@jsl76 said in Teenage knife fights are no big deal, say liberals:

Did you watch the video? It seems you want to weigh in on leftist talking points without acutally apprehending the facts in the case. I'm not interested in debating counterfactuals with someone who hasn't even mastered the factuals. But thanks for playing.

I had to go back and check because sometimes you guys say bs so confidently, I was like did I miss something? How can you blame me for not watching a video you didn't even link? My thoughts are based on what I've read about the case. If there is some kind of video floating around that you believe justifies this shooting why don't you share it?

You just hurt my feelings bro. Maybe I just needed more information, jeez. "factuals" and "counterfactuals" what kind of pretentious... What are you even talking about? If you don't want to defend your argument just say so, don't make it seem like there's a problem with my intelligence.

Why the mean girl energy, Regina George??

@vmalar also we don't know why person a had the knife, it's possible she was defending herself, and it's possible she may have been the person to call the police in the first place.

to me it's just pathetic how cops shoot people to death the minute the situation becomes a little inconvenient. They rather someone else's life end than working harder to defuse a situation. This is what our taxpayer dollars are going towards?

@raphjd first of all this is a site the measures bias, this is not partisan. it's not this site's fault that reality has a left wing bias.

secondly, the bias is not at all the problem, there is nothing wrong with getting news that has a preference, the problem is this source has failed multiple fact check making them uncredible

@eobox91103 said in Party of family values part 1 :

It's also the "pro-life" party that favours capital punishment.

Here is fox news celebrating that South Carolina brought back the firing squad in may of 2021:

link

@eobox91103 omg That's such a great point. I'm a nurse, I'm positive they wipe down the injection site first.

I agree with cenk, the male host, in saying that the death penalty is wrong because we keep executing the wrong people.

I don't mind killing people who have killed people especially in purposeful and cruel ways. I'll go even farther and say, I believe people should die the same exact way you killed someone else. If you shot someone to death you should be shot to death, if you knifed someone you should be knifed, if you strangled someone you should be strangled, and if you raped someone you should be raped too. But I'm not a bible hugger who purports to be pro life though. I'm pro justice. I'm sure there is something about this logic that's a bit messed up, but I can't help the way I feel.

The only problem is that we keep killing innocent people on death row. And I'd rather get rid of the death penalty entirely than risk even 1 innocent person dying because of it.

@bi4smooth ah ok, I was arguing against:

Many American police departments use militarized training tactics

Many servicemen I know would disagree with such a characterization, they don't want to be associated the dumpster fire that has become american policing. A lot of them are quite proud of their training.

but I concede that our general points are the same.

@jsl76 said in Teenage knife fights are no big deal, say liberals:

@calatar Check the video, dude. The officer had fewer than 10 seconds from arriving on scene to shooting to make a decision, and in this case, the use of force was surely justified. Had this happened in London, the girl in pink would have been severely wounded or killed. In America, the knife-wielding attacker was killed. I prefer our solution to that of our cousins across the pond, IMO. No one wants to see ANYONE killed by anyone for any reason, but your comments demonstrate you haven't performed even the most cursory review of the Bryant scene.

I once pulled out a knife on my own father, because he violated a restraining order and came to my mom's house to do her and me harm. This is the same man who on another occasion used an axe to break down my mother's bedroom door, who took all of our china and set it on fire in the back yard, who broke my mother's nose and pushed her down a flight of stairs. I went to the kitchen and grabbed a serrated steak knife because I was scared and needed something to protect myself with. Had the police in this story had seen me I'm the one who would've been shot dead, are you saying I would've deserved it?

@raphjd said in Candace Owens and the art selling out your own race for profit:

@chanelkokoro
He wasn't saintly, as liberal outlets like to portray blacks killed by whites and especially white cops or hispanics that can be called white.

why is this relevant

Without seeing the full clips, unedited, I won't comment because liberals, including members of Congress, have purposely edited her and others totally out of context to demonize them.

here you go: tucker and candace's unedited crazy on full display

Let me ask you this. What do you have to say about the 7 dead white men who were killed in a similar manner and everyone ignored because of their race?

There were 7 white men whose necks were kneeled on and they suffocated to death?

@jsl76 pffft, I'm not trolling, I am asking you to envision a situation in which the girl may have been completely justified in holding that knife. I didn't realize I was asking too much by sharing a personal story and asking you to think a little bit, my bad.

If it was okay to kill people based on potentialities all of us would be dead by now.

@raphjd said in The Truth About Bill Gates:

Youtube Video

Proof that Bill Gates is a total fucking hypocrite and scum of the earth.

lololol so for those of you that didn't watch the video it's just 6 minutes and 35 seconds psa on why we should tax the hell out of the rich.

bro if you want to complain about rich people buying rich people shit and living in craven luxe, you need to start asking why we allow them to evade taxes and pay their workers starvation wages. conservatives are the ones obsessed with protecting "job-creators" like bil gates.

also, didn't even know bill gates wrote a book but I don't care. although he had the right stances on the environment, defeating climate change will take a collectivist effort. Asking individuals to live by the right standard while the majority of others refuse to will not solve the problem. We need laws that everyone will adhere to.

@vmalar said in Party of family values part 1 :

@chanelkokoro Why don't we unmask this issue and talk about the real issue. The fact that we even have circumcision (male or female) is a religious one. When it was 'practiced' in ancient times arguments of HPV and other health related arguments was not even considered.

I'm agnostic. I left religion with my hair on fire. That is not the point and this is not a valid argument. There are plenty of things that we used to do that had no medical merit or had a different purpose that we later discovered was actually beneficial. For example: viagra was first made to treat heart conditions. It just so happens that we discovered that it could also help with erectile dysfunction.

The fact is that we now know that circumcision is completely useless (if not harmful) practice that is only propagated via religious customs.
I'm sorry for your loss (of foreskin) but the fact of the matter is that they did something to you (not even asked you) so that God can recognize their true followers. Stop trying to explain away the mussing of some illiterate shepherds!

@raphjd I can't wait to see how you spin this, since Sean Hannity of the main reason why we still have MSNBC's biggest thundercunt.

Sean Hannity saved Joy Reid's career

@raphjd said in Party of family values part 1 :

Circumcision for boys became a thing in the US as an anti-masturbation technique, at about the same time as all the other wacky medical stuff came out. Graham Crackers also cured masturbation.

Well we can agree that Graham crackers are better than sex, amirite?

All the pro-mutilation "science" comes from Africa. When it gets reported in the west, they leave out the barbaric way it's traditionally done, while reporting on how safe it is in a clinical setting. Of course, it's much safer in a clinic than in the bush using a broken bottle or rusty piece of scrap metal.

As an african I have never seen it done this way but I assume that's the way used to be or could've been. What you need to worry about is some of these jewish rabbis that be sucking on the baby's peen afterwards. What is that about??

Am I weird? Has anyone else ever seen that?

@lololulu19 Yeah I guess I did miss your point. I was thinking well you could've been someone famous, maybe I would've wanted your jizzed underpants...

@bi4smooth said in Party of family values part 1 :

@chanelkokoro said in Party of family values part 1 :

So if circumcision is such a great and wonderful thing, perhaps you can explain why it is mostly prevalent in Northern Africa and the Middle East - 2 areas of the world most highly regarded as leaders in human disease prevention, hygiene, and general excellence in all things intellectual and science-based! (Proof: look at all the lunar and martian landings these countries account for! Not to mention the UNCOUNTABLE numbers of Nobel and other prizes for science and medicine they have achieved!) (end sarcasm)...

Indeed, it's such a great and wonderful thing, the prevalence of it in America (US) has dropped from about 80% in the 1950s to roughly 50/50 in the 2000's... those dumb American parents!

when non Africans argue with an African about Africa...

This is a strawman argument. The rate of circumcisions in the west, has nothing to do with its efficacy, and everything with the media and the perception of circumcision in those places over the years. This is like saying that because 40% of Americans still refuse to get vaccinated because people without medical degrees decided to get on fox news and make it a national debate, the vaccines must not be effective.

Secondly, it's a fallacy to compare Africa to the West in the first place. Africa is a continent of underdeveloped nations while much of the west is industrialized. STDs in Africa occur due to a number of factors, that doesn't mean that circumcision doesn't help lower the number of incidents, as the studies have indicated, over and over again.

Let me explain what you are doing using my own arbitrary made up numbers:

Let's say canada has a 1000/1 million std rate and they don't circumcise much.

then Liberia has a rate of like 10000/1 million std rate and they circumcise 80%

Studies compare the parts of Liberia that circumcise and the parts that don't and realize that the parts that circumcise have 62% less incidents of stds than those who didn't (which is actually what the cdc studies are indicating.)

just because 10,000/1million is higher than 1000/1million does not mean circumcision did not prevent stds. but this is what you are arguing.

Now, saying that we shouldn't circumcise our children because we are living in a first world country with enough wealth and resources to treat or prevent penile health incidents is a MUCH better and sound argument, than looking at these 2 different numbers with no context and saying that circumcision has no health benefits. Because that's false.

Lastly, the united states has the highest rate of stds in the industrialized/developed world. So bragging about how our circumcision rates have lowered when among first and second world countries we're number 1 in STD rates is a weird flex to say the least.

Honestly, and I know I'm repeating myself here, if there was any REAL evidence of any SIGNIFICANT benefit to circumcising male children (or female - gotta include @raphjd here), don't you think there would be world-wide campaigns to get it done?

we can't even get people to do something as simple as wearing masks in the middle of a global pandemic. and we can't get our red states to teach sex ed in schools, but sure, we'll be able to convince people to take off the loose skin off their baby's dick.

the most the US has done is make circumcision free under government health programs.

The FACTS are that STD rates, urethra infections, and rates of most other genital-based diseases and problems in the US/Canada, Australia, Japan, S. Korea, Russia (as much as is reported), and Europe are statistically so even - despite the WIDELY disparate rates of circumcision (e.g.: virtually never done in Asian countries!) - that the BEST you can say is that while circumcision does not appear to help, it also appears to do no harm either!

this is a real simple and flawed logic. that's not how this works. for instance you know why japan's std rate is low? because they ain't fucking!

sidenote: the wikipedia article you liked shows that south koreans are doing it at a rate of 75% and climbing.

Indeed, the fact that it cannot really be shown to be either helpful or harmful is precisely why it remains "optional" around the world.

Look, all I did was quote the cdc, same as you did, which is filled to the brim with health and medical experts from all over the world who have said they have tested and studied this issue for literally decades and have found that male circumcision has so many health benefits that they recommend people circumcise their children. They gave you 61 pages worth of research and studies they've conducted. they were a reliable source for you before, when you wanted to show @raphjd his irrationality, so what changed? You are cherry picking what you want to believe based on your own politics/beliefs and ignoring the science.

If the CDC, National Institute of Health, and World Health Organization which all say that male circumcision has numerous health benefits are out here and you're still holding onto stats with no context and debates from the 80s done by people with no medical degrees to defend your position, then you're never going to be convinced of anything else. There is no informed medical consensus you will ever accept. Just like the people who say manmade climate change is a hoax despite the fact that 98% of the world's scientists are in agreement that it's not, the only reason why this is still a debate are because of the people who want to keep it debate.

As for people doing it for religious reasons, who cares? A broken clock is right twice a day. I'm completely secular, but that doesn't mean I'm going to find fault in them doing something medically beneficial for their child because they've deluded themselves into thinking it's for god.

@lololulu19

But who are you that you believe anyone would want your jizzed panties? Are you a celebrity of some kind?

This reminds me of when tokyo toni, black chyna's mom, used a handkerchief to rub her vagina and then turned around and sold the handkerchief for $500.

@bi4smooth said in Party of family values part 1 :

So, I would say that your claim that circumcision has health benefits is PROVEN false solely by the statistical analysis of populations of circumcised males vs populations of uncircumcised ones... which, in communities of like economic status, are virtually identical.

You might want to read this: article about the fallacy of male circumcision in American Culture written in the 1980s

Other than for religious or cultural "looks" reasons, there is no need or benefit to the practice - though it does surgically remove a LOT of nerve endings!)

The same CDC you are quoting as a great source of information endorsed the practice of male circumcision in December of 2014 after releasing a 61 page literature review saying the health benefits vastly outweigh the risks and they criticized much of the arguments in the opposite direction because they were made off faulty experiments. That is far more updated than anything that was said in the 80s given the studies and technology that has come out since then.

The CDC recommends male circumcision due to the following reasons:

Medical Conditions That Male Circumcision Protects Against Over the Lifetime:

Urinary tract infection

Penile inflammation, for example, balanitis, balanoposthitis, lichen sclerosus

Candidiasis

Phimosis and paraphimosis

Inferior hygiene

Sexually transmitted infections including high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV), genital herpes simplex virus (HSV), trichomoniasis, mycoplasma, syphilis, chancroid, and HIV (now I mentioned that this is a reason that I have never seen here in the west, but when you think of places like Africa, the continent most ravaged by AIDS, it might be relevant.)

Physical injuries to the foreskin, including coital injuries

Cancers of the penis, prostate, and cervix

cdc endorsement

peer reviewed article from 2017 reinforcing cdc Mc reccomendations

If there were no medical value to it there'd be no reason why we'd be doing it in our hospitals. There is no credible evidence that removing the foreskin decreases penile sensitivity and function. However, I think that men believe that is the case and have been struggling to argue that it has no medical value ever since.

At this point, penile foreskin is like a vestigial structure similar to that of the appendix. Perhaps somewhere in our evolutionary ancestry it was an important organ but today It has no real value and serves no real purpose other than being the source of potential infection. The reason why we don't go through the trouble of removing everyone's appendix is because it lies deep within our bodies and is surrounded by the organs of our abdominal cavity. It's too much of a hassle and the risk of surgical trauma is higher than what the appendix poses. However, the appendix is such a useless thing that if for any reason we had to surgically go into that area, like installing a ileostomy, repairing some kind of intestinal trauma, or removing the ovaries, even if the appendix was not infected we would still remove it. Because it's a time bomb.

But unlike the appendix, the foreskin exists on the outside of the body, making it much easier and much more common to remove. I don't know why y'all are struggling to keep it anyways. If all you cared about was vanity, your pig in a blanket dicks are not visually appealing and are prone to strange smells. Not that uncircumcision would ever stop me from getting with a guy I liked, but I'm just keeping it real.

However, getting back to the original argument, we women also pay taxes. And we don't get to decide whether that money pays for your circumcisions (something half of you guys deem unnecessary) and your vasectomies which are wholly unnecessary because it's not that hard to not cum inside a woman. We pay for your birth control all the time without any complaints, I don't see why men think they can decide not to pay for our birth control, and then claim they care about abortion. Best way to avoid abortion is never getting pregnant in the first place. You conservatives should be BEGGING to pay for our birth control, if y'all really cared about abortion the way you say you do.

@raphjd I'm beginning to think you don't read past the first sentence. And this is not an argument bro. try again.

And i'm a leftist, meaning i'm to the left of liberals.

@bi4smooth

So I'm Nigerian American and my family has a roman catholic background. Every male in my family has been circumcised. The reasoning behind it has nothing to do with religion but rather it's a matter of course. It's purely for hygienic reasons.

The medical reasons are quite sound, which of course do not include circumcising infants to prevent stds. (that is crazy) Because like I said the folds of the foreskin are a breeding ground for yeast and bacteria and are prone to infection, so men with foreskin have to more careful and have be cleaner in general. We all exist in our own bubbles. I know that living in America you think you will have access to clean water and daily bathing all the time, but if you live in a third world country this may not be the case. And if that's the way it is, you can see the benefit of male circumcision.

On top of that, the forekin is attached to a highly vascularized organ, therefore most of the time if the foreskin gets infected, the safer option is to just remove it before the infection can reach the bloodstream. If this is occurs above the infant age it is an extremely extremely painful process for men. I've seen it happen to teenagers and it can be pretty traumatic. I can only imagine that the reason why this is still a debate is the belief that this is done for religious or cosmetic reasons but meeting anyone over the age of toddler having to have their foreskin removed will change anyone's mind of the subject. You better thank your parents for circumcising you.

however circumcising females has no medical value pretty much 100% of the time. 0. I repeat 0 medical value. Unlike penises, the vagina is a self cleaning organ. Vaginal secretions clean the organ and maintain ph, yeast and bacteria are just part of the balanced normal flora of the vagina. On top of that the vagina is not vascularized at all. An infection presents no real danger of reaching the bloodstream as a female will feel the problem for days even weeks before that happens and removing a girl's clitoris as is often done in fgm has no real value in preventing this. It's only to make sure that the only one who is able to feel pleasure during having sex is the man. It is 100% a practice born out of ignorance misogyny and control. I have no idea why someone would be so insane to think the 2 are even comparable.

@raphjd said in Caitlyn Jenner causes "transphobia" confusion:

@chanelkokoro

Let's not forget that it was your beloved Democrats that passed DOMA, DADT and RFRA. This was all under Clinton. These are the 3 most homophobic laws the federal government ever passed.

RFRA is still the law of the land. It was authored by Chuckles Schumer and Honest Joe Biden was one of the co-sponsors.

Those are super fair points. At the same time, if we are talking about present day and not 20 years ago, it is conservatives that are fighting against gay and trans rights like their lives depend on it. they are the ones that are using religious rights laws to discriminate against the lbgt community and they are the ones that tried to make gay conversion therapy for minors (torture) legal in all the red states, as well as their very loud vocal opposition to gay adoption. Michelle Bachman even ran for president on that message.

Don't forget that we were always told to vote Democrat because they are the only ones that love us. Talk about an abusive relationship.

when you compare liberals to conservatives who are literally trying to bring back anti sodomy laws, where people would literally be jailed for having butt sex, I'd say dems are the only safe option for you guys. As a straight female I really have no dog in this fight, I'm just making observations here.

You might want to look at some of the racist shit Democrats have said in the last 50 years, as well. Starting with Biden is always a good place.

Both liberals and conservatives exhibit different kinds of racism. I don't need to look up anything Biden said because Biden has been racist for decades. Why do you think Obama picked him in 2008? Do you think Obama needed help with the black vote? No, Obama had that covered. He picked Biden in order to grab a few of the racist white vote.

I don't have a dog in that fight either. I'm not a Dem, I'm an independent and I didn't vote for Biden.