SAURON
1yr ago
No, it will not kill them. We routinely sedate 8 month old children for various medical procedures. It can even be done for a long time as long as the risk of long term complications is acceptable.
SAURON
1yr ago
Yes, they can most definitely be sedated or be given very strong painkillers. They can cause permanent harm if done for extended periods of time, but it can be done. Speaking from a related expertise- I'm an anaesthetist.
SAURON
1yr ago
As a slightly more nationalist Indian than the one you replied to, here's my perspective: I don't really care if Canada stops immigration from India. I have no plans to leave India, and any Indians who do wish to do so can fend for themselves. The Indian government doesn't need to facilitate people who want to emigrate. If that's the price India has to pay to whack a terrorist abroad, I would support more terrorists being whacked. If it leads to anti-india protests in Canada, well that's nothing new. Khalistanis in Canada, the US and the UK have organised such protests in the past, even to the point of attacking the Indian high commission. If Canada doesn't like extra-judicial killings, it could have extradited the guy designated as a terrorist by a fellow democracy and allowed him to stand trial in India.
SAURON
1yr ago
Also, the USA in Vietnam, with the establishment of free fire zones in villages suspected of helping the Viet Cong.
SAURON
1yr ago
Even in war, the golden rule still applies. If you employ tactics that are against the rules of war, so will your opponents, and leaving you with no net benefit. So you end up in an even more destructive war, worse for both sides, for no gain.
SAURON
1yr ago
I'd love to see an AI try and intubate someone, or deal with a difficult airway. Or give spinal anaesthesia, or an epidural, or a brachial plexus block. Anaesthesiology is much more procedure oriented than you think. There is no chance it could be done by a robot without tremendous technological advances.
SAURON
2yr ago
Can someone explain what is meant by "We survived another move?" We moved from reddit to here, right? Do you mean the split off from SSC on reddit was the first move? Or did we move again and I missed it?
SAURON
2yr ago
I'd say that's someone who is pretty clearly pretending to be a woman. It comes down to this- what's your definition of woman? If your definition, like the pro-trans people, is that a woman is anyone who says they're a woman, then this person would qualify as a woman but it makes the word meaningless. If your definition is that a woman is an adult human female, then this is clearly not a woman. If you definition is that a woman is anyone who is trying to present as an adult human female (as I infer) then this is a woman.( From this point on, I'm going to use the specific definition instead of the word to make the argument clearer.)
But then passing makes no sense the way you use the word. You are saying that she passes because you can tell that she's a woman (trying to look like an adult human female). But her objective, if she is a woman by your definition, is to look like an adult human female (not like someone who's trying to look like an adult human female) which she's failing at- hence pro trans people would not think of her as passing.
Steelman of the pro-trans argument: Woman is defined as someone who would prefer to be an adult human female, regardless of what they actually are. They're passing as a woman if they can pretend to be an adult human female so well that they're indistinguishable from a regular adult human female to the casual observer.
Steelman of the anti-trans argument: Woman is an adult human female. This man is pretending to be an adult human female while not actually being one. The pro-trans people are asking everyone else to pretend that his pretense is successful, to participate in his delusion, and that is unacceptable.
Not the person you replied to, but here's my opinion - no, every human does not have to be kept alive, and certainly not at public expense. However, if the parents are willing to pay out of their pocket for a chance at keeping their baby alive, I don't think anyone else should have a say in it. Probably a more moral use of their money than buying a sports car or having a destination wedding.
More options
Context Copy link