airrow

I've heard this claim before that it is not possible for atheists to have "objective moral beliefs" because many moral claims are based on religious authority, which atheists do not believe in.

Thus atheists are subjectivists when it comes to morality: each atheist may disagree with the other about what is moral. Obviously this opens atheists up to problems of disagreements, with some who might believe very conventionally "immoral" things are acceptable for them.

This is not of course to say that atheists may not choose to live lives that are some what "moral" (moral, as is often defined by religions)

So, what's the status of the idea of "objective morality" and atheism?

https://veteran.com/national-moment-remembrance/

Americans observe the National Moment of Remembrance at 3 p.m. every Memorial Day (the last Monday in May). It is intended to help Americans spend a brief, but significant time remembering the sacrifices of those who died as a result of military service.

At 3 p.m. local time on the last Monday in May, Americans are asked to stop for 60 seconds or one full minute to remember those who have died in service to their country.

While participation is voluntary, the VA fact sheet suggests a variety of ways in which you can observe the moment. These include pausing for a simple moment of silence. listening to “Taps” or attending an organized group setting. If you are driving a vehicle, the VA suggests turning on your headlights in observance of the moment.

I saw an "opportunistic" article posted online urging people to not drink raw milk as they might get bird flu from it... which I thought most people would shrug off as obvious propaganda against raw milk, but I saw it posted in earnest elsewhere so I decided to post this here

Raw milk has a lot of alleged health benefits; the author makes the ridiculous plea for "no one to drink raw milk for any reason"...

The problem with pasteurization, as with antibiotics, is the process also kills good nutrients like antibiotics kills good bacteria

So by drinking raw milk you can get the good nutrients without them being destroyed. I know of dairy farmers who would drink pretty much straight from the cow without getting sick. The milk tastes totally different (better, a lot of people think)

The elderly or children or sickly might avoid drinking raw milk, but otherwise it's a healthy consideration for a lot of people

Example pro-raw-milk article: https://www.rawmilkinstitute.org/updates/letter-to-medical-professionals-about-raw-milk

Numerous scientific studies have shown that raw milk is correlated with decreased rates of asthma, allergies, eczema, otitis, fever, and respiratory infections. Raw milk also aids in recovery from antibiotic use, and provides many gut-healthy probiotics and enzymes.

Here's the biased fearmongering article in contrast: https://gizmodo.com/raw-milk-sales-up-bird-flu-h5n1-tiktok-usda-cdc-fda-1851476916

I'm confused here because didn't they think cows were causing methane problems (separate issue?) and why don't cows help take CO2 out of air compared to bison? So could just having a lot more big animals (other animals mentioned in article I think?) help take CO2 out of the air, or is this kind of like the trillion trees project which was plants now being applied to animals... will it work? No? Thoughts on the situation?

could be dangerous

also could be an "alleged election year hoax" that we press x to doubt about

zika virus

swine flu

monkeypox

I think it's like the second full week in May every year

Discuss also cycling-related topics?

So assume three lanes (or more), I guess in some places (everywhere in the U.S.?) the person in the left most lane has the right of way to merge right into a center lane if there is another car that wants to also merge into the center lane from a right lane.

My solution to this is ideally people shouldn't merge if there's a car over directly a couple lanes, but to try to either speed up or slow down to "stagger" the cars so that if you were to merge to center or the other car did, they wouldn't collide with you or you with them.

Is this a standard solved problem on the highways beyond what I've described?

I've come across this idea among backpackers or campers but don't see too many articles about it... it seems like a simple and convenient idea, but any tips on how to clean one's self (like with a washcloth and sink) without taking a shower or a bath?

Well Lemmyverse, how did he do?

Number from https://www.usdebtclock.org/

Do you think national debts to be immoral or wrong?

On the one hand, the country is strained and if the debt is not paid, it's basically like stealing from future generations to pay for the present; it's not "their money" to borrow.

On the other, "good debt" enables people the ability to build at a profit; wealthy people do this all the time: for example, take out a loan for $9 million and buy some properties, wait a bit, sell at $10 million, have a net $1 million gain... in the meantime they are $9 million in "debt", but it's "good debt". Is the national debt "good debt" though (I don't really know).

On the cynical end with this though I guess is the realization that this was likely to be a problem, it's the "tragedy of the commons" applied to government: elites get in power and put the government in to debt for their pet projects, and they don't really care if the government goes bust because it's not "their money or problem". Does this imply a necessity of "anarchism" (anarcho-capitalism) with modern governments being inherently tending towards self-destruction? Or banning taking on national debts to prevent this problem?

Opinions on if national debts are wrong or how they are to be managed?