I_Has_A_Hat @ I_Has_A_Hat @lemmy.ml

Posts

0

Comments

189

Joined

2 yr. ago

Are you aware the motto wasn't established until 1956? It's not like it has some deep rooted history. Fundamentalists took over the government and put it into place relatively recently.

If you are boiling it down to the absolute basics, I guess you can try to say that. But at that point, damn near any movie where the main character is trying to stop a criminal of some sort is a "cop drama".

Die Hard is a cop drama.

Every James Bond is just a cop drama.

Even 'Who Framed Roger Rabbit?' is a cop drama.

Like yea, you can make that stretch, but you're using such broad strokes that "cop drama" is meaningless.

Imagine defending advertisements.

Sorry, but I'm not a fucking product. I don't care who's pushing them.

Ah a cutscene. Let me put my controller down, grab my drink an-

"PUSH 'A', MOTHERFUCKER! DO IT NOW! DO IT! Aww, you fucked it up. Way to go idiot! Why did you think you could relax for even a moment?"

Sounds like you'd love and hate Phoenix Wright.

Please keep going with that train of thought

What is your intended outcome of them having a happy and healthy life? Is it so they... choose... not to have abortions?

You don't want to institute a ban, but would rather influence people's choices. That's pro-choice, dumbass. Anyways you cut it, that's pro-choice.

You can be against abortion and still be pro-choice. No one is pro-abortion. You want to go about it in a way that changes the circumstances in people's lives so they choose not to have an abortion. So you do think the person's choice matters. And you can see circumstances for why someone would choose to abort. But note how you don't want to take actually away their choice, just change the circumstances so they don't make that choice. That's because...

You're pro-choice.

So you don't want to ban it, but rather change the circumstances in society and individual people's lives so they don't want to get them in the first place? Congratulations! You're pro-choice.

So are things like non-viable pregnancies due to the inability to afford a home? How about rape? How about a minor kicked out because their parents don't approve, is their inexperience, immaturity, and lack of support just because they can't afford a house? What if it's a viable pregnancy, but the baby will be brain dead and require constant care; is cost of living the only burden the parents have to be concerned about? What if there's only a chance it's non-viable, but delaying the abortion puts the mother at risk; at what percent chance is a person allowed to terminate the pregnancy and not put their body at risk? 50% chance of living? 10%? Less than 1%?

These aren't exceptions, these are the types of reasons people get abortions. Let me say it again with emphasis: These aren't exceptions, these are the types of reasons people get abortions. It is so God damn ignorant to think the main reason people get abortions is because they're poor and can't afford to have kids. And to plow ahead and support anti-abortion legislation isn't just ignorant, it's dangerously idiotic.

As we are already seeing in states that have banned abortion, even ones that have some half assed medical exemption, doctors just won't perform them. Or they'll wait to perform them until it's much more risky; like when the patient is literally bleeding out. What doctor is going to risk getting constantly sued (and let's just set aside how fucking asinine it is to allow lawsuits from third-parties in no way affected) because some jackass isn't convinced it was REALLY medically necessary?

Here's an idea, how about we leave the decision of abortion up to doctors and their patient's? That way, we don't have to try and legislate around all the very legitimate reasons people get abortions. Do you think it's immoral? Great, no one's forcing you to get one and others having them has literally zero impact on your life.

The fact that you think that's the only reason (or even just the main reason) people get abortions shows how you, like most anti-abortionists, haven't bothered to look at the facts and have your head so far stuck in the sand that its not even worth talking to you.

Let me give you a hypothetical that's close to reality. Say an artist gets very popular, but doesn't want their art used to teach AI. Let's even say there's even legislation that prevents all this artist's work from being used in AI.

Now what if someone else hires a bunch of cheap human artists to produce works in a style similar to the original artist, and then uses those works to feed the AI model? Would that still be stolen art? And if so, why? And if not, what is this extra degree of separation changing? The original artist is still not getting paid and the AI is still producing works based on their style.

And what if the human running the AI likes one of these "mistakes" and tells the AI to run with it?

Several boys only organizations or programs have changed to accepting all genders. Meanwhile, most girls only organizations or programs have remained girls only.

To back this all up, just look at the history of humanity transporting plants and animals all over the place and fucking shit up, all because we figured out the absolute best defense against our own predators, being too fucking smart for our own good.

You're assuming this is the norm rather than something being transported and not able to survive in the new environment. Kudzu, as an example, is an invasive plant from Japan that has taken over the Southern US due to lack of insects and animals that eat it. But if Kudzu was brought to the Amazon instead, it likely wouldn't survive due to the high acidity of the soil. The plants there are specialized and it's unlikely for a plant without this specialization being able to widely spread.

It's a bit of a mixed bag. There are a lot of pro-China comments that are just... Well they either drank the kool-aid or are dishing it out. Especially when it comes to social policies.

On the other hand, China has been making significant technological accomplishments that you just don't hear about in Western media. They've made a lot of advancements in spaceflight and manufacturing processes that humanity as a whole could benefit from if we were more cooperative. And that's not even mentioning Nuclear Power.

China is WAY ahead of the rest of the world when it comes to new nuclear power. They're the only ones with Gen 4 reactors, the only ones working on Thorium reactors, and are on track to build over 100 new nuclear plants over the next few years. China is to nuclear power as the US is to weapons; sure other countries might be tinkering with some stuff, but there's really no comparison when they're doing more than the rest of the world combined.

I wish there were more unbiased sources. Unfortunately, there's usually only one of two sides. Either you get news from China which usually boils down to "We're amazing and nothing we do is ever bad or wrong. Anyone saying otherwise is just lying because they're jealous/afraid of our wild success!" Or you get news from the US/West that's basically "China is a totalitarian poo-country that's on the verge of collapse. They contribute nothing to global advancement and the only thing they're good for is making cheap, poor quality, crap."

That episode was fantastic. This whole season has been amazing actually. SNW has been an huge breath of fresh air after decades of awful Trek's (Abrams movies, Discovery, Picard).

They haven't been afraid to explore heavy topics. The episodes have returned to mostly episodic, with some long term character growth thrown in. That has always been the formula Star Trek needs. An occasional big story arc can be good, but you can't make that the entire show.

It honestly feels like the show has the potential to be up there with TNG or DS9. And unlike those two, it's good episodes aren't surrounded by bad or mediocre filler. I know some people are upset about the shorter seasons compared to other Trek shows, but if they manage to keep the quality consistently high, I don't have any issue with it.

IR Blasters!

I feel like I'm the only one who used them or cares that they were quietly phased out of phones.

You used to be able to use your phone as a universal remote. Being able to control my TV, sound system, ceiling fan, and lights all from my phone was so convenient! Plus if you were stuck in like a waiting room and they had ads or garbage like Fox News on, you could change the channel or turn it off completely. It was an incredibly useful feature to me, but I guess barely anyone else used since it was removed from phones without any complaints.

Except me. I'm complaining!

XBox and Playstation: Hyper-realism! Low latency, higher frame rate! Games for serious adult gamers! FPS and Hack&Slash are the best genres ever!

Nintendo: We make fun games for fun people. Give us your money.

Tasha knew he was fully functional, in every way.