• 2 Posts
  • 62 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: March 5th, 2024

help-circle

  • The current Congress has been one of the least productive in terms of passing laws… But one they did pass was the Epstein Files Transparency Act. It was the best chance to hold perpetrators to account, and had bipartisan support (which is hard to come by these days).

    What I’m getting at is nobody has said “oh well”, but a handful of people appointed to the right positions have blocked anything from moving forward with it. And that’s frustrating as hell. There are also tons of distractions, such as the war in Iran or anything about the ballroom, which can make it feel like The Trump-Epstein Files™ are behind us. But they’re not.

    (Though they should be)






  • For some people, sure - actively choosing chrome despite knowing the kind of company Google has become is silly

    But then I think about the people who have chrome pre-installed on their phones, with no ability to remove it. Despite using a different browser, they still got burned by this.

    I do believe lemmings have a higher tech literacy than the average internet user, but I also believe tech literacy shouldn’t be a requirement to hide from ai.

    The people who boast about using chrome and insist other browsers are trash absolutely had their faces eaten… But the people who did their best to avoid chrome did not











  • I just read it for the first time and the things that really stood out to me were the parts about Israel

    During these times, there will be an evil ruler in Israel who will wage war and cause cities to become desolate

    And

    The Antichrist will form an alliance with the ruler of Israel and will desire to occupy the coastal area. Where the author specifically calls out Gaza.

    This was last updated June of 2020, well before the October 7th attacks that led to the (ongoing) genocide

    (Edited for clarity)



  • The law is meant to be fair (which is a separate can of worms, but the goal is fairness). It is not meant to be moral, though it often follows what people generally consider to be moral, like don’t rape or murder people.

    And, honestly, using the “reasonable person” argument here goes against your point - it indicates that people with different morals exist, and therefore morality must be subjective.


  • Honestly this is a pretty big topic in philosophy. It could be argued that morality is a human construct and therefore must be subjective.

    Some people believe that not going to church each week is amoral, but some atheists think organized religion is amoral - who is right?

    You and I can agree that murder is immoral. Would that stance change if we were on the jury for a murder trial and, if found guilty, the offender would be sentenced to death? If that doesn’t make us murderers, what makes the death penalty an appropriate and moral punishment?

    Simply replying “false” indicates little to no thought on the subject or its nuance, and gives off strong “I’m 13 and this is deep” vibes