Total posts: 4,340
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Groceries aren’t too expensive; people can still afford them. Otherwise you would see people starving.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
At the end of the day, violence for my side is good, violence for the other side is bad.
Your nuts if you think it’s okay to do violence against people you disagree with. If everyone agrees with you, there would be civil war. But your probably okay with that.
But what they fail to understand is that "pro-life" is nothing but an abstract marker to indicate objective opposition to abortion. It is never meant to mean anymore and it doesn't apply to anything else. But because the left perceives this opposition to abortion as some abstract cause for "life", then they can call hypocrisy.
Being a pro lifer that supports the death penalty and opposes welfare is an inconsistency. If you think it’s justified, make sure it’s because it’s what you really believe and not because the GOP told you to believe it.
Consider the following: Let’s say the election of 2024 comes and Joe Biden all of a sudden opposes Roe v Wade because of his desire to save children (like from mass shootings but now he also applies that to abortion) and Donald Trump decides to support Roe V Wade if it’s discovered that the prostitute he slept with wanted an abortion and he let her have one. In other words, the parties flip on abortion. There was a time when both parties disagreed with their current positions on abortion. The question is, do you:
1) Change your stance on abortion
2)Change your stance on every issue besides abortion and become a democrat.
3) Relize that the parties flipped their views and not change your views based on what other people say.
If you do #1 or #2, your being a partisan hack and most people would do #1 or #2 because people are trivial thinkers and this is bad. People should think for themselves instead of trying to fit into a left wing or right wing group. Otherwise, what’s the point of debate? If you (a right wing partisan hack) argues with a left winger, neither one of you is going to change your mind because you both just want to fit into one party and are unwilling to deviate from that party in the slightest, making debate pointless. The only people willing to change their minds are independents.
Trump caused the right to become anti war. If it wasn’t for Trump, if Putin invaded Ukraine, the people with Ukraine flags in their bio would be conservatives. But since Trump is anti war, the people with Ukraine flags in their bios are liberals.
That’s not how politics should work; whether or not Trump is anti war should have no impact on if your anti war. Whether or not Sanders is anti war should have no impact on if your anti war or not. One area where Trump and Sanders agree is on war. If you agree with Trump on war, you also agree with Sanders on war. Yet the right will give Trump credit for being anti war and they won’t give Bernie credit for the same thing because they are partisan hacks (same with left wing media, although corporate dems tend to be pro war). The left supports the Ukraine war to kill Russian forces and the right supports the Iraq war to kill ISIS. Neither side cares about the civilian deaths in the wars they support.
Me personally, I’m with you on abortion and welfare. I also oppose the death penalty, favoring the Stanton penalty for murderers and rapists. I’m anti war, whether it’s with Ukraine or Iraq. I want open borders, just like Reagan.
Power, objective principles, and real action does.
This comes to an inconsistency. If you are willing to do whatever it takes to get right wingers to win elections, are you willing to close down the borders so the democrats can’t get more left wing immigrants and are you willing to mandate abortions for black women to prevent their kids from being future democrat voters? Or can we agree that how someone votes doesn’t matter in terms of if they are allowed to be in the country? If you want immigrant votes, give them a reason they like to vote for you. Otherwise enjoy losing to Biden(who I would prefer over Trump because married men who sleep with prostitutes and commit adultery don’t deserve to be in the White House). If you claim Biden sniffs little kids, good point. Let’s go with Bernie Sanders; he doesn’t sniff kids or sleep with prostitutes. He has some bad policies like repealing the Hyde amendment, but he will save enough civilians from war to make up for that. He also isn’t curropt; to me that is very good as curroption is horrible.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
but your views are actually perfect in line
What does that mean?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
It's not nearly as statist as green energy, not even close.
Wdym? Solar panels allow you to live off grid if you have batteries. That’s the least statist thing possible if you pay for your own panels.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lemming
The most feisable way to pay off the debt is higher taxes and lower spending.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lemming
Libetarians are anti war. But ending the wars won’t pay off the debt. It just reduces the deficit. The only way the debt can be reduced is with tax hikes and less spending.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
I don’t like the term centrist because it implies I’m center on every issue. I perfer the term libertarian leaning independent. Sometimes I’ll back left wingers, right wingers, libertarians and authoritarians. I would say 70% of my views are libertarian.
Created:
-->
@Danielle
Correct. We give birthright citizenship to those BORNin America.
That’s because compared to foreigners, Americans are free speech absolutists and if we let foreigners vote without citizenship, it leads to them voting for policies so bad it causes us all to have to flee America (or at least a lot of us).
For one thing the unborn, especially early in pregnancy, have zero cognitive function at all whatsoever. Why don't animals have the same rights as humans? Because they are not cognitively equivalent to neurotypical humans. And neither are the unborn.
This is the, “fetuses don’t deserve mandated protection” argument. If this is what you believe, do you support a man’s right to ditch the fetus he created? After all, if the fetus has no cognitive ability, it doesn’t matter if the guy wants to smash and dash. You might say the female has to sacrifice her body, but then this goes back to the Conjoined twin argument. You then might say that the fetus isn’t the same as a conjoined twin, and we are going in circles.
But toddlers and babies are no longer physically inhabiting someone else's body, and we generally consider killing those outside the womb murder. It is not okay to kill a baby or anyone outside the womb because someone else will presumably take care of the baby that is born; the baby is no longer reliant on someone else to survive that's unwilling to host it.
Conjoined twins rely on each other’s body. This doesn’t give one the right to kill the other. You may say they are sentient and a fetus isn’t, but that allows smash and dash if a fetus isn’t a human being worthy of protection because of lack of intelligence. And we are going back in circles.
I highly doubt you're interested in changing your mind so the convo may not be fruitful.
I would say I’m more willing to change my mind than you are. There have been times when I defended abortion up until the moment of birth, and they have been frequent. That’s just not what I believe now. Have there ever been times when you were against abortion? If not, your more likely the close minded one than me.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
If you support a female abandoning the fetus she chose to create, do you support the dad doing the same thing? I think that would be ridiculous.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
National Debt is a sort of fantasy concept.
If you REALLY believe this, are you willing to make tax revenue 0, double spending every year, and finance it all by going deeper into debt? Or is that ridiculous and the debt has to be paid off because the debt is a problem.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
If you like nuclear power, go for it. Just don’t call nuclear power libertarian; it’s statist.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
I think France and South Korea have government run nuclear power. I might be wrong here though. This isn’t something libetarians would support.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
All of humanity’s energy needs are already met. If nuclear power was completely privatized, the private sector would incorporate profit waste. I also don’t think new nuclear power plants would be developed because most people don’t care that much about the environment when it comes to paying money for it. Otherwise most people would have solar panels or do what it takes to get them. Meaning people are fine with coal.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
I’m not a libertarian. I agree with them on 70% of issues or so, but I am not 100% libertarian.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
The private sector isn’t going to spend billions of dollars on nuclear power plants. So if libertarians get the nuclear power they want, they are going to have to be government run.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Sex drive is inherent.Sort of an in built addiction.
If sex drive is inevitable and people shouldn’t be punished for it, do you support punishing deadbeat dads with child support money?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
I want to make the world English speaking so I can travel anywhere and have people understand me(plus American soft power). There is no point in making the Pope Islamic.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
inconsistencies from what source ?
My head.
what about out-competing the market with provably-fair games ?
All the people that want to federally gamble use the lottery. Government buisiness ideas are taxpayer funded to start up so libetarians wouldn’t support it. I don’t believe it will generate enough revenue to pay off the debt.
Created:
-->
@Danielle
In the law we make distinctions when it comes to rights.
Every distinction has to be justified by non arbitrary means.
Among humans, immigrants don't have the same rights as citizens
I disagree with this btw. And in America, documented immigrants have the same rights the native born do.
Despite the fact that fetuses are living human beings, they should not have the same rights as born persons.
Why?
There is a difference in status between people that are born because they do not rely on inhabiting another person's body to live. In the case of conjoined twins, both of them are born so both have the right to not have their bodies violated.
Conjoined twins rely on the other person’s body to live. This does not mean it is acceptable for one twin to murder the other on the grounds of bodily autonomy. Why does being born matter? Both the fetus and the twin is dependent on someone else for their survival. If it’s acceptable to kill one, it’s acceptable to kill the other and vice versa. I don’t think it’s acceptable to kill either.
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
Therefore the mother should have the right to choose whether or not her body can be used to nurture an alien invader.
Whether or not one is from someplace else has no relevance. Otherwise, it would justify deportations (which I also oppose). An invasion requires a military and a fetus isn’t a military. Would you call one Siamese twin an invader of the other’s body?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
I figure out inconsistencies by myself.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Libetarians don’t support nationalization of industry.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
One doesn’t need to have sex to know that sex without the intent on producing a kid is addictive and detrimental.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
I think of it all myself. I think about politics every day, so I don’t like any party 100% of the time, including libertarians.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
The interest on the debt is around $240 billion. You can’t pay off even the deficit on pure lotteries.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
The vast majority of new nuclear power plants are government funded.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
What did that have to do with immigration?
Created:
Posted in:
Time for me to distance myself from libetarians because I roast the left and the right. Time to roast the down wing (down for small government).
Libetarians: We need to pay off the debt.
Me: Raising taxes would help pay off the debt.
Libetarians: Not like that. Pay off the debt without taxes as taxation is theft.
Me: So what’s your plan to pay off the debt? If you eliminated all spending and all taxes (both nonstarters), the debt will still go up because of interest payments.
Another issue I have with libertarians:
Libertarians: COVID is not serious. Keep the public schools open.
Also Libetarians: Shut down public school; homeschool your kid.
Me: You can use COVID as an excuse to homeschool your kid even if you don’t think COVID is a big deal.
Another issue I have with libertarians:
Libertarians: The government is bad.
Libertarians: Trust the government with spending billions of dollars on taxpayer money for nuclear power plants.
My response: Support nuclear power if you want; just don’t call it libertarian; it’s not.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TWS1405
I don’t see how anyone can support smash and dash when the female gets pregnant. Men should not smash and dash and they should be prosecuted if they do and forced to pay all the child support they owe.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Canada deports a high proportion of its undocumented population, but that’s because they are too authoritarian. America is less authoritarian.
The ideal number of deportations every year is 0. I can’t think of any scanareao where deportation is justified?
If they do something horrible (like rape a child), deportation is too easy. A life sentence, with hard labor to pay the child for their trauma and castration of the rapist as a deterrent, is better than deporting them to a country where they will rape more children.
If they aren’t harming anyone, deportation is too harsh.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
America is 8x as populated as Canada. Yet we deport 30x as many people and there are 100x as many undocumented immigrants in America than Canada. America is just more popular for the undocumented than socialist hell holes like Canada.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
Me personally, I mean this seriously. If Americans go and make Mexico City anglophone, that would be based. Let’s make the entire Western Hemisphere just like America. If all the Latin American capitals learn English, it would mean more migrants to the US will know it; making the legalization process easier.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Canada#Illegal_migration states there are no more than 120,000 undocumented immigrants in Canada (1% of the 11 million figure for the US).
https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/what-canadas-immigration-policy states that Canada has deported 12,000 people per year. America tops 400,000 people per year.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
they do move to Canada, or at least a LOT try to abuse Canadas asylum laws, but Canada isn't like the USA.
Source? It also makes no sense to move to Canada if they don’t know English. They should head to Spain if they want socialism and America if they want freedom.
Canada deports way more people for fake asylum claims than the USA.
Source?
Created:
-->
@Danielle
Pregnant women have rights and the unborn do not and should not have rights.
Why not? There are 2 reasons you may state:
1) Unborn fetuses aren’t human. If this is what you believe, do you support smash and dash? It would be okay if a fetus wasn’t a human being.
2) Bodily autonomy is more valuable than a human’s right to life. If this is what you believe, do you support the right of a Siamese twin to kill their twin in the name of bodily autonomy? If that would be nuts, it is also nuts to claim that a female should be allowed an abortion if indeed a fetus is a human being. If you don’t think a fetus is a human being, you might want to check bullet point 1.
There was a case similar to this in the U.K. where one conjoined twin had a high chance of survival if separated, while the other would certainly die. But not separating them would have them both die within six months. The Catholic parents wanted to let nature take its course and allow both kids to die, but the court stepped in and ruled in favor of separation so one twin lived.
This is not what I’m referring too. I’m referring to 2 healthy Siamese twins and one of them wants to kill their twin because of how hard it is being a Siamese twin. Would you allow that? If you would, that’s crazy. If you wouldn’t, how is it any different from an abortion if a fetus is a human being?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TWS1405
Having a one-night stand has nothing to do with that which isn't even in existence, let alone even a question of fact.
If the person you have a one night stand gets pregnant, do you support the right to ditch her? No. Why? Because the dad created a human being. Hold the female to the same standard.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
If the undocumented wanted free healthcare, they would move to Spain. But they want lazzaire faire capitalism and the free market, so they move to ‘Murica.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
I’m a mixed bag. Sometimes I agree with the left and other times I agree with the right. I don’t want to be a partisan hack that automatically rents out my brain to party overlords. I agree with the right on abortion and transgenderism. I agree with the left on immigration and drugs. I’m a mixed bag and want to be treated as such.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
She called it a humanitarian crisis. I would treat the situation differently. Let them come but don’t give them free shit that costs taxpayers money.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
The undocumented are rebels. Rebel Pride.
Created:
Posted in:
Conservatives: We support the confederate flag because it’s a rebel flag.
Me: If you support rebels so much, do you support the undocumented? They got Rebel Pride too.
Conservatives: No. They need to comply. But not us.
Me: Smh.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
If she said that, she would get voted out and replaced with an anti ICE democrat.
Created:
Let’s say there are 2 Siamese twins. One of the twins hates being a Siamese twin because of the lifelong pain associated with being a Siamese twin (pregnancy, but for your whole life), and doesn’t think it’s his fault he is in this situation (pregnancy from rape). Let’s say he decides to kill his twin to make his life easier (let’s say he does this in a way that doesn’t harm him but only kills his twin).
Would we allow that? Or would we call it murder? I think pretty much everyone would call it murder.
So why should we treat a pregnant female any different? If the Siamese twin is not allowed to exercise his bodily autonomy by killing his twin, why should a pregnant female be any different?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@iloveshin
Any government can become tyrannical at any time. Guns are needed to defend from a tyrannical government. That tyrannical government can be foreign or domestic. It can be an invading government (Russia). It can be a government that oppresses the undocumented (USA). Guns protect the oppressed from the oppressor.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@iloveshin
What does it mean to identity as a woman or a man?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ua488168
You give up your rights, you don’t pay child support, you never are gonna be in the child’s life. That’s what’s best for you, you need to do what’s best for you.
I looked up child support laws; you can’t opt out of child support just because you don’t want to pay for it.
Created: