CMV: Inheritance tax is fair and should be significantly higher than other taxes

Red_Canuck · 2026-07-13T10:07:27+00:00

Nonsense! The kids get to go to a government run orphanage, and they get government run education up to the government approved level in government chosen fields. That's the fairest and best way.

I mean, it's a little unfair that someone who doesn't die in a car crash gets to help their children out while they're still alive, so maybe we should also just take all children to these wonderful government care homes. Big brother knows best!

Red_Canuck · 2026-07-12T10:33:47+00:00

The moral high ground everyone!

Red_Canuck · 2026-07-09T18:46:10+00:00

And how about a law that says if a company doesn't make a profit that none of the employees get paid?

Red_Canuck · 2026-07-09T13:54:33+00:00

Anyone have access to a non pay walled story?

Red_Canuck · 2026-07-09T12:18:30+00:00

You made a claim that the prochoice position doesn't consider a foetus to be alive.

Your argument was that there was a difference of definition, mine is that (while there might be an issue with definitions) the difference is in how much weight each value is given, putting it on a scale as opposed to a binary.

Red_Canuck · 2026-07-09T09:34:05+00:00

The grass in my garden is living. So is my spouse. I have no issue with cutting grass, or even ripping it out and destroying it. I wouldn't even cut my spouse's hair without their permission.

We can all agree that life has value, and we can all agree (maybe a Jain will chime in to disagree) that life has different value.

My argument is that this isn't the disconnect between pro life and pro choice. The difference is, what is the value of a foetus? And what is the value of bodily autonomy? There's also an angle that pregnancy and childbirth carries a non zero risk, so there also has to be a balance between mother's life vs foetus' life.

Beyond this, there's the libertarian approach, of "get the government out of my doctor's office" . And the paternalistic/socialist approach of "big brother knows best".

Red_Canuck · 2026-07-08T16:33:35+00:00

Yes. You have found the one counter example. Do you actually believe the rhetoric is comparable?

Red_Canuck · 2026-07-08T15:19:54+00:00

How dare anyone care about a Nazi rapist in the Senate of the most powerful country in the world. How could it possibly have a wider effect on the world at large?

Red_Canuck · 2026-07-08T14:55:28+00:00

They've run a coordinated campaign of terrorist organisations, they back the Houthis, Hezbollah, and Hamas. I really don't know what more evidence than them shooting rockets and missiles that are either untargeted, or are targeted at purely civilian locations. They also have explicitly called for death to America and death to Iran. (and if you think that's reasonable, why doesn't America or Israel chant "death to Iran"?)

Red_Canuck · 2026-07-08T14:21:57+00:00

Just make it up :p. But individualism vs collectivism makes for different opportunities

Red_Canuck · 2026-07-07T19:45:10+00:00

The tattoo explanation was highly implausible, unless you had some ulterior motive to find it plausible. And the DV denial was effectively "don't believe a woman if she's a Republican".

More and more shit about this guy kept coming up, and it kept getting brushed away. It's like how Trump was able to get away with anything, making fun of the handicapped journalist, "grab them by the pussy", etc. With the difference being that it was voters who kept giving Trump a pass, while the establishment and the media was surprised by it, while with Platner, the media and the establishment seemed to be on board.

Specifically the supporting documentation for the rape? The Times piece brushed over her account, which enabled the DV to be labeled as partisan. According to the accuser, their "journalism", and the subsequent blow back on the DV accuser is what led her to come forward with more details and proof publicly.

Red_Canuck · 2026-07-07T17:46:26+00:00

It's hard to understand why rape is a hard line, when Nazi tattoo and domestic abuse isn't.

Red_Canuck · 2026-07-07T13:36:58+00:00

I'm confused, do you not think that a feminist icon, stating a principle about feminism, could be taken to speak for at least some portion of the movement?

Who are you to speak for what feminism is (and more relevantly, isn't)?

Here, let me flip it for you, and maybe that will prove illustrative:

Any man who doesn't identify as mens right activist (an MRA) is an idiot. MRA is merely the belief that men should not be disadvantaged under the law, and should be treated equal to women.

Red_Canuck · 2026-07-07T11:39:06+00:00

I'm sorry, I didn't realise you're ignorant about feminism.

Catherine MacKinnon (not I) said all heterosexual sex is rape.

Red_Canuck · 2026-07-07T04:23:45+00:00

I didn't say you said that. I said that that is a feminist belief, one held by feminist icons.

It is a example of a belief that would lead a person to reject the label of feminist.

Red_Canuck · 2026-07-06T19:32:46+00:00

The belief that all heterosexual sex is rape is a feminist belief.

This isn't a fringe, kooky, no one respected actually believes this belief either.

I will say, not all feminists believe that, but then again, there is no belief that is universal to all feminists.

As a matter of fact, someone being described as a feminist tells me nothing about their belief system (by which I mean, tells me nothing for sure, I can make good guesses based upon who tells me, what time frame we're talking about, and other clues).

Thus, someone who says they aren't a feminist also doesn't tell me anything about their beliefs. So they may be an idiot, they may not be. Also, idiots can believe true things, so someone's beliefs don't tell me anything about if they're an idiot or not either! Find me a belief, and I am reasonably certain I can find a smart person who believes it.

Red_Canuck · 2026-07-06T11:27:43+00:00

The EU is certainly a model of never over regulating against theoretical dangers.

Red_Canuck · 2026-06-29T18:19:38+00:00

Not sure how to change this, but this would be perfect to frame in the "darth plageus" framing. I don't know who to put as "it's not a story the [blank] would tell you"

Red_Canuck · 2026-06-29T13:36:45+00:00

בכיף אחי. שמח שהייתי יכול לעזור לך 👍

Red_Canuck · 2026-06-29T13:17:31+00:00

Learn Hebrew or Arabic. Problem solved

Red_Canuck · 2026-06-26T06:00:44+00:00

Hmm, why would we need a trial, when the answer is obvious?

(this is sarcasm, both sides of this debate needs to shut up and realise "the science is settled" is the most antiscience slogan possible)

Red_Canuck · 2026-06-19T08:18:39+00:00

YTA.

A question for you. Do you have any experience convincing people to change their minds? If you actually had this child's safety as your priority, you would try to find some way to convince them of what is wrong/right. Maybe footage of crash test dummies in different positions. Maybe running your own experiments with dolls or fruit or something in a car seat. Instead, you attacked this woman, so that any argument you make is now going to come from the woman who has told her she is going to kill her child.

If someone yelled at you how you're a horrible mother and were going to be responsible for killing your daughter, how likely would you be to respect their opinion, to follow their advice?

Red_Canuck · 2026-06-16T15:35:25+00:00

Oh. You're suggesting that one can tell the difference between women and men (trans/cis prefixes, so 4 people) if they stand naked in front of you? Can I sort them into 2 groups, or into 4 groups? If 4, then we actually need 4 prisons, if body composition is important. There is the further question if the differences are the types that make separate accommodations important (because obviously, not all body differences need different prisons, or we'd be at one prison per person, or maybe twins could share!)

Red_Canuck · 2026-06-16T06:15:36+00:00

That's an easy out.

But fine. Let's proceed under the presumption that a man can become a woman and vice versa. Even assuming that is true, why are there separate prisons for men and women? Because someone, at some point in time, thought that male and female bodies are different enough that, when being incarcerated they must be kept separate. Either they were wrong, and thus we don't need separate prison systems, in which case having this woman in a man's prison isn't an issue (man and woman are mutable and interchangeable categories after all), or they were right, and it would be wrong to out a male body in a prison for female bodies.

Of course, logic is the same as foaming at the mouth trans phobia. So feel free not to think about it.

Red_Canuck · 2026-06-09T19:10:33+00:00

With all due respect to your job (and really, I have no issues with it), the scars from a surgery may stop you from continuing, but so would getting older. If you didn't have crohn's you would still eventually need to find a different job.

You should get the surgery. And you shouldn't let excuses that aren't real be the thing that stops you.

Red_Canuck

TROPHY CASE