Example: I believe that IP is a direct contradiction of nature, sacrificing the advancement of humanity and the world for selfish gain, and therefore is sinful.
Edit: pls do not downvote the comments this is a constructive discussion
Edit2: IP= intellectal property
Edit3: sort by controversal
I thought of a few stupid things, but everyone talking about kids made me think of this one.
I am strongly against Trickle down suffering.
“I put up with this terrible thing when I was your age, and even though we could stop it from happening to anyone, it’s important that we make YOU suffer through it too.”
Hazing, bullying, unfair labor laws, predatory banking and more. It’s really just the “socially acceptable” cycle of abuse.
I agree, and I take it this far: “I worked hard and paid for my house, why should some lazy loafer get housing for free? I paid 24,000$ in tuition, why should kids get free college?” I think that, at some point, one guy has to be the first guy to benefit from progress, and all the people who didn’t benefit just have to suck it up. I would 100% pay a much higher tax rate if it meant that homelessness was gone, hunger was gone, kids got free education… I’m Canadian, so I don’t need to say this about health care. Yeah, I paid an awful lot of mortgage, but if someone else gets a free house? Good!
Strongly agree. Someone has to break the cycle of abuse, it’s wrong to contribute to the cycle so that it can continue harming others in the future.
Edit, one example that comes to mind is the extremely long shifts in the medical field in America. One guy who was really good at being a doctor happened to be someone who voluntarily took on very long hours. Now there is this persistent mindset that every medical worker must accept long hours and double shifts without notice and without complaints.
There are a few cases where it benefits the patient to avoid handing off the case to another doctor, but generally it just limits the pool of people who are willing to go into the medical field, and limits the career length and lifespan of the people who do go for it.
I sort of disagree. Some pain and suffering is what helps some people become better versions of themselves. Doesn’t work for everyone though, so it shouldn’t be the default experience, but rather a last resort.
Yes, facing adversity does build resilience. However, creating adversity for another just because YOU had to face it is wrong. I had a professor who called our career a “brotherhood of suffering” and would purposely create artificial stumbling blocks and make things more difficult because he had the same done to him. It’s perpetrating a cycle of abuse. I’ve now gotten to the point where I’ve taught in university and in the hospital and I try to break that cycle. It’s still a very difficult path, the content and pace are still taxing. Many still don’t make it to graduation, why make it harder then it needs to be?
It’s not pain and suffering that you admire its perseverance. You can have one without the other.
Perseverance against what if not pain?
The fact that this is your reply goes to show you need to learn more.
Sorry, I’m not into S&M play.
Ah yes, the “poverty builds character” argument that’s often used to justify poverty.
Nah mate, it’s the “rich ppl need to experience poverty in order to empathize” argument.
I agree with OP, and I think you may as well but are stating it differently. Hardships and difficulty so indeed provide the opportunities to better oneself, but that shouldn’t come from contrived abuse like bullying or hazing. Those are instances of someone using their previous difficulty as an excuse to make it harder for someone else which I don’t believe is morally correct.
Maybe, maybe not. My thought for the comment was “tried to help, didn’t work, off you go and experience as is”.
Because not everyone learns the same way, so we can’t apply a fix-all universal method. Some kids, adults even, don’t get it until they experience it themselves.
What that “it” is changes from person to person and every time we think “why don’t they just understand”, maybe it’s that they can’t understand and need a different way of learning “it”. Which sometimes is painful.
Absolute free speech is overrated. You shouldn’t be able to just lie out your ass and call it news.
The fact that the only people who had any claim against Fox for telling the Big Lie was the fucking voting machine company over lost profits tells you everything you need to know about our country
The pay rate of the lowest paid worker of any company or institution should be somehow legally and directly tied to the pay rate of the highest paid executive.
If the executive wants to make more money and gets a raise, then so do the workers.
Housing as an investment is wrong.
The price of basic human needs should not be tied to the rise and fall of the stock market, nor should ones retirement depend on the hyper inflated values of houses. 500K+ for a small house is absolute price gouging bullshit, regardless of location.
It’s okay to call stupid people stupid to their face - them, their ideas, whatever it is that they’re doing dumb. In the U.S. we’ve gone too far over on the “tolerate all people and their views” which has allowed fascism and MAGAts to gain far too much power - putting idiots in their place is (or at least would have been) the best way put it back where it belongs.
Killing yourself is ok. You don’t know what it’s like to be them and be in their head.
I’ll never do it. Even in darkest depths, but respect anyone’s right to say peace out.
That cats should remain indoors. Pet cats kill approximately 2.4 billion birds in the US alone, not to mention all the other animals that they also kill. I love cats as much as the next guy but keep them indoors for the love of nature
Plus, they are %99 less likely to get hit by a car or eaten by a coyote.
also they just live longer.
outdoor cats average…what…5 years? Indoor cats can get to 20. a lucky few even more.
I have a take on this that I think no one will have fun with:
In my opinion there is no moral way to keep a cat as a pet.
Allowing cats to roam as they desire results in the aforementioned ecological damage. The opposite - keeping cats locked in a few thousand feet at best for twenty-odd years of life - is cruel.
As someone who was raised in the woods with outdoor cats and couldn’t imagine keeping them inside - even though we lost two as I grew up - it’s a circle I just can’t square. So I figure that if and when I get cats, I’ll dodge the question and adopt some older cats who were already raised inside and couldn’t be trusted to go outside safely anyway.
That capitalism is good. There is no economic system more efficient at progress
It’s government that’s the failure. It’s Governments responsibility to shape the markets so capitalism benefits society and they have failed miserably
Capitalism sucks, but it’s the best we have so far.
Its resource distribution is terribly inefficient, but it’s miles better than the “trust me, bro”-approach pushed by those heavily into alternative systems.
Being “proud” of your acheivements is fine.
Being “proud” of your country or your state or your football team that you’re not a member of,or your ethnicity is douchebaggery.
To quote Margaret Thatcher, “a man who doesn’t own a car by the age of 26 can count himself a failure.”
I heavily disagree with that statement. Everyone has reasons not to drive. From disability, to cities being designed for walking and public transport, to being opposed to the pollution that is caused as a result of it, to not wanting to participate in traffic congestion, to not being able to fucking afford one, to being so bad at driving that you just give up after failing that license test multiple times, or to simple personal preference. Are all these people failures apparently? How does that make sense? Well, I guess the people who give up after failing the license test are, but everyone else??
It’s the nature of conservatives to break things into simple concepts and metrics that are easy to comprehend and conceptualize because facing the nuance and complexity of reality requires work and bravery.
This is a bit meta, but I believe morality is objective. Actions have objective moral worth; epistemological disagreements about how we know the moral value of an action are irrelevant to the objectivity of goodness/badness itself.
deleted by creator
If you look at the facts kids are leaning towards progress. Less underage sex, less drug and alcohol use, and women are more educated then ever. Boys are starting to lag though:/.
deleted by creator
That’s actually a crazy thing to say that we need more under age sex.
That being there are 2 types of people, the ones who cherish childhood and those that want to go up.
deleted by creator
Teenagers slept around because they were bored. Now they can learn coding and game. They are legitimately using less drugs. Drinking less and having sex left because they are busy developing skills for work and life.
deleted by creator
Is this an “I turned out fine” opinion, or is this based on something more concrete?
deleted by creator
No, I never said that but it does show that this serious situation isn’t taken lightly.
deleted by creator
If you dont think sex shouldn’t be taken lightly phew o boy.
Want to know something fun about US parents??
Patents don’t really protect new inventions. They give people a right to sue for financial damages and there is no criminal force of law (this is a generalization and I am not a lawyer). So courts don’t really go “hey, stop using invention ABC, someone else has a patent on it.” They just say “hey, that other guy invented it first, give him some money.”
Patents (not other forms of IP) are made to be wildly public so people can invent things on top of previous inventions.
Does it always work like that? No. But it’s one facet of US federal law that I find interesting, and a little bit hopeful.
People don’t choose to be pedophiles. We shouldn’t hate them just for existing.
People choose to abuse children, and that should be strongly punished and I think the majority agrees with me on that.
But a non-offending pedophile is someone with a disability and should be treated as such.
I see where you are coming from, and have thought about this before when there was a group of people near where i live who were doing a sort of vigilante mob tracking down suspected pedophiles and terrorising them.
It just made me consider that they might be attacking people with a mental disorder who could/should be treated.
But just to speak to what you said, if they are non-offending, are you talking about the ones that dont physically assault children? Because the ones who are viewing and distributing csam are still harming children. Maybe not directly, but its like supply and demand, isn’t it? People make it if people want it.
I think perhaps even the violent ones should be treated for a mental disorder. Maybe punsihed too, but if you draw parallels to other violent crime, many argue other criminals should be rehabilitated. Should this extend to pedophiles too?
The more i type, the more nuanced this becomes in my head. Perhaps that in and of itself is evidence that despite the obvious knee-jerk reaction to probably one of the most heinous things a person can do. Perhaps there is just more to this than anyone is brave enough to admit. (I say brave because anyone that sees you defending a pedophile automatically accuses you of being a pedophile, which is a fucking pathetic leap to make)
Having said all of that. If anyone ever did anything like that to my kids, i would rip their fucking heads off.
But just to speak to what you said, if they are non-offending, are you talking about the ones that dont physically assault children? Because the ones who are viewing and distributing csam are still harming children. Maybe not directly, but its like supply and demand, isn’t it? People make it if people want it.
I intentionally left that vague because of the nuance you mentioned. I think most people agree that physical assault of a child is heinous. Consumption of CP is more of a difficult gray area.
What? No, consumption of it is NOT a grey area. Wtf?
It isn’t?
Sure, consumption means creating demand, but it’s not directly harmful for the child. There is definitely much more wiggle room than when talking about straight up abuse or creating material.
I’d be inclined to agree that pedophiles should not get access to CSAM, and even just owning some should be an offense. I am open to discussion with professionals though, if they say it will be helpful and deliver a good argument, I’d be open to change my opinion. Which makes this a grey area IMO
If it’s pornography of an unwilling subject, surely the distribution and consumption is harmful to the subject, as it’s a violation of their privacy and integrity.
If someone had put secret cameras in your bedroom, would you be completely cool with them selling the pictures online?
What if you were abused, let’s say threatened with a weapon and forced to undress in front of a camera, a traumatic experience for sure. Afterwards you learn that the film is being traded between people who get off on this stuff. Would that really not feel like a further violation?
Would you really be unaffected by the knowledge that for the rest of your life, at any time, there could be creeps getting off on your abuse?
All drugs should be legal, but bodily autonomy is to high a purity test for everyone on planet earth.
Admit it everyone, capitalists will not let us live in peace. At least let me get high to numb the pain of existence.
