argument
stringlengths 55
36k
| conclusion
stringlengths 8
1.16k
| id
stringlengths 36
36
|
|---|---|---|
Twain makes use of the device of the unreliable narrator. That is, we're not supposed to merely take Finn's language at face value, but judge it in context of how it's presented.
| The use of racially derogatory language in Huckleberry Finn has largely been regarded as satirical Bowdlerizing that is, creating a "sanitized" version misses the nuance of this language.
| 24153544-3add-4bf5-a150-728bade9ab12 |
There is a large power imbalance between sex workers and police, as the former are generally held to be immoral and/or irresponsible by general societal values.
| When sex work is illegal, sex workers are particularly vulnerable to abuse by law enforcement.
| 95fb9bdb-277c-421c-87c2-7f8c19588567 |
I feel as if the attitude toward truly heinous crimes and reprehensible behavior has gone past it's respectable limits and negatively affects society as a whole. From bullying, to murder and rape there are many people who feel these things are not redeemable, and the pertrators should be perpetually punished for what they did. The punishment isn't entirely through a legal system and may be an offhand remark or an entire video dragging a person through the mud. I find this troubling for the following reasons 1 we shouldn't assume wether a person has changed or not. We should let thier actions words as appropriate to the intial infraction dictate alone wether they have changed. In the case of celebrities, such as Micheal Vick who was guilty of multiple instances of animal abuse, it is exetremely hard to tell if they are genuinely changed. This is because of our view as the public and their position of being in the public eye. So it makes sense to reserve public judgment of the person in question. The question we should ask is 'is it likely they would do the same thing again?' I am not saying that we shouldn't have contempt for their actions, I am saying that unless you have proof for one side or the other you should not come out publicly against them. 2 if the person has truly changed there is no reason to continue to punish them for thier past transgressions. This is a lesser eye for an eye mentality that serves no one in a positive way. I am not condoning any terrible transgression. I just see no value in continuing to punish people that have changed. If we do this then the only recourse is to remove them entirely from society death, indefinite prison, deportation . In which case a whole slew of other problems arise, that are not beneficial to society.
| I believe people can change and that we should reserve judgement on them until they show signs of change or stagnation.
| b4459134-ea83-40f6-b275-7f04f4697cb7 |
Have you ever heard the saying there's nothing gayer than wearing another man's shirt ? Amen to it. I have a dim opinion of those who walk about town wearing the identifiable jersey of a sporting team on the sole authority that they're a fan. These things will have a player's name and on the back First of all, just aestetically don't be a fanboi is a great ProLifeTip that I sincerely urge to y'all Second, the notion of a sports club selling these things to all comers trivialises the significance of those who've actually earned them. To earn a New Zealand All Blacks jersey takes years of junior rugby, representative play, provincial competition and excellence amongst ones peers. Many come and few are chosen, which somewhat explains why they are the repeat world champions. As it is a crime to wear police insignia and in certain contexts to mix military issued clothing with civilian attire is a breach of discipline, I have always found it declasse to be a fanboi wearing team branded sports attire.
| Fans should never wear the jersey of a pro or college sports team if they've never had the honour of being selected to play for that team
| 6b779aa2-0d4b-4869-86ef-ce5d5c55c2f3 |
At 50km, atmospheric pressure is roughly equivalent to Earth's at sea level. Floating cities would be much easier to sustain than domes on Mars, as a leak would not result in explosive decompression as it would be likely to on Mars.
| Venus is more Earth-like than Mars in many important ways.
| 197d0855-9c66-4b26-8eca-02f13e00a6f0 |
Sports such as MMA, wrestling or boxing could be potentially more dangerous than American football and are not banned.
| People should be able to allowed to consent into dangerous activities.
| 3e192514-453d-4a15-a9a3-cdbc5256f8b6 |
Human Rights Watch HRW concluded in a US report that the lack of policies supporting LGBTQ+ students leads to pupils nationwide experiencing bullying, abuse, exclusion and discrimination by other students and, in some instances, by school staff.
| Gender and sexuality based bullying is widespread within schools. It is therefore necessary that they tackle this issue directly via comprehensive sex education.
| a6af7337-5739-43bd-937e-925322aceec4 |
EDIT Thank you everyone for your input and perspective I understand this side better now, and Nujabes is pretty darn awesome. Upvotes all around I've been listening to Nujabes for a couple of days straight now, thinking he must have been a musical genius to come up with such amazing melodies. Turns out, he sampled a ton of his stuff. It also turns out that sampling is the way DJs and producers make their music yea, I'm new to this stuff, sorry . I have been enjoying just about every one of his works. Now that I found out it isn't all his work, I can't help but feel that it isn't all that amazing, and neither was he. After all, other people wrote these GREAT melodies, and all he did was put a beat to it. Thus, even though it doesn't sound bad, it really devalues the work that he released. The actual composers should be the ones praised if the praise is for melody . My reasoning doesn't completely make sense to me, and I still want to enjoy this music. Please .
| Sampling music in hip hop for example diminishes the worth of the finished piece.
| 1b682144-9980-4ddc-8319-b6dbe6e7e94d |
There are numerous issues an individual faces through life. Subjecting a new life to them by giving it existence despite having knowledge of those problems is a selfish act.
| Life will always be sad and painful. It is selfish to put children through that.
| e0719b08-89f1-49a5-a5d2-233d72120d4b |
Hi everyone, this is my first post in . I love the discussions that take place here and wanted to join in with an idea that's been in the back of my mind lately. I think alcohol in sporting events is a bad idea because of the people around them who are not consuming alcohol. People pay good money for their seats, and should not have to be bothered by people that have had too many beers. I also think of children in the stands who are there because they love the game. My experience doesn't apply to all, but I loved going to the ballpark to see the players who followed their dreams and are doing what every kid my age wanted to do. However, it sucked when obscenities were shouted at those players by people next to me who had had too much to drink. Many times, my dad who does not drink alcohol at sporting events would be berated and on one occasion, even fought just because he would wear a jersey for the opposing team. Sure, those things I just said would likely still happen without alcohol in the stands, but I believe alcohol fosters a lot of it. This idea was obviously sparked by the 10 cent beer game in Cleveland in the 1970s. If any of you are unfamiliar with it, read about it here Although this is an extreme case that does not happen often, I think it is a great example of what too much alcohol in one stadium can do. A more recent example would be the attack of Bryan Stow outside of Dodgers Stadium, in which alcohol was involved I would love to hear a different perspective from you on this. I understand that drinking alcohol and watching sports go hand in hand, as well as alcohol company sponsorships help make the sports leagues money, but that is not grounds for keeping it to me. Please .
| I think alcohol should not be sold at sporting events
| c13f9032-7477-4845-adee-49dff3e207ac |
The dropping of the bomb clearly indicated the military power and resolve of the US to the Soviet Union .
| The display of force helped the U.S. position itself for the approaching Cold War.
| 21492476-eb15-4a4b-8f5d-4a6cb614e4e9 |
As you probably know, professional athletes can be paid up to about 100 million in a year Information taken from Forbes , and I believe that is is way too much. Yes, they do provide entertainment for millions of people, but you could live without it. In contrast, teachers, who are super necessary to society, can barely live off of what they are paid An average of about 36,141 a year, averaged from the 2012 13 year . Teachers should in a perfect world should be paid about the same as a real world pro athlete is, but that truly isn't possible. I'm sorry if I went off on a tangent there, but I can provide clarification should you ask for it. tl dr Pro athletes are paid way too much for what they do.
| Professional athletes should be paid far less than they are
| 69d94f1b-471d-43cf-bdb3-c1294930028f |
When I'm watching a pro basketball game I feel like it's lacking a lot of elements of the game you see in NCAA and under. It feels more like a score fest than a balanced game of offense and defense. In college you'll see a lot of ball movement while the offense looks for a good look at a shot or a lane to drive the ball. In the NBA teams often quickly get the ball to a player who is too large and dominant to guard where he'll dunk or make an easy lay up. There's nothing wrong with this but I just don't find it entertaining as a sport. I think that professional basketball players are so physically and skillfully dominant that defense can never match offense and the game itself is compromised. gt Hello, users of This is a footnote from your moderators. We'd just like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please remember to read through our rules If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than just downvote it. Speaking of which, downvotes don't change views If you are thinking about submitting a yourself, please have a look through our popular topics wiki first. Any questions or concerns? Feel free to message us Happy ing
| I feel like players in the NBA are so good that games just aren't fun to watch.
| 62f270dd-77c2-48c1-bcbf-d2a871a8f8a0 |
Honesty is one of the core values that successful relationships, no matter the type, are built upon. Out of honestly stems trust, reliability, and relationship longevity. Regardless, the decision to cheat in the first place is a clear sign of an immature and poorly developed relationship.
| In an exclusive relationship, should you reveal a one-night stand to your partner?
| c9002fb7-f404-44ac-99bb-c0407f76cb17 |
Excluding the Afghan war, since many view that invading Afghanistan was the right thing to do, Bush invaded Iraq in his 2nd term destroying the country and destabilizing the region. He also initiated the surveillance program that just keeps on growing. There are also strong arguments that ISIS would not have come to be if the US did not invade Iraq. Not that the middle east is not marred with its own issues but I have no evidence indicating that the proverbial sh t would have hit the fan just as badly if the Iraq war didn't happen. Trump mentioned about grabbing em by the . More importantly, Trump armed the Saudis who with those weapons are destroying Yemen. Trump is also being as anti environment as possible at a time when nuclear annihilation and climate change are the biggest risk factors to keeping the planet habitable for humans as we know it. However corrupt the reason behind Trump's attempt towards normalizing the US Russia relation may be, I believe it is a good thing as these are the two superpowers armed with nukes.
| I believe between Trump and George W. Bush, Bush is far worse.
| 94fa3e61-c8cc-40af-bc58-dd1c14f00068 |
The goods and services we consume are made possible by the abundance of cheap resources and labour that the west gets out of underdeveloped countries. The West has no reason to aid or allow the development of these poorer countries, since that would disrupt the ability to acquire cheap resources, thus diminishing the economic superiority of the west. All in all, people in the west's lives can only be good because people's lives in poor nations are bad . With the current infrastructure on earth, it is only possible to make the west happy, not everyone.
| For the west to enjoy the lifestyle it does, subjugation of third world countries is necessary.
| e47978bd-5dae-446f-a181-a943a7541776 |
For example If a man ends up getting a female pregnant but does not want to deal with the kid when it is born and makes the poor decision of trying to kill it without killing the mother and succeeds, he should NOT be charged with murder if that happens during the time that the female can get an abortion legally. He should still get charged for some form of crime, but not murder. If the female can kill the fetus legally during this time, why should he be charged with murder? I hold this view because I think it is wrong for one person to be charged with that serious of a crime that is completely legal for someone else to do. It is ridiculous that if a woman is on her way to the abortion clinic, but someone else kills the fetus first, that person can get charged for murder of the fetus and the woman wouldn't have any consequences.
| I believe a person should NOT be charged with murder if they kill a fetus, but have the mother survive, during the time which abortion is legal.
| f377aecc-9231-4126-abac-a457a1fbe5f3 |
"Is the two-state solution in danger?". Haaretz. May 21, 2009: "The left in Israel has long warned that if settlement construction continues and Israel does not separate from the Palestinians, the country will eventually slide into an apartheid-like reality in which a Jewish minority rules over an Arab majority. The result, they contend: the end of a democratic, Jewish state."
| One-state would see Israeli minority ruling over Palestinian majority
| 1718b1e6-ebb8-4daf-9b4f-d25851fd2f70 |
According to a study, dog owners are about twice as likely as cat owners to report being very happy.
| The bond between dogs and humans is far stronger than the one between cats and humans.
| 27c1025d-9f0e-473a-b264-7e776b997340 |
The aftermath of the war has been to create an entire people with no reason to love the West and more than100,000 reasons to hate it as a result of an estimated 105-115000 dead.i The country is teetering on the brink of civil war, with the leader of the sunni block having said Iraq is heading towards a “sectarian autocracy that carries with it the threat of devastating civil war”ii unemployment is rife and the reputation of the ‘liberators’ lies in tattersiii. It is not hard to see how this combination is likely to lead to chaos in Iraq and insecurity for the West. Millions of young people with a perfectly justifiable grudge, little education, no job and a desire to do something to make things right.iv It is difficult to imagine a situation more likely to produce violence, terrorism and instability. i Iraq Body Count ii Loney, Jim, ‘Iraq on the brink of ‘devastating civil war’: Former PM Allawi’, National Post, 28 December 2011 iii Malou Innocent. “The Iraq War: Still a Massive Mistake.” Christian Science Monitor. 5 April 2010. iv Benmelech, Efraim et al., ‘Economic Conditions and the Quality of Suicide Terrorism’, Journal of Politics, Vol. 74, No. 1, January 2012, pp. 113-128
| An entire generation has been turned against the West and fundamentalist clerics have gained enormously in influence
| 6379f9c1-be56-40ca-8512-82792d22253b |
"Canada's energy industry. Tarred with the same brush." The Economist. Aug 5th 2010: "'A GOOD neighbour lends you a cup of sugar,' read an ad in the Washington Post last month. 'A great neighbour supplies you with 1.4 million barrels of oil a day.' Ed Stelmach, the premier of the energy-rich province of Alberta, certainly knows how to make the case for Canadian petroleum. Buying from Canada neither props up an authoritarian regime nor exposes the United States to political manipulation of its energy supply. Little wonder, then, that Canada is the biggest exporter of oil to America, with 22% of the total. The runners-up, Mexico, Saudi Arabia and Venezuela, have just 11-12% each. And the country’s potential seems limitless: Canada’s 179 billion barrels of oil and gas reserves rank second in the world."
| Better to import oil from Canadian sands than from corrupt regimes
| b5bab295-f340-4e61-b7c0-ea4b0dad8dbd |
If the country preparing for war isn't fully prepared yet, their defences will be vulnerable to penetrating attacks.
| Preventive wars can be won faster compared to waiting for an attack in the defensive.
| ed65b1c3-abf0-4efe-92f8-35e2346e772d |
Even without knowing a dish the non-meat eating traveler can be sure there is no meat in it when he / she does not understand the menu.
| An end to meat as food product makes it easier for non-meat eaters to travel.
| fadd7061-38f1-4dfc-934d-af107da78786 |
So after the recent 'feminism vs tropes' debacle, I recently started researching the more modern feminism movement. Now previously I would have called myself a feminist And by the dictionary definition, still am , and my initial ideas on the movement include personal heroes like the suffragettes movement, or even FEMEN in the middle east While I disagree with the way they are doing things, what they are trying to do is highly respected by myself . However issues like donglegate led me look further into the movement. Now my research started with anti feminist areas of note, MRA's, etc etc. While the movement itself has issues Ironically the same issues I later uncovered with Feminism. , I felt this was important in order to successfully build up a counter argument. When researching an area it's generally a good idea to build up opposing points of view, which then you can bring in a discussion. After you bring these up hopefully they will be countered, and you can make an equal opinion. Sadly this never happened, and even the more moderate feminist websites and ideals are straying far from equality or even empowerment of women in general, hurting both men and those they claim to aid. 1 There is no room for discourse. My main issue with this movement was the lack of space for discourse. I am a strong believer in the scientific method. You present your case, people present their opposing views, and the stronger argument gets taken more seriously. This is how theories like the big bang and evolution became the water tight staples of science. A devil's advocate is worth 20 echo chambers if you are interesting in making a solid argument that can stand up on its own. However, nowhere in the feminist world r feminism, femspire, etc etc is there a place for such important discussion. In fact this post was originally posted and deleted from r AskFeminists where supposedly all questions and view points are welcome Rather than attempting to combat my arguments, much like North Korea and the creationism movement, they instead seemed to be more focused on silencing them. The learning experience I was hoping to gain never appeared. Even when searching online, I couldn't find a single feminist debate that didn't devolve into claims of sexism and other name calling. 2 Their actions are hurting having actual meaningful talks about rape and other issues. Rape is a serious issue, along with DV. However throwing around false statistics like 1 in 3 women will be raped Actual stats seem to be 1 20 1 10 of both genders do nothing but to hurt the argument and turn the discussion less on the actual issues The victims and how we can help them and more on the incorrect statements. This attempt to make every female a 'victim of rape' by including things 99 of rational people of both genders wouldn't considered to be 'wrong' also dilutes the meaning of rape in the public opinion, splitting subconsciously in everyone’s mind into 'real rape' You know, rape rape etc etc , and 'fake rape' Two people got drunk and had consensual sex, etc etc . Doing this is the equivalent of suggesting that all physical violence of any kind should be defined as 'Murder'. If you were to do that you'd also be diluting the stigma of Murder. Also the male slut shaming and automatic presumption of guilt in most of their campaigns Teach men not to rape, etc etc is sexist in of itself, ignoring the many male victims of rape Also see 4 and 5 and being sexist as hell. Now I already know the counter argument to this 'We aren't saying ALL men, or even ONLY men do it, but we're focusing on that part, honestly.' At which point I call bullshit. If I was to make a ad campaign for Teach black people not to shove crack up their ass while robbing someone and eating fried chicken No matter how much I try to say 'Oh I'm not saying all or only black people are doing this, but I want to focus only on that group', this campaign and line of thinking is still racist as hell. 3 The patriarchy might as well be replaced with 'Magic ' What most smart learned people seem to call 'Evolutionary affects on society' the feminist world seems to use this magical patriarchy that never seems to get explained. Sure they explain that it's a system where men have rigged all the systems because of privilege. But then seem to forget to explain where the hell this privilege came from? Did every man around the world all of a sudden at the same time just go 'I'm privileged ' Without these individual cultures ever talking to one another? . And how the hell did this remain through periods of history where individual societies and cultures were being led by successful powerful strong Women For instance Queen Mary gt Queen Elizabeth in England . For such an idea to have any merit there'd need to be a 10,000 year old secret society of bigoted men pulling all the strings, but too stupid to remove all the negative effects of said patriarchy. Of course, conspiracy theories aside, it makes far more sense that evolutionarily speaking, having one sex focus on physical power, and the other to focus on ensuring the survival of offspring, is a good way to ensure the spread of genetic material, a trait found through many many different animal species. And this genetic programming has naturally And always will affected our societies view on what exactly makes a good 'man' and 'woman', since several million years of evolution doesn't just go away because you have an Ipod, making both genders although equal human beings, different in their dreams. 4 Extremely oppressive and offensive to women. Which leads me onto my next point. My mother is a brilliant person. She's a strong, intelligent person, and what she did to teach and raise me made me the person I am today, and is something I will always look up to her for I also look up to my father, but for different reasons . Yet somehow the current movement which claims to represent her suggests that because she chose to do what she loved, that she is somehow a worthless oppressed human. The message of feminism isn't even about breaking gender roles in that sense, as we can see a lack of fund raisers to get more women into being dustbin men. No the message of feminism is you're only worth something as a women if you're a CEO, that screw what you want to do, you are only represented by the money that you make and anything else is simply you're too weak to stop being oppressed by a man. And this is further exemplified by a lot of rhetoric provided by the main movements of feminism, removing responsibility and treating the female like a child. You want to make your own choices while drunk? NO Only a man can handle that kind of responsibility. You want to handle critic and male contact like an adult? NO Don't you worry your priddy little head, let the men work it all out for you so you never have to feel sad. You think you can handle things not targeted towards your gender, or are self confident enough in who you are for it not to affect you? NO Only a man can handle that kind of pressure and acting like an adult. This is even further exemplified when these same movements attempt to suggest that women do no evil. No, all rape cases are true, because women can't do that No, When Female to male DV happens it's because the man did something wrong. The only reason that woman did that was because of MAGIC Evil MENZ Patriarchy. It's impossible for a woman to be Misandric because Which all build a picture of females being less than men, when in reality females are also simply adult human beings, who have the same ability to do evil And good as men. 5 Slows down progress and awareness by ignoring 50 of the issue. From what I can see the majority of the problems raised by feminism Rape, DV, gender bias for certain things, society expecting you to do XYZ to be a 'real woman' aren't woman issues at all, but in general humanity issues that overall affect all humans equally. And these are big wide ranging issues that require aid. So to combat these issues, to take a strategy that automatically ignores and alienates 50 of the problem seems moronically retarded. Throw into this that the majority of these awareness campaigns are not only highly offensive to men, but also play into the actual perpetrators hands. The people at Steubenville knew exactly what the fuck those mother fuckers were doing. They knew that what they were doing was wrong. It wasn't rape culture, but the fact that they are evil little shits. Why did they claim the opposite? Because they had a smart assed lawyer who knew he could make his clients seem like the victim. And Jesus it actually worked to some extent, giving these monsters sympathy. Oh it's not their fault, their lives got ruined, it's because of the patriarchy. They didn't know it was rape because of the 'patriarchy' They are the 'real' victims of the patriarchy Although on an emotionally detached level, I do have to give kudos to the layer for being a smart ass and abusing the current damage these campaigns do. 6 Wishy washy No stable focus And this is the real issue I have the majority of feminism. There's no actual real goals. This isn't a case of 'Make it legal for women to vote' any more, but wishy washy abuse of statistics to flip flop around to make 'feminism' about whatever just offended the author s of whatever article campaign. Want to write a story about a evil group of men? That's patriarchy because there's a lack of female's Want to write a story about a group of evil women. That's also sexist Want to write about a classic nurturing woman? That's sexist because of gender types Want to write about a strong woman? That's also sexist because she's just trying to copy men Want to talk to a random woman? That's sexist and you're probably trying to rape her Ignore random woman on the street? That's also sexist Disprove of sexual behaviour? That's slut shaming and sexist Want to support and interact with a women in such a way? That's sexist and you're probably trying to rape her This flippy floppy lack of focus seems to create problems that don't exist, making interactions between good honestly adults of both sexes harder for everyone for no apparent reason, while at the same time proving zero answers on how to fix these 'issues'.
| The current movement of feminism actually hinders equality for both genders.
| bde9947d-702f-47c7-8cc6-718d0293e22d |
The views of religious clerics are more extreme and uncompromising than those of other people. The presumption of divine or otherworldly authority and righteousness is an unacceptable one for elected representatives of the people. Political office holders must be capable of understanding alternative view-points and balancing these in order to take decisions; clerics would be too inflexible.
| The views of religious clerics are more extreme and uncompromising than those of other people. The p...
| 3989320e-88b9-4aa7-aab5-b6e85a429c6d |
I mean the stereotypical 'feminazi' kind of anti male. I know I sound like the worst thing right now, but hear me out. This is the short verion I'm 19 and I feel more and more judgemental and hating towards men because of many circumstances. I really don't want to be this way and I'm trying to fight it as much as I can I don't want to be an ass to random strangers I meet just because I've had a hard time, and I know it's wrong as hell, but with every incident I'm becoming weaker I asked this on r AskWomen because I know there are a lot of older, more experienced women there who I thought would be able to help me, and one recommended coming here which seems to be a great idea. Don't get me wrong in no way do I actually want to hate men, and that's why I'm trying to change my ways before I fall into it completely, but with everything that's been happening to me I'm honestly loosing the battle with it now So, P.s. I always try my best to be polite to everyone I will not be an ass to a stranger just cause he's male, but lately I catch myself actually being more harsh to them than to females It doesn't feel good. I don't go around promoting this view, and I know it's wrong I can't imagine telling a girl who has a great relationship with her father that he's a horrible being because he's male. But I honestly have had nothing but horrible experiences with males. My father abused me in all kinds of crazy ways, my boyfriends were all stalkers after I broke up with them I had to deal with phonecalls, text messages threatening suicide, them just refusing to fucking leave me alone already one of them actually tried to get me pregnant in all ways possible, without even consulting me and this happens with every single guy I've been getting close to. Even if we weren't dating, just hanging out, and then I'd reject them when they tried to make a move, it automatically turned into a whole ordeal of them attempting to persuade me that they know what I want better than them. My stepfather isn't the best being ever he's an agressive mofo and I can't stand his ways, eventhough we try to live in peace he has zero respect for anything I say. He's ok, but honestly his man pride is fucking ridiculous. My boss is an asshole too, and has made several moves on me. I'm his only employee, and he's in his 50's. I'm 19 for fuck's sake. Saying to me 'Let's get pissed and party alone' is not appropriate. The clients I'm a bartender do the same things which I don't care as much for because it's normal and usually just jokes but the fact that some are serious grosses me out. It's like they are abusing their position as a customer. And lastly I live in a country where cat calling is a completely normal thing. Normally I don't care, but I do care when 3 40yo men cat call me every single night on my way home from work. What kind of behaviour is that, to cat call a girl in the middle of a dark, empty street when she's alone? Honestly I have been trying to find faults in my behaviour, but I just cannot I honestly do not do anything to provoke this kind of behaviour I will not spill acid on my face, or get unnatractive on purpose, or start wearing turtlenecks in 42 C heat that's the temperatures here sometimes . Please help.
| Because of bad experiences with men through my whole life I'm slowly evolving into a full-out man-hater.
| 9c5dc4de-da0c-44ab-b059-4aad0dd83968 |
A few recent conflicts that are fueled by religion Palestine Jews vs. Muslims, the Balkans Orthodox Serbians vs. Catholic Croatians; Orthodox Serbians vs. Bosnian and Albanian Muslims, Northern Ireland Protestants vs. Catholics, Kashmir Muslims vs. Hindus, Sudan Muslims vs. Christians and animists, Nigeria Muslims vs. Christians, Ethiopia and Eritrea Muslims vs. Christians, Sri Lanka Sinhalese Buddhists vs. Tamil Hindus, Indonesia Muslims vs. Timores e Christians, .
| Religions are the root cause of a lot of wars.
| 8262284d-a292-406e-9b41-96a74b531ff8 |
I believe that college degrees already don't do much anymore because of how many people have them these days. We need a master's or something else to stand out because a Bachelor's just isn't enough. Making it free, and pushing so many more people into college would just add more and more degrees and make them useless. Qualification Inflation, as I've heard it called. I believe that free college would remove the incentive to provide quality education, and that overall education will decline and become sluggish to change. I believe free public schooling will make specialized private schools unable to compete, and die out. People wanting highly specialized degrees that aren't offered by most public universities will no longer have that option if the private schools fall apart. A tip I know other countries have implemented free tuition. If someone could point out example of nations doing it successfully and seeing benefits that outweigh the costs, that could probably convince me since it's hard to argue with results and real history. What I'm not as responsive to is speculation. Thank you in advance to anyone who responds.
| Adopting a system of universal, free college tuition in the US is a bad idea and would hurt the country rather than help it.
| f2a3fb1c-b1e7-4bb0-aa60-e178932849e9 |
Some book-based religions have documents their sacred books and their comments to claim that "God gave free will" to mankind.
| Providing an authoritative document as evidence for a fact is accepted in most situations.
| d754f5e2-8e98-4855-883a-ee91e0eb6250 |
Soldiers are generally only tried for war crimes if they are on the losing side - this creates an atmosphere of impunity during war that worsens suffering for civilians.
| Robots do not disobey orders and they do not rape, pillage, or desert. Thus warfare could be overall less chaotic and more civil.
| 9d4388ce-d90f-426a-ba91-f1281f986f48 |
If side proposition are in favour of treating drink driving as if they had hit and killed someone in the status quo, gaining a higher punishment, then the deterrence effect is stronger, not weaker.
| Rehabilitation and Deterrence can still be features of the criminal justice system on side proposition, they simply can't be considerations in the punishment.
| a7a1da02-0fef-4c08-8b37-6dd49006b5fb |
I hope this doesn't strike anyone as trite argument, but it's something that's been on my mind lately and I hoped to get some thoughtful input from you guys if you're willing. It seems to me that every conceivable action a person can take is by definition a selfish act. I do not mean selfish in the moral sense, in the sense that selfishness as a pattern of behavior is reprehensible and selflessness is ideal. I even wish I had a better term, a useful euphemism. Perhaps self interest. I believe it follows that since we pilot our own organisms to some extent, and we do not directly control the organisms of any other, it follows as impossible for any personal act to be anything besides ultimately self interested in nature. It seems to me even pure altruism can be defined as an intelligent projection of personal identity and thus a selfish act. For example the man who jumps on a grenade in the midst of battle to save his comrades. He sacrifices himself, but I say it's not an act of pure selflessness, but at best an act of great intelligence or great unintelligence, depending what one values. But that's just it what one values. The grenade jumper would be acting in a manner in accordance with what he believes to be correct, with what he believes should be considered correct in the world physical bravery, the value of the other soldiers' lives, national objectives , and is thus an extension of his personal identity. He wants his comrades to survive, and reproduce, or at least spread their personal values, and presumably since he is a soldier in battle against opposing soldiers, wishes NOT for the survival of the opposing army the opposite is true and does NOT want them to spread their genes or memes. True selflessness, an act of non self interest for the grenade jumper, could be construed as doing the exact opposite of what he values. Which might be expressed as something like jumping on a grenade for the benefit of the opposing army. Why is this madness and borderline nonsense? Because I propose that even the most selfless act is an expression of selfishness. For another extreme example, the story of Jesus. Let's assume for this purpose that everything happened as prescribed by popular Christian theology that his sacrifice was intended to be the perfectly selfless act of atonement that somehow restored balance in the universe or God's honor, or saved humanity, however it may be interpreted let's say he allowed himself, a symbol of innocence, to be killed as an atonement for some moral imbalance of some kind. Ok, even this act is not perfectly selfless. Jesus, as the story goes, allowed himself to be taken willingly he acquiesced rather than resist or flee, therefore he made a choice. He valued subservience to God, or whatever, as opposed to subservience to creature survival, or whatever. His selflessness was only selfless in regards to his own objectives, his own moral priorities. And I'll close by saying I'm not at all advocating some kind of moral anarchy, but more of a moral accuracy. I've noticed that one very popular way to justify one's own goodness and thus superiority by invoking an ideal of selflessness over selfishness, and while I agree that it shows strength and wisdom to do for others, I think understanding on a complex level the value of selfless behavior is more of a matter of social intelligence as opposed to pure moral superiority. A child is a deeply self centered creature, but the ones we like best are usually the ones that give hugs, show gratitude in some way. It's unfair to say that the child who does not show gratitude overtly has less love for his parents, but I say it is fair to consider the possibility that he may not get why that's an important thing to do. And so it follows, most people become more grateful and empathetic, outwardly, as they mature. One last example a sociopath is alleged to be completely selfish, thus completely evil, a modern demon a criminal by default . But perhaps the fundamental truth is that he has a great disability and is a victim of a horrible amalgamation of circumstances, not in the least being alive in an era where he is considered a villain automatically. I say, should we not view the more basic moral wrong as selfish Pride, an inflated sense of importance, as the actual cause of the kind of selfishness we tend to dislike, and therefore begin to view self interest itself a natural state of being we all begin from? EDIT typo correction
| It is impossible for any human act to be completely unselfish
| d313ab04-8d42-4383-9ac8-424daac07165 |
Millions of gallons of water are used in the fracking process, which directly reduces the amount of clean water available to residents in the surrounding areas.
| Fracking has negative effects on general water supply and water quality in the area.
| 3bfa66e8-a231-45ff-9ed5-55aa68618cfc |
The fallibility of created beings in relationship to an infallible, perfect creator is inevitable precisely because of the fact that if God created beings without the potential to fail, then He, God, would cease to be God; losing all exclusivity to a claim of monotheistic Divinity and all that it entails.
| A monotheistic God, by nature of the concept, must create beings with the potential for fallibility or else they would exist in a state of equality with their creator.
| 08c6c2ea-c8d0-4933-b141-f81796d3743a |
Letting your child eat unhealthy substances, when the child does not have enough knowledge to think critically about what they are eating and how it is harming their body, is a form of child abuse, in my opinion. Parents should be responsible for raising their child in the most healthy way currently known to the best of their ability, and when the child reaches a certain age maybe 18 or 21 , and has gathered knowledge about how food affects the body, then the child can decide if it wants to start eating drinking unhealthy substances.
| I think that parents are obligated to prevent children from eating any kind of unhealthy substance candy, snacks, soda until they reach a certain age.
| dcb89d00-9945-4896-a302-b7d1f80cfb41 |
It is highly questionable whether burning a flag can be considered a speech or expressive act at all. It seems to offer up no new concepts or true opinions to the "marketplace of ideas". Nothing is genuinely expressed by the act that could not be done through words or other, less fiery means. The act of flag burning does nothing to help the advancement or elucidation of truth, which is why people have the right to freedom of expression in the first place. Rather, it clouds the issue supposedly being furthered by the act. It welcomes the rhetoric of "un-Americanism", whereby critics and commentators question the protestors' general patriotism, not the validity of their underlying cause, which can eventually lead to the same criticism of their cause itself. Anger clouds the discussion, with people viewing the cause in terms of unpatriotic people supporting the cause, and thus calling for patriots to oppose it. Examples of this problem can be seen clearly in the various protests during the Vietnam War in which misguided protestors burned flags to show their opposition to the war and killing of innocents. The response to these protests, however, were accusations of lack of patriotism on the parts of those involved and gave a powerful rhetorical tool to the political groups still supporting the fight1. Furthermore, when anger and rhetoric cloud all discussion of an issue, it can lead to unmeasured, even violent responses from authorities and concerned citizens. Flag burning is thus counterproductive as a tool of protest, since it stops the message being propagated and pollutes the forums of discourse from being able to search for answers reasonably. 1 Amar, Akhil. 1992. "The Case of the Missing Amendments: R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul". Yale Law School Legal Scholarship Repository. improve this
| Flag burning does not serve as an effective method of conveying a message, since it is always met only with outrage and sometimes even violent public unrest
| 11102606-c2b0-419f-85b3-feb6e537e2b2 |
A patriarchal status quo does not exist in many western societies, as evidenced by females in positions of power. Both the current UK Prime Minister and the recent USA runner up in the elections are women.
| Women are able to climb to the very top of society now.
| f09fa05a-2403-404c-8b27-cc063db4fe4b |
If the vote of the community were not to be respected it would invalidate the whole idea of voting and community decisions, which would cause grave damage to the Eth community.
| The community voted for ProgPow adoption with an overwhelming majority. The vote of the community should be honored.
| fc6cd608-de49-4188-b9c3-e988b640b315 |
I don't really know where to start, so let's just jump into it. By west I basically mean NATO countries and their allies. These countries are very economically free. Economic freedom also strongly correlates with prosperity and political transparency. When Europe was doing imperialism a while ago, there were a lot of human rights atrocities I don't dispute this and we shouldn't completely follow in their model. nbsp However, look at the colonies of these empires. South Africa, India, China, Hong Kong, Singapore, the US, et cetera. They are growing rapidly and some are developed countries already. Counter examples could include Algeria and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, but those are more like exceptions. nbsp Adding on, we live in the modern world now. Western countries are a lot more progressive than hundreds of years ago so the human rights abuses that come with colonization would be minimized. What I'm trying to say is that via western domination of the world, economic freedom and political transparency would spread around a lot faster than if we let nations to their devices. nbsp I also believe that the ends justify the means so if a few wars to be fought, I'm totally fine with that because the number of lives saved and improved would be greater than the number of lives lost and destroyed. gt This is a footnote from the moderators. We'd like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please read through our rules If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than downvote it. Speaking of which, downvotes don't change views Any questions or concerns? Feel free to message us Happy ing
| The west should take over the world
| a595a4e6-6358-484f-bd87-5db9e5072ea1 |
Hi guys, I know that the death penalty is controversial and tends to fall along party lines. Why can't we have a compromise? Let's say someone murdered one of your parents and lets say you don't personally agree with the death penalty. Whether the murderer is executed or not is largely out of your control, and it may only worsen your anguish to see them die. Conversely, what if the murderer is given life in prison, but you live in constant fear that they will escape and kill you some day? If the point of the courts is to bring justice for those who've been wronged, then why can't we give victims any power of choice when they alone must bear the burden of the murderer's deeds? gt This is a footnote from the moderators. We'd like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please read through our rules If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than downvote it. Speaking of which, downvotes don't change views Any questions or concerns? Feel free to message us Happy ing
| Death penalty should be decided by those impacted by the crime
| f39a310c-9e1d-4649-ab52-2c3fea085b3e |
When the LGBT resolution was adopted in September 2014 by countries in the global south, this was a victory for bisexual people living in countries whose leaders were previously opposed to enforcing human rights. We can assume that politically active LGBT movements in some of the countries who voted for the passing of the resolution were partly responsible.
| Bisexual people also benefit from a 'victory' for LGBT movements.
| d32affee-5a22-46aa-9c1b-c6a6742f7655 |
In the states where religion develops freely and people have free access to places of worship, churches, mosques, temples and synagogues have always served as a shelter for the poor. Some of the greatest works of art were created in the name of God. Furthermore, Woodrow Wilson suggested that a strong affinity exists between religious commitment and patriotism. Love of country, just like love of God, certainly inspires good deeds.
| In the states where religion develops freely and people have free access to places of worship, churc...
| f22da829-8319-40f4-933d-2c2a4a5bf1ae |
Medical ethics say that a doctor has a responsibility to keep the patient alive to administer treatment. In the UK Diana Pretty was denied the right to die by the House of Lords even though she consistently request it. The Israeli Courts ordered the force- feeding of political hunger strikers arguing that in a conflict between life and dignity, life wins. India prosecuted a physician who allowed a hunger striker to die. The medical profession take their responsibility for life very seriously on a global level.
| Medical ethics say that a doctor has a responsibility to keep the patient alive to administer treatm...
| a4391221-cb1a-4014-9c88-378e6b9dc563 |
Britain paid millions of pounds in compensation to British nationals that had been imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay.
| The existence of Guantanamo Bay limits cooperation by American allies in the War on Terror.
| 313afb48-bbbc-4589-af25-e639b37002e1 |
In twin studies the asumption of same environment and other non genetic varibles can alter the interpretation of results.
| Most studies used as supposed evidence for homosexuality being determined biologically are biased.
| f88cc7eb-087c-4f38-ba12-39d5576bff93 |
This group of people well known for researching x think y Experts think this Most scientists say that Highly respected person in the field said this These things are not arguments. People try and say oh well it's different it's a recognized authority in the field so it's an argument from authority and totally proves my point , but that just doesn't hold up to basic scrutiny. Simply because they people or an organization are respected in the field doesn't change anything really. It's just not a logical argument on its own unless they have absolute 100 authority over the subject matter ex a comic creator on the comic he created . You are still saying person, people, or group x says y z, so y z . It doesn't magically change because they happen to be well versed in y. If there is good evidence that made that group or person believe something, then the evidence should be produced instead. Otherwise it's not an argument, it's literally just saying that respected people agree with you. It's just not an argument on its own. gt This is a footnote from the moderators. We'd like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please read through our rules If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than downvote it. Speaking of which, downvotes don't change views Any questions or concerns? Feel free to message us Happy ing
| Appeals to authority/arguments from authority are always fallacious
| 620ac594-e8d6-441c-979e-ba069e397ec3 |
I think that taxing the way its currently set up is inherently unfair and corrupt and creates a regressive tax structure that taxes the rich less than the poor. Here are my personal thoughts on what we could do to simplify the system Consumption VAT tax Taxing incomes necessitates there to be an IRS and leads to an opening in which private, corporate, or monied interests can create exceptions for themselves. With a constant tax on every transaction based on the value added by the company or individual you eliminate the need for complicated forms or year end audits. The government could save money by replacing the IRS with auditors to make sure companies comply with VAT rules. Wealth Tax I've heard reports that taxing 1.5 of everyone's wealth would generate more than enough revenue for the government. I'd add that to make the tax even more progressive than it already is you could limit people with total wealth under a certain dollar amount you pick . The IRS could be replaced by wealth auditors to properly assess investments, house values, and portfolios to make sure people are complying with the wealth tax at the end of the year. If possible please tell me whymy taxes are stupid or propose new and better taxes.
| I believe that the American taxation system is broken and that income tax and the IRS should be replaced with one of many alternatives.
| 60c4c4e7-43be-41ea-acb1-05cb4c55dace |
A joint report from IBM and Kalaari Capital expects that increasing internet access could add $1 trillion to India's GDP by 2025.
| He has managed to infuse dynamism and energy into previously flailing ideas, such as Digital India and Make in India
| 0717338d-586e-441d-a05e-90bf09cd2df1 |
Historically rich language opens deep and provocative discussion which can nurture understanding, and creates a greater appreciation of issues like racism. To censor is to lose the opportunity to explore the greater injustice that underpins America's history.
| To avoid racially insensitive words means to avoid a discussion about racism.
| b38667cc-be75-4e38-890d-18fafb1f6eaa |
I am aware that many religious people today do not believe in the concept of hell or if they do, it isn't the fire and brimstone hell of tradition, but an abstract one of 'separation from god' or suchlike. My argument is not about the existence or non existence of this place, but rather it's about whether or not it can ever be moral to send someone to a place of eternal torture. Many people even if they don't believe that this place exists think that if it did exist, it would be just to send murderers and rapists there. I would argue that through logic, such a place cannot possibly be morally justifiable. So here's the thing. When we talk about 'justice', we mean that the wrongdoer gets a punishment befitting of his crime, right? If a child steals a cookie from the cookie jar, a just punishment might be to send him to his room. Cutting off his hand for stealing the cookie would be un just and immoral because it is grossly disproportionate to the crime committed. I would argue that any crime any immoral activity has a point where the punishment would start to outweigh the crime and thus be more immoral than it . For tiny crimes like stealing a cookie, that point is pretty obvious to see. But for massive crimes like murder the threshold at which the punishment begins to outweigh the crime and thus become unjust is quite hard to distinguish. However, the point is that this threshold does exist somewhere. And logically a hell of eternal suffering has to by very definition reach that point, and then go beyond it. For example, maybe we hypothetically say that 100 years of suffering is a morally just punishment for a murder. Imagine a dripping tap in the bathroom of the 50th floor of a skyscraper. Imagine it dripping for hundreds of thousands of years. When that tap eventually wears away the sink it is dripping against, and wears away all the floors of the skyscraper below it, guess what? That's just a day a minute a second of time in eternity. Now imagine that happening all over again a million times more. Forever. Now think how disproportionate the punishment is now to the threshold we set as a reasonable punishment. Think how much it has eclipsed the point we set as 'just' punishment 100 years . Logically, eternal punishment HAS to go beyond the point of being more unjust than chopping off a child's hand for stealing a cookie and it will keep going, and get more and more unjust and immoral over time. Essentially it can never be moral to use an infinite punishment for a finite crime. And so regardless of whether this hell exists or not, it can never be a morally justified place. .
| There is no way to morally justify the idea of an eternal-suffering 'hell'.
| 46de470e-c4ef-4102-adae-713b9f4941a2 |
For this idea of 'equal intellect' I am using an argument that goes like this There is an upper limit, a boundary, where there is no further complicated task. That upper limit is much lower than people think it is. You can understand brain surgery in and out without having the physical or emotional stamina or steadiness to be able to perform the surgery but this doesn't mean you haven't reached the limit. The definition of intellect is then equal because anyone can reach that level, and grasp anything anyone else can, and because the concept of intellect is based on grasping the most complex things anyone else can we are all equal intellectually barring conditions and disorders. The theory of 'grasping capable' thus says Anyone can grasp anything anyone else has, barring conditions and disorders. If someone seems to not be able to grasp something some other obstacle is in the way other than inherent 'grasp capability' such as time, the clarity of the explanation, differing languages, not wanting to grasp it and other conditions that do not impact the inherent ability to grasp a concept.
| Everyone is equal intellectually, barring physical complications and conditions and emotional and mental disorders.
| 9e86c223-d253-4470-8179-529f7fb3ef31 |
Between May 2015 and December 2018 at least 44 people, mostly Muslims were killed in attacks over beef consumption.
| There have been dozens of vigilante murders of religious minorities in India.
| 8ec05eb5-7353-418f-9390-97cebad02ccd |
There will be fewer priests, who when unable to abide by their vows to celibacy, resort to living secret double lives
| Removing a culture of secrecy will necessarily introduce a stronger culture of transparency.
| dd944e73-5108-4923-9693-d94f121299e5 |
This depends on if there existed any part of their career in which their conduct was not known. Many instances of ill-conduct emerge after the artist has produced many works, or indeed is dead. Thus, this only holds if the artist's original claim to fame was itself the ill-conduct, which is not usually the case
| Some works are only popular because of their creators' prior reputation.
| 9a77fefe-1193-4d9e-927e-6633fc964154 |
In 2007 the United States consumed 7.5 billion barrels of crude oil and petroleum products, of which nearly 70% was used by the transportation sector.
| Sharing rides through public transportation can save non-renewable resources, which are consumed at unsustainable rates to fuel private transportation needs p. 14.
| 0960e6f8-f37c-43da-8d46-66c319edee7b |
In order to discourage academic students from plagiarizing essays, code, etc., the academic students should be allowed to run their own essays and code through plagiarism detection software such as Turnitin, MOSS, Diff, etc. before submitting their work. Students only cheat if they believe that there is a small chance that they may get away with cheating. No student would cheat if they knew they would have a 100 chance of getting caught. The submission program should also have an option to auto reject and essay piece of code that is suspected of plagiarism in the first place. Preventing cheating is better than catching and punishing cheating.
| In order to discourage academic students from plagiarizing essays, code, etc., the academic students should be allowed to run their own essays and code through plagiarism detection software such as Turnitin, MOSS, Diff, etc. before submitting their work.
| b0dafe76-ec59-41b9-a965-37fce8856b61 |
This has been inspired by a move from some of my peers in California, who are hoping that the laws against rent control are repealed by recent actions in the state legislature. I don't quite understand how people can see rent control as a good thing. I'm coming at this from a leftist progressive starting point. Maybe there's a problem with my understanding of what rent control actually is or what the results of rent control programs are, or maybe it's actually bad but not for the reasons I think In my view, rent control functions primarily to divide the disadvantaged class into more privileged and less privileged but competing groups, essentially through a lottery system and, of course, to allow companies to move the cost of supporting their employees in pricey areas on to someone else. It's bad for both those who receive it, and worse for those who do not. Here are the problems I see with it It does not generally create more housing or homes, so does nothing to address the problem of a shortage of homes. In fact, if developers know they are likely to be forced into rent controlled marketplace participation they are incentivized to create fewer instances of new housing, preferring to build things that are not homes like office space or homes in other places where there is less risk to their bottom line . Perhaps statistics disagree with me here, but I don't see how it could be otherwise. It locks those who have a rent controlled home into where they are currently living they have a massive opportunity cost for relocating, losing access to their affordable apartment, which makes them as employees easier to abuse or mistreat by employers. It actively blocks further reforms those who have rent controlled apartments do not have any reason to support other, better policies that would resort in more housing being built overall. In fact, thanks to human nature, they are likely to be at odds with it, since it diminishes the relative advantage afforded by the rent control and when you don't have much, relative advantage i what you cling to . It reduces the incentive for local businesses and powerbrokers to support more housing being built, since it allows them more control over their pool of employees while not leaving them lacking for labour, putting them in a powerful position in relation to local labour. It creates statistical winners to help the average while ignoring all the people left out in the cold, reducing the perceived importance of the issue of housing by the public at large. It's really easy to implement in a particularly poor manner, and thus dangerous. It calcifies into a system that actively supports the existence of rent control and opposition to things that might disrupt it like new, cheaper housing , and the longer it goes on the more pronounced its negative effects tend to be, distorting and reducing the benefits of the market without fixing any of the actual shortcomings. In essence, it's a bandaid at best and a toxic snake oil at worse. It may help individuals, but it helps them by poisoning the system as a whole and at the cost of long term solutions. Anyway, Convince me that rent control is actually a good thing or at least not as harmful as it seems so I can stop being the odd man out in my social group. gt This is a footnote from the moderators. We'd like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please read through our rules If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than downvote it. Speaking of which, downvotes don't change views Any questions or concerns? Feel free to message us Happy ing
| Rent control is a barrier to progress, and a bad thing for progressives to pursue
| 884d45cc-ad54-4617-95cc-958b54b8785d |
There are many things to enjoy. Knowing there is no meaning might actually free your spirits and just enjoy instead of working hard to realize the meaning
| You can still live a happy life, even if you understand that is has no meaning at all.
| f4dd8d80-f3c8-4ce7-824a-d2f068f65e71 |
Libraries are getting budget cuts so people will be able to access the libraries in a different place instead of not at all if their budgets get to a point where the libraries close.
| Libraries should stop having a physical presence and instead only exist digitally i.e. online.
| 0d8d58fc-1f85-4df4-bac5-6f0008dbf88b |
From a customers point of view Why does me ordering a steak mean you deserve more money than if I had ordered a hamburger? The plate isn't any heavier, you still only had to take one trip to bring it to me, you didn't cook anything. Nothing about the cost of my food changed anything you had to do. Also how much more work is a server at Olive Garden doing vs a server at Denny's? Why am I paying you more to carry better more expensive food? From a kitchen worker perspective Servers easily do the least amount of work in a restaurant besides a host ess . gt This is a footnote from the moderators. We'd like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please read through our rules If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than downvote it. Speaking of which, downvotes don't change views Any questions or concerns? Feel free to message us Happy ing
| Servers and wait staff alike do not deserve a 15% tip.
| c5660a87-31db-48f7-b7fe-9dbe26466743 |
I'm using libertarian here in the contemporary American political sense, not the free will, European or classical economic sense. Libertarianism in the sense I mean is a political philosophy which prioritizes individualism, personal choice, personal responsibility, egoism, selfishness and, above all, individual freedom, over collectivism, statism, and the concerns of the many. This view is in conflict with the view that parents should be coerced to vaccinate their children. I am not a libertarian, and am I not antivax. I am, however, pro coherency and intellectual honesty. Given the popularity of American libertarianism on Reddit and the popularity of anti antivax, my view is that there is at best an incoherency, and at worse a hypocrisy, at play on this site, at least in corners where these two views overlap. So I'd be interested to hear from staunch libertarians who are also staunchly anti antivax, on how you believe you make these two views cohere. Thanks gt This is a footnote from the moderators. We'd like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please read through our rules If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than downvote it. Speaking of which, downvotes don't change views Any questions or concerns? Feel free to message us Happy ing
| You can't coherently hold a staunch libertarian/individualist worldview and be staunchly opposed to antivax parents
| 3858ba0f-9567-4848-af3b-b961de85c77f |
I wanna hear why fascism is inherently wrong, and why forcing one good idea is worse than letting money and inheritence decide how politics should be. I'm not saying this in support of anti Semitism, or any archaic racist interpretations of fascism assume that any racist elements are completely divorced from the political philosophy. Given the idea that there actually can be one political ideal that should be indoctrinated to solve economic inefficiencies by force, what exactly is the problem? How is this not an extension of the objective truths of Randian Libertarianism, and an ideal solution of state solution Marxists, while avoiding the follies of indecision through brutal, modernist idealism? I mean, couldn't that actually work?
| Fascism might actually be a logical progression from democracy, and the Italian futurists were right.
| dfeb8e40-f0a1-4ed5-b58c-3f6ec46c895a |
Religion is often imposed on those young enough to be impressionable, leaving them stuck with it at least until they're old enough to question it, which could be a decade or so, or maybe the rest of their life if they're not that smart.
| Religion has been and is used as a form of social control.
| d682bd02-5d38-4eae-9fd8-89874869740d |
Economy wide , short to mid term, a no deal brexit would be absolutely devastating to the UK and pretty painful for EU . UK backing out from it would put a stop to hurting the economies. UK backing out now would, however, be a powerful blow to EU's stability. A constructive proof that even if things get badly, there are no repercussions. It would encourage political cynicism and fuel anti EU movements across EU. A no deal Brexit is an occasion to show how much individual countries gain from being a part of the bloc in a way that everyone understands. Abstract rhetoric based on values and the common good falls on deaf ears. Numbers, estimates are lost on masses swaying elections. They don't understand them and or don't believe people quoting them. Brexit referendum was a great proof of that. If UK pulls out from Brexit, those people will believe they were lied to again. That the democracy failed them. The not only UK's far right will continue to flourish on that. A hard brexit means a short spike of mainly economical pain but a healthier EU going forward. I actually believe UK would come back to EU EEA soon ish. All outcomes where brexiteers feel lied to and don't pay the full economic price of brexit will result in furthering populism and destabilising EU. There's also a side note that I made a conscious effort not to take into consideration while making my mind on the topic. The hard brexit and the destruction it will cause to UK's economy feels fair on some basic level. I do acknowledge it'd be extremely unfair to people who voted remain. I do acknowledge that even if someone made a bad decision, they shouldn't be potentially literally cut off from meds they need to live or face life changing traumas e.g. losing a house and that would certainly happen to some people. I do acknowledge that also individuals outside UK will be affected. Having said that, treaties between countries are inherently linked to collective responsibility, and at the level of nations and not individuals, a huge economical blow for UK simply feels just. Look at how many opt outs UK has in its current relations with EU opt out ~ 'everyone does A, but you're special and you don't have to' UK's way of doing politics seems as if they didn't notice they're not the mighty empire they once were. I cannot help but feel like UK holds EU in contempt. UK literally seemed to believe they'd strike a picky choosy deal with EU. One that would grant all the perks of belonging to EU, but being exempt from the responsibilities and constraints its members have. It STILL feels that way, given their recent votes in parliament. Depending on how you look at it, that seems either childishly naive OR outright insulting.
| A no-deal Brexit is an initially painful, but healthiest way forward long-term.
| 8911af8e-7070-48fe-887f-530729d78708 |
I often hear people disgusted by BigPharma for charging exorbitant prices for drugs they develop. I believe this is shortsighted, and that not only should it remain legal but it is also ethical. I do contend that drug companies are not perfect they exercise shady tactics sometimes. But the right to set their own price should not be infringed. According to a study done by Tufts, developing a new drug costs 2.6 billion when you factor in salaries, lab equipment, clinical trials, failures of other drugs, opportunity cost, etc. That cost must be recouped, otherwise the company cannot survive. The companies have a limited time to recoup that cost. Drug patents last 20 years, but they start when the drug is invented. The company cannot sell the drug until it's passed clinical trials and approved by the FDA, a process which can take over 10 years. Also, drugs for rare diseases have to be even more expensive because there are fewer patients, so the cost has to be spread across fewer people. One might argue that BigPharma takes advantage of the patent laws to reap enormous profits past the point of breaking even. This may be true but those enormous profits are what drive new research. The United States is responsible for the highest amount of drug innovation in the world because drug companies can charge whatever they want. That generic version in India is 100x cheaper because drug manufacturers don't care about U.S. patent laws. In a way, the U.S. is subsidizing much of the healthcare in third world countries. If you take away the reward, you take away the incentive. Then the question becomes Is it better to have a really expensive drug that few can afford for x amount of years and then a cheaper generic once the patent expires, or is it better to have no drug at all? gt This is a footnote from the moderators. We'd like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please read through our rules If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than downvote it. Speaking of which, downvotes don't change views Any questions or concerns? Feel free to message us Happy ing
| Pharmaceutical companies should be allowed to charge whatever they want for drugs
| b46603a1-b0d7-4397-919d-f50e920372ef |
A duty to rescue is a concept in tort law that arises in a number of cases, describing a circumstance in which a party can be held liable for failing to come to the rescue of another party in peril. In common law systems, it is rarely formalized in statutes which would bring the penalty of law down upon those who fail to rescue. This does not necessarily obviate a moral duty to rescue though law is binding and carries government authorized sanctions, there are also separate ethical arguments for a duty to rescue that may prevail even where law does not punish failure to rescue. A typical example would be if you saw a child drowning in a pool. These laws would state that if you do not make an attempt to rescue the child, then you will be held liable and possibly face prosecution. I think these laws are bullshit. To make it clear, I have nothing against Good Samaritan Laws which generally protect you from facing legal punishment for trying to help someone out, and I think that in situations where you bear some kind of responsiblity such as being a lifeguard or a parent, then you should be obligated to act. However, I think that these duty to rescue laws infringe upon my liberty. I should not be legally obliged to save someone in peril if I am not responsible for them or their situation. For example, if someone I hated was trapped under rubble after their home collapsed, I would not want to save them and I think that should be my right. I want my enemies to die and as long as I am not actively doing something that is causing it, then I should not be punished.
| I think that "duty to rescue" laws shouldn't exist.
| 225e363b-9b1e-4188-89e5-e5acdcd3ed3d |
With the Ferguson riots and the way the majority of reddit is acting, it is very obvious there are a lot of racists on reddit and many people seem to agree with them. Just look at the askreddit megathread and you will see a staggering amount of blatant racism that wouldn't be tolerated anywhere outside of reddit. While obviously some of these racists were racist before reddit, many of them became racist from these jokes. The idea of being racist sexist but not taking any criticism about it because it's just a joke does not detract from what you said was a bad thing and that you should take flak for it. Too often, these people fall victim to how much of an echo chamber reddit is and think that being racist is ok. The mentality of it's just a joke needs to stop and this racism should not be tolerated.
| I believe the huge amount of offensive jokes on reddit have made many users racist and should be discouraged
| 2de48867-d441-4724-83e4-7df974a00c64 |
The arts teach things that are not found or are found less frequently in other subjects, such as divergent thinking, creative problem-solving, focus, etc. source: Americans for the Arts National Art Education Association
| Involvement in the arts can positively influence academic performance in students.
| 926e78aa-950e-4fb1-8050-d0ce2f1914cc |
In Hong Kong's suburban districts, as many as 350,000 lease contracts will expire in 2047. Banks have refused to extend lease beyond that period, or issue new leases, given that they don't know what the years beyond 2047 hold.
| There is a lot of financial uncertainty beyond 2047, which is causing Hong Kong's financial market to be less attractive. Prompt reunification may help restore financial certainty.
| b5a1a146-ccae-46d2-8c78-b0ed81000c2e |
Airbnb is able to sustain a growth rate that other hotels simply cannot given its tech-based model which lends to scalability and the lower costs of acquiring new inventory.
| Airbnb is increasingly moving towards having a monopoly of its industry. This would carry with it all of the negative consequences of monopolistic markets.
| 39db3f6b-2fd4-4a16-a89d-01937a53303a |
A higher Minimum Wages gives workers additional space to relocate to industries where their work might be more efficient.
| A study showed that the increase in productivity and sales more than offsets the cost to the employer.
| d32d0b49-bf2e-48a7-a7b4-5b126b131732 |
A little back story. I was diagnosed with lymphoma back in October 2010. I had a fist size tomor in between my lungs and my heart. I had an option get treatment or die. When I was going through treatment everyone that I talked to about it would always say how brave I was. I never actually said it but in my mind it would make me cringe. I would always think to myself why? I'm just taking treatment to try and survive I took the chemo and got better. Been cancer free since then. I did nothing special the doctors are the ones that should get credit not the patients. So why do we put cancer paitients on such a pedestal? Don't get me wrong it's a terrible thing to go through in your life and I am in no way for cancer. I am just speaking from my personal experience. I just don't think cancer paitients are brave. Change my view Edit didn't know it had to be 500 characters or more. Went into a liltle more detail
| I don't think that everyone that gets cancer and goes through treatment is brave or should be praised. Cmv
| 6fc121d3-20b4-46e9-826d-a54efd436052 |
Users have found issues with these roadmaps. There has been a bit of controversy and confusion by some users on why CIG with its new roadmap for Squadron 42 doesn't have all chapters beyond grey-box, when in 2016 apparently most chapters were in the first stages of whiteboxing.
| A roadmap isn't a promise, it is just there to show what they plan on working on. It can and does change frequently.
| c1c6cf28-43fc-47ce-b866-575a17bbeb1b |
An atom bomb inside a cargo container could be set off in an airport near a major city before it's even unloaded from the cargo plane.
| ICBMs are not the only method of delivering nuclear bombs. Even given reliable ICBM interceptors, there are other means of delivery the interceptors cannot stop.
| 8ba5f6ee-d7e2-406d-b55d-00575400c1ff |
The types of characteristics that are protected from discrimination have no bearing on job performance. This means that the best people might not get the jobs they deserve and workplace efficiency will suffer.
| These exemptions have a negative impact on the job market.
| eaebdf19-bc8a-41dc-9b95-c4fb202520d9 |
Under Christianity, children are seen as a blessing, a "heritage from the lord" To some Christians, therefore, the right to have a child stems from God's will, not the state's.
| Under some of the world's largest religions, procreation is seen as a God-given right and, for some, a duty.
| ffd98a6b-a092-4991-be29-f42ac6b6f070 |
The United states were based on a Christian Protestant monoculture which held cultural hegemony until at least 1920s. Protestant ethical values were dominant in culture as well as law, and cultural minorities like the Roman Catholics or Muslims were tolerated, but pressured to integrate.
| The United States is also founded on a single culture, instead of a multi-racial and multi-cultural integration. Individual states vary mostly by industry, but by little else.
| 896ef1b9-55aa-45e5-95ea-988f402c5d03 |
Many of Trump's signature political campaign tactics would not work with Biden as his opponent.
| Trump's aides are rumored to be nervous about Biden receiving the 2020 nomination.
| 618f1d68-2a4c-4780-ba83-183bf90592f2 |
The election loss in 2008 was a turning point for Republicans because the primary issue that turned voters from Republican to Democrat was an issue the Republican party believed it had a monopoly on fiscal competency. The lack of effort to curb the sub prime derivatives market, the full endorsement of bailouts by Bush at the end of his second term, and the subsequent follow through with more bailouts by Obama set in motion what would become the Tea Party a grassroots revolt against the Republican party which, they argued, had abandoned its free market principles Federal intervention in the secondary mortgage market, Federal intervention in the bailouts . From 2008 to 2016, the Tea Party influence has chipped away at the old guard Republican establishment, replacing baby boomer minded leaders with younger counterparts that made their way by not bending their knee to the establishment Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Trey Goudy, Marco Rubio, etc . When in power, the establishment Republicans were too quick to abandoned fiscally conservative measures while also being too quick to exercise federal power over controversial social issues. In contrast, Tea Party elected officials reinforced fiscal conservatism, but were split on the importance of the controversial social issues. During the same time, Democrats, further emboldened by the Obama Coalition of voters, focused almost entirely on minority voters and identity politics. While this strategy worked in 2008 and 2012, against McCain and Romney respectively, an unintended consequence of these efforts was the outcast and near vilification of the majority voters whites. Moreover, throughout the same time, Democrats never fully vindicated their control over the economy, the slow growth of which helped keep the economy as a top issue on the minds of voters in 2016. As the 2016 Republican primaries began moving forward, one thing was obvious the establishment Republicans had completely lost their influence over the party as they had no candidate with the ability to garner more than a few percentage points. The power vacuum in the party was set to be usurped by Tea Party officials either Cruz or Rubio. However, these candidates still fell in line with the establishment Republicans on social issues, leaving a gaping hole for voters who actually sided with Democrats on social issues, or were indifferent to them, yet still wanted a fiscally conservative change from the Democratic status quo. These voters would not champion the Tea Party underdogs and were increasingly frustrated at their own positions in the national dialog due to the exercise of identity politics. This, in turn, is what fueled Trump's success. He was not a leader of this change, but a byproduct. Trump is now representative of a fundamental shift in the Republican Party ethos. He is non politician, who is against large scale military interventions, who is a fiscal conservative and is either in favor of, or indifferent to, the social progress measures championed by Democrats. This is in contrast to old guard Republicans, who favored the Bush political dynasty, who is often in favor of global interventions, who preached fiscal conservatism but rarely practiced it, and who actively fought against the social progress measures of the left. The Republican Party has been defined by its baby boomer constituencies for 30 years. Today, that influence has all but evaporated, and is likely never to reforge itself. Even if Trump reverses himself to adopt old guard Republican positions, the electorate has changed and will ultimately rebuke him for it. The Republican Party has transformed.
| Over the last 18 months, the Republican party has fundamentally transformed and never be like it was for the past 30 years.
| 6e91b791-164d-4fe5-94bd-168f64ed7e30 |
what I'm not talking about suit vests, bulletproof vests, etc. Just the vests that ostensibly are meant to keep you warm. Want to know why there's no such thing as snowpants that end at the knee, or why long underwear all happens to be long ? Because if you want to stay warm, you want to cover the parts of your body that lose heat, ie, as much as possible. The more warmth provided by the vest, the larger the discrepancy from the bareness of the arms. True, certain professions may need such freedom of motion of the arms, like lumberjacks, but that simply represents a singular case in which vests do provide functionality that full jackets do not. True, sometimes the temperature outside is too cool for just a shirt, and too warm for even a light jacket. But what is that window, like 2 or 3 degrees? I also find them ugly, but most of that may very well be linked to my opposition to them functionally. If someone can provide a fashion defense of a fleece or down vest, I'd as well, as we're not all just walking around in balaclavas and spacesuits just because it's cold. gt This is a footnote from the moderators. We'd like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please read through our rules If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than downvote it. Speaking of which, downvotes don't change views Any questions or concerns? Feel free to message us Happy ing
| For your average non-lumberjack, fleece or down vests are a functionally disingenuous and unappealing article of clothing.
| 3a4ea040-bdce-42f2-bcf2-fd6f8d8c1232 |
People can listen to all generations of music now when they couldn't before. So maybe it's possible to get stuck on thinking it's the best, when it was the best at the time and that's all one knows. It's harder to beat the best now when competing against music from all of history.
| It's not that it's better, but just more familiar
| e92d39e4-e6f8-49f5-86d7-a065589bd43a |
If we believe we have free will, we can lay claim to our successes and achievements. It emotionally justifies work, suffering, etc.
| Assuming that free will does not exist, it is better to act as if it does.
| 2e8e7124-5ae5-418e-b567-23e8a964ca41 |
Last week my husband 31 sent me surprise flowers to my workplace to celebrate 1000 days of marriage. Today a male coworker 29 suggested I send him flowers at his workplace for our anniversary. I said, I did that last year, I should think of something different and he explained that he'd been joking He'd 'be mortified' if an SO sent him flowers. That set me off thinking about girly things, and manly things, and chick flicks, and men not listening, and all the ways in which men protest that they don't understand or like what women do and women protest the reverse. It's even very, very common to have no friends of the opposite gender. So how is it that most straight men and women enjoy being in relationships where they spend a lot of time interacting with one another? Why have men and women throughout history gone on record talking about true love and meant to be and perfect matches and mutual understanding? Yes, women will complain that they spent the morning bored out of their skull listening to their husband obsess over Arsenal's chances and men will complain about curtain shopping. But most of the time they seem to enjoy sharing activities with each other. It's not all about sex or security or social status. So I posit that these are irreconcilable. Either the typical couple spend most of their time being bored or irritated with one another, or the typical men and women aren't being honest about how many of the same things they enjoy. Please note that I'm not saying that gender is meaningless or just a social construct. Transsexuality wouldn't exist if gender wasn't meaningful.
| If the typical Western person was as different from the other gender as they claim, modern heterosexual relationships wouldn't work.
| 76b5eab4-39b0-4e8d-9f62-4608ba06efb2 |
Free will is the key requirement for beings to be moral agents. Without free will, humans cannot be held responsible for their actions.
| If we did not have the opportunity to choose or reject God, we would be automatons.
| df885932-0a70-4fec-94fe-ef26216fe598 |
The collective annual CO2 emissions by countries in the EU have dropped by more than 20% since 1990
| Western countries are contributing to the fight more than eastern and less developed countries.
| af9180cf-1981-4387-b998-e553cc735b64 |
I couldn't find a way to describe it well in the title, but it's like this Some people want to put restrictions on food stamps like you can't buy junk food, you can't buy meat, you can't buy seafood, etc. This is because they're angry their tax dollars are being used for things they don't like others to have. If you're going to do that, it's no different than saying things like I disagree with giving babies formula, and breast milk is a lot better. Unless you have a doctor's excuse for some medical reason you can't breastfeed, no formula with food stamps or welfare money. Buying disposable baby diapers and feminine hygiene products is bad for the environment because of the waste, so you can only use welfare dollars to buy cloth diapers. Same for pads and tampons. You can only use welfare dollars to buy cups, sponges, or cloth pads. Denying people certain foods based on your own values is no different from doing it in other areas.
| Wanting to put exemptions on food stamps just to deny people things based on your own values is no different than doing it for other things people need on welfare.
| 9fd82853-94b2-4425-a420-b4bcb8a79b59 |
Children and infants exposed to secondhand smoke can suffer asthma, respiratory infections, ear infections, and sudden infant death syndrome SIDS.
| Secondhand smoke is damaging to the health of non-smokers
| 67495f1b-5aca-4b67-8630-70c68672f6ec |
Natural gas is a safer fuel than gasoline and diesel fuels. This is related to the fact that it has a limited range of flammability; it requires the correct mixture of air and fuel to burn—somewhere in the 5 to 15 percent range, and an ignition temperature of approximately 1100 degrees F. This compares favorably to gasoline and diesel fuels which both have lower concentrations of flammability and lower temperatures of ignition.5
| Natural gas is less flammable and explosive than other fuels
| bcdd5fb6-6d51-48c8-ac30-88cc9700c2a0 |
The usual story is how students were paired into prison andguard groups, and that the whole thing quickly went off the rails as the 'guards' became abusive and dehumanizing. However between Zimbardo himself personally overseeing 'guard' behavior and outright explaining things in a way that seems to encourage extreme behavior Why is this study cited as anything other than 'how not to perform an experiment'? No control group no mechanisms in place to prevent researcher bias and or expectations to influince the experiment. Yet I keep hearing it over and over at how people gravitate into the roles they are assigned by society, or that those in power will always seek to abuse it. Maybe i just have the wrong of things here, but i saw Zimbardo giving a TED talk and i was not seeing him boo'd off the stage and instead treated as if he were to have any sort of respect or insight in the matter. Do i have the wrong of it?
| Zimbardo does not deserve the credibility and notoriety he did from the Stanford Prison Experiment
| 73a924ce-b895-4ec2-bedf-f7c4aced7b60 |
Oppression of demographic minorities: when all Czech political bodies –the parliament, senate, government– passed a resolution that Czech republic shall not accept EU Directive COM2017853, the Directive was nevertheless pushed through the Euro-Parliament with Czech MEPs being openly threatened by an official "non-paper" delivered to all EU representatives and prescribing how all the MEPs are supposed to vote per German, French and Italian request; souce: Czech Ministry of Interior
| Patterns of abuse of power such as the oppression of demographic minorities and centralized economic planning are already surfacing.
| 7fde27c7-83e0-40ab-925f-1e675a64cc25 |
Nobody is idiotic enough to do the stuff he's done during his campaign on accident. Say what you want about him going bankrupt multiple times. The man is probably pretty smart if he's maintained this level of comfort for himself and his family all this time. He's like a pro wrestling villain, an internet troll in real life. I can't figure out why people find this so hard to believe. It's like someone told him to try and alienate as many people as possible by November. Why would he do that? I don't know. Maybe he's secret friends with the Clintons or maybe there's a reward for him at the end or maybe he thought it'd be fun. It just seems obvious to me that his campaign isn't serious and he's not really trying to get elected. It's like he's playing himself in a movie. I don't buy it.
| Donald Trump is a troll and is only here to scare us all into voting for Hillary.
| 584fd2b8-61a1-4f31-a018-bfeec5edd357 |
Though many do wait to take their first sip of alcohol until college, there are still the rebels sneaking drinks into the high school football games. They know the risk of getting caught, they know what their consequences will be, so why do it? It's fun, it's exciting! It's the rush of doing something they are not supposed to be doing and sneaking around. If it was made legal, there wouldn't be quite as much excitement and thrill. Also by the time they finish college, these young adults would not feel the need to do it as much since they will have been drinking for quite a few years, therefore, allowing them to focus more on their school work and not become consumed by the alcohol.
| Lowering the age will cut down on young adults drinking
| e6142e05-a683-4870-9cde-c5635c861267 |
Advertising leads to many people being overwhelmed by the endless need to decide between competing demands on their attention – this is known as the tyranny of choice or choice overload. Recent research suggests that people are on average less happy than they were 30 years ago - despite being better off and having much more choice of things to spend their money on1. The claims of adverts crowd in on people, raising expectations about a product and leading to inevitable disappointment after it is bought. A recent advertisement for make-up was banned in Britain due to the company presenting its product as being more effective than it actually was2. Shoppers feel that a poor purchase is their fault for not choosing more wisely, and regret not choosing something else instead. Some people are so overwhelmed that they cannot choose at all. 1Schwartz, The Tyranny of Choice, 2004. 2Kekeh, Too Beautiful? British MP Draws Line in Sand for Cosmetic Ads, 2011.
| People are given too much choice, which makes them less happy.
| b764b87c-4c53-4961-8b48-3fc9709ac442 |
People should have good lives, and hundreds of millions of dollars in income is not necessary to have a good life. That is more important than Capitalist theories.
| Income inequality damages the lives of many US citizens, at both a social and individual level.
| 389cc941-531f-4a35-8e77-1039f8f3b67e |
Ukraine, bankrupt and hopelessly corrupted, is for sale. Amidst the threat of outright civil war, urban Ukrainians and European oligarchs are now vying with rural ethnic Russians for control of the country's resources. Today President Obama threatened unspecified costs in a strongly worded warning to Russia's President, Vladimir Putin, should Russia involve itself militarily in the conflict. If a percentage of say, Mexifornians in California and Arizona's border lands abetted by cynical Canadian oil execs decided to secede from the USA, and Washington sent federal troops to protect its naval, air, and ground assets from rebel troops and the threat of civil war, the people of the United States would certainly look askance at any interference let alone threat of retaliation from Moscow, Cuba, Iran et al. So why should Kerry, Obama and the US State Department feel justified in dictating to Putin how to deal with unrest on his Russian borders particularly as Russia's military bases in that region are under threat from rebel factions? Edit I'd just like to thank the members of this board for their courtesy and their thoughtful responses. This is the first time I've posted to this sub, and I'm blown away at the caliber of the commentary especially after some of the sites I've visited here on reddit. Thanks all, for elevating the discourse. You're a fine example for this far flung community. a
| The United States, as EU's proxy, has no business telling Vladimir Putin how to manage civil conflict within his own sovereign territories.
| caaab8b3-081f-40bd-9935-96d282029cbf |
Methodological decisions in science always involve human values that cannot themselves be evaluated, and are typically not articulated
| The history of science shows that scientists have their own biases.
| df51e98a-1454-4680-a187-3254c710d8b6 |
Opponents point out that there is no scientific controversy, but only a political and religious one, therefore "teaching the controversy" would only be appropriate in a social studies, religion, or philosophy class.
| If creationism should be taught, it should not be taught in science classes.
| a36d9831-972a-4660-92f2-8de13abb96f5 |
Disclaimer Hitler was an evil man who committed genocide Germany invaded Poland to gain a route to the sea Danzig . Poland would have given up the path to the sea if Britain didn’t give them the war guarantee In 1933, two months after Hitler’s rise to power, Winston Churchill himself made a statement in Parliament gt “Many people would like to see, or would have liked to see, a little while ago – I was one of them – the question of the Polish Corridor adjusted. For my part, I should certainly have considered that to be one of the greatest practical objectives of European peace keeping diplomacy.” Here you have one of the protagonists of the 1930s and 40s laying the framework for peace 6 years before he took part in the destruction of the British Empire and the death of 60 million people by ignoring his own advice. The West lost the world and The United Kingdom lost its empire because of WW2. Other countries lost their colonies as well, but the British Empire was the largest and the loss of their territories set back much of the third world by decades. The Holocaust didn’t start until 1941. That is two years after the beginning of the war. Cause and effect is almost impossible to prove, but before the war Hitler’s plan was one of mass deportation. Two years into the war he began resorting to genocide. WW2 was not a war against Jewish genocide and, if anything, hostilities against the Jews were more intense because of the war. Hitler had no intention of invading westward until Britain declared war on Germany. Why would they have built the German equivalent of the Maginot Line The Westwall if he intended to invade westward? Hitler did not want a war with Britain, France, or the USA. 60 million people were killed in WW2 because of diplomatic blunders. The most disastrous of which was Britain’s war guarantee to Poland. Edits format
| WW2 was not necessary and resulted in more harm than good
| 499845c6-9237-4a3e-ae57-97047256f0a7 |
Bishop Kevin Dowling of Rustenburg, South Africa, on the need to change the church’s policy on condoms in the fact of the AIDS epidemic “Condoms for Catholics?” Newsweek, July 20, 2001. - "The use of a condom can be seen not as a means to prevent the ‘transmission of life’ leading to pregnancy, but rather as a means to prevent the ‘transmission of death’ to another."2
| Condoms prevent transmission of death, not merely transmission of life
| 9387223d-4666-47bc-b3d6-0dcd0dcd8672 |
I am a female student at a British university and I would identify as a feminist that is, I believe in equality for males and females but I don't understand why we need roles specifically for women and their separate issues on any student union council any more. These roles are assigned through elections, they are full time posts with a salary so are taken as a gap year in between years of a degree or at the end of the degree. Typical activities involve campaigns spreading awareness i.e. death by pamphlets thrust in your hands when walking down the street to my lecture halls of various issues deemed specific to women and setting up socialisers amongst students and prominent feminists. This role seems pointless. Why should women get their own role for women's issues when, in this country UK , it is working class males that are in fact becoming less likely to come to university? There is no corresponding role specifically for men. In fact our student union in general is dominated by women. Their roles are unclear and usually highly political. They are supposed to represent females at the university but frankly often seem out of their depth on local issues a bugbear for me especially is the constant decrying of the lack of females in the STEM subjects when no females in the women's society that are so vocal on this issue have any involvement in these subjects whatsoever I take a physical science and half the students at my department are female and prefer to involve themselves in national issues such as the plight of female refugees fleeing sexual violence abroad etc. worthwhile issues no doubt but a societies like Amnesty already have a lot of this covered and b the women's officer seems to have time to fill as opposed to the officer for those with disabilities who often battles to improve disabled students access to areas around campus. It seems more of a tradition, a throwback to the 1970's really. Shouldn't we let this tradition die out like bra burning, political lesbianism and Germaine Greer's relevance to modern feminism now? I know the woman who is the women's officer for my university personally and she is a very intelligent and generally awesome person. I don't begrudge her the job or the advantage of the great experience she is getting she does work hard. I haven't brought this up to her as I feel all views different from the status quo around women's rights oppression amongst her and her friends are not treated very well at all. The fighting talk led by the women's officer is usually mocked and seems embarrassingly old fashioned now. There are issues specific to women but why can't they be dealt with by a combined effort of the student union in general which is around 60 female at any one time no quotas, just more females at this university in general ? I believe a big problem with feminism has been the unwillingness to incorporate men in the campaigns and it has set many against the cause as it looks more like feminism is about superiority of females as opposed to equality for all. So that's my view in a nutshell surprisingly, I thought the opposite until I actually came to university and witnessed the actual actions of these women and it's always women you should have seen the stink when a male, long term member of the university's feminist society tried to stand . Now I have taken a full 180 turn against such roles so please, help me see differently and
| "Women's officers" are outdated and unnecessary for universities these days.
| bbfb2544-9ecd-4cd8-b694-ebd8fb2225de |