In Minnesota they had a Somalian candidate for mayor who lost because of tribalism within the Somali community. Somalians from different tribes would not vote for him. So then some of the Somali leaders came together and said we are all Somali and should be voting together or we will not take power from the white people. More tribalism.

No it’s ironic commentary on how easily people can justify horrific things happening to people they don’t like.

As long as it is someone we don’t like, then yes.

Edit: oops, I guess I need the /s

Being pro free speech has nothing to do with willingness to change your opinion. Rhetoric and philosophy are both contained within the free speech bubble. Also there are no ideologies that are free from the potential of stifling others free speech, which is why it needs to be vigorously protected by everyone, all the time.

Did you read the article? It’s not quite that simple.

The numbers are always skewed. It just depends on which narrative you are pushing.

I looked into this a little bit and you have to remove babies in order for gun violence to be highest. So then gun violence is the highest from 1-17 some years, but other years needs to include 18 or 19 year olds in order to be highest.

I have no issues with human connection, but I am also subject to capitalism.

If they have full fda approval, you can generally trust that they are more beneficial than otherwise. With vaccines that have been available and widely used for decades and even generations, there is basically no risk at all. But I understand hesitation with new vaccines, even if I am not worried about them myself. Most people can’t grasp the level of effort and proof it requires to get approval.

I worked in pharma for ten years. Vaccines work, but some work better than others. There have been many vaccines that were pulled after emergency use approval or because the side effects were not worth the disease that they were trying to prevent. Or like the flu vaccine used to make you mildly sick for a few days, but then you still got the flu because they guessed the wrong strain. You can’t just scream that vaccines work to people who have first hand experience with them not working. Otherwise you risk losing their trust in ALL vaccines. This is a big part of why we have a resurgence in the anti vaccine movement. Anyone who has actually researched knows that the topic of vaccines is more complicated than “vaccines good”.

Vaccines are good as long as they are proven to work, and as long as they are effective enough to be worth the side effects and risks. Big pharma needs to be held accountable and kept honest, because they would definitely try to sell you vaccines that are not necessary or not effective if they could get away with it. It shouldn’t be an all or nothing question.

The fact that you can freely criticize and say whatever you want about Elon means that he is not even close to as oppressive.

Not sure why the knee jerk hate on this one. I like the idea of opening up academic articles and other materials for free and open use.

The UK government apparently thinks that Palestine action is a much bigger threat than the anti vaxxers, but that isn’t really the point. Why don’t you just admit that you are an authoritarian and you only care about authoritarianism when it’s used against you and your preferred causes?

Dang I gotta really spell it out for you. The government makes classifications of crimes that can be applied and then used to shut down speech that they don’t like. That is what they did with the anti vaxxers and that is also what they’ve done with Palestine action. If you allow them to use tools like this, then eventually they will use it against something you believe in. Public nuisance is a whole lot less serious of a crime compared to terrorism, but the end result, or the goal anyway, is the same; shut down people who give voice and advertise causes they believe in if the government doesn’t like them. Additionally, these tools of the government change hands as the parties in power change. Authoritarianism is dangerous no matter who it is used against and needs to constantly kept in check or eventually it will be used against you.

What do you mean? The UK has had a list of terrorists for a long time and if you support them then you can be arrested. “These laws have always been on the books.”

Yes that is the very problematic and dangerous mechanism by which they stifle free speech, and you won’t care until Palestine action people are similarly charged. Which is my entire point.

Yes, they also expressed those views…

I was asking if he thought they should

Yeah? Do you think that should be punishable with jail time?