enki

joined 1 year ago
[–] enki@lemm.ee 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

You're missing the point. If you conflate abortion and murder, you're either being willfully ignorant or exceedingly simple. Just because some people equate two things, doesn't make them the same in reality. Whether you like it or not they are different, and applying the same standards to them makes no sense.

Your argument is like saying "Advil and heroin are both pain relieving drugs, so the law should apply equally." They are not the same, and we should not treat them the same, even if some people mistakenly equate them.

[–] enki@lemm.ee 4 points 10 months ago (3 children)

We have laws that regulate abortion, alcohol, etc already. I said nothing about "why have laws?" in any part of my argument. I said banning abortion will not reduce abortions, much less stop them. That statement is a proven fact.

You and others seem to be applying my belief that abortion should not be illegal to all other laws, which is not the case. That is my opinion on a singular issue. I never stated nor implied other laws shouldn't exist.

[–] enki@lemm.ee 5 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (5 children)

You can equate the two, but they're not functionally the same in reality. There is statistical evidence that banning abortion does not work and in fact has the opposite effect, so swapping the words makes no sense. A better comparison would be Prohibition in the US in the 1920s - banning alcohol didn't stop the production or use of it, it just made it exceedingly dangerous, lots of people got sick, went blind, and died from homemade liquor that contained too much methanol.

If you truly care about the life of the child at conception and after its birth, you'd choose the option where there is never an unwanted or accidental pregnancy. Most unwanted pregnancies result in children suffering abuse, entering the foster system, and eventually aging out without ever having a permanent or stable family. Many of these kids live a life where they've NEVER been loved.

There are nearly 400,000 children in the foster system in the US right now and the number grows every day. There's no one to adopt these babies. Forcing women to have children does not work. No child should ever be unwanted, every child deserves loving parents. This is the world that abortion bans create.

Nobody is pro-abortion. Nobody likes or wants women to have abortions, especially the women getting the procedure...it is NOT pleasant. Pro-choice supporters would be thrilled if there's never another abortion again, as long there were no unwanted pregnancies.

The best, statistically proven method to prevent abortions is education and easy access to contraception. Full stop.

[–] enki@lemm.ee 50 points 10 months ago (30 children)

Banning abortion doesn't stop abortion, it just shifts it to a black market where women are far more likely to die.

What does demonstrably reduce abortion to effectively insignificant levels is better sex education and easy access to contraceptives.

Prohibition has never worked. Education always has.

[–] enki@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago
  1. "Over one billion" - the current number is around 1.1 billion, so if my napkin math is correct that's 1,100,000 x 0.66 = 726,000. Close enough for the girls I go with.

  2. If you've ever learned a foreign language, especially in primary school, one of the first things you learn are nursery rhymes. I remember my French professor singing Frère Jacques to the class on day one of college.

  3. Pretty much every country in Central and South America and a few islands in the Caribbean speak Spanish. They don't speak the same Spanish dialect as Spain, nor do they generally speak the same dialect as countries that border them. Languages evolve, and language alone doesn't typically inform things like nursery rhymes, culture does.

So congratulations, you're ignorant in three different languages.

[–] enki@lemm.ee 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Block those communities or ask the admins of your instance to defederate if there's not much redeeming content from the offending instance(s).

[–] enki@lemm.ee 5 points 11 months ago

Not necessarily. Bahamut himself was known to spar with his followers in his true dragon form to prove their worth. While it's highly unlikely, it's entirely possible to destroy him on his home plane. No god in the Faerunian pantheon is completely immortal or invincible, in fact a fair number are mortals ascended to godhood. Bhaal, Bane, and Myrkul were mortals who l killed a primordial god, then traveled to the domain of Jergal, the original god of death, to kill him. He instead offered his three portfolios to them, ascending them to godhood. Bhaal was later slain by the mortal Cyric who then took over his portfolios and ascended to godhood. Gods in Faerunian pantheon are not omnipotent or omniscient.

[–] enki@lemm.ee 38 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (6 children)

Practically speaking, yes, 99.99999% of creatures wouldn't last a literal second against Bahamut, but gods in the Faerun pantheon are not omnipotent, or invincible. He could be harmed or even killed, but there are very few creatures who could do it. A large party of level 20 adventurers could possibly pull it off, but at that level they're effectively demigods in their own right.

Or Ao could just decide to replace him or give his portfolio to another lawful good god, snap his fingers, and even Bahamut would instantly pop out of existence.

[–] enki@lemm.ee 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Yes, I go to restaurants every so often, and I always tip and tip well. I refuse to punish the workers for the broken system. That doesn't degrade my argument that they should be paid a living wage instead of having to rely on tips at all.

When I say customers should not feel ashamed or obligated to tip, I mean that the system should change in such a way that tips are not expected and workers are paid a living wage. The system is not currently like that, we get that. Snapping back at me over the way the system IS when we both agree on how it should be is being intentionally argumentative for no reason.

[–] enki@lemm.ee 0 points 11 months ago (3 children)

So we're in agreement then? Why are you lighting me up when we're clearly on the same side? You need to learn to recognize an ally and save the anger for someone who deserves it, or you'll find yourself without any allies.

[–] enki@lemm.ee 0 points 11 months ago (17 children)

What fucking conversation do you think you're a part of? Because you're clearly not reading my comments before responding to them.

[–] enki@lemm.ee 0 points 11 months ago (19 children)

I said living wage, homie, not minimum wage. I think everyone should be paid at least a living wage, I just said tipping in general isn't bad - it just shouldn't be used to supplement poor wages.

view more: next ›