No, i’m comparing learning about safe sex to learning about skepticism and critical thinking. Refusing firsthand experience with the cults that are ubiquitous won’t save people from those cults, it will just keep them from developing the skills necessary to cut thtough the bullshit until they’re suddenly thrown in the intellectual deep-end at 18.

Yes, but people learn about it late (if at all), and we end up with lots of adolescents getting STIs/pregnant/etc.

What In the world are you trying to say?

America has a problem with sex ed because people don’t learn about safe sex; many still learn abstinence only. This doesn’t stop STIs nor teen pregnancies, it doesn’t stop SA, it doesn’t stop myths about men and womens reproductive systems from proliferating, it just defers the problem of educating people until later. Basically, America’s sex ed is to avoid teaching people about sex, then hope they suddenly know how to have safe sex when they’re 18 because they’re 18.

Likewise, deferring learning about cults until they’re 18 doesn’t stop people from getting indoctrinated, it just expects 18 year olds unfamiliar with cult tactics to suddenly be immune to cult tactics because they’re 18.

I’m with Terence McKenna here: Culture is not your friend

Not all religions are abrahamic

Same place america is with safe sex: it doesn’t solve any problems, just defers the issue of ignorance and learning until adulthood

Categorization error. The categories of “gay” and “straight,” as we understand them currently, were invented by a cisheteronormative society that treats everything as an extreme male-masculine/female-feminine dichotomy. Trying to shove Gender Non-Conforming people into this framework will necessarily result in errors, because it denies their existence by its very core tenets.

“Identifying as” and “acting in a way that is best described by a certain adjective” are two different things

Do you have a source for that?

That origin is apocryphal, and likely based on a misunderstanding of a text that simply used the original phrase

Check out the mostly trans instance of https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/

Idk about the apps, but on the website a direct link like that takes me to another instance, so I can’t subscribe (without making an account on that instance). If you do the shortlink, it takes everyone to the community via their own instance:

!witchesvspatriarchy@lemmy.ca

Good point. DM me your address, and I’ll respect your life by using all the parts of your body after I thank you for your sacrifice

litehtml looks promising, but I can’t vouch for it

The sanctity of life. All life is sacred and must be treated as such. Even non-human animals, even plants. We should be working for a world where all living beings have their right to life respected and preserved.

The classic argument against Kantian deontology is “if the nazis come searching for the jews at your house, is it still wrong to lie?”

And if we use your procedure: “if everyone always lies, then the nazis will know who is hiding jews,” the lies won’t be effective, and therefore the action is self-contradictory. Thus it is wrong to lie about harboring jews from the nazis.

But if we reword it to “if everyone always denies hiding jews, the nazis will not know who is or is not hiding jews,” thus it is not self-contradictory, therefore it isn’t wrong to lie about harboring jews.

epistemological disagreements about how we know the moral value of an action are irrelevant to the objectivity of goodness/badness itself.

Except that the objective morality of things is completely meaningless if we have no way of knowing it, so it is at least relevant.

Donct ypu realize the end of the world is nigh, and also bad things happen that cause sadness, and therefore our species should stop procreating until nothing bad ever happens again?

While you are explicitly correct, the implication is that institutions deserve respect by virtue of being institutions. Respect should be earned, or rather, given until proven unworthy. I refuse to respect an institution that fails to acknowledge the sanctity of life, much less fulfills the needs of the people it governs.

People who drink cow milk are exploiting another sentient being

The death penalty is just legal murder, and, by the very nature of bestowing that privilege onto some power structure, creates a perverse incentive. Now whoever controls the legal system gets to decide who is worthy of living and who is worthy of dying simply by deciding what counts as a “white collar crime”

That kind of power is resented by those worthy of wielding it, and coveted by those who would abuse it. The perfect recipe for despotism.