

I see this as a failure of society. We have not only neglected the safety of a cyclist and failed to memorialize this person for those that miss them, but also neglected the needs of someone who has resorted to stealing.
I see this as a failure of society. We have not only neglected the safety of a cyclist and failed to memorialize this person for those that miss them, but also neglected the needs of someone who has resorted to stealing.
I think OPs question is still relevant in that context. Does that case reduce their effort towards privacy? I believe the answer is yes.
Biggest takeaway; the media is still in denial.
I agree that ecologically it can be a better move but I also don’t blame anyone that chooses to have a child because who knows when politicians may revoke your ability to decide in the future.
The real problem is that our current way of life is a sinking ship and we’re close to the tipping point when the majority of people will need to find methods of living alternatively. Teaching younger people how to survive in this environment is going to be crucial. A lot will suffer through our collective ignorance until we find a new equilibrium with nature. We can adapt quickly and support climate positive actions or we can prolong it; I think we all know the current direction we’re going. Either way, until either the global ecological demand subsides, we’re just preparing future generations for an uphill battle.
I think it’s less on ceding metaphorical ground and more on getting people caught up that haven’t decoupled the “Jewish people are automatically Zionist” thought yet. The opposition is taking advantage of that preconceived notion that a lot of people have.
Do you mean the actual philosophy of truth or do you just mean that we currently have a cult of personality spewing lies and people en masse accept it as truth?
Because I’ve heard arguments for both.
I may be naive but why wouldn’t a UN governed state not be in the best interest for all parties? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corpus_separatum_(Jerusalem)
We’re clearly not from the same countries, but I think this discussion stems from the recent political actions in the USA. In that instance, yes birthright citizenship is the most common method of citizenship and would have severe consequences by changing the law arbitrarily.
The world’s a fucked up place, and birthright citizenship probably isn’t the best way to go about things (neither are borders in general but that’s a tangent), but I don’t think removing rights before a better implementation is in place is the best way to go about things. More people get hurt this way, obviously, and we lose sight of what the actual point of this was. Not to mention it’s easy for fascism to take root when you can more easily say who gets to be a citizen.
And what are the benefits of authoritarian rule for its citizens? Given enough time, those rulers will cause harm in any circumstance.
Looks like it’s because it’s labeled as a Higher-Speed Rail rather than High-speed.