3
NewNameIguess 3 points ago +3 / -0

And with cars banned people will be demanding for onsite coffin sized sleeping pods at their places of work and one daily meal of beans and rice. Going to work and grocery stores will become unfeasible for most people.

1
NewNameIguess 1 point ago +2 / -1

The only reason there aren't people living in them is because the government isn't renting them out. I bet if they were available to live in for a welfare check you'd have tons of people living in them.

2
NewNameIguess 2 points ago +2 / -0

I'd rather have these dens of degeneracy be left completely unguarded.

1
NewNameIguess 1 point ago +1 / -0

I'm sure there can't be too many positions for a data engineer and most would already be taken.

-12
NewNameIguess -12 points ago +2 / -14

It's a job, you take whatever they could get.

6
NewNameIguess 6 points ago +7 / -1

Most people don't make enough to ever be able to save a meaningful amount, almost all money goes to living costs.

5
NewNameIguess 5 points ago +5 / -0

Firstly, the government has no business regulating marriage.

I will accept that only if we're churches power to dole out punishment and carry out investigations, otherwise marriage becomes meaningless with no backing to ensure loyalty.

Civil Unions should also be easy to dissolved

I completely disagree as that spits in the face of what they're meant to be.

people should be allowed to form them for whatever reason. Even two straight people wanting to consolidate living arrangements and taxes under one roof should have those same benefits.

Actually in support of this because there are a lot of incels who would benefit from it, the only problem is they'd be seen as faggots.

Most people are not as in favor of the trans thing as the TV insists

Doesn't matter, they will tolerate whatever they're forced to.

-2
NewNameIguess -2 points ago +1 / -3

The way I see it almost everyone will obey orders when there is an immediate consequence backing it up, it's harder to sell people on promises of a good life though, especially to those with a pessimistic outlook on life.

-3
NewNameIguess -3 points ago +1 / -4

I am the wife and I never slutted.

Never slept with a man before marriage even if you thought you were going to "spend the rest of your lives together"?

My daughters haven't either

How can you be sure?

Granted, no one is perfect, but it doesn't mean people should give up their personal responsibility.

They'll still have the personal responsibility to engage in self control, only now there will be harsher consequences.

I suggest you research prohibition

This would be different as it would be policing human interaction rather than material goods. Besides, all the anti-prohibition arguements also apply to other controlled substances.

People need Jesus and decent parenting, not invasive laws and red guard snooping neighbors.

I don't see how they're mutually exclusive, as is we don't really have a way of policing our community and options for disciplining our children are somewhat limited especially if they're let out of your sight at any time such as at school when you can't keep track of what they're doing.

0
NewNameIguess 0 points ago +1 / -1

This is a legitimate question though, how are they supposed to automatically filter things like that? it's different when it's a guy going for a girl in person when you can just ask to see her ID, but how do you do it with a picture of a girl who isn't even connected to the guy who uploaded the image?

-3
NewNameIguess -3 points ago +1 / -4

So you're okay with your future wife and daughter slutting around before marriage and having no idea their sexual history?

-1
NewNameIguess -1 points ago +1 / -2

How are they supposed to automatically ban content featuring a girl that looks of age but isn't, judge the desires of someone having an upskirt taken, and protect the privacy of whores who sleep around with random men?

0
NewNameIguess 0 points ago +1 / -1

Are those laws still enforced though? Laws are meaningless if there's nothing backing them.

OOC in your mind, who gets charged with rape when two 14 year olds consent?

Both, and the woman should get equal or greater sentance than the woman as women are more seductive while guys are trained to have to take every chance they get.

Should they do hard time (no pun intended)

Yes.

-3
NewNameIguess -3 points ago +1 / -4

Yes, because it should be a crime, and it used to be for half the time this country has existed.

-3
NewNameIguess -3 points ago +1 / -4

My only thread here, but I have a long comment history in other subs that will back up my point.

-5
NewNameIguess -5 points ago +1 / -6

I'm farther right and more pro-tradition than any of you posers could be. Most posters here hold values that would be considered far left just a few decades ago.

-3
NewNameIguess -3 points ago +1 / -4

There's a big difference between something being confiscated just because of a call in and a simple sample gathering. I'm sure we already have laws in place where the police can require a urine test if you're suspected of being under the influence of drugs so this would be the same thing.

-3
NewNameIguess -3 points ago +1 / -4

I'm not a shill, I see premarital sex as a gateway to many forms of degeneracy including pedophilia, and I view sex between minors as just as damaging as if it was an adult and a minor. You can see all this from my post history that goes month back.

view more: Next ›