Gavitor

The amount of energy in the universe.

Yes Retarded people are human also. You can justify killing anyone by simply removing their humanity.

Are you saying the woman is not enough reason for me to stay around? Why would I leave a great woman? I can easily ask the same whats stopping her from leaving? Marriage certainly doesn't stop her. A smart woman is not necessarily a scrupulous one. If 2 scrupulous people agree to stay together for life, chances are they will. Do you think the government piece of paper is necessary or is a marriage only involving family and friends enough? To be clear the fact that she CAN leave and chooses not to means shes staying in the relationship of her own free will and not because I have a gun to her head. I want the woman I choose to be with to be with me because she WANTS to not because of some contract.

The whole issue with abortion is that people want to escape responsibility for their actions and are denying the child their humanity to justify their choice.

Still nothing telling me why 1 person or group of people should have the ok to do what is considered wrong/immoral/unlawful for everyone else...

The shorter version looks longer than the longer version... try being more concise because you bring up multiple points. Worried about divorce? Don't get married or pick a woman you know will never leave you. If you want to date younger than date younger, you don't need his permission. Women generally like to date older men anyways. Regardless men make shitty choices too. I watch it happen regularly. No one is perfect and we all make mistakes. The question is whether or not you learn from those mistakes. As for how to vet women, Stef shows you in real time with the very caller you mention. Ask them what you want to know. They will tell you, the question is are you paying attention. If you go out with enough women you'll know right away if they are being honest or if they're just bullshitting. Often I've found that women are actually surprisingly honest with important details that if you're not paying attention to will cost you dearly in the long run. Red flags are usually obvious if you're actually paying attention, the problem is a lot of men and women do NOT pay attention nor do they ask the right questions to get the information they're looking for. Judging by actions is another easy way to vet someone. Like I said before removing the laws would be the best course of action and is far more doable than removing the state in its entirety. If you don't want to wait then make sure you know exactly what you're looking for in a woman and don't settle for anyone you know would abuse those laws. Alternatively you can move to a country where these laws are not an issue. Why are you bringing up what most men do? I don't know about you but personally I'm not most men and could care less what most men do. I've already pointed out that the laws are biased towards women so I'm not sure on what you disagree with. So you want a young career woman who is wealthy and doesn't want a free meal? First of all I don't know many young adults of either gender who are both in a career and wealthy, I also don't get what that has to do with virtue as you can have both of those things and not be virtuous. Also if your intention is to start a family why would you want her to have a career? the 2 really don't go well together because she only has time to do one. You say you've met a few so that's pretty good, at least you are meeting some. You've done everything possible in your power to meet a good woman? well if you fail you'll be single regardless unless you want to pick a not so good woman. Anything in life worth doing is going to be difficult. That's what separates great men from mediocre men.

How does the man have power? He needs his wife to take care of the home and children while hes working. Also after the first 2 years the husband can stay at home while the wife works, the only reason the wife has to be there the first 2 years is because the wife has the plumbing needed to breast feed and men dont. Also a lot of men work dangerous jobs and literally risk their lives to provide for their wife and children. The reality is that men and women are a team and both have responsibility in the relationship. Both are vulnerable in different ways. Relationships are voluntary, and if you want to spend the rest of your life and have children with someone you better make damn sure that the person is someone you truly want to be with. You mention how a man would be shamed for mistreating his wife, the funny thing is for as long as i can remember men have been taught to NEVER hit a woman. As far as cheating goes, men are still chastised for it while the media is trying to normalize the behavior among women. Removing the state from the equation will add back societal and community norms. As long as women can get away with bad behavior they will continue to make poor choices, if men were allowed to they would also make bad choices. A fair system is no system, relationships should always be 100% voluntary. If you cannot trust the person you are with you should not be with that person.

Where did i say anything about length of divorce? I said length of marriage. And it is important because if you actually had a 50 year study showing how long first time marriages last you'd likely find that very few last at all. I don't have that data so it's possible my assumption could be wrong. The thing is we don't have that data, and if we do I can't find it and would be grateful if someone could show me. The primary issue with marriage is the fact that the laws are one sided, if those laws were removed then how long a marriage lasts would be irrelevant since the woman would no longer be able to use the state to destroy the man and steal his property. Remove womens ability to invoke state force in a relationship and the problem goes away.

He mentioned women worth marrying, none of the stuff you just mentioned makes that woman worth marrying. Being physically attractive alone is not enough reason for me to marry someone. A virtuous woman would not be squandering her youth and high SMV riding the carousel for a decade. As far as having lots of potential suitors goes, well we have access to lots of potential women if we want to lower our standards. Women aren't exactly rare. Finding virtuous women is whats difficult because people tend to not be virtuous and this is true for both genders. I will continue to speak the truth and be virtuous. If I meet a virtuous woman to be with great, if not oh well. If a woman decides she doesn't want to date me because i don't want to sign a one sided agreement she isn't for me and likely isn't virtuous or understanding in the first place.

Why do I need to have a contract to stay with someone I want to be with? This makes no sense. If they want to be with me I don't need them to sign a piece of paper saying so. contracts are for lack of trust. Also if both parties can leave without consequence then it means you are more willing to behave if you want to keep them. The issue with marriage is that women can leave without consequence and men cannot, it's one sided. For marriage to be fair either you have to actually stay together forever or remove marriage in its entirety which is basically what no fault divorce does. Marriage today is just another state program, Marriage is no longer about commitment. I don't need the governments permission to have a committed relationship with someone. However as long as the government is involved I will not be.

The stats on marriage are skewed, they are taken for a one year period and include people on their second,3rd, 4th etch marriage. Also what is the average length of said marriages. if you have a bunch of recently married that doesn't mean much given that sometimes people will stay together while the kids grow and then divorce after. Does anyone have stats for a decade or more period and actually breaks down first time not first time marriages? Closest i found was one from the cdc for 2006-2010 but it leaves much to be desired as far as the information I'm looking for.

All this arguing about rights is rather interesting, you cannot even agree on what they are. I have a simple question for you. If morality and "rights" can be ignored, why do they matter?

human form and attributes vary greatly. and the fertilized egg exists. The fertilized egg is human because it doesn't grow into a giraffe. A human being is cells, literally! The same argument used to support abortion is the same argument used to justify genocide. The the ones being killed are not human. It's considered immoral to murder, doesn't mean people won't do it. You're making my point for me, anyone who isn't able to mentally function is considered not human to you. This is what I mean about being able to justify murder. I never once stated I know whats best for anyone, try again? I'm simply arguing that abortion is murder by definition which is immoral. I never said you couldn't do it. What you do with that information is entirely up to you.

Objectively speaking a human being begins when sperm meets egg. Otherwise I could argue that anyone not human. Once the egg is fertilized by the sperm it will grow and mature, saying well you're not human until some arbitrary point in development is intellectually dishonest and can be used to justify killing anyone. An egg by itself will not grow and mature, neither can sperm. Only when combined is the human formed. If rights exist why are they constantly violated? Rights by definition cannot be violated, the reality is all you have are privileges given to you by those that call themselves government. You're making an assumption the mute can write, that may not be the case. what about someone who is not disabled in anyway but doesn't know how to say no? or speaks a different language that you don't understand? Saying no one wants the child so its ok to kill said child is silly. If no one wanted the child why did they make said child in the first place? Pregnancy is extremely easy to prevent. No excuses. Making a bad choice does not make it ok for you to murder.

You are a bunch of cells, is it ok to kill you? Also rights do not exist. So rights are irrelevant when it comes to this. If I understand correctly anyone who can't say no (ie mute people and/or people in a coma and/or infants) can be murdered because they can't say no? Is this your position? The fact is that if that "bunch of cells" was allowed to grow it would become a human, Sperm and eggs cannot do this alone. So as soon as the egg and sperm meet you have a human.

I return like for like. If they can use violence against me I can retaliate with violence. I don't see many people dispute self defense being valid.

Can't people prepare for nuclear Armageddon by inventing a method to neutralize said threat? Either by blowing them up mid trajectory or by outright rendering them impotent or whatever else people can come up with. No matter how powerful weapons become people are always trying to make even bigger weapons and/or shields strong enough to withstand said weapons.

1. Yes, they hope to benefit in some manner which requires them to live to enjoy said benefit. 2. Definitions are important when trying to understand each other. Risking your life is not a voluntary death because the goal is to NOT die. 3. This is not always the case, people gamble things they don't want to lose all the time then get butt hurt when they lose. There are plenty of cops who refuse to enforce laws in no go zones because they don't want to die, why are these people cops when they are not willing to die? 4. I don't see the point. If they were a mercenary army are you saying they were doing it for money? why would you kill yourself for a reward you will not receive? 5. I'm curious though, instead of looking for a reason to die why aren't you looking for a reason to live?

Not an argument. I still don't get why these people would be in a voluntary society in the first place if they just want to be a slave. Your anecdotal evidence isn't particularly convincing, especially since I doubt you've met people who live in a voluntary society. Why would someone need a master to protect them from strong people when its the strong people who tend to be the master? It's like saying "to protect my self from rapists I'm going to get someone to rape me".

1. You risk your life for a variety of reasons, it's usually to gain something worth more than what you are risking. IE you hope to gain more than you would lose. The less you have the easier it is to risk your life. 2. To sacrifice your life is to literally give up or destroy your life which is the very definition of suicide. 3. Risking your life and sacrificing it are not the same thing, you keep switching it, why? You gave an example of sacrificing life and then asked about risking it. It's not a risk if you know for sure you will die. It's also not a risk if success is guaranteed. 4. Yea I think they are dumb throwing away their lives for the pope. This brings up a interesting point, generally people who are willing to sacrifice their lives are religious. likely because they believe they will be rewarded in the afterlife.

When you meet a new person you know that its a person and you don't refer to that person as god. People find new species all the time, they don't call those things god and they are able to describe in detail what it is they met. God is always a vague description if any description is given at all, and changes when people question it. This is not the case for everything else we find. Why would they need to look for or experience such a thing to begin with? Can you describe in detail exactly what they/you are experiencing/finding when you say its god?

1-3. There is a reason I make a distinction between risking your life and sacrificing it. Risking your life does not mean you are committing suicide. Sacrificing your life is literally committing suicide. Sometimes you risk your life because you know that you will die for sure if you don't. IE you have to fight to live. Also when sacrificing your life you are not risking it, you are guaranteed to die. 6. Being persecuted by the Japanese is what helped it, I seriously doubt them killing themselves would have had the same affect. 7.What was stopping them from jumping out last minute? Also they lost the war... I'm not familiar with this example, were they fighting or killing themselves?

Here is the thing, if it is unknown or undefined then by definition you wouldn't be talking about it. To talk about something unknown means you know something about it otherwise why would you bring it up? Especially when you say that unknown thing exists. In other words people who say god exists are saying they have knowledge they couldn't possibly have. To answer your game question, yes i would play. The act of playing the game is fun for me even if I know the outcome. I don't really see how this is relevant to the discussion though.

It's useless in the sense that unknown and undefined are already words. we don't need the word god. If it can't be described then how do you know there is an it in the first place. People attempt to describe god all the time, and when you point out how what they describe isn't god they change the description. I don't understand what you are saying here, can you clarify for me?

God is an unknown, has no definition and thus is a useless word. This is why I don't care about the word god and instead ask people to describe whatever it is they are talking about.