What a horrifying disaster.
What a horrifying disaster.
Not sure I understand, who is being called names?
And sure, laws like these are always a compromise, with no objectively true answer.
The point of having an age of consent (in this case 16 in the UK) is not popularity, and not just parental awareness or protection from people in positions of power.
It’s a decision by society that kids below this age are incapable of grasping the full consequences of their consent.
Of course the limit is going to be somewhat arbitrary, and you can definitely argue that age of consent laws are bad without being a creep, but you’d have to argue that a 15 year old understands the ramifications of consent.
The UN is more a place to talk with your enemies than with your friends, and getting the chance to sit at a table with people you disagree with rather than fighting each other is great.
If there are any Palestinians left to disagree with.
That’s only “longtermism”. EA as introduced by Peter Singer in “the life you can save” is an incredibly sincere and well founded philosophy of charity.
Original from Perry Bible Fellowship: https://pbfcomics.com/comics/one-more-day/
Weird that the text was re-written, I wonder if the comic was somehow translated and translated back to English?
If you consider serious, global issues with empirical data, such as disease, poverty, hunger, the world is indeed improving, and has been for a while, see e.g. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-of-population-living-in-extreme-poverty-cost-of-basic-needs
That other countries would do it too does in no way make it morally justified, it just makes those countries monstrous as well.
Hamas are horrible terrorists. There, your first liberal pointing a finger at Hamas. Now, consider what the point of critique is. Will Hamas ever care about western criticism? No. Will Israel ever care? Maybe. They depend on Western support in their political and economic stability. Therefore continued scrutiny and criticism of Israel has a chance of actually making a difference.
Not a commie, but didn’t the Norwegian people nationalize the oil production, leasing it out to companies while keeping a huge share of the profit for the welfare of common Norwegians?
My understanding is that, in a sense, that is exactly what seizing the means of production is about.
According to the article, studies in places where the ammunition has been used “indicated that the existence of depleted uranium residues dispersed in the environment does not pose a radiological hazard to the population of the affected regions.”
What effect does it have on the grain?
They’re only seeking to make it illegal in front of embassies, not in general. For now at least.
How is that?