DarthBueller @ DarthBueller @lemmy.world

Posts

4

Comments

588

Joined

2 yr. ago

I'm all in favor of going apeshit with renewables, but I was under the impression that with current global energy usage, it would take renewables on a scale that is basically impossible to accomplish, if we wanted to drop carbon and nuclear as the backbone of global power production. Or at least that's what Sabine Hossenfelder told me on YouTube.

Too bad the thing you want hard data on is virtually impossible to accurately gather with any reliability. What I do know is that as a former fundamentalist evangelical xtian examining my own former in-group, there was a ton of active coordination to poison the well of our young minds against "the world," which meant science, evolution, sex, role of women, higher education, and anyone who was not our flavor of christian. Most kids willfully mimicked their parents opinions, like I did. And of my then in-group, it seemed that for every handful of families, half of them had insane parents (domineering fathers and submissive mothers) that were very happy that the Bible gave a divine mandate/suggestion to beat their children to enforce compliance with the dictates of their faith.

Religion isn't a choice - you can't choose to believe something. I used to be obsessed with my religion and my relationship to god. Then I had a nervous breakdown, saw a shrink, and was diagnosed with depression and ADHD. Two weeks into taking wellbutrin, ALL CARES about my immortal soul and god and whatever just turned off entirely, like a giant breaker being thrown. It was amazing, and made me realize that people's brain chemistry has as much to do with them being religious as cultural factors.

The point is that by banning it, they remove agency from the kid. So the parents will be WAY less likely to take out their displeasure of their kid not wearing religiocultural garb on the kid, since the kid has no choice. Far better than the beatings and other less physical abuse that will rain down on a substantial minority of kids if they voluntarily opted out of the garb.

It's obvious that the "we should give women from oppressive backgrounds the choice to volunteer to oppress themselves in public schools" folks didn't grow up in an oppressive religion. It is actually quite easier to understand if one thinks of ALL religions as cults for a moment, to remove the veneer of the sacred.

What technically could be called a "choice" is often far from it. On the mild side, maybe your momma or daddy isn't "forcing" you to wear an abaya/floor length jean dress/bonnet/whatever, but if you choose NOT to wear it, you face disapproval and pushback from co-religionists. On the harsh side, choosing not to wear whatever garb can lead you to being harshly punished, ostracized, even beaten.

Giving the kids half a chance to form a self-concept that is larger than their family's own religiocultural worldview is a kind of freedom, and yes, it diverges greatly from the US view of "religious freedom," which is includes the freedom to try and indoctrinate one's kids to ensure that there will be a future generation of primitive baptists/mainstream evangelicals/US anglicans/muslims/etc. that continue to teach that women are subserviant to men.

Protecting the society's Overton window concerning women from being shifted toward any religious group's preferred direction (let alone a minority group that has a terrible present tract record insofar as female equality is concerned) is a real hard thing to get right. Quite honestly, having grown up as a fundamentalist evangelical Christian and having spent years deprogramming myself from my childhood indoctrination, I would have zero issue seeing the same laws equally enforced against public expressions of religion in this country as well. Any space children have from their family to form their own opinions, without being forced to "other" themselves through religiocultural garb, is good space.

What percentage of husbands/street enforcers will beat her if she doesn't wear it? Where do those cultural norms of modesty come from, pray tell?

Compared to the US, France has massive taxes and wealth redistribution. You actually have an estate/inheritance tax that captures tax not only from the inheritance but from gifts made during the lifetime of the deceased. You have universal healthcare. You also have a massive influx of immigrants, not all of them from former French colonies, many of whom don't give a fuck about France's highly valued secularism and other cultural values. You don't come to a France looking for a better life and simultaneously demand that France make an exception for you to allow the offensive visible symbolic separation of women from society because your religion/culture demands it. It is entitled in the extreme that people want to make France like the country they fled.

Well if I’m going to have to worry about the borg queen trying to crush Unimatrix Zero, forgettaboudit.

As an attorney that worked for Legal Aid in a past life, I offer the observation that people in poverty have an entirely different experience with the legal system than folks who are not desperately poor. A traffic ticket turns into an inescapable pile of court debt, your license gets suspended because of the debt, but you have to drive to get to work. You get caught driving on a suspended license then you miss your first court date because the notice went to an old address that you were evicted from, then you are late to your second court date because your boss wouldn't let you out the door. Then your kid gets sick and you miss another date, but your phone is dead and you can't call the court, and the judge throws your ass in jail for contempt. You miss work, you lose your job. You are absolutely panicking, and possibly incredibly cynical and angry to boot. Once you've got the system looking at you, the attention offers numerous ways to fuck you thirty times to Tuesday, in ways that reach beyond the direct action of the system.

I am not justfying crime, but I have seen enough variations of the aforementioned scenario to understand that for some, this translates into an extremely nihilistic view of a very small world where the morality of certain behavior stops being evaluated.

Again, not excusing responsibility, but just sharing what I've encountered - I've also witnessed people that seem like perfectly well adjusted folks who suddenly commit shockingly criminal acts, and seeing this transformation occur, it is clear that something just isn't right in their head. Don't know if it's nature or nuture, but they're subtly broken and there's probably not a damn thing that can fix them. These folks are far fewer in number than folks driven by worldview shaped by desperation.

Dude, if you didn't get my point indirectly from my extremely sarcastic prior comment, here it is directly: you're putting the word "hate" into my mouth, leading me to believe that any conversation we have has a foregone conclusion. I have zero interest in engaging in the discourse as you've shaped it. Peace.

No, I consider those with fundamentalist beliefs in an exclusionary religion to be extremist. Bug off.

Relevant: Excellent congressional legal memo explaining the current US law on CSAM (as of 2022) Link

AHS? American Home Shield? American Horror Story?

People are downvoting you because you're acting like a dick.

I'd be more likely to reach out to a carefully chosen DA rather than LEO - far less risk of running into troglodytic idiocy, more likely to have someone who can listen, process, and draw correct conclusions and if necessary connect you with LEO capable of doing the same. But then again, this is not an area I have any experience in.

Yes. It makes sense. I am a former evangelical Christian, and yes, they are passive extremists. Passive, as in only a handful are dumb enough to take up arms, and extremists, insofar as they will allow, encourage, or justify horrors if it achieves their ends.

Actually, in law, appeal to authority is how the law fucking works. If there's controlling authority, great. If there's non-controlling authority that is particularly well thought out, that authority might be adopted whole cloth, or with some caveats. A law journal article, for example, was the source of the "transformation" standard for derivative works under copyright law.