I had a conversation with my second grade teacher on Instagram the other day. I posted Matthew 25:35-40 on my story with the comment “I can’t believe so many Christians I know support a president and a government that would willingly and forcefully kick Jesus himself out of the country thousands of times.”
She replied saying that this verse doesn’t apply for the same reason that I don’t allow just anyone into my house: because there are people who shouldn’t be there. There’s just so many things wrong with her logic AND her premises that I barely knew where to start, and that’s part of the problem. Fascism works by sowing doubt in the fabric of credibility. All she really knows is that her idea of Jesus comforts her, and so finding comfort somewhere probably means she can find Jesus and righteousness there too. You can’t really teach someone to care because they probably already do care, but you have to teach them to see the things that are actually happening, to trust the real experts, and to see the connections between themselves and the people who need care.
I haven’t touched them in 5 years, but Hinge was the best of all of them. The thing is designed to make it as easy as possible to set up a profile packed to the brim with conversation-starting prompts, and then it’s stupid easy to start a conversation with someone else because you can respond to a specific prompt on someone else’s profile.
In my experience, it works really well if you set someone up to ask a question
I feel like you may have missed the point of what I’m saying. Ending the progression of human life because it’s burdensome is 100% the wrong reason.
That being said, I agree the right to abortion services is critical and ought not to be infringed by any sort of rule that takes the decision out of the hands of the pregnant person. I just could never disagree more with the idea that abortion rights are crucial to prevent the person who would give birth from being burdened.
The community is called “no stupid questions” so I won’t say this is a stupid question, but damn if this isn’t the most ‘murican question I’ve seen.
Your question seems heavily weighted by the idea that a child is only the responsibility of the people who brought it into the world, which is completely wrong even if it is a fundamental assumption of an individualistic capitalist society like America. It’s a backwards notion to say that someone who has a right to live can have that right taken away because it’s too much of a burden to help them live; life is the exact thing that an organized society ought to be focused on protecting, otherwise what good is that society?
People say “it takes a village to raise a child” and while that is seldom followed especially in America, it is absolutely true. Raising a human being is among the hardest jobs imaginable, full stop. The abilities and needs of that child have to be considered every step of the way because it is among the most important jobs imaginable. If that child is ever treated like a burden, then something in that society has failed. It’s not just the parents’ responsibility to raise them, it is everyone’s.
Should a parent be allowed to euthanize a burden? No. 100% no. That parent needs to enlist help, and honestly help structures should be built into that society.
Lastly, the way you phrase your question is really concerning. “Parents should be able to euthanize their children, because it is better to be dead than feel like a burden.” I hope you can see that whatever convinced you that it’s better to be dead than a burden is utterly wrong. You matter, OP, for no reason other than that you exist <3
It’s not thought policing. Proton, a company all about privacy, is literally nothing without the trust of its user base. Aligning with someone who is not trustworthy by making a statement that makes no sense (literally saying Trump’s administration will be anti-big tech while it’s been gaining shit tons of support from the Tech Titans Musk, Bezos, and Zuck) completely debases that trust. Additionally it’s not thought policing because companies are not people and cannot think.
Even if it was thought policing, in line with the Social Contract of Tolerance, there is no room to tolerate, let alone vocally support, fascists.
Pompey and his allies induced the Senate to demand Caesar give up his provinces and armies in the opening days of 49 BC. Caesar refused and instead marched on Rome.
The civil war ultimately led to Caesar's becoming dictator for life (dictator perpetuo). Caesar had been appointed to a governorshipover a region that ranged from southern Gaulto Illyricum. As his term of governorship ended, the Senate ordered him to disband his army and return to Rome. As it was illegal to bring armies into the northern border of which was marked by the river Rubicon, his crossing the river under arms amounted to insurrection, treason, and a declaration of war on the state. According to some authors, he uttered the phrase iacta alea est ("the die is cast") before crossing.
If I remember correctly, this policy was introduced after they got flack because some employee called the cops on a black person who was just hanging out inside the store.
Turns out money is more important to them than the appearance of inclusion surprised pikachu face
I had a conversation with my second grade teacher on Instagram the other day. I posted Matthew 25:35-40 on my story with the comment “I can’t believe so many Christians I know support a president and a government that would willingly and forcefully kick Jesus himself out of the country thousands of times.”
She replied saying that this verse doesn’t apply for the same reason that I don’t allow just anyone into my house: because there are people who shouldn’t be there. There’s just so many things wrong with her logic AND her premises that I barely knew where to start, and that’s part of the problem. Fascism works by sowing doubt in the fabric of credibility. All she really knows is that her idea of Jesus comforts her, and so finding comfort somewhere probably means she can find Jesus and righteousness there too. You can’t really teach someone to care because they probably already do care, but you have to teach them to see the things that are actually happening, to trust the real experts, and to see the connections between themselves and the people who need care.