this post was submitted on 27 Apr 2024
59 points (92.8% liked)
Asklemmy
43896 readers
985 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
More like lots of having to refute dumb arguments that imply choosing harm reduction is the same thing as endorsing harm.
"harm reduction" in the context of genocide is absolutely wild. It's a genocide, not a heroin habit
I want no genocide. My choices are: vote for a candidate that would make the genocide worse, while complaining they're supporting a genocide, or vote for a candidate that would more or less do nothing about it, while complaining they're ineffectual at stopping the genocide.
How can you not see one of those two options is better?
That genocide supporter oughta Genocide Biden and the other do nothing one oughta Peaceful Trump I see.