LMAO… I’m “right wing intellect” because I subscribe to the concept of factual relevance over sensationalism and manufactured outrage?

Strange, it’s doesn’t seem very much like “right wing intellectualism” to me, but I’d wager you call everyone something similar if they disagree with you.

Don’t bother responding. I have you blocked.

Removed by mod

Yeah… I can’t waste my time with this. It’s gotten absurd, as usual here on lemmy.

So a person is only a murderer if they’re caught?

LMAO. That’s some ‘uncertainty principle’ level of bullshit right there!

Seems to me, following this logic- if you murder someone, you’d want to get caught, seeing as how as long as no one saw you, and to get away with it- your victim is un-murdered because it only happens if it can be proven.

Removed by mod

I don’t think you understand how ANY of this works.

Innocent doesn’t mean you did not do a crime. You can’t go murder someone and if a court finds you innocent, if means you never killed anyone.

It means not enough evidence was brought for a hurry to convict you of the crime you ACTUALLY committed.

So when someone say “criminal” it’s safe to assume they mean someone who ACTUALLY COMMITTED A CRIME.

Lastly, I wasn’t talking about Luigi, I was countering a point that someone claimed ALL cops plant evidence which is every bit as untrue as believing that ALL criminals are innocent.

Did you note that I said CRIMINAL, and not ACCUSED CRIMINAL?

I swear, if lemmy could ever get its head out from its own ass and actually read comments in good faith instead of seeing each one as a platform to launch a manufactured bullshit argument from, more people would come here.

But this is why people don’t. I know a lot of people this think this place is a joke. And shit like this is why.

Oh ffs…

A criminal is not innocent, and an innocent person is not a criminal.

It’s like you’re almost there….

Yup! Replied the same thing!

Cool, so you know what malpractice lawsuits bring in?

Counterpoint, it’s a fucking exaggerated cartoon.

Okay, so this is a damn good argument!

Hah!

And I’m replying in context to the comment I responded to. I’m seeing now that it isn’t that lemmy lacks nuance, it’s that lemmy chooses what nuance to allow.

Not on lemmy apparently.

The overwhelming amount of people that don’t understand why this is a medically necessary thing to ask, somehow has to correlate with the complete lack of nuanced debate to be found here.

I’ll break it down simply;

IF A WOMAN IS PREGNANT- X-RAYS CAN DAMAGE A FETUS. IF A WOMA DOESN’T KNOW SHES PREGNANT- A MENSTRUAL CYCLE CAN INDICATE THAT A TEST MAY BE WISE BEFORE POTENTIALLY KILLING HER UNBORN FETUS.

also:

CERTAIN MEDICATIONS CAN KILL OR SEVERELY DAMAGE THE HEALTH OF AN UNBORN FETUS.

therefore we can summarize by saying:

MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS ARE TRAINED TO ASK THESE QUESTIONS PRIOR TO PERFORMING POTENTIALLY HARMFUL PROCEDURES OR ADMINISTERING POTENTIALLY HARMFUL MEDICATIONS.

Now, is it safe to assume we understand why they don’t ask men this question?

I’m guessing the word “criminal” to you means innocent person?

For fuck’s sake, I was told there is zero nuance to be understood here. I didn’t think I’d have to explain simple concepts like what a criminal is.

Civics course indeed.

Note how I said, “criminal”. This implies that we already know they are guilty- yet they’ll claim innocence.

My point is, this works both ways.