No, but you must be.
Baby murder gets the death penalty in Texas. This law calls for civil penalties, not even a parking ticket. It's an infraction of a regulation other citizens can profit from enforcing, not murder in any way shape or form, by Texas law.

You gave me the definition!!! ROTFLMFAHS!!!!
" Definition
Murder: the unlawful premeditated killing of one HUMAN BEING by another"
But you intentionally ignore the fact that the unborn aren't yet people. You can't murder non people. I've pointed this out repeatedly. It seems you must have the illiteracy problem along with your reality problem.

It's true, I WOULD and HAVE defended infanticide, especially historically, but I absolutely have not mentioned it before now in this thread. Supporting abortion is not defending murder by any accepted definition of those words, you have to skew the definitions of human beings and the definition of murder before your position makes sense. Duh. I expect your verbal SAT score was awful, you have a tenuous grasp of English.

According to the bible, yep, not people. Sorry. Try reading it and interpreting what's actually there instead of having someone do it for you.

So, you are advocating Baptist Sharia law.

America has legalized abortions in every state by law because the majority wants it. Don't like it, fuck right off. As easy as that, but your ilk didn't fuck off, you prefer end runs around the constitution and the destruction of codified rights and using legal trickery and convolutions to enact laws that are knowingly unconstitutional but will effectively end abortions before the legal process can invalidate them by bankrupting providers. Anything BUT fucking right off. Take your own advice first, maybe.

Again, the majority in Texas don't want this, didn't vote for it, and absolutely don't want the consequences....which is an exodus of multi national corporations who won't support this nonsense with their wallets.

The majority of Americans are Christians, and a large majority want abortion to be legal and easy to access. Your logic is fatally flawed, being Christian doesn't mean you're anti abortion any more than it means you're anti murder, in fact it means you're more likely to support and defend murder, the bible prescribes it for almost any infraction from actual murder to mowing your lawn on Sunday. The bible says nearly nothing about abortion, what little it does say indicates it's not a crime. Holy fuck, learn your own religion before trying to impose it on others!

Texas was already teetering on the brink of bankruptcy, no doubt the backlash for this move will push them hard over the edge. I already cancelled my trip there, and won't be buying any Texas made products. I'm not alone.
Enjoy!

Agreed, so learn the fundamentals, because you have them wrong.

The bible says if a group of men beat a woman so hard she has a miscarriage but otherwise don't hurt her, no crime or harm has been done, but if they harm HER an eye for an eye comes into play. That's as close to directly saying abortions are fine because the unborn aren't people under Christianity as you could possibly hope for 1800 years before the current procedure existed....but it should be noted that the practice began nearly 5000 years ago in China, and 3500 years ago in European culture. It was not unknown when the bible was written, but is unmentioned beyond this passage that indicated it's not a crime under Christianity.

All the nonsense you've been taught and are repeating is not in the bible, it's only coming from the church as a power grab over reproduction rights. If you don't know the fundamentals of your own religion, please don't try to impose your ignorant misunderstandings on others.

No, they absolutely are not.
Christians have murdered more people in the name of their religion than any other groups for any other reasons.
Christians LOVE murder.
Duh.

"other christians?" ...

"perscribed opinions" ...

If you don't know very fundamentals of the religion please don't try and be "smart"

It's called scientism and this religion has many adherents in the secular community.

Unbelievably *terrible idea.

Never in a million years, and it shouldn’t happen, and wouldn’t help. Trump would show for the money and do nothing but bash Obama as a foreigner Muslim illegitimate “so called president” (who won two more presidential elections than Trump), would blame all his failures on either Obama or Biden, and would interrupt Obama’s every thoughtful point with rambling, self congratulatory nonsense. Trump has no interest in unification unless that means everyone unify behind him and he’s emperor. Trump is a divider, his entire platform is “blame the libs for everything wrong, take credit for anything that’s working, even if he opposed it”. He has nothing to offer but hateful lies.

Trump is incapable of having a nice discussion. If the other people speaking aren’t just praising him, he thinks they should just shut up and let him praise himself. It’s an impossibility for him to sit and have a productive conversation with a non sycophant, especially one as intelligent and knowledgeable as Obama that would outshine him like a supernova beside a black hole of ignorance. He wouldn’t make it 5 minutes before his first temper tantrum.

Obama doesn’t need the money, he’s a real, successful, happy, self made multi millionaire...no doubt he would donate any payments to the needy ….Trump does need the money, he’s an unhappy failed businessman and broke trust fund baby with dozens of criminal court cases pending and hundreds of millions in unpaid bills...no doubt he would pocket every penny...and Trump is considered by most Americans as personally responsible for the worst attack on Washington since 1812 as an attempted coup....and the idea is to give him another high profile platform from which he can try again to make his baseless and highly divisive case that he's not a loser, like he does at his shrinking rallies and random paid events at his properties.

If you want to unify America, you need to remove Trump from the equation, he divided America more than slavery. Division is his only real accomplishment….how does this guy think he’s the one to help unify?

It's like saying Jim Jones or David Koresh should be publicly debating the Dalai Lama to unify people around religion in positive ways, they both just had that one little slip up and their remaining people still believe in them for the most part.

Lol....your theocratic colors are showing.
We know you would prefer Sharia law, where religion determines what's criminal, immoral, and degenerate.
I ask you, what does the bible say about transsexuals?

Republicans
The party of
Death (penalty, covid, domestic terrorism)
Destruction (of infrastructure and the union, the economy, the ecosystem, discourse, functioning government, freedoms, and civil rights)
Debauchery (they ALWAYS are guilty of the sins they complain about...without fail and to extremes)

Puritanism (for others)
Patriotism (only for others)
Punishment (definitely only for others)

Your video, No. 45 Offers Nothing New At Rambling Ohio Rally, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Your video, Kanye West still misunderstands the fish stick joke, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 525 Badge!

"Two weeks ago a 30 year old came into my hospital perfectly healthy dead....dead from the swine flu."....really?! What kind of nonsense is this? How often does he treat perfectly healthy dead people? Wasn't he surprised when a dead man walked in?

Bill is 100% correct that the average American diet leads to a large percentage of American health issues across the board, and exacerbates others.

Islam today is largely fundamentalist. Any religion practiced like Islam is practiced by many today is bad and evil. That is Bill's position. Christianity had it's fundamentalist period....we call it the dark ages....it's seeing a resurgence in America.

Milo on Bill was not a platform, more an expose. He didn't look intelligent at all. Bill's show is about getting both sides of a debate, even when one side is abhorrent. It's about exposing Nazis, not pretending they're right.

Compared to right wing talking heads, Bill is 100% right about everything....which is to say, those who complain about his mistakes and odd opinions AS A COMEDIAN are invariably the same people who back outrageous nutjobs like Beck, Jones, Limbaugh, Trump, and all the other feckless and feculent right wing propagandists who never honestly explain positions they disagree with and always create paper tigers and windmills to fight. Bill has them on to have their say in their own words to expose the insanity, and often goes on to contradict them.

BTW, Bill did get fully vaccinated for Covid....and one month ago he contracted it anyway. This broke his perfect attendance record of never missing a show since 93. He is not a crazed anti vaxer, he simply believes in America that the health crisis and poor overall health of Americans comes mainly from our diets since >70% of us are overweight and >42% are clinically obese. He's right.

Maybe what these people mean (whether they know it or not) is that their belief in a god gave them the false(yet real enough to them) confidence that they would be ok, which gave them the courage and energy to push through and do all the things to make sure they had the opportunity to have the medical staff fix them. It's like how a lot of people have religion to thank for getting sober and off the street, not because of the divine influence of the hand of god or some shit... some people just need the religious 'narrative' to help them keep moving forward, where others may not need it at all and not see the point.

because obviously if god can physically save this dude's life, then he would have also had the power to make that barrel survive the hot round which I'm sure the dude in question would have preferred.

Way to invoke Godwins law off the bat. You lose.

Isn't it funny how the ridiculous radical right wants to empower businesses to act as they please, deny service to anyone they choose for any reason including race, sexuality, social status, religion, political affiliation, a hat that isn't red, anything until it denies them service, then suddenly the government should be there in full force to protect their right to demand service at all private businesses.

Enjoy your own medicine, morons. You asked for it.

I hope professional sports leave Florida too now, since Desantos has made it a crime to discriminate based on vaccinations in Florida and plans to make that permanent. If I owned a business, I would already be looking to move out of Florida before I got sued for exposing people to Covid. They deserve all the business losses this idiocy causes them. I hope it reaches $ billions that go to other states.

"What on earth are you talking about?"
-newt

The rules for property and income when one or both parties decide they no longer want to be in the relationship.




"not having a marriage means you almost certainly will pay for them for 18+ years but won't have many rights to be in their lives"
-newt

Incorrect. If you are on birth certificate, you have the same rights and obligations.
The only pitfalls are that :
- Child support is calculated from the income of the parent with less custody (rather than from the true cost of raising a child).
- Women almost always get custody if the choice is between two parents (like when they live far apart and child can only be at one or the other).



"and may lose your rights to any assets if she grabs first"
-newt

Negative. Co-parenting does not conflate property.

Shared assets when not married are divided either by percentage of purchase price contribution, or by percentage stated in a contract.




"My brother paid well over a hundred thousand dollars for his divorce in Texas"
-newt

"My brother won."
-newt

Won by your own definition. Hence I congratulate.




"You assume women take off time to raise the kids"
-newt

No assumptions. Although afaik they still do it more often.




"You start from a false position that men work both harder and better, but you have no data to back that up. "
-newt

Top result from a zero effort google of "men working hours vs women working hours"

https://towardsdatascience.com/is-the-difference-in-work-hours-the-real-reason-for-the-gender-wage-gap-interactive-infographic-6051dff3a041




"Um...so since you admit many women outearn men and the trend reinforces that"
-newt

I admit that women [as a group] under 35 out earn men under 35 because of preferential admittance (such as to higher education) and preferential hiring (such as to managerial positions).

I did not say that women earn more in the same position for the same hours worked. Young men are simply getting shut out of opportunities, so their incomes are lower. As by design.

It does however highlight how affirmative action is being poorly controlled.
The target statistic is based on overall population at all ages.
The adjustment is skewed to younger ages (school admission is typically for younger people).
So the system is trying to balance out incomes of older men by trimming up incomes of younger women, with no accounting for the effects on younger men or consequences of older men retiring.
The situation is doomed to overshoot with time.

A natural result is the popularity of people like Jordan Peterson, with messages like : "Young men, nobody will help you, stop waiting for someone to help you, stop lamenting your situation, you gotta pull yourself up by your boot straps. Start by cleaning your room, then go make something of yourself".






"Bullshit. You said you would immediately dismiss any woman who has...
"Long dating history? Too much risk[etc]" -scheherazade "
-newt

Straw man argument.

You know I stated that those marriageability criteria exist specifically due to risk of consequences of divorce.

I never stated that I have personal issues with those attributes.
I have dated women on that list. I didn't /marry/ them.

My only criteria for a relationship that I am happy being in is :
- We are mutually attracted
- We like each other
- We are nice to each other
I don't care what your religion is, your politics, your family status, whatever. It's all just noise to me.





" And again, prenuptial. Do you not know what they are?"
-newt

Prenups can be negated by these simple words :

"I did not understand what I was signing"
or
"My lawyer was not present".

Poof. Prenup thrown out.




"their husbands are more likely to break their vows first"
-newt

A woman to cheat needs a willing man (easy)
A man to cheat needs a willing woman (hard)

Times have changed. Online dating made chatting someone up in person and make an impression uncommon, and even considered creepy/unusual. Now people are picked on their online profile based on looks/height/social-media-game.

Dating apps and sites publish their statistics. Nowadays, around 20% of men match with around 80% of women.
Most men aren't having sex. Most men can't find a match to cheat with if they wanted to.

The tall cute photogenic guys are cleaning up.
The 20% of men that match the bulk of women are going through women like a mill. They will smash whatever bored housewife crosses their path.

A 2 second google result :
https://usustatesman.com/economics-of-dating-2-the-brutal-reality-of-dating-apps/




"Women don't like men that believe wholeheartedly that all women are just lessers, leeches"
-newt

Agreed.

Fortunately, I never say that about women.






" you can't grasp that a codified, delineated, agreed to partnership is almost always better, more fulfilling, and has many benefits cohabitation lacks"
-newt

False equivalence.

Cohabitation and Partnership are mutually independent.
Meaning both can exist at the same time.


-scheherazade

Adding video to channels (Religion, Wtf) - requested by ant.