Send me bad puns. Good puns welcome too.

  • 0 Posts
  • 35 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 13th, 2024

help-circle



  • Basically I don’t believe in intellectual property in the first place, so I consider the whole debate moot. It becomes obviously absurd when you try to think of how to apply the rulings of actual property. For example if I have an OC and “lend” it to someone, what? Am I not allowed to draw it anymore? Will they sue me? How do I return a stolen OC? Are we really going to consider piracy a major sin (stealing)? Accepting IP as property would also imply that it never ends, and literally nobody does that.

    Intellectual property should be seen for what it is: A system thought up by the British to make the rich richer that has about as much Islamic legitimacy as, say, segregation.

    Edit: Also you’re generally not going to get many replies from Muslims here seeing as the number of Muslims on the Threadverse is in the single digits.
















  • That’s not what that means. Separation of church and state simply means that the law doesn’t favor one religion over another. What you’re thinking of is the French formulation, known as laicite, which—you guessed it—is a French thing. It’s also based on some pretty problematic ideas that lead and have led to some pretty problematic results, so yeah.

    For a non-French example, he’s the Australian constitution on the topic:

    The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth.

    Nothing at all about lawmakers publicly adhering to a religion.