You should read her words rather than just the intro to the article quoted in the OP.
'I made that choice. And now I'm watching my dad suffer because of it,' she responded.
She has admitted it. That's not a free pass to make bad decisions, but most of the quotes in the article are about her trying to change and do better.
'I'm learning everything I unlearned,' she said. 'And I'm going to fight for people who don't have a voice.'
'The guilt I carry is heavy, but I won't stay silent anymore,' she added.
'We all make choices,' she said. 'But we can make better ones next.'
I definitely have conflicted feelings about this: it's like when some former white supremacist changes their mind, gets the swastika tattoos removed and speaks out in support of anti-racism. They don't deserve a medal for saying "Whoops, I fucked up" after fucking up extremely hard, but is telling them to fuck off serving the greater good, or just giving us an opportunity to feel superior?
The "stone" with the words in it has a suspiciously uniform appearance. I wonder whether it might be concrete and the letters pressed into it while wet, in which case basically none of it is true.
Agreed on all counts. Most of what occurs around the farting aliens is pretty solid, but they're not at all entertaining. They also play into some ugly tropes about fat people being disgusting. Oddly, I don't feel a lot of the episode is particularly appealing to children outside of the Slitheen. It's got some fairly "adult" stuff with Jackie, all the political goings-on, and multiple fairly long segments of people just watching the news.
There is that one odd moment of Rose telling the Doctor "You're so gay!" as they discuss the slap. It's hard to take much offense to it coming from the famously-gay Davies, but it's at least unexpected. Davies explained the inclusion in an email exchange with a fan:
tl;dr: That's how people of the time talked, not how he felt they should talk. He then goes into some contradictory arguments: that the word is changing and complaining about it now is no better than the people who complained when it changed from meaning "happy" ... but also that it is wrong and he included it in the episode in order to deliberately spark opposition to its use.
It eventually devolves into him "today" threatening to smash a 12 year-old girl's face in for calling her brother a "gayboy". I don't much know what to make of it. Is it activism for a 42-year-old man to threaten a child with violence? Weird stuff.
Also he was primarying Andrew Cuomo, who previously resigned in disgrace over a slew of sexual misconduct allegations and an impeachment. There's plenty of reasons to vote against Cuomo that are completely unrelated to Israel.
Yeah, he was reportedly conceived in a casual encounter. His parents weren't in an ongoing relationship and the father didn't remain very involved in either of their lives.
That is not how a bastard works. To be clear, all of this is archaic, I'm not actually calling anybody a bastard, but the definition of bastard is "a child born to parents who are not married to each other." He matches that definition because his parents were never married.
Affairs don't come into it, it's just some old bullshit cultural and religious ideals about which types of relationships (just the one: heterosexual marriages) children are "supposed" to be born into.
I don't think he's anywhere in the line of succession regardless. He's the son of the Crown Princess (by marriage) but not of the Crown Prince. i.e. His mother had him as a result of a prior relationship, then married the Crown Prince, making him the stepson of the man who will one day be king, but not really anything on his own account. Besides a rapist.
Did you all hear the recent announcement that they're making a Spaceballs 2? It's scheduled for 2027. Bill Pullman (Lone Starr), Daphne Zuniga (Vespa), Rick Moranis (Dark Helmet) and Mel Brooks (Yogurt) are all returning, alongside new characters played by Lewis Pullman (Bill's real son), Josh Gad and Keke Palmer. I'm not even joking.
I think this one's pretty fun. The one disappointment for me is that the story sacrifices all its complexity by making the Gelth generic evil monsters. The moral question of reusing the bodies of the dead is an interesting one that the episode ultimately doesn't have to bother reckoning with because it turns out the Gelth really suck. It's the rare twist that makes the story less compelling. It's already pretty twisty to do a zombie body snatcher plot where it turns out the snatchers aren't evil, so pivoting back to them being evil again is just a bit boring.
Otherwise, I like how the episode makes good use of a historical figure. They can sometimes feel a bit hit and miss, but Dickens makes for a good one-off companion who doesn't suffer a major character assassination, etc. It is mildly weird that we have two episodes in a row where a one-off companion burns up (Jabe last week, Gwyneth this week). I wonder if more thought goes into episode order in later series, just to avoid stories echoing each other's plot points. It's not really a problem, but you wouldn't want to turn it into a pattern.
There's already several comments saying "depends on the beliefs and how important they are," and obviously there's that.
I'll add that there are beliefs people don't immediately think of when talking about religion. There's religious humanism, which is a secular religion based around behaving ethically which also has a bunch of traditions similar to spiritually-based religions, minus the spirituality. Adherents (can) attend church and hear sermons on ways to be a better person, etc.
I'm not a religious humanist but they sound like they're probably decent enough people. They're quite different to my generic fediverse atheist/irreligious views, in the sense that I don't have any desire to attend congregations of people who identify as religiously ethical, but I don't harbor any strong objections to their beliefs.
Personally, I understand it more as something that might be nice for people who have left spiritual religion but still want the trappings of a place to go and be with a community of like-minded people, but that's not my experience. Ultimately, that's probably about as far as I'd be comfortable, where we have roughly equivalent spiritual views but highly divergent religious views.
I understand why this is wrong (order of operations dictates the division happens first, so it's really 25 - 1 = 24), but why is it funny? I don't mean "This isn't funny," I think I'm just missing the joke.
This is a tough question because it's like asking "What's the most forgettable game you've ever played?" I can remember some of the best and worst games I've ever played, but mediocre games are explicitly not interesting.
That said, the first one that came to mind for me was Starshot: Space Circus Fever for N64. It's just a very generic late-'90s collectathon platformer. It's hard to be mad at it, because it's not terrible or anything, there's just no reason to play it. If you've got an N64, there's Mario, Banjo, Rayman, even B- and C-tier stuff like Gex and Chameleon Twist. There's hidden gems like Space Station Silicon Valley or Rocket: Robot on Wheels.
That last one is the only reason I played Starshot, I saw it clearanced at a used game store and was like "Oh yeah, I remember hearing this game was good," but it turned out I was thinking of Rocket. That game actually is good, while Starshot is just fine.
The Penguin is the #30 show you must see before you die? Holy recency bias, Batman!