Nahvi

as evidence for what Christianity in the US is like is intentionally misleading

If I was trying to claim that is that standard view, then it would be misleading. Since I was actually claiming that there are a wide variety of beliefs among Christians, some even aligning with your values, it is pretty spot on representation. Treating them all the same is prejudicial behavior.

A fair-minded person would give an individual a chance to act like an asshole before treating them like trash.

There is a difference between attacking someone who chooses a disgusting belief system and bigotry.

Bigotry is thinking, what I believe is right and everyone who believes differently is wrong.

To point at all varieties of Christianity and say, "you are bad," is being bigoted.

Now go restore Roe v. Wade or you are useless to me.

If you want someone useful here are some people that agree with you and will help you fight, assuming you can manage to not call their belief system disgusting to their faces:

Rev. Angela Williams, a Presbyterian pastor and the lead organizer of SACReD: Spiritual Alliance of Communities for Reproductive Dignity, told Healthline that faith leaders and religious groups that support abortion rights have been preparing for this moment for a long time.

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/meet-the-religious-groups-fighting-to-save-abortion-access

Members of the Episcopal Church (79%) and the United Church of Christ (72%) are especially likely to support legal abortion, while most members of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) and the mainline Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (65%) also take this position.

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2018/01/22/american-religious-groups-vary-widely-in-their-views-of-abortion/

It is unfortunate that you think so, there is a lot of wisdom in the various world religions.

We may be beyond the need for religion, but I doubt even that.

I have done and will continue to call out racial and homophobic bigotry as quickly as I do religious bigotry.

Unfortunately, as shameful as it is, one of those forms of prejudice is supported by most of the active population here.

Excuse me, but your bigotry is hanging out. Would you mind zipping up?

Like the other commenter, I would be genuinely curious to hear your thoughts on that fundamental difference.

I am by no means an AI expert, but my impressions is that AI sill needs to process each book and incorporate the new knowledge into its existing knowledge. Which at least from a surface level sounds a lot like what I do when I read a new book.

The fact that each AI is effectively a non-sapient slave of a person or corporation really doesn't change my opinion.

Have you ever had a reason to read much in a new or developing sub-genre? As a fan of LitRPG, a genre that virtually didn't exist 10 years ago, I can tell you with some certainty that everything is a derivative work of something. It is amazing how as soon as one author pulls in and idea from another genre, the next 30 novels that come out will have some variation of the same idea, and the 300 that follow it will each have variations of those.

I get the logic, but I think it is a more complex issue than that.

How many writer's have read his works and been influenced by them? Did they buy a proper license or just buy/borrow the book from somewhere?

Billionaires aren't the ones that starve when the economy implodes.

This kind of rhetoric is what makes moderates ambivalent about unions. Sure we support your goals but the side-effects of that cure are ten times worse than the disease itself.