Youtube comments of Hugh Jassle (@hughjassle5876).
-
112
-
82
-
33
-
30
-
29
-
20
-
19
-
19
-
16
-
15
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
@waris4thewealthy549 you mistake my meaning, friend. I completely understand there is no substantive difference between democrat and republican. I've been preaching this for years. They are the left and right hand, respectively, of the same monster. When I say leftist I imply the opposite ideology of conservatism. You'll note at no time did I specify democrat, or republican. They are the establishment and are both dragging this country steadily to the left. Again, the differences are minor at best. Whereas democrats say, "burn the whole house down", republicans say, "hold on a minute. Maybe just burn down the living room, kitchen and maybe a bedroom. Then we'll negotiate further burning." It is a system of controlled opposition, with republicans existing at this point in time as nothing more than an illusory body to give the ignorant they idea they have a choice.
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
@mandomtn1962 sorry chuckles, but socialism has never worked anytime, or anywhere. I take that back. It has worked for the people at the top, those ultimately tasked with confiscating and redistributing wealth. It has not worked for the fools at the bottom. The fools who ironically are the ones, in their supreme ignorance, clamoring for it. People like you who want socialism always seem to forget who ends up in charge of confiscating and redistributing the wealth. You seem to forget the misery, poverty starvation and death they invariably inflict because while they confiscate it just fine, it's the redistribution that never quite comes to fruition. Furthermore, socialism cannot work because at its core it is anathema to human nature. Capitalism, true capitalism on the other hand, (which we no longer have) is not an unregulated system. It is very well regulated; by the invisible hand of the free market. Disabuse yourself of the notion that we still have free market capitalism in this country. There are some aspects of capitalism that are being allowed to persist, however, what we really have is more akin to economic fascism; where the state picks winners and losers.
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@nicklang7670 the health care provided by the Veteran's Administration or V.A. here is an abysmal, unmitigated disaster. It is 100% government funded, and receives over a $billion per annum to operate. Veterans wait months, years, sometimes decades to be treated. It's such a complete failure that people have actually killed themselves, at the V.A. because of the lack of treatment. I'm eligible for V.A. benefits, but I would rather spend my own money to ensure proper and prompt treatment. My point, however, is to illustrate for you the unbroken leg fallacy. I've already explained it earlier on in this thread, but to recap, the unbroken leg fallacy is when the state inserts itself into an area of the private sector due to some real, or perceived inequity they feel should be rectified, where they then proceed to completely f*** things up. That sector, now in disarray, then calls upon the state to fix what it broke, whereupon begins a feedback loop of greater and greater state intrusion and mishandling. You're asking the same people that that have proven themselves incapable of managing health care on a small scale to manage it not just on a larger scale, but an universal scale. There is something off in that thought process.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@darkmagic9590 yeah, actually, unfortunately it very often does mean that he dies. And yes, I do what I'm told because I'm smart enough to know if you choose to fight the cops in the street, they have the numerical and tactical advantage. If you choose to fight them in court, there you have the advantage. There's also something called non-violent resistance. You sit there, you shut up, you keep your hands visible, you don't move and you make them move you. And speaking from personal experience, especially if you're in the right, it pays off very well in court. But you go ahead and slug it out with po-po on their turf over a fake $20 bill. See who's right.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@albback8176 please, point out to me any one of our 50 states that does not compel a father not in the home to pay child support. Regardless of that state's stand on abortion, all have child support laws. Either the man refuses to pay, which is contempt of court, and in most places, a criminal offense, or a lazy woman won't name the father because she'll get more from welfare than from child support. It's impossible to force a man to pay child support prior to conclusively ascertaining the parentage of the child, which is usually only possible after birth. That being said, I'm ok with collecting the money from him retroactively when he is determined to be the father. In fact, that's a great idea, and I think I'll lobby for those laws to be passed. I guarantee you, men would be less likely to raw dog the town trollop.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@user-ue5yw6zb9k $22 billion dollars would end homelessness? I'm dying to find out how you think that would be accomplished. Have you ever worked with the homeless? Do you know anything about the homeless? I'm going to guess no on both counts. The answer for me is yes. I work extensively with them; veterans and civilians, mentally ill, substance addicted, or just down on their luck. Believe it, or not the last one, folks homeless because they're down on their luck are few and far between. The vast majority are where they are because they want to be there. They don't want help for their mental illnesses, they don't want help with their addiction, they don't want to have to follow any rules just for a roof over their head. My sister in law is one of those. She's a mentally ill addict. She lives on the streets, gets arrested, gets clean and her condition medicated, she get out of jail, she's normal for a time, she starts using again, goes off her meds, goes crazy and ends up on the streets again. It's one big predictable feedback loop. That is the majority of who's out there. My solution? I don't have one. I don't think anyone has one. You can't help someone who won't help themselves. Build more mental hospitals and lock em up when they get out of hand, I guess? Make services available to them if at any time they decide they want help. I really don't know.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@MohamedMohamed-so6dk no sir. I hold no animosity toward Islam. The Articles of Faith I mentioned earlier have something for that, too. "We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may." I hold no animosity toward Palestinians either. I do believe that the Jews own the land, but I also believe there can be peaceful coexistence between them. No one thought the historic peace deals between Israel and Islamic nations, AKA the Abraham accords were possible. But they happened. There are even Palestinians that sit on the Knesset; the Israeli parliament. I think that's a good step forward. Yes the Jews gave Jesus over to the Romans to be crucified, however, just like the fall of Adam, it had to transpire, or our heavenly Father's eternal plan for us, our ability to repent of our sins, be resurrected and return to Him would not have been possible.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@randomoverpopulatedworldid3286 I'm not totally sure what you're trying to say. Kinda got the word salad thing going on there, but I'll try and decipher it. Yes, I'm a man. I'm a real man, and by that I don't just mean a person born with a penis. I'm a man who takes care of, pays for and physically protects his children. Even the ones my ex wife left with. Men are bigger, stronger and have a greater capacity for violence. We were created this way so we could protect our spouses and progeny. Whether you believe in evolution, or creation, the purpose of a man is not debatable. I wish there was equality as it pertains to abortion, but true equality would be every person involved getting a say...including the baby. But no one ever thinks that the baby might actually want to live, in spite of the innate right to life all people are created with. But but if a man allows his child to be aborted without fighting to protect him/her, he is no man. And if he succeed in defending that life, he damn well better take care of it. Or again, he is no man.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@Don-md6wn is not about a religion. It's about the sanctity of human life. You mention rape. Yes that's an horrible violation of a person's bodily autonomy, and if it results in pregnancy, there are now two victims. Why would you advocate for sentencing one of the victims to death, but not for sentencing the rapist to death? That being said, the number of abortions as a result of rape, or incest is less than 1% of all abortions performed. This statistic doesn't come from Fox news, or some other right wing outlet. It comes from the Gutmacher Institute, a very pro abortion organization. And, in fact, the only other organization besides the CDC that compiles accurate abortion statistics. To fully answer your question, if in the hypothesized position, and if my daughter was still a minor child, barring any unforseen medical conditions, I would recommend the child be carried to term. I would not, however, make a unilateral decision without committing the matter to fervent prayer. If in the situation my daughter was an adult, again, I would make my recommendation, but at that point she's an adult and can exercise her free agency.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@vallee7966 I'm old enough to remember the same old shtick about the planet dying when I was a child. Zero population, acid rain, new ice age, the long emergency, blubbering Indians, global warming, climate change, 10 years, 12 years, 20 years... Dude, there is literally nothing new under the sun. Zealots have been predicting the end of the world since the beginning of the world.
3
-
@mackone8035 well now, you've sure convinced me with your ad hominem attack. That's the way to win a debate, right? Alright, listen here, cupcake. First, I was using geomagnetic reversal as an example of one of the ways the planet changes. Second, since you brought it up, the last time it happened was almost 800,000 years ago. If your contention is that it happens every 400,000 years, don't you think that would put us more than a bit overdue? And finally the planet is an estimated 4.5 billion years old. If your assertion is correct, that would mean it's happened in excess of 11,000 times. Now be gone with you, infant.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@buckiesmalls it's a shame you get all your information from talking points, but let's go ahead and unpack them anyway. Spoiler alert: you're way out of your depth, son. First, the wilful conception of a child presupposes a viable life. Otherwise, no one would have children. Therefore, it is not solely my presupposition, but that of millions of people everyday. Next, the viable human that decides this is not for them should have thought a bit more about it before she spread her legs. Yes, she should be forced to bring the baby to term. Choices have consequences. And the father should be forced to provide monetary support for the prenatal care. But the mother needn't love it, or even keep it. There are the countless number of couples that can't conceive and would readily adopt the child as well as pay the medical expenses of the birth mother. And what about rape, you may ask? How about killing the rapist, rather than the innocent child, who is also a victim. The recidivism rate among sexual offenders is higher than all other offender categories except one; auto theft. Nevertheless, it's upwards of 80%, and people aren't generally killed when their car is stolen. Short answer, kill the rapist and it guarantees he won't rape again. Kill the child, you have a dead baby and a predator on the loose. On to crime and poverty. Statistically a child is more likely to become a criminal if there is no father in the home. Again, that goes back to the woman making poor choices. The man who helped create that life should have far more severe consequences for abandoning his responsibility. There are consequences for one's choices. Speaking of which, poverty is a choice. In this the most free, most prosperous, most tolerant, most diverse nation in the history of the world, if you spend your life in poverty you have made poor decisions. Next, do we punish the mother for killing her child? No. She's been every bit as brainwashed as you have, with lies and taking points meant to alleviate the guilt of such an heinous act. Hold the Dr who violated his oath to first do no harm criminally liable. Onward. The term "back alley abortion" is a misnomer designed to illicit an emotional response; which it does especially for those who use it. Nevertheless, it is a statistical fact that, due to the prolific nature of abortion, more women are harmed, or killed during legal abortions that were harmed, or killed by illegal abortions. The very nature of illegality makes far more rare, albeit difficult to suss accurate numbers. But since you're worried about the heath and safety of women, how many of the 60 million dead children aborted were female? But again, that gets into presupposition of achieving adulthood, and you don't like to think that far ahead, right? The irony of a social justice warrior calling me a SJW is delicious. Nevertheless, the reason men seem to be the most vocal about this is because first, we've no voice in the matter, (for now) and second, we were created to be protectors. That's why men are typically bigger, stronger, and have a better command of strategic violence. We were made this way for a reason. And I hate to break this to you, but you're actually in the minority on this. The minority just happens to have a very loud and obnoxious voice. The empty can rattles the most, I reckon. Now here's something you didn't mention; the racist nature of abortion. In the US, the abortion rate for black women is 5x that of whites. Most abortion clinics are located in communities of color. And then there's Margaret Sanger.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Tukemuth no you don't understand. I was not exploited, nor do I exploit people. When I go to work for someone I have a sale price for my labor, what I believe my labor is worth to the buyer. If the potential employer meets that expectation, I sell them my labor. If at any time I feel I'm not getting full value for my efforts, I renegotiate the deal. If they are unwilling to renegotiate, I move on. I'm not a slave, nor are those that work for me. As for people who can't sell their labor, why can't they? I average about a decade in each career I've been in. When I feel the bottom is about to drop out, for whatever reason, I look for something else. Usually it requires an education and training in another field, so I get that education and training and move on. There is literally no reason why anyone else can't do that. As I said before, you are a fool. You are the one being exploited. You're taught this equity garbage in the public education arena and you swallow it hook line and sinker. And why are you taught equity and egalitarianism, while I'm taught a skill? Because the state wants you to be their slave. And you consent to it. They hold out crumbs which you dutifully lick from their hands because you believe they have your best interest at heart. They don't! They f**king hate you! They hate all of us, but still you remain on their plantation, a loyal establishment lickspittle. You understand nothing except for your own selfish wants and care not that they come to the detriment of others. Good luck with your socialist utopia. I hope you find it someday. Just not here. I'll give my last breath to prevent it.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@bettymontgomery2400 considering you invalidated your argument in your first two words, I'll start unpacking there. "this country". You start your argument by asserting that this is, in fact, a country. That means we have a government, borders and a regulated process of ingress. On to your "native American" argument: if one is born in a particular country, which you've already contended this is, they are a native. I was born in the United States, therefore I am a native American. I believe the word you're seeking is "indigenous". Now, on to that term: When indigenous tribes roamed this continent warring with, conquering, enslaving and even eating the other indigenous peoples, there was no America. Therefore anyone coming here could not be classified as an immigrant. Now, on to your claim that this nation was built by immigrants. No. It was built by British colonists who had had it up to their tits with the British monarchy, essentially an absentee landlord, levying exorbitant taxes and restrictions on them. And in their expansion, they did what the indigenous tribes had been doing for a couple millenia before them; they obtained the land by conquest, sand the enslavement and cannibalism. And do you want to know why? Because the indigenous tribes didn't have the wheel. The colonists and their progeny were more technologically advanced and that's just the way of the world. Back then, and today. By the way, there are many other countries with far more stringent immigration laws than ours, and they enforce them. Why don't you complain about that?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@kx7500 nah, the only people that care are kids conditioned through social media and government schools to care. They don't know what they care about, but it sure ain't the actual issues associated with the climate. It's all the gobbledygook BS kids have been fed about climate change for the past half century. Blah blah extinction, blah blah acid rain, blah blah, zero population, blah blah new ice age, blah blah polar bears, blah blah 10 years to go, blah blah blah. Holy shit, I sound like that stupid Swedish girl. LOL.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@cleopatrajones7096 first, your comparison of abortion to capital punishment is a false equivalence and intellectually disingenuous. No child killed in his mother's womb ever committed any crime. Much less, something deserving of the death penalty. You answered your second question, although you answered it incorrectly. Many states that will be, or have already implemented partial, or total abortion bans have categorically stated that there would be additional funds and services allocated to address "crisis pregnancies" pre and neo natal assistance as well as adoption services. On your last point; something about a father, a rapist and a 12 year old girl, your syntax is a clusterfuck, so I really have no idea what you're trying to say there. Now, if what you're on about there was abortion in cases of rape, or incest, less than 1% of abortions performed meet that criteria. So that also is a red herring.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Diana1000Smiles let's say you own a factory and you have a machine that makes a product, whatever it may be. You put the raw materials into one end of the machine and out the other end comes the fully formed product. Then one day someone breaks a key component of the machine. Now when you put the raw materials in one end, what comes out the other end is the raw materials; not simply unassembled, but damaged beyond repair, beaten into an unrecognizable, unusable pile of matter. That is what Zinn has done to the American public education system. The only difference is, in a factory you would fix, or replace the machine. Government schools, however, continue to shove the raw materials, our (your) children into one end being perfectly satisfied with the broken, unusable scraps being pumped out the other end.
2
-
2
-
2
-
@jbaby007 I can understand why you see it that way. John Adams said, "Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." Therefore, the constitution is inadequate for those that would perform, or advocate for the performance of human sacrifice; which is what abortion is. To deny that speaks to one's immorality. And to refute your second nonsensical point, the constitution may physically be an "old, ratty piece of paper", but the God-given rights enshrined therein do not age, or tarnish. They do not disappear on your whim, nor on that of the state. "all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are LIFE, LIBERTY, and the PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS. To abort a baby denied another human being of those innate rights. And that baby is an altogether distinct and separate human being, with his, or her individual DNA, distinctly different and separate from the parents. It's a child, and that child is not the woman's body.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
You obviously have no clue what oil is used for. Since you think we can just randomly "end this addiction on fossil fuels", tell me what come out of a barrel of oil. Of those 42 gallons of oil, how much is gasoline, diesel, jet fuel, pharmaceuticals, fertilizers, food packaging, clothing, household goods, pieces for your electric cars and their infrastructure? You know nothing. Nothing!
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@adriancollette7010 wow, for a minute you seemed to know everything about the subject, and were willing to impart that knowledge. I get it though. Like all half-baked leftist dogma; transgenderism, gun control, abortion, etc., universal health care in America falls apart under even mild scrutiny. I'm sorry I fractured you fragile worldview all these confusing facts. Now that you've been schooled, if you're a reasonably intelligent person, you'll put aside your prejudice and really look into the issue with a critical mind. When talking with people like you whose ideas, if implemented would hurt potentially millions of people, I generally lean on Hanlon's razor, ascribing to ignorance that which cannot definitively be ascribed to malice. I lean that way toward you as well. I don't think you're a bad person. Just ignorant and ill-informed. Nevertheless, peace be unto you.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
It's a damn shame so many people are so ignorant about the way money works. By the way, Marilyn, did you know that those with incomes of $200k or more paid well over half of the federal income taxes, (58.8%) but only account for 4.5% of returns filed. Meanwhile, those making $30k or less filled nearly 44% of all returns, but paid less than 1.5% of all federal income tax; with many paying what amounts to a negative tax rate. That is to say with various income credits they actually got more back than they paid. Furthermore, chronic poverty is a choice. If you're chronically poor in this the most free, most prosperous, most tolerant, most diverse nation in the history of the world, you have made poor life choices.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
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
-
@marygard4608 first, I'm sure your definition of a "strong man" and mine are profoundly different. Second, no matter how bad things get in these United States, I will never leave. Like being on a ship at sea when I fire breaks out, I'll stay and help fight the fire because my chances of survival are better on the ship than jumping into the water. The United States is the last, best hope for liberty and prosperity in this world, so I think I'll stay and help fight the fire. Finally, if you think Bernie Sanders would be a good president, that his values and methods would align with what's needed to right the ship of state, you are deliberately historically ignorant of the carnage, inhumanity and destruction inherent in communism.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jerrysamuels8716 first, I didn't say Jesus died for me. I believe I was very specific in stating that he died to atone for the sins of all mankind. Even yours. Second, I'm well aware that I and everyone must die. It is, after all, a necessary step in our eternal progression. Finally, I'm glad you believe in the Easter Bunny. You're mistaken because I, however, do not. I do believe in God the eternal Father and in his only begotten son in the flesh, Jesus Christ. I've seen and done things in my time on this earth that to say there is no God I feel might well put me in danger of perdition. You may not believe now, but at some point you will. I pray it is in this life, and not the next. And I pray you won't have to see, or experience what I have in order for you to come to your testimony of Christ. Peace be unto you.
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
-
@flash522gp For decades we have paid the lion's share of NATO and UN operating fees, while the rest of the world lives under their protection and an IOU. Like Wimpy, "I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for some military protection today." Know why the bulk of the civilized world has universal health care and other crazy expensive social safety nets? In part its because they tax the shit out of their population, but that's only part. The other part is that we, the "bully" through technology, personnel and the funding of multinational organizations, provide their national defense. That doesn't sound like a bully to me. Sounds more like a bodyguard. The hegemony we have until recently enjoyed has allowed billions of people worldwide to rest easy and prosper, while we run to check out what goes bump in the night.
Furthermore, the British crown wasn't going after Gandhi with tanks, rockets and FAE bombs. There are times when passive resistance is useless. Even Jesus, the prince of peace picked up a hank of rope and whooped some ass when it was warranted.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@3dagedesign so you start your diatribe by telling me that there's no evidence Jesus ever existed. That is false, as there exist first-hand accounts from scholars of that time of having met him. Scholars that did not necessarily subscribe to Jesus' teachings. As for the Bible, you've left a lot to unpack, but here goes. First, I believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly. You do realize it wasn't written in English originally, right? Second, if you actually read the Bible, you'll find that the whole killing children thing was done by the bad guys; worshipers of Baal, worshipers of Moloch, Rameses and later King Herod in his attempt to forestall his own demise. Finally, as to God's direction to the Israelites to thoroughly wipe out other nations, I don't pretend to know the mind of my Heavenly Father, so I'm not going to second guess him on that. That being said, I don't recall His telling the Israelites to rape the young malachite girls. Only not to destroy them. Perhaps your spin on that is your own lascivious projection. Lastly, try as you might to depict him as one, Jesus was not a socialist. Sure, I'll accept that he was by Jewish and Roman society a rebel. He also wasn't a terrorist, as he didn't use terror to achieve a political end. He used love. He didn't force anyone to tithe or donate to the poor. Neither does any modern denomination of Christianity I'm familiar with. Worst case scenario, your church excommunicates you if you don't pay. You still have your free agency, unlike under a socialist government who'll send men with guns to your house to coerce compliance. You have no idea what you're talking about. You conflate the voluntary consecration of one's own means with the theft of wealth and property that is socialism. You seem to thinks it's all some hippy-dippy sharing fest, completely ignorant that socialism and communism lead to the deaths of well in excess of 100 million people in just the 20th century.
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
-
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
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@sambathehusqueen9909 interesting how you equate a belief in God with religion. You obviously do not believe in a God, yet you are religious. Your obeisance to the cult-like dogma of the left is your religion. It is a non-theistic religion. That fact is lost on you, of course, but if you're here, on this page disagreeing so vehemently (and childishly) with me, you're not a liberal. You're a leftist. And as a leftist, it's a veritable certainty you believe in the unrestricted killing of unborn children, that a person's sex is malleable and subject to whim, that somehow it's noble to castrate young boys and amputate the breasts of young girls, that it's harmless to expose young children to deviant and aberrant sexual behavior. These are the tenets of your religion, and killing and destroying children is your sacrament. Our happiness in this world is predicated on our understanding of our heavenly Father's love for us and our place in His eternal plan. I know, in spite of any contention on your part, that you are a profoundly unhappy person. Just those five simple words you posted to me tells me that, without a doubt. G. K. Chesterton said, "when a man stops believing in God, he doesn't believe in nothing. He believes in anything." I'm not sure if you're a man, or a woman, and I don't really care. You are, however, far more religious than you believe yourself to be.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@robertgardner2782 you're wrong. First, that's not really what I'd call a cogent argument. It's more ad hominem than anything else; the labeling of lawful AR-15 owners as cowards. But that's fine. You don't have one. You're wrong in that they are loved equally, however. With over 20 million AR-15s legally in circulation in this country, how many of those are used illegally? I'll answer for you, since I'm sure you don't know. Comparatively few. The evidence is in crime statistics. First, more people are beaten to death every year than are killed by rifles of any type, including the ubiquitous AR-15. Second, most mass shootings are committed with handguns. Third most mass shootings, including those in which rifles are used are committed by black men with the intended target(s) being other black men. These are facts. Another fact: the AR-15 is designed to kill people. It is exceptional in this capacity. In fact, most guns are purpose built to kill people. Why? Because there are bad, dangerous people in this world and sometimes you meet them. I'm not afraid to give up any of my guns. I'm wise enough not to. Finally, apostrophes. They're the difference between knowing your shit and knowing you're shit. Peace.
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
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@creativestudios3d is not about white guilt, huh? I don't think people like Kendi, Sharpton, and other race baiters got the memo. I never said there were not lasting repercussions from slavery and Jim Crow. There are, but those repercussions are not systemic, or institutionalized racism. There are no laws in this country that apply to any particular color of skin, but not others. Blacks, Hispanics, Asians and white are all equal under the law. All have the same freedom to excel, as well as the same freedom to be a delinquent. In this the most free, most prosperous, most tolerant, most racially diverse nation in earth in world history, your are where you are because you want to be there. Furthermore, my assessment that the problem is cultural is not mine. It's Dr. Thomas Sowell's.
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
-
1
-
1
-
@patshelby9285 first, disabuse yourself of the idea that an equally experienced woman doing the same job as a man makes less money for it. A Harvard study debunked that myth years ago, and concluded that any disparity is attributable to the woman's lifestyle choices. Other than that, it seems to me you have a very dim view of womanhood. It must suck to be you. Want to know why women couldn't vote? Because they didn't want the responsibility that came along with it, like being drafted and performing mandatory community service. They only received the right to vote after it was agreed they wouldn't have to honor the same commitments as men. Want to know why wages are stagnating? Because feminism drove women into the work force diluting the labor pool. If women had realized how good they had it, taking care of the home and having all of their needs taken care of, we would be a much happier and far more productive society. Women had so much power and they never even realized it. My new wife, the mother of my youngest child is 20 years my junior. She's the smartest woman I've ever met, and certainly the smartest millennial. She's a full time homemaker. All she does is keep the house clean, keep herself attractive and make sure our 5 year old barbarian doesn't kill herself. I even do most of the cooking. My wife loves that arrangement because she understands what a woman's mission on this earth is. As long as women act like shrill c u next Tuesdays, reveling in some non-existent "right" to murder their children, demanding to be different, but equal, (a farcical and impossible proposition) and as long as men act like cringy little pussified maggots in support of these shrieky infantile women, our society is doomed. Both men and women need to know their place and return to it. God has told us why we're here. The people who didn't listen, or think they know better than God are profoundly unhappy. Unlike those of us who know what's up.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@spookymulder945 first, I'm a petty smart guy. I come from a long line of pretty smart guys. As such, I'm sure my grandfather would have understood the numerical and tactical disadvantages inherent in that situation. And therefore, wouldn't have f**ked around and found out. Second, peaceful protesting doesn't necessarily mean smart protesting. Finally, could you please show me anywhere in any of my comments that implies I'm a "boot licker"? In fact, cupcake, I believe in one of my comments, I stated quite the opposite. Now, pull your panties out of your crack, where they're obviously causing you some irritation, and go play with the rest of the toddlers. You're way out of your depth here.
1
-
1
-
You have a generation of boys convinced they're toxic and bad because they're boys. Poisonous, evil progressive rhetoric has been inculcated into the democrat-controlled educational establishment in the form of confusing BS about race, sex, gender, environmentalism, etc. If a boy grows up constantly being told he's bad because he's a boy, especially if there is no father at home to be the head of the household to dispel that notion, and he's convinced that he'll never succeed because the system is rigged against him, and it doesn't matter anyway because climate change is going to kill us all in a decade, is it really surprising when he picks up a gun and goes crazy? This is the fault of progressive democrats and the hateful, toxic rhetoric they spew.
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
-
@amiaswolfgang sorry chuckles, but you don't have the moral high ground here. First, a college degree is becoming less necessary to achieve personal wealth. Not more necessary. Unless you're going into a specialized field like the law, medicine, or engineering, you don't need a college degree. Second, what pisses me off about the money being spent on wars abroad is that 70% of it is unaccounted for. Poof! Gone! No one knows (or is saying) where it went. Nevertheless, the United States of America, in spite of her decrepit, feckless leadership, is still the last, best hope for peace and democracy in the world. Finally, the people complaining about paying back their student loans fall into one of two categories. In one category you've got people like AOC (and AOC herself) who make enough money to pay, but are lazy communists who think they should have a free ride on the back of the taxpayer. And in the second category you have stupid people who thought it would be a good idea to get some worthless degree like lesbian dance theory, only to find out there isn't a lot of good paying work out there for lesbian dance theorists. F**k them all! I shouldn't have to pay their bills. But I guess that's why $80 billion is going to hire and train 87,000 new armed IRS agents to forcibly extract the wealth from the middle class, making sure we "pay our fair share." It's certainly not too go after the few hundred billionaires in this country.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@immortalasirpa8199 @Immortal Asirpa I'm sorry, I'm not quite understanding you. You said you're a proud boy and a female amine character? Which one? Anyway, you said, "suddenly the killer and his long gun were six feet away from you" and that a "survivor stumbled into me. I mean, into my camera man." So no, bro/proud boy/female amine character, you didn't specifically say that you weren't there. In fact, what you said gives the reader the distinct and mistaken impression you were there. My initial assessment of you stands. You're a liar. I wasn't there, I didn't want to be there, I don't ever again wish to be anywhere I may be forced to take someone's life. But I still know way more about what happened that night, the people who were shot and the circumstances under which they were shot than you do.
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
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Diana1000Smiles as a matter of fact I do. It's always good to know what lies are being told and where. Realistically, however, I don't really care about what's going on anywhere other than here in the US. When my neighbors have to decide if they're going pay the electric bill, or put gas in the car, so they can get to work, I tend not to care about what's happening overseas. When the food to feed their children is not available, or so prohibitively expensive as to essentially be unavailable, but our feckless administration's answer is, "just buy an electric car", a few abnormally hot days in Europe, or an Egyptian dissident starving himself to death really don't trip my givashit switch.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@all_day309 I never said the world was 6000 years old, nor did I deny the part evolution has played in the development of living things. Neither did the Bible. Some silly fundamentalists think the world is only 6k years old and that there's no such thing as evolution. Those are people who think they follow the Bible, but they ignored probably one of the most crucial passages in scripture. "Lean not unto thine own understanding..." There are quite a few scientists who are Christian, or otherwise theologically faithful. Maybe you should hear what some of them have to say. Either way, none of us are getting off this rock alive, so we'll all find out sooner, or later. I believe you read the Bible, but did you pray about what you were reading? If all you're going to do is read the Bible as if it were any other book, you probably won't get much out of it. Read and pray. And if I may make another suggestion, read The Book of Mormon, too. And of course pray about it. It really is another testament of Jesus Christ. I know this beyond a shadow of a doubt. Anyway, I've got to get dinner started, so gotta go. Pleasure talking with you. Peace.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@nikm5628 OK, let's go with fetus. What is a fetus? Encyclopedia Britannica defines it as, "the unborn young of any vertebrate animal, particularly a mammal, after it has attained the basic form and structure typical of its kind." If that's biologically correct, which it is, an human fetus would be an unborn human in its typical form and structure. Your argument proceeds to stipulate that before sentience and full organ function, it is admissible to kill humans beings. Would it therefore be acceptable to kill you in your sleep, as you're not technically sentient? Or to kill those suffering a catastrophic accident that require machines to keep them alive while their organs, currently incapable of supporting life, heal? Surely, the likelihood of an human fetus developing into a sentient being with fully functional organs if left to gestate fully is no different than an injured person expected to fully recover from injury, yet for the time being, needing medical intervention to do so.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@poncedeoly469 I agree that in some markets there is a lack of affordable housing. Most of that has to do with government overregulation. However, as someone who works closely with the homeless, my head is not in the sand, and drug addicts that don't get sober don't want to get sober. You are where your are because you want to be there. The reason I work so closely with the homeless is because I have (had) a sister who was mentally ill and chronically homeless. She would get cleaned up, start taking meds, get an apartment, get a job, stop taking her meds, lose her job and end up on the street again. It was cyclical. That is typical of a good portion of the homeless. And many of the rest of the mentally ill never clean up. They continue to self-medicate, perfectly content in their circumstances. What would you suggest for them? Incarceration? Institutionalization? Or we just park them in someone else's property, let them destroy it and bill the tax payers? I believe it quite possible yours is the head stuck in the sand.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@5kids1goldfish sorry, girl, but you lost me at abortion. First, don't get pregnant outside of marriage, and if you can't take care of a child. Second, make a personal assessment of where you need to be before getting pregnant, and if you can't do that, or you're not in the right place financially, don't get pregnant. Your casual, off-hand mention of infanticide as birth control is sickening. I know how much Baal worshipers love to sacrifice children to Moloch on the altar of personal convenience, but you will never convince me that a child is better off dead than poor. The isn't The Handmaid's Tale. No one is forcing anyone to get pregnant.
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
-
@MrDXRamirez I have to admit, I only read about a quarter of your word vomit before I realized you're not half as smart as you think you are, and a mixture of boredom and pity overtook me. Realizing you're a tad slow, I'll try to explain it again.
When used to defend my life, or the lives of those I'm responsible to protect, a gun is a tool. Even when sitting idly on a shelf, it is no different than any other tool not currently being used. It is a tool that, when used properly, does a specific job, when used improperly can harm innocent people and when not presently needed, something I simply don't think about.
1
-
@Clusterboy those who call to go to war have never been. I strongly suspect that applies to you. Would you fight? Would you pick up a rifle and kill your fellow Americans, your neighbors, your children? First, this nation is already in a state of civil war. At present, it's a cold civil war, employing 5th generational warfare; information and propaganda. Second, if it turned into a hot war, a shooting war, there would be no Mason-Dixon line. The battle lines would as Bill Mahr said, "run through grandma's living room." Your next door neighbor, your pastor, the mother of the kid your children play with would now be your mortal enemy. Is that really what you want?
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
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@cleopatrajones7096 you're right. 1% of a group is a big deal when the group you're taking about is dead children. 630,000 is 1% of the 63 million children killed in the 49 years you've had unfettered access to abortion. Those numbers qualify as a genocide. However, when you rely on that 1% as the touch stone for why you should kill children in the first place, it's rather insignificant and, as I said, disingenuous. And let's be honest. That 1% is always the "go to" example for advocates of abortion. When 99% of children killed by abortion are killed simply for the convenience of the mother, you want abortion as birth control and for no other reason. The 1% is a red herring. Here's something you obviously overlooked. If a woman is impregnated during a rape there are now two victims. For someone who values all life, it seems strange you want to kill one of the victims of rape, rather than the rapist. As for capital punishment, it is just that; punishment. It's not murder. Trying to reason there is no one worthy of capital punishment is not soft hearted. It's soft headed. There are some truly evil people that have walked among us, and the world is better without them. Additionally, the idea of one's impending death should give that person time to regret their crimes and a chance to repent. "Nothing concentrates the mind as when a man knows he's to be hung in a fortnight." Now to your last point; your embryological expertise. Did they not offer biology in the schools you attended? An embryo is literally the first stage of life after the ova is fertilized. An embryo is alive. If it's an human embryo, it is both alive and human. Try as you might to assuage the guilt of supporting such a barbaric practice as abortion, you can't. And trying to dehumanize the child by labeling it with terminology you clearly don't understand betrays you for the confused soul you really are.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@stefaniebrocker8084 we're talking about a mean global temperature increase of one to two degrees Celsius...over the next century. Not as bad as the grifters would have you believe. Certainly more than 12 years. What's more, the first world enforcement of a global abandonment of fossil fuels would have devastating effects on the 2nd and 3rd world nations...first. Then it would have devastating effects on the world as a whole. What happens when 2nd and 3rd world nations like, well most of Africa, a lot of Asia, a significant part of South America, who are just starting to catch their mechanized stride, are forced off of fossil fuels? They go back to burning wood and dung. That's what they do. And how much unnecessary carbon will that put into the atmosphere? The fact is, pound for pound, petroleum and gas are the most efficient fuel we have, other than nuclear. More than wind, more than solar. And we have ways to make them reasonably clean. The climate change hysteria is a grift. Always, ALWAYS look at where the money is going.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@haleybrown2836 allow me to unpack all that for you. First, it was categorically proven that legacy media was less than kind to Donald Trump. 90% of what they have to say about Trump is either embellishment, or outright lie. Fox News was slightly less, but only slightly. Anyone with two, or more brain cells to rub together is hard pressed to place any veracity in anything CNN says if Trump is mentioned. Next, let's take into consideration that over the first couple weeks of President Houseplant's reign, his administration barfed out some 70 executive orders rolling back virtually everything Trump did in office. Finally we haven't fought any recent wars for the Europeans per se, however, we continue to keep a large contingent of troops on their soil, and ready to do so if required. That, coupled with the prodigious rate at which the US government provides then with weapons is quite costly.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@lisacoye7979 what people did "your" people take their land from? Sorry, crybully, but I'm not the typical white apologist you're used to pushing around. Did white Europeans come to the promised land and conquer the savages? Why, yes they did. And it's a good thing they did, too. For if they hadn't "your" people would still be killing, raping, enslaving and eating; yes, eating each other. They were easy to conquer, too. Why? Technological disparity. Indigenous tribes were stuck in the bronze age. It was the late 15th century, and they still hadn't figured out the concept of the wheel. Now sugar, you're way out of your depth here, so I suggest you pipe down till you have something besides leftist word vomit to offer. I know way more about this subject than you.
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
-
@NotAPacifist825 why would you waste time and resources helping someone who doesn't want help and won't help themselves. I actually do quite a bit of work with the homeless, including with a family member who is mentally ill and homeless. She goes in cycles. She's homeless and crazy, she gets arrested, she gets medicated in jail, she gets out, lives normally for a while, (as long as she takes her correct meds) she begins to self-medicate with alcohol and illegal narcotics, stops taking her correct meds, becomes homeless and crazy again, wash, rinse repeat. When she wants help and is willing to do what she needs to do to get it, we always reach out and help. But when she's wearing one shoe, screaming and cars and shitting on the sidewalk, there's nothing that can be done.
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
-
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
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@shiitakestick first, the term "slave wages" is a misnomer. Unless you're a complete dunce, you know slaves didn't earn a wage. They also couldn't leave their job if dissatisfied. Second, the jobs you mention are in what's called the service industry. You're essentially a servant. They've never been high paying jobs, and generally they are reserved for kids as a first job, or someone looking for a part time second job. They do, however, open the door to advancement to a better position; that is, if you have ambitions that extend beyond stealing wealth from other. The owner of a business assumes all the cost for operation. They assume all the risk and liability associated with the endeavor. To grouse about the earning inequity is to show a profound ignorance of reality. Finally, a callback from my first point, you're not a slave. You sell your labor to your employer for a mutually agreed upon price. Don't like it? Ask for more. And if more is not forthcoming, walk away and find someone who will meet a better sale price for your labor. Or (stay with me here, because this is a complex concept) start your own business.
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
-
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
-
@ALL_CAPS__ if you want to synonymize conquered with "systematically destroy" that's fine, but it overlooks much of the nuance. Oh, and can you please tell me how the US government is continuing that destruction? Because I don't see it; unless, of course you're referring to their own government's taking advantage of people that have conditioned themselves to live on handouts. But I see that in every community of every color. What I do see is people who simply happened to be members of the latest conquering group to live on the land when a superior, more technologically advanced society arrived on scene. A group of people who, in spite of thousands of years of human technology, were so ass-backwards they didn't even have the wheel. A group of people that now allow themselves to be duped into believing the lies told them by their own tribal governments having enriched themselves on vice by using the sad-faced put upon minority stereotype of their own people. A group of people who, if they would stop believing the lies told to them by their casino owners...um, I mean tribal elders, they would realize this is a free country and that they have the same rights and protections under the law as any other person. They would realize they can get up and leave the reservation any time they choose. Sorry, not sorry. I have no sympathy for the obtuse and no will to fight for those who will not fight for themselves. So you can take your self-righteous virtue signaling and cram it with walnuts.
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
-
@agny369 @AGNY36 first, my political beliefs are my ideology. My theological beliefs are my faith. Second, the current religious zealotry is coming from the left. Girls walking around with their nether regions covered in red paint analogous of blood, carrying dolls they pretend are their aborted children. Armed stalkers showing up at Supreme Court justices' homes with the intent to kill them. Fat, rainbow-haired women and scrawny testosterone-deficient men shrieking the sacramental abortion prayer; (much like the communion liturgy) "this is my body." Depraved men dressed as ridiculous lampoons of women teaching pre-pubescent boys to take their cloths of for money. Men and women pretending to be the opposite sex, grooming young children in their perverse ideations. All of this is a non-theistic religion, and these low, ungodly people are the actual religious zealots. To deny this is to show your ignorance of religion. Finally, while I believe what's written in scripture to be true as far as it is translated correctly, my entire faith is not predicated on that alone. I have seen and experienced things in my life that have shaken me and left no doubt in my mind that God is real, He exists and He has an eternal plan for all of us. However, I don't expect the world, or anyone to "adjust itself" to my beliefs. It is, in fact, a fallen world. In the end many will die in unbelief. That knowledge, however, will not stop me from sharing my testimony.
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
-
1
-
@federalreservebrown2507 what do you drive? Do you think someone who may not be able to afford what you drive might themselves be bitten by the green-eyed monster? Jealousy is so gauche. Have you ever turned down a job because it didn't pay enough? If you say no, you're either stupid, a liar, or perpetually unemployed; the latter explaining your jealousy and avarice for the wealth of others. There are still some vestiges of capitalism alive and well in America. Not the least of which is the free alienation of one's labor. We get to decide what our time and talents are worth. But I begin to digress. We're talking about health care. It's true the free market does not reign in the world of health care, but that, my friend, is because government is so heavily invested in it. Let's jump into the wayback machine, shall we? Under the Nixon administration, government got their foot in that door, and they've been forcing it farther open for decades, all but eliminating any semblance of a free market. You're opinion is based on the broken leg fallacy. The state breaks your leg, and you let them fix it by doubling down on the same malfeasance that broke it in the first place. Not too bright, homey.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kidmohair8151 I hardly think 8 years of post-compulsory education is a get rich quick scheme. Nevertheless, the state would not pay you what you're worth. And to rub salt in that wound, you would find yourself giving about 60% of what they do pay you right back to them in taxes, just like the European countries y'all like to trot out a examples of universal health care. Is it equitable as a laborer to work three out of every five days for free? Does that sound like a good deal, or does that sound like a lot of erstwhile doctors will likely go into a different line of work. That, of course, would create shortages in the industry which will lead to rationed care, and the state telling you, "sorry about your heart, but we feel your not worth saving." Oops! I've gotten ahead of myself again. We're still talking about the labor inequities of universal health care. As an addendum to that, there's are many well paid professionals in the health care industry. The labor inequities apply to them all.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kidmohair8151 I will be the first to acquiesce that health care is more expensive than it should be. I never said it wasn't. That, however, doesn't negate the fact that the industry is in a shambles because of government interference. Government should not interfere with business and business should not interfere with government. All that being said, my ability to pay for mine and my family's health care is anything but luck. I work hard and I made good financial decisions. None of that was luck. And again, that being said, if for some reason I decide I no longer appreciate the type of care I'm getting, I am free to engage another insurer, or pay out of pocket. Believe it or not, sometimes it's cheaper to pay or of pocket. Nevertheless, that's one of the vestiges of the free market that remains, and it is a freedom that will go away under a universal single payer system.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@joannemoser3443 no no no, they can't have it both ways. A single payer system would be run by the government. And the government would pick their favorite. This selection would, of course be based on which political candidates they supported, which politicians were offered lucrative revolving door positions, etc. This would, in turn, eliminate all competition in the industry, thus eliminating the free market. Government too heavily involved in business (and business in government) creates a system of crony capitalism. Not true, free market capitalism and it gives rise to monopolies. Government and business need to be divorced from each other. This divorce would trend away from monopolistic behavior and allow the invisible hand of the free market to regulate the industry. Allowing the state to "pick a favorite", as it were, means companies like Amazon and Walmart are permitted to rake in billions of dollars while non-elected bureaucrats force mom and pop shops to stay closed, ultimately going out of business, just to use an example. Don't get me wrong. I believe some regulations, and thus regulatory agencies are necessary. I don't want my food and drugs to poison me and I don't want my cars and appliances to blow up, but emphasis on the REGULATORY part of regulatory agencies. That's all they do; regulate according to laws already established. They're not legislators. They don't make laws. They just enforce those already there. And few and far between, those laws should be.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@themarbleking like I said, buttercup, you're way out of your depth on this one. I'ma break out one crayon just for you though. Indigenous tribes fought with each other for centuries before the arrival of Europeans. They were prehistoric savages that had zero technology. They didn't even have the wheel. They conquered each other, "stole" land, enslaved and even ate each other. You don't seem too perturbed about that. Nevertheless, when the American revolution went down, there there were many indigenous tribes, the entire Iroquois confederation, for example that sided with England. Suffice it to say, they got their asses handed to them. Spoils of war. And yes, there are times in which war is justified. You want to keep being a butter-soft beta boy and blubbering over history and the fact what happened is a net positive for everyone, carry on. Just don't cry on my shoulder or expect me to weep with you. L8r, puddin'.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@RyanFeatherston thank you for proving my point that leftoloids are hung up on harming children when the real issue is the economy, stupid. nevertheless, it's not a conspiracy theory. In something right out of Dr. Joseph Mengele's play book, doctors are giving children puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones, which, usually has the effect of chemically castrating boys and sterilizing young girls. The claim is that the effects of these drugs are reversible, but there are no studies indicating such. Never mind teaching young boys to "tuck", which can cause testicular torsion and irreparable injury to the penile cavernosum. Or the elective double mastectomies being performed on girls a young as 14. You sir, are either ignorant, or a liar. There is no third option. But either way, you're way out of your depth here, son.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Who.is.kidding.who. well, I am watching Democracy Now, so you're correct in that I'm watching "heavily propagandized media". And so are you, cupcake.
Let's say you own some land, and people not very friendly to you take up residence on that land. And then people allied with those people start saying things like you shouldn't exist and your land is actually theirs, and it's their life's mission to wipe you from the face of the earth. Then they do things that would cause any reasonable person to believe they mean business. Would your preemptive removal of those people from your land be considered "oppressive"? You're probably not very well versed on the biblical history of the Jewish people, but I'll just say, what we're seeing in relation to the Jewish state, and all the world, in fact, is the fulfillment of prophesy. Buckle up. It's gonna be a bumpy ride.
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
-
@westindianduchess the plural of anecdote is anecdotes. Not data, and you're gonna need to provide some very compelling data for your claims. Because the existing data says you're wrong. Let's start with the incarceration rate of black and brown people, as compared to white people. That's no surprise when black and brown people commit crimes at a much higher rate than do whites, or Asians. Whites actually commit more crimes than Asians, but for the sake of this argument, and because I've heard many black racists refer to Asians as "white adjacent", we'll lump whites and Asians together. Anyway, the prevalence of criminal activity in communities of color would naturally lead to more people of color being incarcerated. Even though we have a pretty good criminal justice system, it's not flawless. It's run by people and people are imperfect. That being said, an outsized number of crimes being committed by people of color means that an outsized number of people of color will be in prison. One could logically and accurately conclude then that the errors committed by the judicial system would fall, in an outsized way, on the people of color.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ivey9916 first, apostrophes: the difference between knowing your shit and knowing you're shit. Second, everyone has those same four choices. 1)Graduate high school. High school is free in this country. 2)Get a job and keep it. Particularly easy, especially now that there's a labor shortage. 3)Don't have children outside of wedlock. I realize many of you aligned with the left are biologically ignorant, and don't know the difference between men and women, but you do know how children are made right? Finally, 4)stay out of the criminal justice system. I mean, do I really have to explain the strategy behind that one? And my sense of entitled righteous knowledge comes from having chosen incorrectly on at least two of those, thereby getting a later start on my financial success than I should have. Guess what. I still made it work. Literally everyone will, at some point in their life, have to make those decisions. And by the way, this comes not from me, but from the Brookings Institute, a left wing organization.
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
-
@MrDXRamirez 🤣🤣🤣 Yes, we pay for NATO. The greater part of the operating cost is shouldered by the US. And yes, we have bases all over Europe. You mentioned direct correlation, but I can't believe you don't see this one. Why do we have bases all over Europe? What is part of the gross effect of the United States so heavily funding NATO? Citizens of European nations enjoy such expansive social safety nets in part because of the high taxes they pay, but also in part because the United States essentially is their military. Europeans don't spend very much money on their individual national defense because they don't have to. America picks up the check for that. That's why they can afford such bountiful social welfare. That you didn't seem to make that connection, surprises me. Do I agree with the policy? No. And if it were up to me, I would pull the US out of NATO, out of the UN and scrap 99.9% of the treaties and political entanglements were involved in. The United States is a geographical nightmare for any invading army, so we're all good here. You need us. We don't need you. On your assessment of the Democrat's tax and spend policies, however, I agree. We're pissing away too much money on pretending to be the world police.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@DanA-nl5uo quality of life while subjective, is objectively better than it was 10,000 years ago. It's objectively better than it was 100 years ago. Even the poorest people in this country have cell phones and computers. Speaking of which, even though you don't live in a tiny apartment in the city, or work in an office, you obviously are connected in some capacity to the internet. What percentage of petroleum do you suppose is in the device you're using to talk to me? It's not even a debatable point. There is no next great thing primed and ready to slam into the breach that would sufficiently supplant fossil fuels. Abandoning fossil fuels at the drop of a hat, as seems the desire of the left would, first of all, kill millions of people. Somehow, I don't think that worries them. Second, it would collapse the economy. Again, I don't think they care. Finally, it would force humanity to revert burning wood and animal dung to stay warm in the winter, something infinitely worse for the environment than natural gas.
1
-
@DanA-nl5uo 🤣🤣🤣 Oh, dude, you slay me! First, the poor in this country are wealthier and enjoy a better quality of life than the poor in the majority of the rest of the world. Second, they enjoy a better quality of life by far than some mid-19th century farm-dwelling sod buster. In fact, most poor in this country live better than the wealthy people living in that time period. How about go ask some poor people if they'd rather live here, at this time, in this country, or 170 years ago, on a farm, with no electricity, no mechanized transportation, no subsidized health care, etc. I think their answers would surprise you.
1
-
1
-
@DanA-nl5uo good for you. I've nothing against renewable energy. It's just that, for one, it's not as green as we're being told. Two, it's going to take much longer than we're being told to create the necessary infrastructure to accommodate it. Three , aside from nuclear, right now nothing else has the anywhere close to the same energy density as fossil fuels. And four, let's not forget the over 6,000 other uses for what's inside a barrel of oil; fertilizer, pharmaceuticals, fabric, preservatives, insulation, paint, and on, and on. Your "I'm set, screw everyone else" attitude is vaguely reminiscent of what most of the left says about capitalists.
1
-
@DanA-nl5uo it's a good thing we don't don't need to do it that way. God bless natural gas and nuclear energy. But we're also not talking about a single house. We're talking about hundreds and thousands of houses, and businesses, and schools, and churches, and playgrounds, and EV charging stations, etc; you know, cities. A few solar cells, a couple windmills and a few deep cycle storage batteries simply won't cut it. And again, your argument seems predicated on liquid fuel being the only thing to come out of a barrel of oil. By and large, of all the things that do come out of a barrel of oil, gasoline and diesel fuel make up the highest percentage. But it's not all. Not by a long shot.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@micbear9334 actually, mine is far more applicable than you, or most people realize. And when you're talking about the railroad, you need to understand how it became a monopoly. It wasn't through corporate greed. It was through mismanagement by the financiers; the federal government. Up to 80% of their operating costs are payed by you, me and everyone else who pays taxes. It's relatively the same problem with health care and education. Over regulation by under smart people, aka: government intrusion. It creates a phenomenon called the "unbroken leg fallacy". Nevertheless, lots of people see the writing on the wall with their chosen profession, understand they're going to have to make a change and then do so, which usually includes some sort of training for the profession into which they're transferring. The majority of workers in this country do not have a college degree, and therefore don't need another degree to make that jump. Tech, or trade school for a few months, or a few weeks of online classes is usually all it takes. Easy enough to do with a family and full time job.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@vickils9571 I'm a bit older than 12. Quite a bit older, but my age is irrelevant. My dad was a high school teacher and my mom was a homemaker. Again, that should be irrelevant. I'm financially stable. In fact, you could say I'm well off. But everything I have I worked hard my entire life to achieve and attain. Neither you, nor anyone else (my wife and children the obvious exception) are entitled to the product of my labor. Whatever you want, it's out there. Go and get it. Just don't expect people to give it to you if you're not willing to work for it. Even my wife, a stay-at-home mom works for what she gets. She takes care of our home, our children, she cleans and does the grocery shopping and household finances. I cook, but only because I really enjoy cooking. She keeps herself looking hot. And for her efforts I give her a nice car, a nice home, beautiful children and unlimited access to my paycheck. What she never did, however, is what you're doing; GIMME GIMME GIMME! I bet if you stow that shit, you might find a good man that'll take care of you. Go in peace.
1
-
1
-
@vickils9571 so you only make $8/hr? That must be what you're worth, and internally you know it. Otherwise you would negotiate for more. And if more was not forthcoming from your current employer, you'd find another employer that would pay you what you're worth. That, my dear, is the beauty of capitalism; the free alienation of one's own labor to the end of accruing private property. Know why I'm not complaining about making $8/hr? First, because I make a damn sight more than that, but second, I work for a billionaire. (you know, those people you self-absorbed navel gazers love to hate?) And when I decided I wanted to work for that person, I set the sale price of my own labor. Then I worked my ass off to prove I was worth every penny and more. If you want it, it's yours. All you gotta do is work for it. If you're chronically poor in this the most free, most prosperous, most tolerant, most diverse nation in the history of the world, you have made poor life choices. But every day you wake up above ground I another day to mitigate the damage caused by those bad decisions. I wish you the best. Peace be unto you.
1
-
@vickils9571 PMC? Private Military Contractor? I've done that. It's pretty lucrative. Sucks being shot at though. Anyway, there's not as much nuance to people working low paying jobs as you would have others believe. They're either uneducated, unmotivated, or in the country illegally. There are, of course, some limited exceptions, but you know what they say. Even a broken clock is right twice a day. I suppose I am part of the capitalist class insofar as I'm the only one that sets the sale price of my labor. I'm not "part of the capitalist class" as you intend it, however. There's no grand cadre of top hat-wearing money bags conspiring to keep the commoners out of their ranks. That's not to say there is not an oligarchy, but that's a topic for another time. True capitalism doesn't flourish by keeping people down. It never has. Furthermore, in the 20th century alone, capitalism has lifted more than half of the world's population from abject poverty. You're a classist laboring under a misbegotten sense of entitlement, positively green with envy over what others have achieved through their own hard work. My bosses aren't my masters. They know as I do that any time I feel like I'm not getting a fair shake I can walk. It is a mutual arrangement wherein I decide what my labor is worth and then I exchange that labor for an agreed upon price.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
MTG first of all, if it's not a child, what is it? It's not a puppy. Second, your cramming a comma, or a conjunction in between so many separate clauses creates a run-on sentence which is next to impossible to decipher. Other than the fact most of you have no idea what you're talking about, murdered grammar is the primary reason I don't like debating in text form. Third, the lengths to which a woman of means will go to kill her child does not in any way negate the fact it is a child she's killing, nor the immorality of killing that child. Finally, after leading your convoluted argument with your opinion on biology, you talk about women in precarious and dangerous situations. Since you're so astute in this area, tell me, what is a woman?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@GlennMarshallnz I fully support the use of condoms, birth control pills, as well as other forms of birth control that prevent conception, including abstinence. Life begins at conception. Neither sperm, nor ova is a child by themselves, but when they combine, an entirely new organism is formed; one with distinct and markedly different DNA than that of the parents. As for my beliefs, I'm a Christian because I believe in the Supreme sacrifice of our lord Jesus the Christ. As far as the term "religious" is concerned, however, look at these pro-abortion devotees, or those who say men can become women and women men. Many of them subscribe to it with religious fervor. Religion isn't restricted solely to a belief in a theistic God. I do believe that sexual activity should be restricted to within the confines of marriage, but it is not only performed for procreation. It is something uniquely shared between husband and wife with procreation as its fundamental purpose, but it also creates an emotional closeness that no other act can. Nevertheless, I don't condemn those who have sex outside of marriage. It's not my place to judge others, and like myself, our heavenly Father created them with free agency, too.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@nosondre I'm old enough to remember the TV commercials starring the old Indian dude blubbering next to a river bank choked with trash, the subtext that we're all going to be dead in a decade. I remember acid rain was gonna kill us all, I remember smog alerts, I remember being threatened with a new ice age. None of it has come to pass. Know what has come to pass? Unleaded gasoline, more fuel-efficient vehicles, more energy-efficient appliances, innovation and improvement. The world, as a whole is getting cleaner. The climate may be changing, but there's little to nothing human beings can do about it except ride it out. Why? Because the climate on this rock has been changing every since it was formed. Global warming, climate change, what have you, is being used as a grift to steal money from the working class to give to the ruling class. Why do you think the ruling class continues to jet set while telling us if we don't like $6/gallon gas go buy an electric car...that we can't afford...and then can't charge. It's all a big f**king grift.
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
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@margaretcaine4219 potato, potahto. Don't split hairs with me. I have a 5 year old. I see right through that shit. So the NHS is facing financial collapse because of government's "sudden" lack of largess? What makes you think that's abnormal? Look at the American Medicare and social security systems. They're constantly fighting to stay solvent. Some kinda deja vu, don't you think? Like I said, it's the unbroken leg fallacy; government comes into a free market sector, screws everything up with their intervention, then maneuvers into a position where that sector now cries out for more government intervention to fix things. Wash, rinse, repeat ad nauseam. Tell me something. If you took your car to a mechanic for something simple, say new tires, and it was returned to you not only without the tires, but with the engine in pieces, would that say incompetence to you? Would you then take it back to that same mechanic? By clamoring for universal health care as a means to fix our broken health care system, that's exactly what you're doing.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bumblebootwiddletoes5185 you didn't answer my question. Who will pay for those who cannot? You know good and well that the one paying decides who provides, right? And you know good and well that it'll be the state paying for those who cannot. Likewise, you also know that the state, if they are paying, will not give the individual the choice of provider. And that, my dear, is the exact opposite of a free market. And any time the state involves itself in the private sector... Well, see my encapsulation of the unbroken leg fallacy in my earlier comments. If you want a true free market, you get government out. It's that simple. Otherwise, you can have cheap health care, good health care, or abundant health care. You may be able to wrangle 2 out of the 3, but with state involvement, you'll never have all 3.
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
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@VermilionCandles speaking of misinformed... You are both misinformed and uninformed. Allow me to unpack some of that for you. First, the stats on who's dying from the 'rona are out there, readily available and were just confirmed, albeit reluctantly, by the head of the CDC in a senate hearing. I'll tell you the same thing I tell my daughter. "I'm not going to do your homework for you." Next, to the tax issue. There are two reasons other nations have universal health care; because they spend a lot of money to have it. They have the money to spend because first, our military budget pays for their protection. Do you think the Canadian army could fight off an hostile invasion without our help? How about Poland, Germany, Norway, Sweden, France, England? The treaties we have in place with them allow them to spend their tax revenue on social programs. And their tax revenue is high. In excess of 60% for some of those countries. Do you feel like working 3 days out of every 5 for free? Because that's what they do. Furthermore, and this is tangential, many countries with universal and single payer health care programs are shifting away from it, at least for those who can afford it, and allowing people to go outside the state-run system. Now why would they do that if everything is otherwise paid for them by the state? Rationing of care, for one. Long waits, for another. In fact in the case of Chaoulli v. Quebec, the Canadian Supreme Court ruled the wait times imposed by the Canadian health care system to be a violation of human rights. Now that I've taken you to school and disrupted your sense of moral superiority with facts, you can call bullshit, or you can exercise due diligence and confirm what I've said. Either way, this thread has become tedious, and has gone on entirely to long with people who couldn't find their asshole with both hands and a flashlight. I'm out.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tonyolo4591 it's not a silly question. It's completely valid, and is, in fact, the crux of the issue. You lot are always gassing on about evil corporations, and wage theft, and slave wages, and capitalism bad, and liveable wages, and on and on. If the people that own and run the corporations that employ everyone are so evil how will you compel them to do your "benevolent" bidding? Who will enforce your will? You can't answer, can you. Or rather, you won't answer. I didn't think so. Have a good weekend, cupcake.
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
-
@saigejones3363 if you want universal heath care, best move to one of the countries that has it. And I'm sure you don't realize it, but the reason those countries have it is because we provide them with their military defense. Take Canada, for example. They have universal health care, but do you think they could fight a war? And although their public health care system it's so abysmal their Supreme Court in the case of Chaouli v. Quebec ruled it a violation of human rights, they spend so much on it that they rely on our military for defense. The same holds true for virtually every other country in the western world. They tax the crap out of the citizenry to pay for social safety nets, and we pick up the tab for their national defense. If we had Medicare for all, the individual tax burden would increase beyond the price point of most private health insurance policies, and many other far more important things critical to the sovereignty of this nation would suffer. Even those who currently pay a negative tax rate would be hit by a massive tax bill. If you're really interested in fixing our broken heath care system, there's only one way to do it; get government out of it. What you're advocating is colloquially called the unbroken leg fallacy, and big, intrusive government is famous for it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@SolntsaSvet thank you for bolstering my point. "Murica", as you put it, needs to stay out of it. On the other hand, if we meddle and it escalates to a nuclear conflict, I'm good with that too. And as for the China problem, their impending annexation of Taiwan does, in fact, pose a direct threat to American national security. Apropos of that, we should be sending troops and weapons to Taiwan, the Philippines, Japan and anywhere we can stage them in the south China sea region. And again, if that escalates into a nuclear conflict, I'm good with it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ripvanwando political science 240 years ago was a bit different than the idiocy passing for it today. And I never said anything about censoring my children. If they want to go away for 4, 6, 8 years, borrow money from the government at loan shark rates to do so, just so they can come home tatted, pierced, pink-haired, parent-hating asshats, fuck em. They can pay for that shit. It's not coming out of my pocket. Realistically, however, I don't have to worry about that. I homeschooled my three oldest, now adult children, two of whom have lucrative careers with nothing more than trade school. The third passed away last year. And I'm a year into homeschooling my 5 year old. And if she wants to do something that requires a college degree, again, she can pay for it. You don't get life experience from college. You get life experience from life. You want to change college from an exorbitantly expensive safe space for pussies to hold hands and experiment with self-medication into a place of learning and personal growth? Get government out of it. I'm all for privatizing the education system; both compulsory and continued.
1
-
@will.roman-ros obviously I'm speaking about college. Not compulsory education. If government requires it, such as they do with K-12, they can bloody well pay for it. Although my children were all homeschooled and received a far better education than what a government school could have provided. I am, however, a big fan of school vouchers. Four some reason, democrats complain about the decrepit conditions of public schools, but they always shit on school vouchers. Maybe they just don't care. Nevertheless, college is not required, and generally, is a waste of time and money, and therefore, should come out of pocket.
As for health care, I'm sorry, but you're just wrong. First and foremost, no one has an innate right to the labor of another, so let's get that right out in front of the "health care is a human right" bullshit. Second, universal health care means an exorbitant tax hike across the board, but it would be particularly deleterious to those that can least afford it; the middle class and working poor. Third, taxes never cover it all, so then the government starts rationing services and limiting staff and salaries. The highly trained professionals abandon the profession, and seeing the state of the industry, no one new is willing to train as a medical professional. Number four, the homogeneity of many European countries makes universal health care a tad more feasible, though not by much. The sheer massive ethnic diversity we have here in the US would not allow anything close to competent, or comprehensive health care for everyone. These are just a few of the reasons it won't work. There are many more.
The unbroken leg fallacy applies to both institutions, and it stagers my mind that so many apparently intelligent people can't see it. In a nutshell, the unbroken leg fallacy is this: government intrudes on business effectively "breaking the legs" of private sector entities. Government then blames market forces for the "broken legs". Government then purposes to fix said legs with the same intrusions that broke them in the first place. Lather, rinse, repeat, lather, rinse, repeat. Ad nauseam.
1
-
@will.roman-ros since Americans are having children below the replacement rate, your math doesn't work. Look, dude, I never said they couldn't do it. But if and when they do, it'll come with crippling tax on the middle class and working poor, rationing of services, a critical shortage of medical professionals and care far below what we have even now; essentially a violation of human rights. I'll take Chaoulli v. Quebec for $500, Alex. Stop trying to convince me of something you know nothing about. You're like the 3rd, or 4th person on this thread that has vomited the same trite talking points onto their keyboard. Is our system broken? Fuck yeah it's broken. I defy you to find one comment of mine in which I opined differently. But unlike you, I know how fix it. All you state allegiants seem to be able to do is just continue to regurgitate the same bullshit, all of it based on your misunderstanding of the unbroken leg fallacy.
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
-
@DrBear-rk4qb if you read Sun Tzu's "The Art of War" you'll know why I follow this channel. So I may know my enemy. It's why most conservatives know more than their leftist counterparts; because we get information from both sides of the political spectrum. Even from outlets like this, whose ideology is anathema to righteousness. Most people that watch this channel are obsequious followers of leftist dogma, completely invulnerable to anything different. They are, for the most part, low-information belligerents stuck in a war they don't understand. I do understand it because I have fought on both sides of the battle lines. My comments are for the most part not angry. They can be harsh and terse from time to time, but they come from a place of love; love for my fellow man. And a desire to rescue them from their own ignorance. As I'm sure you're aware, there are some here who are permanent toddlers. They yell and scream and pitch a fit anytime someone says something that runs cross-grain to their indoctrination. What I say isn't for them. It's for those who are like I was; feeling like something is missing from the narrative. I discovered the fundamental difference between conservative and progressive is, conservatives see progressives as people with bad ideas. Progressives see conservatives as bad people with ideas. It's not easy to break through that kind of barrier, but I'm an example of what is possible. I thank the lord every day that He blessed me with the discernment to abandon leftist folly and to see what is real. Maybe there are others here like me, searching for the truth. I'm here for them. And there is nothing more worthy of my time on the internet than that. Thank you for asking, and may God bless you with the clarity of vision to see the many pitfalls along this road.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jimcrelm9478 you misunderstand. I am all for abolishing police, however, not for the usual litany of reasons. First and foremost, because they have become a tool of oppression. Not just of the poor, or people of color, but of the populace in general. Upwards of 80% of people living in impoverished communities, and communities of color want MORE police. Unfortunately, it's because many of them are still laboring under the idea that the cop is good ole "officer Friendly", and he's here to help. Because of Obama's 1033 program, police became nothing more than militarized goons, an enforcement arm of the establishment, no longer concerned with their primary job of protecting the rights of those who cannot do it themselves. Now, through the implementation of red flag laws, gun confiscation incentives, a license to steal through asset forfeiture laws and with the backing of a corrupt court system, police openly violate constitutionally guaranteed rights. I dearly love the irony of the dude with the "Molon Labe" sticker on his truck, right next to his "Back the Blue" sticker. That poor, ignorant soul doesn't realize, it's the "blue" that will be the ones coming to take his guns. This brings me to my second reason for agreeing that police should be abolished. I am a constitutional conservative and as it pertains to the Bill of Rights therein, a textualist. I have the God-given right to protect myself and my family; be it from the criminal on the street, the criminal in government, or a foreign invading power. I have the God-given right to possess whatever tools I feel are necessary to that end. The Supreme Court has ruled on multiple occasions that police are under no obligation to protect the citizenry. Where then does that leave us? Why should we bear such an inordinate tax burden to pay for over armed goons who won't protect us. I have the means to protect myself, as should everyone. So yes, abolish the police.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@NoMasters. it is most certainly not ad hominem to point out to someone that they don't know what they're taking about. And in my opinion, humble though it may be, you don't know what you're talking about. You speak of free market capitalism and the opportunity it alone affords everyone to own property as if you're the jealous kid brother at his older sibling's birthday party, whining because they are getting gifts and you're not. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of the concept.
Now to answer your question. First, I wasn't making a statement about morality. I was making a statement about free agency. Second, it is not immoral to accrue more wealth than I can ever use. It is, however, immoral for one to put a limit on what I can accrue. That unjustly impedes my free agency, and any time a person is unjustly deprived of their free agency, that is a moral affront. Finally, do you think wealth is finite? Do you think that because you "have", someone else must by default "have not"? Do you think there is a default limit set on every person as to how much wealth they can earn? That's some wack-a-doo shit right there. There isn't any limit, you know. It's all based on you and what you're willing to work for. And there is literally no one in heaven, or earth deprived of what could have been theirs because I have more than they do. In spite of the fact there are elected officials steering this country straight for a cliff, with their foot on the gas a-la "Thelma & Louise", and a mainstream media machine that tries their hardest to cover for them, this is still the most free, most prosperous, most tolerant, most diverse nation in the history of the world. And if you're chronically poor, you have made poor life choices. It's time to make better ones.
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
-
1
-
1
-
@olivierkigotho7639 first of all, this is YouTube. Don't try to write a doctoral dissertation. No one's gonna read all that. Especially when it's so far off base, as determined by your first paragraph. Since you seem to have no understanding of the distinction between negative rights; rights that are innate to your existence, thus rely on no one to provide, and positive rights; rights that rely on the provision of another human being, or group of human beings, I'll just leave it at this. The rights to life, liberty and happiness are given by God and codified by the Bill of Rights. A government may tell you they are taking, or altering those rights, but, in fact, you must abdicate them for that to happen. Take the 2nd Amendment, for example. That, quite literally, is the right to life. You have the right to bear arms in the defense of your life. Has the state attempted to abridge that right? Of course. But you and I both know, most people do not comply when government tries to curtail those kinds of rights. Government cannot take any negative or God-given right, unless you forfeit it. And you do not have the right, or authority to violate the rights of others by compelling them to provide you with something. Even if you call it a right. Peace. I'm out.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@vallee7966 no. 70% of Americans agree that abortion should be legal, but with restrictions; restrictions on gestational duration, restricted to cases of rape and incest, restricted to fetal, or parental medical issues. You either ignorantly, or maliciously misconstrue that number, as do most anti-life proponents, claiming the majority agrees with your unscientific, anti-life rhetoric in an effort to convince those who don't know any better that the numbers are on your side. You are mistaken. They are not. A very small percentage, of which you are likely a part, want, and I'm quoting from both leftist politicians, and protest signs carried aloft by fat, pink-haired feminists, "abortion on demand. No limits, no apologies."
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
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@lloydmoore982 it's not housing for big profit until government gets involved and picks a favorite. Government screws up every facet of the free market into which they insert themselves; health care, education, energy, banking, housing. Then what happens? Everybody cries, "daddy government, come save us." This is called the unbroken leg fallacy. It's the assumption that the market does not function without government intervention. The fallacy is this reasoning ignores the ways that said intervention metaphorically breaks the legs of the private sector they're supposedly helping. And the whole thing creates a feedback loop of "leg breaking". Government gets involved, legs get broken, people cry for more government regulation, government gets more involved, more legs get broken, people cry for more government... That's the biggest socioeconomic problem today.
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
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kimberlychodur3508 ding ding ding! Winner winner, chicken dinner! YOU explained it to YOUR son. How hard is it for a teacher when asked this type of question to say, "that's really not something I should be teaching you. You should ask your parents." And if the child comes back and says something like, "I asked them and they wouldn't tell me", the teachers response should be, "I guess they don't feel it's an appropriate talk to have with a child your age, and since I'm only your teacher, I can't go against them on this." I know many teachers these days like to pretend their students are community property, and they must have a hand in raising them, but no. If you're a teacher of those age groups, you teach the child to read, to speak properly, to write and to compute mathematics. That's what you get paid for. And this doesn't indemnify the parents of upholding their responsibility to their children either. Don't be lazy. Don't relinquish to the state your responsibility for raising your child.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@samgamgee7384 first, I think we're all looking for truth. However, if there's nothing to compare it to, if everyone is only permitted to parrot the same thing in the public square, how will we know what truth is? As far as Musk not doing anything to benefit humanity... His company makes the most prolific electric car on the planet. He is pioneering space travel. The man is an innovative legend, and I think we can all agree that innovation leads to the betterment of society. Case in point, the atomic bomb. It was created for war, an horrible weapon of mass district, but through its innovation came nuclear power plants, a relatively carbon free, supremely efficient way to generate electricity. I think if one contributes as much as Musk has to the betterment of society, he's earned the right to be rich and famous.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@n.r.2258 First, the United States hegemony is anything but local, and turns out, it's not a bad thing. Second, that's either a typo, or you used "approbation" incorrectly. Finally, Russian cyber attacks haven't netted the desired results, and have, for the most part been shrugged off by the US. Militarily speaking, what else besides nuclear weapons, with which they've already repeatedly threatened us, do they have to strike us with, commensurate with the intimation of the initial comment? They're not a financial threat to us. Their GDP is less than Florida.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mackone8035 yes, but who gets the compensation? If you know anything about the indigenous tribes that were on this land when European settlers came, you know they weren't the first ones to own the land. Invariable there was another tribe they took it from, and a tribe before that, and a tribe before that. Indigenous tribes were conquering each other's land, raping, killing, enslaving and eating; yes, I said eating each other for thousands of years before the Europeans showed up. So why should I feel compelled to compensate descendants of people that first, I did nothing to. And second, compensate a group of people that for whatever reason were still stuck in the iron age in the middle of the 19th century. I mean, they didn't even have the fucking wheel!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kaidi223 I read your response and at first I was going to factually debunk your claims, (without any Fox news references either) but as I read more of your response I realized two things. First, everything you think you know is rooted in emotion. Not truth. And second, your response was little more than a pretext to insult me. That tells me all I need to know about you. You are incapable of any form of substantive discourse and, when confronted by anything that challenges your worldview, you cannot defend your position. Your default is toddler-esque and as such, your instinct is not to think, but to engage in ad hominem attack. I will, however, thank you for showing your true self early on, this saving me any additional time in engagement. Peace be unto you.
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
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@whygohome172 if not the people who have failed to succeed in this the most free, most prosperous, most tolerant, most diverse nation in the history of the world, whom should I blame? If you're a man and you are able to work, but you will not, I've no sympathy for you. If you are retired after working all your life and you're living on SSI, and Medicare, I've no sympathy for you. If you're a woman that makes herself unappealing to men by being fat, shrill, contentious, or any number of things that good men cannot abide, and therefore cannot find a man to physically and financially care for your, I've no sympathy for you.
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
-
@fabiopilnik827 I hardly think ceasing to eat meat would factor much into it. The way meat is produced could stand a tweak, or two, but we're omnivores. Our physiology could not stand a meatless existence. And plant-based proteins are an inadequate long-term substitute. And speaking of plant-based anything, let's imagine just the US transitioning to a completely plant-based diet. Guess who would be in charge of growing those plants. That's right. Giant agribusiness concerns like Bayer-Monsanto, Con-Agra, BASF, etc. They haven't exactly been good stewards of the planet. When God created man he was created with a few instructions. One of them was to exercise righteous dominion over the earth. Granted, we've come up short in that respect more than a time, or two, but I don't believe we're radically altering weather patterns, creating fire storms, and so forth. The earth is doing what it's always done; change. And evidence of the effect man has had in that change is dubious in my opinion, but debatable at the very least.
1
-
@OriginalMeanGirl oh, but it is real. That we are in the end times, I mean. I may seem glib about it, but the reality is, I actually have a profound sense of peace about it all. I've seen and experienced enough in my life to convince me that God is real and He has a plan for us. And He's not the wrathful, vengeful, terrible God a lot of religions like to frighten their congregation with. He is a loving father in heaven that wants every one of His children, every one of us, to return to Him. So much so that He not only allowed His only begotten done in the flesh to suffer and die us, but it was always part of the plan. Before this world was even created it was all part of the plan. So as rough as I know things are likely to get, the sorrow allows me to appreciate the joy. And when my life is over I'll look back at it and realize in the greater context of eternity, my trials were but a flicker of time. I wish you peace in your life.
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
-
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
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Dangreenwatson if we're talking specifically about Alphabet, yes they're an organ of the rising totalitarian state. But they're still a business, and therefore profit driven. Why do you think they're offering to pay for abortions for their employees? That's a no-brainer, dude. It's cheaper to pay your employee to kill their child and have them back to work Monday morning than it is to pay maternity leave, child care, and so forth. However, if we're talking about the majority of corporations, DBAs, LLCs and so forth, while they are also profit driven, just as you are, the average company still exists on free market capitalist principles. They are therefore, a net gain for the overall economy, and those that choose to participate in it.
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
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@thowl7065 with the food shortages coming, extra trips to the store will be pointless. But do you think gasoline is the only thing that comes out of a barrel of oil. One barrel of oil is 42 gallons. From that is made either 19 gallons of gas, or 12 gallons of diesel fuel, or 4 gallons of jet fuel, or almost literally everything else that makes your life livable. From medications, to pesticides, to fertilizers, to foods packaging, to your clothing, to the plastics on your electric car, to the phone, or computer your reading this on.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@wendyparker7586 thank you for your question, Wendy. A mother can carry the child to term, then give the child up for adoption. If she's smart, she can get that ball rolling as soon as she realizes she's pregnant. There is a national backlog for couples that cannot conceive looking to adopt infants. So much so that most are more than happy to pick up the check for all prenatal, natal and post natal care. If the mother is not quite as smart, she can carry the child to term and then drop it off, no questions asked, at any of literally hundreds of thousands of safe surrender sites nation wide. In fact, the hospital where she delivers will be one. If the mother is dumber than that, she can carry the child to term and then sue whatever derelict she thinks might be the father for child support. That's easier to do if she knows his name and puts it on the birth certificate. If the mother is a complete dullard she can have the baby, receive a stipend from the state and spend the rest of her life impoverished, grousing about how her life isn't fair, and if she had only been able to kill her child her life would be immeasurably better. All that being said, if women and men practiced abstinence except within the confines of marriage, broken condoms and failed birth control wouldn't be much of an issue. One final thing: your attempted dehumanization of a child by calling it a "fetus" is both gross, and shows you don't know what the word actually means. If you have any more questions about, or arguments in favor of killing children, I'll be happy to answer, or refute them.
1
-
1
-
@xzonia1 your drivel is a prefect illustration first, that the empty can rattles the most. And second, why conservatism always wins in the end. Your fundamental misunderstanding of Judeo-Christianity and theistic religion in general, and your self-serving need to pervert doctrine is an hallmark of authoritarians and tyrants since man first walked on this earth. But let's, for the sake of argument, leave God out of this and look at it logically. I apologize if you're a woman. I know y'all tend towards logical deficiency, but I'll try and keep it simple. You members of the leftist cult don't have children. Which is why y'all try so hard to get at ours through the institutions; mainstream media, government schools, etc. The sheer mathematical reality is, we have the numbers, and we will continue to increase in number. One reason, because the left has completely lost their frigging minds, and even some of the most die hard liberals are jumping ship to escape the insanity. Another reason, conservatives are having children while you lot are killing and castrating yours. Peace. Out.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@taylorbaysinger look I get it. I know it's really hard for women to admit they're wrong, so don't read the bills, or the laws. Continue to be a strong, proud single woman, staunchly confident in your ignorance. And BTW, I'm not afraid of you, although there is something deeply disturbing about a mother that willingly kills their child, and/or advocates for others who do. And I'm not a misogynist either. I just recognize the fundamental differences between men and women. And in doing so, I've discovered I have a very low tolerance for hysteria. Especially hysteria fueled by ignorance. Sorry to cut this short as it's probably the most meaningful conversation you've had with a real man in a long time, but like I said, I've zero time for ignorant hysteria. Peace be unto you. I'm out.
1
-
@taylorbaysinger you're repeating more lies. A sin of commission, or a sin of omission? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say the latter. Nevertheless, since you and the truth seem to be less than nodding acquaintances, here it is. The truth is almost no abortions performed are medically necessary. Because medical science has progressed to the point where the mother's life can be saved, along with the pregnancy, or the baby can be delivered prematurely and still survive, medically necessary abortions are a statistical anomaly so infrequent as to be nominally zero. The majority of abortions performed and written off as "medically necessary" are in fact abortions of convenience, or due to an expected birth defect of the child, such as down syndrome. These comprise approximately 3% of all abortions. Now to your other repeated lie; rape and incest. Less than 1% of abortions performed are done so because of rape, or incest. Ignoring, of course, the incoherence of imposing a death sentence on one of the victims of this horrible crime with no mention of punishing the perpetrator, so called medically necessary abortions and those performed to kill a child conceived in rape or incest total roughly 3.5%. That means that 96.5% of abortions are preformed out of convenience. And yes, that includes financial convenience. It stuns me to know how many elitist mothers, yourself included, are ok with killing their child simply because they're poor. So I guess "killing poor people: good" is our takeaway. Do you overlook the rampant attacks on the homeless as deserved because of their economic class? Or how about the monster setting homeless people on fire in Los Angeles? An angel of mercy, right? How noble of you. I know! Maybe you could just tell poor women to commit suicide so they don't get pregnant in the first place. I can't even begin to guess what's wrong in your head. By the way, all the foregoing statistics are avaliable not from Fox News, or some other right wing source, but from the Gutmacher Institute, a very pro abortion organization. In fact, the only organization besides the CDC that tracks and compiles accurate abortion data. You may now return to your snobby, self-indulgent, elitist life, safe from all truth and reality...and poor people.
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
-
@davidpeppers551 dude, you gotta quit drinking the bong water. Of course Trump was good for ratings. He was so good network's like CNN and MSNBC built their brand on him. So much so that when he was gone they crashed and burned because they couldn't revert from activism back to journalism. Trump is obviously still good for ratings in some limited context because there are so many idiots out there who still allow him to live in their brain. Trump wasn't left, however, the media is. Look at their coverage of him. Negative, all of it. Everything on mainstream media was a steady parade of orange man bad. From music, to TV, to movies, to news, to social media. All of it. That you fail to recognize that shows that you still have some lingering effects of TDS yourself. The media's leftist activism shines through on how they cover Ron DeSantis, or any prominent republican. It shines through on how they fellate Joe Biden, covering for his every hiccup. Where do you think "let's go, Brandon" came from? 🤣
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@davidpeppers551 you're way off. By woke I mean "no cash bail" policies and "criminal justice reform" policies that release and fail to punish violent criminals. Laws and policies that hinder, or negate our natural right to self-defense in our ability to keep and bear arms. Open border policies that allow violent Mexican and South American cartels to smuggle in unvetted people, many with criminal backgrounds in their home countries. Open border policies that allow those same cartels to traffic women and children. Policies that allow for the unfettered importation of dangerous and deadly narcotics to the extent that it has actually lowered the American average life expectancy. By woke I mean advocating for the unrestricted killing of pre-born children, and in some cases those already born. No bullshit, California just passed a referendum enshrining abortion up to the moment of birth in the state constitution that includes provisions for killing your child up to a month AFTER it is born. Look it up if you don't believe me. By woke I mean policies that encourage the drugging, castration, sterilization and mutilation of children, in absence and contravention of any actual science. Policies that flood government schools with pornography and discourage if not outright prohibit parental involvement in the inculcation of the curricula. The blocking of laws that would otherwise prohibit the sexualization and grooming of children. Policies that actively discourage the exercising of personal moral agency as expressed in the freedom to worship; unless your god is the state. Theft of taxpayer dollars for pet projects that create a privileged class of citizen and only benefit that tiny demographic; like cash payments to LGBTQ only, cash aid for which only black farmers are eligible and college loan debt transfer, to name just a few. Aside from the foregoing, there are no laws in this country that apply to one sex and not another, one race and not another. Certainly no constitutional laws. All the demographics you name are not an oppressed class. They are a privileged class with special "rights" and "protections" not available to the rest of society. This is evidenced by throngs of people going out of their way to identify as a member of these imaginarily oppressed groups. To deny these things are happening and to deny they are originating only from the left side of the aisle is to display either a profound stupidity, or a profound dishonesty. You decide which. Furthermore, if you deny the existence and perpetuation of the aforementioned policies and their people and place of origin, you and I cannot have a rational conversation, as you would prove beyond doubt that you live in a completely different universe. You, in a universe in which objective truth is not a value, or even a part.
1
-
@davidpeppers551 that's the only thing you're gonna try and refute, huh? Strange choice, but still irrefutable. And you kind of digressed into strawman territory at the end there. Remember the so called "don't say gay bill" in Florida? Yeah, there was nothing in that bill that stipulated any specific group. In fact, the word "gay" appeared nowhere in the bill. The bill, now law, makes it illegal for any teacher, regardless of sexual orientation to discuss things of a sexual nature with children. I didn't hear any heterosexual teachers complaining about the bill. It was all teachers that belonged to the Alphabet mafia complaining that now they couldn't come out to their students, or talk to them about being trans and other aberrant, disgusting things. That's because hetero teachers don't generally talk about things like that with their students. Conversely, the Alphabet mafia does. So it is the LGBTQ teachers that are grooming kids.
Dude, here we are with Trump nearly two years gone from the oval office, and he still rents space in your head for free. Trump said a lot of things that the media reported out of context, so asking if I remember any particular one is pointless. Here are two things the media didn't report out of context. In fact, they didn't report them at all. With the help of the FBI, they buried them. Hunter Biden's laptop, which contained proof Joe paid for Hunter's hookers and crack while hunter was playing bagman for the Biden family. Then there was Ashley Biden's diary, which alleged she was molested by a family member and took "inappropriate showers" with Joe...her father. You gonna side with mainstream media and the FBI and call that "Russian disinformation"?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mychloebaby1 see, that's the problem with racists like you; the requirement that you create an oppressor class to validate your claim of victim status. The irony is, it's impossible for you to maintain your claim to victimhood without outing yourself as a racist, which you just did. In your stupid, nonsensical comment, you shift the blame for slavery to "different people". The people that captured and sold slaves "are not OUR people" (literally your words) . But then you assign blame to my entire race as the evil beneficiaries of slavery. Let me tell you something, you schmuck. We are ALL beneficiaries of our forefathers' legacy, but that legacy isn't slavery, no matter how much you lazy crybaby wannabe victims say it is. Their legacy is this nation; literally the most racially diverse nation on the planet, in world history. A nation to which millions of people of all ethnic backgrounds have fled in search of liberty and a better life. If you want to continue to wallow in your imaginary victimhood hoping that some day you might be able to cash in on it, great. Being hopefully lazy is your right. But it's my right to to call you out for being a racist asshole and tell you to go pound sand.
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
-
@berniv7375 I'm not sure how you arrived at the conclusion that veganism is the cure for capitalism. There are two ways to "encourage" lifestyle change. Either through capitalism, or through government, which owns the monopoly on violence, pointing guns at people. Capitalism has, in the 20th century alone, lifted more than half the earth's population from the depths of abject poverty. And if you'll go back and read my previous comments, I was pretty clear that what we have in America today is not capitalism. It is essentially, corporate fascism; an unholy symbiosis of corporate oligarchs and government elite becoming incredible wealthy by removing choices from the people. That is NOT capitalism. Finally, to answer your question, no I am not vegan. Nor do I intend to be. I eat a well balanced diet of plants and animals. When God created this earth and all things in it, he then bequeathed it to us; man, his greatest creation. He commanded us to subdue it and to exercise righteous dominion over it. He gave us the beasts of the field, fowl of the air and plants and trees to consume wisely, as needed. I feel I do that, so absent the point of a gun, I'll not be going down the vegan road.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Moonlight God is not imaginary. God is real. He lives, as does His only begotten son in the flesh, Jesus the Christ, redeemer of the world. God has granted me time enough on this earth to know, not just believe, but to KNOW He is real. I've experienced a lot in my life; war, tragedy, death, peace, love, comfort. I have seen proof of God's existence and love in all of it. "God is imaginary" is something people tell themselves to assuage the guilt of sin.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@AudioPervert1 first, anyone who uses more than two emojis, other than laughing faces, in a row has no cogent argument. Second, "real people with facts"? Pound sand, dingus! Those same "real people with facts" also try to tell me that a human fetus is neither alive, nor human. Or that sex is malleable, and a man can by self proclamation become a woman and a woman, a man. You want facts? Here are the facts. I guarantee I have read more about this from rational people, with clearly constructed theories, on both sides of the argument than you have. Probably more than anyone else commenting on this topic. And like a rational human being, which most subscribers to Democracy Now are not, I have processed all that information and made a rational decision. Good day to you.
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