I think the core trait to look out for is willingness to work around personal issues. With time that might be an openness about your problems, at the very least. Maybe aiming for half an hour earlier, communicating status often and early.
Fucking up is human, but not trying your best not to fuck up is a dick move.
The point is that even without that reason you wouldn't have any kids. It's not the cornerstone of your childfree-ness. Neither is it for me, which is why I recognize that it's morally lazy to rest on the imaginary laurels of not birthing children.
By that logic, every parent could ALSO claim they are doing their part for the earth. Simply by not having EVEN MORE children. Hell, maybe they are better than you because you only didn't have 2 kids, but they didn't have 4 additional kids. Thats twice the savings, twice the reason to not make the world a better place and blame everyone else!
We could absolutely regulate veganism. Hell, it's the other way around at the moment. For pretty much every animal rights law, there's an exception specifically for farm animals. Just removing those exceptions would make factory farming (and therefore like 90% of meat production) illegal.
And in a more general sense, we absolutely can regulate carnism (aka the opposite of veganism), exactly how we regulate a million other moral questions.
Considered innocent, by the state organs. Considered innocent, in how the state treats them. NOT EVER AT ALL PROVEN innocent by the courts.
Courts are not and have never been concerned about proving innocence. All they care about is guilty or not guilty. Not guilty could mean innocent, but again, the courts don't care about that.
Considered innocent, by the state organs. Considered innocent, in how the state treats them. NOT EVER AT ALL PROVEN innocent by the courts.
Courts are not and have never been concerned about proving innocence. All they care about is guilty or not guilty. Not guilty could mean innocent, but again, the courts don't care about that.
If I buy my support staff "IT for Dummies", and they then, sometimes, reproduce the same/similar advice (turn it off and on again), I owe the textbook writers money? That's news to me.
Nothing about todays iteration of copyright is reasonable or good for us. And in any other context, this (relatively) leftist forum would clamour to hate on copyright. But since it could now hurt a big corporation, suddenly copyright is totally cool and awesome.
(for reference, the true problem here is, as always, capitalism)
NO! That is how the court system, and therefore the state sees him in regards to punishment and treatment. That does not mean, and has never ever ever ever meant, that being declared not guilty means they are proven to be innocent. Just that there's wasn't evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.
Innocence is VERY SPECIFICALLY NOT WHAT COURTS declare. They only ever declare that there wasn't enough evidence presented to proof guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
But it's the idiots that CONSTANTLY argue that the world will be fine. The framing of it as protection of animals/the planet/the climate makes it incredibly easy for people to pretend it's optional, not directly related to them. This isn't a hypothetical point, EVERY SINGLE climate discussion I've ever witnessed some mouthbreather has argued that "the climate will continue to exist, it doesn't need protecting".
What needs protecting isn't the planet, the ecology, the animals or plants, it's US. It's ENTIRELY an US problem.
I don't read it that way, quite the opposite. So, so many people act like this is mostly about protecting the climate or the environment or animals, not about protecting our way of life. The way so many frame it as protecting the earth makes it so easy to make it sound optional.
But the world will be okay, it doesn't need protecting. It's the 8 billion humans that RELY on the world AS IT IS NOW that will be fucked. It's human protection, not ecological protection.
Does she even need Linux? 99% of things that run on Linux will also run on MacOS (or have a MacOS version).
If you need a VM, Virtualbox is good enough. I'd recommend Ubuntu, simply because that's what most people use, ergo you'll find tutorials/information for every little aspect of it.
Your 7 year old probably also wishes for world peace, better stop working for a better world!
Everything on this world dies, therefore it's morally totally fine to artificially create, imprison, and then kill billions for no other reason than taste. Every dog dies, therefore shooting them for fun is morally totally fine!
Appeal to nature, seriously, for your 7 year olds sake, look it up.
Sure, and if you could somehow demonstrate that advocating for 100% means those 100 people are definitely, totally not going to change their consumption at all, you'd have an actual point.
Can you explain what the collective in "collective action" is made up of, if not individuals? How does your solution not require individual action? "My individual vote won't change anything" is the exact argument you're making.
But let's pretend a world filled with meat eaters would vote for the anti-meat party. Suddenly, meat costs 3 times as much (at the very least). Do you genuinely believe people would simply accept this change? There wouldn't be protests the very next day? People wouldn't vote for the yes-meat party immediately?
Any political action needs to be supported by the populace. Otherwise known as individual action.
I think the core trait to look out for is willingness to work around personal issues. With time that might be an openness about your problems, at the very least. Maybe aiming for half an hour earlier, communicating status often and early. Fucking up is human, but not trying your best not to fuck up is a dick move.