Even if it wasn’t human made, if we can do something about it and help ourselves out of it as a result, why shouldn’t we? It’s crazy that this is even an argument.
It is a trend on all governments to push public services to third parties and, as consequence, social media platforms. How many we see that have their own websites but news and updates only available on twitter or facebook? It’s insane, imho.
Doctors have to 100% respect their patient’s wishes but treatment has to be delivered in a biological sense. There’s no good reason to not point out to a patient that this or that treatment is the best course of action based on their biological make up, even if that may hurt or even offend some people. There’s no way a patient could make informed decisions about their own health otherwise. If the doctors don’t do that then they become liable for the wrong diagnoses or treatments they prescribe.
I mostly agree with the second half of your comment though. What I disagree is that people seem to be very quick to stereotype anything that doesn’t fit the narrative as supremacist and the likes. That’s not constructive at all to say the least. If we want change we need to promote change in a good and positive sense because otherwise will mean shutting that communication’s door with a lot of people.
I’ve heard something that made sense and went like: “I’ve never seen a racist person stop being racist for being called a racist”. Yes real racists must be punished for doing what they do but we can’t generalise and call everybody a racist for things they’re mostly ignorant about. They need to be informed and invited to follow a better path.
Same here. Supremacist? Is that really the correct use for the term? Ludicrous claim… People have no understanding of meaning anymore and throw around words as if to “make the most damage” is always the objective.
He’s not against the use of inclusive language, rather he’s against compelled speech. There’s no law ordering us all to use he/she/it or else but when the matter becomes “inclusive” then it is basically mandated or face consequences and somehow people are okay with that? Insane.
There were branches of the political spectrum who brought up the discussion of accountability of the Brazilian electoral system. It had to do with the fact that the only way for a recount of total votes is now 100% based on software which no common citizen can understand and/or check. How can a voting system be fair to an entire population when only a few highly skilled people can actually understand its inner workings? My opinion in this particular matter is irrelevant here but this was the topic that I said bozo’s supporters highjacked to push forth their own agenda. Which in turn ridiculed the whole thing for no gain, whatsoever.
He wasn’t smart for implying fraud, what are you talking about? He was clearly following his supporters wishes to hijack an important discussion of election accountability by making highly simplistic claims. Do you remember that? The whole thing started as a valid and important discussion which the bozo nutters made sound ridiculous and dumb. He was only a puppet for the right wingers, like what Dilma was to the left.
Sorry, the guy who didn’t know what a golden shower meant wanted to contract a hacker to hack elections?! Look, you can’t have it both ways. He’s either a dumb fuck or he’s a smart removed, not both.
131·10 months ago
291·10 months ago
169·10 months ago
4·10 months ago
12·10 months ago
Removed by mod