Total posts: 4,340
-->
@Username
Why do you think I'm punishing people?
Because Reperations would cost tax dollars which white people would have to pay for. Increased taxes are a punishment.
If I break your shins do I have moral obligations towards you if you are still affected by your shins being broken?
Breaking someone's shins is illegal. Slavery was legal when it happened, so you can't punish someone for something that they did when it was legal.
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
sure. other countries have things like that
Like who?
how so? $15 per hour isn't a great wage anyway.
It's the median wage in the United States.
The kind of people that would be satisfied with that aren't going to be the sort of people to seek higher paying jobs anyway. you can't force people to be ambitious.
I don't want to reward people for not being ambitious by guaranteeing them a fixed amount of money.
A minimum wage doesn't change the person's ambition.
Repealing the minimum wage would kickstart people to be ambitious with their salaries, which benefits them in the long term.
Teens don't tend to have a great work ethic
I think some teens do, and these are going to be the teens working for companies.
If the job is trivial enough that a high schooler could do it well, then why would they need an adult doing it?
I don't think a minimum wage employer cares if a teen or an adult works the job, and as someone who works a minimum wage job, the majority of the workers are teenagers.
Of course the tax payer consents to that.
They don't consent to having some of their money taken from them. If they don't consent to a theft taking $100, what makes you think they are willing to pay $20000 to a government when they aren't going to get $20,000 in benefits?
It does things for it's citizens. It builds roads, ensures safety, protects people etc.
The roads are already built, people can ensure their own safety and people can protect themselves by buying a gun and bullets. It's cheaper and more effective than the police.
If someone does not consent to this, then they should not live somewhere with a government.
Impossible as every piece of land on this planet is ruled by a country. America was the nation of small government for the world to emulate. Now, we fight in endless war and we kill poor people's ambition by government programs.
You will get some areas where people can get help and others where they cannot.
The internet exists though. If you want to help homeless people who can't get help other ways, you can donate to charities.
By and large, most of (the rich) got that way by being cut throat and screwing people over whenever they could get away with it.
This isn't true. Who did Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, Bill Gates, and Steve Jobs screw to get rich?
But the workers at Walmart who need to get food at a food bank just to survive lose.
The adults can find better paying jobs, of which the university of Georgetown found 13 million of.
Thus charities and the tax payers are forced to subsidize these highly profitable companies.
I don't like corporate welfare or individual welfare.
That is why we have things like labor laws so companies can't force you to work 80 hours per week in unsafe conditions, like they used to.
This isn't controversial.
For example, this poll found that 39% of republicans were in favor of free college. At least 20% of republicans like Obamacare. These things don't fit into your view of what a republican is. 63% of Americans say the US government has a responsibility to provide healthcare for all.
What doesn't make sense is the vast majority of polls show the left wing position being the majority position. 61% of Americans are pro choice(Public Opinion on Abortion | Pew Research Center (pewforum.org)). Poll: Most Republicans support assault weapons ban, despite Trump saying 'no appetite' - POLITICOBack ButtonSearch IconFilter Icon states that 73% of the public support banning "assault weapons" and want stricter background checks. The American People Agree: Cut the Pentagon’s Budget (dataforprogress.org) states that most people want to cut the military's budget. Add your poll in there, and I can confirm that roughly 65% of the country believes a majority of left wing ideas. How come liberals and left of center people don't make up 65% of the country? I think if the polls were right, then democrats would win almost every state and would win every presidency. But the polls I think are wrong.
If you can only be a republican if you believe all the things you are claiming, then the republicans are screwed because the majority of americans don't want those things.
You have to be a republican on a majority of issues to be a republican. If you don't agree with the republicans on a majority of the issues, get out of the party and join the democrats. You will be more honest then.
Created:
-->
@Username
Nations have obligations to those they've discriminated against in the past.
They don't. Slavery was legal when it happened, and you can't punish people for something that happened when it was legal.
Created:
-->
@Death23
If we tax inheritance, it provides less incentive for rich people to save and invest for their kids. Rich people love their kids, so if you take away the kid's inheritence, the rich will be less inclined to save for their kids.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
Do you think reparations are everything after your first sentence?
Yes. BLM says that they want Reperations for 400 years of slavery with interest, which amounts to billions of dollars owed per black person. Since white people can't pay off that debt, the only way they have a chance of paying every single black person billions of dollars is if they become slaves themselves. As a white person, I don't want to be a slave for slavery that legally happened 200 years ago.
Created:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
You should be punished for your actions only if a victim is produced and no victim is produced by angry alternatives. You shouldn’t get punished for doing a push-up, since doing this action produced no victim.
Although a victim is produced with abortion, a victim is also produced with setting the child up for adoption. Somebody will die because of your actions whether you abort or set the kid up for adoption. I therefore am pro choice.
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
the simpler answer is just to put minimum wage based on age/school status. IE the minimum wage for a minor or someone in college is X ammount and the minimum wage for an adult is like $15 per hour. If they did that then it completely negates your argument.
So you want 2 different minimum wages. The problem I see with this is for adults out of college, it kills their ambition. It makes them satisfied, and therefore unwilling to pursue higher paying jobs. While the government could force businesses to pay $15 an hour to its adult employees, the absence of a minimum wage would make adult employees that are out of school try to find jobs that will pay around $30 an hour that consent to paying such high wages without government intervention because the products and services produced by these businesses make these businesses even more money than what a minimum wage job produces from buisiness.
Another reason why I don’t like that idea is it would cause businesses to fire adults so they can hire more high schoolers and save money from their cheap labor. What would you make the minimum wage for high school workers? I don’t think it should be anything. They don’t need the money.
Your point is exactly what the right wants.
Well, I’m fiscally right wing.
They want responsibility for taking care of american citizens to not be something the government does, but to be something done by private charities.
Basically. The charities consent to help people. The taxpayer does not. It’s better that consenting people help out than non consenting people.
That way they can gouge and take advantage of people, amass huge amounts of wealth and do very little to pay back into the system that has made them so wealthy.
The rich get rich by making other people’s lives better in a mutually consensual way. The rich get rich, but they pay back by providing products and services to people at a competitive price. For example, you may give Wal mart $100, but they give you a blender in exchange for this $100. From the perspective of you, the blender is worth more than $100. From the perspective of Wal Mary, the blender is worth less than $100. You agree to trade the blender for $100, and both parties win from their perspective. This is a mutually beneficial exchange. You make billions of mutually beneficial exchanges, and that is how your company becomes rich. If you don’t want billionaires getting rich, stop buying their stuff.
Capitalism is the only known economic system where you can only get rich by helping your fellow man. Every other economic system , people have gotten rich by taking money from people without their consent.
ok. and what about people who are pro-life, but also believe in taking care of the poor, you know like Jesus said Christians should?
Depends. If your pro life on religious grounds and you believe in donating to the poor with your money, your charitable. If you are pro life on religious grounds and believe in a welfare state because of the Bible, your a statist, an authoritarian, and a theocrat. Nothing wrong with this, but your not a conservative or Republican.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
I think abortion is moral and here is why:
Let’s say somebody gets pregnant unintentionally and they gave a kid they don’t want to take care of. 2 things can happen:
1) The unintended pregnancy gets brought to term and set up for adoption (because teenagers and anyone who doesn’t want to be a parent shouldn’t parent a baby). In the best of circumstances, the kid gets adopted by foster parents super early in the kids life. A starving African kid that got adopted by the foster parents in situation 2 dies of starvation because the foster parents adopted a baby that got aborted in situation 2, so no one was available to adopt the starving kid. As a result, he dies of starvation and it is extremely painful.
2) The fetus gets aborted; a painless death since it was aborted before 20 weeks. The starving African child gets saved by foster parents.
In situation 1, an African kid died of starvation and it was very slow and painful. In situation 2, a fetus died a painless death. The foster parents only have the ability and the will to adopt 1 of the kids. Which situation do you prefer? I prefer situation 2. Banning abortion causes situation 1 to occur if everyone followed the law. If a kid will die either way, it’s better to kill the kid who can’t feel pain and is not expecting the death. If someone is going to die, it should be the entity that won’t suffer with their death.
If there were no starving kids anywhere in the world, I’d be against abortion. But there are tens of millions of starving kids worldwide that are going to die a painful death from starvation. If babies that didn’t have to be birthed were aborted, then foster parents could save starving kids in the rest of the world instead of having to adopt kids that didn’t have to exist.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
That’s not very much. Your over 3x as likely to die from a gun, and guns are legal, both democrats and republicans have majorities that believe that guns should stay legal.
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
so in this hypothetical world, low paying jobs do not exist? companies like walmart, amazon, McDonalds, etc are paying all their workers enough to be able to afford healthcare?
In this world, given that the University of Georgetown found 13 million high school degree jobs that pay $55K or more per year(or nearly double Bernie Sander’s $15 an hour promise) and that there are only 1.6 million jobs that work minimum wage(the majority are held by minors and people in college), there is no need for a minimum wage because adults can find better paying jobs and kids don’t need the money that much.
Or are you suggesting that these businesses simply shouldn't exist because we should make sure all workers get high paying jobs and no one should work for these companies?
I’m saying let the people (out of school permanently) that work for these companies find better paying jobs and let young people work jobs where they don’t need huge sums of money to survive since their parents pay for all their kid’s living expenses.
this makes no sense. It's like saying if you are concerned about crime, go out and stop all crime yourself. If you are unwilling to do that, don't expect taxpayers to pay for police.
This is different. Crime is hard to stop. It requires so much training to stop crime. Homelessness is easy to stop; just adopt homeless people and get enough people to do the same thing.
wow... no. just no. That is a hard right wing view. If you think only people who believe that are conservative, then there are very few conservatives in america.
I doubt it. There are many social authoritarians. These are pro lifers, anti drug legalization people, people who want to give the military more money. If these people also believe in fiscal libertarianism, then they are conservative.
Created:
I think reparations for slavery would be a terrible idea. Enslaving white people for hundreds of years because blacks were enslaved before violates the 8th and 13th amendment. It also would cause the repeal of the 2nd amendment, since white Americans would fight their 2nd amendment rights being taken from them.
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
So the solution for people going bankrupt because they can't afford the insanely over priced healhcare, is to force people to pay for their own healthcare..
The solution to the poor’s healthcare problem is to hook low income people up with better paying jobs so they can pay for their own healthcare.
You are arguing exactly what the rich want.
Or I don’t want mandatory charity. If your so concerned about poor people, adopt a homeless person. If your unwilling to do that, don’t expect taxpayers to pay for a homeless person’s house either.
lol, why do you believe that you get to define what a conservative is?
A conservative wants fiscal libertarianism and social authoritarianism. It’s a fact.
no, they like having lots of guns because they believe they will need to use them on black people.
Funny. Conservatives have no desire to shoot black people.
Trump doesn't give a shit about illegal immigrants.
His redereck does because he is against it. You judge a politician by their redereck and what they get done. Trump tried to get a wall, but he failed.
He pretends to care to appeal to stupid/racist/xenophobic people.
I wouldn’t call Trump supporters racist. Drums are racist because they want reparations.
Created:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Doesn’t matter. Pregnancy shouldn’t be a punishment for having premarital sex.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
At all levels of consumption, the odds of dying in a motor vehicle crash were significantly higher than for zero alcohol consumption, and were approximately 13 times higher at the current legal limit of BAC = 0.08.
Driving at the legal limit makes you 13x more likely to cause death, but when the odds of you driving sober cause a deadly accident are super rare to begin with, driving drunk only increases the death from driving by a little bit(from a numerical perspective).
Let’s say that not doing action A resulted in 1 death annually and doing action A results in 100 deaths a year in the US. Let’s say that a typical person has a 50 percent chance of doing action A in a year. On one hand, given that action A is 100x more dangerous, governments might ban action A. But on the other hand, if action A only results in 99 more deaths a year, let people live their lives.
I don’t think the ratio of dunk driving deaths to non drunk driving deaths matters as much as how many people die from drunk driving, and how many would die per year if it were legal to drive drunk. If few deaths happen, give people liberty.
Created:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
While I don’t think people should have premarital sex, people are going to do it and get pregnant. If people don’t need to take care of foster kids, then why should people have to take care of their biological kids?
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
There is nothing on there that says anything about income per capita. Those are 2 very different things.
What’s the difference between GDP per capita and income per capita?
For example, most of Europe doesn't have hundreds of thousands of people going bankrupt because of medical costs. The US very much does.
The solution is to encourage poor people to pay for their own healthcare. If your fine with your tax dollars going to help the poor, remove the government middleman and adopt a homeless person. At least it’s cheaper that way. If your unwilling to do that, don’t force the taxpayer to pay for the homeless persons free stuff since your not willing to.
There are lots people who would love universal health care but also have concerns about abortion.
These people aren’t conservative, but probably statist. They want the government involved with giving poor people and fetuses free stuff.
Do you think all conservatives love war? that's messed up.
A majority of conservatives support war otherwise they wouldn’t feel the need to give the military more money.
this is some more off the scale crazy. The large majority of americans support background checks.
I meant if someone was super pro gun, they probably wouldn’t be liberal.
you are confusing "conservative" with "racist". Although I agree there is alot of overlap.
If conservatives were racist, they would support gun control which harms blacks people more.
-And want to close American borderslol, this is absolutely not a conservative value.
Then why does Trump want the wall? He’s right wing and he supports stricter immigration requirements.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
How often does someone drunk driving cause a fatality or injury when it is done? If it’s very frequent, then drunk driving should be banned since the odds are too high. But if one million people drunk drive and it causes only 1 death(and it’s an average of all drunk driving incidents), then I’d support legalizing drunk driving. Odds of death matter.
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
1) where did you get your numbers? I'm not sure they are accurate.
https://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/eu-position-in-world-trade/index_en.htm States the EU’s per capita income is 25000 euros a year, or roughly $30000. This is comparable to Puerto Rico, which if it were a state would mean that the EU average is comparable to America’s worst state like area. Half of the EU is below this.
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD?locations=US States that the GDP per capita in the US is roughly $65,000 a year.
this isn't a good way to determine the health of an economy. Because the vast majority of that wealth you are describing ends up in the hands of a very tiny fraction of people.
This applies to both Europe and the US. Wealth distribution is always skewed to the right in countries.
Also, by that measure there are at least a dozen countries better than the US, like Luxembourg, Switzerland and Norway.
I think there are 3 countries with a per capita income higher than America in Europe(https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_in_Europe_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita#Table_of_sovereign_states_in_Europe_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita). Luxembourg is incredibly urban, and urban areas tend to be better off than rural areas in all countries. Ireland has less taxes than the rest of Europe generally. Switzerland has a tourism advantage I think. Every other country in Europe is falling behind the US. Oddballs like these 3 countries exist, but overall America has managed to replicate the rare success of the rich places in Europe across its whole country, which would be the equivalent of Europe replicating Its wealthy success stories across the entire EU.
So Europe, despite it being more urban than America, earns less than half of the American salary, when adjusted for population.
Rather than demonize America as this radical conservative place, Europe can learn from American economics.
If someone doesn't believe the same thing as you, they must be fake or less than you. Because only far right wing loonies could possibly be right....
If someone agrees with the liberals on a majority of social and economic issues, then they are a liberal. How can one be conservative and believe in the following:
-Medicare for all
-Free college
-Gun control
-Pro choice on abortion
Nothing wrong with claiming your a liberal, but be honest. If you claim to be a liberal but believe the following:
-Are pro life
-Are pro war
-Want to repeal the income tax
-Don’t want UHC
-Want to repeal Obamacare
-Are pro AK47 and oppose background checks
-Don’t believe in white privilege
-And want to close American borders
If you believe all that, your not a liberal, even if you claim to be. Nothing wrong with being a conservative, but come as advertised.
If you claim that you can be a liberal while believing in everything conservative, then what does it mean to be a liberal and what does it mean to be a conservative if you can believe whatever and even if you agree with one party most of the time, how can you claim to represent the other party?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Would you consider drunk-driving to be "victimless"?
No. The victim is the person that the drunk driver killed or injured.
Created:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
I know that if every unwanted pregnancy was aborted, then foster companies would have to go to poor places like Africa to find kids to keep their business going. Foster couples who want to adopt can adopt one of these kids instead of a kid that could have been aborted.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
If people wanted to do that with their property and their hair, their choice. I wouldn’t punish it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
To make an amendment to the US constitution that says, “Any noun or action not producing a victim or victims shall be legalized in the United States”. That amendment would legalize all victimless crimes and give America more liberty.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
A company can make up whatever rules (regarding speech) they want.
Certain companies can, namely publishers. PragerU can only host conservatives. CNN can host only liberals. Publishers have the right to allow any views they want. Also, if a publisher says something wrong, it can be sued.
Twitter on the other hand is a platform. If something false is displayed on Twitter, you can’t sue Twitter for it. But Twitter has to let it be up there.
Twitter can be a platform or a publisher and they have to be consistent. If they want to be a platform, they have to allow ANYBODY to post what they want to post on the site. If they wish to be a publisher, they can be sued for inaccurate claims. Twitter can’t be both. DART can’t be both. Both sites have to pick.
Created:
Posted in:
There are thousands of species on planet earth, probably millions.
Each species on Earth, according to evolution has a common ancestor.
But if every species on earth had a common ancestor, then all of the animals that existed at this time would have interbred with each other and as a result, there would either be only be one species on this planet, or no species on the planet if the species starved to death due to our distant ancestors interbreeding with the ancestors of every other species(which was the same species back then, so viable offspring would be produced)
This is what would happen if science’s view on the origin of life was true.
But we know millions of species exist on this planet. The alternative to evolution is creationism:
With creationism, every species was distinctly made by a higher power. This explains the millions of species we know exist today.
If evolution is real, the animals of the distant past would have interbred into unification. If creationism is real, it helps explain why different species exist today.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Let’s make our rights real and not an illusion.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Why did you send gun videos?
Created:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
They are connected because the more US born babies there are that are unwanted, the more American kids in the foster system. The more kids in the foster system, the more number of foster parents have to adopt these kids. The more foster parents adopting these kids, the less are available to save a starving African kid, and the more of THOSE kids die.
It’s either the fetus that will die or the starving African kid. I’d rather have the party die that can’t feel pain(ie the fetus).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
The only way you can jail all Trump supporters is by spending trillions of tax dollars building prisons and by violating multiple constitutional amendments. Such a way should not be pursued in the land of the free.
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
In Europe, if even conservatives back UHC, are pro choice, and support gun control, how are they any different from liberals? If Europe was under one party rule(the liberal party), then Europe would be more honest.
Here in America, the conservatives actually believe in fiscally conservative policies and it allowed America to have double the per capita income of the EU and 50 percent more than Canada. In Europe, your either liberal or conservative in name only (with an exception to immigration).
So, European conservatives are diet liberals.
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
Specifically, people calling for the murder of government officials or the overthrow of democracy.
Calling for the killing of murderers is free speech.
Calling for the killing of rapists is free speech.
Calling for the death of pedophilles is free speech.
Calling for the death of thieves, while an extremely unpopular idea, is free speech nonetheless.
Calling for anyone to be killed, as long as you don’t kill them or claim that you will kill them, is protected by the first amendment since it gives you the right to hate someone to the point of wishing them dead.
They want companies to be able free to do what they want. They want the free market to decide.
The free market means customers. They can choose to buy Parler or not. The option shouldn’t be taken away.
Created:
-->
@n8nrgmi
If Twitter has some terrorism on its site, Twitter is not responsible. Parler is a platform, so people can say whatever they want on it.
What did Parler say that was terrorism? Most of what they say isn’t terrorism.
Created:
-->
@n8nrgmi
Remember when a far left terrorist attacked right wing congress people. Whatever news sources inspired the violence is not responsible for the event. Just the shooter is. Similarly, Parler should not be accountable for the DC violence. It was out of their control. Only the people who acted should be responsible.
Created:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
If abortion was banned and not practiced, then there would be even more starving kids since they never were aborted.
Created:
I’m pro choice up until 20 weeks into pregnancy because there are 2 situations in my head:
1) An unintended pregnancy gets brought to term and set up for adoption (because teenagers and anyone who doesn’t want to be a parent shouldn’t parent a baby). In the best of circumstances, the kid gets adopted by foster parents super early in the kids life. A starving African kid that got adopted by the foster parents in situation 2 dies of starvation because the foster parents adopted a baby that got aborted in situation 2.
2) The fetus gets aborted; a painless death since it was aborted before 20 weeks. The starving African child gets saved by foster parents.
In situation 1, an African kid died of starvation and it was very slow and painful. In situation 2, a fetus died a painless death. The foster parents only have the ability and the will to adopt 1 of the kids. Which situation do you prefer? I prefer situation 2. Banning abortion causes situation 1 to occur if everyone followed the law. If a kid will die either way, it’s better to kill the kid who can’t feel pain and is not expecting the death. Even if you kill somebody painlessly, they are expecting the death so such a death truly isn’t painless since death stress(stress knowing your going to be killed) is often more painful than a shot in the back of the head.
If there were no starving kids anywhere in the world, I’d be against abortion. But there are tens of millions of starving kids worldwide that are going to die a painful death from starvation. If babies that didn’t have to be birthed were aborted, then foster parents could save starving kids in the rest of the world instead of having to adopt kids that didn’t have to exist.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
That may be the case, but the Chinese don’t kill each other anymore, so can’t they all get along?
Created:
In Europe and Canada, the conservatives support free college and UHC from what I have heard. So what separates them from the liberals? Why don’t they become liberals if they agree with the left on everything?
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
The people of China have a rich diversity of regional customs, beliefs, dialects and histories.
I can’t tell. I’m white and I also can’t tell an ethnic Italian from an ethnic Greek, provided they are assimilated Americans. America has different regional customs in that if you live in PA, your more likely to eat a Philly cheesesteak, the religious beliefs in China are mostly bhuddist. History differences I fail to see how they are relevant.
How are you going to track down the person you plan on charging a dime?
Anytime someone spreads an STI, whoever gets the disease reports it to the police and the police make the person who spread the disease get it treated, along with the person who contracted the disease. The reward for those who get the disease telling the cops is $100, paid for by the person who spread the disease.
If you have an STI, just get it treated; it’s not that hard.
Why are you in favor of "ASSIMILATION"
2 reasons;
1) Learning English for any immigrant is something that makes them fiscally wealthier and makes life easier. More wealth per immigrant means less welfare that has to be paid to them.
2) It prevents separatist movements in the US along ethnic grounds.
what does ideal "ASSIMILATION" mean to you in practical terms?
Assimilating to the US means learning enough English to get by.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
The only way you could jail Trump supporters is to increase the police budget drastically (so much for giving police less money), you would need substantial increases to the prison budget, it is a complete violation of the 1st and 8th amendment. Trump supporters are not being jailed, and they shouldn’t be.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
The Onion(where you got that story from) makes sarcastic, stupid, funny videos. You shouldn’t take them seriously. They are making a joke.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
You and the other your immoral Trumpet tooters need to be jailed.
Why do you think Trump supporters should be jailed? Your talking about jailing roughly half the country. Seems extreme.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
Conceptually, communism is radical equality.
Communism advocates fiscal equality and everything being nationalized. It has nothing to do with culture.
The only way for everyone to be truly equal is for everyone to be (functionally) indistinguishable from one another.
This isn’t true as the USSR maintained communism and diversity.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
This claim is demonstrably FALSE.
The vast majority of Chinese people speak Chinese as a first language, so culturally, the nation is very homogeneous.
Moreover, if they aren’t, it’s further evidence that communist countries don’t necessarily assimilate people.
How do you determine WHO exactly transmitted tuberculosis to you?
Whoever has the disease, whether they transmitted the disease to you or not, should get the disease treated on their dime.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
Let's say you get sick and go to the hospital and the doctor says you have tuberculosis.Who do you send to prison?How do the police investigate this "crime"?
I said the punishment for getting a disease should be treatment paid for by the person with the disease; no jail necessary.
I fail to see how encouraging minorities to change their names to something western is communist. The USSR was a very diverse country, culturally. The Chinese were homogeneous. The USA is culturally homogeneous, given that most people speak English. Assimilation has nothing to do with communism, including name assimilation.
Created:
Posted in:
Christians: An all loving all knowing and all powerful God exists.
Atheists: Then why is there evil?
Me: Why does God have to be all knowing, all powerful, and all loving(referred to as the 3 All characteristics? I mean, is there a possibility that God is none of those things? Where in the Bible does it say that God meets the 3 All characteristics? Even if it is said in the Bible that God meets the 3 All characteristics, could that just be a metaphor? I mean, God uses metaphors a lot.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
I think it should be illegal to spread any harmful disease and the punishment is treatment that you pay for.
Created:
Posted in:
I don’t know much about the vaccine debate, but I take vaccines because I think they will help me out.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
I don’t want to turn hospitals into prisons and I want to keep medicine legal. But people shouldn’t spread STIs. If they have an STI, they should get it treated before they fuck more pussy or swallow more sperm cells.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
I don’t know if STIs get reported, but I would want financial incentive to report the STI, paid for by the person who spread the disease.
How would you criminalize spreading any disease?
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
The same way I propose enforcing any other crime. It would make the news. If someone gets an STI from sex, they report it to the police and then punishment is administered, which includes mandatory treatment paid for by the people who had sex.
Created: