Omarchy will henceforth be known as Oligarchy Linux.

Moontan

No they say "Your choice to move away from your family or their choice to move away from you shouldn't adversely affect all of the other children in your child's class because the teacher has limited time and is now spending it catching up your child who missed foundational concepts for the stuff that is being taught when they get back.

You are not entitled to cheap travel. I never got to travel all over the world as a child because, spoiler, we couldn't afford it, but people also didn't feel so entitled to cheap travel that they were taking their kids out of school for cheaper flights. You just didn't fly.

That's nuts!!

And for the record, we are not talking about large commercial products, more niche medical products that are much lower volume and much more expensive.

Yes, and created a stigma

Jeez, why the aggression? I dislike meta too, but there are other products that have glasses mounted cameras that do offer zoom and text to speech for macular degeneration that he now won't consider because people react like you just did to the meta product .

Well all I can say is the macular society suggested them to him. We approached them about another product designed for vision impairment to find out if they had any experience and they said to try the meta glasses. We didn't, but I still think if there is a camera based solution that helps him, he now won't wear it because of the stigma.

And for the record I'm not in need of any convincing to avoid meta.

I'm not just talking about meta glasses. There are others more targeting vision impairment, but they have similar camera-in-glasses issues that attract the pervert label.

The meta ones were recommended by the macular society, don't ask me why.

Glasses for perverts huh? My dad was considering glasses like this (not necessarily meta) to help with his macular degeneration. They can read out text in front of them, zoom and useful stuff like that for people with vision problems. But now he won't even consider it because he's worried he will be labelled a pervert if he is seen wearing them because apparently no one can conceive of a reason why smart glasses might be about more than spying. So he has chosen going slowly blind over having people shout at him in the street. I don't really blame him but I am sad for him that a viable aid is now so stigmatised he is afraid to use it.

That said I do not trust Meta and fully expect them to use the devices for spying and harvesting data even if the wearer does not.

As others have said, the response is to ask where in the bible it states you should not have sex with roadkill.

When they point to a passage about something they think is related (but obviously cannot be explicitly about roadkill) ask them if they think that having sex with roadkill is morally equivalent to the passage they cited. I would be surprised if they say yes..

If they do say yes, ask if the only reason they do not do these things is because the Bible told them so. If they say no, ask them what the extra moral information they are drawing from is.

Also ask them why atheists are not caught doing this (at a rate higher than religious groups).

Reflecting...