this post was submitted on 31 Oct 2023
389 points (91.1% liked)
Technology
59299 readers
6829 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That's the good part, though. Problematic drug use is a health problem and should be treated as such rather than a criminal and moral one.
And that's not even mentioning what often happens when cops interact with members of any marginalized group..
I agree that the use of drugs should be decriminalized, but it should also come with other responsibilities. For example, a government organized intervention and mandatory rehabilitation. Depending on how much money the person has, they should be required to pay for it. Or they should be expected to pay it back over time.
We should have a welfare state. It should also come with responsibilities.
Do you want to do that with alcohol and tobacco too, or just the ones that the rich and powerful consider taboo?
One size fits all mandates are a recipe for disaster. Depending on the individual case, you end up either violating the patient's right to bodily autonomy, refusing needed help because the mandate says it's not time yet or both.
Better to leave the medical decisions to medical professionals. They're much better at it than even the best politicians and/or parliamentarians.
Absolutely not. Means testing like that breeds resentment and often leads people between a rock and a hard place where they're too wealthy to get it for free but not wealthy enough that they won't have make sacrifices they might not think to be worth it.
Rich or poor, cost should never be a determining factor in whether or not to seek needed healthcare.
People have enough responsibilities already without the government making demands in order to give them healthcare that they need.
When someone needs help battling addiction, the caring thing isn't to check whether they've worked hard enough to be allowed to work hard.
People forfeit bodily autonomy when they prove that they can't take care of themselves. At that point they must be placed into conservatorship of someone who can make decisions for them.
No. Absolutely not.
Terminal cancer patients can't take care of themselves either, do you want to take their rights away too?
What about people with disabilities that require constant care, should they become "wards of the state" with fewer rights than children again like in the bad old days?
Even if someone is a ward of the state, they still have rights and must be treated humanely.
Not according to the regressive dogma YOU'RE spewing 🤦
You can't be treated humanely without rights.
Progressives who don't believe in God support murdering disabled people through programs like MAID, which is just rehash of Action T4.
Disabled people with families who take care of them don't need government assistance. Unfortunately there are some people who need the government to take care of them.
I should also point out that if someone relies on their family for care, they only have the rights that their family allows them.
Yeah, those of us who want humanity to progress rather than stagnate or even regress. So awful of us 🙄
Leave your imaginary sky daddy out of it.
Nah, that kind of thing is done by regressive monsters who are religious, superstitious or both. Like the nazis you're referring to. They were religious, superstitious and not the least bit progressive. They were fascists.
What fucking century do you live in where you think amateurs are better at dealing with disabilities than medical professionals??
Yeah, literally everyone, in matters great and small. That's what government is there for. To help and support all of the people who need it.
Ah, the century would be the 1700s if not earlier. That's not how the law works, fundie.
Fuck off with your libel.
How is MAID any different from Action T4?
Who cares? MAID is irrelevant. You can care for disabled people without denying them the free exercise of their rights. You have to to care for them properly.
You said I support murdering people. Fuck you.
"Prove" according to who? You? What if I think you've forfeited the right to bodily autonomy?
Means testing doesn't work.