I assume it’s “Your kink is not my kink”
I assume it’s “Your kink is not my kink”
I guess it depends on the employer. I don’t do office work myself, but according to what I’ve heard from my wife about her jobs in banking adjacent fields, she has a few different queues of things to do that everyone takes from.
The way you phrased this could go either way: were you never taking on more work, no matter how obviously it needed to get done, just because you weren’t explicitly told to do that job? Because that would be a fair criticism in my estimation.
That’s not what they are saying at all. They’re saying small vehicles aren’t even safe in crashes with other small vehicles, let alone with bigger vehicles.
Mind explaining why?
As someone who is much more centrist/liberal, I had to block a whole bunch of leftist communities recently just so that I could keep enjoying the Fediverse. I would have greatly prefered not to, but so much of leftist content on here is far too cynical to any other position.
Considering there were probably a large group of people who showed up just to see Trump, and that it is more awkward to boo than it is to clap, I think that was actually a pretty decent showing.
Obviously, it would still be stacked against the employee, but the biggest thing would be that the person under investigation could sue the law firm and hurt the law firm and their client through social media or by encouraging unionization if there was any proof of misconduct during the investigation.
The hospital was shut down in November and Israel moved in some time after that so while it’s still not a great look, it’s a far cry from Hamas allegedly using active hospitals.
Why is this news?
Since it says “To everybody in the business” in the corner, and it has the police officer kicking someone out of the way for the sake of that cartoonist, I took it as ridiculing cartoonists as being full of themselves.
Those storm troopers must be some big boys.
Context is important. Literally the next couple verses in both passages say something along the lines of "The disciples asked, ‘Then who can be saved?’ Jesus said, ‘With people it is impossible, but not with God; for all things are possible with God.’ "
According to the Lexham Bible Dictionary, “most scholars reject this interpretation because the meager textual evidence most likely can be attributed to speculations about this verse by some church fathers.”
According to the Lexham Bible Dictionary, this interpretation “dates back to the fifth century and suggests that kamelos, the Greek word for camel, should actually be read as kamilos, which denotes a rope or a ship’s anchor cable. … However, most scholars reject this interpretation because the meager textual evidence most likely can be attributed to speculations about this verse by some church fathers (Origen, Cyril of Alexandria; see Fitzmyer, Luke, 1204; Barclay, Matthew, 239).”
They also disagree with the gate interpretation, saying that “Scholars have found no historical foundation for this view, and no evidence supports the existence of such a small gate in Jerusalem’s walls.”
Just because you shouldn’t trust them doesn’t mean you’re not allowed to interact with them. It just means you need to be careful.
Sopuli.xyz/c/aneurysmposting comes close (sorry, can’t remember the proper formatting for sharing community links.)