2024 ELECTION THREAD
The next presidential race will be here soon! Please see current Bovada odds. Thoughts?
Yes i think there should be a full constitutional ban to all concept of "animal rights", there should be no case where they are treated differently than any other object.
The question of wildlife is a question of property rights. It's not a super-easy one as enforcement gets tricky and so on, so some compromise has to be found (and regulation be used) as for all common property, life for traffic and public roads.
But once the wildlife if privately owned it's incredible we even discuss the topic un
Exactly, so under your world view having sex with an animal is completely within the property rights.
All forms of classification require some type of classifier. You can point to various particulars in a given set of objects but the “given set of objects” only becomes valid in the case that there is some brain/mind giving the set. Otherwise nothing would inherently differentiate itself into universals as what you are claiming.
The Indian ocean is an arbitrary label given to the water in that region. It is a social construction, just like the United States of America is.
However, there are certain facts that exist regardless of how humans categorise them. The earth would be spherical in shape regardless of whether humans exist. Gravity would still exist on earth, regardless of whether humans are around to observe and document its properties.
Likewise, biological sex existed as a binary for 1.2bn years before humans exis
Biological sex is a universal that we classified due to its utility to us. Classifying it purely in terms of gametes has very little utility unless you are trying to make some kind of political point, but scientifically we’re going to want a more robust definition.
And 1.2 billion seems too long ago, pretty sure the first forms of life were just cells that reproduced asexually.
Again what you’re getting at is the concept of objective sexual categories, which I think is going to commit you to some realist theory of category which is going to be difficult to justify.
There might be explanations that make look that guam result either irrelevant or not as significant as it looks like which i am not aware of though.
I just posted the data to learn more about it, i didn't even know they voted in guam
I thought maybe people In Guam are less inclined to vote for a female ? More so than the rest of the nation ? So I looked at 2016 election results in Guam and Hillary won 72% to 24%. So obv not a female thing.
Really looking like harris is cooked.
Despite me just having demonstrated that there are more and you agreeing with it. Typical conservative. Ignores facts, sticks to deeply held belief that is the only way they can keep believing the crap they believe.
Another waste of an account to add to my ignore list.
Inb4 Harris wins electoral college and loses popular vote
Despite me just having demonstrated that there are more and you agreeing with it. Typical conservative. Ignores facts, sticks to deeply held belief that is the only way they can keep believing the crap they believe.
Another waste of an account to add to my ignore list.
You didn't demonstrate that. You said gametes switch sometimes (presumably from one to the other). That's still a binary.
All forms of classification require some type of classifier. You can point to various particulars in a given set of objects but the “given set of objects” only becomes valid in the case that there is some brain/mind giving the set. Otherwise nothing would inherently differentiate itself into universals as what you are claiming.
.
Even under this definition/set of axioms, still very anthropocentric of you to think animals that can pass the mirror test or otherwise show remarkable levels of intelligence (like crows, dolphins, elephants) don't work as classifiers.
If Trump overperforms like he did in Guam in the swing states, it's going to be a blowout. Kamala is only up 1.3% nationally compared to 8.5% for Biden in 2020.
Back to the idea that men can get pregnant..
Is this currently being taught in the U.S public education system?
Where is the segment of the population who believes this learning this from exactly?
It has significant utility if you are doing science - it enables us to understand that male seahorses carry their offspring to term, for example.
So if it had a disutility when it came to science you would advocate against it?
Even under this definition/set of axioms, still very anthropocentric of you to think animals that can pass the mirror test or otherwise show remarkable levels of intelligence (like crows, dolphins, elephants) don't work as classifiers.
Classification requires syntax which they lack the ability to produce. At least as far as I’m aware. Classification is a practice done within the linguistic domain.
It's ****ing Guam. It means nothing.
Back to the idea that men can get pregnant..
Is this currently being taught in the U.S public education system?
Where is the segment of the population who believes this learning this from exactly?
Men can get pregnant is a tautology given that trans men are men. But trans men are not men biologically, they are trans men, so it doesn’t make sense to unqualify the expression “men can get pregnant” because in the domain of pregnancy, man is used in common language to mean male, not the gender “man”.
I'm baffled that these people think a group of people with no motivation to vote are some indicator of how many women who are supremely motivated to vote are going to show up and destroy their dreams. I don't think they are going to enjoy the next 24-48 hours.
Men can get pregnant is a tautology given that trans men are men. But trans men are not men biologically, they are trans men, so it doesn’t make sense to unqualify the expression “men can get pregnant” because in the domain of pregnancy, man is used in common language to mean male, not the gender “man”.
How do people not see that the idea a man can get pregnant completely guts the meaning of man? Man means nothing after making this move, so then saying trans men are men means what at this point? How do you define man after completely gutting the meaning of man?
