Total posts: 14,582
-->
@sadolite
to protect their own national security
from whom ?
Created:
-->
@sadolite
kill the people who ruin it with fraud and corruption. That's the solution.
murder might not be the ONLY solution
Top 10 Least Corrupt Countries in the World (CPI 2021)
- (tie) Denmark - 88
- (tie) Finland - 88
- (tie) New Zealand - 88
- (tie) Norway - 85
- (tie) Singapore - 85
- (tie) Sweden - 85
- Switzerland - 84
- Netherlands - 82
- Luxembourg - 81
- Germany - 80
Created:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
If children always knew when they were being harmed and reported it, they wouldn't need so much protection. They don't.
this isn't even close to being true
i personally know individuals who were quite brutally abused, and reported it to the proper authorities who promptly told them to "shut-up" and after being sexually assaulted by the police, then forcibly returned to their abusive parents
Created:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
They would claim the government has a compelling and narrow interest in preventing the abuse of children.
the government has a compelling and narrow interest in very clearly DEFINING "the abuse of children"
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
"The State" as if it's something that they are completely separate from.
POLITIA = POLITICS = POLICE
Created:
-->
@thett3
I do think this kind of thing and the numerous other stories readily available is a catastrophe and I make no apologies for opposing
(IFF) someone later regrets the consent of their younger selves (THEN) they have the option to sue those (parents and or doctors) who coerced them for "emotional trauma"
It is estimated that the number of detransitioners ranges from less than one percent to as many as five percent. [**]
it seems strange that anyone would focus on legislation for this one particular plight considering the rampant nature of far greater atrocities
Created:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Legal standing is whatever a judge says it is.
not exactly
"legal standing" is required for one party to bring a case against another
the plaintiff must make some attempt to demonstrate how the activity of the accused has harmed them in some material way
for example
chris rock has legal standing to press charges against will smith
you do NOT have legal standing to press charges against will smith (unless you have also been assaulted by will smith)
Created:
-->
@Double_R
When it comes to managing its finances we can have a reasonable discussion about how a government should operate. Your original comment was about liberal values, which is an entirely different conversation.
you seemed to suggest that competency selection is ill served by democracy
would you be in favor of screening political (and or managerial) candidates with some sort of standardized intelligence exams ?
Created:
-->
@thett3
Bad things happening to vulnerable people is something that upsets me.
do you consider scolding "child abuse" ?
do you consider unrestricted screen-time "child abuse" ?
do you consider making a cabinet of candy and chips freely available "child abuse" ?
Created:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
This is permanent mutilation before the age of maturity.
this claim is demonstrably false
Created:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
That's oversimplifying it a bit. The state does get involved when there is a very strong claim of harm to the child. That also the root claim of anti-abortion stances.
are the children claiming "harm" ?
are the parents of the children claiming "harm" ?
who has the legal standing to claim that someone unrelated to them is being harmed ?
Created:
-->
@thett3
the result is an exponential growth in the number of youth identifying as trans
and ?
exactly what manner of "catastrophe" do you suppose this will manifest ?
Created:
-->
@thett3
The claim is unsubstantiated. Professional organizations such as the Endocrine Society recommend against puberty blockers for children who have not reached puberty, and recommend that patients be at least 16 years old before beginning hormone treatments for feminization or masculinization of the body. The last step in transitioning to another gender, gender reassignment surgery, is only available to those 18 and older in the United States.
also, strangely, it would seem that this should be a private medical decision between the patient, their parents, and their doctor
if you don't want your own child to receive "hormone blockers" then, explain that to them yourself
there is no reason at all for the state to get involved with this in any way
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
a legalist is someone who believes the law needs no underlying moral principle or set of coherent values
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
Usually says on the Birth Certificate.....Which is generally in the first place.Why do we record things?Because recording things is what sets us apart from every other species, allowing us to do all manner of stuff, whilst everything else just eats and f**ks and eats.Do you think that you are not the State?
"we record information and that's why we record information"
honestly, that was a bit more informative than i expected
Created:
-->
@thett3
I pretty much agree with that. Even the concept of what “the self” is is just kind of navel gazing imo…people can do it if they want to but it’s not a requirement. It’s generally healthier for society to get people to consider less and less minute distinctions between people
perhaps you should "self"-identify as you wish
and allow other people the same courtesy
why does the state need to know what chromosomes each of us might possess ?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
ou gave me this label. I like how simply expressing an opinion on a micro subject will paint a person with a political/ideological paint roller. LOL. Ya, I am a legalist. what ever the fu
you seem to have completely missed the question mark
also, you don't seem to have any idea what a "legalist" is
Created:
-->
@thett3
because like 0.0001%
The number of births with ambiguous genitals is in the range of 0.02% to 0.05%. Other conditions involve atypical chromosomes, gonads, or hormones.
now, i know you might have some "problem" with "minorities", so it may be worth pointing out that (0.02%) is roughly, one million, five hundred and sixty thousand souls
and (0.05%) is roughly, three million, nine hundred thousand souls
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
Egg producer, sperm producer = procreative potential.
how do you propose the state "fact-check" someone's "gender" claim ?
and furthermore, why does the state even need to record "gender" in the first place ?
Created:
-->
@thett3
and it's generally incredibly obvious
only if you strip them naked
"all toupees are ugly and obvious" (this is an example of sample-bias)
because, of course, how would you spot the good ones if you only notice the ugly and obvious ones
Created:
-->
@Double_R
Because corporations and countries are two entirely different types of entities with two different sets of goals.
many conservatives complain that government should run more like a corporation
a ceo can be voted out by a board-of-directors
an elected official can be voted out by organized-moneyed-oligarchs
the key distinction is the frequency at which they can be voted out
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
Surgical contrivances maketh the person these days then?
Androgen insensitivity syndrome makes a human with XY chromosomes physically indistinguishable from XX
A woman's best reproductive years are in her 20s. Fertility gradually declines in the 30s, particularly after age 35.
Many humans will never reproduce, it doesn't make sense to categorize them based on reproductive roles
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
What do you call them?
i don't generally call them "egg producers and sperm producers"
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
The egg producer and the sperm producer.
what do you call those outside of the reproductive cycle ?
Created:
-->
@sadolite
I much prefer a Republic.
do you prefer a "Republic" model for corporate governance ?
Created:
-->
@sadolite
Because the people who run them have actual knowledge on how to run a business and make a profit.
many are charismatic con-artists
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
I can't. Despite that, If you don't want to define gender by chromosomes, find a different definition for gender. If your definition of a woman is, "a human without a penis", you would have to define a man as, "somebody with a penis". This means that trans men aren't men because they don't have penises.
perhaps you're unfamiliar with the concept of epistemological limits
Created:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
It's a cultural problem that has it's roots in government interference, but even if government interference stopped today conscious effort is required to recalibrate.
well stated
Created:
-->
@Nyxified
Trans women are women.
it's nobody's business what you look like without clothes
Free-market capitalism is inherently flawed.
free pursuit of profit always works to the advantage of those who magically create the money
Piracy is morally acceptable in some instances..
piracy is called "tax" when the pirates are wearing the proper uniforms
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Currently, the definition is, "Someone with XX chromosomes".
can you see my chromosomes ?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
In my opinion, some puddings are spiritual and some are just nice.
yep
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
Imagine getting re- married.When heaven gets awkward. ...
great point
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
spiritual: relating to or affecting the human spirit or soul as opposed to material or physical things.
would you consider "spiritual" = "brain-states"
or do you quantify "spiritual" by some other metric ?
Created:
-->
@Double_R
There’s nothing controversial here, everyone believes democracy is good. Don’t be silly.
why aren't corporations run by democratic principles ?
why can't people vote for their managers and executives ?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
I can tell you with 100% certainty that one of these is true and the other false. Undefined terms doesn't allow the laws of logic to be broken. X =/= not X, no matter what X is.
a nonsensical statement cannot be "true"
the negation of a nonsensical statement cannot be "true"
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Conservallectual
I don't get why people even want to be atheists,
i'm quite certain nobody "wants" to be an atheist
most of them are simply looking for logical-coherence
I mean there is no morality,
ethical standards are essential to human survival
no afterlife,
we will all become part of the one
no wonder,
science is amazing
no magic,
everything that is not understood seems magical
no nothing.
there is no such thing as "nothing"
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
Is a 5 month old soul the same as a 83 year old soul. ?
(IFF) one believes in heaven (THEN) going to heaven would seem to be a universal good
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
The thing that really bugs atheist more than anything is service. If what they're doing doesn't somehow benefit them they want no part of it. Since religion is about service especially service to something they can't see or feel without any actual reward for them they're not interested. And they believe whatever they think is right is moral whether it is or not. I don't believe there's any sort of line you can cross that makes something bad even though we all know there are certainly things that happened to people that are bad and they've been done to people with the intent of being bad.
do social animals perform altruistic actions ?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
A spiritual being at the very least. I don't take issue with the modification of this being as "supreme."
what is your preferred definition of "spiritual" and what is your preferred definition of "supreme" ?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
CLAIM (1) : BLINBLORT IS THE ONE AND ONLY FLORKLOPCLAIM (2) : BLINBLORT IS NOT THE ONE AND ONLY FLORKLOPI can tell you with 100% certainty that one of these is true and the other false. Undefined terms doesn't allow the laws of logic to be broken. X =/= not X, no matter what X is.
THE IMPOSSIBILITY OF YOU KNOWING WHICH ONE IS "TRUE" MAKES THE DISTINCTION MEANINGLESS
NOT ALL CLAIMS CONTAIN "TRUTH-VALUE"
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
CLAIM (1) : YHWH IS THE ONE AND ONLY GODCLAIM (2) : YHWH IS NOT THE ONE AND ONLY GODThe truth of either proves the other false, and vice versa. This is the formal definition of a logical contradiction.
both of these claims are unfalsifiable making it IMPOSSIBLE for either of them to be considered "true"
(IFF) the terms of your claim are UNDEFINED (THEN) your claim can NEVER be considered (EITHER) "true" (OR) "false"
YHWH = ???
GOD = ???
CLAIM (1) : BLINBLORT IS THE ONE AND ONLY FLORKLOPCLAIM (2) : BLINBLORT IS NOT THE ONE AND ONLY FLORKLOP
can you determine the "truth-value" of either one of these claims ?
with the information provided ?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
two contradictory statements can be false at the same timeNope. The logical definition of contradictory statements is that they have opposite truth values.
CLAIM (1) : YHWH IS THE ONE AND ONLY GOD
CLAIM (2) : AHURA MAZDA IS THE ONE AND ONLY GOD
IT IS QUITE POSSIBLE FOR BOTH CLAIMS TO BE FALSE
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
I remember a story about two ambitious yeshiva students arguing to an impasse.
They both agreed to settle their dispute by consulting a wise old rabbi.
The first student feverishly made their case to the wise old rabbi and the rabbi nodded thoughtfully and said, "you're right".
The second student, unfazed, stepped up and laid out their own argument, making sure not to skip over any critical points of doctrine, and when they had exhausted their rhetoric, the wise old rabbi nodded thoughtfully and said, "you're right".
Now the students couldn't fathom how both arguments could possibly be considered correct and implored the wise old rabbi for some sort of satisfactory explanation.
Well, it's rather simple really, the wise old rabbi began slowly, if you accept the first student's axioms, then their conclusions follow logically. And if you accept the second student's axioms, then their conclusions follow logically.
You two forgot to negotiate your axioms.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
" I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own — a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotisms.“ — Albert Einstein
well stated
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
because no two contradictory statements can be true at the same time.
two contradictory statements can be false at the same time
two contradictory statements can be true at different times
two contradictory statements can be unfalsifiable at the same time
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
You are just arguing to argue. You can live in denial of copy right and intellectual property laws all you want. I could not give a shit. "Willful ignorance is no excuse for breaking the law". That is all.
so now you're a LEGALIST ?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
which do not necessarily guarantee loyalty.
nothing guarantees loyalty
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
I would suggest that it's more a case of survival instinct. Therefore consensus isn't necessary.
SURVIVAL INSTINCT = CONSENSUS
Created: