Thursday's Most Active Threads

The two most active threads yesterday were ones that I've already discussed and, therefore, I will start with yesterday's third most active thread. That thread was titled, "Event everyone can celebrate: terrorist leader Sinwar dead", and posted in the "Political Discussion" forum. The original poster started this thread soon after reports emerged that Yahya Sinwar, the leader of Hamas, had been killed in Gaza by Israeli forces. The original poster believes that this is an event that will please both Israelis and Palestinians. In addition, the original poster expresses hope that Sinwar's death will lead to an end to the fighting in Gaza, the release of the hostages being held by Hamas, and peace in the Middle East. I don't want to be too critical of the original poster because this view was commonly expressed yesterday, including by those much more prominent than the anonymous original poster. But this perspective mostly highlights the disconnect between U.S. perceptions of the war and the reality of what is actually occurring. Far from bringing an end to the war, Israel is continuing to widen the conflict in the region. Almost immediately, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu assured his nation that the fighting would continue. What will happen with the hostages is unclear. It is possible that some will be killed in retaliation. More likely there will be no real impact. It is probable that even before Sinwar's death, Hamas had lost most of its ability to exert top down control of its members. The fate of the hostages could well be left to the individual groups that are holding them. As for peace in the region, it will be a long time before Gaza is anything more than a catalyst for further violence in the region. Moreover, as I wrote recently on this blog, Netanyahu's personal motivations are for continual war. Based on what I observed on social media, the reaction of Palestinians and Lebanese, even among some who were no fans of Sinwar, is not one of celebration. Israel released video from a drone that entered the building in which Sinwar had taken refuge after a firefight with Israeli troops. Sinwar's right arm appeared to have been amputated near his wrist and he seems to have applied a tourniquet himself. Using his left arm, he threw a stick at the drone. Arabs point out that rather than hiding in a tunnel, Sinwar was above ground leading the battle against Israeli forces and resisted to the last moment of his life. It appears that Israel may have just created a martyr whose life will inspire others. We have seen how little impact Israel's assassination of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah has had as Israel continues to face stiff resistance in southern Lebanon. Hamas and Hezbollah are resistance organizations whose members face the choice of fighting to the death or surrendering their homelands. Quite a few will prefer the former. The biggest impact of Sinwar's killing may be on U.S. - Israeli relations. For President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, this provides an off-ramp for Israel. Rather than the continued slaughter and starvation of Gazans which is costing Harris votes and possibly even the election, she would much rather see an end to the violence which might decrease the war's importance as an election issue. But Netanyahu appears determined to bomb and starve Gazans into submission. Biden and Harris will be forced to choose between their own interests and Netanyahu's.

The next most active thread yesterday was posted in the "Off-Topic" forum. Titled, "DUI and Death on Harrison", this thread is about the same topic as one that I discussed on Tuesday. Both threads are about the tragic death of a young college student in a car accident involving a drunk driver. The earlier thread got so contentious and with so many inappropriate posts that I ended up locking it. This thread was started soon after that and is also occasionally getting out of control. Therefore, it's fate may be to get locked before long as well. The original poster of this thread started it by asking why the 18-year-old driver of the car is being held in jail rather than released on bail. There are a few different themes that run throughout this thread. One is the comparison of the driver of the car who is still being held in jail to the driver in another incident in which the driver was drunk and crashed his car, resulting in the death of another young person. In the second case, the driver was a few months from reaching the age of 18 and was, therefore, tried as a juvenile and received a very minor sentence. Many observers believed that the driver should have been tried as an adult and sentenced more harshly. In this case, with the driver still being held in jail several days after the crash, some posters are concerned that the pendulum might be swinging too far in the other direction. Other posters argue that the differences between the two cases are simply down to age and, as an adult, the driver in the more recent case deserves the treatment that he is receiving. Several posters support no-nonsense reactions to drunk driving and are happy that the driver is being detained. They also hope that he will eventually receive a harsh sentence. At least one poster, and perhaps more than one, are concerned about the apparent rush to judgement in this case. They argue that not all the facts are known and that posters should give the justice system time to work before coming to conclusions. It is not clear what mitigating factors they believe might arise during the legal process. About the only thing that I can envision is that the driver might not be proven to have been legally drunk. The driver refused a breathalyzer test at the scene and, while police have said that alcohol was a factor, it is not clear to me what evidence they have to prove that he was legally drunk. Regardless, many posters say that they don't need further evidence to consider the driver guilty. Some posters suggest that too much attention is being given to this case and that drunk driving is less common now and there are other factors that contribute considerably more to dangerous driving. For instance, one poster argues, texting is much more common and rather than focusing on this driver posters should do more to prevent texting and driving. As in the other thread, several posters criticize parents who they believe model alcohol abuse, resulting in children who don't take such things as driving drunk seriously. The question about why the driver still hasn't been offered bail never does get answered and posters are still wondering about it in the most recent posts in the thread.

Next was a thread titled, "Italy, France, Germany, and Spain outlaw surrogacy?" and posted in the "Off-Topic" forum. The original poster linked to an article discussing legal changes in Italy involving surrogacy. Surrogacy was already illegal in Italy, but the parliament just passed a law prohibiting going abroad for surrogacy. This was seen primarily as an anti-LGBTQ action. Because gay couples are not allowed to adopt in Italy, this removes the last opportunity for male couples to become parents. But, what catches the original poster's eye was the last part of the article that mentioned that all forms of surrogacy are illegal in France, Germany and Spain. This surprises her because she typically views these countries are more progressive than the U.S. Many posters explain that the countries that ban surrogacy see this as an issue of human dignity and that such laws prevent poor women from being exploited. Without such laws, poor women could be forced into "renting their womb" out of desperation. Other posters counter this argument by pointing out that these countries have social safety nets, minimum wages, generous benefits, and other practices that should prevent a woman from being placed in desparate situation. For some, this reflects different perspectives regarding capitalism. In the U.S., there is a widely-held belief that individuals should be able to do what they want with their bodies and, if they are able to make money using their bodies, that is their choice. Obviously, in most of America, this thinking does not extend to prostitution. However, in the countries that ban surrogacy, babies are not viewed as product that can be marketed or subject to transactions. Posters are divided over whether banning surrogacy is progressive and done to prevent exploitation or conservative and aimed at preventing LGBTG couples from becoming parents. Almost immediately, several posters side-tracked this thread to debate Europe's abortion laws. Conservative misunderstanding of European abortion restrictions has been an issue in a great number of threads on DCUM. European laws are often used to justify abortion restrictions in the U.S. Yet, those laws exist in much different healthcare environment than that of the U.S. and conservatives have no interest in the other aspects of healthcare in Europe. European healthcare often results in their abortion laws to, in practice, be more liberal than our laws. Back to the issue of surrogacy, many posters themselves are strongly opposed to the practice and express a desire that surrogacy be prohibited in the U.S. as well. They have little sympathy for couples who are dealing with infertility and even less for gay couples. Other posters deny that surrogates are being exploited. Some are being paid well and others are doing it by choice out of sympathy. One thing this thread does is highlight the many different views posters have about "appropriate" parents. As noted, many posters in this thread oppose surrogacy, but some also oppose IVF for various reasons. Some even suggest concerns about adoption, seeing that as not that far removed from surrogacy. One poster even referred to adoption as "stealing" a child. There is a contradiction between the very common importance that is placed on parenthood and the frequent opposition to non-traditional methods of becoming parents. Individuals and couples are told that they must become parents, but then prevented from any but traditional means of doing so, often leaving them feeling like failures, and sometimes even treated as such.

The final thread that I will discuss today was posted in the "Tweens and Teens" forum and titled, "Did you get you teen a covid shot?". The original poster says that she is on the fence about COVID vaccinations for her teen or teens (because the poster used the pronoun "they" I don't know if it is singular or plural). The original poster says they received the first shot but none of the boosters. However, her husband is adamant that they get the shot from now on. I am not going to spend much time on this thread as the topic has been debated ad infinitum. Some posters support having teens receive all COVID shots and some don't. Threads like this, including this one, always end up debating COVID itself with posters complaining that the shots make them feel poorly for a day or two, that they caught COVID anyway and it was "just a cold", and that the shots themselves are more dangerous than catching COVID. Other posters argue the opposite views. I don't think anyone is going to change their opinion at this time other than in marginal cases such as the original poster where she and her husband have a disagreement. I assume that eventually one of them will win the argument. Otherwise, COVID and the vaccines have been politicized, subject to myth and misinformation, and developed into an almost religious topic. Most people have settled into one camp or the other and nothing is going to change their opinions. It will be interesting if over the long-term one side or the other turns out to have been correct. But there are so many other variables involved that I am not sure there will ever be a clear answer. In all likelihood, both sides will consider themselves validated by future events.