She/her. I don’t know what the fuck I’m doing. New to the Fediverse, literally just picked the instance that seemed the most frictionless. Progressive new urbanist vegan in New England.

  • 2 Posts
  • 51 Comments
Joined 2 months ago
Cake day: January 29th, 2026
  • pomegranatefern@sh.itjust.workstoPolitical Memes@lemmy.world•Polymarket needs some serious regulation.
    2·
    9 days ago

    Gambling, like a lot of other things, is a high dopamine reward behavior which can be fun recreationally but also lead to serious addictions. Prohibition-only approaches to things like this tend to just lead to it becoming a widespread source of funds for organized crime, and so I tend to favor a public health perspective which involves legalization with heavy regulation and taxation + behavioral health support as a part of a robust safety net.

    That having been said, this to me is a strong indication that there are some things it should not be legal to bet on.

    But also I’m also pretty sure that this is illegal under the Commodities Exchange Act already? So this feels like either a loophole in emphatic need of closing, or, more likely, the law just no longer fucking mattering under this administration because too many of the enforcers are corrupt.

  • pomegranatefern@sh.itjust.workstoFree Video Game Giveaways@feddit.uk•[Google Play] *Colorzzle*, minimal puzzleEnglish
    3·
    10 days ago

    Fun little game! I’d say up through the first forty levels or so, it’s easy but not effortless, very relaxing. Around the forties it starts to require more active thought and effort, and becomes more challenging. Both are appealing in their own way. As a game strongly reliant on color matching, this game isn’t going to work well for you if you have limited color vision, but otherwise it’s pretty accessible to all players and runs smoothly. If this sounds like your thing, give it a whirl!

  • pomegranatefern@sh.itjust.workstoWorld News@quokk.au•South Korea woman and doctors guilty of murder after newborn placed in freezer until it died
    7·
    11 days ago

    The case has gripped South Korea, where abortions are not regulated properly. The procedure was decriminalised in 2019, there is no clear regulation on how far into pregnancy it can be carried out.

    I cannot imagine a single reasonable person arguing that there is any legal right to kill an already born baby as a part of any abortion policy.

    A huge fundamental principle of the pro-choice movement is about bodily autonomy and your right to decide that you will not use your body to incubate a fetus to maturity at this time, for any reason. The idea is that you have the right to remove a fetus from your body using reasonable methods, and if hasn’t matured into a viable baby that can survive outside of your uterus by that point, then it is an abortion.

    There are a whole lot of arguments to be had within this realm. What does ‘reasonable’ look like in different cases? At what point is the fetus enough of a person for its rights to be considered, and how does that weigh against the pregnant person’s right to decline consent to using their organs to provide life support to another person? If a pregnancy is near the point of viability and there is no threat to the pregnant person, how long is it reasonable to expect them to wait to bring the fetus to the point of being a viable baby instead of aborting? Even among people who hold a consensus on the right to an abortion, there is some debate.

    But I have never once encountered a single person who has argued that abortion law applies after the baby is already fucking born.

    This is not a legal gray area.