Party of family values part 1 😂
-
@chanelkokoro said in Party of family values part 1
:Here is fox news celebrating that South Carolina brought back the firing squad in may of 2021:
That is a very disturbing item, but I thank you for sharing it.
A firing squad does indeed show the barbarism behind capital punishment, although there are people who rather sickly crave that sort of thing. Lethal injection seems so "clean" to people. I imagine they wipe down the injection site before inserting a sterile needle--we wouldn't want to cause an infection.
-
@eobox91103 omg That's such a great point. I'm a nurse, I'm positive they wipe down the injection site first.
I agree with cenk, the male host, in saying that the death penalty is wrong because we keep executing the wrong people.
I don't mind killing people who have killed people especially in purposeful and cruel ways. I'll go even farther and say, I believe people should die the same exact way you killed someone else. If you shot someone to death you should be shot to death, if you knifed someone you should be knifed, if you strangled someone you should be strangled, and if you raped someone you should be raped too. But I'm not a bible hugger who purports to be pro life though. I'm pro justice. I'm sure there is something about this logic that's a bit messed up, but I can't help the way I feel.
The only problem is that we keep killing innocent people on death row. And I'd rather get rid of the death penalty entirely than risk even 1 innocent person dying because of it.
-
@chanelkokoro said in Party of family values part 1
:@eobox91103 omg That's such a great point. I'm a nurse, I'm positive they wipe down the injection site first.
The only problem is that we keep killing innocent people on death row. And I'd rather get rid of the death penalty entirely than risk even 1 innocent person dying because of it.
Yes, that's the problem. Whether needle or noose, there's no "undo" button after the fact.
-
Pro-Life is giving each person a chance.
Pro-Choice is killing people before they have a chance.
Clearly, you liberals are unable to understand that.
-
@raphjd said in Party of family values part 1
:Pro-Life is giving each person a chance.
Pro-Choice is killing people before they have a chance.
Clearly, you liberals are unable to understand that.
Let's try it this way:
Thou shalt not kill
It doesn't say: thou shalt not kill babies any more than it says thou shalt not kill murderers....
What really gets me are the pro-lifers who argue that rape & incest pregnancies should be exceptions. Sure, the kid's father is a criminal, so just OK their murder because of the actions of their father...
That's the American Way!
-
You mean the same religions that have stonings and went on murderous rampages through the region?
-
@raphjd said in Party of family values part 1
:You mean the same religions that have stonings and went on murderous rampages through the region?
Yup - same ones! Same ones that sanctioned slavery! Same ones that sanctioned genocide - multiple times throughout history!
Glad there's no confusion there...
Murder was wrong then, and its wrong now.
Men were sinners then, and they are sinners now!
-
@raphjd but we both have a different definition of what life is.
Have you ever had eggs? you kill life each time you do because had y'all just left the hen alone to do it's thing and bring that egg to term it would've become a chick. why is that life any different from an the clump of cells that make up a human zygote, why does that life matter to you more?
We have to define where life begins. Science has defined it as viability. Because if you define life at the potentiality for life such as at conception that rabbit hole never ends. That means by the time you get that dick up there is a 3rd person in that room. have you ever condemned yourself for all the lives you've killed cumming in your toilet?
but then, why do conservatives claim to be pro life, but anti birth control and anti sex education that would lead to less abortions? how do y'all claim to be pro life and then try to gut and defund the programs that would help sustain that life? make it make sense.
-
@bi4smooth the bible was pro-abortion though lol.
-
@chanelkokoro said in Party of family values part 1
:We have to define where life begins. Science has defined it as viability. Because if you define life at the potentiality for life such as at conception that rabbit hole never ends. That means by the time you get that dick up there is a 3rd person in that room. have you ever condemned yourself for all the lives you've killed cumming in your toilet?
but then, why do conservatives claim to be pro life, but anti birth control and anti sex education that would lead to less abortions? how do y'all claim to be pro life and then try to gut and defund the programs that would help sustain that life? make it make sense.
"Viability" is a tricky concept: As medical science improves, smaller and smaller fetuses could be considered viable. But there could also be an argument (which I don't think anybody has made) that a child isn't "viable" until age 8 or 10, given that for some period of many years, s/he is dependent on other humans to provide food, shelter, etc. The young of other species (I'm thinking of turtles and fish, and likely others) are abandoned when hatched, so they are by definition viable at birth. I don't know the way out of this mess.
As for birth control and sex education, the conservatives' view on that baffles me. If conservatives don't want women to terminate an unwanted pregnancy, why don't they seek to prevent those unwanted pregnancies from occurring in the first place? Quite illogical on their part.
-
Most conservatives don't care about birth control and sex ed. It's a non-issue for us.
What you will find is that most conservatives don't want to fund your birth control and abortions.
As another person mentioned, viability for ancient jews was deemed on the 7th birthday. Other cultures had various ages, but usually between 7 and 13.
-
@raphjd but contraception is healthcare, it falls under prescription medication. Birth control is used for a myriad of things not just to prevent birth but it aids women in regulating their cycles, easing cramps and treating hormonal acne. Conservatives have no right getting in between a woman and her doctor and cherry picking which medication taxpayers should pay for, the same way we leftists have no right to decide that our taxpayer dollars shouldn't go towards paying for men's viagra or gonorrhea ointment. If public insurance programs like medicare ad medicaid cover prescription medication, than they cover prescription medication no matter the type.
Furthermore conservatives have been crying about not paying for people's abortions for a hot minute. For anyone who is not american please do not be fooled. The American taxpayer does not pay for a single person's abortion. The Hyde Amendment a federal law, prevents taxpayer money in going to abortions (although it should, because again abortions are healthcare). They are crying about an issue that does not exist.
and bro, if you're the kind of conservative that doesn't care about contraception and sex ed i commend you but you are definitely in the minority. all along the bible belt conservatives fought and lobbied to remove comprehensive sex education from schools. The result was the red states having much higher rates of stds and teen pregnancy. Ken Cucchinelli of virginia even ran for governor on trying to bring back an anti-sodomy law that would've outlawed even blowjobs. (Yes. even blowjobs.) Y'all conservatives are obsessed butt sex and obsessed with pretending you aren't obsessed with butt sex.
-
@eobox91103 said in Party of family values part 1
:"Viability" is a tricky concept: As medical science improves, smaller and smaller fetuses could be considered viable. But there could also be an argument (which I don't think anybody has made) that a child isn't "viable" until age 8 or 10, given that for some period of many years, s/he is dependent on other humans to provide food, shelter, etc. The young of other species (I'm thinking of turtles and fish, and likely others) are abandoned when hatched, so they are by definition viable at birth. I don't know the way out of this mess.
I am also concered about technology as well redefining viability however we have some leeway. So far a woman usually finds out she's pregnant around 3 months. and then they have another 3 months after that to decide if they want the baby. I can live with that becoming 2 months but we all need to respect a woman's autonomy but as it stands there is really no way a baby less than 6 months can survive outside of the womb so that is still the standard.
Dying because of lack of care or lack of resources, is a different standard then dying because of lack of development and and your organs not having the capacity to breathe and your heart to beat.
-
@chanelkokoro said in Party of family values part 1
:@raphjd but contraception is healthcare,
exactly - which is why politics & religion have almost no place at the table when talking about these issues (IMHO)
-
@bi4smooth I think it's just craven and rampant sexism. Imagine if we women rose up and said "hell no, we ain't paying for your vasectomy! we ain't paying for your viagra!, we ain't paying for your circumcisions! we ain't paying for your itchy ballsack medication!!" You guys would be wondering how that's any of our damn business, and you'd be right to. But the conservative base has built an entire national conversation out of saying such things to women and we're all supposed to pretend it's normal because of "sincerely held religious beliefs." I just can't.
-
@bi4smooth said in Party of family values part 1
:@chanelkokoro said in Party of family values part 1
:@raphjd but contraception is healthcare,
exactly - which is why politics & religion have almost no place at the table when talking about these issues (IMHO)
It's my business when you demand I pay for it.
-
@chanelkokoro said in Party of family values part 1
:@bi4smooth I think it's just craven and rampant sexism. Imagine if we women rose up and said "hell no, we ain't paying for your vasectomy! we ain't paying for your viagra!, we ain't paying for your circumcisions! we ain't paying for your itchy ballsack medication!!" You guys would be wondering how that's any of our damn business, and you'd be right to. But the conservative base has built an entire national conversation out of saying such things to women and we're all supposed to pretend it's normal because of "sincerely held religious beliefs." I just can't.
We already had the Male Genital Mutilation discussion and its sexist attitudes in the US. You can find the thread here somewhere. 84% of MGM is ordered by the mother. The same women that would never, ever have their daughters circumcised.
Female circumcision was banned throughout the west, but male genital mutilation was not.
Scotland used studies on male genital mutilation as justification to ban ear cropping and tail docking on dogs but still allow boys to be mutilated.
WHO and other medical groups advocate for male genital mutilation as a part of female health care. This is sexist on its face. It also ignores that HPV hides in the genital folds regardless of gender. So they should be advocating for the "extra skin" on both genders to be removed.
Planned Parenthood is severely funded by the government. The claim is that they don't use any of that money for abortions, which is extremely dishonest. If they stopped getting taxpayer money, where would they get the money to fund their buildings, staff, etc, etc, etc?!
The HPV vaccine was only given to females in the west for over a decade, despite males getting far more often than females. From memory, males got it 5 times more than females.
Females still get Affirmative Action, despite overtaking males in every aspect of education.
In many countries, women can not commit sex crimes, domestic violence, and other things.
There is a laundry list of things where there is rampant sexism against men.
-
@raphjd said in Party of family values part 1
:We already had the Male Genital Mutilation discussion and its sexist attitudes in the US. You can find the thread here somewhere. 84% of MGM is ordered by the mother. The same women that would never, ever have their daughters circumcised.
Damn, dude! They've been snipping at the ends of boy's penises for over 3,000 years... (not hyperbole - three millenia!) and it's all been a feminist plot? Has even the past 100 years been a feminist plot?
I'm no fan of circumcision (and I do not object to the term male-genital-mutilation, as that's truly what it is)... but an ancient, barbaric, religious practice is not exactly a "tool of the feminists"!
Planned Parenthood is severely funded by the government. The claim is that they don't use any of that money for abortions, which is extremely dishonest. If they stopped getting taxpayer money, where would they get the money to fund their buildings, staff, etc, etc, etc?!
I am curious how the word "severely" can apply to government funding... but word choice aside, Planned Parenthood has had its government funding cutoff before, and the organization didn't wither up and die. Indeed, they offer many different kinds of programs: non-medical, as well as medical - including abortion services - that are often paid for by their clients' health insurers.
It's always easy to vilify an organization that does something you fundamentally disagree with (in this case, that would be abortion), but the real world seldom can be so easily categorized into good vs. bad.
The HPV vaccine was only given to females in the west for over a decade, despite males getting far more often than females. From memory, males got it 5 times more than females.
The identification of HPV as being a cause of cervical cancer was quite the shocker to the medical community. The HPV vaccine was, for most of its early years, seen strictly as a preventative for cervical cancer.... and any man who had a cervix was strongly suggested to take the vaccine.
It wasn't until later that they also traced other cancers - and genital warts (eww... can we change the subject... quickly!) that they started recommending it for boys as well as girls.
As the father of 9 (current ages from the 30s to mid-teens), I am pleased to report that all of my children: with and without a cervix, have been vaccinated against HPV.
Females still get Affirmative Action, despite overtaking males in every aspect of education.
I'll have to alert every Engineering school in America... their counts are wrong!
FACT: STEM enrollments are still predominantly male, with some exceptions - like medicine. But even then, you're looking at enrollments strictly in European and North American colleges... include the REST of the world (with far more population, mind you) and the numbers vary widely... Indeed, with the US pullout from Afghanistan, female education is destined to once again become outlawed there. Sharia Law, don't ya know!In many countries, women can not commit sex crimes, domestic violence, and other things.
It is true: in Saudi Arabia, by way of example, a woman cannot be accused of raping a man. No such crime exists on the books. On the other hand, she can be killed by her husband's (or brother's or father's) hand on a whim - with no consequences to him (so long as he claims it was to protect his honor) - so, what's the point in charging her with rape? Just kill her! Silly westerner with such outlandish ideas! Why would you waste time and money on a woman! If she doesn't please you, just kill her and find another!
There is a laundry list of things where there is rampant sexism against men.
This is an area you and I fundamentally disagree on routinely: I don't mind competing on an even playing field - even if that field is slightly in favor of others. White men have been the privileged class for so long, and I am keenly aware of many areas of my life where I received (and, to be fair & truthful, I continue to receive) advantages.
To me it's just "evening up the competition".... to you, it's an affront to all that is masculine and a challenge to the "rightness" of the way things used to be - the way that favored you.
Whereas I welcome the competition - even if the playing field is not perfectly fair (as-if it ever was) - you appear to want to be victimized by it...
-
You do love to defend the liberal dogma.
India, Israel, UK, and others don't allow women to be charged with sex crimes. The UK allows for some sex crimes, but not the most serious ones.
Some countries, like India and Israel, have outright bans on women being charged with any form of domestic abuse. Western countries use the Duluth Model of DV which dictates that except in extreme cases, the man is to be arrested, even when he is the victim.
France and Germany don't allow paternity tests, for "family harmony".
If women refuse to go into STEM, that is not men's fault. Nor does it negate that women are doing far better in all levels of education than men.
In about 1968/69, the way kids were taught was starting to change to give help to girls because, despite liberal BS, the genders are different. The current way of teaching is that boys are deemed, defective girls. This is why recess is nearly gone and kids are only given "quiet reading time".
Females still dominate college admissions and those that get degrees.
-
As always, you can only view the world through your liberal lenses.
I support equality. By that, I mean true equality, not some liberal "equity" bull shit.
If poor families are to get $500 a month to help them out, then don't be a fucking racist and exclude poor white families from that program.
Likewise with the Biden farming money to non-white and/or non-male poor farmers.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login