roguetrick

Username checks out.

Corporations are a protected class of people.

So it's the person you're suing. Essentially, it's a civil case like a car accident, but you're suing someone for going into the wrong bathroom. You're guaranteed a $10k judgement but can get more for "emotional damages" if the judge is a particular bigot.

Edit: it also means you can blackmail a trans person for a settlement and that's legal too, since the threat isn't so much the criminal fine but the civil one

The fine is a criminal statute of $500. The bounty is a civil statute of $10,000.

Actually the fine is $500 at most. This is a guaranteed civil court payout, on top of any "damages" someone may receive. And since this is civil court, you operate on preponderance of evidence instead of beyond a reasonable doubt.

This sort of legislated punitive damages is what should be happening for instances of wage theft, but instead we're using it for harassing trans people while wage theft tends to have few if any punitive damages and mostly amounts to "ok, now give them their paycheck."

Baby, thanks to CRISPR, humans can too.

I don't know what the age metric has to do with anything.

https://tradingeconomics.com/afghanistan/corruption-index

Along with the general removal of US money spigots and the CIA/DOD putting it's thumb on the scale for corrupt politicians that will collaborate with them. It's frankly the entire reason the regime folded so fast when the Taliban invaded. Entire divisions of troops were just some guy taking their paychecks and putting it into his pocket after forcing them to sign up. And when everyone is power is just blatantly stealing while being propped up by US agencies for being cooperative, well, it trickles down.

https://youtu.be/4fndeDfaWCg?t=54

The problem is, they've actually successfully reduced corruption from the unjust kleptocracy the US installed. Shits pretty bad when the fucking taliban can come along and create a less corrupt government.

I just don't think it's useful. Trying to argue against a non consequentialist ethical position with consequences is like beating your head against the wall. It's just an endless circular argument.