Huh. I wonder what they have against being anti-bullying? It can't possibly be because of some other facet of his identity that cannot be changed, right? I mean, if it were, that would probably be a violation of his rights and he might have grounds to sue.
Ehhemmm...I believe she specifically said it was his choice of lifestyle. She made her stance very clear. 😮💨
“It’s not discriminating against his lifestyle — that’s his choice,” Potteiger said in the meeting. “But it’s him speaking about it.”
I'm just glad this wasn't one of my local schools this time. We at least ran them out of the school boards here. This is off in the Pennsyltucky part of the state.
They launched a massive attack on Israel, Israel responded with a very small and limited strike. Iran have been funding terrorist proxy groups for decades. They also treat their own people and women horrifically.
Hate Israel all you want, but cheerleading for an Islamic theocracy is stupid.
It's strange how you're ignoring the fact that Israel attacked first. Iran retaliated, and did so after warning Israel of exactly what it was going to do so it could prepare. It did this even though Israel attacked Iran without a similar warning and assassinated an Iranian general.
Iran's response has been tepid and measured because it doesn't want to start WW3. Israel, on the other hand, very clearly does.
Bit disingenious to call (senior) Members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps 'officials' like they're low level bureaucrats, not military personnel.
you’re ignoring the fact that Israel attacked first.
Why did they attack?
According to Al Jazeera, the IRGC initially claimed the october 7 attack on Israel was revenge for the killing of IRGC commander Qassem Soleimani, although they later retracted that statement.
In any case, the cold war between Israel and Iran didn't start with Israel bombing an Iranian embassy. Honeslty don't know who started it, but it wasn't the first attack, not the first attack on an embassy either.
Iran retaliated, and did so after warning Israel of exactly what it was going to do
Iran claims they warned Israel. The US says they didn't.
In any case, the cold war between Israel and Iran didn’t start with Israel bombing an Iranian embassy. Honeslty don’t know who started it, but it wasn’t the first attack, not the first attack on an embassy either.
Fair. Netanyahu has been provoking Iran for decades, this is just the latest escalation. But the fact remains that Iran was retaliating to an attack that came from Israel, Iran wasn't just attacking out of nowhere.
Iran claims they warned Israel. The US says they didn’t.
And yet the US and Israel were able to perfectly defend against the attack and prevent any serious damage. 🤔
I guess we're just supposed to believe that those defensive capabilities are god-like and can respond to any attack with zero warning!
I mean, your user name suggests you’re queer and a communist. How utterly bizarre that you’re defending an Islamic theocracy.
Y'all keep telling me to choose the lesser evil in the elections but you won't do the same thing in a geopolitical context. 🤨
Israel identified the ring leaders of the October 7 event as Iranian military commanders who also happen to use an embassy as their base of operations to plan and execute their attacks.
The moment that was discovered, the embassy no longer became a neutral zone and was changed to be a target.
This is the same rules schoolyard bullies do to protect themselves from punishment by hiding behind their shitty parents after bullying you, and so do terrorists (including Hamas).
International law doesnt allow you to declare "not an embassy" because i want to kill a motherfucker in it. Countries in conflict will often have embassies filled with people the other country wants dead.
The whole point of embassies is that they are "off limits" so that matters of state can be solved by disgruntled parties via diplomacy, not warfare. Bombing an embassy is a direct call for war, exactly because it by definition has important leaders of that countires nation inside of it.
Bombing it is no different than bombing any goverment building staffed by that nation's leadership in Tehran. It is in fact a huge provocation for war, and so far its only Irans restraint that has stopped this
from escalating.
The fact that Israel has put the world into a position where Iran, a nation run by theocratic despots who brutalize women and sponsor terror, is the calmer actor, is absolutely surreal.
International law is such a stupid concept to me since it's literally pointless unless there is someone who can enforce it.
So don't come at us with that bullshit, otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion at all and it would've already been handled by the "international police"
Israel and Iran and Russia will continue to conduct whatever they want, and there's literally nothing you and I can do about it besides waste time arguing about it online.
It's pretty disgusting to see you cheer for Islamic terrorist groups who would throw you off buildings. Iran was responsible for October 7th, Hamas is their proxy.
I don't think anyone in this thread has "cheered for Islamic terrorist groups".
The factual statements people have made are true: Iran has been the more restrained actor. Israel's aggression has been alarming. The US govt's position has prioritized an alliance far past our national interests. It's any of this incorrect?
I don't like the Iranian govt. I don't like the current Israeli gov't. I'm not thrilled with America's gov't. I love my country (the US), and I like most Israelis, Palestinians, and Iranians. Is that really hard to reconcile? It seems like the majority opinion.
Look at queermunist's comment history, every time I see them in the comment section, they are simping for some islamist violent group known for murdering LGBT people. When it wasn't Iran it was Hamas.
Israel commits terrorism themselves, but since it's against brown people who don't have their own intertionally recognized state, I guess it doesn't count. We should sanction both.
Israel is a good international neighbor. Iran funds terrorist groups all over the world.
From all your comments, we can conclude you’re an heavy Israel supporter (perhaps Zionist?).
You keep writing things like “terrorist groups’’, '’7th October’’, and the most ironic one ‘’ Israel is a good international neighbor. Iran funds terrorist groups all over the world’’. Do you even realize; Israel funded Hamas.
You seem to purposefully dismiss/ not mention how Israel even became an actual state. Not only that, Israel being a good neighbor? Such a joke - They refuse to listen to anything what Biden asks and/ or says. They use the WW2, holocaust and the star as if that allows them to commit all the atrocities (genocide) they are currently doing.
Israel became an actual state in 1948 by displacing 750 000 Palestinian people and murdering many (men, women and children). Laying sieges, bombarding villages and population centers, setting fires to homes, properties and goods. Planting mines among the rubble to prevent any of the expelled people from returning (source: The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine by ilan Pappé).
Hamas did not exist until 1987, they became an actual group only in 1987 because of all the horrifying things Israel had done from 1948 up until 1987. Which is approximately 40 years after what Israel had done to the Palestinian people.
The entire 7th October and ‘’self-defense’’ is such a lame excuse at this point. More than 33 000 normal Palestinians have been brutally murdered by Israel. Iran only attacked Israel because Israel attacked their consulate/ embassy (and killed someone).
Israel is currently doing:
Stealing land (illegal settlements, driving Palestinian people away from their homes)
Ethnic cleansing (removing Palestinians from their homeland)
EDIT: Also majority of the normal civilians in Israel does not even want their current prime minister anymore. Only 15% of the Israeli's want him, the rest (85%) want him gone.
Israel is only a threat to those who attack it, and Palestinian Arab nationalists have been trying to murder Jews for the last hundred years for merely existing in the Levant and legally buying land there. Were it not for this, a one-state solution would have been workable, borders would have never been drawn by the UN, and Israel never would have formed as it did, in mutual self-defense.
No doubt many atrocities occurred during the nakba, there were Jewish terrorist groups who drove out peaceful villages, while this does not justify them, let us not forget they were formed in response to slaughters of Jews. Violence causes violence. Some people will do terrible things for safety. Many of the Arabs who left did so in order to fight against Israel. Those who stayed and were not driven out are now faring relatively well. Better than many of their Arab neighbors under their own leadership.
I believe Israel should exist right where it does because it's the only home the people who live there know. I guess that means I am a Zionist because I oppose genocide via destruction of Israel and think it's a bad idea to let the people who have been trying to murder them for 100 years elect their leaders.
Being a good neighbor does not mean you don't defend yourself when attacked, nor does it mean yielding to the United States necessarily. In this context, it means that unlike Iran, Israel isn't a threat to worldwide peace and stability, does not represent islamist conquest, does not fund terror groups worldwide and is not trying to undo the enlightenment. Israel is a modern Western country that just wants safety for its people. Leave them alone and they will leave you alone.
Collateral damage happens in war, and those figures are from Hamas and are not credible. Recent analysis of them indicates they are probably doctored.
Genocide requires an intent to destroy, and Israel has been clear they intend to destroy Hamas not Palestine/ Palestinians. Collateral damage is not genocide.
It's unsurprising that there is public animosity against Palestinians, given the violence they have been inflicting upon Israel for the last century. It's terrible that some Israelis might call them rats and other dehumanizing names, but using that to vilify Israel as a whole seems inappropriate, I'm sure Palestinians also dehumanize Israelis but that's not really relevant to this discussion or a valid cause for national violence.
Some right-wing politicians in Israel have said some pretty horrible things, even called for war crimes, but they do not represent Israel as a whole, nor are they directing the war. Meanwhile, Hamas has been pretty unambiguously calling for genocide against Israel and Jews even in their own charter. October 7th itself was an act of genocide. I support Israel because I oppose genocide.
Sometimes people get things wrong in the fog of war, this is not unique to Israel, and Hamas has been doing the same thing, like when they attacked their own hospital with a rocket and blamed Israel for it. They operate out of otherwise protected buildings, then blame Israel when they are treated like military assets they are being used as. They intentionally murder, torture, rape, and kidnap civilians. Israel isn't infallible and they go to Great lengths to legally justify every attack and minimize civilian casualties.
Comments like these are why I really don't care how many Palestinians die in Israel's war, Israel is fighting for its right to exist while people like this are calling for the extermination of Israelis.
Some judgement here. Knowingly causing suffering to sentient beings for your pleasure non consensually is kinda squicky. At least get the cow at the end of the universe that wants you to eat it.
Gee gosh, haven't heard that clever and witty argument before. Not even vegans are trying to be perfect, they're trying to minimize suffering. The top comment didn't say they'd care about field mice, they said they don't care about sentience because they take pleasure in the products of its destruction. Not really interested in talking any more with someone that misses the point so obviously whenever on purpose or because of a lack of mental faculties. Bye.
The suffering of sentient beings that directly results from human activity isn't an accident just because the harm wasn't the main or direct intention. Factory farming is not ethically justifiable whether it's cattle, fruit, vegetables, or grain.
Braindead logic is thinking you're better than anyone else because the creatures you harm get left in the field to rot.
Do you seriously think your argument has even a tiny bit of sense to it?
Until harm can be eradicated, we limit it. Trying to suggest that people eating a plant based diet might as well not bother because field mice is absurd.
80% of soy is fed to animals for humans to exploit, so not really sure what you're getting at.
A plant based diet eliminates the vast majority of animal suffering (bonus points for reduced climate destruction, antibiotic degradation and future pandemic likelihood)
I think this new model makes a lot more sense. It is clear many organisms experience sensation and it goes beyond some innate programming to avoid danger.
I’ve always felt the same, but that’s empathy talking. It’s been difficult to prove that the action is anything more than neurological response. I’m happy to see science is finding evidence to support what instinct has been telling us.
I agree with the first part, but you lost me with "no evidence of that": everything conscious is "evidence of that". And, unless you're getting epistemological af, there really isn't a lot of assumption here: quarks -> atoms -> molecules -> organelles -> cells -> tissues -> organs -> systems -> organisms -> consciousness -> sentience.
Same,more neurons create more complexity but not necessarily more acute distress. Although you could imagine there’s only so much distress a 100 neurons could create. That being said if you watch a bacteria get killed by another it quite clearly is not enjoying it
Would it not be relative? If sentience were to emerge from just 100 neurons, wouldn't their experience of terror be the same as our own? I mean, you could argue that ego is required for true suffering, but I think there is a more fundamental biological aspect that ensures all species capable of moving out of the fire are incentivized to do so.
Even plants are sentient and way more evolved than we are... BUT in THEIR own direction.
We think that we HUMAN specie are the only sentient and intelligent thing, but every animal specie, insect, living being has somehow a complex evolved way of thinking/living.
And guess what? Animals have blood, eyes, a brain, vessels, produce babys, a complex chemical body interaction...... If that isn't a sign for you that all living being are... Living... Than it's time to get out of your head, and get into your heart and reconnect with nature.
This last paragraph, along with Falter's position, makes me very suspicious about the thrust NBC News is giving this story:
Falter rejected the idea that he was staging a protest, saying he was planning to go for a walk as a “private individual” and others might choose to join him.
I am Jewish. I look very Jewish. I could certainly see me being harassed by bigoted cops for it. But this is really suspicious.
"Babu added: “They offered to take him to a crossing point, they offered to help him and the group he was with the opportunity to cross at a more appropriate place. So the narrative that’s been pushed for the past few days is not accurate.
“Personally, if I was policing that march, I would have been inclined to have arrested [Falter] for assault on a police officer and breach of the peace.”"
seems like legitimizing the outright theft of foreign assets is going to give billionaires around the world some second thoughts about the security of their dollars held in u.s. banks
No, the point is that this move undermines western financial system because billionaires all over the world will realize that if they or the government of their country runs afoul of the west, then their assets will be stolen. Meanwhile, freezing and seizing the assets of Russian billionaires amounts to the west doing capital controls for Russia. This would've been a very unpopular move if the Russian government imposed such controls, but the west decided to helpfully do that themselves. This forced Russian oligarchs to invest domestically resulting in Russian economy growing faster than the west now.
Actually, surprisingly, I recently had a text on topic during my English studies, and it actually describes a useful perspective:
"Is play the new tool to use? A recent paper recounts bumblebees rolling tiny wooden balls, not for
a reward, but apparently just for fun. The authors conclude that the behavior fulfills the criteria for
play, with one noting: “It goes to show... that despite their small size and tiny brains, they are more
than small robotic beings.” Put another way, bees just wanna have fun, and that presumably makes
them more like people.
This discovery underscores a long-standing conflict in our view of animals. On the one hand, we
want to find the features that distinguish humans from other animals: tools, language, a theory of
mind (in which animals can infer the mental states of others). On the other, we delight in finding
animals that breach those boundaries: chimps, crows and now bees that use tools, dolphins with
signature whistles. But what do those boundaries mean?
Not much, or at least not what people sometimes think. As an evolutionary biologist who studies
animal behavior, Lam is bemused by this effort to rank animals by their capabilities. The ranking
is wrong not because animals lack amazing abilities, but because evolution doesn't produce an
organization like the military, with the equivalent of amoeba privates and primate generals.
Instead, everything that is alive today is just as evolved as everything else. Some species
(crocodiles and cockroaches, for instance) look more like their ancient ancestors than others and
may well behave more like them, but that doesn’t mean some creatures are more or less highly
evolved than the rest.
You might think that calling attention to bees and other animals that do things we didn't think they
could do would be a way to circumvent this ranking and make our view of nature more realistic.
But it isn’t. It is pointless to elevate creatures, whether bumblebees or chimps, so that we can put
them in an exclusive club that used to only contain humans.
Underpinning these efforts is a desire to show that animals, even tiny ones with lots of legs, are
like us and shouldn't be dismissed as automatons. I applaud that desire. But we can recognise
animals for what they are, and be awestruck at their abilities, without having to make their behavior
mirror that of humans. Bees may play, but that doesn’t mean they are like children with
exoskeletons.
Once we get out from under the tyranny of those rankings, of thinking that animals have to be like
people with human motivations and feelings, we are freed up to consider the mechanisms behind
the behaviors. Often, that involves convergent evolution. For example, the same neurotransmitter
— serotonin — influences anxiety in humans and maze exploration in crayfish. In a tank divided
into well-lit and shadowy areas, crayfish explore both, but prefer the dimmer areas, consistent with
their nocturnal lifestyle. Crayfish stressed by mild electrical shocks avoided the light sections of
the maze, a response that was linked to their serotonin levels and that could be altered by a
serotonin inhibitor.
If we can let go of the impulse to rank animals, we might find out that our intuition is wrong. And
being wrong is one of the most productive things about science."
TL;DR Animals evolve to have all sorts of traits we may perceive as "humanlike", but that's just a product of our fallacies that drive us to put animals into an exclusive "human club" - in fact, they just evolve to have various traits we see in ourselves, just like animals with other unique properties.
nbcnews.com
Oldest