She/Her - Was bullied off reddit by mean moderators, but it’s a corporation anyway - 🏳️‍⚧️omni, heart - Pro kindness|gressiveness, Anti cruelty|bullshit.

  • 4 Posts
  • 333 Comments
Joined 2 months ago
cake
Cake day: February 23rd, 2025

help-circle

  • Afaik only Israel said Hamas used the hospitals, back when they lied about their genocide attempts… Tbf I don’t even care if Hamas did, using children as a shield is still not as cruel as actually fucking bombing them

    Not to mention tens(hundreds?) of thousands of innocents shelled by the IDF. And decades of abuse at the hands of the Israeli population. And the complete ignorance that Hamas, before being forced to become terrorists resistance fighters for Palestine, was elected by the people as government of Gaza in 2006, to regain some order after the last time the Israeli government attacked Gaza. And some dimwit rose-tinted fucks still have the audacity to complain about October 7th and support the elimination of the Palestinian and Muslim population headed by Netanyahu.

    I’m always on the side of the oppressed. And against evil States. Go Yemen.







  • It’s almost like they don’t know transgenderism is a physical issue from birth. You can’t change a brain but you can change a body. Try telling someone with dwarfism to get therapy instead of a stepladder, or someone born paralysed to cope with crawling until they die instead of have a wheelchair. That’s how stupid transphobes sound.

    Anyway, laws of state come second to laws of morality, which come second to laws of reality. Reality is immutable. Morality is unquestionable. State is optional, especially if it breaches morality or denies reality. Respecting corporate law is merely an act of politeness.













  • Lyra_Lycan@lemmy.blahaj.zonetoDogs@lemmy.worldDefinitely a good initiative
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    That’s the thing. I believe, if handled correctly, progress could be made with eugenics. But I agree, my views are radical and by definition not fit for standard policy or any teaching format.

    My definition of non-innocence is someone who has caused physical or emotional harm to another living being with malicious intent, regardless of provocation. Cruelty is the intent to repeat. This is the base for my laws of morality.