@Celestial-body-NOS's banner p

Celestial-body-NOS

🟦 All human beings are equal, **even when they aren't.**

0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 05 00:16:31 UTC

				

User ID: 290

Celestial-body-NOS

🟦 All human beings are equal, **even when they aren't.**

0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 05 00:16:31 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 290

β€Ž
β€Ž

And how do you decide who those fewer voters should be?

That was not the case in the 1990s.

gay club

More of a "gay-people-shoudn't-be-under-constant-threat-of-violence-intended-to-force-them-back-into-the-closet" club, or a "shift-the-societal-response-to-gay-people-existing-from-violent-repression-to-minding-your-own-d*mn-business" club.

14 foot high bolsheviks

What about 14-foot-high Left-SRs?

some not-IVF but medical procedure

It was my understanding that the majority of these procedures are performed when a husband and wife have been trying and failing to conceive in the traditional manner....

hard coded male sensibilities

Can you elaborate on the meaning of this term, as you understand it?

idk how to strikethrough

Put a tilde before and after.

(tilde = ~)

A War-of-Southern-Treason-era Unitedstatesian being both a leftist and a Democrat would be as incongruous an as a current-year Unitedstatesian being both a leftist and a Republican. (Also, Booth was a Know-Nothing, not a Democrat. The Know-Nothings were right-wing on their loudest issue (immigration) but also had some left-wing positions.)

[I] called him a leftist and a [D]emocrat

In 1865, the Democrats were the right-wing party.

Modest proposal: Automate the ports, but keep paying the longshore-men until they reach retirement age, and then just don't hire any more to replace them.

We'll get the efficiency benefits right away, the financial benefits over the next 47 years, but no-one will find themselves suddenly struggling to put food on their families.

Linda, 52, six years of experience; Louise, 52, hobby triathlon runner, six years of experience, applies for an admin position. Which do you pick, no other information?

If I can't get more information?

Heads, I hire Linda; tails, I hire Louise.

I am suspicious of a theory that happens to be embraced mostly by fat acceptance activists.

I am suspicious of any hypothesis which allows people to think their cruellest instincts justifiable.

A British citizen living in the US is substantially affected by political goings-on in the United States. Should [if RAND < 0.5 print "he" else print "she"] be entitled to vote in US elections?

(This isn't entirely intended as a 'gotcha' question, by the way. I can see the argument that people should vote where they live currently; I reject the notion that there are certain kinds of people who don't deserve any voice anywhere.)

Why do you think some people are able to lose weight, then?

Independent upper and lower set points?

Why do UK residents need to vote in Montana?

Because they're not British citizens and can not vote in British elections.

Do you think we're going to get to a world where elected officials say "HBD is true actually and that's why blacks underperform"[?]

I suppose that depends on how much progress we make in genetic engineering.

Maybe he was using a SEP field?

What if the Gros Michel banana specifically contained some protein that could have cured malaria

Like the Cinchona tree?

So you consider it fair for Bob, if he cannot swallow his pride, to be publicly humiliated, without any way of avoiding the situation beforehand, but not right for Alice, if she is incapable of swallowing her pride, to be expected to pursue a different career?

he can grumble about how β€œthis is bullshit”

And, in your view, is it a violation of his rights for him to suffer any consequences for grumbling and complaining while complying?

Obviously I am not saying that nobody ever gets pulled over despite not actually being guilty of the suspected offense.

Alice suspects Bob has done something wrong. Bob hasn't. If the onus is placed on Alice, she can avoid it by pursuing a different career. If it is placed on Bob, and Bob is not capable of stifling his indignation, is there some way for Bob to avoid being attacked in your proposed system?

"Generally speaking" isn't good enough. In this example, Bob didn't do anything wrong.

Denying that individual human beings matter, rather than the 'general' state of the community, is another path lined with skulls.

How exactly do you propose that a society of subsistence farmers build WMDs?

When Officer Alice interacts with ordinary citizen Bob, Alice could have opted out of the situation by pursuing a different career. Unless there is a similar way for Bob to opt out of the interaction, imposing on Alice a requirement, which not everyone is capable of fulfilling, is fairer than imposing the same requirement on Bob, as the former case allows those who cannot fulfil said requirement to exist in some other societal role, while the latter does not allow them to exist at all.

Admittedly this argument is dependent on the proposition that There Is No Such Thing As A Human Being Who Is Unworthy Of Life; however, societies which reject this axiom tend to feature piles of skulls.

Why is it the responsibility of the officers to be calm and gentle

Because if they can't, they have the option of pursuing a different career.