58
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 11 points 21 hours ago

The problem is who decides what is considered "degrading" by law.

I imagine many conservatives believe an LGBTQ+ person existing is degrading in some stupid way.

[-] EatingOnions@lemmy.world -1 points 21 hours ago

Court decide it, who else supposed to? It seems you're one of freedom fighters like Elon Musk who then use it to interfere with elections and spread his nazi ideas and if you don't let him he'll say that's against freedom of speach

[-] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago)

seems you're one of freedom fighters like Elon Musk who then use it to interfere with elections and spread his nazi ideas and if you don't let him he'll say that's against freedom of speach

Uh, beg pardon?

You really need to inform yourself about history if you really think something like this won't be taken advantage of in order to hurt people.

[-] EatingOnions@lemmy.world -1 points 19 hours ago

That's literally why we have laws, taking your retarded argument that's why we have laws protecting LGBTQ, other minorities, and human rights in general. According to you we should just abolish laws just in cases someone wants to abuse it, wow what a brilliant idea, you solved humanity

[-] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago)

Naive as fuck.

According to you we should just abolish laws just in cases someone wants to abuse it, wow what a brilliant idea, you solved humanity

Yeah no that's not my argument.

Do you know what Jim Crow is? Those were laws too, and guess what? They were evil and caused untold suffering.

So yeah, some laws we should not have. Sometimes, it's when they're really bad laws that are obviously meant to do bad things.

And sometimes it's when a law is proposed with good intentions, and is then used by bad actors in ways that hurt far more than the law could ever help.

Sometimes people pretend that a law being proposed is the latter, when in reality it's the former. It's called "lying."

A law like the one in OP could have been just fine with the word "degrading" left out. But no, it's intentionally kept vague and will be "up to interpretation" by people who wish to use it for harm.

Mark my words. Save this comment and come back when Poland inevitably uses this in a harmful way against a marginalized group.

[-] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 2 points 19 hours ago

So what laws can't be abused? You know police and prosecutors decide which crimes to investigate and who to charge? You now that police and prosecutors are controlled by the government? Absolutely everything in penal code can be interpreted differently by different governments and abused. It's your argument that's naive because you don't realize how laws work.

[-] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago)

What does "degrading" mean?

I think a trans person streaming is degrading, therefore my platform will no longer allow trans streamers per this law.

Go ahead and sue me.

[-] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 1 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago)

Awesome. Now name one criminal law that can't be abused.

[-] EatingOnions@lemmy.world 2 points 19 hours ago

That's exactly what far right politicians who voted against it used as argument, people should be able to stream how they abuse and humiliate themselves / others because of "freedom of speach and freedom of expression" so once again applying your retarded logic we abolish freedom of speach laws because bad guys trying to abuse it,you could literally apply this nonsense to every single law we have, so yeah your entire argument is just backwards and retarded.

[-] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago)

,you could literally apply this nonsense to every single law we have, so yeah your entire argument is just backwards and retarded.

So you could take any law, remove one word, and make it acceptable? Because that was my "retarded" argument.

This is something that has happened countless times, there are so many examples that it would be next to impossible to list them all. It's honestly shocking that this still needs to be explained to people.

Read a fucking book.

[-] EatingOnions@lemmy.world 1 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

I can use this stupid logic against any law. Let's remove rape law because someone women will abuse it to get insurance claims or put men to prison, let me bully and assault people on the streets because i should be able to have freedom of speach and expression, let me walk naked on the streets if I want to express myself this way why I can't? Women abuse it to walk with half breasts out so why I can't walk with my balls out? If you still don't understand this retarded reasoning then someone else have to explain it to you

this post was submitted on 11 Jun 2026
58 points (98.3% liked)

Europe

11320 readers
717 users here now

News and information from Europe 🇪🇺

(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)

Rules (2024-08-30)

  1. This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
  2. No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
  3. Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
  4. No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don't question the statehood of Israel.
  5. Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
  6. If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
  7. Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in other communities.
  8. Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
  9. No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
  10. Always provide context with posts: Don't post uncontextualized images or videos, and don't start discussions without giving some context first.

(This list may get expanded as necessary.)

Posts that link to the following sources will be removed

Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media (incl. Substack). Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com

(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)

Ban lengths, etc.

We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.

If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.

If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the admin that applied the rule (check modlog first to find who was it.)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS