lol right?

Precisely! This is why advocating for any new rights (ie: these minority rights on the left that are constantly being shoved down our throats) is foolish.

I would say it would be an extension of your right to preservation of life. Furthermore, I don't think any medical healthcare professional should be entirely obligated to do so. It is your responsibility, as you said for your own medical care.

In the US you have the right to emergency medical care. The way I see it, is a medical professional would probably hold the right to preserve your life if they so wished to do so, but it is their right to do so, not their obligation.

No. They do what they do for profit in this society as far as I can see.

Yes but the judiciary branch acts according in interpretation to policy.

That would not lie within any sort of rights. That would be a personal obligation (personal meaning that the person holding such obligation does so because they feel they need to, not out of any sort of forced or coerced obligation) to do so and feel it would be better of in their interest than in the child's or incapacitated person's best interest. Children are still of a developing mind, and do to this, and lack of experience, they require guidance from their parental figures. A person that is incapacitated is not of the right mind, or are unconscious. It is understandable that a person that cares for this individual would feel some sort of obligation to get that person out of harms way.

Sorry, I've no idea of these cases you are speaking of, and cannot address them directly in any matter as of right now.

I see.

Mike Rowe? Whaaaaaa? You mean the guy from *Dirty Jobs*?

I gotta look at this lol.

Even if I did vote, I would not vote for Trump lol.

*enlightened*

Most of Trump's bad is based on rhetoric, leading a further divide within the country, and is also foreign policy.

The results of his foreign policy have increased support for war in Yemen, and increasing the situation with Israel and Palestine.

The situation in Yemen is the worst humanitarian crisis in the past 100 years.

I'm versed pretty well in the situations in the middle east well enough as far as I know.

People should be able to do that actually. Have different opinions, and still be able to get along while discussing issues in a civil manner. Is that the case though?

Well, the media actually played a big part in it, by taking and focusing on the negatives in all instances, especially during the 2016 campaign.

The way I see it when I say *divide* is people who are so far ideologically apart that they have a harder time reacing a middle ground between both sides.

I don't see it as people "having different opinions than me"

IT started around the time that the liberals switched from focusing on the working class to pocusing on identity politics as far as I know.

I don't care how the msm uses it. It doesn't disprove my point, nor does it make theirs any more right.

yes lol

The left are also the neo-liberal right...so... 🤷

Classic liberals cared about the working class. Not the modern liberals.

Modern liberals sit on the left pole, which isn't the case with classic liberals.

It is the same rhetoric dividing America right now.

And Canada.

And the UK.

In fact Canada and the UK are further along that pole than the US.

The only reason the US isn't as far along that pole is because of the 1st Amendment.

and the 2nd Amendment.

But due to this rise in leftist ideology has given rise to the division between socialists and non-socialists.

Oh I agree, people should not be going straight for authoritarian socialism, but there shouldn't be so much division that people can't even have a conversation without getting butthurt because something didn't click with their ideas.

I mean, christ, you go authoritaria right, and you have fascism, which works as well as authoritarian socialism.

What if someone presents an equal and opposite truth that directly goes against your truth?

Everyone is biased.

That notion I agree with.

But what about if someone presents you an equal and opposite truth that directly conflicts with the truth you present?

Might as well say to hell with the social structure than, because that is where all of that exists.

@Samer agreed.

stupid.

I've only watched the most hated rewind video.

All of these creators should move to d.tube and bitchute, or make their own platform if they have the power to do so.

That would be. lol

xD

Agreed.

ancoms usually promote voluntary communism, however it's not an idea I'm very well versed in...

I'm not well versed in ancom philosophy, so I can't make a position on their idea of communism.

But because of the lack of knowledge I have on the subject, I tend to agree with the ideas you guys present about communism overall.

I actually want to dive more into reading materials related to anarchocommunism, however I think a lot of the ideas revolve around Proudon's ideas? Not sure, like I said, I'm not well versed in it.

@Strufa in our society today, yes I agree with this.

And @Strufa anarchy itself, is the opposite of authoritarianism.

@NativeInterface agreed.

I'm more partial to agorists than ancaps.

"The first lesson of economics is scarcity: there is never enough of anything to fully satisfy all those who want it. The first lesson of politics is to disregard the first lesson of economics." -Thomas Sowell

Who's in doubt? lol

Soooo whatchu guys think of collapsitarianism?

it's a belief that we need a collapse in society to make any sort of positive change.

Government debt is shit.

Don't start again, not with another fiat currency.

I'm not saying go the anarchist path.

Just don't start with a fiat currency. That's how you end up with a financial bubble.

Well, this would be a good place to talk about cryptos.

Crypto, in my opinion would be a better replacement for currency than fiat currency.

Why not?

No they aren't xD

How is crypto fiat currency?

You cannot deflate the US dollar, because the debt between the treasury and feds cannot be paid.

lol

You know what's interesting, taking history into account, mexicans are more American than the european pillagers.

lol

I love shooters!

But I'm picky...

I don't like the battle royale too much tbh...

I've been liking the progression of Destiny 2 as compared to the first Destiny, as the entire story line for the game was completely scrapped after they released.

I don't think so, but I've never played Anthem lol

they are.

Games should be everlasting :P

lol

lol

Good day

Damn

I'm here to be a degenerate, debate, and do shit...idk >.>

Morality is subjective though.

fag

got

<:GWnoneAngryPing:382222471572488196>

Shit changes, get over yourself xD

That sounds like a feminist depiction of masculinity and is therefore wrong because it is feminist.

Though, I do agree that masculinity is not defined as loyalty towards one's authority. That's just silly.

Equating masculinity to being pro-state is just as correct as stating that masculinity is simply more violent.

I will say that masculinity is generally more driven and authoritative than femininity and usually renders less agreeableness

And yes, this could mean that men would be more driven to power

And that men can be more aggressive, but that isn't always the case.

You have Hilary Clinton for example.

There has been no man more driven to authority and violence than hillary clinton.

Ew

Gae