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
Religious people who push their fake shit on you.
Can you just NOT!
If I wanted an imaginary friend WTF makes you think I’d pick your asshole POS of a god?
That was rhetorical.
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, o r 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.
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.
Eating and using animals when there is a plant-based alternative is wrong and should not be done.
Summary death to bicycle thieves, and anyone else actively wrecking the world. I am averse to the death penalty in most cases, but bicycle thieves are actively wrecking their communities. Someone rides a bike because they:
- Have no other option
- Are trying to improve their health
- Are living car-free or car-lite
- Are trying to enjoy the locals with active transportation OR
- Are complying with a court-ordered driving suspension
Stealing bicycles undermines these goals and poisons the community.
Of course, we could easily scale this up to, say, almost all CEOs of megacorporations.
Yesterday I got shit for supporting ZorinOS Pro. So I guess paying for FOSS.
It seems donations are okay, but when distros frame it as a Pro Version purchase then the FOSS peeps get pissed. Even though no one could point out what’s actually being locked behind the pro version, because spoiler: nothing is locked behind it.
How is zorinOS? Do they ship new software or do they hold it back for testing?
It looks good, things work out of the box and it’s stable. CLI use is minimal, perfect for newbs. Besides that it can keep grandma’s laptop running. So yeah pretty decent OS.
On Lemmy, no one pays for anything but everyone makes a living wage.
Ya, everyone supports workers until the bill arrives.
I also use Zorin. I feel validated
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.
IP? Do you mean imaginary property? If so, I agree. I think that ideas and culture should be shared. I understand the stated goal (protect individual inventors from being exploited by huge corporations) but that’s not how it’s played out. It’s used as a tool of control by powerful companies to stifle innovation. Ask any 3d printer hobbyist if they like stratysus. (I effing hate them) there should be some mechanism to protect inventors but this isn’t it.
I think peta is probably right to kill all those dogs. Better to be euthanized than to live in a kennel.
Pacifism.
The overwhelming majority of people, no matter where they sit in terms of culture, religion, and politics, see total nonviolence as a naive position.
But it’s among my most deeply held beliefs.
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.”
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.
The reason why native people don’t take shit jobs is the bad wages (also lack of benefits). You pay truckers five bucks a mile, suddenly every trucker is native born. You pay ditch diggers thirty bucks an hour, watch all the guys turn up.
Guess what happens if you take all the cheap labor away? The companies don’t just shut down, they start paying more. It’s how Unions work.
As a liberal i feel I need to step in and defend endless economic growth. Its not tied to resources as they’re only one way an economy can grow. Economic growth can be 2 people buying digital art from each other.
Majority of the companies are nowhere near being resource capped. From their point of view the only thing for then to do is to keep doing more of what they do best. The problem and reason why endless growth gets a bad rep is that consumers are super apathetic and governments do a terrible job of regulating. So companies exploit consumer apathy and “eat” smaller companies with illegal practices.
Zero tolerance for the death penalty.
As an American I am not on the fringe with that opinion but I am certainly not in the majority.
Full on empathy for all things. Sometimes it even bleeds into inanimate objects.
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.
Firstly, do you mean only animals aren’t possessions? What about all other things and resources?
Secondly, are you saying people should do they best to keep consumption to a minimum, while surviving themselves? Does this mean we could let all animals die and stop existing because we have no use for them, or should we do our best to maintain biodiversity and life on this planet?
Do you feel the same way about plants?
Do you think that plants are sentient?
Do you think fish are sentient?
Extend that to plants and mineral resources, and you’ll be both fully moral and dead.
Plants and minerals aren’t conscious, don’t have feelings and sense of self.
They also don’t exist for us and aren’t ours. Your first comment didn’t mention consciousness or feelings.
I mentioned specifically animals, and didn’t feel the need to go into detail to why I feel that way. It doesn’t feel like you’re really commenting on good faith, so I’m not gonna respond any further than this.
That hasn’t been proven yet, and plants and trees do have sensations and awareness of others around them.
Also I don’t understand how you can reconcile your opinion about animals when they hunt each other, play with their preys, and are sometimes cannibalistic.
they hunt each other, play with their preys, and are sometimes cannibalistic.
Pretty wacko generalization. Human animals who do this are called sociopaths. My dog has never done any of this stuff. There are tons of herbivores, etc.
Weird carnist fantasy. Too much “social darwinism”.
Why impose human concepts of ethics onto animals that survive based on instinct? Humans are omnivores, and in places where we have access to Lemmy, we also have access to things like grocery stores and farmers markets. We don’t need to eat animals to be healthy, nor do we need to eat any other animal products. We do so out of tradition, or familiarity, and then justify the horrible way we treat other life because we like the taste. Plant life having sensations isn’t equivalent to the sensations that we know that animals have, and the suffering we know farming animals causes. And rather frankly, eating animals requires growing more plants and killing more plants than just eating the plants.
Listen, I understand where you’re coming from. But plant farming can be just as bad as animal farming. They cut down massive swaths of local wildlife, trees, flora, and use pesticides and other means that soak into the ground water and run off into lakes and streams. That affects literally everything too.
Yes, animal farming causes massive emissions. It’s filled with cruelty and waste. But so is plant farming. You can sustainably farm. But if you shop anywhere but your own back yard you’re contributing to that pollution. The produce we get at markets and stores comes from those big battery farms. Even farmer’s markets aren’t safe anymore - at least here the sellers are no longer small-time farmers. They’re resellers and from the big company owned farms that have more acres than workers. Because it’s too expensive for small time farmers to keep up with demand.
Vegan leather is so much worse for the enviroment than leather made from skin. Actual leather decomposes and becomes food for the earth. Vegan leather is usually made of plastic. The nail polish my spouse found recently is vegan - it’s made with plastics rather than biodegradable materials like beetle shells and plant-based colors.
There is no ethical consumption under capitalism. You are a part of this cycle too.
No, I don’t think you do understand where I’m coming from. One aspect of that is that I haven’t made a long thorough explanation of where exactly I stand because that was never my original intent w/ this thread. I meant it as one comment sharing an unpopular viewpoint, but I digress. Totally, animal farming also causes emissions. So does driving. There’s cruelty and waste all throughout capitalism - and we should do what we can to avoid as much of it as possible. Some things are in our personal control, such as choosing what we eat, where we shop, and reducing our personal waste through re-using things. Veganism is one part of activism, not the whole. I can totally agree that “vegan leather” is awful and instead of buying plastic people can use what they already have, or simply put not buy leather OR pleather products. I do, however, still take issue with treating other sentient living creatures as if they are products for us to own and use however we want, with no regard to their own desires, and with no autonomy over their own lives. If a human is raped, we consider that one of the worst things you can do to a person and if caught, the rapist will likely end up in prison for a very long time. But if you set up a factory to systematically forcibly impregnate millions of cows, take their children at birth and kill them, then harvest the milk they produced for those children for human consumption, then not only is that considered totally ethical by most people, but you’ll end up making a lot of money off that operation. Eugenics on humans is typically seen as unethical, but when we breed chickens to produce more meat so much that as they grow their legs break because they cannot handle their own body weight, that’s seen as fine and just business. When we throw millions of male chicks that aren’t useful as they won’t lay eggs, onto a conveyor belt that drops them into a box of spinning blades to chop them up, or put them into gas chambers, that’s just business. The worst possible things you could do to another person, you can do to an animal that feels many of the same things we feel, and it’s seen by the general population as totally fine because they like the fucking taste of a cheeseburger - even though they could just eat a black bean patty and a slice of fake cheese. And yeah, plant farming has it’s problems - and part of the advantage of not eating animals is that it takes less plants to eat just plants, then it does to eat animals - since you have to feed those animals too. We’re all part of this cycle, and there is no ethical consumption under capitalism, but that doesn’t mean that animal agriculture is okay or should be supported in any way.
part of the advantage of not eating animals is that it takes less plants to eat just plants, then it does to eat animals - since you have to feed those animals too
animals graze, and what crops they are fed are often crop-seconds or parts of plants that people can’t (or won’t) eat.
there is no ethical consumption under capitalism, but that doesn’t mean that animal agriculture is okay
of course not. but it is probably ok, regardless of whether there is ethical consumption under capitalism
So you have moved other animals into your circle of respect but not plants. You still draw a line somewhere.
And outside of that line, you chomp down with the crushers evolution has placed in your mouth
What an incredible concept, that one would want to avoid causing suffering yet still eat.
Some people are so chauvinistic that they dont recognize their kinship with animals. Because animals cant speak. Then they come up with bullshit like `animals cant suffer´.
Some people are so chauvinistic that they dont recognize their kinship with plants. Because plants cant make sounds. Then they come up with bullshit like `plants cant suffer´.
