What in heaven's name is this monstrosity? It's like WEF, for football! They want to create supranational financial rules for clubs, overriding league sovereignty; they want to do the same with stadium design; they want to shove women's football down our throats from the top-down, versus letting the market decide; and they say clubs must "embrace the values" of the EU-- "or what?", the question is begged? Which "values"? Why does a football club need to have "values" other than playing football?

Just like with the UN, the EU, and the WEF, so much of the text on this page is "doublethink".

This group is proposing adding fourteen matches to club schedules-- then has the audacity to say that no new matches should be added, respecting "player health"; they say they want to increase competitiveness of domestic leagues, while simultaneously distracting clubs from their domestic leagues; they claim that football is "the people's game", yet they want this competition to be added revenue for only the very top-most clubs participating in it.

They want to make matches "more accessible"... people can already buy tickets to watch their team! They want to create "exciting" pan-European matches-- we already have that, ever heard of the Champions League? And on and on it goes. Evidently, this company is based in Madrid and is bankrolled by Real Madrid-- specifically two guys with Spanish ties: John Hahn and Anas Laghrari.

As usual, pure greed couched in nauseating pluralistic language.

I'd be more ok if they'd just be honest: "Yup, it's a cash grab, but in exchange the matches could be entertaining." It's the incessant lying that's truly tiresome. Remember: we already have domestic leagues; the Champions League; the Europa League; the Conference League, which is brand new; domestic cups; and in some cases national cups too. Clubs are already playing every three days. At what point are players being abused to make the people at the top rich? Are squads going to need to carry forty rostered players now?


Gay Acts

There is no such thing as a "gay" person. There are people who succumb to the devil's temptations, and commit sinful sexual acts. "Gay" is a verb, not an adjective. Because someone commits a deeply sinful act such as homosexuality, does not mean they can not offer their hearts wholly to Christ, reform, and achieve salvation. We are all sinners axiomatically, very much myself included.

There is the expression, "Love the sinner, hate the sin." This is in relation to what I wrote here. Just because someone has performed sinful sexual acts, does not mean they should be exiled from the Church. There are people who have sinned, who have confessed that sin, and who are authentically contrite of heart. As an elderly Sister said to me recently, they have "pitched their tent" in the Church, and who are we to throw them and their tent out?

But then there are those who identify with their vice: they quite literally define themselves according to their sin. In fact, they are proud of their sin! "I am gay!", or "I am queer!", and so forth. "Gay pride!" These people should absolutely not be allowed into the Church, they should not receive "same sex couple blessings"-- in the same way someone who brags about how proud they are that they are a serial axe murderer, or proud about how they actively worship Satan, would not be welcome in the Church.

People should define themselves by their virtues, not their vices. Not only do these people frequently identify by their vices, and boast about their sins, but they actively want to change Christ's Church to support their vices, contrary to all of scripture, which is God's literal Word.

This is the defining line for me regarding not just homosexual behavior and the Church, but between sin of all kind. People who are contrite of heart and have turned to Jesus are not just welcome-- they are the "parts" of the Church's body. By contrast, people who are proud of their sins and wish to turn the Church towards evil, should have no place within the body.

In no way is this me "casting stones", or not recognizing the "plank in my own eye". Like all humans, I am very much tempted to sin, by Satan. But Pope Francis, my Bishop, and the Church's official positions these days are constantly emphasizing the "synodal" nature of the Church, and how everyone should be able to express their opinions. In that spirit and since they've asked, this is my opinion.


Insomniac Leak

Much has already been said regarding the Insomniac leaks such as this material, but it's worth emphasizing just how out-of-control game budgets are. "Ratchet & Clank: Rift Apart" made a whopping seventy-one million USD, but was unprofitable-- that is patently absurd. Just to add some high resolution textures and get ray-traced window reflections to an existing game-- the original "Spider-Man" PlayStation 4 title-- cost forty million USD!

This is a dead industry. It's only a matter of time before the "triple-A", "Hollywood cinematic blockbuster" concept is abandoned. And good riddance! Right around the year 2000, the industry prioritized mimicking Hollywood, and the whole hobby has been artistically off the rails since then. Unfortunately, what comes next is "GaaS", which is even worse than the walking simulators.


The Vatican and AI

Back to the topic of the Church, this is a superb letter, written at least in part by, and certainly endorsed by, Pope Francis. It accurately lists all of the risks of "AI", in such a way I have not yet seen done. The letter has only reinforced my views that "AI" should be internationally banned: it should be understood to be in the same category as, let's say, chemical weapons. A clear boundary should be set: "Computers are allowed to do A, B, and C, but not X, Y, or Z." There should be jail time for anyone who violates.