Old Racists - KC shooting of kid at wrong house

[House of Leaves]

My late Grandmother (RIP)...when she was in her Mid-80s few years ago...I specifically remember:

The NICEST /kindest hearted person in the world.

AND I'm sure (earlier in her life/career...if there were any (albeit rare) interactions with a black individual (male or female) she would treat them with respect and dignity. As a fellow human should/would. She had a great heart. I didn't know she had any hate.

The word I believe is ignorance.

As, in her mid-80s getting a little more cranky/tiny senile...it's the "Random" black stranger walking down the sidewalk, as she looks out her window.

You know...she doesn't like "the look of him"...is threatened a little perhaps? By the mere appearance. Of her neighborhood which is now probably close to 50-50 white/minority...

She made a very distastefuly racist comment in front of me and my family after witnessing the black man pass by.

I AM NOT EXCUSING THIS THOUGHT PROCESS/BEHAVIOR.

I am saying: I am NOT SURPRISED that an 85 year old white male SOUTHERNER **** up this bad and nearly killed an innocent kid.

It is not so much hate (with the very old generation). It is ignorance and the way they lived for decades and decades.

Times have changed...but we still aren't where we need to be apparently.

Maybe when all the Octegenarians DIE OUT like my AMAZING grandma...things will be a little better.

[House of Leaves]

Many years ago, the National Review (in my opinion) basically debunked most of the points made by the "gender paygap" arguments...

As we see from the article, childless women made 97 cents on the dollar compared with men...

Certainly, motherhood and biology are factors...more than sexism or racism.

The National Review article pointed out that SCHEDULE FLEXIBILITY/ VARIABLE HOURS/ were priority #1 for women workers, particularly mothers -- OVER salary... women also (IN GENERAL) do a poorer job negotiating starting salaries (in an interview setting) when entering a new position or a promotion.

[House of Leaves]

Are you two being serious? REALLY

I thought I was quite cynical, in general, but this really takes the cake....

OHHH the poor kids there's bullying in school....and TECHNOLOGY....school shootings happen.....

Solution: Ohhhh I'm so glad I'm not bringing a new life into this (tough) world...lol

OHHH anyone who has kids is implicity SELFISH.... lol per KIMs...yes, you are selfish If you procreate because the worlds is hardddd for them....

Lol, you two are adults?

I had a rough time in my late-teens/early 20s. The world is rough, had some mental health issues....you PERSEVERE...you overcome....you get treatment (if necessary) and you ENJOY LIFE as you can, try to be productive, kind to people, etc.... BEST time to be alive in human history.....2023....the technology...size of the MIDDLE CLASS (worldwide? vs. any past generations...)

Sorry but you two debbie downers need to re-evaluate your positions here. Seriously.

Ryan I see yours may be a medical issue, but to make the blanket statement not to bring any more kids into this world is laughable...that's why this rant....

Any kid being bullied can A)report it (very sensitive topic that WILL get attention)...B)stick up for yourself with rhetoric, and if need be a few quick jabs....C)counseling if the damage is already done....

poor babies; poor cynical little babies

========================

I in no way proved your point and your response is lazy.

Your claim that anyone who has a child is selfish is beyond "selfish" - in and of itself, and is why you got that tone, hun.

can you refute any of my points?

-bullying is a big deal in schools now and when reported is usually dealt with in a serious fashion

-mental health professionals and counselors are more abundant than ever, and usually free with medicaid...

-the MIDDLE CLASS (in general, worldwide) is larger than at any time in human history....human well-being COMPARATIVELY is objectively better than it was in decades/centuries past

-technology has helped humanity more than hurt it, (despite this AI article)

I don't expect a response...but would be impressed if you provided an articulate one.

I'm actually glad you won't have a kid because (based on that one post) your outlook & parenting might not be ideal.

[House of Leaves]

Alright, your multiple exclamation points and condescending know-it all tone are enough to make me "care to play"...so let's!:

"Is gender dysphoria a medical condition which needs medical treatment?"

Yes, Mot, why yes it is. According to the vast majority of scientists/psychologists in the field. So you see, I hope my answer isn't part of the "problem"..., but I'll add a qualifier:

AGE is an important "sliding scale" to consider... I'm sure you'd take any 4-5 year old's word that they are the wrong gender or in the wrong body (and there ARE documented cases of the very young knowing this early)...However!!!...There are also many cases of young children claiming wholeheartedly that they are Barbie...perhaps T-Rex, etc. I'm not trying to de-ligitimize gender dysphoria or trans with that admittedly simple analogy...I'm simply pointing out that very young children might just be a little whimsical, unsettled, highly influenced by peers or media trends, etc...setting a young child "on the course" of puberty blockers in a few years, and after that possible surgery/transitioning at 18 (or younger) should NOT be taken lightly. (This is why there is still debate - people talking/arguing about it).

YES, there are many bigots out there (yes, often religious) People like you, Mot, often can't discern between blind hatred/bigotry VS. legitimate concerns about Women/Feminism/ young kids

Stay out of women's spaces: SPORTS / beauty pageants.

Stop meddling with Title IX.

-signed,

a "lefty" athiest~

[House of Leaves]

"Crimes against Asian Americans notably increased by 70%, prompting Congress to pass the COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act in 2021."

There are a litany of Federal laws against discrimination and hate crimes. Yes, they already cover Asians and Jewish people / victims.

Plus: this relatively new one in 2021.

I guess my question is - why all the redundancy?

[House of Leaves]

I am "left" on a bunch of issues, but the Voter ID thing, to me, seems an unfounded complaint by Dems:

You need ID for MANY basic things in adult life...I will not list them all here, but they are all googleable...

Even red states have MULTIPLE orginizations (both Gov't and private non-profits) who focus intently on helping older minority voters -- who don't have a driver's liscense --procure identification.

Even without a driver's license, in many states other options will suffice...utility bill, bank statement, ss card, birth cert, etc...

"18 states ask for a photo ID and 17 states also accept non-photo IDs."

Regarding this particular article and the gerrymandering - I will get to that later.

I just see so many complaints of voter supression that, to me, seem exaggerated at best, unfounded at worst. Adults in society need ID, unless you're off the grid in the woods.

[House of Leaves]

I'd love to pose for GQ...get PAID for it...but, a fan who wants me to sign the GQ pic is innapropriate and sexualizing me.

-Got it, Bella.

next?

[House of Leaves]

"Feinstein is one of two Senate Democrats currently out with illness, prompting Vice President Kamala Harris to break three tied votes this week."

Her age & need for retirement ASIDE for a sec,

It's 2023. Why do Congresspeople have to be physically present for an important vote.

Why can't a vote be web-cammed, e-mailed, spoken on the phone, lol...whatever method...

Right?

Why the ridiculous rigidity of a physical body on the Senate floor?

[House of Leaves]

"Data shows that participating in sports can help LGBTQ+ youth increase their self-esteem and gives them a sense of belonging while decreasing feelings of "hopelessness and suicidality," according to GLSEN, an organization that fights LGBTQ+ discrimination."

Notice the focus is only on the effect on LGBTQ youth athletes. Not one mention of how biological females are discriminated against...having to compete against/ risk injury/ potentially lose championships/ &SCHOLARSHIPS to an athlete who was born with greater lung capacity, more bone density, a larger heart, etc...

This issue flabbergasts me how the trans lobby is keeping this an "issue". They don't even want it to be a contested issue. I don't think it should be a contested issue either -- IN the other direction. Seems so obvious. This is why a lot of left-leaning people are sick of "woke".

=====unfortunate update ** NEW edit... not only did they forfeit this game THEY WERE BANNED FROM THE REST OF THE SEASON LOL.. .FOR "THEIR" "BIGOTRY"???

So who's discriminating?

[House of Leaves]

I make judgements individually. In fairness, you do sound racist.

If you're referring to black folks as "these people", there are plenty of decent law-abiding black citizens, who I don't mind working with and wouldn't have a problem having as a friend.

[House of Leaves]

She's the best of the current female far right trolls...shes got the looks (incel comment?)...does her research to get her hard right point across, no matter how outlandish...always able to rile up the libs with the simplest over the top statements... denounces MTG tries to distance herself from conspiracy theories and feign intellectualism...

Younger Palin with a few brains but no one admits it... NOT saying i agree with her positions..

haha... o yeah.. this tweet is beyond the pale, etc...

[House of Leaves]

I'm who a user in favor of legalization.

And I agree it's "less bad" than being an alcoholic.

However, it's basic common sense to say that HABITUAL smoking is bad for your lungs-- much like cigarette smoke.

1) The smoke is usually held in the lungs longer to help get the desired effect

2) TAKE A LOOK AT THE RESIN IN YOUR BOWL...THAT is also the lining of your lungs if you do it all the time.

In rare cases, smoking daily for years CAN make you psychotic. Or at least contribute to/exacerbate the issue.

But direct causation is not proven, as there can be many other factors (other substances, pre-existing mental health condition, family history, lack of sleep, etc.),.

While not physical, It can be "psychologically" addictive...If it's your daily lifestyle and you are stuck in that pattern @Objective

[House of Leaves]

Lol - That's YOUR opinion that you think the reason I think that argument is bereft of substance is solely because it does not match MY opinion.

"At least my opinion and my stance respects EVERYONE...it is based on choice over one's own body."

Again, once there's a developing fetus in the womb (particularly as the weeks tick on) it is not simply HER body... Yes, it's in the womb, but separate DNA, skeleton, organs, etc..

Your stance respects everyone except the potential life -- the soon to be newborn human baby. So I'd argue it doesn't respect everyone -- otherwise we wouldn't be in this situation.

Don't get me wrong. I AGREE that Red states are going WAY too far: with the no exceptions, 6-week bans before the woman even knows she's preg, attempts to restrict birth control and day after pills, threatening doctors & pharmacies w/ prosecution AGREED that this is draconian & terrible...AND I will argue/ have argued with the extreme pro-lifers about these sick measures.

I'm a more moderate and am just pointing out [my perceived] flaws in the(your) pro-abortion arguments. "Don't get one if you don't like them" is lazy. I'd argue it's objectively lazy, but yes, that's technically still an opinion.

[House of Leaves]

Agreed that it's simply my opinion and that others have different opinions.

"There is a very simple solution....if you believe an abortion shouldn't be done, just don't have one."

I find this tired/trite argument to be intellectually bare, lazy, and a shut-down attempt of the conversation.

How is this argument working on the rabid pro-life crowd? -who just overturned Roe and now are working state-by-state.

Try again.

(In my opinion), refusing a surgery on a fetus with complications is a different thing than terminating a healthy pregnancy.

[House of Leaves]

Replied toTocsin 12w ago
If she believes herself unfit to raise a child, adoption is an option.

Regarding the standard pro-abortion rebuttals?:

I posit that a life in foster care is objectively "less bad" than a premature death.

Yes, it's 9 months for that mother. But she would be saving a potential life / producing a life....

To me, the issue is complex*. (That's why we're still here - talking about it & the country is debating it]. It's not a simple cut&dry answer as both extremes would make it out to be. That's why length of gestation is very important to me when it comes to my opinion on the matter.

*Your closing sentence IS persuasive. My only answer so far was a mother's selflessness & adoption.

Thanks for getting in the weeds w/ me and not being too extreme or ad hominem.
=====================

Replied toJess 12w ago
I am not religious so your closer is barking up the wrong tree. How is it the “same process”. An unintended (dare I say natural) miscarriage/abortion VS a pill or medical procedure to terminate the pregnancy.

I dare say one is nature/biology and one is a human procedure using medical technology (in most cases).

Can you try and re-iterate your statement and be a little more clear?

[House of Leaves]

"Viability outside of the womb"

22-23 week ban OK with you? With medical/criminal exceptions of course
==============================================

[VS rabit Righties pro-life (NOW defending pro-choicers kinda)]*

Replied toRico T 12w ago
"NO artificial birth control."

This runs counter to ALL your goals of saving fetuses. You are an extremist with no real proposals.

[House of Leaves]

"You are wrong because no person should be forced to share their body with another. Common sense tells us that a person's body is their own and they shouldn't be forced by others to share their body and its nutrients with a being..."

Yes, a person's body is their own.

But you refuted none of my points about separate DNA, separate skeleten&organs, separate BEING. Yes, it's in the womb. But it's not just the woman's body. I hope we can agree on that?

Regarding sharing nutrients etc... I mean...that's biology, Tocs.

Most species of female mammals have pregnancies, and wombs for such a thing...

[Hypothetical]:

?What would we humans think if pregnant apes or dogs or elephants practiced their "choice" of aborting their offspring while it developed in the womb. Let's say the apes harmed their own lower stomach area, or bellyflopped on hard ground...because of the "inconvenience" of carrying the offspring in the womb, god forbid sharing nutrients, and then raising the youngster when it's born.

I don't know...I'D look on it as kind of barbaric...those sub-human species killing their potential offspring...

I used the phrase common sense because terminating a developing fetus that will soon be an infant human seems wrong on it's face. The main reason I am appalled by some of the late-termers & "parasite" claims.... The main reason I am intellectually/morally drawn to some of the BASIC concepts that pro-lifers "try" to articulate. [Yes,2many are religious fanatics who don't want exceptions,etc.]


Replied toTocsin 12w ago
Thanks for responding.

My comment about miscarriages was indeed a bit heartless. I do apologize for the wording. I was trying to make a stark point but I shouldn't have been so snide on that particular "both ways" comment.

Regarding your closing sentence and your "both ways" rebuttal:

I would never chastise women for receiving public assistance. I realize that many pro-life/anti-abortion folks do. That is wrong to me.

Optimistically, I truly think we are making progress already within 2 posts....based on this comment of yours:

"Once the being inside the other being can survive outside, the "host" being shouldn't be allowed to kill it without consequence."

That sounds like reasonable middle-ground to me.

The scientific community says viability is currently around 22-23 weeks...there are various %s for survival, but most range from 12 - 50% at 22-23 weeks.

I understand abortions after that are fairly rare (compared to the total # of abortions).

However, they still happen, particulary in the deep blue states. (And you cannot tell me that many of the pro-abortion crowd think a termination at 22-23 weeks is no big deal.)

How about a law that outlaws elective abortion after the 22nd or 23rd week??...WITH exceptions for life/health of the mother, deadly birth defects, rape/incest. (Although I would hope a victim would decide to terminate before waiting that long)....

[House of Leaves]

Replied toTocsin 12w ago
Common sense and science tell us that once there is a developing fetus inside the womb, it is NO LONGER "Just" "her own body".

If you think I'm wrong, explain how I'm wrong.

Separate DNA, separate skeleton, organs, etc (as it develops with time).

YES, early on it's just a clump of cells, then a tiny sea-horse looking embryo...but (FACT:) as the WEEKS PROGRESS, it is more and more of a HUMAN baby. And by week 21-23 or so, it can be a viable being outside the womb (yes, sometimes w/ the help of medical technology and care)...

In summary, the timing is everything.

Taking a pill to terminate a clump of 16 cells, to me, is not a huge deal.

But an elective abortion for the purposes of birth control...after a certain amount of weeks (and yes, we can debate about the # of weeks) to End a pregnancy (NOT caused by rape or incest [small %])...it gets more "wrong" as the weeks go on. In my opinion.

This seems like common sense to me.

Heartless late-term abortion-right advocates use shocking terms (not backed by science) such as "parasite", etc.. to justify terminating a potential life as n.b.d. lol...

If it's just a parasite/clump of cells why are miscarriages so devastating for women and their husbands?

Want it both ways much?

And yes I am a male without a womb. That should not preclude me from having an opinion about the sanctity of a 20+week old soon-to-be infant.

I'm trying to find some middle ground, as both extremes are ridiculous IMO. All about how long the fetus has been developing.

-athiest

[House of Leaves]

Replied toGoldGlasses 12w ago
Be careful Chinalover. Some of your posts (particulary on the cop-kiler article) are threats which are borderline criminal.

Cannot believe you got around the censors...but when they see them it may go beyond a simple deletion.

Not joking around. Direct threats of child rape, murder, and torture @Sinacog

[House of Leaves]

Replied toJames 12w ago
"China wants to bust us in the economic arena, not by war."

Absolutely. Debt. Trade. Corporate espionage. Superior schooling & engineering/tech students.

If it ever comes to a "hot" war, (IMO) it will be a war of EMPs, drones, and cyber-attacks on important infrastructure.