Should misinformation be banned from the major platforms?

[Daedalus X]

For this topic misinformation is any information that promotes needle hesitancy or anti authoritarian approved information.

Here is an example of misinformation that can't be posted to YouTube, twitter, Facebook or any mainline medium. Is this good public policy?



This is a MUST WATCH.

https://www.therealanthonyfaucimovie.com/viewing/

[Adonai Yahweh]

For this topic misinformation is any information that promotes needle hesitancy or anti authoritarian approved information.

I think the issue with banning information is that companies can go as far as classifying the truth as misinformation can banning it from platform . The question will be who will decide what to ban and how do we determine that the person or company is not biased in their banning of information ?

Instead we should be educating people on how to be identifying scams , because lets say we do ban misleading information on social media platforms meaning that these platforms have the reputation of always spreading accurate information . Whats stopping those companies to take advantage of that reputation as a means to spreading their own misinformation about their company or even worse whats not stopping the wealthy person from bribing those companies to promote their agenda .

[brunumb]

It would be absurd if that was the point. It wasn't. I imagine the opposite is absurd - that you are saying that we can dispense with Trans people. That we can ignore their existence and pretend they aren't real. The science says they are part of life, whether we like it or not. We can't toss them aside as if they don't or shouldn't exist.

You are disingenuously distorting the argument. I am not saying that we can dispense with trans people. I am not saying that we have to ignore them and pretend they aren't real. I am not saying that they should be tossed aside as if they don't or shouldn't exist. All those claims are part of the trans activist playlist in order to make an emotional argument that distracts from the truth.

Trans people have never had it better, despite the fact that there will always be people who object to just about any group of people they have a problem with. That is a facet of human nature you can't just legislate away. Set speed limit laws and you will still get people who speed. Just look at social media, pride parades, trans people at the White House, women of the year. Oppression? You've got to be kidding.

Back to the first point. Being trans is not essential to society. Surely it is not even a desirable condition for those who have genuine gender dysphoria. It is something those people have to cope with rather than aspire to. If it is possible to avoid having children chemically and surgically transitioning and then go on to lead happy, healthy lives, that to me is a far more desirable outcome.

[brunumb]

As for "errors", perhaps your brain is the error in that you can't fathom why some organisms are born the way they are? See how offended you are at this idea - yet, you appear to joyfully decide that others are the ones that are biological errors.

You seem incapable of distinguishing the scientific argument from the emotional one. A fertilised egg should contain 23 chromosome pairs, one of which is either XX or XY. Any other outcome is an error in the process that led to it. I can fathom why some humans are born with those errors. The process is not infallible. To say that I appear to "joyfully decide that others are the ones that are biological errors" demonstrates that you have little understanding of me or what I am saying.

[brunumb]

There is no underlying principle. Life isn't working from a set of plans, or rules determined by some Master Planner. It's humans that try to put things in categories - then - apparently - some humans get bent out of shape when Life doesn't conform to their invented categories.

I'll follow the science, not the angry rants from Categorists, thank you.

There is an underlying principle established by millions of years of evolution and sexual reproduction. No master planner necessary. And, sadly, you are not following the science, just misinformation spread through the new hysteria of gender ideology.

[brunumb]

What the hell? I leave for a few days and you're still here being a bigot. Why? What is it about trans people that bothers you so much? What exactly are you so worried that they're going to do? What do you think their "real agenda" might be?

Typical response from someone who has swallowed the ideology and is incapable of refuting anything with a rational argument. I have no problem with trans people. They were right off my horizon before these militant trans activists starting shoving their ideology down the throats of everyone and started on indoctrinating children. Could the real agenda be to white-ant society so that we end up with weak minded individuals who are easily controlled and manipulated? Welcome to New North Korea.

[brunumb]

You couldn't behave more like a creationist if you tried.

That is precisely the accusation I was going to aim at you. Gender ideology is very much like a religion. The defenders of both use exactly the same tactics. The most significant is the denial of science or the misrepresentation of science so that it bears some sort of semblance to the truth in the minds of less critical thinkers. The animal and plant world evolved with a binary principle of sexual reproduction. Now we have humans trying to distort reality for everyone in order to alleviate the mental discomfort of a very few. There are better ways.

[boatsnguitars]

As for "errors", perhaps your brain is the error in that you can't fathom why some organisms are born the way they are? See how offended you are at this idea - yet, you appear to joyfully decide that others are the ones that are biological errors.

You seem incapable of distinguishing the scientific argument from the emotional one. A fertilised egg should contain 23 chromosome pairs, one of which is either XX or XY. Any other outcome is an error in the process that led to it. I can fathom why some humans are born with those errors. The process is not infallible. To say that I appear to "joyfully decide that others are the ones that are biological errors" demonstrates that you have little understanding of me or what I am saying.

I covered this. You are wrong. You seem incapable of understanding the science because of your bigotry and fear of some ideology. I have no dog in this fight, I simply recognize the science that you ignore because it doesn't confirm to your ideology.

[boatsnguitars]

It would be absurd if that was the point. It wasn't. I imagine the opposite is absurd - that you are saying that we can dispense with Trans people. That we can ignore their existence and pretend they aren't real. The science says they are part of life, whether we like it or not. We can't toss them aside as if they don't or shouldn't exist.

You are disingenuously distorting the argument. I am not saying that we can dispense with trans people. I am not saying that we have to ignore them and pretend they aren't real. I am not saying that they should be tossed aside as if they don't or shouldn't exist. All those claims are part of the trans activist playlist in order to make an emotional argument that distracts from the truth.

Trans people have never had it better, despite the fact that there will always be people who object to just about any group of people they have a problem with. That is a facet of human nature you can't just legislate away. Set speed limit laws and you will still get people who speed. Just look at social media, pride parades, trans people at the White House, women of the year. Oppression? You've got to be kidding.

Back to the first point. Being trans is not essential to society. Surely it is not even a desirable condition for those who have genuine gender dysphoria. It is something those people have to cope with rather than aspire to. If it is possible to avoid having children chemically and surgically transitioning and then go on to lead happy, healthy lives, that to me is a far more desirable outcome.

I was responding in kind. You distorted my argument. Read through it again, without all your anger clouding your judgement.

[DrNoGods]

[Replying to oldbadger in post #252]

And so my gentleman friend who is asexual is still male after his entire life, just as some asexual women that I know are female, but you know and I know that any of them could have decided to change sex.

Good to see you recognize that these asexual people remain biologically male or female, which is the point I've been making all along. Their biological sex does not change no matter what their sexual preferences are. But I disagree that they can change their biological sex. They can get hormone treatments, surguries etc. to look as much as is medically possible like the opposite sex, and carry on with their lives as if they were the opposite sex, but they cannot change their 23rd pair of chromosomes from XX to XY, or vice-versa. This is not scientifically possible in 2023. I'm making a distinction between biological sex (determined by chromosomes), and individual sexuality and sexual preferences which can and do vary all over the map.

And so there's nothing for you to challenge, then..... You've already identified that asexuality exists in both males and females, and so it shouldn't be too much of a problem for you to recognise that some people feel strongly that they are transsexuals, or bisexuals, or homosexuals, or polysexuals, etc etc.....

I've never not recognized this. You just used the term "feel strongly", which is exactly my point. Someone can "feel strongly" that they wish to be the opposite sex (that term itself implying a binary scenario), or be homosexual, bisexual, etc. and that is fine. They can pursue their feelings however they wish and I'm not disputing that. But no matter how strongly they feel that their 23rd pair of chromosomes should be XX rather than XY, or vice-versa, it will not happen. They cannot change their biological sex by any method known to us now.

[oldbadger]

Your ad hominem is noted. As is the absence of any scientific refutation of the contents of that video. He was right in at least one thing. Transgender advocates have no answer.

Discovering that the star, producer and director of your 'film to prove your point' is a Catholic Apologist and not a genetics scientist and making mention of this to you is hardly an ad-hominem argument. It could not have been funnier if he had been a postman or a pilot!