Total posts: 4,340
Posted in:
-->
@Kritikal
Then it is unhealthier.
Rice and beans are healthier than beef burgers.
but my point was more just that we should not trust the government to make good choices.
People that can pay their own way shouldn’t be told what to do by the government unless they intend to harm others. But people that cannot pay their own way need to be regulated to make their lives cheaper to fund. You can opt out of regulations if you agree to not get a government subsidy for your existence.
We do not want to discourage people from participation in the military.
Your not going to discourage a lot of people from joining the military. The military obeys orders and Soliders aren’t ideologue. They do what they are told. It’s like saying we aren’t going to mandate push-ups for the military because it would discourage people from joining.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Including them. If your more likely to get flooded, you should pay more for flood insurance.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Would you call yourself a lump of organic matter that is not worthy of life? If so, your self esteem is really low.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@CoolApe
In the case of consensual sex, both parents should have custody of the child regardless of their liking it.
Would you outlaw adoption?
Seeking restitution from rapists is not feasible in most cases.
Have the rapist do hard labor and the revenue generated helps the victim.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
The reason why I plan on getting insurance is something unforeseen could happen to me where I would need help. People that are bigger risks should pay more for insurance.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Kritikal
That would be way too expensive.
Rice and beans are cheap.
we should just let those in the government who are so old that they are also so stupid they cannot make decisions for themselves, make desiscions for the children?
Old people can usually make their own decisions unless they have alztimers.
I understand the argument if it is a smallpox vaccine in war time, but if it is a flu shot in peace time it seems like a very bad idea.
What’s the difference? Soliders being vaccinated against every disease that has a vaccination is precedent.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Our statist government violates the constitution way too much.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
If your a bigger health risk, you should pay more for health insurance. Don’t be a fiscal burden on others. I’m sick of my healthcare bills subsidizing the unvaccinated, the sexually active, and smokers. I don’t like subsidizing others.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Spelling retarded as retarted is like three layers of taboo mockery and abuse.
False. It just means my spelling isn’t the best. Kamala Harris misspelled Louisiana. I don’t get angry at her for misspelling. She didn’t hate Louisiana and did that to show it.
The term you mean is Down's syndrome
So be it. Having Down syndrome is not worthy of death.
Created:
Posted in:
In general, I oppose vaccine mandates, but I think the following groups of people should be subject to a vaccine mandate:
1)Soliders. Soliders have to be in good health. I would equate this with a mandate to do 50 push-ups a day.
2)Children; it is precedent and children don’t have agency.
3)Anyone on government health insurance. If the government is paying for your health insurance, they have a vested interest in keeping you healthy. This means I would force anyone on government health insurance to be vaccinated, work out, I’d mandate veganism for them because it’s healthier. If they don’t like these restrictions, then get a job mooncher. If you are going to life off government health insurance, you need to be as cheap as possible to insure. If you don’t like these restrictions, get a job!
Other than that, you should be allowed to opt out of a vaccine, but it’s not recommended. I also would ban companies from having a vaccine mandate (just like I wouldn’t let them fire you for being LGBT). But they would be allowed to charge more for health insurance premiums if your unvaccinated or sexually active as these behaviors are costly for health insurance companies.
None of my exceptions apply if you have natural immunity. If you have natural immunity, you don’t need to be vaxxed, but I recommend it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
The constitution applies to we the people. Just like if I vadcation in Saudi Arabia, I’m subject to their laws even though I’m not a citizen.
Created:
Posted in:
What I try to do to determine an abortion stance is, “What if a guy did something similar?”
When it comes to aborting zygotes, if hypothetically a girl got pregnant and the guy ditched her because she was pregnant with a zygote, that guy is a deadbeat and should have to pay child support. Doing what he did should be illegal, even when it’s a zygote.
You should hold the female to the same standard. If a guy isn’t allowed to ditch the zygote he chose to create, then neither is the female.
People may say, “It’s the female’s body whereas the deadbeat only sacrifices mere money.”. I would argue that bodily sensations that are temporary aren’t worth infinite money.
So how much is a pregnancy worth? The rate that surrogates charge for a pregnancy is about $25,000. So this would be a good estimate for the worth of a pregnancy (which takes into account all the pain and all the direct expenses that come with pregnancy). We force deadbeat dads to pay $135,000 for child support even if their girlfriend is pregnant with a zygote over the course of the child’s life. I personally think this should triple to $20,000 per kid per year. So I have to force the female to sacrifice a smaller fee in pregnancy labor for her kid.
Now if a female was raped and got pregnant, let’s equate this to a deadbeat dad getting raped and the girl gets pregnant from it. I would not force that guy to pay child support if he was raped. So I would let a female abort if raped. Either that, or compensate the female with enough cash paid for by the rapist’s hard labor and ban abortion for rape victims under those circumstances (if a hypothetical female rapist paid the child support once she got pregnant, I’d be fine with that if I got compensated enough for the trauma of being raped by a female). Whatever amount the female rape victim gets from the rapist from the mere trauma of being raped should be the same as when a male gets raped by a female if he is drunk and she rapes him when drunk.
If abortion is needed to save someone’s life (just like if child support can’t be paid in order to save the life of the deadbeat), then you can abort. But try and have the deadbeat find another way to pay child support. You can’t really do this with a female who is pregnant.
If the fetus is retarted, it doesn’t matter; being retarted should not be a death sentence.
Thoughts?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
False; the constitution says the right of the PEOPLE (not citizens who complete an arbitrary legalization process) to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. We the people.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
I don’t support background checks. They are too expensive for gun owners collectively for the few number of lives they save.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Bones
It’s “The right of the PEOPLE”, not the right of the citizens.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
We get it; your a gun grabber. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
Created:
Posted in:
Conservatives: We believe the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. This is to protect people from tyranny.
Me: Do you support the undocumented arming themselves to defend from tyranny (I.C.E)?
Conservatives: Absolutely not! The government needs to be tyrannical to the illegal aliens!
Me: You don’t support the 2nd amendment then. The 2nd amendment isn’t just for conservatives. It’s also for people you dislike.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
I wonder why the border areas shifted heavily to Trump. Don’t you?
Border areas lean blue because they know firsthand the undocumented aren’t bad for America. Same with cities and the suburbs.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
I fall on the left side of almost every issue, including the ones listed.
Do you agree with the right AT ALL?
Am I just taking the positions I'm told?
I think so and you don’t realize it.
Whether they should be believed is situational and based on evidence, the left wing position is that all women should be heard and taken seriously.
This is the right wing position. The left wing position is to try Kavenough as a rapist.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
How would the "left" and the "right" see the Ukraine war?
The left wants to bomb Russian troops because they think Trump is a Putin puppet. The right wants America to stay out of foreign wars. Although there is more bipartisanship on that issue than others.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
The problem with you and Libertarianism is that it is way too linear.
Linear thinking is based. It shows your consistent.
The Right subscribes to Christianity, which provides a blueprint for society instead of providing a broad range of principles.
Does this include the Bible verses that advocate for open borders, or the ones that call for stoning people to death for adultery(so Trump would be stoned if we live in a theocracy)? Does this mean we would have to have a 100% wealth tax (the Bible says to sell all you have and give to the poor)? What about all the times the Bible contradicts its self? The part where it advocates abstinence until marriage (and very few Republican politicians follow this)? The right is not a pro theocracy party.
The Left subscribes to progressivism.
What does it mean to be a progressive? If it means changing the status quo, then Mike Pence is progressive on abortion because he wants to change the status quo. It would mean any politician that implemented constitutional carry would be a progressive on guns since they are also changing the status quo. What does it mean to be progressive?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
I don’t wish to create a cult. If you support me in general, don’t be afraid to criticize one policy I have and vice versa.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
How about everyone get rid of their tribes and think independently of others? I’ve been doing that since September.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
And yet, not one left-leaning adminstration has done anything about it, federally.
It’s not on their radar. But many left states abolished the death penalty.
Which is?
Oppose the war; America first.
And, yet it took more than two years from a left-leaning president to make a show of removing forces from Iraq.
It takes time.
I’m glad your consistent on firing issues even if we disagree.
Because they ideologues without principle?
Yes, and they make up the majority of Americans with few exceptions.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
Why would you take sides with any political party's thoughts on a meme?
The left supports believe women, many leftists I met agree. Prosecute the accused rapist without evidence because it reduces the rape rate and evidence is hard to get. I disagree, but most leftists only back this position because it is a left wing position. If the right backed it first (which they might have because they are tough on crime), the left would denounce it just because it’s a right wing idea. Form your opinions independent of what your parties say.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
technically, each individual's medical status should be protected by medical privacy
Would you say that sexual orientation is also medical privacy? Would you say transgender status is also a protected identity? Transgenders want to hide the fact they are trans, unless at protests (the unvaccinated have no problem showing off their status at protests.). If an unvaccinated person outed themselves, the right still wouldn’t want them fired. Would you apply that same treatment to transgenders? If the left backed equality for the unvaccinated and the right backed discipline with vaccine mandates (and cited biblical verses to justify this), would you change your opinion with the parties? I think most people would, and it’s why most people are partisan hacks.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Wouldn't you agree that your concept of right-wing politics itself makes no sense here?
I think the concept of Right wing politics AND left wing politics makes no sense. The right thinks private companies should be allowed to do what they want when it comes to firing LGBT people (but not for Big Tech censorship or firing the unvaccinated) and the left thinks private companies should be allowed to do what they want when it comes to firing unvaccinated people or Big Tech Censorship (but not for firing LGBT people). The right makes no sense, but ALSO, the left makes no sense. I'm willing to call out both sides because I try and be consistent. Most people will defend their side no matter what contradiction they run into. The chads are the independents, who have principles and don't care if the left or right backs an idea. If it works with their principles, they support it. I have enough left wing and right wing beliefs, so I am confident I think for myself. But with post 1, if you agree with the left on every issue or the right on every issue, I think your being a partisan hack.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
I don't think #1 is strawmanned. I've met plenty of people that support believe women.
Many right-wingers are anti-Iraq war and many left-wingers see Saddam Hussein as this evil sociopath/psychopath (which he was) that ought to have been taken down as he was.
I don't think this is true. I think the vast majority of Republicans liked the Iraq war when Bush did it and disliked it when Obama did it. The corporate dems liked the Iraq war when Obama did it and disliked it when Bush did it.
The right wing don't generally support this, only the far right do.
The right thinks you should be allowed to fire someone for being LGBT because it's a business choice in their view. "There a private company; they can do what they want"(the same thing the left says about Big Tech censorship).
Many right-wingers agree with this, what they disagree with is government mandates on it.
The right thinks you should not be allowed to fire someone for being unvaccinated.
Created:
Posted in:
There are 4 following issues in my head:
1) Believe women (which I agree with the right on).
2) Death penalty (which I agree with the left on)
3) The Ukraine war (which I side with the right on)
4) The Iraq war (which I side with the left on)
5) Firing someone for being gay/trans (which I side with the left on)
6) Firing someone for being unvaccinated (which I side with the right on)
Why do most people I come across either agree with the left on all of these issues or agree with the right on all these issues? Why are there few people that look at each issue individually? Is it because people are partisan hacks?
Created:
-->
@coal
Statistically, banning semi automatic guns has not reduced the mass shooting rate. Efficiency is irrelevant.
Created:
Before 1994 and from 1994 to 2004, the mass shooting rate was comparable. After 2004, it went up significantly (more like after 2006) because the internet became more ingrained in our lives. The way I think to reduce mass shootings is to ban the internet. But I think that’s too authoritarian to implement. So mass shootings will continue to rise due to the rise of the internet and I think that’s fine because I don’t want to ban the internet.
Created:
-->
@Lemming
And one of my values is that between an arbitrary individual of my blood, and an arbitrary individual 'not of my blood.I care more for the individual with my blood,
Should a female who was raped be forced to have that same sentiment? If not, then she is allowed an abortion if she was raped.
I think people have a moral obligation and duty to one another,Doesn't mean I'm going to 'act on it.
This is hypocrisy. If you care about ANY problem and you are able to help out, help out. I just couldn't care less if people other than myself are starving.
Created:
-->
@amandragon01
I know it's possible I'll get run over when I cross the road, doesn't mean I won't cross the road.
You cross the road in sidewalks if you can to reduce your odds of getting hit. The odds of you getting hit from crossing the road once is significantly less than the odds of a female getting pregnant from straight sex once if she uses birth control (note birth control produces bad side effects so I wouldn't expect a female to use birth control).
I would say the evidence suggeats that isn't their opinion.
It's their opinion. Abortions are painful.
As for the rest, if the parties are two consenting adults aware of the possible consequences and willing to take them, I fail to see the issue.
The pain from abortion isn't a good enough reason to ban it, but you really shouldn't get an abortion if your a female because of it's pain (and fetal personhood, but that's something else).
This is why people should be encouraged to learn the risks and practice safe sex (contraceptives aren't perfect, but they're a good measure if used properly)
No sex is 100% safe and abstinence is. I'm not even blaming women. It's men's fault women are pregnant, so men should stop pressuring women to have sex.
if it's two consenting adults who are aware of the possible risks and still want to do it, I fail to see an issue for either party.
I wouldn't ban their sex, but I would strongly discourage it since it's just a few minutes of pleasure and once the kid is born, the female is vomiting for hours after the abortion.
If a woman is willing to risk the pain of abortions for the sake of having sex, why should anyone nay say them? If they're aware of the risks and preferably of the precautions they can take to minimise those risks why should anyone be against them having sex? This doesn't seem to be an argument against abortion so much as an argument for abstinence and frankly a fairly weak one at that.
It's their right to want to be in pain from abortion; but it's also your right to refuse to be vaccinated and suffer from covid. If you exercise that right, I think it's kinda dumb.
No where before this post did either of us mention men pressuring women into sex. That is not part of my argument at all. I don't think it's ever correct for anyone to pressure others into having sex.
Men pressure women into having sex unfortunately, and it's how consent is obtained. Women aren't that horny.
Risk vs reward, if the woman knows pain is possible, but feels the reward is worth that pain, then obviously the pain isn't a good reason for her to not do it.
The thing is, I don't think they do. Otherwise if a female was pro Roe V Wade and didn't believe in fetal personhood, she would be having dozens of abortions since she wouldn't want the side effects from birth control and would want to have sex.
Created:
-->
@oromagi
The State Legislature in Louisiana advanced a proposal this week that would classify abortion as homicide, going further than anti-abortion measures in other states by making it possible for prosecutors to bring criminal cases against women who end a pregnancy.None of these Republicans are even considering punishment for the fathers of unwanted pregnancies. Ultimately, the Republican position is not anti-sex, just anti-women.
If this is the case, then I don't approve. The fathers need the punishment for abortion; not the mothers.
Well, gay sex is fine- that never produces unwanted children and is way more fun. The Republican party should require all extra-marital sex to be gay sex.
You think gay sex is more fun because your gay, but it spreads HIV like wildfire, condoms aren't 100% effective, and people don't want to take PreP because of it's side effects. The GOP (and Democrats) should discourage all sex that isn't designed to produce a kid and should lead by example. I do think there needs to be laws against politicians having sex because they should put their country first; not their sex lives. Also, they get room and board, healthcare, and no additional salary because anyone who goes into politics to get rich is a crook.
I agree although $625/month is a small price for many fathers of unwanted children to pay
I'm just stating the status quo; a deadbeat should have to pay $400,000 per child in child support over 18 years since they do none of the work. For reference, it costs about $200,000 to raise a kid excluding college costs. Deadbeat dads are scum. If they don't want pregnancy, they shouldn't have sex.
I think they should also be required to either reside with their children
They wouldn't be a deadbeat if this was the case.
Created:
-->
@Lemming
The African kid is far away, and not my blood.
Doesn't matter if they are related to you or not. Are you willing to adopt a kid that isn't your fault that they exist? If not, why would you expect a female to do the same thing for the fetus she got from rape?
I feel 'less for a homeless individual that I do not see, that lives in another city,Than a homeless individual I pass in the street.
But most people don't do anything about either, so they don't care about them. Nothing wrong with this, but just be upfront about it.
And even that street passed homeless individual, I feel less for,Than if an immediate family member of mine was homeless.
If my brother was homeless, I wouldn't take care of him. By brother treats me like crap.
Well, power to you, if you get into a habit and lifestyle where you eat animals less.
Thanks.
Created:
Posted in:
@RM
If somebody is so poor they can't eat, they can't have the energy to do a good job at work, decreasing their productivity towards the nation's economy.
They rely on a church to get their food, not the government that uses forcibly obtained taxpayer funds to feed people the taxpayers don't care about.
This 'they are lazy' concept is bullshit.
I don't agree with this concept. The poor are unlucky. Which is why the government should hook them up with a private sector job so they aren't starvin' Marvin anymore.
I ask to you, in your ideal solution to poverty without moving towards social democratic benefits, welfare etc how does the society eliminate brutally severe poverty where going severely hungry and without basic sanitary products is necessary for the poor to be able to afford their bills?
Welfare is backed by social democracy, socialism, and communism.
this question is about both and why the right-wing oppose them.
Because I should under no circumstances be forced to take care of people that I did not create. If you want to help the poor, donate food items to a church so they can give it to the starvin' marvins of the country. Also, encourage sotres to donate their excess food to churches so the starvin marvins of 'Murica can go to churches for their food so they don't starve. It's a shame and moral travesty that the left and antifa and BLM and the socialists and the social democrats and the alphabet mafia bosses are trying to undermine the sanctity of the church, which donates more consensually obtained funds than the government ever did.
The government can use the money saved on welfare to give everyone a free freedom gun so they can defend against tyranny and so we can save money on the military because everyone would have guns so no country would want to invade us. It works in Ukraine, the woke left's favorite country. Ukraine arms random citizens and the Russians would lose Ukraine. Make America Ukraine. Make America Florida. Make America Texas. Make America Alpha-Male again.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
I think the GOP can win D+10 and more right wing states if they ditch Orange Man and stick to a hardcore conservative policy framework. But Connecticut they can't do this in.
Created:
-->
@Lemming
Myself I have difficulty seeing abortion as 'right, even in the case of rape,The 'rapist should face consequences,
Everyone believes that rapists should be punished so you are changing nothing by advocating this and this punishment usually doesn't help the female that was raped. It can't help the female enough.
But the crux to me seems whether one view the beginning process of a human as sacred.
An unborn baby that was conceived in rape is like a starving African kid. You should not be forced to take care of either since it's not your fault they exist.
People say dogs are as intelligent as a (I forget how many years) old.People in 'general don't value 'animals very much, we eat cows, pigs, various.
When I'm living on my own, I don't want to do eat animals.
Created:
-->
@amandragon01
But they don't know they're going to get abortions do they?
They know it's a possibility.
but your opinion doesn't seem a good reason for people to assert what others should or shouldn't do.
Their opinion is they might get pregnant, and they would just not have sex on that basis.
Why? Why should sex be restricted only to those that want children?
I don't support mandating this, but if your a male that doesn't want kids and aren't vasectomized, you shouldn't have sex because you might get the girl pregnant and then either a kid is going to be killed and the female endures a lot of pain from the abortion, or she births the kid and endures even more pain. Either option is painful for the female, so she shouldn't have sex unless she wants a kid. In addition, the male shouldn't pressure her to have sex because if she gets pregnant, she will endure pain either from the abortion or from childbirth.
People seem to enjoy sex enough to risk those consequences and frankly good luck to them.
It's why people get very painful abortions which they shouldn't get because they shouldn't become pregnant unless they want a kid.
The question becomes is it a good reason for women who don't want children not to have sex?
Yes, and it is even better when the male does not pressure the female into having sex.
Created:
I don't think abortion should be banned if the female gets raped (this doesn't apply to consensual sex). The fetus is a human being, but so are starving African children. I'm not going to force you to adopt a starving African kid even if it saves their life, and adopting a kid is less of a sacrifice than being pregnant. If I was raped, I aint paying child support. So nobody rape me because I aint raising your kid.
Created:
-->
@ILikePie5
I debated with someone for over 20 pages one time. Analyzed hours of video footage. Turns out I was right. Any objective individual could see I was right. But it didn’t change that gentleman’s mind one bit because of Orange Man Bad.
That's just a bias. I'm sure he thought the same thing.
Created:
-->
@oromagi
Men and women bear the responsibility for pregnancy equally but as we see here, men seldom acknowledge their equal burden of responsibility.
That's a problem. If a female gets an abortion, the male should be punished and if he doesn't want pregnancy, he shouldn't have sex.
T-dog views the statement "I have the right to premarital sex and get an abortion from it" as something women say when almost all men would state the former as true but then too many men go silent when the consequences are named.
You shouldn't have sex unless you want a kid or have a vasectomy and if you get an abortion, the guy should be punished for impregnating you and being responsible for the kid's death.
The fact that women share the overwhelmingly disproportionate burden of responsibility for the consequences of decisions that of a right should burden men in like proportion means that women get to be the primary stakeholder in all decisions made about pregnancy and so requires an explicit protection from government intervention into those decisions that men enjoy by default.
Men who don't take care of their kids are deadbeats that have to pay $135,000 of child support over 18 years. The Surrogacy rate is about $25,000 per pregnancy. So deadbeats sacrifice more for their kids than females that are forced to carry the kid to term. Granted, the sacrifice is justified because being deadbeats are among the lowest of the low.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
I also really liked Youngkin's speech where he gave zero fucks to Trump. Youngkin's win without Trump's support is a clear signal that the magic is gone from the Orangeman.
Youngkin only did that because Virginia is a blue state and he had to appeal to some blue voters by disliking Trump but agreeing with him on 85% of his policies.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
I don't think it's helpful to focus on micro aggressions because they are by definition, micro, which means they can be explained in more ways than one, but the whole klan hood wearing n-word using concept also needs to go in the trash.
What's your definition of a racist? Is it anyone that is right wing on BLM?
Created:
-->
@FLRW
Well, until the Supreme Court rules that women don't have the right to vote since they were made from Adam's rib.
Slippery slope fallacy.
Created:
-->
@amandragon01
What about married women who want abortions? They'd be painful too right?
If they knew they were going to get abortions from their sex, they shouldn't have gotten pregnant and therefore shouldn't have had sex(this applies to the men even more).
Does that mean feminists should be against sex?
If they don't want kids, then yes.
Also it seems to me that the logical statement is more 'I have the right to premarital sex, even though there is the risk of adverse consequences'
You have the right to sex without the desire to conceive. This doesn't mean you should do it.
If an act carries consequences that may harm you and only you, then why shouldn't you be allowed to make an informed decision to take that act?
My argument isn't a good argument to ban abortion. But it is a reason as to why females wouldn't want one.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
That's the case with alcohol already; people are allowed to put that poisonous substance in their own bodies. Weed is less poisonous.
Created: