Yeah they are. But fun fact, garnishments and liens work just as well without an INTERNATIONAL TREATY and a surprising number of these loons still work and own stuff.
Yes but they’re their own country, and the USA needs to form a treaty to have say in their business, unless they’re “travelling” or receiving welfare or benefit in some other way
The reality is that they are not bodies politic, have no demos, and every person everywhere ever is subject to the law of the jurisdiction in which they are present.
“I don’t have anything to do with that kid! Why should I have to pay child support?”
Unfortunately I know people like that in real life, who don’t seem to understand that the child support is largely because they want nothing to do with their kid
She is the only one granted the choice to end the responsibility. The father is left with massive financial responsibility for 18 years, that the mother had the choice to prevent. This even occurs in cases of rape.
An abortion is a medical procedure that has a high risk for the woman, and carries with it the trauma of ending a human life.
Yes, she is the only one granted the choice to end it. Because “it” happens within her body.
An abortion is a medical procedure that has a high risk for the woman, and carries with it the trauma of ending a human life.
Should the mother or father be given custody assuming both parents are equally fit and willing? Should the father be able to say either put the child up for adoption or not pay child support? Obviously this lack of choice could happen to the mother too, but she had 9 months of another choice.
Child support isn’t meant to punish a parent that’s no longer in the child’s life. Even if thats the end result, it’s meant to support the child.
Because of the bodily autonomy argument there won’t be true equality surrounding pregnancy because nobody has (or should have) weight of decision of whether to carry the child except for the person who does so.
But if a child is brought into the world as a result, it needs to be supported. And that’s the responsibility of the parents- willing or not.
I think that if male birth control becomes safe and available it will be much closer to equality.
Your logic is fundamentally flawed. In several ways. I see several people arguing with you ineffectively because they assume you are arguing in good faith or have a coherent position… Neither of which I am convinced you possess.
In the US (and most of the world) it is a fundamental right of bodily autonomy that any individual is not subjected to any forced medical situation in the support of another person’s life, regardless of that person’s age, gender or relationship with the other person. Even if we agreed on when personhood happens (I assume we disagree on it) at no point must one person give up their bodily rights for another. If you provide a special case for pregnancy then we are in a discussion of if your inconsistent belief structure is valid.
Your logic is fundamentally flawed. In several ways. I see several people arguing with you ineffectively because they assume you are arguing in good faith or have a coherent position…
You’re free to disagree with me, but everything I say on here is in good faith.
In the US (and most of the world) it is a fundamental right of bodily autonomy that any individual is not subjected to any forced medical situation in the support of another person’s life, regardless of that person’s age, gender or relationship with the other person.
Yep, I agree.
Even if we agreed on when personhood happens (I assume we disagree on it) at no point must one person give up their bodily rights for another.
I have no strong opinion on when personhood happens, I simply don’t know.
If you provide a special case for pregnancy then we are in a discussion of if your inconsistent belief structure is valid.
A special case for what? You never expressed your disagreement with me.
If they were going to want the baby aborted, they shouldn’t have had sex without a condom. You don’t get to cum inside someone and then tell them what to do with it. Your jizz, your problem.
Obviously not. They’re saying that the person that gets pregnant gets to decide whether or not they want to abort. It’s not the decision of the sperm donor.
The father made that choice when he decided it was a good idea to fuck without protection. You don’t get to undo mistakes you made by telling someone else to undergo a medical procedure they don’t want. It doesn’t matter if you realized your mistake the next day and started telling them to use plan B. You can not want a baby all you want, but the only thing that matters is, did you willingly play your part in making it?
The father made that choice when he decided it was a good idea to fuck without protection.
I agree with your basic argument, but this point in particular is dumb for 2 reasons
Unless the father is a rapist, they both decided to have unprotected sex
Condoms fail sometimes. Wearing one significantly reduces the likelihood of pregnancy but it’s hardly a pancea. Any competent sex-ed teacher should have explained that
That being said, there’s no ethical way to give a man control after conception and allowing them to bail on child support eould be detrimental to society. Single mothers have it hard enough already.
The mother clearly has a bigger stake in pregnancy than a father and I can’t believe this needs to be explained. Yes, women get to choose if they want to be mothers for a variety of complicated and nuanced reasons. For men they can simply choose to not raw dog a woman. Obviously it’s different if they were raped or their semen was stolen but those are much more rare cases.
Yes. Everyone should have autonomy over their own bodies, especially when it’s a matter of something as major as pregnancy. Pregnancy is a medical condition, and the only person that should (legally) have any input in medical decision making for pregnancy is the person that’s pregnant.
What a person does with their own body is entirely up to them. If you play your part in making that baby, and the person you came inside of plays their part too, you both have to pay for it. The sperm donor has one opportunity to opt out of being a parent, and that one opportunity is when they’re having sex.
You can express your desire to not raise a child all you want, it doesn’t change the fact that you made a choice that led to that child being born.
You both have to pay for it because you both made a decision to make it. Both parents have an obligation to provide support, and if one parent wants nothing to do with the kid, that support must be financial. “Why?” Because that kid costs money to raise, and the alternative is the state paying for your decision not to wrap it up. Like hell do I want my taxes paying for your one night stand.
Because you can’t make medical decisions for someone else, your one and only opportunity to opt out of being a father is while you’re having sex. The only person who gets to decide whether or not to have an abortion is the pregnant party. If they opt not to, but you really, really want them to, then that sucks for you, but refer back to point 2.
It’s a pretty weird claim. They think they are their own country? Okay then… Do they realize that foreign countries can be taken to war against their wishes? I hope so, because that’s probably going to happen to a lot of these people.
I love this assertion by them. Because it’s them saying they are an independent nation. But they are living on or within the US’s declared borders and do not have a treaty as the American Indians do. Therefore they’d qualify as invaders or secessionist and the US military/immigration authorities should have jurisdiction to prosecute them. Afterall, this Sovereign Citizen is currently abroad in another country.
A lot of the times these sovcit types of people try and “pay” their debts using a secret bank account the US government provides. I think in this case he’s trying to argue that since he never signed a physical contract, he doesn’t need to pay his debts. He is seemingly unaware that contracts can be proven by actions. If he used the card, he accepted the terms of payment.
They think, and I am being serious, that the government has a secret bank account created in their name at birth worth 2 million dollars, and this is a “trust” they can use to pay for things by writing nonsense documents to various officials. They think that money was outlawed by the US government and that you can only pay in real silver.
Wait what!? If they think money is outlawed by the US government how do they explain let alone go to the grocery store? And who do they think issued all the money that exists everywhere
It’s simple. Other people don’t know that money is outlawed and they use it. So a sovciv will use it too, and when asked to pay, they try to weasel out by saying money isn’t real.
ah ok thanks, that makes sense. Not like how things in reality make sense but it makes sense they would think that and then behave the way they do as a result.
They think, and I am being serious, that the government has a secret bank account created in their name at birth worth 2 million dollars,
I have so many questions!
Someone told them they got $2m, they’ve never seen anyone officially acknowledge this, they’ve never seen any of their friends that believe the same thing produce anything close to proof this exist…and they believe this?
Why $2million? Why not $1million or $1billion?
If the government outlawed money, wouldn’t the $2 million also be outlawed or at least worthless?
If they think the government outlawed money, what do they call all the currency we’re carrying around and why do they even want it?
I don’t expect you to have answers. I understand you’re reporting the crazy, not a believer in it.
"Financial schemes Tax protest and financial schemes form an important part of Sovereign Citizens’ acts of resistance. One of such practices is known as the ‘redemption scheme’. It rests on the assumption that the U.S. government uses its citizens as collateral to pay off foreign debts.
According to this theory, the government uses people’s strawmen identities to set up secret trusts in their names that hold hundreds and thousands of dollars. Some Sovereign Citizens believe that by filing certain IRS forms or by signing bills and tax forms with notices like “Accepted for Value”, they can access and spend the money in their secret account. Other financial schemes include efforts aimed at evading state and federal income taxes, hiding assets or eliminating debts. Most of these activities are considered fraudulent and result in bank, tax or wire fraud charges. "
The 2 million part seems to be a randomly assigned number but it’s what I see them claim again and again.
The rest of your questions I can’t answer except to say sovcits sure do use money when it suits them.
patriarchy : social organization marked by the supremacy of the father in the clan or family, the legal dependence of wives and children, and the reckoning of descent and inheritance in the male line
“They don’t value patriarchy”. It’s not meant to be a positive thing you idiot.
They can’t say “Christian values” anymore, so they’ve replaced it with “family values”, and in this case the more brazen “patriarchy” (which probably came from bashing feminism) and various scattering of “values”.
It’s one of those “if you won’t respect me as an authority, I’m going to treat it like you aren’t respecting me as a person”. It all comes back to authoritarianism and maintaining hierarchies. Conservatives believe someone must be in charge and what that person says goes, and then an extension to that is they want to approve of who is in charge and do not want to follow a woman or minority.
I mean, he admits to not being there when his kids were growing up. And he spends the time talking about his offspring’s family and their “values.” They have the kids, so they’re obviously willing to keep tolerating him if the kids get to see him enough that they are “the light of his life” or whatever. But he’s still talking about how he doesn’t know if he can stand to have a further relationship with his kid (that he wasn’t around to raise) and their spouse. Because politics.
So…I don’t think this guy’s probably on the right side of any issue they have.
Every once in awhile these sort of posts make me introspective, they say almost exactly the same as my opinion about what I think of far right conservatives. Then I remember I’m not the one oppressing people and want to accept everyone as long as they don’t bring intolerance.
This is one thing that I find very odd: you’ll see posts like this of obvious pieces of shit but the moment you start talking about being intolerant on intolerant people, or of being tired of caring about this sort of thing, you’re suddenly a worse per son than the actual bigot.
Something to remember I think is that just because people on both sides of an issue talk the same way about the other side, does not inherently mean that both or neither have a point.
Can confirm, wrt the boundaries portion. I had to have a discussion with the parent with whom I maintain minimal contact, for reasons. They managed to throw in a wild accusation and went absolutely bat guano, demanding I inform a payee of one of her checks that did not show up in the mail that she would be deducting the stop payment fee from the next check. I said I would not, because there is no legal provision for that, and they sent me a screenshot of their bank's stop payment notice suggesting she talk with the payee, circled and highlighted in paint, to inform me, and I copied the text to paste it here:
You’re out of line. Its not my fault they can’t keep up with their mail. Someone has to pay the fees and I’m not paying!
That’s how the religious indoctrination at the base of this works. By design you NEVER question the church. And the Conservative GOP leadership has tapped into that reality distortion field. They could literally tell these people to commit murder and they would…
It’s crazy. I know I’m part of the problem too. These people need something other than factual rebuttals to bring them back into the fold but I’m le tired. I can’t do it anymore. But that means the system is working as intended and we must strive to dismantle it.
In other posts I’ve seen, sovcits believe that each us citizen has a trust held by the government, which can be “accessed” by claiming it, or portions of it, through a 1099a, which is the root of their obsession w/ 1099a. (As far as I understand their underlying beliefs)
As I understand it the problem is upholding the conviction. I mean… it’s hard to argue that a intellectually challenged individual who represented themselves based on legal advice from a conman had adequate legal representation.
I’m pretty sure “your honor I’m an idiot” is not actually a defense. Especially in the absence of any other defense. I.e. a reason to drive without a license.
They’d be a pretty shit lawyer if they couldn’t. They’re playing make-believe in a place that has hard rules. Unless their defence includes some kind of “insanity” plea, I don’t know how any of them have any “victory against the courts” stories to tell.
First, reverse pickpocket poison apples into all of the guards inventories, then hang out in their barracks until they all eat poisoned apples, once the guards all die steal their stuff and sell it to the town merchants. Now not only are you richer, but the town’s guards can’t arrest you on account of being dead.
The best part is that when the guards eventually respawn they keep the poisoned status and will quickly die again, with a new loadout of guard equipment!
I’m not sure about other states, but the one I live in usually requires two brain death tests at least 6 hours apart and by different MDs that have to be credentialed to perform brain death testing. They also have(and usually perform) an apnea test where they turn the ventilator off for a set period of time and see if the patient initiates any breathes on their own as well as measuring blood gases before and after the procedure. Finally, they often use an injected nucleotide to measure blood flow to the brain, taking multiple images of several angles to confirm that there is no blood flowing to the brain.
If the person was on any paralytics, they have to be cleared from the system before testing can begin as well as all labs such as sodium, potassium, etc. and body temperature must be within normal parameters to begin.
If all those things are confirmed, the person is legally declared dead with an official time of death and only then can the legal next of kin be approached for organ donation.
Basically, this person is bonkers(as we all know) and organ donation is highly regulated.
The thing is, they all read like people joking around on the internet. Like if someone pretended to be a sovereign citizen on some lemmy shitpost sub I would expect those kinds of comments as humorous playing around. It just boggles my mind how some people really seem to be serious when they sound like the snarkiest internet trolls.
I’ll try to explain this as quickly and correctly as I can
Sov cits believe their name does not represent themselves, but actually a stock/ commodity that belongs to the US government
They believe this stock to be valued at GDP/population
These “coupons” are instructions to whatever entity they don’t want to pay, informing said entity that they should request the funds from aforementioned stock under the Sov Cit’s name.
I don’t think these people think they’re trying to scam anyone or get away with “not paying”. They genuinely think that every citizen has an equal share of the US’s GDP and can just use it like cash.
In very simple terms (explained by someone who also doesn’t have an amazing grasp on macroeconomics), a country’s GDP is the value of everything they produced for a given time period. So a country can owe a shit ton of money to other countries and will pretty much always have a positive GDP. When people say there was a negative GDP they probably mean it went down from last year.
Which means these people’s “logic” essentially grants them infinite money. The US economy could be in shambles, GDP decreasing every year, but they would somehow always be entitled to tens of thousands of dollars.
insanepeoplefacebook
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.