Total posts: 3,457
-->
@Timid8967
Uhuh - and you realize the difference between using animal products when you have to and being against the idea right?
Created:
-->
@Timid8967
Um... cool. I don't care. Plus you havne't sourced your view, please substantiate a single assertion you've made
Created:
-->
@Athias
So because it generates more commerce its worth more? Uhuh - I suppose I don't have to remind you of the economic arguments for slavery, do I? Or forcibly starving people? The mere fact that doing something creates more profit means nothing in regards to its actual worth to society, please do explain how trading stocks benefits societies, I wait with bated breath.
Furthermore, an example of an out-of-context thing you took:
Furthermore, let's assume that Biden's 15 dollar an hour minimum wage passes - that's 15 dollars times an average workweek of 40 hours, multiplied by four for your gross monthly incomeThat would only create unemployment.
The point wasn't advocating for Joe's bill, the point was that even given a thing that's not true, most poor people can't generate enough wealth to pay for basic necessities. Its such an obtuse thing to get wrong, I scarcely believe that you're doing it unintentionally.
Exploitative Capitilism? Let me think - monopolizing an industry effectively eliminating any other prices for a product, not allowing workers to form worker unions, the general concept of never receiving the full worth of their labour? All of the above, and the easy answer is easy, just give 'em what they need to live for free. How do you "gauge" wealth - three questions buckaroo - "How many times over could that dude afford housing?" "How much surplus money does that dude have after paying ever basic utility?" and "how many zeroes are at the end of that check?" It's pretty easy, they do it to poor people all the time, frightened at the prospect of rich people getting it done to them?
As for the claim? "That would create unemployment", bud
Created:
-->
@Timid8967
Do you just... do no research?
"According to Forbes, most vegan leather goods are “made with polyvinyl chloride or polyurethane,” although, “vegan leathers, synthetic leathers, or leather alternatives include everything from apple peels to lab-grown spider silk.” Real leather shoes have historically been considered more durable, comfortable, and long-lasting than faux alternatives, but that’s starting to change, thanks to a few quality-focused brands."
You have no idea what you're talking about, lmao - but just to argue against your general position - being an ethical vegan means that you believe that killing animals for mere ease of use or food is bad, and that is the reason that you don't eat animal products. It doesn't necessarily mean that you don't use animal products, it means that whenever you can you don't.
Created:
-->
@Timid8967
"ethical" and "vegan" and "military" and "intelligence.." uhuh - look dude, I happen to hate the military, but they necessarily have to be intelligent, not necessarily right, but certainly intelligent. Now, please substantiate your claim.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sum1hugme
Um... first of all "sovereign masters" is extremely redundant and second of all - no. I think that they are incredibly important, but they neither have any will to impose over any other individual nor do they both have an axiomatic place in moral ethics. They have an important role yes, but I think that sentience is much more important, as well as a general idea of well-being.
Created:
-->
@Timid8967
Nope, not really.
Created:
Posted in:
RMM
No... because fat people don't have NEARLY enough mass to even noticeably affect another's gravity... but more than that, the only reason that you NOTICE gravity is because of normal force, so, even if they did, you would not notice it most likely. Furthermore, um... have you ever been in car that's driving really fast? And noticed that you weren't slamming against the seats until after the car stopped? The same thing happens with the earth, as we are all already on the earth, being affected by gravity, it doesn't suddenly reach out more and specifically grab mosquitoes. Gravity is the thing that bugs and such have to create lift to overcome in the first place... also - any gravity that mountains had would be overwhelmed by the gravity of the earth so... that's kinda a weird point to make.
Finally, no... you are aware of the atmosphere right, and the vastness of space? there is literally an entirely new measure of distance (dealing specifically with how far light can travel) for space, because that's how far things are out in space, and anything that does get by is usually burnt up by the atmosphere... if anything did get through, well, we wouldn't be able to talk anymore cause it'd most likely be an extinction event. Most of this is just an argument from incredulity... which is sad, because I know most of this stuff has been explained to you countless times with no rebuttals on your end.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sum1hugme
Mostly synonymous with consciousness - boiled down to an ability to feel on pain, and aware of themself.
Created:
-->
@Athias
Umm... a lot of these responses are irrelevant and in response to snippets that are out of context - or at the very least your response is framed as a response to something which the quoted portion is not trying to establish. You've also made some claims... um, prove it, and lastly - yes - we should declare what is "enough" - certainly we should, and we should certainly fight back against exploitative capitalism being described as income that someone "deserved".
Tell me, why is trading stocks worth more than teaching young people? Or surgery or things that actually benefit society? Such a thing is quite arbitrary, and the mere fact that someone is wealthy does not mean that they "earned" that wealth.
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
Here is what your second, and much more authoritative source, says on this issue:
In reviewing the neuroanatomical and physiological evidence in the fetus, it was apparent thatconnections from the periphery to the cortex are not intact before 24 weeks of gestation and,as most neuroscientists believe that the cortex is necessary for pain perception, it can beconcluded that the fetus cannot experience pain in any sense prior to this gestation. After 24weeks there is continuing development and elaboration of intracortical networks such thatnoxious stimuli in newborn preterm infants produce cortical responses. Such connections tothe cortex are necessary for pain experience but not sufficient, as experience of external stimulirequires consciousness. Furthermore, there is increasing evidence that the fetus neverexperiences a state of true wakefulness in utero and is kept, by the presence of its chemicalenvironment, in a continuous sleep-like unconsciousness or sedation. This state can suppresshigher cortical activation in the presence of intrusive external stimuli. This observationhighlights the important differences between fetal and neonatal life and the difficulties ofextrapolating from observations made in newborn preterm infants to the fetus.
So.... yeah - please take that in.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sum1hugme
I 'suppose? I'm not familiar with the term - I've outlined my moral theory a lot here.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
Yup... ever read Revalations without choking on the irony?
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
Er.. sorry it's a "can't load page"
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
The full link sends me to the search bar... which -cool- but ya know an actual study would be nice, and the link sends me to "Cannot load page"
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sum1hugme
It depends on which theory of ethics your' talking about - the closest thing to mine would probably be humanism, but its probably more descriptive as "sentience-ism" or essentially two axioms. that anything with sentience has moral value - and - that we ought maximize moral value/good/etc, and reduce bad/things that would detract from moral value.
From that framework, each thing with moral value has a plethora of rights that would defend against another creature trying to violate that value - we ought not kill x because x is morally valuable. Along those rights are ones to not having their minds or bodies exploited (only separated for pragmatics), hurting them, psychologically or physiologically, would detract from that moral good, that pleasure, etc.
Consent is a key component in performing acts that psychologically and physiologically change people.
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
What? You've interpreted that code to mean pre-natal, but obviously, it's not murder, ya know, cause its legal. It literally can't be murder if it's legal to kill a thing - and that's accepting that thing has personhood - which I disagree with.
And consciousness has been the entire point, a fetus has no consciousness, which is literally the root of all moral and ethical value.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
Ya know? The rapture and all? We've had a single, very straightforward conversation. IF you forgot what that conversation is, literally just go back and read 'em..
Created:
-->
@Reece101
Same thing. I am an ethical vegan.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
No.... see - I know what I'm referring to because I said the thing - you can pretend you know what I mean when I say things but unless you can demonstrate that all you have is assertions. Jesus quite literally means that he'll come back and raise up the Christians - you can switch it up all you like, but I haven't stalled once. You've been disingenuous, there is a difference bud.
Created:
-->
@Safalcon7
That's the point bud. It can't provide consent.
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
And yet - fetuses cant even do that- my point is that regardless of your consciousness being used or not you still have one - and you grabbing onto an inconsequential example- doesn't change that fact.
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
You don't seem to understand - personhood is a thing that you either have or don't have - and literally, every single person whose developed past gestation has personhood - because ya know - that's the entire point of gestation - developing.
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
That's.... dumb - no you still have a consciousness and a capability to think - you do know that dreams exist right - the fact that they aren't being used externally does not mean that they don't exist.
It'd be like saying you have no voice while you aren't talking... well, yeah, you do have one- you just aren't using it.
Created:
-->
@Safalcon7
No - I wouldn't say its right. Before you start, don't think its necessarily wrong - I think any sexual activity with any individual without consent is morally abhorrent. Dead things can't give consent..... so - yeah. However, the reason for that is each individual's right to sovereignty over their body, as well as obligating to not do harm to others.
So - on one hand - its very bad - but the reasons that the thing is bad aren't a thing - so - its not abhorrent, just not good. I wouldn't call it neutral either though.
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
Um... I said that all abortions that occur less than 20 weeks aren't ethically a problem, because they aren't people with consciousness, furthermore, yeah - not a lot of abortions happen after 13 weeks much less 20 weeks.
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
You do know that a termination of pregnancy includes a cee-section right? "Or removal" and - there is more than enough technology to support an aborted fetus that is born after 20 weeks. No, you're just wrong.
Created:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Hm... probably, when I took computer science there was a lot about trademark and copy right laws - because a lot of computer science is design and coding, so you do have to have a degree of copyright and trademark law known.
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
Abortion after 20 weeks is a cee-section, did you forget?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
First of all, it obviously isn't a quote - if it were a quote then it'd be in quotation marks, second of all - um... again - do you have any several thousand year old guys - because practically speaking it doens't matter if "some" of them would taste death, that means some of them wouldn't, therefore meaning that some of them would live, its quite apparent there.
And no - I am not talking about Mathews, I'm talking about revelations - Revalations 1:7 - "Behold, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him, and all tribes of the earth will wail on account of him. Even so. Amen."
So... yeah, its pretty hard to misinterpret that bud.
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
Consciousness, an ability to process pain (mental and physical) - that's the difference - during gestation fetus aren't "people", not in any manner that matters. I apologize if it upsets your sensibilities, but the fact is there.
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
No - most people do not- a very large majority of people are living in poverty - furthermore - yes - taxes is taking money, because they don't need that money. And you agreed to my comparison, if you believe that teachers ought to read out the test to dyslexic people, then you agree poor people should have a reduced taxes.
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
Because a fetus aren't people - that's pretty easy. Doesn't change the fact that these things are a right.
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
No - this entire this is a false equivalence - we are not "tearing down the rich" it would be more akin to allowing people with dyslexia or who have trouble reading English in general to have someone to read tests to them - would you consider allowing them that and "robbing" the other children of that privllege tearing them down? No - it happens that in order for those students to be able to demonstrate their academic progress at the same rate as their peers they need more attention.
I am arguing that taxing poor and rich people the same rate is fundamentally flawed, just as testing people with dyslexia and people without it the same is flawed - and the only way for the tax rate to keep up and support the infrastructure is to increase the taxes on the rich - they make more than enough money to succeed - they don't need the translator.
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
And here you are isolating my statements from their context - represent them honestly and you'll get a response - here - I'll start it for you:
It worked for the people of ancient Israel and it would work for people living here.Makes me want to laugh at you - I am being serious- if you are claiming that SERIOUSLY - it'd be like saying: "Women were casually raped in the past, and them being casually raped now is just fine." The fact that something happened in the past and you thought it "worked" is by no means evidence that it would work ethically today - nor do I even think it is ethical then.
Yet you tried to represent the text as if I had said that people being raped wasn't covered by your laws - I was talking about how your justification regarding how it "worked" in the past is a fallacy. There's your freebie, correct the rest yourself - because I don't like dealing with people who are dishonest
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Reece101
Hey don't judge my edge, I just like dystopian, lmao
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Don't be an asshole.... that's pretty much it.
Created:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
A lot of computer science is problem-solving, so honestly, I would not be surprised if it did.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Gender Dysphoria is always "acquired" just as every state of mind is - gender dysphoria and gender identity do not correlate - transgender people and gender dysphoria do not correlate. Furthermore "studies do suggest this" - okay then! Link the studies! Don't just claim that studies prove x or y without actually providing the studies. Again - there is no modern proliferation, it is the fact that now the social environment is more receptive to trans people, and therefore more trans people will feel comfortable coming out.
There are reportedly 200,000 people who are trans in the UK, in contrast, in the US there are 1,400,000 (mind you - the US number is from 2016, and the UK number is from 2020), the population of the US is 328.2 million, compared to 66.65 million - so we get a for every five Americans there's one UK citizen - so we would expect for the number of trans individuals to be closer to 300,000 in UK, why are they underrepresented then? It's very easy to know why - and the numbers being fairly close here actually make sense:
"A recent YouGov poll for PinkNews showed that by 50% to 27% Britons believe that people should be allowed to self-identify as a gender different to the one they were assigned at birth. While still a commanding lead, this figure is a slight decline since 2019 (56% to 23%"
"More than six in ten (62%) Americans say they have become more supportive toward transgender rights compared to their views five years ago. By contrast, about one-quarter (25%) say their views are more opposed compared to five years ago."
As I said, the reception to trans people often has causes on the amount of trans people who feel comfortable to come out - the same thing happened with gay people, with bi people, literally any sexual minoirty that would be burned at stake.
Also... what? Treating the effects? Have you actually been paying attention - the cause of gender dysphoria is someone's body not matching their gender identity.... so you change the body using hormones, just like you would in a case of depression - and I've already said this.
"To answer that question - we do.... do you not know how transitioning works? The physical body is at fault, just like in a case of depression, so we use hormones to correct said physical body, it's not that hard to follow." [Post #30]
But just like most of that response, you ignored it.
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
By the way - this has been the case since 1948 - please do at least cursory research before making a claim like that.
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
Um... because you need those things to live. Yeah - that's a pretty simple thing.
Also - Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights would disagree with you there bud:
"Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control."
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
I mean... that's cool - I don't agree. Like, obviously the minimum wage wasn't made with the idea of supporting people in mind - but I fundamentally think that enough income to afford basic utilities like shelter, water, food, etc, is a human right - not a privilege.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
Nah, Jesus said he's be back and the rapture would happen. I mean... you can insert your fanfiction in, but that doesn't change the original text
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
I'd have to disagree there. He said he'd be back before the end of his apostle's lives.... and well, unless you know, like, some 2000 year old dudes?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Funny thing is that you didn't engage with my arguments - and I suppose I've come to accept that - you don't really want to facilitate conversation - you want to waste time and endlessly argue semantics. Have fun with that
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
To clear up -NO - gender identity does not have two different definitions - there are different ways of describing the same thing... ya know for example like: The boots of shiny midnight, and the black boots - you can describe something in multiple ways and be referring to the same thing - there is also a difference between someone identifies their gender identity and what it is fundamentally - it seems to me that you really just want to summon as many misinterpretations as you possible can. This kinda shit is why I don't take you seriously.
And your whole "predetermined is the same as inherent" yeah - that shows me you know about as much about this as you do pedophilia, that is to say almost nothing. Predetermined and inherent mean two very different things - for something to be predetermined, it is to be decided BEFORE its occurrence, for something to be inherent it must be foundationally true in order for another thing to be true, for example, the game console known as the xbox is inherently an electronic. In contrast, something being predetermined would be like... if a god existed and had already decided who would and wouldn't go to heaven - those two things mean VERY VERY different things, and you just hand waving it away really shows that you really don't want to engage with my arguments, just repeat yourself.
To answer that question - we do.... do you not know how transitioning works? The physical body is at fault, just like in a case of depression, so we use hormones to correct said physical body, it's not that hard to follow. Yes - psyche doesn't work that way your right - however pedophilia is actually HARMFUL TO OTHERS - because children cannot give consent that would not be coerced, nor are they actually physically mature enough to have any sort of physical relations with any adult - to compare the two is a fallacy of equivocation.
To say that gender identity is "acquired" is like saying that eyes are acquired, in a manner of speaking your correct, but then every biological component of an individual is acquired, its not a useful distinction - and quite right you are - that is my entire point - chromosomal sex and gender identity are two different things that sometimes happen to correlate.
All I see here is you trying to make "gotcha's" without actually reading my responses because I repeat myself here- nor did you actually respond to the last point - because you apparently realize that you were being disingenuous.
This last part is the only one you could say I haven't answered, but you know - I don't figure you actually care."And out of interest...... Do you think that environmental factors could affect hormone production/balance?.....Certainly a factor that might influence the modern proliferation of transsexualism and it's associated dysphoria."There is no modern "proliferation" it happens that now trans people receive fewer death threats and orders to burn on a stake than they used to - same as gay people - it just happens that society is now much more open and accepting than it used to be. Your entire question is based on a praxis that isn't correct, nor is it well reasoned, certainly, there are environmental factors that affect dysphoria, but hormone levels, that is to a much lesser extent. Gender Dysphoria is not necessarily associated with "transsexualism" and the sooner you realize that the better.
So - a deal then - you actually engage with what I'm saying, actually substantiate yourself, or - no more substantive responses, because you are wasting my time.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
So... in other words - you don't think that there should be one word for two different things? I mean cool - whatever - but that doesn't change the fact that "mouse" does describe both a rodent and a remote controller to your cursor, calling that device a "mouse' is specific. The letters themselves are meaningless its all about the intent behind the words, so yes, I am being exact in my wording whether you like it or not.
Furthermore, the fact that we find new evidence that convinces us to change our mind does not mean that these things are not facts. Are you seriously so insistent on these things that you don't realize that we learn new things as we explore the natural world? Its fallacy after fallacy with you, the fact that we have learned new evidence and changed our mind accordingly does not mean that these facts are being "modified" in a bad way, it means we're intellectually honest.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
Um... no - the fact is that there are different definitions of theory - there's the layman's term - your - and then there the scientific and academic definition. Simple as that.
Created: