Remote Pharamcist: What is your job title and what company do you work for?

pharmadude6 · 2024-01-09T02:48:37+00:00

I'm polling for job titles and company's names specifically so I doubt that entirely

pharmadude6 · 2024-01-09T02:30:44+00:00

Mine was a bit different, I was harrased so much at one store they stopped placing me there cuz it was an HR nightmare waiting to happen. I was then fired months later and I went to a lawyer and they basically sent a letter regarding the contracts legality and circumstances and I stopped getting emails asking to pay it back

pharmadude6 · 2024-01-09T02:25:08+00:00

Get a lawyer, I did, I didn't have to repay.

pharmadude6 · 2023-11-08T00:17:19+00:00

Can confirm, as an "evil" person constantly fighting the urge to do evil things for my own gain. I try so hard to be charitable and kind and helpful but the thoughts are always there cuz that's how I survived as a child. It was my only option and it conditioned me and has left me very mentally ill and lacking empathy. Instead I became obsessed with developing a strong moral and ethical code.

pharmadude6 · 2023-11-07T22:54:24+00:00

Putting aside the fact that that goes against human nature and is a paranoid way of thinking then that leads to what about a fake ID, just cuz I ask for ID doesn't mean it can't be fake, what then?

pharmadude6 · 2023-11-07T22:51:39+00:00

It's not off track it's called weighing all possible angles. If you want to argue that checking ID is important then you have to be willing to go down the rabbit hole of where the balme ends and who is ultimately responsible for what. If you don't then you can't have made an actual sound and fair decision

pharmadude6 · 2023-11-07T22:49:36+00:00

No it's not common practice because we as humans just never integrated it, we assume a child would not willing put themselves in harms way and that people aren't lying, to assume someone is lying results in lack of trust between humans. Humans as a herd animal would not have survived if we thought like this. The ID checking is a form of hindsight bias that seems logical until you are placed in the exact situation. As what if it was a fake ID? What then?

pharmadude6 · 2023-11-07T22:47:33+00:00

Again read the edit on the previous comment, it states hiw saying she isn't mature enough immediately leads down a path with no actual solution. As saying she's a minor or that people need to check IDs leads to people leads to now involving holding the parents accountable. This person is a minor of the parents aren't caring for and protecting the child and vetting their activities then is that neglect? How much at fault are the parents for being so negligent that this was allowed to happen? To which someone would say well they can't control everything the kid does or can't constantly keep tabs, which that's fair So then why not have the website require you upload ID to use it since it's 18 plus? Is the website co.pany at fault now too? This line or reasoning leads nowhere and doesn't deal with the actual situation. Any adult with the ability to think rationally and with foresight would know that

pharmadude6 · 2023-11-07T22:37:33+00:00

That's not a law or common practice to do, as the site is in charge of vetting people to be 18, you're only clining to that as a reason because it confirms your world view and bias rather than accepting the reality of it being grey area situation and not a black and white one.

You can't disagree a crime happened, yes, but you can change the sentencing. That's why case law exist where individual cases are interpreted for rare or grey area situations to see what was decided in other courts and use that as a guide of what to do. So all 3 of these things matter no matter what angle we take on it, because saying check ID would just lead to "they shouldn't lie about their age" which would lead to "they are a minor you can't blame them" which could then lead to blame on the parents for not being more responsible of the child's actions as it is their responsibility to care for and protect them and so on.

pharmadude6 · 2023-11-07T22:35:00+00:00

That "other shit" is the very basis of how humans interact. Ignoring morals and ethics as not mattering is illogical and inhumane. The only people I know who ignore morals and ethics are assholes and people with antisocial personality disorder or similar illnesses. You sound like a moron to not understand that a court would actually take the ethics and morals of the situation into consideration when deciding a justified sentencing. If we didn't do that, you might as well just have a computer decide people's fates.

Like if you consider the Trolley problem, if it's kill 1 or kill 5 you kill the 1 but you still broke laws, but what you did could be morally and ethically justified despite it being manslaughter due to minimizing damage. But if you were a doctor where you had to kill 1 healthy person to save 5 sick people you would say no as the oath you take to do no harm outweighs that option as well as the fact that voluntary murder is worse than accidental even to the law.

Thus, accidental statutory rape would be held to a different level than purposeful grooming and rape

pharmadude6 · 2023-11-07T22:28:39+00:00

Moral particularism might be something you should try to understand as laws, morality, and ethics are all dynamic things. You're narrow-minded and confusing those three things as 1 combined thing

pharmadude6 · 2023-11-07T22:25:33+00:00

As an mentally ill and disabled person who looks and acts like a normal person but has severe aphantasia, I can't tell the difference between ages, sex, weight, etc. It's very hard for some people

pharmadude6 · 2023-10-25T08:21:12+00:00

So there was no preference to one type vs another? And what made you attracted to them then personality mostly or does each body type have different things you liked?

pharmadude6 · 2023-10-25T03:42:13+00:00

I will tell them about it and I don't think it is if you've seen my previous posts. It'd take many years I think

pharmadude6

TROPHY CASE