-
The Sietch will be brought offline for HPG systems maintenance tomorrow (Thursday, 2 May 2024). Please remain calm and do not start any interstellar wars while ComStar is busy. May the Peace of Blake be with you. Precentor Dune
Five minutes of hate news
- Thread starter PsihoKekec
- Start date
Never worked in my games. We'll, that's not entirely true. Bard did delay the Dragon a bit allowing the rest of the party a head start. Bard was just eaten first by the Dragon after listening to his song. Dragon told the rest of the party he wanted the Bard to end on a high note.
I mostly agree with this.
An abortion is not to be taken likely, and I am "shade of grey" pro-choice. Each side has points, and there are ultimately no real winners.
Women considering it should heavily think about and, to be frank, agonize over the decision. They are looking to terminate a life, regardless of what other people say about it "just being a cluster of cells" (something I disagree with other pro-choicers, since those cells can and will become a human being).
If, for example, a pair discuss this weighted situation and agree to go through with it, I understand, respect, and agree with this, since they did not take the decision lightly. They'd understand the ramifications of what they're about to consent to. That's choice. This also includes medical reasonings too, such as the child being severely deformed or mutilated (but this also runs the risk of going into eugenics territory, too -- "Oh, I don't want a Down Syndrome baby" for example, instead of "if my baby doesn't have a fully formed brain or heart, then we should be merciful", et cetera).
It gets more murky when, for example, if a twelve year old child has been raped and is pregnant.
A grey line here is whether it should be terminated for the mother's health and her age as a default (and it should be terminated if there's no doubt it'd kill her giving birth or by letting the baby grow). She (or rather her guardians/parents with her input, unless the father/guardian is the one responsible, of course) should also heavily consider things like the above, and it'd be even more weighted a decision because of the mother's age herself.
No one wins here for obvious reasons regardless if she'd give birth or not because each result in life-altering/destroying decisions/consequences.
That child should also not be forced to bring the baby to term, regardless of whether it'd kill or cripple her. This is where I vehemently disagree with pro-lifers. This is where "my body, my choice" comes into play because, in this context, a woman's body is not property of the fucking State when it comes to reproduction.
However, right now pro-choicers view abortion is seen an easy way of birth-control instead of it being a heavy decision to make, and they even celebrate killing unborn children or what would become a child because of their view of "my body, my choice".
"Whoops, I fucked Chad or Tyrone a few weeks back during a Tinder hookup without using a condom again, and now I'm preggo again. I guess I should schedule another Appointment!"
And this is where my hypocritical/double-standard view comes in -- women, and this mostly applies to late teenagers and women in their twenties because they're the ones who are mostly doing this, who do the above? Maybe they should be forced to bring that baby to term (unless it threatens their lives medically) after a set amount of abortions have already been done (e.g. five or so in the last year/three years) on record, even if they put the newborn up for adoption straight after birth.
But, as I said before, this tramples on a woman's "my body, my choice"/"not property of the State" in principles, and it'd likely lead to an increase in home-made abortion procedure attempts like the infamous "falling down stairs" and "coathangers" (which, ya know, never go well) or "back alley abortionists", as seen in 19th Century London.
So, yeah -- the bipartizanization of pro-choice and pro-life are stupid because neither consider in-depth context 99% of the time. It's not a black and white issue with clearly defined lines but a mess of shades of grey that makes my cooking attempts look like colourful rainbows, and laws need to reflect this/be more flexible
Last edited:
Skitzyfrenic
Well-known member
I've always considered the medical reason and rape reason abortions to be a different discussion, tbh.
Of course, with how domestic courts blatantly favor women, all an abortion ban is going to do is fuck over more men.
'Yeah, we hooked up, nine months ago, your honor, and about two weeks ago she slammed me with child support papers. And now you're saying that despite having to pay for this kid, who we haven't even confirmed is mine, for 18 years, I'm not allowed to even see a hair upon their head' is already plenty common.
Of course, with how domestic courts blatantly favor women, all an abortion ban is going to do is fuck over more men.
'Yeah, we hooked up, nine months ago, your honor, and about two weeks ago she slammed me with child support papers. And now you're saying that despite having to pay for this kid, who we haven't even confirmed is mine, for 18 years, I'm not allowed to even see a hair upon their head' is already plenty common.
That's actually highly illegal in France lmao.
Bear Ribs
Well-known member
Illegal in some areas. Even when it's not, courts routinely order men to pay child support in cases of adultery where the child isn't his.
US man forced to pay support for a child that's not his
A US man has been ordered to continue paying child support even after DNA evidence proved he is not the fat...
www.9news.com.au
Michigan Case Shows Need For Paternity Fraud Laws
Carnell Alexander could be sent to prison for failing to pay child support for a child that isn't his because of Michigan's lack of paternity fraud laws.
dadsdivorce.com
Dad learns daughter isn't his - but he's still made to pay child maintenance
The father, from Hull, has hit out at the Child Maintenance Service (CMS) after he paid £38,000 over 14 years before learning that the girl he helped raise wasn't his
www.mirror.co.uk
DarthOne
☦️
Illegal in some areas. Even when it's not, courts routinely order men to pay child support in cases of adultery where the child isn't his.
US man forced to pay support for a child that's not his
A US man has been ordered to continue paying child support even after DNA evidence proved he is not the fat...
Michigan Case Shows Need For Paternity Fraud Laws
Carnell Alexander could be sent to prison for failing to pay child support for a child that isn't his because of Michigan's lack of paternity fraud laws.
Dad learns daughter isn't his - but he's still made to pay child maintenance
The father, from Hull, has hit out at the Child Maintenance Service (CMS) after he paid £38,000 over 14 years before learning that the girl he helped raise wasn't his
We have much work to do in fixing things.
I think we need to marry responsibility and power.
If abortion is legal then having a child is a unalateral decision, and having some one else pay for your unalateral decision isn't fair. Thus where abortion is legal child support and alimony should be illegal. If the woman wants the mate to help support the child they should come to an arrangement about what she will do to help make him happy with said decision.
Theres this thing called marrage that I hear is pretty good at that. If said aggrement ends, then the fincial support ends. This sounds harsh yes but children raised by single mothers do worse on pretty much every metric so like most civilizations in human history we should make it suck.
It's not just domestic courts but society, culture, and the legal system as a whole -- even down to arresting methods used by police. If they arrive at a house for a domestic disturbance call and see a crazy woman shrieking her head off, waving a bloodied knife, and a guy heavily bleeding from a wound in his arm, they'd still put the guy in cuffs because "procedure": He's the one presumed guilty.
Let's not even get into softer sentences (or rather "what sentences?") which are given to women compared to if a man did the same crime.
Basically, we live in a soft matriarchy, despite what FemNazi groomers like to shriek their heads off about on a regular basis.
Until this all changes, men should just walk away, do not engage, and let them rot on the vine.
My prediction is that it will change and it wont be a peaceful one.
Historically speaking lots of unmarried men with no prospects of ever having a family and nothing to lose....that leads to rather violent revolutions. And with the left doing everything in its power to humilate men when ever they can....the blow back when men do snap is going to be pretty epic.
TheRejectionist
TheRejectionist
I will try my best in the future👌 unfortunately I haven't done so much of it because I am constantly exhausted by the stuff I still have to do for university.
Ixian
Well-known member
The farmers were literally burning effigies of her after that.
Turns out posting your "how to subvert a political movement for your own ends" guide accidentally whilst in the middle of attempting to subvert a political movement leads to backlash.
We need to stop pointlessly meedling in other nations affairs
Your "We" should be GloboHomo, like the WHO and WEF -- goddamn fucking parasites.
Unfortunately, one-side pacifism doesn't work, and other nations have meddled in our affairs to a massive degree over the years.
Russia and Germany both are responsible for introducing communism to the world at large and US media/academia specifically, Iran has been waging a cyberwar against most Americans with Russia as a partner (and a literal war against Israel-Americans), the CCP are dangerous to the fucking biosphere, and North Korea is just a psychotic little nuclear armed hamlet with ego and famine issues. I guess we could add Pakistan to the list too (we haven't forgotten where Osama was hiding out).
National disgengagement from world affairs doesn't work, as much as some may wish it could; that's a lesson shown to be very clearly by the last 3~ years or so, and history has shown it again and again the last century or so.
mrttao
Well-known member
He isn't advocating one side pacifism
He is advocating kneecapping our "glorious leaders" (parasites) because all they do in foreign nations is fuck everyone over.
In that specific example, he is not even referring to our "elected" leaders. but rather to a secretive cabal of western corporations trying to undermine foreign govts
Basically. have laws where if america catches an american corporation undermining a foreign govt, their ceo goes to prison
I said pointlessly.
As in it actually has to serve American interests instead of just imposing shit on others.
Ixian
Well-known member
I hate calling them a "secretive cabal" they stopped even the pretense of secrecy about 7 years ago
Also it makes them seem bigger then they are, its a good ol'boys club of some of our nation's top corporate and political leadership on the leftwing, with some RINO allies and foreign allies in the globalist community.