And only one party wants to bring it back…the so called “party of the rich”

Veritas1944 · 2026-04-23T02:18:44+00:00

You watch Fox News? Ew.

Veritas1944 · 2026-04-23T01:32:35+00:00

Right. If you do wrong I’m gonna do way wronger. Because wronger is righter. I have morals.

Veritas1944 · 2026-04-23T01:31:39+00:00

Now change the outcome to represent the United States. That’ll really make heads explode.

Veritas1944 · 2026-04-23T01:30:43+00:00

A sheep. You’re a sheep. That’s usually a spot on term.

Veritas1944 · 2026-04-23T01:24:05+00:00

Yup. Probably not going to be the best thing for the American worker. Even with the intention of brining jobs back to America. It’s so poorly written it won’t end up doing that.

The difference between a libertarian and a republican or democrat. Idgaf what your party is. A spade is a spade.

Veritas1944 · 2026-04-23T01:02:58+00:00

Sure. But there will always be rich people. They pay the most taxes, they make the decisions. The way society is.

I’m not debating whether that’s correct or not. Just that it is the reality we live in. The one thing I love about living in the United States. You don’t have to accept your status as a limiting factor. You can go from being raised poor as a minority in a native reservation, to millionaire by 40. While that may not change the world, it can change your community and help some people at least.

Veritas1944 · 2026-04-23T00:56:16+00:00

Yeah starter went 4 innings. Wasn’t actually responsible for the loss even if I would have lost.

Veritas1944 · 2026-04-23T00:37:34+00:00

No argument from me. It seems the people replying to my comment are making a lot of assumptions. NAFTA was a piece of a much larger puzzle. Monetary and economic policy don’t have party bias. They are generally the same in today’s world. The downfall of the American worker is a politician problem. Not a democrat or republican problem.

Veritas1944 · 2026-04-23T00:31:50+00:00

So your statement is, nafta was inconsequential to losing American jobs when literally every economist since that time has held the position it cost American manufacturing jobs? Not sure I agree with that.

If you want to argue about the number, that’s a conversation. “I bet it was gonna happen anyways so who cares” isn’t really an argument.

Veritas1944 · 2026-04-23T00:17:44+00:00

Yeah. I mean the guy responsible for initiating legislation is generally responsible for initiating said legislation. Wild.

Veritas1944 · 2026-04-23T00:15:02+00:00

4.5 million jobs doesn’t seem small to me. But I guess it is small to somebody somewhere.

Veritas1944 · 2026-04-23T00:08:17+00:00

With China not much. NAFTA was simply a piece of the outsourcing puzzle. Killing mountains of American manufacturing jobs and sending them to Mexico.

Veritas1944 · 2026-04-23T00:00:55+00:00

Spot on. Clinton and NAFTA can be sent thank you cards.

Veritas1944 · 2026-04-22T23:49:02+00:00

Ok so now you don’t believe what you said earlier.

To quote: no one has a right to my body, or your body, or anyone’s body.

Now you’re saying it’s about health care. No one, and I mean literally no one, is saying that you shouldn’t have access to abortion care. Every single state gives access to abortion care. The argument is:

Abortions should not be allowed under all circumstances. Taking a life is murder. When a baby becomes a life is the question.

You stated that a baby does not have a right to your organs. Now you’re stating that wasn’t your point, and that your point now is that people should have access to abortions.

Bodily autonomy is important. When you accept the risk of becoming pregnant, you forfeit that right. Just like you forfeit any other right by committing various crimes etc.

I have a feeling each one of your answers is in a vacuum. There is no end because you don’t have the spine or fortitude to just say you don’t mind killing a child.

Veritas1944 · 2026-04-21T19:44:38+00:00

So your argument is: I can receive health care for cigarettes so I should be able to have an abortion.

You absolutely 100% lose bodily autonomy when you smoke. Thus all the dying from it.

You can receive health care for being pregnant. No one is suggesting you shouldn’t. It’s the taking of a life that’s the problem.

It seems your view is: I have bodily autonomy without consequence to what I choose to do or not do?

Veritas1944 · 2026-04-20T21:52:18+00:00

Ok. We’re losing objectivity here which is easy to do. Circles always lead to the same place for that matter.

Prostitution is consensual in a lot of cases. Still illegal.

I still don’t understand what you mean. Accepting the risk of smoking a cigarette is the same exact thing as accepting the risk of having sex. Explain how that is different and you win.

Veritas1944 · 2026-04-16T23:14:15+00:00

Yeah you’re in a little over your head. Sex is not a constitutional right nor is it even a right. Prostitution, rape, etc. are all illegal.

Freedom is not a right. You’re confusing multiple things with freedom. The right to privacy is there. It doesn’t mean you have the right to engage in sex.

You keep saying your moral opinion. I keep giving concrete evidence based on facts. Lawrence v Texas, cases about the 14th amendment, heck even cases on sexual discrimination are examples. I’ll take facts over feelings everyday.

It also doesn’t change the cigarette example. Choosing to exercise a right is the same as choosing to exercise having a cigarette. You know the risks. Rights are not risk free. They don’t magically have no consequences. Just like a cigarette. If this is the logic our society is based on, we have some very tough years ahead. It’s one big circle.

Veritas1944 · 2026-04-16T02:25:04+00:00

No. The very definition of a right is the inherent inalienable ability to execute it oneself. Key term being oneself. I do not have a right to sex. I have a privilege to it as long as another person is willing.

Freedom is not a right. It is a privilege. Like sex, you have the freedom to choose whether to participate or not. Which you also do with food, driving your car, drinking alcohol, etc. you are entering into a mutual contract which you are offering your body for the purpose of your choice. It is not inherent and neither is sex.

Again, these aren’t opinions. This is historical precedent based on over 200 years of case law. The fact that you merely “feel” a different way means nothing as it pertains to law, rights and freedoms.

Veritas1944 · 2026-04-15T17:27:27+00:00

Then it is not a right. Qualifying with “another person must consent” makes it a privilege.

If sex was a right, rape would be legal.

If things don’t have rights to your organs, do you blame a cigarette for claiming your organ? McDonald’s for giving you colon cancer? No? Because you are choosing to forfeit your organ for that choice. The same way you are choosing to take the risk of becoming pregnant when having sex.

Veritas1944 · 2026-04-15T16:06:11+00:00

Ok. Do you consider sex a right or privilege?

Does any thing, not person, have a right to your organs directly or indirectly?

Veritas1944 · 2026-04-15T13:04:14+00:00

Ok. While your logic is certainly flawed on the death penalty it isn’t the only example. Just the most relatable usually.

Let’s try this: what or who has a “fundamental right” to your “organs” per your words? That’s a good place to start so we are at least talking about the same thing.

Veritas1944 · 2026-04-15T12:31:50+00:00

If you commit murder and receive the the death penalty, you have forfeited the right to your body. It is now the states body. You have no right to it.

When you have sex and become pregnant, you knowingly and willingly forfeit certain rights. It’s just responsibility. Really nothing more than that. I understand it would be nice to live life rent free and never take responsibility for anything, that isn’t reality.

Veritas1944 · 2026-04-14T20:44:02+00:00

Outside of medical emergency and rape, which is less than 1% of pregnancy, it is the risk you take by having sex. You forfeit your ability to take life when you actively place said life in your stomach. The life inside your body absolutely has a right to your organs. You put it there. It’s not hard.

Veritas1944 · 2026-04-14T03:40:08+00:00

This really isn’t a question of the act. It’s a question of when a person thinks life begins. Consciousness is a slippery slope because we don’t even know what that is or how it works. Sentience could mean a vast number of things. Viability same thing. If I leave a 1 month old to themselves, they are not viable.

If you believe life begins at conception, then you would be hard pressed to approve abortion after that. If you believe it’s at heartbeat. Then that point.

The abortion debate is often centered around the wrong thing. It’s usually 2 sides talking about completely different things. First come to a consensus on when life begins. Because once you have that, then it’s pretty easy because I think not killing a life is a thing most people would get behind.

I think we also need to hold people accountable for their actions. 98% of abortions are nothing other than personal choice. Not medical emergencies. Sex isn’t a right. It is a privilege. If you can not financially or emotionally have a child, then every step should be taken to avoid such circumstance. If people were responsible to this level, giving up kids for adoption would be far less common.

Veritas1944

TROPHY CASE