• 0 Posts
  • 151 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 9th, 2023

help-circle
  • Not sure about biological reasons. Its possible I spose but without more medical knowledge. In not sure how removing / changing organs as they grow developmentally effects the final outcome.

    The argument has always been about the maturity of the candidate. And the idea that surgery is not practically reversible. Vs the mental harm of growing up in a body that dose not match your perceived gender.

    But I have to wonder. As In the UK and I am sure the US hormone blockers are also being attacked with often questionable medical evidence as to the harm the may do when used on developing teenagers.

    Given In the UK it is definatly not legal for anyone under the age of consent to have gender reasignment surgery. The current attacks seem to be aimed at making it impossible for that surgery to achive its best success once it is legal.


  • Not disagreeing. More devils advocate.

    But are you basically saying if your home is attacked by another nation. One much larger and using draft to fill the ranks of attackers.

    You are happy to allow your leader to fail to convince people to save your and your family/childrens lives.

    Because at the end of it. That is why many folks support draft for a nation under attack.

    I personally always think it is best as a last resort. Trained full time pros are genrally better at the job. But in an attack like this the amount of work needed to build and manage defences needs a huge labour force. Even modern tech warfare needs huge labour.

    It is the idea that everyone needs the actions of these people to survive. That makes the vast majority express views like Ops original comment.




  • It dose. But its not like western xtian stopped influencing Africa some time in the past. Today American xtian orgs spend a fortune lobbying African nations and supporting extream right wing politics.

    Lets face it the western world has difficulty removing money from politics. Even in the richest nation in the world. So having money from that nation interfere with the politics of less wealthy nations. Well lets face it there is a reason those are the nations right wing xtians try to push their ideals. It works.


  • Bollocks. The Ukraine has every hope of convincing Russia to leave its soil. If it has the support of other nations.

    Having those nations allow the Ukraine to use weapons supplied in a way that forces Russia to actually spend resources defending its own inferstructure is the first step to lowering there ability to push everything they have into another nation.

    The Ukraine has done a fantastic job of limiting the ability of Russia to over run its nation. While being limited in its ability to respond to the attacker. Forcing Russia to defend its ow borders will make a huge difference in the Ukraine ability to remove Russia fro mits own borders.







  • Again not covered by the EU agreement. Although a few EU members argue strongly for military unification. It was raised by many during brexit as a reason to leave the EU. So again unlikely to find full upport in the near future.

    Currently the supply of arms and weapons is totally uncovered by EU trade agreements. NATO has some agreements. But non that cover this.

    The thing people forget. International law dose not really exist beyond atual agreements nations are willing to commit to. Unfortunately as the world is a bloody long way from a utopia. Most nations are unwilling to agree to things that limit their own military actions. So nothing most other nations can do.

    The closest we ever came is post WW2 where the Geneva convention and ICC was set up.

    But as you can see. No nation is forced to abide by such rules. The US and Russia make i clear. Might makes right until some event leaves oa nation on the losing side of a battle with enough losses of resources to need help from other nations.

    What the rest of the world thinks in wars is still pretty much unimportant to the events.


  • Blasphemy quick stone the unbelievers.

    Kidding of course. Have to admit I agree. I’ve used Linux since the late 1990s. So long long before it was usable by most folks standards.

    I started because my university had HPUX machines that we needed to submit work on. So wanted a unix like enviroment at home I could work on. This was a tim when linux was basically slackers on 50plus floppy disks. Xwindows needed configuring for every monitor. Honestly by current standards usability was non existant compared to windows.

    But honestly I spent so much time on the system. And watched it improve. To the point I find windows an utter pain in the arse now. And will avoid it under all circumstances.

    But the idea of convincing folks who have no interest. Where the hell do folks find the time.





  • I sorta agree.

    Unfortunately modern science is slow to change ideas it has accepted in the past.

    Neil Degrass Tyson did an interesting talk on the % of religion in science. Based in the US. And it basically indicated that the higher you get. The lower the odds you belie in religiose ideals.

    But the levels were pretty high until the top. And still not 0 then.

    I personally think (opinion not fact) this has left us with a community. That hesitates to challenge science on religion alone. IE we don’t see ideas thrown out when it is clear religion was involved in forming them. But instead only when clear evidence refutes them.

    In my less the humble opinion. This leaves science with a few old wives nuns tails. That are still followed 400years after the 1689 acceptance of the scientific method.


  • Honestly Humanity has been pretty arrogant. Took 100s of years before we recognised birds use tools. Mainly because everytime it was seen. Some other excuse was seen for why the bird was sticking a stick into a tree. Science was so sure mankind was unique it was unwilling to see reality.

    But honestly if you think that is bad. Do some research into why European explorers thought Europe represented the most advanced civilisation. African cities raised to the ground rather then face the idea they may have been their before us.


  • revoking their visas and restricting any US-based property transactions.

    So any icc employee who has settled in the US. Loses access to family. And is unable to sell property to fund moving them. To a less politically toxic nation?

    It could be a ĺittle more then symbolism to the lives of anyone involved who has a visa.

    Republicans seem to really ignore:we no longer live in a world where the girl/boy next door is your most likely wife/husband. Many of us human beings build relationships accross borders now the Internet is so linked to our daily lives.