Does your politics matter on a dating app? Love should be about discovery
While it's been around for a few years, the trend appears to have solidified with the victory of Zohran Mamdani in the Democratic primary ahead of the New York City mayoral election later this year. In Mamdani's story about meeting his wife on a dating app, many see hope of finding their own perfect matches. This practical approach to relationships, with the elimination of an entire area of potential conflict, may seem admirable, especially in these polarised times. But does it offer any room for the spontaneous combustion known as love?
Because no matter how many heartbreaks it might cause, friction is essential if sparks are to fly. And while the good common sense of laying out the terms and conditions of a relationship right at the outset is undeniable, so is the fact that love is a journey of acceptance and discovery. It is neither a contract to be signed, nor a checklist to be filled. As William Faulkner once wrote, love happens 'despite', not 'because'. It unfolds in bits and pieces, in arguments and conversations. This age-old process may lead to a broken heart or two, some unmet expectations and dashed illusions. But when a clash of wills results in a meeting of minds and hearts, it is a price well worth paying.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Trump's EPA targets key health ruling underpinning all US greenhouse gas rules
Washington: The Trump administration said on Tuesday it will rescind the long-standing finding that greenhouse gas emissions endanger human health, removing the legal foundation for all U.S. greenhouse gas regulations. If finalized, the repeal would end current limits on greenhouse gas pollution from vehicle tailpipes, power plants, smokestacks and other sources, and hamper future U.S. efforts to combat global warming. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin announced the agency's plan to rescind the "endangerment finding" at an event at a car dealership in Indiana, alongside Energy Secretary Chris Wright, and called it the largest deregulatory action in U.S. history. The proposal, which needs to undergo a public comment period, would cut $54 billion in costs annually through the repeal of all greenhouse gas standards, including the vehicle tailpipe standard, he said. Under President Joe Biden, the EPA said the tailpipe rules through 2032 would avoid more than 7 billion tons of carbon emissions as it prodded automakers to build more EVs and provide nearly $100 billion of annual net benefits to society including $62 billion in reduced fuel costs, and maintenance and repair costs for drivers. Environmental groups blasted the move, saying it spells the end of the road for U.S. action against climate change, even as the impacts of global warming become more severe. "With today's announcement, the EPA is telling us in no uncertain terms that U.S. efforts to address climate change are over. For the industries that contribute most to climate change, the message is 'pollute more.' For everyone feeling the pain of climate disasters, the message is 'you're on our own,'" said Abigail Dillen, president of Earthjustice. The move is expected to trigger legal challenges, according to several environmental groups, states and lawyers. Zeldin said a 2024 Supreme Court decision that reduced the power of federal agencies to interpret the laws they administer, known as the Chevron deference, means that the EPA does not have the ability to regulate greenhouse gases. "We do not have that power on our own to decide as an agency that we are going to combat global climate change because we give ourselves that power," Zeldin said. He added that if Congress decides it wants to amend the federal Clean Air Act to explicitly state the U.S. should regulate carbon dioxide, methane and other planet-warming gases, the EPA would follow its lead. SHAKING THE FOUNDATION The endangerment finding's roots date back to 2009, when the EPA under former Democratic President Barack Obama issued a finding that emissions from new motor vehicles contribute to pollution and endanger public health and welfare. That assessment followed a 2007 U.S. Supreme Court decision in its landmark Massachusetts v. EPA case that said the EPA has the authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gas emissions and required the agency to make a scientific finding on whether those emissions endanger public health. The endangerment finding was upheld in several legal challenges and underpinned subsequent greenhouse gas regulations, ranging from tailpipe standards for vehicles, carbon dioxide standards for aircraft, and methane standards for oil and gas operations. Zeldin and Wright challenged the global scientific consensus on climate change that global warming and its impacts have since been unfolding faster than expected and that policymakers need to step up action to curb global greenhouse gas emissions. They also contradict the advisory opinion issued last week by the International Court of Justice, which said failure by governments to reduce emissions could be an internationally wrongful act, and found that treaties such as the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change should be considered legally binding. The administration has already dismissed all authors of the U.S. National Climate Assessment, which detailed climate change impacts across the country. "Now the public is open to engage in a thoughtful dialogue about what is climate change? It is a real physical phenomenon. It's worthy of study. It's worthy of even some action, but what we have done instead is nothing related to the actual science of climate change or pragmatic ways to make progress," Wright said. Zeldin said on a podcast earlier Tuesday that the endangerment finding never acknowledged "any benefit or need for carbon dioxide." Industry reaction was limited on Tuesday, with some trade groups weighing in and some companies remaining quiet. American Trucking Associations welcomed the announcement, saying that Biden-era vehicle emissions standards "put the trucking industry on a path to economic ruin and would have crippled our supply chain," said its president, Chris Spear. Ford said in a statement that Biden-created tailpipe standards did "not align with the market," and America needs "a single, stable standard to foster business planning." "The standard should align with science and customer choice, reduce carbon emissions by getting more stringent over time, and grow American manufacturing," Ford said. Other automakers Toyota, GM, Stellantis declined to comment. Marty Durbin, president of the Global Energy Institute at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, said it welcomed the administration's focus on affordable energy but said it is still weighing the proposal. "While we did not call for this proposal, we are reviewing it and will consult with members so we can provide constructive feedback to the agency," he said.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
US Senate Democrats to investigate Kennedy's firing of vaccine expert panel
Washington: Democrats on the U.S. Senate's health committee launched an investigation on Tuesday into Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. 's firing of all members of a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention panel of vaccine experts. Kennedy last month fired the 17 members of the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, which reviews vaccines approved by the Food and Drug Administration before making recommendations to the CDC on their use. Kennedy replaced them with hand-picked advisers including anti-vaccine activists . "The harm your actions will cause is significant. As your new ACIP makes recommendations based on pseudoscience, fewer and fewer Americans will have access to fewer and fewer vaccines," Democrats on the Senate's Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee wrote to Kennedy in a letter reviewed by Reuters. A spokesperson for Senator Bernie Sanders said committee Democrats launched the investigation after Senator Bill Cassidy, the committee's Republican chairman, denied his call for a bipartisan investigation. Cassidy's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Democrats requested Kennedy provide information on the firings by August 12, including details of the alleged conflict of interest for each fired member and note how they differ from ones they previously disclosed. Kennedy said at the time that he fired the committee because it was rife with conflicts, but provided no specific evidence of conflicts among any departing members. They requested that Kennedy outline everyone involved in the firing decision within and out of government, asking about the role played by specific individuals, including Lyn Redwood, the former leader of an anti-vaccine group founded by Kennedy. Redwood led a presentation at the newly constituted ACIP's first meeting. The Democratic senators asked who approved the meeting agenda and who selected Redwood as presenter. They asked for all communications and documents on the appointment of the new members, including selection criteria, the vetting process, and proof they complied with government ethics requirements. "As you give a platform to conspiracy theorists, and even promote their theories yourself, Americans will continue to lose confidence in whatever vaccines are still available," the senators wrote. Kennedy said the firings were to restore public confidence in vaccines. "Millions more lives are at risk from vaccine-preventable diseases if you continue to undermine vaccine access
Time of India
5 hours ago
- Time of India
Fiercest Senate Clash Between Democrats As Klobuchar Slams Booker's Protest
/ Jul 30, 2025, 08:37AM IST Tensions exploded on the Senate floor in one of the most dramatic Democratic showdowns. Senator Amy Klobuchar forcefully condemned Senator Cory Booker's protest tactics, accusing him of undermining national unity during a high-stakes debate. With pointed words and unwavering tone, Klobuchar sparked a fiery confrontation. Booker fired back with a blistering, impassioned response, defending his stance and challenging Klobuchar's leadership in a rare, public intra-party clash.
