Poll of the Day > Why are people freaking out over Alabama?

Topic List	Page List: 1 ... 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
_AdjI_ 05/22/19 4:12:17 PM #253:	Mead posted... If you dont make all the right choices then fuck you, you deserve to be impoverished and die Conservatives, apparently The same conservatives: "I'm pro-life." <cite>_AdjI_ posted [p:922235528] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>Mead posted...</cite> <quote>If you dont make all the right choices then fuck you, you deserve to be impoverished and die Conservatives, apparently</quote> The same conservatives: "I'm pro-life."</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kyuubi4269 05/22/19 4:12:37 PM #254:	_AdjI_ posted... Making money, however, is the means by which those basic needs can be realized. Transitive property, yo. You can have a clothes hanger abortion, that doesn't mean you would consent to one. You're being "forced". _AdjI_ posted... Pregnancy (and subsequently, parenting) really isn't passive enough to look at it through that lens. It requires a substantial amount of additional effort and energy intake (to say nothing of personal risk), such that it's much more reasonable to look at it in terms of being forced to continue performing an action that was started at conception. That only works if you consider burning more energy to maintain the fetus as active. Your body however passively takes the energy and you only have to actively eat, and you have a right to eat to survive, regardless of your required intake. _AdjI_ posted... Alternatively, you can look at it in terms of forbidding them from seeking treatment for a medical problem, which similarly violates bodily autonomy. Either works. I don't think anywhere considers a pregnancy a medical problem, otherwise you could have a 9 month abortion as it's still parasitic to you. LinkPizza posted... Except they arent even allowed to use their own money to take care of their medical needs. Theyre denied the option all together, no matter whos paying for it... You're not allowed to harm others with your autonomy, so fetuses get protected as an "other". I love this argument btw as I'm pro-choice, I just don't like the argument of "My arbitrary boundary is morally superior to yours!". --- Doctor Foxx posted... The demonizing of soy has a lot to do with xenophobic ideas. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted [p:922235538] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>_AdjI_ posted...</cite> <quote>Making money, however, is the means by which those basic needs can be realized. Transitive property, yo.</quote> You can have a clothes hanger abortion, that doesn't mean you would consent to one. You're being "forced". <cite>_AdjI_ posted...</cite> <quote>Pregnancy (and subsequently, parenting) really isn't passive enough to look at it through that lens. It requires a substantial amount of additional effort and energy intake (to say nothing of personal risk), such that it's much more reasonable to look at it in terms of being forced to continue performing an action that was started at conception.</quote> That only works if you consider burning more energy to maintain the fetus as active. Your body however passively takes the energy and you only have to actively eat, and you have a right to eat to survive, regardless of your required intake. <cite>_AdjI_ posted...</cite> <quote>Alternatively, you can look at it in terms of forbidding them from seeking treatment for a medical problem, which similarly violates bodily autonomy. Either works.</quote> I don't think anywhere considers a pregnancy a medical problem, otherwise you could have a 9 month abortion as it's still parasitic to you. <cite>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote>Except they arent even allowed to use their own money to take care of their medical needs. Theyre denied the option all together, no matter whos paying for it...</quote> You're not allowed to harm others with your autonomy, so fetuses get protected as an "other". I love this argument btw as I'm pro-choice, I just don't like the argument of "My arbitrary boundary is morally superior to yours!".</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#255	Post #255 was unavailable or deleted.
OhhhJa 05/22/19 4:13:24 PM #256:	Mead posted... If you dont make all the right choices then fuck you, you deserve to be impoverished and die Conservatives, apparently Stanley eyeroll gif I'm pretty sure not getting an abortion doesn't make you die barring some kinda medical issue <cite>OhhhJa posted [p:922235577] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>Mead posted...</cite> <quote>If you dont make all the right choices then fuck you, you deserve to be impoverished and die Conservatives, apparently</quote> Stanley eyeroll gif I'm pretty sure not getting an abortion doesn't make you die barring some kinda medical issue</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LinkPizza 05/22/19 4:19:13 PM #257:	OhhhJa posted... Mead posted... If you dont make all the right choices then fuck you, you deserve to be impoverished and die Conservatives, apparently Stanley eyeroll gif I'm pretty sure not getting an abortion doesn't make you die barring some kinda medical issue I mean, unless you really fall into poverty (or worse poverty) and die from not being able to take care of anything because this new child force upon you destroyed you financially... Maybe... --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around. <cite>LinkPizza posted [p:922235794] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>OhhhJa posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Mead posted...</cite> <quote>If you dont make all the right choices then fuck you, you deserve to be impoverished and die Conservatives, apparently</quote> Stanley eyeroll gif I'm pretty sure not getting an abortion doesn't make you die barring some kinda medical issue</quote> I mean, unless you really fall into poverty (or worse poverty) and die from not being able to take care of anything because this new child force upon you destroyed you financially... Maybe...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mead 05/22/19 4:37:32 PM #258:	Not to mention the mortality rate for women giving birth in the US is astoundingly high Especially if youre poor --- If they drag you through the mud, it doesnt change whats in your blood <cite>Mead posted [p:922236557] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote>Not to mention the mortality rate for women giving birth in the US is astoundingly high Especially if youre poor</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OhhhJa 05/22/19 4:40:02 PM #259:	LinkPizza posted... OhhhJa posted... Mead posted... If you dont make all the right choices then fuck you, you deserve to be impoverished and die Conservatives, apparently Stanley eyeroll gif I'm pretty sure not getting an abortion doesn't make you die barring some kinda medical issue I mean, unless you really fall into poverty (or worse poverty) and die from not being able to take care of anything because this new child force upon you destroyed you financially... Maybe... Lol yeah that would definitely be a rare case. One kid shouldn't break someone financially. It's just a bit more budgeting. Plus there is definitely government funding availability for that sort of thing <cite>OhhhJa posted [p:922236663] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote><cite>OhhhJa posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Mead posted...</cite> <quote>If you dont make all the right choices then fuck you, you deserve to be impoverished and die Conservatives, apparently</quote> Stanley eyeroll gif I'm pretty sure not getting an abortion doesn't make you die barring some kinda medical issue</quote> I mean, unless you really fall into poverty (or worse poverty) and die from not being able to take care of anything because this new child force upon you destroyed you financially... Maybe...</quote> Lol yeah that would definitely be a rare case. One kid shouldn't break someone financially. It's just a bit more budgeting. Plus there is definitely government funding availability for that sort of thing</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LinkPizza 05/22/19 4:47:28 PM #260:	OhhhJa posted... LinkPizza posted... OhhhJa posted... Mead posted... If you dont make all the right choices then fuck you, you deserve to be impoverished and die Conservatives, apparently Stanley eyeroll gif I'm pretty sure not getting an abortion doesn't make you die barring some kinda medical issue I mean, unless you really fall into poverty (or worse poverty) and die from not being able to take care of anything because this new child force upon you destroyed you financially... Maybe... Lol yeah that would definitely be a rare case. One kid shouldn't break someone financially. It's just a bit more budgeting. Plus there is definitely government funding availability for that sort of thing It definitely can. Especially if youre already struggling. Like, based on my income and outcome currently, having a child would break me financially. And they are many families living paycheck to paycheck. Some a latte better off. Some a little worse. I think most of the US or something is living like that. But I would have to look that up again. Budgeting works if you have the money to budget. When all of my paycheck is going to bills with barely anything left over, budgeting doesnt help as much... I would just need more money... --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around. <cite>LinkPizza posted [p:922237014] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>OhhhJa posted...</cite> <quote><cite>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote><cite>OhhhJa posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Mead posted...</cite> <quote>If you dont make all the right choices then fuck you, you deserve to be impoverished and die Conservatives, apparently</quote> Stanley eyeroll gif I'm pretty sure not getting an abortion doesn't make you die barring some kinda medical issue</quote> I mean, unless you really fall into poverty (or worse poverty) and die from not being able to take care of anything because this new child force upon you destroyed you financially... Maybe...</quote> Lol yeah that would definitely be a rare case. One kid shouldn't break someone financially. It's just a bit more budgeting. Plus there is definitely government funding availability for that sort of thing</quote> It definitely can. Especially if youre already struggling. Like, based on my income and outcome currently, having a child would break me financially. And they are many families living paycheck to paycheck. Some a latte better off. Some a little worse. I think most of the US or something is living like that. But I would have to look that up again. Budgeting works if you have the money to budget. When all of my paycheck is going to bills with barely anything left over, budgeting doesnt help as much... I would just need more money...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
_AdjI_ 05/22/19 4:50:48 PM #261:	Kyuubi4269 posted... That only works if you consider burning more energy to maintain the fetus as active. Why yes, I do consider "requiring more energy expenditure than the alternative" to be a reasonable criterion for considering something to be an active process, at least comparatively speaking. Furthermore, delivering a baby is very much an active process, and that is the natural conclusion of letting a pregnancy run its course. Even if we consider continuing a pregnancy to be a passive process, the fact that it culminates in an unambiguously active process means that distinction is entirely moot. Kyuubi4269 posted... I don't think anywhere considers a pregnancy a medical problem, otherwise you could have a 9 month abortion as it's still parasitic to you. I mean, if we want to be really pedantic, fetuses cannot be considered parasitic because the energy they consume is used to provide their host with not just any benefit, but the ultimate goal of all life: successful reproduction. That said, for somebody who doesn't want a child, pregnancy definitely qualifies as an undesirable aberrant state for their body, which is an apt description for any genuine medical problem. It's an oversimplification, certainly, but not an inaccurate way to view the issue. Kyuubi4269 posted... You're not allowed to harm others with your autonomy, so fetuses get protected as an "other". You are when they threaten your autonomy, actually. If somebody were to kidnap a woman and force her to become his breeding stock, for example, she would be completely justified in harming or even killing him to prevent that (the more obvious example is self-defense against attempted murder, but this example is more nuanced, interesting, and analogous to the discussion at hand). The argument could therefore be made that an unwanted fetus - as a discrete person of its own - is forcing its mother to carry a child against her will, and that an abortion constitutes protecting herself against that attack on her body by killing it. An extreme interpretation, to be certain, but not an invalid one if we start invoking the concept of the fetus as its own person with enough agency to be treated like post-conception people. Kyuubi4269 posted... I love this argument btw as I'm pro-choice, I just don't like the argument of "My arbitrary boundary is morally superior to yours!". And that's pretty fair. As much as people try to simplify it for the sake of getting through to people that disagree with them/making impassioned internet arguments without having to spend too long on them, this is a complex ethical issue, and that means any attempts to simplify it are going to ignore a whole bunch of nuance that conflicts with those simplifications. There's a reason these discussions always go on for so long without any sort of definitive conclusion, and it's that there's a huge amount of room to look at the issue from different angles, as well as a whole lot of personal arbitrary decisions to be shared. That's just morality, really. <cite>_AdjI_ posted [p:922237156] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>That only works if you consider burning more energy to maintain the fetus as active.</quote> Why yes, I do consider "requiring more energy expenditure than the alternative" to be a reasonable criterion for considering something to be an active process, at least comparatively speaking. Furthermore, delivering a baby is very much an active process, and that is the natural conclusion of letting a pregnancy run its course. Even if we consider continuing a pregnancy to be a passive process, the fact that it culminates in an unambiguously active process means that distinction is entirely moot. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>I don't think anywhere considers a pregnancy a medical problem, otherwise you could have a 9 month abortion as it's still parasitic to you.</quote> I mean, if we want to be really pedantic, fetuses cannot be considered parasitic because the energy they consume is used to provide their host with not just any benefit, but the ultimate goal of all life: successful reproduction. That said, for somebody who doesn't want a child, pregnancy definitely qualifies as an undesirable aberrant state for their body, which is an apt description for any genuine medical problem. It's an oversimplification, certainly, but not an inaccurate way to view the issue. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>You're not allowed to harm others with your autonomy, so fetuses get protected as an "other".</quote> You are when they threaten your autonomy, actually. If somebody were to kidnap a woman and force her to become his breeding stock, for example, she would be completely justified in harming or even killing him to prevent that (the more obvious example is self-defense against attempted murder, but this example is more nuanced, interesting, and analogous to the discussion at hand). The argument could therefore be made that an unwanted fetus - as a discrete person of its own - is forcing its mother to carry a child against her will, and that an abortion constitutes protecting herself against that attack on her body by killing it. An extreme interpretation, to be certain, but not an invalid one if we start invoking the concept of the fetus as its own person with enough agency to be treated like post-conception people. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>I love this argument btw as I'm pro-choice, I just don't like the argument of "My arbitrary boundary is morally superior to yours!".</quote> And that's pretty fair. As much as people try to simplify it for the sake of getting through to people that disagree with them/making impassioned internet arguments without having to spend too long on them, this is a complex ethical issue, and that means any attempts to simplify it are going to ignore a whole bunch of nuance that conflicts with those simplifications. There's a reason these discussions always go on for so long without any sort of definitive conclusion, and it's that there's a huge amount of room to look at the issue from different angles, as well as a whole lot of personal arbitrary decisions to be shared. That's just morality, really.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mead 05/22/19 5:17:58 PM #262:	Lmao at @OhhhJa thinking raising a kid is just a bit more budgeting Not with childcare and healthcare costs nowadays --- If they drag you through the mud, it doesnt change whats in your blood <cite>Mead posted [p:922238254] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote>Lmao at @OhhhJa thinking raising a kid is just a bit more budgeting Not with childcare and healthcare costs nowadays</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OhhhJa 05/22/19 5:37:07 PM #263:	Mead posted... Lmao at @OhhhJa thinking raising a kid is just a bit more budgeting Not with childcare and healthcare costs nowadays Do you not understand what a bit more budgeting is? I understand though that you're probably super poor (being that you're unemployed) and would have a hard time cutting down on flaming hot cheetos and taco bell for the sake of a child <cite>OhhhJa posted [p:922239067] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>Mead posted...</cite> <quote>Lmao at @OhhhJa thinking raising a kid is just a bit more budgeting Not with childcare and healthcare costs nowadays</quote> Do you not understand what a bit more budgeting is? I understand though that you're probably super poor (being that you're unemployed) and would have a hard time cutting down on flaming hot cheetos and taco bell for the sake of a child</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OhhhJa 05/22/19 5:39:19 PM #264:	LinkPizza posted... OhhhJa posted... LinkPizza posted... OhhhJa posted... Mead posted... If you dont make all the right choices then fuck you, you deserve to be impoverished and die Conservatives, apparently Stanley eyeroll gif I'm pretty sure not getting an abortion doesn't make you die barring some kinda medical issue I mean, unless you really fall into poverty (or worse poverty) and die from not being able to take care of anything because this new child force upon you destroyed you financially... Maybe... Lol yeah that would definitely be a rare case. One kid shouldn't break someone financially. It's just a bit more budgeting. Plus there is definitely government funding availability for that sort of thing It definitely can. Especially if youre already struggling. Like, based on my income and outcome currently, having a child would break me financially. And they are many families living paycheck to paycheck. Some a latte better off. Some a little worse. I think most of the US or something is living like that. But I would have to look that up again. Budgeting works if you have the money to budget. When all of my paycheck is going to bills with barely anything left over, budgeting doesnt help as much... I would just need more money... I actually personally know a young couple that dont have much money and keep popping out babies. They're pregnant with their third in a row now unfortunately but they're keeping it and I'm sure they'll end up fine just like the last one. It can be done if you have the balls to man up <cite>OhhhJa posted [p:922239169] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote><cite>OhhhJa posted...</cite> <quote><cite>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote><cite>OhhhJa posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Mead posted...</cite> <quote>If you dont make all the right choices then fuck you, you deserve to be impoverished and die Conservatives, apparently</quote> Stanley eyeroll gif I'm pretty sure not getting an abortion doesn't make you die barring some kinda medical issue</quote> I mean, unless you really fall into poverty (or worse poverty) and die from not being able to take care of anything because this new child force upon you destroyed you financially... Maybe...</quote> Lol yeah that would definitely be a rare case. One kid shouldn't break someone financially. It's just a bit more budgeting. Plus there is definitely government funding availability for that sort of thing</quote> It definitely can. Especially if youre already struggling. Like, based on my income and outcome currently, having a child would break me financially. And they are many families living paycheck to paycheck. Some a latte better off. Some a little worse. I think most of the US or something is living like that. But I would have to look that up again. Budgeting works if you have the money to budget. When all of my paycheck is going to bills with barely anything left over, budgeting doesnt help as much... I would just need more money...</quote> I actually personally know a young couple that dont have much money and keep popping out babies. They're pregnant with their third in a row now unfortunately but they're keeping it and I'm sure they'll end up fine just like the last one. It can be done if you have the balls to man up</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
_AdjI_ 05/22/19 5:40:39 PM #265:	OhhhJa posted... Do you not understand what a bit more budgeting is? Cutting back on a few things to be able to afford something like an unexpected repair, or saving up for a new TV. An unexpected kid requires substantially more than a bit more budgeting, especially for a couple that doesn't already have one. <cite>_AdjI_ posted [p:922239234] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>OhhhJa posted...</cite> <quote>Do you not understand what a bit more budgeting is?</quote> Cutting back on a few things to be able to afford something like an unexpected repair, or saving up for a new TV. An unexpected kid requires substantially more than a bit more budgeting, especially for a couple that doesn't already have one.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LinkPizza 05/22/19 5:45:01 PM #266:	OhhhJa posted... LinkPizza posted... OhhhJa posted... LinkPizza posted... OhhhJa posted... Mead posted... If you dont make all the right choices then fuck you, you deserve to be impoverished and die Conservatives, apparently Stanley eyeroll gif I'm pretty sure not getting an abortion doesn't make you die barring some kinda medical issue I mean, unless you really fall into poverty (or worse poverty) and die from not being able to take care of anything because this new child force upon you destroyed you financially... Maybe... Lol yeah that would definitely be a rare case. One kid shouldn't break someone financially. It's just a bit more budgeting. Plus there is definitely government funding availability for that sort of thing It definitely can. Especially if youre already struggling. Like, based on my income and outcome currently, having a child would break me financially. And they are many families living paycheck to paycheck. Some a latte better off. Some a little worse. I think most of the US or something is living like that. But I would have to look that up again. Budgeting works if you have the money to budget. When all of my paycheck is going to bills with barely anything left over, budgeting doesnt help as much... I would just need more money... I actually personally know a young couple that dont have much money and keep popping out babies. They're pregnant with their third in a row now unfortunately but they're keeping it and I'm sure they'll end up fine just like the last one. It can be done if you have the balls to man up For some people, they can do it. Other cant. Thats why I didnt say that its hard for everyone. Just that it definitely can break someone financially. Just because they cant doesnt mean I could, for example. Not only do I barely have enough for me, but I would need to buy a lot do stuff to take care of a baby. Like diapers, clothes, crib, formula, etc... And a lot of those things are expensive. I could work more hours, but that would cost extra for more childcare. Not to mention that I already have to pay for childcare. I definitely wouldnt have enough. And other people can end up in similar situations. Thats good that your friends can do it. But that doesnt mean everybody else can. Or is in the same situation. Its not just about having the balls to man up. I dont even know what that means in this context. Its about having the money to do. Working more hours gets you more money. But also cost more childcare. And youre probably already more tired than normal just having a baby around... --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around. <cite>LinkPizza posted [p:922239404] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>OhhhJa posted...</cite> <quote><cite>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote><cite>OhhhJa posted...</cite> <quote><cite>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote><cite>OhhhJa posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Mead posted...</cite> <quote>If you dont make all the right choices then fuck you, you deserve to be impoverished and die Conservatives, apparently</quote> Stanley eyeroll gif I'm pretty sure not getting an abortion doesn't make you die barring some kinda medical issue</quote> I mean, unless you really fall into poverty (or worse poverty) and die from not being able to take care of anything because this new child force upon you destroyed you financially... Maybe...</quote> Lol yeah that would definitely be a rare case. One kid shouldn't break someone financially. It's just a bit more budgeting. Plus there is definitely government funding availability for that sort of thing</quote> It definitely can. Especially if youre already struggling. Like, based on my income and outcome currently, having a child would break me financially. And they are many families living paycheck to paycheck. Some a latte better off. Some a little worse. I think most of the US or something is living like that. But I would have to look that up again. Budgeting works if you have the money to budget. When all of my paycheck is going to bills with barely anything left over, budgeting doesnt help as much... I would just need more money...</quote> I actually personally know a young couple that dont have much money and keep popping out babies. They're pregnant with their third in a row now unfortunately but they're keeping it and I'm sure they'll end up fine just like the last one. It can be done if you have the balls to man up</quote> For some people, they can do it. Other cant. Thats why I didnt say that its hard for everyone. Just that it definitely can break someone financially. Just because they cant doesnt mean I could, for example. Not only do I barely have enough for me, but I would need to buy a lot do stuff to take care of a baby. Like diapers, clothes, crib, formula, etc... And a lot of those things are expensive. I could work more hours, but that would cost extra for more childcare. Not to mention that I already have to pay for childcare. I definitely wouldnt have enough. And other people can end up in similar situations. Thats good that your friends can do it. But that doesnt mean everybody else can. Or is in the same situation. Its not just about having the balls to man up. I dont even know what that means in this context. Its about having the money to do. Working more hours gets you more money. But also cost more childcare. And youre probably already more tired than normal just having a baby around...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kyuubi4269 05/22/19 5:50:34 PM #267:	_AdjI_ posted... Why yes, I do consider "requiring more energy expenditure than the alternative" to be a reasonable criterion for considering something to be an active process, at least comparatively speaking. That's not what active means. You don't have to do anything, it requires zero activity on your part to occur. _AdjI_ posted... Furthermore, delivering a baby is very much an active process, and that is the natural conclusion of letting a pregnancy run its course. Even if we consider continuing a pregnancy to be a passive process, the fact that it culminates in an unambiguously active process means that distinction is entirely moot. Delivering a baby is not something you choose to do, your body does it whether you're ready or not, you do not get to decide whether or not that baby's ready to come. Let's also note that the active beginnings (sex) are not banned, because your bodily autonomy is not being infringed on. _AdjI_ posted... I mean, if we want to be really pedantic, fetuses cannot be considered parasitic because the energy they consume is used to provide their host with not just any benefit, but the ultimate goal of all life: successful reproduction. It consumes your energy, it does not return anything, it is parasitic. You can derive joy from it in a secondary manner, but it is very much acting in a parasitic manner. _AdjI_ posted... That said, for somebody who doesn't want a child, pregnancy definitely qualifies as an undesirable aberrant state for their body, which is an apt description for any genuine medical problem. It's an oversimplification, certainly, but not an inaccurate way to view the issue. It's inaccurate enough that "unwanted pregnancy" isn't in the DSM. _AdjI_ posted... You are when they threaten your autonomy, actually. If somebody were to kidnap a woman and force her to become his breeding stock, for example, she would be completely justified in harming or even killing him to prevent that (the more obvious example is self-defense against attempted murder, but this example is more nuanced, interesting, and analogous to the discussion at hand). The fetus doesn't effect your autonomy, it does not stop you acting. A kidnap victim cannot kill their kidnapper's family to escape as they were an innocent party. _AdjI_ posted... The argument could therefore be made that an unwanted fetus - as a discrete person of its own - is forcing its mother to carry a child against her will, and that an abortion constitutes protecting herself against that attack on her body by killing it. An extreme interpretation, to be certain, but not an invalid one if we start invoking the concept of the fetus as its own person with enough agency to be treated like post-conception people. It's not acting against you, it's just existing. You're not allowed to get a person fired because they are occupying a job vacancy you could fill. Their existence stops you acting in a way you want, but they aren't doing anything to you, it is passive. --- Doctor Foxx posted... The demonizing of soy has a lot to do with xenophobic ideas. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted [p:922239634] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>_AdjI_ posted...</cite> <quote>Why yes, I do consider "requiring more energy expenditure than the alternative" to be a reasonable criterion for considering something to be an active process, at least comparatively speaking.</quote> That's not what active means. You don't have to do anything, it requires zero activity on your part to occur. <cite>_AdjI_ posted...</cite> <quote>Furthermore, delivering a baby is very much an active process, and that is the natural conclusion of letting a pregnancy run its course. Even if we consider continuing a pregnancy to be a passive process, the fact that it culminates in an unambiguously active process means that distinction is entirely moot.</quote> Delivering a baby is not something you choose to do, your body does it whether you're ready or not, you do not get to decide whether or not that baby's ready to come. Let's also note that the active beginnings (sex) are not banned, because your bodily autonomy is not being infringed on. <cite>_AdjI_ posted...</cite> <quote>I mean, if we want to be really pedantic, fetuses cannot be considered parasitic because the energy they consume is used to provide their host with not just any benefit, but the ultimate goal of all life: successful reproduction.</quote> It consumes your energy, it does not return anything, it is parasitic. You can derive joy from it in a secondary manner, but it is very much acting in a parasitic manner. <cite>_AdjI_ posted...</cite> <quote>That said, for somebody who doesn't want a child, pregnancy definitely qualifies as an undesirable aberrant state for their body, which is an apt description for any genuine medical problem. It's an oversimplification, certainly, but not an inaccurate way to view the issue.</quote> It's inaccurate enough that "unwanted pregnancy" isn't in the DSM. <cite>_AdjI_ posted...</cite> <quote>You are when they threaten your autonomy, actually. If somebody were to kidnap a woman and force her to become his breeding stock, for example, she would be completely justified in harming or even killing him to prevent that (the more obvious example is self-defense against attempted murder, but this example is more nuanced, interesting, and analogous to the discussion at hand).</quote> The fetus doesn't effect your autonomy, it does not stop you acting. A kidnap victim cannot kill their kidnapper's family to escape as they were an innocent party. <cite>_AdjI_ posted...</cite> <quote>The argument could therefore be made that an unwanted fetus - as a discrete person of its own - is forcing its mother to carry a child against her will, and that an abortion constitutes protecting herself against that attack on her body by killing it. An extreme interpretation, to be certain, but not an invalid one if we start invoking the concept of the fetus as its own person with enough agency to be treated like post-conception people.</quote> It's not acting against you, it's just existing. You're not allowed to get a person fired because they are occupying a job vacancy you could fill. Their existence stops you acting in a way you want, but they aren't doing anything to you, it is passive.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
miki_sauvester 05/22/19 6:03:55 PM #268:	I wonder if liberals are ready to accept that there is a high chance that Roe v Wade is overturned or significantly weakened in the next few years. I feel like a lot of people I know are in denial about this issue, kind of like they were in denial about the chances of Trump winning, mainly because they are only surrounded by pro-choice people so they cant imagine living in a country where that could be illegal. <cite>miki_sauvester posted [p:922240172] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote>I wonder if liberals are ready to accept that there is a high chance that Roe v Wade is overturned or significantly weakened in the next few years. I feel like a lot of people I know are in denial about this issue, kind of like they were in denial about the chances of Trump winning, mainly because they are only surrounded by pro-choice people so they cant imagine living in a country where that could be illegal.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mead 05/22/19 6:07:01 PM #269:	I wonder if conservatives are capable of understanding that outlawing abortion will cause a direct increase in violent crime, drug use, healthcare costs, entitlement funding, and public education costs I guess theyre really desperate to pay more taxes --- If they drag you through the mud, it doesnt change whats in your blood <cite>Mead posted [p:922240300] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote>I wonder if conservatives are capable of understanding that outlawing abortion will cause a direct increase in violent crime, drug use, healthcare costs, entitlement funding, and public education costs I guess theyre really desperate to pay more taxes</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kyuubi4269 05/22/19 6:09:31 PM #270:	Mead posted... I wonder if conservatives are capable of understanding that outlawing abortion will cause a direct increase in violent crime, drug use, healthcare costs, entitlement funding, and public education costs I guess theyre really desperate to pay more taxes Sounds like a good reason to reduce taxes. --- Doctor Foxx posted... The demonizing of soy has a lot to do with xenophobic ideas. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted [p:922240408] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>Mead posted...</cite> <quote>I wonder if conservatives are capable of understanding that outlawing abortion will cause a direct increase in violent crime, drug use, healthcare costs, entitlement funding, and public education costs I guess theyre really desperate to pay more taxes</quote> Sounds like a good reason to reduce taxes.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
_AdjI_ 05/22/19 6:16:46 PM #271:	Kyuubi4269 posted... That's not what active means. You don't have to do anything, it requires zero activity on your part to occur. Eating more is an activity. Kyuubi4269 posted... Delivering a baby is not something you choose to do Next delivery you attend, suggest that the woman just lie back and let it happen without putting any deliberate effort into it. See how well that works out. Kyuubi4269 posted... It consumes your energy, it does not return anything, it is parasitic. It returns the only form of success that biology cares about. Biologically speaking, benefit/detriment is considered entirely in terms of their impacts on reproductive success. That means your offspring cannot be considered parasitic. Kyuubi4269 posted... It's inaccurate enough that "unwanted pregnancy" isn't in the DSM. The DSM is specifically for mental disorders, which pregnancy would never qualify as, plus you know full well that I'm not talking about formal medical diagnoses. I'm talking about medical problems as a logical concept, not concrete diagnoses. Kyuubi4269 posted... The fetus doesn't effect your autonomy, it does not stop you acting. Autonomy can be infringed both by stopping you from acting and by forcing you to act, and we've already established that a fetus forces the mother to act. Furthermore, it absolutely does stop you from acting in certain ways, especially if you end up with complications that necessitate bed rest (not uncommon). Kyuubi4269 posted... It's not acting against you, it's just existing. Kyuubi4269 posted... It consumes your energy Verbs are action words, my friend. Any entity which performs a verb is acting. <cite>_AdjI_ posted [p:922240729] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>That's not what active means. You don't have to do anything, it requires zero activity on your part to occur.</quote> Eating more is an activity. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>Delivering a baby is not something you choose to do</quote> Next delivery you attend, suggest that the woman just lie back and let it happen without putting any deliberate effort into it. See how well that works out. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>It consumes your energy, it does not return anything, it is parasitic. </quote> It returns the only form of success that biology cares about. Biologically speaking, benefit/detriment is considered entirely in terms of their impacts on reproductive success. That means your offspring cannot be considered parasitic. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>It's inaccurate enough that "unwanted pregnancy" isn't in the DSM.</quote> The DSM is specifically for mental disorders, which pregnancy would never qualify as, plus you know full well that I'm not talking about formal medical diagnoses. I'm talking about medical problems as a logical concept, not concrete diagnoses. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>The fetus doesn't effect your autonomy, it does not stop you acting.</quote> Autonomy can be infringed both by stopping you from acting and by forcing you to act, and we've already established that a fetus forces the mother to act. Furthermore, it absolutely does stop you from acting in certain ways, especially if you end up with complications that necessitate bed rest (not uncommon). <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>It's not acting against you, it's just existing.</quote> <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>It consumes your energy</quote> Verbs are action words, my friend. Any entity which performs a verb is acting.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kyuubi4269 05/22/19 7:10:04 PM #273:	_AdjI_ posted... Eating more is an activity. And you can do that freely without restriction. _AdjI_ posted... Next delivery you attend, suggest that the woman just lie back and let it happen without putting any deliberate effort into it. See how well that works out. Next time you hear a girl wants an abortion, just tell her it won't be born if she doesn't want. _AdjI_ posted... It returns the only form of success that biology cares about. Biologically speaking, benefit/detriment is considered entirely in terms of their impacts on reproductive success. That means your offspring cannot be considered parasitic. Biologically speaking, benefit/detriment is considered entirely in terms of their impact on personal survival. Parasitic fetuses drain energy. Other species eat their young to survive, survival is number one. _AdjI_ posted... The DSM is specifically for mental disorders, which pregnancy would never qualify as, plus you know full well that I'm not talking about formal medical diagnoses. I'm talking about medical problems as a logical concept, not concrete diagnoses. Following your whole "biology only considers reproduction" angle, pregnancy can't be a detriment. You can't have it both ways. _AdjI_ posted... Autonomy can be infringed both by stopping you from acting and by forcing you to act, and we've already established that a fetus forces the mother to act. Furthermore, it absolutely does stop you from acting in certain ways, especially if you end up with complications that necessitate bed rest (not uncommon). We haven't established shit, and you already established it's okay to infringe autonomy to stop you from acting. _AdjI_ posted... Verbs are action words, my friend. Any entity which performs a verb is acting. Verbs are occurrence words too, buddy. An event can occur without acting on it. Such as metabolising. --- Doctor Foxx posted... The demonizing of soy has a lot to do with xenophobic ideas. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted [p:922242715] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>_AdjI_ posted...</cite> <quote>Eating more is an activity. </quote> And you can do that freely without restriction. <cite>_AdjI_ posted...</cite> <quote>Next delivery you attend, suggest that the woman just lie back and let it happen without putting any deliberate effort into it. See how well that works out.</quote> Next time you hear a girl wants an abortion, just tell her it won't be born if she doesn't want. <cite>_AdjI_ posted...</cite> <quote>It returns the only form of success that biology cares about. Biologically speaking, benefit/detriment is considered entirely in terms of their impacts on reproductive success. That means your offspring cannot be considered parasitic. </quote> Biologically speaking, benefit/detriment is considered entirely in terms of their impact on personal survival. Parasitic fetuses drain energy. Other species eat their young to survive, survival is number one. <cite>_AdjI_ posted...</cite> <quote>The DSM is specifically for mental disorders, which pregnancy would never qualify as, plus you know full well that I'm not talking about formal medical diagnoses. I'm talking about medical problems as a logical concept, not concrete diagnoses.</quote> Following your whole "biology only considers reproduction" angle, pregnancy can't be a detriment. You can't have it both ways. <cite>_AdjI_ posted...</cite> <quote>Autonomy can be infringed both by stopping you from acting and by forcing you to act, and we've already established that a fetus forces the mother to act. Furthermore, it absolutely does stop you from acting in certain ways, especially if you end up with complications that necessitate bed rest (not uncommon).</quote> We haven't established shit, and you already established it's okay to infringe autonomy to stop you from acting. <cite>_AdjI_ posted...</cite> <quote>Verbs are action words, my friend. Any entity which performs a verb is acting.</quote> Verbs are occurrence words too, buddy. An event can occur without acting on it. Such as metabolising.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
_AdjI_ 05/22/19 8:27:22 PM #274:	Kyuubi4269 posted... And you can do that freely without restriction. And you are forced to do it if your energetic needs increase. I would have thought this was obvious. Kyuubi4269 posted... Next time you hear a girl wants an abortion, just tell her it won't be born if she doesn't want. I'm not sure how that's supposed to make any sense at all, let alone pertain to what you quoted. Kyuubi4269 posted... Biologically speaking, benefit/detriment is considered entirely in terms of their impact on personal survival. Parasitic fetuses drain energy. Other species eat their young to survive, survival is number one. Survival is prioritized for the sake of maximizing reproductive success. If you're going to starve to death unless you eat your baby, eating your baby ensures that you'll be able to make more babies later, particularly where the baby in question likely wouldn't have survived without you. Quite simply, species that don't prioritize reproduction die out. Kyuubi4269 posted... Following your whole "biology only considers reproduction" angle, pregnancy can't be a detriment. You can't have it both ways. "Parasite" is a biological term. Therefore I used biological definitions to assess it. "Medical problem," however, can be defined in a substantially greater number of ways, including personal opinion. I can in fact have it both ways, because the two terms are being used in entirely different contexts. Kyuubi4269 posted... We haven't established s* Except that "push" refers to a deliberate action, which I really wouldn't have thought needed to be said. Kyuubi4269 posted... Verbs are occurrence words too, buddy. An event can occur without acting on it. Such as metabolising. Metabolism is also performed by an agent. <cite>_AdjI_ posted [p:922245816] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>And you can do that freely without restriction.</quote> And you are forced to do it if your energetic needs increase. I would have thought this was obvious. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>Next time you hear a girl wants an abortion, just tell her it won't be born if she doesn't want.</quote> I'm not sure how that's supposed to make any sense at all, let alone pertain to what you quoted. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>Biologically speaking, benefit/detriment is considered entirely in terms of their impact on personal survival. Parasitic fetuses drain energy. Other species eat their young to survive, survival is number one.</quote> Survival is prioritized for the sake of maximizing reproductive success. If you're going to starve to death unless you eat your baby, eating your baby ensures that you'll be able to make more babies later, particularly where the baby in question likely wouldn't have survived without you. Quite simply, species that don't prioritize reproduction die out. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>Following your whole "biology only considers reproduction" angle, pregnancy can't be a detriment. You can't have it both ways.</quote> "Parasite" is a biological term. Therefore I used biological definitions to assess it. "Medical problem," however, can be defined in a substantially greater number of ways, including personal opinion. I can in fact have it both ways, because the two terms are being used in entirely different contexts. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>We haven't established s*</quote> Except that "push" refers to a deliberate action, which I really wouldn't have thought needed to be said. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>Verbs are occurrence words too, buddy. An event can occur without acting on it. Such as metabolising.</quote> Metabolism is also performed by an agent.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
The_tall_midget 05/22/19 11:00:50 PM #275:	OhhhJa posted... Do you not understand what a bit more budgeting is? I understand though that you're probably super poor (being that you're unemployed) and would have a hard time cutting down on flaming hot cheetos and taco bell for the sake of a child Wow... I was wondering he had such a typical "me, me, me, pay for every one of my bad choices" attitude that leftists have, but I didn't think I would be so close to the mark. --- "If masculinity was toxic, children growing without fathers would be better off. Unfortunately, criminals often come from single mother households." <cite>The_tall_midget posted [p:922251545] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>OhhhJa posted...</cite> <quote>Do you not understand what a bit more budgeting is? I understand though that you're probably super poor (being that you're unemployed) and would have a hard time cutting down on flaming hot cheetos and taco bell for the sake of a child</quote> Wow... I was wondering he had such a typical "me, me, me, pay for every one of my bad choices" attitude that leftists have, but I didn't think I would be so close to the mark.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
The_tall_midget 05/22/19 11:04:27 PM #276:	miki_sauvester posted... I wonder if liberals are ready to accept that there is a high chance that Roe v Wade is overturned or significantly weakened in the next few years. I feel like a lot of people I know are in denial about this issue, kind of like they were in denial about the chances of Trump winning, mainly because they are only surrounded by pro-choice people so they cant imagine living in a country where that could be illegal. I SERIOUSLY doubt this will happen. But, honestly, I do want it to happen. Not because I care that much about it, but the endless overflowing amount of salt that will spew out of all the feminists, loser white knights desperate to get laid, soy boys, insane leftists, Marxists scum, will be simply glorious to watch. I mean, the last 3 years have been endless entertainment to watch how irresponsible and whiny they are. It's also fantastic in showing that literal cancers they are to society. --- "If masculinity was toxic, children growing without fathers would be better off. Unfortunately, criminals often come from single mother households." <cite>The_tall_midget posted [p:922251693] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>miki_sauvester posted...</cite> <quote>I wonder if liberals are ready to accept that there is a high chance that Roe v Wade is overturned or significantly weakened in the next few years. I feel like a lot of people I know are in denial about this issue, kind of like they were in denial about the chances of Trump winning, mainly because they are only surrounded by pro-choice people so they cant imagine living in a country where that could be illegal.</quote> I SERIOUSLY doubt this will happen. But, honestly, I do want it to happen. Not because I care that much about it, but the endless overflowing amount of salt that will spew out of all the feminists, loser white knights desperate to get laid, soy boys, insane leftists, Marxists scum, will be simply glorious to watch. I mean, the last 3 years have been endless entertainment to watch how irresponsible and whiny they are. It's also fantastic in showing that literal cancers they are to society.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
spooky96 05/23/19 12:24:43 AM #277:	I'm not for the US but I enjoy watching Steven Crowder's 'Change My Mind' series, and I was watching this the other night: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nhXQS5UUGQ" data-time=" I have no opinion on this, but late stage abortion does kinda feel wrong. Don't know if his facts are reliable but he said most late-stage abortions aren't medically necessary. But not having a choice feels wrong too <_< --- Congrats to Advokaiser, the Guru Champ! <cite>spooky96 posted [p:922254200] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote>I'm not for the US but I enjoy watching Steven Crowder's 'Change My Mind' series, and I was watching this the other night: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nhXQS5UUGQ" data-time=" I have no opinion on this, but late stage abortion does kinda feel wrong. Don't know if his facts are reliable but he said most late-stage abortions aren't medically necessary. But not having a choice feels wrong too <_<</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mead 05/23/19 12:26:26 AM #278:	What defines late stage? From what I know even most pro-choice folks dont think its right to have an abortion after the third trimester begins --- If they drag you through the mud, it doesnt change whats in your blood <cite>Mead posted [p:922254244] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote>What defines late stage? From what I know even most pro-choice folks dont think its right to have an abortion after the third trimester begins</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
spooky96 05/23/19 12:47:00 AM #279:	Mead posted... What defines late stage? From what I know even most pro-choice folks dont think its right to have an abortion after the third trimester begins Yeah I think it refers to around the third trimester. I guess at that point the fetus has a beating heart, neural activities (can experience pain and suffering). It's amazing though, just one state in the US did this and entire world is talking about it. Some of my friends here are talking about it as if it's directly going to affect them. --- Congrats to Advokaiser, the Guru Champ! <cite>spooky96 posted [p:922254840] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>Mead posted...</cite> <quote>What defines late stage? From what I know even most pro-choice folks dont think its right to have an abortion after the third trimester begins</quote> Yeah I think it refers to around the third trimester. I guess at that point the fetus has a beating heart, neural activities (can experience pain and suffering). It's amazing though, just one state in the US did this and entire world is talking about it. Some of my friends here are talking about it as if it's directly going to affect them.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LinkPizza 05/23/19 12:49:14 AM #280:	spooky96 posted... Mead posted... What defines late stage? From what I know even most pro-choice folks dont think its right to have an abortion after the third trimester begins Yeah I think it refers to around the third trimester. I guess at that point the fetus has a beating heart, neural activities (can experience pain and suffering). It's amazing though, just one state in the US did this and entire world is talking about it. Some of my friends here are talking about it as if it's directly going to affect them. I can understand that, though. I mean, one state is already moving backwards according to most people. And if one state does it, maybe another will. And maybe it will spread to other countries... Its a scary thought... --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around. <cite>LinkPizza posted [p:922254902] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>spooky96 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Mead posted...</cite> <quote>What defines late stage? From what I know even most pro-choice folks dont think its right to have an abortion after the third trimester begins</quote> Yeah I think it refers to around the third trimester. I guess at that point the fetus has a beating heart, neural activities (can experience pain and suffering). It's amazing though, just one state in the US did this and entire world is talking about it. Some of my friends here are talking about it as if it's directly going to affect them.</quote> I can understand that, though. I mean, one state is already moving backwards according to most people. And if one state does it, maybe another will. And maybe it will spread to other countries... Its a scary thought...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
FrndNhbrHdCEman 05/23/19 4:23:54 AM #281:	The sad fact is republicans care when it's a fetus. Once its born "lmao later lady. We only deal in unborn fetuses the babies your problem." Like a teenage guy knocking up a girl an running out on em. --- Official nosy neighbor and gossip https://imgur.com/uGKwGsK <cite>FrndNhbrHdCEman posted [p:922258774] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote>The sad fact is republicans care when it's a fetus. Once its born "lmao later lady. We only deal in unborn fetuses the babies your problem." Like a teenage guy knocking up a girl an running out on em.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kyuubi4269 05/23/19 4:49:08 AM #282:	_AdjI_ posted... And you are forced to do it if your energetic needs increase. I would have thought this was obvious. You're not being forced to eat, you can starve yourself if you want, just circumstances mean you require more to retain whatever bodily state you want. _AdjI_ posted... I'm not sure how that's supposed to make any sense at all, let alone pertain to what you quoted. It occurs automatically, it's passive. _AdjI_ posted... "Parasite" is a biological term. Therefore I used biological definitions to assess it. "Medical problem," however, can be defined in a substantially greater number of ways, including personal opinion. I can in fact have it both ways, because the two terms are being used in entirely different contexts. Personal opinion doesn't mean dick when trying to determine the objectively best stance. If you want to justify abortion, give a reason that isn't invalidated by "I don't agree". _AdjI_ posted... Except that "push" refers to a deliberate action, which I really wouldn't have thought needed to be said. "During the collapse of a skyscraper, the rubble was pushed through the surrounding buildings." An example of non-deliberate pushing. _AdjI_ posted... Metabolism is also performed by an agent. Your body doesn't have agency, it's a machine reacting to stimulus. Your conscious moves are from your agency, not subconscious ones. FrndNhbrHdCEman posted... The sad fact is republicans care when it's a fetus. Once its born "lmao later lady. We only deal in unborn fetuses the babies your problem." Like a teenage guy knocking up a girl an running out on em. Things look strange through a warped lens. Their stance is that you can't kill it at any point, and failure to raise the child is neglectful and poor planning. They don't consider being poor a factor as they expect you to sacrifice everything to help the child once you make it, even if that means working 3 jobs and living on stale bread and water. It's maximum freedom tempered with maximum responsibility, otherwise known as right wing extremism. --- Doctor Foxx posted... The demonizing of soy has a lot to do with xenophobic ideas. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted [p:922259121] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>_AdjI_ posted...</cite> <quote>And you are forced to do it if your energetic needs increase. I would have thought this was obvious.</quote> You're not being forced to eat, you can starve yourself if you want, just circumstances mean you require more to retain whatever bodily state you want. <cite>_AdjI_ posted...</cite> <quote>I'm not sure how that's supposed to make any sense at all, let alone pertain to what you quoted.</quote> It occurs automatically, it's passive. <cite>_AdjI_ posted...</cite> <quote>"Parasite" is a biological term. Therefore I used biological definitions to assess it. "Medical problem," however, can be defined in a substantially greater number of ways, including personal opinion. I can in fact have it both ways, because the two terms are being used in entirely different contexts.</quote> Personal opinion doesn't mean dick when trying to determine the objectively best stance. If you want to justify abortion, give a reason that isn't invalidated by "I don't agree". <cite>_AdjI_ posted...</cite> <quote>Except that "push" refers to a deliberate action, which I really wouldn't have thought needed to be said.</quote> "During the collapse of a skyscraper, the rubble was pushed through the surrounding buildings." An example of non-deliberate pushing. <cite>_AdjI_ posted...</cite> <quote>Metabolism is also performed by an agent.</quote> Your body doesn't have agency, it's a machine reacting to stimulus. Your conscious moves are from your agency, not subconscious ones. <cite>FrndNhbrHdCEman posted...</cite> <quote>The sad fact is republicans care when it's a fetus. Once its born "lmao later lady. We only deal in unborn fetuses the babies your problem." Like a teenage guy knocking up a girl an running out on em.</quote> Things look strange through a warped lens. Their stance is that you can't kill it at any point, and failure to raise the child is neglectful and poor planning. They don't consider being poor a factor as they expect you to sacrifice everything to help the child once you make it, even if that means working 3 jobs and living on stale bread and water. It's maximum freedom tempered with maximum responsibility, otherwise known as right wing extremism.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
FrndNhbrHdCEman 05/23/19 4:56:16 AM #283:	Kyuubi4269 posted... FrndNhbrHdCEman posted... The sad fact is republicans care when it's a fetus. Once its born "lmao later lady. We only deal in unborn fetuses the babies your problem." Like a teenage guy knocking up a girl an running out on em. Things look strange through a warped lens. Their stance is that you can't kill it at any point, and failure to raise the child is neglectful and poor planning. They don't consider being poor a factor as they expect you to sacrifice everything to help the child once you make it, even if that means working 3 jobs and living on stale bread and water. It's maximum freedom tempered with maximum responsibility, otherwise known as right wing extremism. Yup. It's insanity. --- Official nosy neighbor and gossip https://imgur.com/uGKwGsK <cite>FrndNhbrHdCEman posted [p:922259232] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>FrndNhbrHdCEman posted...</cite> <quote>The sad fact is republicans care when it's a fetus. Once its born "lmao later lady. We only deal in unborn fetuses the babies your problem." Like a teenage guy knocking up a girl an running out on em.</quote> Things look strange through a warped lens. Their stance is that you can't kill it at any point, and failure to raise the child is neglectful and poor planning. They don't consider being poor a factor as they expect you to sacrifice everything to help the child once you make it, even if that means working 3 jobs and living on stale bread and water. It's maximum freedom tempered with maximum responsibility, otherwise known as right wing extremism.</quote> Yup. It's insanity.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kyuubi4269 05/23/19 5:00:10 AM #284:	FrndNhbrHdCEman posted... Yup. It's insanity. "Everybody who disagrees with me is Hitler." --- Doctor Foxx posted... The demonizing of soy has a lot to do with xenophobic ideas. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted [p:922259287] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>FrndNhbrHdCEman posted...</cite> <quote>Yup. It's insanity.</quote> "Everybody who disagrees with me is Hitler."</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
The_tall_midget 05/23/19 7:47:03 AM #285:	FrndNhbrHdCEman posted... The sad fact is republicans care when it's a fetus. Once its born "lmao later lady. We only deal in unborn fetuses the babies your problem." Like a teenage guy knocking up a girl an running out on em. What an idiotic assumption. The ones who keep pushing policies to encourage broken homes, removing the father from the children life, the irresponsible mentality that comes from throwing welfare at every imbecile that makes terrible choices, and giving the fathers zero rights are the feminists, the socialists, and sjw's--all metaphorical cancers. And it just so happens to be leftists in the overwhelming majority of cases. I also won't mention on how republicans are the ones who keep pushing pro-family values, while it's the lefties who keep pushing policies which creates more single mothers and broken homes. Which is why the single mother % explodes the moment that welfare is introduced anywhere, the kind of shit pushed by socialists. I suppose that's also the fault of the fathers? You know, the gender that has no rights to say anything when it comes to the birth of a child, but is apparently responsible for all the problems of society, the creation of life, and to pay for said lives he has no right to say anything about? What happened to all our strong, independent wahmynz who need no men? Hypocrite leftists. Kyuubi4269 "Everybody who disagrees with me is Hitler." In his crazy leftist defense, he didn't say that, but it's unfortunately the mentality pushed by lefties. Which is why they are the ones to push for socially destroying people on social medias and to censor anyone who disagreeeeeees with them; the very notion of someone having a different opinion than their "morally superior" selves is pure craziness to them. --- "If masculinity was toxic, children growing without fathers would be better off. Unfortunately, criminals often come from single mother households." <cite>The_tall_midget posted [p:922261603] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>FrndNhbrHdCEman posted...</cite> <quote>The sad fact is republicans care when it's a fetus. Once its born "lmao later lady. We only deal in unborn fetuses the babies your problem." Like a teenage guy knocking up a girl an running out on em.</quote> What an idiotic assumption. The ones who keep pushing policies to encourage broken homes, removing the father from the children life, the irresponsible mentality that comes from throwing welfare at every imbecile that makes terrible choices, and giving the fathers zero rights are the feminists, the socialists, and sjw's--all metaphorical cancers. And it just so happens to be leftists in the overwhelming majority of cases. I also won't mention on how republicans are the ones who keep pushing pro-family values, while it's the lefties who keep pushing policies which creates more single mothers and broken homes. Which is why the single mother % explodes the moment that welfare is introduced anywhere, the kind of shit pushed by socialists. I suppose that's also the fault of the fathers? You know, the gender that has no rights to say anything when it comes to the birth of a child, but is apparently responsible for all the problems of society, the creation of life, and to pay for said lives he has no right to say anything about? What happened to all our strong, independent wahmynz who need no men? Hypocrite leftists. <cite>Kyuubi4269</cite><quote> "Everybody who disagrees with me is Hitler."</quote>In his crazy leftist defense, he didn't say that, but it's unfortunately the mentality pushed by lefties. Which is why they are the ones to push for socially destroying people on social medias and to censor anyone who disagreeeeeees with them; the very notion of someone having a different opinion than their "morally superior" selves is pure craziness to them.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OhhhJa 05/23/19 9:23:27 AM #286:	Leftists say, "quit trying to tell a woman what to do with her body!" Simultaneously, the father gets zero say in anything and will go to jail for not paying child support that he's forced to pay by the state. As soon as women can go to jail for not paying for their kids, I'll call it fair for the father to have zero say in anything <cite>OhhhJa posted [p:922263834] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote>Leftists say, "quit trying to tell a woman what to do with her body!" Simultaneously, the father gets zero say in anything and will go to jail for not paying child support that he's forced to pay by the state. As soon as women can go to jail for not paying for their kids, I'll call it fair for the father to have zero say in anything</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#287	Post #287 was unavailable or deleted.
_AdjI_ 05/23/19 9:32:34 AM #288:	Kyuubi4269 posted... You're not being forced to eat, And you're not being forced to give your wallet to a mugger who's threatening to stab you if you don't. At least, if we're being truly pedantic about the definition of "forced" and not taking the fairly reasonable step of lumping coercion in with direct force, which seems to be your approach for some reason. Also, under some of these laws, the mother would be legally prohibited from trying to induce a miscarriage by deliberately not eating enough to support the fetus, so your premise is wrong from the outset. Kyuubi4269 posted... It occurs automatically, it's passive. Do you really believe that childbirth happens with no conscious effort? Kyuubi4269 posted... Personal opinion doesn't mean dick when trying to determine the objectively best stance. It does, however, mean pretty much everything in determining whether or not somebody feels the need to seek medical treatment for a problem. Kyuubi4269 posted... "During the collapse of a skyscraper, the rubble was pushed through the surrounding buildings." An example of non-deliberate pushing. Using the passive voice only means you don't have to explicitly indicate an agent, not that there isn't one. Verbs cannot exist without subjects, whether real or implied. In that case, the implication is that the rubble was pushed by the force of the collapse. Also, we're talking about childbirth, not skyscrapers, and it's extremely obvious that I was referring specifically to the act of pushing a baby out and not to the applicability of the passive voice to the verb "push" in a broader sense. Kyuubi4269 posted... Your body doesn't have agency, it's a machine reacting to stimulus. So's your brain, consciousness, and entire personality. If you're going to take a reductionist view of the world, don't half-ass it. The_tall_midget posted... while it's the lefties who keep pushing policies which creates more single mothers and broken homes. Do you honestly think that banning abortion won't create more single mothers and broken homes? For that matter, what policies are you even talking about? <cite>_AdjI_ posted [p:922264083] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>You're not being forced to eat,</quote> And you're not being forced to give your wallet to a mugger who's threatening to stab you if you don't. At least, if we're being truly pedantic about the definition of "forced" and not taking the fairly reasonable step of lumping coercion in with direct force, which seems to be your approach for some reason. Also, under some of these laws, the mother would be legally prohibited from trying to induce a miscarriage by deliberately not eating enough to support the fetus, so your premise is wrong from the outset. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>It occurs automatically, it's passive.</quote> Do you really believe that childbirth happens with no conscious effort? <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>Personal opinion doesn't mean dick when trying to determine the objectively best stance.</quote> It does, however, mean pretty much everything in determining whether or not somebody feels the need to seek medical treatment for a problem. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>"During the collapse of a skyscraper, the rubble was pushed through the surrounding buildings." An example of non-deliberate pushing.</quote> Using the passive voice only means you don't have to explicitly indicate an agent, not that there isn't one. Verbs cannot exist without subjects, whether real or implied. In that case, the implication is that the rubble was pushed by the force of the collapse. Also, we're talking about childbirth, not skyscrapers, and it's extremely obvious that I was referring specifically to the act of pushing a baby out and not to the applicability of the passive voice to the verb "push" in a broader sense. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>Your body doesn't have agency, it's a machine reacting to stimulus.</quote> So's your brain, consciousness, and entire personality. If you're going to take a reductionist view of the world, don't half-ass it. <cite>The_tall_midget posted...</cite> <quote>while it's the lefties who keep pushing policies which creates more single mothers and broken homes.</quote> Do you honestly think that banning abortion won't create more single mothers and broken homes? For that matter, what policies are you even talking about?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kyuubi4269 05/23/19 9:37:26 AM #289:	Zangulus posted... Oh, next youre going to tell me its very rare. Yeah it is. Because men are much more likely to not want to do anything with a child than the mother. So its not really an apt comparison. The assumption is the father cares less, which is deeply sexist. Men are more likely to not be involved, but women are the only one who can "trap" someone with pregnancy. Women both have the only say on the child being born and the ability to weaponise the child, so inherently men are going to be less likely to be willing, but that's the nature of the system as is. Men don't get custody because people are biased toward assisting women and nobody accounts for it. --- Doctor Foxx posted... The demonizing of soy has a lot to do with xenophobic ideas. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted [p:922264252] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>Zangulus posted...</cite> <quote>Oh, next youre going to tell me its very rare. Yeah it is. Because men are much more likely to not want to do anything with a child than the mother. So its not really an apt comparison.</quote> The assumption is the father cares less, which is deeply sexist. Men are more likely to not be involved, but women are the only one who can "trap" someone with pregnancy. Women both have the only say on the child being born and the ability to weaponise the child, so inherently men are going to be less likely to be willing, but that's the nature of the system as is. Men don't get custody because people are biased toward assisting women and nobody accounts for it.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OhhhJa 05/23/19 9:37:52 AM #290:	Zangulus posted... OhhhJa posted... Leftists say, "quit trying to tell a woman what to do with her body!" Simultaneously, the father gets zero say in anything and will go to jail for not paying child support that he's forced to pay by the state. As soon as women can go to jail for not paying for their kids, I'll call it fair for the father to have zero say in anything You do realize that a woman can be ordered to pay child support and going into arrears can cause her to be jailed as well, right? Right? Oh, next youre going to tell me its very rare. Yeah it is. Because men are much more likely to not want to do anything with a child than the mother. So its not really an apt comparison. You're really gonna try and argue the courts dont very heavily favor women in cases of custody and divorce? Ha ok go for it. I'd love to hear how they dont. A woman has to be the absolute worst fuck up in order to face any real consequences <cite>OhhhJa posted [p:922264263] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>Zangulus posted...</cite> <quote><cite>OhhhJa posted...</cite> <quote>Leftists say, "quit trying to tell a woman what to do with her body!" Simultaneously, the father gets zero say in anything and will go to jail for not paying child support that he's forced to pay by the state. As soon as women can go to jail for not paying for their kids, I'll call it fair for the father to have zero say in anything</quote> You do realize that a woman can be ordered to pay child support and going into arrears can cause her to be jailed as well, right? Right? Oh, next youre going to tell me its very rare. Yeah it is. Because men are much more likely to not want to do anything with a child than the mother. So its not really an apt comparison.</quote> You're really gonna try and argue the courts dont very heavily favor women in cases of custody and divorce? Ha ok go for it. I'd love to hear how they dont. A woman has to be the absolute worst fuck up in order to face any real consequences</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
_AdjI_ 05/23/19 9:42:54 AM #291:	Kyuubi4269 posted... The assumption is the father cares less, which is deeply sexist. You've made this exact assumption yourself in talking about the pay gap (something to the effect of "women are more emotional and inclined toward nurturing, rather than competition"). <cite>_AdjI_ posted [p:922264435] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>The assumption is the father cares less, which is deeply sexist.</quote> You've made this exact assumption yourself in talking about the pay gap (something to the effect of "women are more emotional and inclined toward nurturing, rather than competition").</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OhhhJa 05/23/19 9:46:44 AM #292:	_AdjI_ posted... Kyuubi4269 posted... The assumption is the father cares less, which is deeply sexist. You've made this exact assumption yourself in talking about the pay gap (something to the effect of "women are more emotional and inclined toward nurturing, rather than competition"). There is actually data to back that up though. For instance, stem is dominated by men because men choose to go into stem and not because men are pushing them out. And there are far more women nurses, housekeepers, and babysitters for that very reason as well <cite>OhhhJa posted [p:922264557] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>_AdjI_ posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>The assumption is the father cares less, which is deeply sexist.</quote> You've made this exact assumption yourself in talking about the pay gap (something to the effect of "women are more emotional and inclined toward nurturing, rather than competition").</quote> There is actually data to back that up though. For instance, stem is dominated by men because men choose to go into stem and not because men are pushing them out. And there are far more women nurses, housekeepers, and babysitters for that very reason as well</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kyuubi4269 05/23/19 9:51:44 AM #293:	_AdjI_ posted... Kyuubi4269 posted... You're not being forced to eat, And you're not being forced to give your wallet to a mugger who's threatening to stab you if you don't. Mugging is active, we covered this. _AdjI_ posted... Also, under some of these laws, the mother would be legally prohibited from trying to induce a miscarriage by deliberately not eating enough to support the fetus Because it's an attempt to bypass the law. You're allowed to under eat, you're not allowed to attempt to kill the fetus. _AdjI_ posted... Do you really believe that childbirth happens with no conscious effort? The process does. You're strongly encouraged physically to get it out so no sane person is just going to sit and wait, but there was that woman with a bike handle in her vag for 2 years so clearly there are some people that insane. Considering they exist, don't you think it's odd that there's no case of a person keep their baby inside forever? It would certainly be newsworthy, but it never has and never will happen. _AdjI_ posted... It does, however, mean pretty much everything in determining whether or not somebody feels the need to seek medical treatment for a problem. Whether you feel the need or not is irrelevant. If you go to a doctor for a problem that doesn't exist, they will turn you away. _AdjI_ posted... Using the passive voice only means you don't have to explicitly indicate an agent, not that there isn't one. Verbs cannot exist without subjects, whether real or implied. In that case, the implication is that the rubble was pushed by the force of the collapse. Are you seriously implying that the force of a falling skyscraper has agency? Because it don't. _AdjI_ posted... Also, we're talking about childbirth, not skyscrapers, and it's extremely obvious that I was referring specifically to the act of pushing a baby out and not to the applicability of the passive voice to the verb "push" in a broader sense. Your body ejects the baby slowly and painfully, you are strongly encouraged not to prolong that. --- Doctor Foxx posted... The demonizing of soy has a lot to do with xenophobic ideas. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted [p:922264760] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>_AdjI_ posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>You're not being forced to eat,</quote> And you're not being forced to give your wallet to a mugger who's threatening to stab you if you don't.</quote> Mugging is active, we covered this. <cite>_AdjI_ posted...</cite> <quote>Also, under some of these laws, the mother would be legally prohibited from trying to induce a miscarriage by deliberately not eating enough to support the fetus</quote> Because it's an attempt to bypass the law. You're allowed to under eat, you're not allowed to attempt to kill the fetus. <cite>_AdjI_ posted...</cite> <quote> Do you really believe that childbirth happens with no conscious effort?</quote> The process does. You're strongly encouraged physically to get it out so no sane person is just going to sit and wait, but there was that woman with a bike handle in her vag for 2 years so clearly there are some people that insane. Considering they exist, don't you think it's odd that there's no case of a person keep their baby inside forever? It would certainly be newsworthy, but it never has and never will happen. <cite>_AdjI_ posted...</cite> <quote>It does, however, mean pretty much everything in determining whether or not somebody feels the need to seek medical treatment for a problem. </quote> Whether you feel the need or not is irrelevant. If you go to a doctor for a problem that doesn't exist, they will turn you away. <cite>_AdjI_ posted...</cite> <quote>Using the passive voice only means you don't have to explicitly indicate an agent, not that there isn't one. Verbs cannot exist without subjects, whether real or implied. In that case, the implication is that the rubble was pushed by the force of the collapse. </quote> Are you seriously implying that the force of a falling skyscraper has agency? Because it don't. <cite>_AdjI_ posted...</cite> <quote>Also, we're talking about childbirth, not skyscrapers, and it's extremely obvious that I was referring specifically to the act of pushing a baby out and not to the applicability of the passive voice to the verb "push" in a broader sense.</quote> Your body ejects the baby slowly and painfully, you are strongly encouraged not to prolong that.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kyuubi4269 05/23/19 9:51:49 AM #294:	_AdjI_ posted... So's your brain, consciousness, and entire personality. If you're going to take a reductionist view of the world, don't half-ass it. Your body doesn't have agency, "you" do. You don't control your subconscious actions because your body has distinction from what is "you". --- Doctor Foxx posted... The demonizing of soy has a lot to do with xenophobic ideas. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted [p:922264763] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>_AdjI_ posted...</cite> <quote>So's your brain, consciousness, and entire personality. If you're going to take a reductionist view of the world, don't half-ass it.</quote> Your body doesn't have agency, "you" do. You don't control your subconscious actions because your body has distinction from what is "you".</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kyuubi4269 05/23/19 9:54:37 AM #295:	_AdjI_ posted... Kyuubi4269 posted... The assumption is the father cares less, which is deeply sexist. You've made this exact assumption yourself in talking about the pay gap (something to the effect of "women are more emotional and inclined toward nurturing, rather than competition"). Factually true, even apes in the wild have females prefering dolls as toys. It's an effect of our differing sexual hormones. Note, "more nurturing" does not mean "cares more", the different traits express different ways of caring for children, one isn't more betterer than the other. --- Doctor Foxx posted... The demonizing of soy has a lot to do with xenophobic ideas. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted [p:922264846] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>_AdjI_ posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>The assumption is the father cares less, which is deeply sexist.</quote> You've made this exact assumption yourself in talking about the pay gap (something to the effect of "women are more emotional and inclined toward nurturing, rather than competition").</quote> Factually true, even apes in the wild have females prefering dolls as toys. It's an effect of our differing sexual hormones. Note, "more nurturing" does not mean "cares more", the different traits express different ways of caring for children, one isn't more betterer than the other.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mead 05/23/19 9:59:52 AM #296:	LinkPizza posted... spooky96 posted... Mead posted... What defines late stage? From what I know even most pro-choice folks dont think its right to have an abortion after the third trimester begins Yeah I think it refers to around the third trimester. I guess at that point the fetus has a beating heart, neural activities (can experience pain and suffering). It's amazing though, just one state in the US did this and entire world is talking about it. Some of my friends here are talking about it as if it's directly going to affect them. I can understand that, though. I mean, one state is already moving backwards according to most people. And if one state does it, maybe another will. And maybe it will spread to other countries... Its a scary thought... Other conservative states are already putting similar legislation forward. Here in Missouri theyre banning abortions if a woman has been pregnant for six weeks --- If they drag you through the mud, it doesnt change whats in your blood <cite>Mead posted [p:922264995] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>LinkPizza posted...</cite> <quote><cite>spooky96 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Mead posted...</cite> <quote>What defines late stage? From what I know even most pro-choice folks dont think its right to have an abortion after the third trimester begins</quote> Yeah I think it refers to around the third trimester. I guess at that point the fetus has a beating heart, neural activities (can experience pain and suffering). It's amazing though, just one state in the US did this and entire world is talking about it. Some of my friends here are talking about it as if it's directly going to affect them.</quote> I can understand that, though. I mean, one state is already moving backwards according to most people. And if one state does it, maybe another will. And maybe it will spread to other countries... Its a scary thought...</quote> Other conservative states are already putting similar legislation forward. Here in Missouri theyre banning abortions if a woman has been pregnant for six weeks</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#297	Post #297 was unavailable or deleted.
Kyuubi4269 05/23/19 10:26:16 AM #298:	Sulugnaz posted... Also, try not to move the goal posts. First its Women dont get into trouble to she has to fuck up real hard. You're really going to read absolutes literally when it's basically never considering outliers? I suppose you can be disingenuous, but it doesn't help you. Sulugnaz posted... Guess what, the man had to fuck up real hard to get thrown into jail for it to. So that, again, isnt really a valid argument. Oh yeah, because the punishment is doable, that makes the wild abuse of men okay. --- Doctor Foxx posted... The demonizing of soy has a lot to do with xenophobic ideas. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted [p:922265874] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>Sulugnaz posted...</cite> <quote>Also, try not to move the goal posts. First its Women dont get into trouble to she has to fuck up real hard. </quote> You're really going to read absolutes literally when it's basically never considering outliers? I suppose you can be disingenuous, but it doesn't help you. <cite>Sulugnaz posted...</cite> <quote>Guess what, the man had to fuck up real hard to get thrown into jail for it to. So that, again, isnt really a valid argument.</quote> Oh yeah, because the punishment is doable, that makes the wild abuse of men okay.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#299	Post #299 was unavailable or deleted.
OhhhJa 05/23/19 10:28:14 AM #300:	Sulugnaz posted... Guess what, the man had to f* up real hard to get thrown into jail for it to. This is simply not true <cite>OhhhJa posted [p:922265931] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>Sulugnaz posted...</cite> <quote>Guess what, the man had to f* up real hard to get thrown into jail for it to.</quote> This is simply not true</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#301	Post #301 was unavailable or deleted.
Kyuubi4269 05/23/19 10:31:58 AM #302:	Sulugnaz posted... Im stating how it is. Not that its equitable or defending the system. You said his argument was invalid, and his argument is that it's not equitable, so you are defending it by saying it is equitable. Sulugnaz posted... Im only stating that Ooohja is not correct that women never get ordered to pay child support or get into trouble for not paying it. If you read literally rather than rationally, you're going to look bad; best you change that. --- Doctor Foxx posted... The demonizing of soy has a lot to do with xenophobic ideas. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted [p:922266050] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote><cite>Sulugnaz posted...</cite> <quote>Im stating how it is. Not that its equitable or defending the system.</quote> You said his argument was invalid, and his argument is that it's not equitable, so you are defending it by saying it is equitable. <cite>Sulugnaz posted...</cite> <quote>Im only stating that Ooohja is not correct that women never get ordered to pay child support or get into trouble for not paying it. </quote> If you read literally rather than rationally, you're going to look bad; best you change that.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OhhhJa 05/23/19 10:34:59 AM #303:	https://dadsdivorce.com/articles/dads-represent-85-of-child-support-providers-pay-more-than-female-payers/ <cite>OhhhJa posted [p:922266162] in Why are pe... [t:77719119]...</cite> <quote>https://dadsdivorce.com/articles/dads-represent-85-of-child-support-providers-pay-more-than-female-payers/</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1 ... 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

Poll of the Day > Why are people freaking out over Alabama? (+) Yeah! (+)

Poll of the Day > Why are people freaking out over Alabama?