5 ms·

Are we pretending things like vasectomies aren’t a thing? The success rate is generally in the upper-90% so sure it could fail but for the vast majority of peop

Are we pretending things like vasectomies aren’t a thing? The success rate is generally in the upper-90% so sure it could fail but for the vast majority of people, that is equivalent to “disabling sperm production entirely” The laws also, as have been mentioned already elsewhere in this post, do include such a consent clause. So it’s not really theory either.

XorNot 3y ago
Are you ignoring my distinction between hypothetically perfect laws and the laws as written? And also being just downright stupid about what a vasectomy is and it's reversibility (hint: no medical professional will perform a vasectomy if you are getting one under the impression that it is reliably reversible, particularly after decades).
- mynameisvlad 3y ago
  You never said it had to be reversible, so maybe next time outline your goal posts a bit better if you don’t want people to blow right through them. It’s almost as if all you said was: > Invent a world where men can disable sperm production entirely, and you'd be able to write very different laws. And you clearly can’t bother looking at the existing comments when you have so much snark to share so let me help you out with real, actual laws that exist. There is no difference between an ideal world and real laws when the laws actually exist. https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90c12#BK9 https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90c12#BK9
  - XorNot 3y ago
    > There is no difference between an ideal world and real laws when the laws actually exist. If you're not capable of understanding what a hypothetical is then there's really no further discussion to be had here.
    - mynameisvlad 3y ago
      Hypotheticals get thrown out the window when an actual law exists. I agree there's no further discussion to be had but not for the reasons you think.
      - XorNot 3y ago
        That's still not how hypotheticals work, nor does it have any bearing on the original argument I was making. You've managed to not read my original post, and have been doubling down by pretending that "well what about vasectomies" was a core problem or even oversight.
        mynameisvlad 3y ago
        What hypothetical? The one where men can turn off reproduction? Congrats, that already exists. The one where laws are made around the ability to do so? Congratu-fucking-lations. It exists. There is no hypothetical when the things being discussed already exist. That's not how hypotherticals work. Next time, don't have a shit argument that can be broken down in a heartbeat and then whine about your precious hypotheticals not being respected.
        dragonwriter 3y ago
        > This is relatively new; previously Visa/MC prevented their merchants from doing this but it changed recently. Not that it is the biggest point in this chain of people arguing badly past each other, but you have confused “hypothetical” (which assumes a condition independent of what is true in reality) vs. “counterfactual” (which assumes a condition contrary to what is true in reality).
        mynameisvlad 3y ago
        Gotta love replying to a day old thread you had nothing to do with with both a quote that doesn’t come from the thread and a definition that isn’t accepted by most major dictionaries. That’s like peak “I know what I’m talking about” material.

XorNot 3y ago

Are you ignoring my distinction between hypothetically perfect laws and the laws as written? And also being just downright stupid about what a vasectomy is and it's reversibility (hint: no medical professional will perform a vasectomy if you are getting one under the impression that it is reliably reversible, particularly after decades).

mynameisvlad 3y ago
You never said it had to be reversible, so maybe next time outline your goal posts a bit better if you don’t want people to blow right through them. It’s almost as if all you said was: > Invent a world where men can disable sperm production entirely, and you'd be able to write very different laws. And you clearly can’t bother looking at the existing comments when you have so much snark to share so let me help you out with real, actual laws that exist. There is no difference between an ideal world and real laws when the laws actually exist. https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90c12#BK9 https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90c12#BK9
- XorNot 3y ago
  > There is no difference between an ideal world and real laws when the laws actually exist. If you're not capable of understanding what a hypothetical is then there's really no further discussion to be had here.
  - mynameisvlad 3y ago
    Hypotheticals get thrown out the window when an actual law exists. I agree there's no further discussion to be had but not for the reasons you think.
    - XorNot 3y ago
      That's still not how hypotheticals work, nor does it have any bearing on the original argument I was making. You've managed to not read my original post, and have been doubling down by pretending that "well what about vasectomies" was a core problem or even oversight.
      - mynameisvlad 3y ago
        What hypothetical? The one where men can turn off reproduction? Congrats, that already exists. The one where laws are made around the ability to do so? Congratu-fucking-lations. It exists. There is no hypothetical when the things being discussed already exist. That's not how hypotherticals work. Next time, don't have a shit argument that can be broken down in a heartbeat and then whine about your precious hypotheticals not being respected.
        dragonwriter 3y ago
        > This is relatively new; previously Visa/MC prevented their merchants from doing this but it changed recently. Not that it is the biggest point in this chain of people arguing badly past each other, but you have confused “hypothetical” (which assumes a condition independent of what is true in reality) vs. “counterfactual” (which assumes a condition contrary to what is true in reality).
        mynameisvlad 3y ago
        Gotta love replying to a day old thread you had nothing to do with with both a quote that doesn’t come from the thread and a definition that isn’t accepted by most major dictionaries. That’s like peak “I know what I’m talking about” material.