When one divorced parent gets their toddler prescribed Adderall without the other parent being informed. AAP recommends against it for ages 3 (not 2 but 3) to 5 but it is allowed.

I’m not saying I even have an opinion on this, but I do think if someone said they think 3 is too young to take Adderall I think that doesn’t automatically tell me they are anti medicine or a bad person.

What does minorities have to do with this?

Armenian’s were a majority. The Fur people of Darfur are a majority in their region. Palestinians are a majority.

Genocide is a method often used in converting a majority to a minority.

I agree with your endpoint that those people don’t care, but I think if you told someone like that that they don’t care about minorities I think you would be confirming their thoughts not convincing them away from it.

Because I don’t think a 2 year old should be given Adderall without a parent knowing?

I personally am pretty open minded about these things, I was able to get birth control with my partner when I was 15 without her Catholic parents knowing. That was very important, but I recognize that if we were 10 it maybe becomes a different conversation involving parents.

You might say a parent could be included but you also have cases of divorced parents where one parent is for and another is against and there is a question of if the childs opinions are theirs or their parents. What age should the child be able to make the call? 15? 10? 5?

You’ve got a bunch of nutjobs that will turn that phrasing into a white genocide conversation is the problem.

The second part of that is that genocide is a subjective term due to classification of ethnic groups being subjective.

Honestly this well encapsulates the problem I tend to have aligning on goals with other progressives and some liberals. Every time folks try to simplify something as complex as genocide down to a yes or no question it means they are already invalidating the majority of positions and forcing a conversation of agree with me or call me wrong. That isn’t how it works, that isn’t how discussion and debate work. Forcing people into Yes/No thinking doesn’t lead to progress, asking for people to think critically does.

The reasonable debate is at what age is that allowed. I do not think that has an easy answer other than legal age of majority for the country you are a citizen of. I think that the problem is there are harder answers than that worth seriously considering.

I can’t imagine thinking any medical procedure has a simple answer, especially anything that permanently alters you.

Medical professionals are people, sometimes they make the right choice, sometimes the wrong choice. There are people who shop for the wrong answer, and also people who get the wrong answer and live in suffering. It is important to question things and have a discourse.

If my 16 year old came to me and asked to have their hearing removed as a solution to their mispohonia and that their therapist agrees and they found a surgeon… I don’t think I could just jump on board with that call.

Genocide is a term that is both over and under used. There are currently about six genocides ongoing. I don’t see the point in trying to call someone out on it because no one is actually doing anything for or against it outside of a very small number of people.

If someone asks me if I’m anti genocide I assume they mean something they specifically consider a genocide and they are trying to use this as bait to get me to out myself in some way. They don’t actually expect I’m personally participating or countering it in any way.

Trans rights also is a loaded term now because there are a LOT of individual rights Trans people are needing to fight for all in parallel. It’s better to be specific.

Sure someone who says they are against trans people is awful, but I find folks set the bar in different places and use that to start an argument. The easiest example is, what age should someone be allowed to transition which is an intensely challenging question to answer even on a medical level.

Year of the Linux desktop pushed out a year due to Linux infighting and intolerable advocates for the 33rd year. Clearly the fault of the other distros as I use Arch.

Would you rather our current administration make their decisions by using the lowest bidder LLM, or their own brains?

I had to check what cabinet position he held and was shocked he wasn’t in there. He seems like he has all the qualifications they look for.

There is also the legality of it and if it is treasonous. The one person at least the senators have some saftey nets from the Supreme Court but they still are at risk here.

I drink milk, but milk isn’t superior to oat milk.

mammal milk has specific ingredients that are meant to specifically feed infants of that animal. So its often high in fat and has specific things that are meant to be digested by that animal. Breast milk from a human has special ingredients that help digest the high lactose content and those ingredients are not in other milks.

Now Oats have been designed over years to be digested by humans and other animals. They propagate by being consumed and then travel to other areas post consumption. The nutrition in oats and other vegetables is mostly there specifically to drive animals like us to eat them so that we propagate them.

Milk is just watery fatty cow food with some extra steps involved.

I use far far less if I use a very small amount twice rather than a lot once. The shampoo will mix with oils in your hair and when you wash once you just keep rubbing the oil and detergent mix back onto yourself. Using a small amount and rinsing it off will make it function far better.

You are supposed to, but it is only insured to 250k. That might seem like a decent amount but if you suffer inflation and a government that is inclined to decrease FDIC rather than increase, you might end up not really getting much value out of that cash.

250k is not a very big nest egg for retirement.

Your funds might be in a HYSA but the bank holding them probably has them in stocks and bonds.

So if the stocks fall enough you won’t have your money anyways.

Now you could say you want to hold onto cash instead, but the only fix for the banks not having money is to print money which makes cash worth less.

Okay but what if you held gold or other minerals. Well the value of those comes from the perception that they could be used to trade when other things fail, but even if milk is $500 a gallon no grocery store is going to take gold as it isn’t able to be insured and tracked. So the value of gold also will drop as it can’t actually be used for goods and services.

So basically you can’t isolate yourself and protect yourself from societies stupidity. Its all a gamble and maybe your option works out or maybe it doesn’t but there isn’t a clear way to avoid the problem.

The only people who progressives lose to are the Democrats. Even in cases where they win a primary they get kneecapped by the DNC. Most US progressives come in with wild ideas like making the rich pay things instead of poor people. Making sure water is clean. Keeping the government out of our bedrooms. Governing rather than blustering. They also tend to be relatable as most have worked at least one real job in their life.

I believe the rule is any food that is perfect for eating on the road while you drive 45min from your first job, to your second part time night shift job. All of that kind of food doesn’t exist in Europe or at least isn’t popular for some reason.

It is the progressive party. But they can’t win a local council seat let alone any valuable position. But they run for President every year and normally run one of their established candidates. The right gains more by supporting them.

That said funding is questionable. They normally have their primary debate around a rental folding table. Im shocked they can even afford chairs.

The reminder is due to the fact that she never should have been the candidate in 2024 in the first place. She was not even in the top 5 in 2020. She didn’t do anything during her time as VP that made up for that gap. She was pushed in because the folks above her were two leftists, a gay man, and a rich DINO.

I don’t know that she would win California and if California goes to a Republican governor that takes away one of the handful of hail mary possible counter balances to Trump right now in a possible secession action. Right now if Trump attacked Mexico and Canada it isnt unreasonable to think some states would actively refuse to support the action but if California or New York were not both states to support it then it would be meaningless.