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
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.
I agree, and I take it this far: “I worked hard and paid for my house, why should some lazy loafer get housing for free? I paid 24,000$ in tuition, why should kids get free college?” I think that, at some point, one guy has to be the first guy to benefit from progress, and all the people who didn’t benefit just have to suck it up. I would 100% pay a much higher tax rate if it meant that homelessness was gone, hunger was gone, kids got free education… I’m Canadian, so I don’t need to say this about health care. Yeah, I paid an awful lot of mortgage, but if someone else gets a free house? Good!
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
That capitalism is good. There is no economic system more efficient at progress
It’s government that’s the failure. It’s Governments responsibility to shape the markets so capitalism benefits society and they have failed miserably
People don’t choose to be pedophiles. We shouldn’t hate them just for existing.
People choose to abuse children, and that should be strongly punished and I think the majority agrees with me on that.
But a non-offending pedophile is someone with a disability and should be treated as such.
I see where you are coming from, and have thought about this before when there was a group of people near where i live who were doing a sort of vigilante mob tracking down suspected pedophiles and terrorising them.
It just made me consider that they might be attacking people with a mental disorder who could/should be treated.
But just to speak to what you said, if they are non-offending, are you talking about the ones that dont physically assault children? Because the ones who are viewing and distributing csam are still harming children. Maybe not directly, but its like supply and demand, isn’t it? People make it if people want it.
I think perhaps even the violent ones should be treated for a mental disorder. Maybe punsihed too, but if you draw parallels to other violent crime, many argue other criminals should be rehabilitated. Should this extend to pedophiles too?
The more i type, the more nuanced this becomes in my head. Perhaps that in and of itself is evidence that despite the obvious knee-jerk reaction to probably one of the most heinous things a person can do. Perhaps there is just more to this than anyone is brave enough to admit. (I say brave because anyone that sees you defending a pedophile automatically accuses you of being a pedophile, which is a fucking pathetic leap to make)
Having said all of that. If anyone ever did anything like that to my kids, i would rip their fucking heads off.
But just to speak to what you said, if they are non-offending, are you talking about the ones that dont physically assault children? Because the ones who are viewing and distributing csam are still harming children. Maybe not directly, but its like supply and demand, isn’t it? People make it if people want it.
I intentionally left that vague because of the nuance you mentioned. I think most people agree that physical assault of a child is heinous. Consumption of CP is more of a difficult gray area.
What? No, consumption of it is NOT a grey area. Wtf?
It isn’t?
Sure, consumption means creating demand, but it’s not directly harmful for the child. There is definitely much more wiggle room than when talking about straight up abuse or creating material.
I’d be inclined to agree that pedophiles should not get access to CSAM, and even just owning some should be an offense. I am open to discussion with professionals though, if they say it will be helpful and deliver a good argument, I’d be open to change my opinion. Which makes this a grey area IMO
If it’s pornography of an unwilling subject, surely the distribution and consumption is harmful to the subject, as it’s a violation of their privacy and integrity.
If someone had put secret cameras in your bedroom, would you be completely cool with them selling the pictures online?
What if you were abused, let’s say threatened with a weapon and forced to undress in front of a camera, a traumatic experience for sure. Afterwards you learn that the film is being traded between people who get off on this stuff. Would that really not feel like a further violation?
Would you really be unaffected by the knowledge that for the rest of your life, at any time, there could be creeps getting off on your abuse?
Want to know something fun about US parents??
Patents don’t really protect new inventions. They give people a right to sue for financial damages and there is no criminal force of law (this is a generalization and I am not a lawyer). So courts don’t really go “hey, stop using invention ABC, someone else has a patent on it.” They just say “hey, that other guy invented it first, give him some money.”
Patents (not other forms of IP) are made to be wildly public so people can invent things on top of previous inventions.
Does it always work like that? No. But it’s one facet of US federal law that I find interesting, and a little bit hopeful.
That cats should remain indoors. Pet cats kill approximately 2.4 billion birds in the US alone, not to mention all the other animals that they also kill. I love cats as much as the next guy but keep them indoors for the love of nature
Plus, they are %99 less likely to get hit by a car or eaten by a coyote.
also they just live longer.
outdoor cats average…what…5 years? Indoor cats can get to 20. a lucky few even more.
I have a take on this that I think no one will have fun with:
In my opinion there is no moral way to keep a cat as a pet.
Allowing cats to roam as they desire results in the aforementioned ecological damage. The opposite - keeping cats locked in a few thousand feet at best for twenty-odd years of life - is cruel.
As someone who was raised in the woods with outdoor cats and couldn’t imagine keeping them inside - even though we lost two as I grew up - it’s a circle I just can’t square. So I figure that if and when I get cats, I’ll dodge the question and adopt some older cats who were already raised inside and couldn’t be trusted to go outside safely anyway.
To quote Margaret Thatcher, “a man who doesn’t own a car by the age of 26 can count himself a failure.”
I heavily disagree with that statement. Everyone has reasons not to drive. From disability, to cities being designed for walking and public transport, to being opposed to the pollution that is caused as a result of it, to not wanting to participate in traffic congestion, to not being able to fucking afford one, to being so bad at driving that you just give up after failing that license test multiple times, or to simple personal preference. Are all these people failures apparently? How does that make sense? Well, I guess the people who give up after failing the license test are, but everyone else??
Housing as an investment is wrong.
The price of basic human needs should not be tied to the rise and fall of the stock market, nor should ones retirement depend on the hyper inflated values of houses. 500K+ for a small house is absolute price gouging bullshit, regardless of location.
Victims should be the ones to decide whether forgiveness is deserved. no one else.
This is a bit meta, but I believe morality is objective. Actions have objective moral worth; epistemological disagreements about how we know the moral value of an action are irrelevant to the objectivity of goodness/badness itself.
Unpopular on lemmy or irl? Because I have plenty for lemmy
how about both?
Irl, I don’t think infinite economic growth is reasonable, feasible, or practical. There’s only so much land, only so much space in the world. Once we leave Earth, that changes, but not until then.
We should stop developing new plots of land and start building up. If a plot of land is already developed, it’s fair game. But no new plots of land.
I’m tired of seeing every empty field and forest getting bulldozed, although that’s not unpopular.
On Lemmy, I think illegal immigrants should be deported as a default. If they commit serious crimes, sure, jail them. But the vast majority should just get deported. And claiming asylum when you get caught is abusing the asylum system and ruining it for people who actually need it.
We should also heavily reduce the amount of legal immigrants too. We take in a fifth of the world’s immigrants, and we do not have a fifth of the world’s population. Immigration doesn’t really help the common man, it’s used to suppress wages. It’s a kind of a selfish thing, because more immigrants means less fields and woods, but immigration isn’t helping anyone but the rich either.
Abolish the ATF and the NFA. People have the right to defend themselves regardless of what the government says.
Protective tariffs like the Chicken Tax are good for domestic industry. This is a feature not a bug. I was thinking this long before Trump got in.
Immigration helps the common man by filling low level positions that most natives will not take. A lot of immigrants don’t know the local language and/or the local culture, so it is fair that they take free, unwanted jobs.
Further, there are a lot of protections for the workers, including immigrants, meaning wages and working conditions do not fall below acceptable standards. Immigrants strengthen the core pillars of industry, which might even lead to an increase in productivity and better conditions. They contribute to the economy and help pay public services which benefits the broader community.
All drugs should be legal, but bodily autonomy is to high a purity test for everyone on planet earth.
Admit it everyone, capitalists will not let us live in peace. At least let me get high to numb the pain of existence.
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.
The death penalty should be used only for white collar crimes and violations of the public trust. These crimes have the greatest impact on society, and usually have the strongest evidence reducing the chances of a wrongful conviction.
Everything is fair in fiction. No matter how sensitive or dark a topic is, fictional settings are the only place where anything should be allowed.
This does not mean that attacking/defaming people is ok, just that “I don’t like this” or “this is insensitive” should never be brought up against the existence of a work of fiction.
I’m not sure if “most” people would disagree with that, but there are too many that believe that fiction should be ruled by (subjective) morale and laws, while I believe it should be the place where anything goes.
