Occamsrazer

There's a probability that a teen will get the energy and motivation to step outside and interact, but if they don't have a decent experience interacting or if they can't reliably find another teen to interact with, then it reduces their motivation and that probability drops. Phones and availability of "good enough" entertainment alternatives to interacting combined with reduced probability of having a good experience result in reaching a critical mass where interactions and good social experiences are so unlikely that many people don't even try. The only way to fix this problem is by increasing the motivation to get out, but unfortunately it depends on everyone doing it and not just you.

Yes everyone knows that, but it makes the hate crime charge a little thin and using it is taking advantage of a technicality for revenge. Fine whatever, but it also devalues hate crime laws themselves.

Well that depends on the motivation for the bomb threat.

I wonder what they imagine "the colony falling" to be like. How would that be rolled out, what exactly does that even mean anymore? Seems more performative than an actual attempt to change something.

You have it completely backwards. They loved every minute of COVID and that's exactly how their wealth doubled. They were positioned perfectly to be able to take advantage of the situation and that's exactly what they did.

Also she was black. For some reason that's important enough to be mentioned several times.

That would apply to any minority opinion as well, like supporting Palestine today, or being opposed to Japanese internment camps during world war 2 or opposing the Iraq war. Or being opposed to COVID vaccine mandates or school closures. People get cancelled for this stuff all the time, and being able to speak freely is critical to derailing social movements that go too far, which they always do. Anonymity is a double edged sword, where it holds people accountable for hate speech, but also provides security to express opinions that are contrary to prevailing narratives, things that desperately need to be said.

End of life care is easily the most expensive part of any health care system, and implementing euthanasia policies will save a crap ton of money. Smells like regular old capitalism dressed up as compassion.

That depends if it's your team or not, obviously

The only argument for the death penalty was back before long term prisons were available and someone was too dangerous to be released in society. The death penalty should be obsolete.

Better than being a bootlicker for one of the parties. If people could acknowledge fault with their side, maybe we could have honest dialogue and discussion instead of drones shouting unintelligible noise back and forth at each other according to the script from their party.

It's not a very good litmus test to determine right and wrong because tolerance is subjective based on what you feel to be untouchable, inviolable topics. Those could be religion, gender ideology, sexual preference, free speech, right to bear arms, right to own property, right to bodily autonomy, right to associate, and so on, or some combination of these but likely not all of them. It varies with the individual, though most would agree on some of them. The paradox of intolerance should not be expanded to include too much, because it then becomes simply another tool for rhetoric. In the Bill of rights our constitution does a pretty good job describing which topics are off limits, I think.