Comments by "whyamimrpink78" (@whyamimrpink78) on "" video.
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ludovicusbathory1715 here is the reality, the left are the only ones crying about gay marriage. Those on the right, especially younger people, don't care. They don't care about social issues, they care about economic issues and being left alone. They elected Trump, a man who has been divorced twice and cheated on his wife with a porn star. Trump also picked Richard Grennell to be the US ambassador to Germany and in doing so did not make a big deal about it. But when Biden hires someone who is gay or trans, people on his team do. Look at how Karine Jean-Pierre had to announce she was a lesbian (along with being a black immigrant) as if that is relevant for her position.
Next, how do conservatives want to drag anything backwards? And what rights are being taken away?
As for taxes, two things. Federally, we can always go back to a tax on the states and not on the people. .And locally, you can vote to have your tax code change. I pay zero income taxes in the state I live in.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@salomaogomes7311 a few things. One, why should married people get tax exemptions? Next, as for next of kin, you can work around that.
In fact, my family ran into problems because of marriage. My sister ended up in the hospital for mental issues, and they were extreme. She had a kid with, at that time, her husband. They were not getting along, however, there was a kid, due to mental health laws in that state the kid was receiving money, and my system had money. There was a risk that the father (my sister's husband at that time) would just take the kid, the kid's money and my sister's money and bail and leave my sister alone in the hospital. That would have been legal because they were married and due to her mental state at that time a divorce was difficult.
We avoided it by hiding the fact there was money involved and eventually my sister became well enough for a long enough time a divorce took place. But them being married was going to potentially cause more problems.
1
-
@JanglesPrime999 it doesn't make it harder. In fact, sometimes marriage makes things harder. Here is a comment I wrote to someone else about my sister. I will copy and paste it here
"In fact, my family ran into problems because of marriage. My sister ended up in the hospital for mental issues, and they were extreme. She had a kid with, at that time, her husband. They were not getting along, however, there was a kid, due to mental health laws in that state the kid was receiving money, and my system had money. There was a risk that the father (my sister's husband at that time) would just take the kid, the kid's money and my sister's money and bail and leave my sister alone in the hospital. That would have been legal because they were married and due to her mental state at that time a divorce was difficult.
We avoided it by hiding the fact there was money involved and eventually my sister became well enough for a long enough time a divorce took place. But them being married was going to potentially cause more problems."
My sister's marriage almost screwed over her and her niece big time.
You don't really need to do extra steps without marriage.
Many people get married and do not mix money and property for great reasons. And you can do it without getting married. For example, on property, more than one person can own a house or business.
Many factors involve parental rights, marriage is actually a very small, if any portion of that.
Retirement can easily be transferred to someone else.
Wills are done by single people all the time. Many people have created wills and not have their spouse in them.
On insurance, that is a whole different mess in itself. Besides, some plans allows you to cover a non spouse. Look it up.
On medical decisions, you can decide who makes them. Besides, seems like the Terry Shiavo showed marriage made things more complicated like it did with my sister.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jamescarr4504 Congress cannot legislate something as a right, the Constitution lists our rights. The federal congress has limits as well via the Constitution. For example, on K-12 education you have the department of education at the federal level created by congress essentially. However, states still manage their own public education. When CCSS was passed many states refused to adopt them. Essentially, the federal government's duties, as in Congress, is to deal with foreign affairs and commerce between states.
States cannot cross certain lines laid out in the Constitution. But they control a lot. Most issues are actually handled by the states.
"Yet by removing federal protection and sending it to the states, self-righteous moralists can then dictate their sense of ethics on other people in the state who don't agree with them and use state government to deny them those Rights as granted by the courts or the federal government."
No, states cannot deny rights that are in the Constitution. Next, the more local a government is the more it serves the people. On your point and morals, every issue has an objective and subjective side. With state rights you take on the subjective side. Take overturning Roe v Wade. Many people on blue states were protesting, but what about in Mississippi? You have people in blue states feel women are being oppressed there, but more women than men voted in Mississippi. They seem OK with it.
Judicial review is in the Constitution. It is in Article III.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@moviemaestro800 "Problem with that attitude is that it presupposes I should only worry about my singular community of my choosing, and not the good for all humanity."
This is a big problem with many people, especially on the left. Many times people on the left will say
"They are voting against their own interest"
or
"I am here to help them out"
While not trying to understand the very people they want to "help" out. Again with the Roe v Wade overturn, MS recently passed laws creating restrictions on abortion. Many on the left will cry that women are being oppressed. However, how many pro-choice rallies happened in MS? And did you know that more women than men voted in MS? Seems like the women in MS are fine with the law. But you, like many leftists, are on the outside looking in saying
"Those women are oppressed, I must be the hero and save them"
Without understanding how they really fell. That is a problem. You say you refuse to be selfish but in fact you are being very selfish. You have your belief, which is fine and I respect, but you feel others have the same belief as well. And for those you meet that don't you feel they are misguided or dumb and you must change them.
You say empathy, define it. I lived in a state that was becoming very left wing. I hated it. I was excited to leave that area. When leaving I felt it was fine for some people, but not me. I live in a red state now, I love it. So do the people around me. The irony is that it is a red state but there is way more diversity here than the blue state I lived in.
Here is your problem, you have your belief which is fine. But you feel others have it as well, and those that don't are evil and bad. I strongly suggest you go out in the world and meet other people. You would be surprise how many on the right are great people and very open.
But tell me, in what ways did I try to discriminate? Tell me. Again, I moved from a blue part of the nation and I say very little diversity where I live in a red part of the nation now and I see a ton of diversity. Explain that.
I feel you need to get out and interact with more people in society.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@moviemaestro800 "Conservatives never have come out on top, looking like the good guys, with the benefit of hindsight"
How so? Lately the left has gone insane and it is destroying our nation. Roe v Wade gets overturned and now the left freak out saying interracial marriage is next when it is not. They freak out in blue states saying they are not going to be able to get an abortion when they can. Many states still allow it. The left literally feel that if government is not involved somehow in something it will cease to exist.
Yes, state rights led to the Civil War. Think about it, say the federal government were to completely ban gambling. How would the Nevada feel? They would be mad. That was similar to the federal government trying to ban slavery, it was going to ruin the economies of the southern states. And it was also federal government overreach. You know what ended slavery? A Constitutional amendment.
You want federal government overreach because you don't like how the people in MS, MT, AL, NE, and other red, rural states act. You feel they are not informed, bad people and need to be changed by the great hand of the federal government.
1
-
1
-
1