this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2024
-17 points (32.7% liked)

Open Source

30764 readers
495 users here now

All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!

Useful Links

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

(cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/21522265)

A group of people including Drew DeVault are trying to cancel RMS again, basing their claims on ancient misinterpreted quotes. Stallman may be controversial, but these activists are just acid for the entire Free Software movement.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] RobotToaster@mander.xyz -2 points 5 hours ago (2 children)
[–] UncleBadTouch@lemmy.ca 10 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

forgot to add this from 2017

A national campaign seeks to make all US states prohibit sex between humans and nonhuman animals.

This campaign seems to be sheer bull-headed prudery, using the perverse assumption that sex between a human and an animal hurts the animal. That’s true for some ways of having sex, and false for others.

[–] UncleBadTouch@lemmy.ca 4 points 4 hours ago

you lost me at " Many years ago I posted that I could not see anything wrong about sex between an adult and a child, if the child accepted it.

Through personal conversations in recent years, I've learned to understand how sex with a child can harm per psychologically. This changed my mind about the matter: I think adults should not do that. I am grateful for the conversations that enabled me to understand why."

the guy did NOT change his mind, hes scared of getting caught and called out for being a pedo, necrophiliac, and enjoying bestiality

Stallman remarked most recently on the subject of pornography featuring humans and animals in 2018:

Prudish censorship attacks again in the UK, convicting someone for possessing “extreme pornography”, including images of sex with animals.

I can’t imagine a possible reason to punish people for this. The article does not report that the animals were harmed, or that they objected to the experience, or that they thought of it as sexual. The law does not consider these questions pertinent.

What is, however, clear is that prohibiting the possession of copies of some image or text — no matter what that image or text may be — threatens human rights. It creates excuses to search through people’s possessions and files. It creates ways to make people vulnerable to criminal charges without their cooperation or even their knowledge. All such laws must be repealed.