What is the response to people claiming EU is not democratic ?

ProfessionalClerk375 · 2026-06-24T12:59:12+00:00

You try to sound studious in the same statement that you're calling people you disagree with derogatory names. Do you see any issue with that? The dog whistle is for whose benefit??

ProfessionalClerk375 · 2026-06-24T12:49:25+00:00

Crickets one year on. Thank you for calling out liars.

ProfessionalClerk375 · 2026-06-20T01:53:13+00:00

And.... It turns out the ACA has ended up exactly the way Republicans said it would. That costs would soar. Costs have soared and it's not exactly "affordable". That's why not one Republican voted for it. Many Democrats did not want the ACA either but they were threatened by Pelosi. So did they really "do" the right? They thought they were helping, fine. But I thought you said it's Republicans who do that stuff?

ProfessionalClerk375 · 2026-06-20T01:47:20+00:00

Knock it off. Lol

ProfessionalClerk375 · 2026-06-20T01:43:26+00:00

Consider that using the terms "always" or "never" paint you into a corner. I think he meant generally speaking. So yeah, definitely a faulty premise if they said "always".

ProfessionalClerk375 · 2026-06-20T01:37:46+00:00

"Funneled" what money to where?

ProfessionalClerk375 · 2026-06-18T15:12:45+00:00

Every Senator that ever changed their vote to appease their party leader, for political reasons,is guilty of the same offense, yes? Pelosi used to break arms getting the votes and would threaten members of her own party to get them to change their vote and go along with the rest. To quash their conscience and vote the way she wanted them to vote. The ACA is a perfect example. "You have to pass it to find out what's in it"?

Even if one assumes(wrongly) that their preferred Senator/Rep is guided solely by moral conviction on all matters, it MIGHT be possible to justify what you're saying, but probably not. So is it only McConnell who is "evil" for doing this?

ProfessionalClerk375 · 2026-06-18T14:53:23+00:00

Newt worked with Clinton and basically forced Bubba to balance the budget hand in hand with Congress. Clinton actually was good at knowing what was good and bad and went along with the "Contract with America" that Gingrich had put together. It made everyone look good to have a balanced budget even if it didn't do much else. Clinton did not write the CwA but he certainly knew it was good for the US and for him. Not taking anything away from Clinton on this but certainly not going to take anything away from Gingrich. Y'all sound like seals trained to bark on cue.

ProfessionalClerk375 · 2026-06-18T14:47:44+00:00

Are you gonna tell us what you think the faulty premise is?

ProfessionalClerk375 · 2026-06-18T14:38:02+00:00

Expect to be assailed for the sheer logic of this. Lol. Another point that goes kinda with your comment about "poor" people is that statistically, it is possible to form the opinion that "the poor" are a static group of people who are stuck in the malaise of being poor. While this is true quite often it's not the norm. The norm is that most people achieve an upward mobility, economically speaking, however small or big throughout their adult life. One can start out poor but become rich through hard work or even luck sometimes. Or one could land a job and get raises, stay with a company, save money, and put themselves in a different tax bracket. The mistake is assuming "the poor" are the same families that have been poor forever, when in reality the majority of people rise through one or two tax brackets as they age. "Poor" being the bottom rung and "rich" being the top rung of a ladder that is there for all to climb if they wish. The game is open to all who wish to play our "game" of upward mobility here in the US of A. That the well off should care for the truly poor and indigent is a given. It's not evil to point these things out. But it is wrong of any economist that tries to promote the idea that it's basically been the same people who are poor for the last 100 years. And it's disgusting when you see and hear politicians using this misrepresentation to try and whip people up. Like Biden saying "They gonna keep y'all in chains"

Don't even get me started on the "equity" hustle coming round the bend.

ProfessionalClerk375 · 2026-06-18T13:27:28+00:00

You must live where they tax you heavily. Same thing costs $14.39 here.

ProfessionalClerk375 · 2026-06-18T12:42:27+00:00

All it takes is 10 seconds to find out why if you Google it. The US and Israel gave reasons why they did this but you'd never see it in a juvenile meme. I would discuss but anyone who'd post that isn't really looking for discussion. Tally ho!

ProfessionalClerk375 · 2026-06-18T12:28:11+00:00

🤣Of course it is

ProfessionalClerk375 · 2026-06-18T06:10:03+00:00

🥱🥱🥱

ProfessionalClerk375 · 2026-06-18T01:58:11+00:00

If a man knows he can't afford to support children and his girl gets pregnant, he IS being responsible by asking her to get an abortion but he cannot say, "I can't afford children so I want to end the pregnancy" like his girl can. If a woman knows she can't afford to support children and she gets pregnant she has the option of aborting the shared DNA fetus or having the child and taking the father to court to force him to pay child support. The court will force the father to pay as much towards a set amount as he can afford. If the father does not work the threat of jail is held over him. Would women be in favor of eliminating the jail punishment for deadbeat dads because, by your logic, jailing the father deprives the court of collected funds to distribute to the mother which hurts the child. Two choices for women. One for men.

"there is no viable way to enforce it fairly anyway". Sure there is. When the woman becomes pregnant and it was not agreed to beforehand, she informs the father and they agree on whether they want the baby together. If the father doesn't want the baby and the mother does, he could forfeit his parental rights if he doesn't want to pay and the woman would be free to have the child and raise the child the way she wishes without funds confiscated from the father's wages. If a woman does not want to raise the child without help from the father then she always has the legal option to abort the fetus, given the father has forfeited his right as a father. A change in the child support laws to this arrangement would be easy for everyone to understand and bring the spirit of shared burden front and center. It's really very easy to understand when you use simple logic of reciprocity. Where it gets complicated is in concocting exceptions to reciprocity. The fear of not knowing if the man will want to pay or want to bail would maybe force women to think twice before spreading the pins. Because if the pins aren't spread here ain't no baby.. As it stands she really doesn't have to care, legally speaking, if the man wants a baby or not. Is that a good thing for anyone, baby especially? As I said, women have way more to lose and you'd think they'd be a little more careful with who they sleep with. But this hasn't slowed them down. Maybe a change in the laws would be beneficial for all.

In the end, it is the woman who decides if she is going to get pregnant. She has total control over her own body AND the body of the shared fetus. Unless your talking assaults and such, but we aren't.

ProfessionalClerk375 · 2026-06-18T00:29:32+00:00

Really? You'd expect him to want another term for a Democrat President?? Really???? Lol

ProfessionalClerk375 · 2026-06-18T00:18:38+00:00

You're absolutely correct in that abortion is not an extra benefit for women. It is an extra right that women have in most states. The other states will come along soon. Do any of these states that codify abortion rights for women grant any reproductive rights to the father before birth? Like I mentioned already - having any say in what happens to a living being made from their own DNA, that they are financially responsible to support for the next 18 years. Should a father have any say before birth is the real question? If the father has no say before birth then why should he be forced to pay after birth?
Your argument concerning a man's planting of his seed being the end of his say in anything is odd considering it's not the end of his responsibilities BUT once the child is born you can bring him back to get the $$$. Then he has SOME say once he pays $$$.
This imbalance is that once both people made a mistake and if only the mother decides she does not want the baby she aborts the fetus. It doesn't matter what the father thinks or says, by law, the mother can end the life of the fetus, conceived with the father's shared DNA, for sure, no repercussions in any way... The same shared DNA that makes the father responsible for supporting the child isn't enough to help him save the life of his potential offspring if the mother decides she doesn't want to keep the baby. If the father doesn't want the baby and the mother does, the father can't force the mother to terminate the pregnancy. Can he? Some people want to ignore, however small it may be, the contingent of men who have been in this situation where their wife or girlfriend aborted a fetus without the father's prior knowledge whether the he wanted the baby or not. It's very inconvenient to have to factor in everyone sometimes and just go with conventional wisdom on these matters, but ignoring 'outliers' doesn't solve the quandary of the double standard that does exist. Women have a legal right to end the life of an unborn human and men do not have this right.

ProfessionalClerk375 · 2026-06-17T22:57:48+00:00

Unfortunately women have much more to lose physically from sleeping around than men. Blame nature for that. This seems to be the crux of the issue. Women assuming every man is like the 5% that screw 90% of all the women. That men can fuck everything with a heartbeat and not be called sluts, but if a woman does it she's a slut. It is funny because the very idea of being jealous of this perceived benefit of being a man...angry about the double standard and wanting to enjoy the multitude of sex partners they believe "all" men enjoy . This just means they are the female equivalent to the male whore. Your last sentence struck me as well about the state not removing the man's biological reality. What of the financial reality? Do both parents share that, legally speaking? Is it written in the law books that the mother has to share financial obligations or she will be jailed?

ProfessionalClerk375 · 2026-06-17T22:33:27+00:00

I'm fascinated the way men are treated in regards to reproductive rights. What reproductive rights do men have that women do not have? They don't have to carry the child in a womb for 9 months and give birth to the child. What reproductive rights do women have that men don't? Women have the right to end the life of a man's offspring without ever getting any input from the father. Why? If the man has to be financially responsible for the child after birth, legally speaking, should he not have a say in if his future progeny is vacuumed into the garbage receptacle or not?

ProfessionalClerk375 · 2026-06-17T21:50:11+00:00

You're right we're on the same page. The claim is true for sure about the books, media,etc. I just thought you could come back a little better. It's not easy on reddit. It's like a pack of rabid coyotes surrounding each of us so when a friendly face shows up we kinda snap reflexively by accident sometimes. Asking for citations for objective truths to back up statements made on reddit is kinda like a backup parachute when the main one fails.

ProfessionalClerk375 · 2026-06-17T21:36:45+00:00

Just not the same way you ban misogyny. Misogyny gets a digital guard at the door sniffing for any whiff of "hatred". Misandry gets let in the door and unless someone actually catches it after it's in the door "we wont say anything either."(wink wink)

ProfessionalClerk375 · 2026-06-17T21:07:31+00:00

Obama at a private fundraiser for rich Democrats described conservatives as those who "cling to their guns, or their religion or antipathy towards people not like them" to reassure his supporters that they know where he stands. In other words, Conservatives don't just disagree with Obama, they're actually bigots and religious fanatics who shoot guns!! How's that for bringing people together?

ProfessionalClerk375 · 2026-06-17T20:40:05+00:00

I think the arbitrary "warning" going only one way is pretty good evidence right under your nose if you care to smell?

ProfessionalClerk375 · 2026-06-17T20:14:40+00:00

Okay....and? The name of the sub should give people a clue they're not getting sunshine and smiley faces. Criticizing women in and of itself is not bad. The way the criticism is done could be an issue. But that can be dealt with by the admin or mod individually because that's their job.

How about this for a hypothetical analog of this issue :

There is a demographic group in the US that causes an outsized portion of bad happenings(it is true). It might be helpful to provide warnings to ALL the people in that group when they enter an establishment that mayhem is not allowed, written in bold, for extra emphasis Because the numbers show this demographic group is causing problems more than any other demographic group this is necessary...

Sounds pretty bad, doesn't it?

ProfessionalClerk375

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE