Total posts: 2,799
-->
@Death23
Prenatal life has no value. Suck their brains out and throw them in to the garbage. Bye bye little guy!
I want that! Except with communists instead.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Let us see them pry that canal from our cold, dead drones.
Created:
-->
@Intelligence_06
Lmao, what do you mean?
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
Rich people pay taxes on their social security payments, while poorer people don’t .
Rich people pay a lower percentage of their income into social security, but that is hardly painting a fair picture. Their ratio of benefits to taxes paid is far worse
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
It always strikes me as strange when people insist that a "social safety net" makes people "lazy" and yet still expect their "social security".Shouldn't you be campaigning to cancel "social security"?
Like I said, social security is mismanaged. They should be able to invest those funds so that they don’t need to tax as much.
But I think this is an exception to the laziness rule. This is money taken WHILE you work for a time in your life when you can’t work. You can’t just not work until retirement, because then you aren’t eligible.
I think that the government should be less responsible for your retirement. There are great plans like 401Ks and Roth-IRAs that are much better
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
Social Security is a system that steals from the YOUNG to pay for the OLD.Social Security is also a system that steals from the POOR because their contributions are never capped.Social Security is NOT a "self-funded" "retirement" account.It's more like "retirement (unemployment) insurance".AND INSURANCE ALWAYS STEALS FROM THE LUCKY (PREPARED) AND GIVES TO THE UNLUCKY (UNPREPARED).INSURANCE IS NEVER "SELF-FUNDED".
Young pay for the old under the presumption that the young will pay for them when they are old.
"Social security steals from the poor" "insurance steals from the prepared and gives to the unprepared"
These seem rather contradictory. SS contributions are capped at $132,900. That is hardly "poor". Most people in the upper half of that range, I'd consider well off.
The reason that it is capped for the "rich" is because the "rich" are much more likely to be prepared for retirement.
Plus there is no incentive to be unprepared because distributions are hardly enough to live on.
I don't particularly like social security because it, like most of our government institutions, is mismanaged.
But forgive me, what does this have to do with the forum topic? lol
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
Well men are biologically geared to sleeping with as many women as possible to procreate, but women aren't because they need help raising kids and guys don't like raising other peoples' kids for them.
But I am not pontificating. I hold both men and women accountable. After all, it takes two to do the (horizontal) tango.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Let's just take back the canal that we built......
Created:
-->
@Intelligence_06
Rape is .5% of cases and therefore irrelevant to the discussion. There are about 3% done for health reasons. I'm more interested in the other 96.5% in which it is done because of "not being ready to be a parent". If you aren't ready to be a parent, don't be sleeping around. Pretty simple concept.
Whether or not somebody else will care about a death is also irrelevant. Killing hobos with no family or friends wouldn't inflict emotional pain on anyone. Many of them don't contribute much of anything, often only taking. I would still see a problem with murdering them.
Created:
-->
@Intelligence_06
I believe death penalty should only be used when its negativity exceeds all positivity that has done. If the fetus had brought grief and trouble and nothing else to the only person it'd ever know, then I believe it is just to abort it. You don't see a crime lord and a savior the same way, so you don't see a baby that has brought the mother utter grief the same as one tha brought overall joy.
Grief vs death. Tell me which is worse.
It is the fault of the parents for the pregnancy, not the baby's. So why should it suffer for their poor decision-making?
Created:
-->
@Intelligence_06
And since you think abortion isn't wrong at all, then I was correct in saying you don't believe that baby murder is very wrong.
Created:
-->
@Intelligence_06
So killing a 10-month-old baby isn't THAT bad to you?
Created:
-->
@Intelligence_06
If you are basing human life's worth based on "value", then killing a 10-month old baby would have to be 100% fine by you. That baby can't do anything of value, so why is abusing it wrong?
Created:
-->
@Intelligence_06
"We should not tell other people what to do with their child. It is their choice"
So by that logic, you think we should legalize child abuse and neglect, yes?
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
I don’t even know if they care about slavery as much as they want to use it as a bludgeon to get preferential treatment.
Either way, I would agree. You can not assimilate if you don’t let go of your past. Either you consider yourself an American, or you don’t. Notice how they call themselves “African American” despite not being an African immigrant, while Italian Americans began calling themselves Americans. It is reflective of the desire to not assimilate into “White culture”
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
Remind me who exactly invented "social security"?
FDR..... That is something paid into for your whole career and that dictates how much you get. SNAP doesn't.
Perhaps we could force them all to swear an oath of allegiance to something that represents state power, you know like a, something maybe made of cloth? Or maybe I'm just mixing that up with an old 1891 advertising campaign. [LINK]
I don't think they do a compulsory pledge of allegiance anymore.
Would you say that "Irish culture" and "British culture" "share a lot of fundamental qualities"?
They share a decent amount of qualities. However, Irish are generally Catholic. They also don't like each other because they have a few-hundred-year history of fighting.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
You seem to be ignoring the vast differences between "white" northern "culture" and "white" southern "cultures" and "white" eastern "culture" and "white" western "culture" and "white" "bible belt" "culture" and "white" "middle america" "culture".Do you realize that there are 50 different states within the "United" States?Do you realize that each one of these states has it's own set of "cultures"?When you advocate for "assimilation" you sound an awful lot like THX1984BORG.What is your preferred "solution" to this "problem"??
That is precisely why I stayed with generalities that are applicable to most "White" cultures. They aren't 100% the same, but they share a lot of fundamental qualities.
As for "assimilation" and not having a multicultural country, we need to significantly cut immigration and mandate patriotic education in public schools.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
Have you ever seen a "lazy" tribal culture?
I suppose not in its natural habitat. However, if you promise a tribal culture a generous social safety net.....
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
FDR tried it, until he had a bunch of backlash. Hopefully it could be blocked somehow, but if they had big enough majorities, I'm sure it could be done within the constitution.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
The one thing Mitch is good at is getting judges on the bench. Even if there’s one week left, he’ll do it for sure. It’ll be easier during a lame duck session even if Trump loses
If so, and Biden wins both House and Senate, he will just add another two seats to SCOTUS and have another liberal majority for another few decades. Yay.......
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
All that is accomplished by these countries that punish their skilled laborers and rich get is a whole lot of brain drain. Lots of the smart, able people leave to go to a country that will reward their efforts more.
Created:
-->
@n8nrgmi
Yeah, I have never really thought that income inequality was an issue. In Saudi Arabia, income is very equal.... everyone is just equally poor. What you should aim to do is increase standards of living for everyone in your country.
Now, there is the issue of people with tons of money corrupting the political process, via soft money spending on politics (like buying a news outlet and then giving super positive press to someone you want in office). That is just kinda indirectly related to income inequality, though.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Hell, this is when you just look at culture. Culture is just one part of the “nature” column in nature vs nurture.
This is completely ignoring genetic factors. For instance, first-born children generally have higher IQs and are more successful than later children.
Then, they want to compare the two geographically dispersed groups who underwent millions of different environmental factors contributing to different natural selection outcomes.
You can’t even have the same outcomes from children of the same parents, but then they want to compare two genetically different groups with essentially antithetical cultures?
How the hell are they supposed to prove “rAcIsM” when you couldn’t even expect the same outcomes from the start?
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
A lot of this problem slowing integration was due to 1800's systemic segregation policies.Today we still have some systemic segregation policies (no school choice, welfare based on color and affirmative action based on color, police no-go zones) but it's not nearly as bad as the Jim Crow laws.The real problem is that there are no policies supporting integration into Asian and European culture. In fact, Asian and European culture today are directly blamed for the failure of African culture, and the opposite is encouraged. (see BLM manifesto on disrupting the western family structure), as if the integration of whites and brown people into African culture is the "real solution" to disparities (at least the tribalistic Marxist part of African culture)The reality is that disparities and inequalities will ALWAYS exist in a nation of competing cultures and ideologies. Some ideas just work better than others. In the world of Darwin, wars usually settle the inequalities when Democracy fails to declare a winner of the culture Olympics.
It doesn't seem to me that they even want to assimilate, and I wouldn't expect them to want to. Making someone give up their cultural identity is cruel in my opinion. They don't want to give that up voluntarily, either, and that is exactly why multicultural societies can't work.
If they wanted to, they would have assimilated long ago. As for school choice, we had that in a different sense by using public busing to reach racial quotas in schools. That, if anything, deteriorated the quality of those schools affected. Forced integration didn't make black people more likely to assimilate into our culture at all. If anything, it brought more resentment for one another.
Having people with vastly different cultures and values who hate each other in close quarters won't work. In Europe, it led to balkanization, not integration. In Europe, there wasn't even a racial component to further divide people by.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
I really don't like the term "black culture" as you have people of all colors that are part of European culture and also people of all colors that are part of African culture.
I don't think most minorities have even assimilated into the European "hard work, Christian, family values" culture (Asians are pretty close, but their home cultures are hard working too). People are tribal and the vast majority will reject other race's cultures and embrace their own. I can't think of one non-homogenous country that isn't also multicultural.
Even the NMAAHC described "individualism, hard work is key to success, nuclear family" as being "White" culture.
Created:
-->
@n8nrgmi
Are you saying that glorifying thugs rapping about getting shot, doing drugs, and having a bunch of sex can have bad effects on children?
Heresy!
Created:
-->
@Intelligence_06
And saying that you shouldn't be able to "force your way up a woman's uterus" is a silly argument.
How would you feel applying it to other arguments?
If you aren't a gun owner, you shouldn't be able to offer any policy suggestions on gun control.
If you aren't a minority, you shouldn't be able to have any opinion on civil rights legislation.
If you aren't a murderer, you shouldn't be able to give a policy opinion on what to do with murderers. Not all perfect examples, but surely you get the point.
Simply taking this position of "you don't have X characteristic" or "you don't have any 'skin in the game'" isn't how I believe anyone wants to operate a country. Simply having certain sex organs doesn't make your opinion any more or less valid.
It is a cheap tactic to try to avoid valid criticisms of your position. All that matters is this: either a fetus is a person or it isn't. If it is, then abortion is murder, and murder is and should be illegal. If you can prove that a fetus isn't a person, then the pro-choice position is correct. If you fail to prove that, then the pro-life position is correct. (Since a human life is at stake, then I believe that pro-choicers have the burden of proof. If there is a shadow of a doubt that it is a human, then we should err on the side of not murdering millions of babies).
Created:
-->
@Intelligence_06
This seems to fundamentally ignore what it is that pro-life people believe. They believe that abortion is murder.
For the same reason that we outlaw regular adult on adult murder, they believe that we should outlaw doctor on baby (or fetus, which ever you want to call it) murder
If you are personally pro-life and believe in the policy of allowing abortion, you are just a pro-choice person that "chooses" not to get an abortion.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Woah woah woah woah. Have you seen the video? You said some things that were clearly false.
A gun is obviously more powerful than a skateboard, but that in no way limits your ability to defend yourself. A skateboard can easily kill you. This is a 17 year old kid getting hit with a hard piece of wood in the head wielded by a fully grown adult. You can simply be punched or kicked to death, so saying a skateboard isn’t a lethal weapon is just silly.
Second, this was not 1v1 combat, he was being chased by a large mob. He was attacked by multiple foes while on the ground: one who charged him with a gun and one who hit him with a skateboard. He ONLY shot people directly attacking him.
As for that case in your state, I would need all of the facts. Had he started the conflict with some form of aggression, I could see it being a murder charge. If it was a school or something where a knife is in no way needed, maybe as well. As for why you would need to carry a knife: for the exact reason he did. He was attacked, and you should always carry a weapon just in case.
And you can’t believe that every state will follow what yours did. Some black kids killed a 52 year old because they wouldn’t give him a dollar. The one that threw the fatal punch, guess what he got. Anger management and probation!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Death23
I would think that it would matter. He may get 20 years for just the one depending on what degree he would be convicted of. Now with two murders and one attempted murder, you're probably going in for life.
Thanks for digging into that, I'll give that link a gander later.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Death23
But I'm wondering how the legality might change if they determined that he was guilty of murder for the first guy. Would he then be charged for the other ones by default?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Death23
Yeah, I think that being chased by a violent mob would make it difficult to fault him for much of what occurred.
The second shooting is certainly justified, but I'm wondering if they found the first to be unjustified that they would say that the next two were trying to make a citizen's arrest. While that obviously(to us at least) wasn't the case, they could pretend that they were doing just that and that it was simply a stupid decision on their part that ended badly.
Good graphic btw.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Death23
Alright, I guess I'd have to get a closer look at the video. I also saw what looked like him being fired at by a pistol right around that time. What is your opinion of the case?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
I am not surprised that he "fled". Like I said to ILikePie, he was attacked WHILE he was running to the police line.
He definitely should have left the area because he probably would have been killed had he stayed.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
Yeah, but apparently not resisting arrest is just too difficult for some people.......
Funny thing is, he was running to the police line, yet they pretend that they were trying to apprehend him. (And despite pulling a gun on him and throwing a molotov cocktail)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Ok, I see. So he could get slapped with a weapon crime is what you're saying?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
I just looked it up. It is a 33 minute drive from Antioch, IL (Kyle’s hometown) and Kenosha, WI.
I think the distinction between states is rather arbitrary for this matter.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Why does the fact that it was a different state matter? What I would think matters is the length of the drive, which wasn't very long.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Death23
Self-defense from what I have seen. One guy hit him with a skateboard, a molotov cocktail was thrown at him, and a guy tried to rush him with a gun.
Seems like a hero to me, keeping order when the government refuses to.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dustryder
Well I'm certainly glad you agree it's morally reprehensible.
I don't. I believe it is morally reprehensible that we have had to subsidize their unlawful residence.
I was saying that even if it was, I wouldn't care. The role of a government is to serve its peoples' interests, not take care of everyone else on the planet. Abandoning your citizens' interests is more "morally reprehensible" than any language you use to describe "sending people back to their nation". So I don't care what DACA people want. Their opinion is 100% irrelevant.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dustryder
I know. What a strange thing to talk about DACA in a conversation about DACA instead of veering off into unrelated conversation
Oh yes. My bad. Choosing what to do with them based on what is best for Americans is tooootally unrelated.......
No, they are having their lives destroyed. You're just attempting to justify and minimise it. The fact is, getting bundled off to a foreign country where you don't understand the culture and language and where you don't have your friends, work connections, family or job is tantamount to having your life destroyed short of literally getting executed.
I doubt most of them speak English better than their home language. Having marketable skills and knowledge of English will get you a great job, considering America and other European countries that speak English do a lot of business abroad.
I agree. They should've along with their parents. However I do not address what should have been but what is. It is morally reprehensible to destroy the lives of those who are basically Americans when they've personally done nothing wrong.
Don’t care. There can be a debate about if it is beneficial that they stay here. But if they are a net negative to real Americans, they should be deported immediately. A nation’s job is to take care of ITS citizens, not a bunch of foreign national criminals.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Yeah, Bernie was a consistent marxist for decades, much more radical than the rest of the Democrat party. Eventually, the Dems radicalized so much, that a lot of them were to the Left of Bernie, so now he has to be inconsistent to appeal to them. Especially on issues of temporary workers and immigration, as well as gun policy (to some degree. He was generally pretty bad on that).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dustryder
Assuming you're talking about DACA recipients, then yes. Destroying someone's life who is for all intents and purposes an American on a technicality that they could not control is morally reprehensible.
You see, the conversation is always "what about the poor DACA people (criminals)" and never "what is best for actual Americans".
They aren't having their lives destroyed. Having years of education in a first-world nation will prepare them to be a lot more successful in their home countries than they otherwise would have been.
I don't believe in awarding criminal behavior in any fashion. They should have been deported immediately, years ago. The fact that immigration authorities didn't do their job well doesn't give those criminals a free pass.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dustryder
So not allowing people to force themselves on the country against our will and not paying for their welfare, housing, schooling, and whatever else they might need is “morally reprehensible”?
Sending them to their rightful country is “morally reprehensible”?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@lady3keys
And second, we shouldn't treat them like "real" criminals, simply because they want a better life.
We absolutely should treat them like real criminals because they broke REAL laws. I'm sure people committing tax fraud are doing so to improve their life, but that doesn't excuse blatant disregard for the law.
We came here as a serf class.
And we didn't survive off of billions of dollars in welfare handouts.
But I think there should be a clear path to it
Absolutely not. Just because you can breathe and walk doesn't mean you have any right to go into another's country.
I was a stranger, and you didn’t invite me into your home.
That whole Bible quote is referrring to individual behavior. You are advocating forcing other people to pay for that immigrant. Would you let illegal immigrants into your home? Would you like being forced to pay for criminals undercutting your labor? Probably not.
Again, for the most part, THEY are not criminals. Like everything else, some are, most are not (just like the police). They are desperate. The wait is so long. They end up sneaking in. This may not be right, but I can't imagine not living in the USA, so I don't understand their suffering really. And DACA are mostly adults, who came in as children, and have been living here their whole lives! They are probably more American than anyone; they know suffering; they know compassion; they know hard work; they know the Constitution! Law is critically important, but so is compassionate inclusion.
They are mostly criminals, unlike the police is what you meant to say. No matter your age, you can break immigration laws. We take in 1 million immigrants per year, and if they cannot wait, then they can screw off. Then you go on making a lot of gross, inaccurate generalizations about them being compassionate and knowing the Constitution.
It doesn't matter how long they have been living here. They don't belong here.
When an illegal immigrant breaks into your country, you don't know anything about them except that they are willing to knowingly break your laws for their own gain.
And I'm not sure if I should dignify your "rule of law" slam or your racial suggestion that I am more suited for Latin America or an African country. I think you make yourself look bad enough all on your own with that one.
I don't see how that makes me look bad at all. Most Latin American countries and African countries don't have rule of law. That is factual. Are you suggesting that their race is what is making them incapable of properly governing themselves? Because if so, that would make you the one with "racial suggestions". I didn't mention race once in my response.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@lady3keys
There were two of those that he actually ran on: a wall and anti-DACA.
Is it good and just to allow an illegal serf class to come here and work for slave wages, while simultaneously stealing jobs, reducing wages, and worsening working conditions for domestic workers? No, I'd argue that isn't very moral, so let's get a wall to stop illegal immigration.
DACA: A bunch of criminals came over here with their kids. Since those kids have no right to be here at all, send them and their parents back. We are a country, and countries have laws. If you are against rule of law, perhaps you would be better suited living in a Latin American or African country.
I could come up with a bunch of bad policies Biden supported if you would like.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Idk. Are you talking about Francis?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@lady3keys
Probably because they would care more about the morality of the policies more than the politicians themselves.
If Gandhi ran for office on a genocide platform, I don't think they would care much about his peaceful protests from the past.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Trent0405
This is where I got it
Created: