this post was submitted on 06 Apr 2025
0 points (NaN% liked)

Ask Lemmy

33059 readers
1574 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected]. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected] or [email protected]


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Example: I believe that IP is a direct contradiction of nature, sacrificing the advancement of humanity and the world for selfish gain, and therefore is sinful.

~~Edit: pls do not downvote the comments this is a constructive discussion~~

Edit2: IP= intellectal property

Edit3: sort by controversal

top 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

The free movement of people is a human right!

Note that capital is free to go whatever it wants to.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 months ago

i think that institutions should be respected.

It's the number one problem in american politics right now, everything we are currently experiencing, is from people treating politics like a toy. Rather than an institution.

It's so incredibly hard to state how critically important it is for the functioning of society, that the structures running our society, are respected.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 months ago

People shouldn't be jumping through hoops to conceive their own child while there are already children in need of a home

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago
  • The illusion that we are "rational" has done more damage than good, and if we were to just embrace that emotions are not just real, but a stronger influence on people's behaviour (and therefore reality) than any facts, we might start getting somewhere as a species.
[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

Circumcision is multilation

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 months ago

I have two.

There is no such thing as toxic masculinity or toxic femininity. There is only toxic individualism.

Sometimes, you shouldn't be yourself. The person you are might be awful. Bullying and societal pressure correcting you to a norm can be a good thing.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

Open borders. I strongly believe in open borders as a moral imperative. Human beings have been migrating for survival, resources, and exploration for over 20,000 years. The concept of nation-states imposing constraints on movement is a modern invention that doesn't align with the inherent human need for freedom of mobility. People in the southwestern states of the US with Mexican roots will tell you "We didn't cross the border, the border crossed us."

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

If you cannot cook yourself a basic meal (I'm talking boil water, dump a box of pasta in, cook it, strain it, then add red sauce from a jar level of basic), you have failed as a human being. An adult using the whole excuse of "I just can't cook" is pathetic and inexcusable unless you have genuine mental incapacities that prevent you from learning a basic recipe and how to use a stovetop, especially now with access to the internet/videos teaching how to cook.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

The pay rate of the lowest paid worker of any company or institution should be somehow legally and directly tied to the pay rate of the highest paid executive.

If the executive wants to make more money and gets a raise, then so do the workers.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

Suicide shouldn't be illegal. If you've tried treatments and seen a therapist for years but just want out - you should be able to schedule a day to be put to sleep.

I think its immoral not to give people a dignified way out.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 months ago

Monogamy is very often an extremely toxic factor in many relationships.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 months ago

Eating and using animals when there is a plant-based alternative is wrong and should not be done.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

Being "proud" of your acheivements is fine.

Being "proud" of your country or your state or your football team that you're not a member of,or your ethnicity is douchebaggery.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 months ago (6 children)

Veganism. It's interesting to see how even seemingly very moral people throw logic out the door when the topic turns to not killing animals.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Totally.

And I think the torture and abuse of non-human animals is fundamental to the treatment of human animals. When I see hegemony promoting the genocide of humans, it's obviously related to the complete devaluation of non-human life.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

Is your belief based on an animal's capacity for consciousness? If so do you think all animals, regardless of their intelligence, deserve the right to not be eaten? Where would you draw the line?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

Hmmm, I wonder why people dedicated to forcing 95% of the population into an unwanted lifestyle change ever receive pushback at all? I mean it's completely reasonable to radically alter the diet that has supported humanity since before talking was invented but I'm sure you have a ton of nifty ideas on how to make lentils almost taste like chicken

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 months ago

Especially when it's "foodies" that pretend to have this enormous respect for food. Shouldn't these people be on the bleeding edge of things?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

It's interesting to me in the reverse, because it's sort of how the food chain works, granted I do hate seeing the inhumane conditions in which a lot of animals for food are kept (if we were still cavemen it seems more ok than now because it'd be more of a fair match between us and our prey).

Also plants feel pain too (please also kill them humanely).

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 months ago

Yup. It's a moral baseline that, sadly, most people trip and fall over.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Simply being family doesn't mean you get to remain in my life. Cut off anyone who is toxic or otherwise not good for your life and health. This includes parents.

After a decade it is still surprising to me how many people seem appalled by my no contact situation. I'm sorry, but I've wasted enough of my life on them and wishing for a fantasy dynamic that will never exist.

"But they're your blood..."

So what.

"But they're your family..."

No they're not. I made new family.

Some people have really judged me for this decision. I judge others as they complain about their toxic families they never do anything about.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

Stealing is OK, the ok-ness of the stealing is inversely proportional to the wealth of the person you steal from.

If you steal 100 dollars from someone who only has 1000 dollars, that's reprehensible, but if you can nick a few million off a billionaire fucking go for it.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 months ago

You can't direguard anyone's humanity. Even billionaires. There are no universally bad people, negativity is always relational.

Though I do think you can weigh a billionaire's comfort against the folks they made billions from, and that may just be potent enough for the death penalty.

However, I don't think punishment is a humane solution. Rehabilitation and integration are always preferred. Though again, some folks integrate best as corpses.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

I treat all people with religious beliefs as members of a dormant terrorist cell.

They could be your nice neighbor with whom you can interact normally on a day-to-day basis, but in the end they all have compromised against logic and, in the right conditions, that is a terrible liability.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

Ideally children should be raised by more than two people.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

Your feelings are not facts.

Being offended, doesn't mean you're in the right and the other person is in the wrong.

Just because your religion says something (or claims it does), doesn't put you in the right.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 months ago

Polygamy should be legal. If three or more consenting adults want to commit to each other, who the hell cares? Same goes for relatives in sexual relationships who aren't having kids. Like why do we care who fucks who as long as everyone is capable of enthusiastic consent?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

We need stricter social rules again in a lot of areas and children need to be brought up stricter again. Now I don't mean we should get back to being in other people's business in regards to what they wear or who they love. But let's go back to shunning people for littering. Teach kids to sit still and be quiet in certain spaces like public transport or restaurants. Ostracize people who are loud and disruptive in public. Let's just implement some stricter social rules again.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

Killing yourself is ok. You don't know what it's like to be them and be in their head.

I'll never do it. Even in darkest depths, but respect anyone's right to say peace out.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 months ago

Being trans, gay, bi, black, or a different ethnicity than what is considered 'normal' in your society doesn't make you special, or less than human. I support trans rights and want to treat all humans equally on a base level. Assuming someone who looks or sounds like a woman is a woman is not transphobic, even if they are a trans man. Nor is assuming a man is straight homophobic.

At the same time, I think it's strange to introduce yourself as trans or gay in a public setting or on a social platform as if it's your calling card or occupation to be proud of. I was born with double-jointed thumbs, I don't think I should be congratulated or mocked for that, the same I don't think someone born with a man's body and a woman's brain, or otherwise decides to identify as a woman later in life, or is sexually attracted to either anything or nothing, should be given more than a passing acknowledgement.

I understand the world is cruel and harsh, and so I understand why there needs to be an LGBTQ community, but there -shouldn't- be one.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

There is no utility in punishment. Wanting people who wronged you to suffer isn't a desire for justice, but a desire for revenge. Dangerous people can be stopped from hurting others without locking them in cages or treating them poorly.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

I think individualism has gone too far. We pander too much to each person’s individual rights, and not each person’s individual responsibilities. I’m not talking about human rights here, I’m not talking about labour rights or any of the genuinely important stuff.

I’m talking about the self important experiences of the individual. The idea that someone has the right to believe whatever they want without responsibility to those around them. The most obvious answer is anti-vaxxers that spread literal lies. Whatever about vaccine hesitancy when there is legitimate peer reviewed medical potential for harm, there are levels of hesitancy. But when it goes to the point of fabricating data and spreading lies that will ultimately only cause harm to society, then in that case I’m ok with those people having any free speech rights voided, including full legal culpability for the harm it causes, akin to medical terrorism.

Where established data shows that people are contributing harm to society, contradicting scientifically proven data, and a person deliberately continues to spread misinformation when they are informed that they are causing harm, then they clearly do not care for the protection of the community, they should have forego societal protections for themselves, rights to free speech, rights to own property, and where necessary incarceration. If you’re in a position of power/authority or have specific training in the field, then you should face exponentially greater legal consequences for this deliberate harm.

Many people may agree with the general principles of this sentiment but as a society we are not ready to have that conversation, because the first person to be locked up would trigger a mass protest not widespread agreement. All because we have permitted individualism to far overpower the importance of collectivism. Rights should not be absolute they should always be coupled to responsibilities. Even if that responsibility is simply not to cause deliberate harm to others.

And the idea that someone’s beliefs about reality are somehow important to uphold. That the person above believes they are not doing harm, despite being told otherwise, that this idea should hold any weight in court is wrong. People should be informed of their ignorance and measurable reality is the only true reality that should be taken into account . Just like ignorance of the law is not a defence, ignorance of reality should not be a defence.

If a person is spreading misinformation that causes harm, they should be served a legal notice that outlines that they have been “judged to have been causing harm to society by spreading information that is adjudicated as false and harmful by an sanctioned and independently operated committee, whose ruling has been further agreed upon by a plurality of specialist training bodies in the relevant field. The only entities who contradict this societally important and data derived ruling are those that mean harm to society or those without the relevant knowledge base to make any informed statements on the matter. As of this point you will be treated as the former now that you have been served notice that the information you are spreading is factually incorrect and harmful. If you continue to spread this misinformation you sacrifice a portion or all of your rights afforded to you by this society. Your assets can be seized, you may be incarcerated, and your access to any and all communication with other humans may be partially or entirely withheld. This is a measure to combat information terrorism.”

Civil liberties are a privilege not an inalienable right.

You might think this sounds dystopian but it’s my answer to your question. Obviously it needs baked in failsafes to stop a small few individuals from corrupting it for authoritatian abuse. But just because something could be hypothetically abused doesn’t make it a bad idea. You just need to insulate against the abuse.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

I think immigration laws are inherently a violation of universal human rights. What is a more basic expression of freedom and liberty than being able to choose where in the world to build your life?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

Absolute free speech is overrated. You shouldn’t be able to just lie out your ass and call it news.

The fact that the only people who had any claim against Fox for telling the Big Lie was the fucking voting machine company over lost profits tells you everything you need to know about our country

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Animals don't exist for us to use. They aren't ours. Outside of survival scenarios, it's wrong to eat animals or take things like milk or eggs from animals. It's fucked up.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

Extend that to plants and mineral resources, and you'll be both fully moral and dead.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

I thought of a few stupid things, but everyone talking about kids made me think of this one.

I am strongly against Trickle down suffering.

"I put up with this terrible thing when I was your age, and even though we could stop it from happening to anyone, it's important that we make YOU suffer through it too."

Hazing, bullying, unfair labor laws, predatory banking and more. It's really just the "socially acceptable" cycle of abuse.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

Mine: Kids are pretty great, actually. They are smarter than you think and can make sense of a lot of stuff you wouldnt expect them to. You should treat their thoughts and feelings with the same respect that you would give an adult.