309
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] ganymede@lemmy.ml 74 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

our strange treatment of animals

we anthropomorphise and infantilise our pets, yet boast about the animals we eat who've had legit insanity level cruel lives thanks to our systems.

[ not saying fussing over your pets is bad, i love it too, just the contrast is whiplash++ ]

lack of body autonomy

hint: most lqbqtia rights, reproductive rights, medical/medication rights, are all the SAME RIGHT:

your body, your choice.

it is constantly under attack, and diffused into separate arguments when its the one right effecting all these issues. newsflash: when it comes to my body, your unwelcome opinion, religious or otherwise, ain't worth the air its vibrating through.

slippery slope gatekeeping laws

making harmless x illegal because a subset of x might lead to harmful y. if y is bad, then enforce your ban on y, and fuckoff trying to use it as an excuse to control x₀, x₁, x₂ etc.

[-] CharAhNalaar@lemmy.world 29 points 1 year ago

"Your body, your choice" has a limit once a super dangerous pathogen shows up and people start refusing the best tool we have to stop it for increasingly batshit reasons.

If you choose not to vaccinate, you're directly putting everyone else you interact with at risk. So there's a limit

[-] BitSound@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago

Eh, "your body, your choice" still holds. The rest of us just also get to use our bodily autonomy to say "fine, but stay away from society". Go live in the wilderness and avoid the 5Gs or whatever as you die of a stubbed toe because of your choices.

[-] ganymede@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

when anything is that important, the medicine must be opensourced ^1^.

if so, and it's handled correctly, you can still have body autonomy in those situations due to the resulting freedoms - much akin in nature to the software foss freedoms we all cherish. and in that sense, would not be a limit of “Your body, your choice". while still maintaining, if not increasing, the public protection to such threats.

it was really refreshing to see some discussion in public health policy from some very smart and relevant people for opensourcing those medications. unsurprisingly it was swiftly shot down, but it was nice to at least see it taking place - which is a small positive change.

^1^ naturally we decouple authentication and traceability from commercial interests. and ofc it does not mean noone gets paid

[-] CharAhNalaar@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

That's definitely a valid concern, I don't think private enterprises should hold the secrets to protecting people from deadly diseases.

[-] Franzia@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 year ago

There is no limit. Even in those cases they could be treated without vaccination. And the unvaccinated could be banned from spaces where they would be a danger. I mean come on, you're not even liberal? This is a super basic liberal principle baked into our society snd you just... disagree with it.

this post was submitted on 24 Aug 2023
309 points (97.0% liked)

Asklemmy

43912 readers
855 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS