letsgocrazy @ letsgocrazy @lemm.ee

Posts

1

Comments

162

Joined

2 yr. ago

Using them for that purpose is fine.

Using them to hold back puberty in children who believe they are trans has SEVERE medical repercussions.

I disagree that children know they are trans.

You're trying to equate bigotry "there must be something wrong with trans" with the idea that "children do not have enough life experience to understand complex things like sex and gender"

I don't think children are smart enough not to shove a pencil up their nose, and you think they understand things like sex, gender expression, parenthood, and sexuality?

And you think children can decide they are trans?

No.

This kind of rhetoric has to stop.

Children cannot decide if they have gender dysphoria.

It's not about gays though, it's about children thinking they are trans.

Yes, there needs to be limits on the health care that is provided to children and parental concent.

There's nothing hypocritical about that.

You mean the book about a bunch of Muslims who take over the galaxy because they learn Karate?

Lord, please deliver us from people with really "clever" hot takes that are horribly reductive and strained through the mesh of whatever synonym for "woke" won't get me downvoted.

Is it not possible we just have a social media platform where we talk abouts hobbies and computers and not evangelise our political beliefs?

Some people have to complain about how bad things are - when things work the way they are supposed to these people get upset becuse cynicism is also a mask to hide lazy thinking.

In early April 2020, Chinese authorities in the southern city of Guangzhou, Guangdong province, which has China's largest African community, began a campaign to forcibly test Africans for the coronavirus, and ordered them to self-isolate or to quarantine in designated hotels. Landlords then evicted African residents, forcing many to sleep on the street, and hotels, shops, and restaurants refused African customers. Other foreign groups have enerally not been subjected to similar treatment.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/05/05/china-covid-19-discrimination-against-africans

You mean the same China that nailed everyone into their homes recently?

Woke people made it bad by their constant petty paternalism, and authoritarian bullying.

The mixture of narcissism and thinking they are always morally superior beings has created this situation.

"the rulers" dude, this isn't D&D

Imagine if Lemmy just totally avoided playground level political debate?

You forgot "logic" and "mushrooms" 🙄

I never said it wasn't a problem.

I said it wasn't socially acceptable.

Let me give you an example because it seems that you're getting too emotional to think straight.

Theft is a problem.

Theft is not socially acceptable.

Does that make things clearer for you?

I don't know what you mean by anti vaxxers. What defamation cases arr you talking about?

As for the rest of it, defamation laws vary from state to state, and defamation very much is an exception to to the first ammendment.

I think you are a bit confused about how defamation cases work.

If your comments are not protected if they are defamatory. The decision is made in the trial, not "before" the trial.

The defamatory statements are presumed to be untrue, it is for defendant to prove that they are not true.

If you go on record as saying something defamatory, and it can be shown be harmful to reputation, then you HAVE to be able to prove it is true.

Otherwise people could just accuse anyone of anything all the time, and that would be utter chaos.

You can't prove a negative.

So it you accuse me of molesting my patients, and I have beverage molested my patients, how can one prove it or doesn't make sense.

Here are the tests for defamation in Alabama:

To be defamatory:

• The statements must not be true but presented as facts (not opinions).
• The statements must be published or spoken.
• The statements must be read or heard by others.
• The statements must cause injury to your reputation.
• The statements are not protected under any kind of legal privilege.

If this black mayor guy is accusing others of racism, then they can sue him.

Obviously accusing government employees of racism and refusing to follow orders will harm their reputation.

There's Tests to decide that, but it's pretty obviously the case here.

The mayor has presented his opinions as facts. That is also clear.

Whether his remark are true or not would be for the court to decide, and would clearly be what the court case would be about.

The mayor has damaged to reputation of these people - and he will be found to have defamed them unless HE can prove his statements were true because HE is the one who made them.

Truth is a (the!) defence for defamation.

The last compounding factor would be whether he has a special kind of legal privelage. I don't know how it works for them in that regard.

Sorry, but the longer I think about this the more I think it is you who are deeply confused about defamation law.

That's not how they used it though. Grammatical construction matters

Just more subscription hell. It's ridiculous anymore.

"It's ridiculous these days"

"I don't go out any more"

But fascism wss also heavily defeated by a world war and that didn't stop it.

So if you're picking things that don't work, then violence also doesn't work.

It's almost as if you are more interested in ideating about committing violence than actually solving the problem.

Of course racism isn't socially acceptable.

OP just wanted to sound moral.

It's not naming them, it's repeating a claim, which, if not proven would be defamation.

Are black politicians immune from lying?