What is really allowed for women in the US?

[Cecilie1200]

A 3-year-old child can fire a pistol. Is he "gender equal" too?

This is a good trick for men who are physically close to the female type, they justify their "muskulinity" by the fact that they can stick an awl in the back. For such men, feminism is beneficial, and this is exactly what evolution will be if there is gender equality.

The problem with your "analogy" is that women aren't 3-year-old children. Why don't you try learning to compare things that are actually similar?

Is that really all you've got? "I'm physically stronger than women, so that makes me king of the world, and they should be my serfs"?

 

[rupol2000]

The Constitution does not "declare" rights for anyone

You're lying, see the 19th amendment

 

[rupol2000]

The problem with your "analogy" is that women aren't 3-year-old children

I don't see a problem

 

[LuckyDuck]

That is why they protect them from the fraud of feminists who call to take off their dresses and pick up sledgehammers to tear the uterus, or become a whore for the sake of an ephemeral "sexual freedom"

I'm guessing this guy is either a troll or an Islamist.

 

[Colin norris]

The Sage of Main Street
Solving anything by plebiscites is generally the worst idea for the right.

do you mean you don't like women having a say in democracy? How considerate of you. No misogyny there.

Among the plebeians there were many sophists and moneybags who manipulated the dark masses,

like the republicans nowadays?

this is not real democracy, but an ochlocracy in favor of merchants and swindlers.

Finally you are waking up. Hallelujah

That is why American law has mechanisms against ochlocracy, such as electoral systems.

Its a shame someone didn't tell Trump about it. He doesn't want democracy in any form.

 

[Cecilie1200]

You're lying, see the 19th amendment

No, I'm just smarter and more educated than you are . . . which I realize isn't a high bar to clear. The Constitution assumes that people have rights by natural default, which are then infringed upon by the government for various reasons. The Constitution exists for the purpose of limiting government power to infringe upon the rights of citizens.

How do I know this? I can read. I can also then apply ACTUAL logic to what I read.

Here's the Preamble to the US Constitution: "WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." If the Constitution is established by the THE PEOPLE, how do THE PEOPLE grant rights back to themselves? The Constitution doesn't use phrases like, "The people shall have the right . . ." It uses phrases like, "Congress shall make no law abridging . . ." and (In the first line of Article 1) "All legislative Powers herein granted…"

The Ninth and Tenth Amendments make this explicit: "The enumeration in the constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the People", and "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution,are reserved to the States respectively, or to the People."

The Constitution is very clear, to anyone who can read, that rights are clearly assumed to already exist in the hands of the people, and are grudgingly granted to the government by the people.

Now, let's look at the 19th Amendment: "The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex."

Once again, we see the wording that the right is already assumed to exist, and the power of government to infringe on that right is now being limited.

I would also like to point out that I, a woman, have just demonstrated that I have at least 60 IQ points on you, and about 10 years of education.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I don't see a problem

Yeah, neither does my dog, because you have comparable intelligences. Difference is, HE is cute and serves a purpose. What's your excuse for imposing yourself on the world?

 

[surada]

There is generally no patriarchy other than window dressing. This is not a culture where patriarchy could take root. They are constantly fidgeting, separating marital relations from the man-loving Sufi poets , constantly trying to demonstrate masculinity where it is difficult to see it under a microscope. This is the same as in Russia, in the Caucasus.
They live in mountainous areas and they even have almost no mountainskiers. They attack guys in droves and say that they act like real men. They recruit guys from Central Asia and Russia to their fight-clubs, and the public thinks that they are all Caucasians and so on. There are millions of tricks, all this is done precisely in order to be respected by those peoples who are now labeled "gender equality". See how Nurmagomedov behaves. He avoids fights, he hangs on leg instead of fighting, he takes off his underpants to weigh in, and he yells on every corner that he is a "man"

Are you talking about the Gulf States?

 

[Cecilie1200]

I'm guessing this guy is either a troll or an Islamist.

I'm assuming he's just bitter because he's 40 and still a virgin, and figures he could get laid if women didn't have the freedom to turn him down and laugh at him.

 

[surada]

I do not think that this is the most progressive thing that can be found in Islam

Ancient Evil Practice of Bacha Bazi - Boys' Sex Slavery in Afghanistan

However, the Interior and Defence Ministries, as well as the National Directorate of Security "denied that Afghan security forces recruited or used child soldiers, despite multiple cases," Many trafficking victims ran and told that authorities forced them to have sex and brutally raped them in...

www.seekersthoughts.com

Saudi Arabia isn't Afghanistan or pashtun. The pashtun claim they are descended from the tribe of Benjamin.

 

[surada]

I'm guessing this guy is either a troll or an Islamist.

Why do you think he's an islamist?

 

[rupol2000]

No, I'm just smarter and more educated than you are . . . which I realize isn't a high bar to clear. The Constitution assumes that people have rights by natural default, which are then infringed upon by the government for various reasons. The Constitution exists for the purpose of limiting government power to infringe upon the rights of citizens.

How do I know this? I can read. I can also then apply ACTUAL logic to what I read.

Here's the Preamble to the US Constitution: "WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." If the Constitution is established by the THE PEOPLE, how do THE PEOPLE grant rights back to themselves? The Constitution doesn't use phrases like, "The people shall have the right . . ." It uses phrases like, "Congress shall make no law abridging . . ." and (In the first line of Article 1) "All legislative Powers herein granted…"

The Ninth and Tenth Amendments make this explicit: "The enumeration in the constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the People", and "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution,are reserved to the States respectively, or to the People."

The Constitution is very clear, to anyone who can read, that rights are clearly assumed to already exist in the hands of the people, and are grudgingly granted to the government by the people.

That is, the suffragettes achieved infringement of rights when they achieved the right to vote for women? ok mr literate

 

[rupol2000]

Are you talking about the Gulf States?

I'm talking about Islam and its Arabic roots in general. I don't know the nuances in each country.

 

[rupol2000]

Saudi Arabia isn't Afghanistan or pashtun. The pashtun claim they are descended from the tribe of Benjamin.

It doesn't matter, it didn't come out of nowhere.

By the way, do you think Islamic Sufism and Greek Sophism have common roots?

 

[Cecilie1200]

That is, the suffragettes achieved infringement of rights when they achieved the right to vote for women? ok mr literate

You just summarized what I said with something that bore no resemblance or relationship to what I said. Speaking of illiterate . . .

No wonder you have no idea what the Constitution says or does, given that someone else is having to read it for you.

 

[rupol2000]

You just summarized what I said with something that bore no resemblance or relationship to what I said. Speaking of illiterate . . .

No wonder you have no idea what the Constitution says or does, given that someone else is having to read it for you.

You said that the constitution is an infringement of rights. Leave me alone.

 

[surada]

It doesn't matter, it didn't come out of nowhere.

By the way, do you think Islamic Sufism and Greek Sophism have common roots?

I don't know anything about Sufism. Where are you from? Is there some reason you won't answer the question?

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

The Sage of Main Street
Solving anything by plebiscites is generally the worst idea for the right. Among the plebeians there were many sophists and moneybags who manipulated the dark masses, this is not real democracy, but an ochlocracy in favor of merchants and swindlers.

That is why American law has mechanisms against ochlocracy, such as electoral systems.

A Republic Is a Foster Government

Once the people have the self-respect from making their own political decisions instead of being treated like adopted children, they will be suspicious of powerful cliques trying to manipulate them. Snobs who call democracy "mob rule" show their contempt for the majority, which is why they always sell the rest of us down the river.

However, a takeover of the government must take place first so that those who wouldn't have had voting rights if referendums had existed back in the 1950s will be disenfranchised. With our Popular Vote dominated by undesirables, referendums under the present elitist tyranny will just affirm the agenda of the Left Wing of the hereditary ruling class.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

In my country we all have to serve. it is your duty unless exempt for religous reasons. It is different for the men. They must serve longer and train more for combat.

Calling It "Selective" Service Says That Only Certain People Can Be Wasted

Is their military obligation "deferred" if they go to college? In Chickenhawk-ruled America, that has turned out to be pure treason.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Saudi Arabia has recently given women the right to vote the right to drive and form their own sports leagues because the Crown Prince wants to modernize the country. He has taken power away from the religious police. However women in most Arab or Moslem nations do not the same rights I do.

Imp Press

But MBS ordered the execution of a treasonous jurinalist, so our self-obsessed media (scribbling soliloquists) have brainwashed people against him.