleagues in the squad bay or hangar think your pronoun is “fukin’ idiot”, as in, “Hey, Fukin Idiot!, fixed that tire yet???” They need to be gently reminded that they are just stubbornly insisting on their rights. /They/ have no right to identity /you/ as “Fukin’ Idiot”. There is nuance, even here.
I guess I lost track of the original subject of the discussion? But I remember someone telling me to be proud of being born in the same land Julius Cesear or Colombus were born in, for some reason. So I pointed out in my own way why I think that is a silly thing to do.
The CDC just approved COVID-19 vaccines for children as young as 6 months. This happened shortly after advisory meetings of the FDA and CDC. Both of those meetings cited a preprint titled “Covid-19 is a leading cause of death in children and young people ages 0-19 years in the United States” (see pages 17-18 of these slides). It had been posted about 3 weeks prior.
The preprint was based on a clearly flawed interpretation of mortality data. It is now being corrected.