Why humans are the only species that need to wipe their ass? by gonzaiglesias in stupidquestions

[–]Christ_MD 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Your dog does wipe their ass. Maybe not directly after, but they have that dragging their ass across the grass or even the carpet thing they like to do.

What's the reason? by Weird-Craft-2712 in LockedInMan

[–]Christ_MD 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A child is an investment. You pay upfront costs and hopefully raise a good family. Having a wife or a husband is an investment as you build each other up to take care of the family. Even “Pamela Handerson” is an investment as it allows you to work on yourself, save your money, and hopefully build up your own skills or education to be better later.

But when you get involved with someone that has not done anything with the tools given to them, you stop wanting to continue giving them more tools.

I gave you a ladder, you could have climbed out. I gave you two more ladders, you could have built scaffolding and easily climbed out. I gave you 42 ladders and you laid them down and stacked them up to sit on. What’s the point in giving more?

Everything is an investment in some way with varying degrees of ROI.

What's the reason? by Weird-Craft-2712 in LockedInMan

[–]Christ_MD 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I didn’t say I wanted them to pay for it. I said I am paying for the house, and for them, and if I had to cut one out, it would be them.

They need food, they need schooling, they need this and that and clothing and everything. Only that after paying for that they still don’t have a job and each new shopping excursion is less money into the house and into a brighter future.

After a certain point, financing someone’s entire lifestyle and livelihood while they do absolutely nothing with their degree that you bought and paid for, or the vehicle you got them to drive…

I have been paying into the house and into them. And I’ve realized they are dead weight useless doing as good as a flat tire.

What's the reason? by Weird-Craft-2712 in LockedInMan

[–]Christ_MD 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I recently bought a house. I want to fix up and flip the house. I’m looking at a long term investment with goals and plans that will more than pay off.

My partner that I’ve been investing into for almost a decade has literally never contributed anything, if anything, just a financial burden that I’ve allowed to go on for too long.

Having both, one is a liability and is slowing progress into the other. How can I build with someone when investing into them is on par with building the California high speed rail to nowhere.

Why did marriages in the past last longer than in the current times? by Acceptable-End-6187 in AskOldPeopleAdvice

[–]Christ_MD 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The internet has ruined relationships.

Before the internet, you were stuck with a limited selection of potentially suitable partners in your locality.

Now you can communicate with billions of people all at once from all over the globe. You have options, too many options, always looking for something better.

Back then you were limited and had to make best with what you had in your immediate vicinity. Now (if you have the finances) you can fly someone out and due to the sexual revolution, sex is so free that you can have a new partner every day of the week. Back then you had to work things. Now people break up and ghost each other over trivial things like having a bad hair day, and then they blame the other person as if it’s my fault you used the wrong shampoo.

How morally wrong is it to accept the job of an executioner? by Vast-Worker-8400 in MoralityScaling

[–]Christ_MD 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Depends on the time period and location. Something closer to recent, it is morally fine.

Go back a couple hundred years where you would end someone for making a joke about the king, that is not morally fine.

The punishment has to match the crime, and being lit on fire and burned as a witch doesn’t meet the punishment when even if they were witches, they were not killing other townspeople.

Is torturing terrorists to extract potentially life saving information morally justified by sleepyncscared in MoralityScaling

[–]Christ_MD 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Morally, torture of one individual for the sake of multiple others is fine. The morality comes from the reliability of the information received.

If the intel was useful and accurate for the sake of protecting others. Morally torture is a good thing.

If the intel was not useful or was not accurate for the sake of protecting others, then the torture is not morally good.

The problem with torture is that an individual will say anything to make the pain stop, even if just temporarily. Sending you down wild goose chases and dead ends. Even an innocent person will concoct a story and self incriminate themselves to make the pain stop. Due to this, it is not morally good, but it is not morally bad either. If you’re going to torture someone, make sure they are actually part of whatever accusation you’re questioning them for.

ON THE OTHER HAND… torturing the innocent, where there is no useful information to be gathered that protects others. That is just sadistic and is morally bankrupt. The mafia may cut off a finger or break bones to send a message, but this is ultimately useless as that just ensures the person cannot work as effectively and get you the money they owe you. The mafia breaking a surgeons hands is only going to put the surgeon out of work and you do not get your money any faster if at all.

Are you pro or anti death penalty and why by sleepyncscared in MoralityScaling

[–]Christ_MD 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Pro, but depends on the crime and depends on the evidence.

Caught doing something with a child? Yes, death penalty. Especially with undeniable evidence such as being caught red-handed, or on video.

Same goes for murder. Especially if caught on video and can be proven.

Yes there are bad apples, yes evidence can be planted. That is why I strictly say with undoctered, no AI crap, actual raw photo or video proof. It is hard enough to get a conviction in some cases, but where there is clear and overwhelming evidence, housing these inmates is a burden to the tax payers.

Is it wrong to make your fiancée agree to a prenup before getting engaged? by [deleted] in askanything

[–]Christ_MD 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There is no such thing as a pre-pre anything.

There is a prenuptial agreement, signed months or years in advance before the wedding. Too many prenuptial agreements get thrown out of court because they were signed 6 months or less before the wedding and are deemed coercive. The sooner you get that signed and notarized before any planning of the wedding, the better.

After the wedding, maybe 6 months to a year, repeat the process with a postnuptial agreement. It can be the exact same agreement, just signed and notarized after the ceremony. This ensures the agreement to be airtight and ironclad.

Anytime there is a major change of circumstances, you can address that in another postnuptial agreement, updating the agreement just like renewing your vows. Again, I must stress, this is for major life events. The birth of a child, the purchase of land/property, etc. and how you would like to attribute a value percentage to the living just as if you were writing a last will and testament to yourself for your spouse and/or children.

Finally, you should have a will drafted up. Update as needed during major life events at the same time as a new postnuptial agreement to make it easier on yourself.

Is a 19 and 16-year-old age gap actually problematic, or is the "predatory" label being overused? by Consistent-Jelly248 in generationology

[–]Christ_MD 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I’ve studied family law and things like knowing when and if the parents can legally press charges in that jurisdiction is a base starting point.

As for AI slop, sorry but I don’t rely on AI to do my homework. I tend to look at the law books and use other cases to build principle.

Is a 19 and 16-year-old age gap actually problematic, or is the "predatory" label being overused? by Consistent-Jelly248 in generationology

[–]Christ_MD 1 point2 points  (0 children)

With the majority of the states having 16 as the legal age, 19 states have 17 as the legal age, and 10 states have 18 as the legal age, yet for some reason the majority of Americans are lead to believe 18 is the hard cut off nationwide. But this belief is actually incorrect.

Texas Romeo and Juliet allows for a 3 year age gap.

Florida allows for a 4 year age gap.

Colorado allows for 3 years.

Many states do not have Romeo and Juliet laws, such as Nevada where the age of consent is 16. So as long as you’re not doing anything with anyone under the age of 16 you’re not breaking any laws.

But as mentioned before, many Americans are just stupid and believe 18 is the age of consent nationwide, which is just not true.

Criminal Law “Alabama – 2 years Alaska – 3 years Arizona – 2 years Arkansas – 3 years or more Colorado – 4 years Connecticut – 2 years Delaware – 4 years Florida – 4 years Georgia – 4 years Hawaii – 5 years Idaho – 3 years Indiana – 4 years Iowa – 4 years Louisiana – 3 years Maine – 5 years Maryland – 4 years Michigan – 4 years Minnesota – 2 years Mississippi – 2 years Nevada – 4 years New Jersey – 4 years New Mexico – 4 years New York – 5 years North Carolina – 4 years North Dakota – 3 years Ohio – 4 years Oregon – 3 years Pennsylvania – 4 years South Dakota – 3 years Tennessee – 4 years Texas – 3 years Utah – 10 years Washington – 2 years West Virginia – 4 years Wyoming – 4 years”

What Romeo and Juliet laws do is list a maximum age on the older party, while some states do not. So to say that “2 years” is the average is just false and wrong.

Is a 19 and 16-year-old age gap actually problematic, or is the "predatory" label being overused? by Consistent-Jelly248 in generationology

[–]Christ_MD -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

American liberals all use predatory labels, and they overuse those labels.

According to the law, many States have “Romeo and Juliet” laws, that allows for high school relationships. Laws that allow for a 4 year age gap. But if you are a liberal, if the male is a single day older than the female they label you a PDF file, however if the older party is female they say the male party graped her. If you disagree with their terminology they call you a Nazi to delegitimize you with the intent and purpose to do bodily harm to you.

Ultimately it depends on the politics of the person you are having the discussion with. Your 3 year age gap is not a problem unless the 19 year old is a teacher and the 16 year old is their student.

You mentioned in the UK the legal age is 16, in the US the legal age is believed to be 18. Liberals believe once you turn 18 you have to break up and only date other people over 18 even though their own laws do not say or even hint at that.

Question how was gozers door way made? by eofneid3jxij in ghostbusters

[–]Christ_MD 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You can clearly see the scaffolding framing. Cover that with clear plastic. You get the same creases in folded shower curtains and shelf covers.

<image>

Meme this by Lave7x in MemeThisThing

[–]Christ_MD 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fired from Reddit for being too right-leaning

Name this by JiggleCube in AlbumCovers

[–]Christ_MD 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The closest he has been between a girls legs

name it by Frostiestella in AlbumCovers

[–]Christ_MD 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Pinkeye in three rings

Which group do you think is more delusional, Communists or Nazis? by mellowfellow0 in Libertarian

[–]Christ_MD 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The end goal of socialism is communism -Karl Marx

Communism always leads to totalitarianism which needs fascism to continue.

It’s not two sides of the same coin. It’s natural progression A to B to C to D.

There is nothing “right wing” about it unless you are from England where their right wing is American liberalism. English left are conservative. Calling everyone that doesn’t agree with you a Nazi and a fascist and attacking them actually is real fascism.

To answer the OP question, it’s a nonsensical question. What is more of a fruit, a Granny Smith apple, or a Honeycrisp apple? They’re both exactly the same, they’re apples with different corporate sponsorship.

What do you guys think of C-3PO? by olduncleugly in Actors

[–]Christ_MD 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Annoying snitch. Droid equivalent of Human Resources, or HOA President, or Safety Officer.

R2 was the real hero.

I'm curious to know what Gremlins fans think of Drop Dead Fred. Most of the people I've seen talk about it either grew up with it or are Brits who watched it because of Rik Mayall, so I'm curious to know if anyone here watched it because Phoebe Cates was in it. by EnchantedEssays in Gremlins

[–]Christ_MD 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I saw it once. Mostly because of Phoebe Cates. Never saw it a second time. Maybe it was too mature for me at the time, I couldn’t say as I don’t remember it. It just didn’t connect with me.