Should cities implement congestion pricing to reduce traffic in busy urban areas?

Dear lord you act surprised when being called a bigot and then spout this utter bull. Let’s start from the beginning, you assume the intent of gay people as if you understand them in the slightest, but in this conversation alone, you have called them delusional, “cultists”, “abominable” (their “practices” at the very least), and as far as calling their legalization propaganda. I am LGBTQ myself, I have talked to THOUSANDS of that population, and they’re just want to live happily, that’s all they really want. The reason pride parades happen…  Read more isn’t because they want to run it in your face, but because they actually CAN now, and because in the majority of countries, gay people are not free. Honestly, if you go as far as calling them abominable, I’d HOPE that their legalization is viewed as a good, because your bigotry is revolting. Their legalization doesn’t take away from the usual marriage, it doesn’t prevent straight couples from marrying, it simply allows and acknowledges others to do so. If you can find a non-religious and solid reason why the government recognizing them as valid along the area of marriage, I’ll be glad to refute it, because they do not get to be held back from marrying the loves of their lives because your religious views think that’s an abomination. Oh, and before you make the “pedophilia would be okay by that logic” excuse, age limits don’t disappear, that is an agreed upon idea by the vast majority of everyone, LGBTQ+ or not, and that ideal won’t change because there’s a solid difference between pedophilia and marriage above 18: minors do not have the mental capacity to consent, nor do they have the legal ability to leave their parents, and as such, aren’t allowed to marry until those requirements are filled, which is, and will remain, a solid case.

you are pretty embarrassing, jesus christ. i never said we don't live off of other people, but living off of other people and a fetus living off a person's body are not the same things. consumerism and birth are not comparable, jeez louise! you're a little coocoo, y'know, patriot? but I still love you, sweetie pie. you'll be mine forever.

Well greater spread of funding would be helpful in the police aspect, I do understand the need for safety officers, while I dont like many of the other roles they play, which they should not, on this issue is one of the only cases in which they are a benifit, I dont think for this you need armed teachers. While you could decide teachers who want to be able to do so should, I still think overall the additions of more weapons into the environment isnt a helpful addition. Also I was reffering to gun access and mental health not of teachers but as it pertains generally, mental health being increa…  Read moresingly worse leads to more shooters (often shooters are suicidal and either kill themselves or plan to die during the events), in addition gun access is much to high, we are the only country with more guns than people. While I agree with the right to have and use a firearm, I dont not agree that this necessary extends to all weapons (as even on the basis most people would agree you should not be able to get tanks or nukes) though I think generally if its not obvious something shouldnt be allowed, it should be allowed. In addition its not a protection from background checks or my preferable system of liscensing and ensuring understanding of gun safety and use, a gun needs to be an active and tough descision, much different than it currently is.

I explained my point in the other message you posted, though I’ll continue with extra reasoning. There aren’t always ways out of that situation where an abortion isn’t done. That could would be tied to her and her husband, and as such, would likely be required by the court to stay. There’s a thousand possibilities, and she DID consider adoption, but that wasn’t the life she wanted for her child. She didn’t WANT to do the abortion, but she felt she HAD to, and I will not judge her in the slightest for it. A situation is always more complicated than simply providing a sentence-long solution.

Yes we do! And as a people, we should respect other nations’ sovereignty and ability to enact the will of its citizens. You may not like it, but it’s not up to you. We are similar in many ways and absolutely different in others and that’s okay. The world doesn’t owe us anything.

I just want to punish the distributors, who are far smaller in number

Slippery slope issue. Then go after distributors who are illegally exploiting women and children. You are widening the scope beyond your stated concern to ban everyone, even if they are legally, safely, and voluntarily producing or consuming the content. You sound like an anti-gun activist.

It is extremely addictive, and as cognitively damaging as any illegal drug

Again, look how quickly you are going down a slippery slope. Next you are going to try to ban video games because they have the same cognitive effects.

Im saying, you should personally test that theory, and have sex with a man to see that you WILL get pregnant. If im wrong, im wrong, and will admit that, but we first need to test this theory to prove who is actually right here.

It proves you acknowledge Trump is sexist

I'm ending this conversation. I'm sick of presenting logical lines of reasoning and you calling out false fallacies while committing the fallacy of argument by repetition. Women is a term crafted by society fo control females with no real meaning.

It's a generalisation based on dear experience, sir, dear, dear, experience.

If you believe that consent to bodily autonomy can be withdrawn at any time, then how would you resolve this scenario? Let's say a person voluntarily consents to donate a kidney to a person in need. The operation is done, the kidney is transplanted successfully. But after a month or so, the donor decides to withdraw consent and wants their kidney back. Should the recipient be obliged to return it because the donor has withdrawn their consent?