On 5/1/2022 5:37 AM, trotsky wrote:
> On 4/30/2022 4:44 PM, moviePig wrote:
>> On 4/30/2022 4:05 PM, trotsky wrote:
>>> On 4/30/2022 2:57 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>>> On 4/30/2022 3:49 PM, trotsky wrote:
>>>>> On 4/30/2022 8:58 AM, moviePig wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/30/2022 5:05 AM, trotsky wrote:
>>>>>>> On 4/29/2022 4:00 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 4/29/2022 3:49 PM, trotsky wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 4/29/2022 1:28 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 4/29/2022 2:15 PM, trotsky wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/29/2022 10:06 AM, moviePig wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/29/2022 10:39 AM, trotsky wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/29/2022 8:33 AM, moviePig wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/29/2022 1:08 AM, trotsky wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/28/2022 5:11 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/28/2022 4:18 PM, trotsky wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/28/2022 2:50 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/28/2022 3:10 PM, trotsky wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/28/2022 9:34 AM, moviePig wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/28/2022 3:38 AM, trotsky wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/27/2022 5:43 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/27/2022 6:07 PM, trotsky wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/27/2022 9:11 AM, moviePig wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/27/2022 8:24 AM, trotsky wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I propose as an alternative to incarceration
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> both men and women be sent on a date with Ms.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Heard. Clearly a couple of hours with her would
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make any person sorry for what they've done.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not that Johnny Depp, as an example, didn't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> deserve it to some extent.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've seen only his courtroom testimony.  What
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are we certain he did?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He was passed out due to opiates much of the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> time. Amber of course has accused him of all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kinds of things. I don't have a dog in the fight
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but she really is fucking crazy. Depp was kind of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an idiot to pursue her in the first place.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  From the courtroom videos I do feel sorry for him
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ...though bearing in mind that he's an
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accomplished actor.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sorry for him?  He's fucking deluded himself into
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thinking he knows the "correct" way to use opiates.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He might as well be an antivaxxer while he's at it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't consider *self*-delusion a hanging offense.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that what we were discussing?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Afaik, you were giving reasons to dislike Depp,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> including self-delusion.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So any kind of self delusion is okay even if it's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> opioid abuse? Before covid, opioids were already a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> worldwide epidemic.  Are you attempting to downplay
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this?  This is the worst thing about this group, even
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the most rational seem like they've lost reality contact.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, *self* delusion is solely the business of the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> individual. Hell, maybe Depp *has* figured out how to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have fun with fentanyl. *My* responsibility is only to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> let him know he's probably nuts.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is just offensive.  "Self delusion" trumps the abuse
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of drugs. And that's "his business" if confused himself
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about what he's doing as has every drug addicts since the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dawn of time. And maybe he's "safely" using fentanyl.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you drugs?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The ultimate -- and unacceptable -- alternative is someone
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> else's right to interfere with *my* decisions that affect
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only *me*. E.g., if Depp shows no other signs of mental
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impairment, he's free to choose drugs.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I can't criticize your personal preference but I sure as
>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit don't agree with it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>   Why would you renounce your ultimate right of
>>>>>>>>>>>> self-determination?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I have no idea what that means.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If you're of completely sound mind, why would you give someone
>>>>>>>>>> else a veto power over you, about drugs or anything else?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Who are you claiming gave "veto power" to whom?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Just above, you disagree that Depp should be allowed to choose
>>>>>>>> drugs ...whereas I'd give him that right, just as I'd demand it
>>>>>>>> for myself.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That right?  This is a nation of laws, doing stuff that's illegal
>>>>>>> isn't a "right".  Wow, that's twisted.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is a nation based on the concept of *inalienable* rights.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, and using illicit substances isn't one of them.
>>>>
>>>> Iirc, forming that nation was 'illicit'.
>>>
>>>
>>> That's not a valid analogy.  The country was formed to escape the
>>> King's tyranny.
>>>
>>
>> The king, a.k.a. the law, took a different view.
>
> I have no idea what that means either.  Unless you're promoting
> oligarchies now.  The U.S. took govt. a huge leap forward.  You're
> cognizant of this, right?

The question is about when 'legality' trumps 'morality', and v.v. .