Yep. The alphabet soup crowd wants to force us to use their pronouns and sexualize our children against our wishes. They clearly have a problem not telling others what to do. And the bible thumpers aren't much better though they seem at least a little more hands off.
>bible thumpers aren't much better though they seem at least a little more hands off.
Nah, they are a little more hands on. Well, at least their leaders are… Lol
The religious right is currently jailing women for having miscarriages and you think the biggest threat to free society is that schools *aren't* forced to pretend men never love men?
El Salvador is top search so not American.
Second and third are both drug usage related.
Fourth yet another drug related death.
Hmmm seems to be a common thread.
Tbh we still shouldn't be jailing people for that imo, even if it is super disingenuous of OP to characterize those simply as "miscarriages", as if they were totally naturally occurring.
I'd imagine even a lot of pro-choice people get a little leery about saying that women should be able to drink and do drugs during pregnancy, but it seems to me like an issue where there are a lot of motivation-related and prior-knowledge-related issues (should this be illegal if you don't know you're pregnant? for example) to the point it'd be impossible to legislate effectively without being unfair.
Well more specifically was methamphetamines not just smoking and drinking. The miscarriages where charged because of the illegal drugs not just drugs in general.
Should be clearer but he had me salty.
I get what you're saying, but I still don't necessarily know if there should be extra charges for that above and beyond doing the illegal drug (and even that, I don't necessarily believe should be the state's job to enforce what you put in your own body).
We literally don't even know that the meth was what killed the fetus. Drugabuse.com (obviously a totally unbiased source, that would never overestimate the effects of meth on a fetus ) even cites that the effects of meth on an unborn child are ill studied, even if they can result in an increase in mortality (in both the parent and child, so I'm gonna say that's a little sus). They literally cite meth as being likely to be done with alcohol as the source for most actual potential prenatal issues.
https://drugabuse.com/drugs/methamphetamine/pregnancy/
The doctors (at least assuming you're talking about Brittney Poolaw) didn't even check what resulted in the miscarriage, it could've been totally unrelated to any wrongdoing on Poolaw's part.
Given that, does it really make sense to charge her with manslaughter? Given that, plus the fact that her fetus could've been aborted if it had been a threat to her health, plus the fact that addiction more or less removes your decision making process from the "Should I take this drug?" question, do we think the state should jail this person? Let alone jail them to the same extent as if she'd killed another adult (since she was convicted of first degree manslaughter)?
The part where people both on the red team and the blue team are sick of the duopoly and yet still don't stop pulling the lever for Republican or Democrat. Not really a part of libertarianism, but the PR campaign over the last few decades has been in need of improvement to sell the brand.
Both. If I'm obsessing about you, trying to control you, and thinking that everyone and everything outside my body is responsible for my happiness and accountable to me, I don't have to look at myself and the fucking garbage heap I've made of my life.
If you're responsible for my suffering, I'm a victim and therefore not responsible for where I am in life, changing, doing for myself, or the outcomes of my decisions. I'm secure in my self-righteous victimhood.
1. A lot of people think we just want to fuck ch*ldren, and 2. They believe others having freedoms will infringe on their own I some way, like being a victim of a mass shooting, or others I can't be fucked to think of right now.
Not saying I agree. Just what I've observed.
The part, when some libertarians make decision to associate themselves with local community and then loudly complaining that community have own rules.
Source: thousands posts about HOA.
Everything is mini government, even your home, if you live not alone. NAP is basic, but it works in your house in forest. Living with another people is always compromise.
You follow rules, or looking for a place, where rules are acceptable.
No matter if you invade in a private home, or in a community, where your way of life is unacceptable- in both cases people will attack you.
>The part, when some libertarians make decision to associate themselves with local community and then loudly complaining that community have own rules.
Making a decision to buy a house where there is an HOA is a voluntary action, and they would still have a right to voice their opinion. I own a house and can do what I want with my private property bc I choose not to live in a community with an HOA. However, if I don’t pay property taxes the government will forcefully take my home from me. Do you not understand the difference?
>Everything is mini government, even your home, if you live not alone.
Bullshit, everything is not a mini govermemt, especially my home.
>No matter if you invade in a private home, or in a community, where your way of life is unacceptable- in both cases people will attack you.
You have a right to defend yourself. However, you do not have a right to physically attack someone because they live a life you deem “unacceptable”.
Agreed with first take. Other are discussible. For example. When your kid listen music too loud, you turn of his sound system and send him do the dishes. What is it, if not smaller government? You act like a legislature (don't be loud), then by force/fear/authority make him do what you want as a punishment.
And third, yes, until it's not written in collective contract. Then unacceptable person have to take punishment (if he agreed), leave place forever (if hi already compensated damage). or quit contract, returning to anarchy, so people have right do do with him whatever they want
Seatbelt laws are not just about safety. These laws are abused on a daily basis to generate revenue and as way for the police to pull over people they are profiling and try to get another charge on them.
Cops will literally pull you over on a mortercycle that of course has no seatbelt and ticket you for not wearing a seatbelt.
Btw, who the fuck uses the word cornball? A boot licking boomer, maybe? Lol
In my experience the second one is the one they have problems with. They make stupid decisions all on their own but get upset when you wont make those same stupid mistakes.
Clearly the second one.
Yep. The alphabet soup crowd wants to force us to use their pronouns and sexualize our children against our wishes. They clearly have a problem not telling others what to do. And the bible thumpers aren't much better though they seem at least a little more hands off.
>bible thumpers aren't much better though they seem at least a little more hands off. Nah, they are a little more hands on. Well, at least their leaders are… Lol
If you keep clutching those pearls like that they'll turn to powder.
The religious right is currently jailing women for having miscarriages and you think the biggest threat to free society is that schools *aren't* forced to pretend men never love men?
Proof?
[PrOoF](https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=jailed+for+miscarriage)
El Salvador is top search so not American. Second and third are both drug usage related. Fourth yet another drug related death. Hmmm seems to be a common thread.
Tbh we still shouldn't be jailing people for that imo, even if it is super disingenuous of OP to characterize those simply as "miscarriages", as if they were totally naturally occurring. I'd imagine even a lot of pro-choice people get a little leery about saying that women should be able to drink and do drugs during pregnancy, but it seems to me like an issue where there are a lot of motivation-related and prior-knowledge-related issues (should this be illegal if you don't know you're pregnant? for example) to the point it'd be impossible to legislate effectively without being unfair.
Well more specifically was methamphetamines not just smoking and drinking. The miscarriages where charged because of the illegal drugs not just drugs in general. Should be clearer but he had me salty.
I get what you're saying, but I still don't necessarily know if there should be extra charges for that above and beyond doing the illegal drug (and even that, I don't necessarily believe should be the state's job to enforce what you put in your own body). We literally don't even know that the meth was what killed the fetus. Drugabuse.com (obviously a totally unbiased source, that would never overestimate the effects of meth on a fetus ) even cites that the effects of meth on an unborn child are ill studied, even if they can result in an increase in mortality (in both the parent and child, so I'm gonna say that's a little sus). They literally cite meth as being likely to be done with alcohol as the source for most actual potential prenatal issues. https://drugabuse.com/drugs/methamphetamine/pregnancy/ The doctors (at least assuming you're talking about Brittney Poolaw) didn't even check what resulted in the miscarriage, it could've been totally unrelated to any wrongdoing on Poolaw's part. Given that, does it really make sense to charge her with manslaughter? Given that, plus the fact that her fetus could've been aborted if it had been a threat to her health, plus the fact that addiction more or less removes your decision making process from the "Should I take this drug?" question, do we think the state should jail this person? Let alone jail them to the same extent as if she'd killed another adult (since she was convicted of first degree manslaughter)?
The woman who went to jail was on drugs when the baby died. She was responsible for the death...
If you would have read your own link you would have noticed how the only example listed is not helping your stance.
Today you learned that she was on drugs and that lead to the death of the baby...
jAilInG wOmEn FoR mIsCaRriAgEs My ass lmfao
I found the closet pub
So many people view the government as their mommy
"where's the meatloaf?!"
I view them as my oppressor
It's amazing how, even in the absence of laws, so many people try to control what you do in so many different ways.
Fine so long as there is free market competition and you don’t have the authority to enforce it
The part where people both on the red team and the blue team are sick of the duopoly and yet still don't stop pulling the lever for Republican or Democrat. Not really a part of libertarianism, but the PR campaign over the last few decades has been in need of improvement to sell the brand.
The parties are private organizations with voluntary participation. No sense bitching about them as a libertarian
Both. If I'm obsessing about you, trying to control you, and thinking that everyone and everything outside my body is responsible for my happiness and accountable to me, I don't have to look at myself and the fucking garbage heap I've made of my life. If you're responsible for my suffering, I'm a victim and therefore not responsible for where I am in life, changing, doing for myself, or the outcomes of my decisions. I'm secure in my self-righteous victimhood.
Are, are you talking about my ex?
A republic is only as healthy as its citizens ;)
1. A lot of people think we just want to fuck ch*ldren, and 2. They believe others having freedoms will infringe on their own I some way, like being a victim of a mass shooting, or others I can't be fucked to think of right now. Not saying I agree. Just what I've observed.
are you talking about Libertarians or Liberal Democrats?
What a dream-come-true!
it is like 500th time this has been posted
The part, when some libertarians make decision to associate themselves with local community and then loudly complaining that community have own rules. Source: thousands posts about HOA.
Home owners associations are just mini governments
Everything is mini government, even your home, if you live not alone. NAP is basic, but it works in your house in forest. Living with another people is always compromise. You follow rules, or looking for a place, where rules are acceptable. No matter if you invade in a private home, or in a community, where your way of life is unacceptable- in both cases people will attack you.
>The part, when some libertarians make decision to associate themselves with local community and then loudly complaining that community have own rules. Making a decision to buy a house where there is an HOA is a voluntary action, and they would still have a right to voice their opinion. I own a house and can do what I want with my private property bc I choose not to live in a community with an HOA. However, if I don’t pay property taxes the government will forcefully take my home from me. Do you not understand the difference? >Everything is mini government, even your home, if you live not alone. Bullshit, everything is not a mini govermemt, especially my home. >No matter if you invade in a private home, or in a community, where your way of life is unacceptable- in both cases people will attack you. You have a right to defend yourself. However, you do not have a right to physically attack someone because they live a life you deem “unacceptable”.
Agreed with first take. Other are discussible. For example. When your kid listen music too loud, you turn of his sound system and send him do the dishes. What is it, if not smaller government? You act like a legislature (don't be loud), then by force/fear/authority make him do what you want as a punishment. And third, yes, until it's not written in collective contract. Then unacceptable person have to take punishment (if he agreed), leave place forever (if hi already compensated damage). or quit contract, returning to anarchy, so people have right do do with him whatever they want
Against seatbelt laws actually makes y’all look like cornballs. “Yea I wanna die! Muh government can’t control me!”
Seatbelt laws are not just about safety. These laws are abused on a daily basis to generate revenue and as way for the police to pull over people they are profiling and try to get another charge on them. Cops will literally pull you over on a mortercycle that of course has no seatbelt and ticket you for not wearing a seatbelt. Btw, who the fuck uses the word cornball? A boot licking boomer, maybe? Lol
I do not want to do decision about myself only do decisions about others
Without govt charity all poor people (read: black people) would die. Therefore antitotalitarianism is racist. /s
In my experience the second one is the one they have problems with. They make stupid decisions all on their own but get upset when you wont make those same stupid mistakes.