Aren’t fruits subsets of vegetables? Without looking it up I thought that vegetables were the edible part of the plant and fruits are edible reproductive parts of the plant. I could be totally off on that though.
- 0 Posts
- 6 Comments
two_wheel2@lemm.eeto Linux@lemmy.ml•8 Websites Linux Users Should Have bookmarkedEnglish2·2 years agoTotally fair, and largely what I use it for, but it’s also helpful in the term at times to just get out a weird regex for a weirder file operation you don’t want to dork
two_wheel2@lemm.eeto Linux@lemmy.ml•8 Websites Linux Users Should Have bookmarkedEnglish10·2 years agoAdd in regexr as well
two_wheel2@lemm.eeto Malicious Compliance@lemmy.world•Businesses can discriminate against their customers? Alright then...English1·2 years agoThe question THIS LAW interacts with is the CONTENT of the message. If you’re providing tables for a wedding this law wouldn’t protect you. If you were asked to write something specific for the wedding and the content of the request is antithetical to your beliefs, this law would protect you, if you could show that. Not a lawyer, but that’s how I read it.
Now. Is it “right” to do so? I would say in absolutely no universe. It’s morally wrong, it undermines our liberal society, and I have no tolerance for it. My point is that this particular law isn’t about whether someone is a Christian, their race, or sexuality. This decision wouldn’t protect me from writing some basic software for a nazi (others might) but it DOES protect me from building a website supporting them, or writing prose related to nazism, or anything else which would be CLEARLY against what I believe. Please DON’T read that I’m saying that being a nazi is the same as being homosexual, it isn’t, I’m not, fuck nazis.
To get back to your question: as I read this decision, a cake maker could potentially be compelled to make a cake for an interracial couple, but they might not be compelled to make a cake with something like “interracial is the only way to go”
two_wheel2@lemm.eeto Malicious Compliance@lemmy.world•Businesses can discriminate against their customers? Alright then...English0·2 years agoThis is the best take I’ve seen in this thread so far. It’s an issue of compelled speech, not of this or that demographic or ideology of the client or service. I’m not trying to dog whistle here, I hate that any business would exercise this in a hateful way, but another example of the reverse would be compelling a black-owned bakery to write an awful racist message on a cake. Obviously no person should be compelled to say what they don’t believe, regardless of the level of asshattery they dabble in.
Would there be any aspect of defense you would consider? For example another comment mentioned situational awareness, etc. Basically weapons systems which might STOP them from being used on civilians?