DragonWasabi

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago

Legal rights vs moral rights, that's the confusion.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago (3 children)

They legally had that right at the time. I don't think they should have had that right, or that they morally have that right. I think we're talking about 2 different meanings of the term "right". In one sense (legally), they had the right, as in it was codified into law. That's not a belief as much as a fact. The part which concerns my belief is whether I think they should have had the right or if they have the moral right, which I don't. I hope that makes sense.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (10 children)

That's a weird assumption when I said it was good that it was abolished. Humans shouldn't have the right to own slaves is my belief. (But they did have that right at the time legally speaking). Or another way to put it, is that I don't think humans have the moral right to own slaves, even if they did have the legal right. This was a response to someone else telling me that banning slavery was an authoritarian decision. I just wanted to get clarification and try to understand it better.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago

Thanks, I think this answers my question. Even if it was a majority decision, it seems intuitively like the government (and the majority of people) imposed some kind of authority over the remaining slave owners (who were in the minority), but I understand that generally such a decision wouldn't be considered generally "authoritarian" just because it used that authority, unless it was imposed upon the majority of people.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Honestly wondering why people do this (why people immediately assume you must be part of any group you're defending). And I didn't think I answered that, but maybe I did and I missed it

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

Just want to add that I think it's unfortunate that people dismiss anxiety issues by saying "everyone has that". While it's true most people might experience some anxiety, I don't think everyone has the same level of anxiety, and not everyone has an extremely debilitating type of anxiety to where it warrants an understanding that they might struggle more with some things and deserve some leeway or simply understanding and empathy.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

Yes, there are. But there also some clinics that have chiropractors in training who aren't as qualified to do chiropractic as experienced chiropractors. I know a place where they use chiropractors who are still in training and developing experience, and lots of people say to avoid it and go to more professional chiropractors.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

There are literally some clinics that have chiropractors in training who aren't as qualified to do chiropractic as experienced chiropractors. I know a place where they use chiropractors who are still in training and developing experience, and lots of people say to avoid it and go to more professional chiropractors.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (5 children)

Glad they worked for you. One thing I would add: Maybe make sure they're actually skilled/qualified and not a chiropractor-in-training using you as a test dummy.

 

I want to be respectful but if they say they don't care what pronouns I use for them, that feels like it puts the decision on me to choose what to call them and I guess I would probably default to "they" because choosing a gender for them feels weird... am I wrong?

 

People often talk about swapping out plastic straws for other materials to help the ocean/fish and the environment, but they also complain about paper straws falling apart easily. Other alternatives that are slightly more sturdy like straws made of straw don't seem very common.

But do we even need straws? My first reaction was that any liquid can be drunk directly from the vessel it's in, and straws just add another level of convenience. If we don't want to use plastic straws and the alternatives mostly suck (actually all straws suck 🤓), why not just ditch straws entirely?

 

While child labor is viewed negatively, apparently child labor and child slavery aren't the same thing, and child labor though it could still be exploitative/cruel in other ways, can be done voluntarily by the child, and with fair treatment/compensation/etc.

I suppose you could make the argument that any child labor opens itself up to problems, but could it be done responsibly? And if not, then at what age do we draw the line of labor being not ok regardless of consent?

 

I thought, coconut milk is made by soaking the white bits of coconut fruit ("flesh") in water; while the coconuts naturally contain a clear liquid called "coconut juice" or "coconut water".

But do some coconuts naturally have a milky white liquid inside instead of a clear liquid?

38
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by [email protected] to c/nostupidquestions
 

I want to say something like this:

"These products are found to be healthfully risky."

"These products are found to be healthily risky."

"These products are found to be risky health-wise."

"These products are found to be medically risky."

Unfortunately "healthfully" and "healthily" seem to only be used in positive contexts, relating to good health rather than just to health/degree or nature of health in general. As a result, used like this it sounds like an oxymoron/contradiction.

"Medically" sounds too formal and also sounds more specifically focused on the risk of complicating other medical issues than about overall heath.

"Health-wise" is ok but it makes it difficult to combine other aspects into the same sentence, for example: "These products were found to be environmentally, economically, and 'healthfully' risky".

view more: ‹ prev next ›