Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Nice highscore

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

:tayclap: :marseyclapping: :clap: :!marseyclapping: :!tayclap:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

darn it got y’alled

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

It was 420 at one point.

And 69 :marseyboomer:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Abortion is healthcare and healthcare is a human right. You will never have any control over the bodies of women. Get over it.

God I hate lefties. How can service from someone else be a human right you absolute fricking brainlet? If no one wants to provide health care who is violating your rights? It's like they discovered by pure rote that "X is a human right" gets a response and didn't apply any reason whatsoever to these brain dead slogans.


:#marseytwerking:

:marseycoin::marseycoin::marseycoin:
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

How can service from someone else be a human right you absolute fricking brainlet

legal counsel for accused is a right, as is equal protection and speedy trial, all are and require services

ditto for military and police protection

Legal counsel is also private person serving u

food and water are also β€œβ€β€rights””” international nonsense law wise

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

you are confusing civil rights with human rights

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

mad. Human rights may be bullshit but

while there is consensus that human rights encompasses a wide variety of rights[5] such as the right to a fair trial, protection against enslavement, prohibition of genocide, free speech[9] or a right to education,

Education you will note is a service, like healthcare. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights

β€œThe right to adequate food is realized when every man, woman and child, alone or in community with others, has physical and economic access at all times to adequate food or means for its procurement.” – Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights

This is recognized in the Universal declaration of human rights

https://ohchr.org/En/Issues/ESCR/Pages/food.aspx

So no I am not. Civil rights are seen as much more restrictive and narrow than human rights. Stop making shit up.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Why would I give a frick about the word salad the United Nations vomits onto their website? Let me know when fricking Pakistan and China get kicked off their Human Rights council. Maybe then they won't be gigantic fricking hypocrites.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Seethe

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

sinophile cope ^

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

And? Chyna's going to the dominant world power for the next century.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Chad China dominate my bussy vs Virgin No we must protect the sanctity of democracy.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I hate rightoids so much

Sometimes correct in a large scale sense but illiterate and factually wrong and thus dumb and useless

what does he even think a human right is? It’s literally what the United Nations do

And β€œPakistan and China are on the council” is the precise complaint of idiots. Yeah if you want sovereign nations to protect human rights you either have to kill their leaders or work with them. The US hasn’t exported their ideals by just conquering, we do multilateral value added cooperation and global leadership.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

it's literally what the United Nations do

LMFAO what the heck is this high school-level political take? You think the United Nations is an authority on what constitutes a human right?

The United Nations is a useless-by-design international political quagmire designed to prevent countries from starting WW3 by ensuring that absolutely fricking nothing gets done. That's literally their entire purpose. They are not a moral or philosophical authority and you can stop sucking their peepee whenever you want.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

yes the united nations is an authority on human rights. The US is an authority on democracy freedom and equality, China is an authority on Common Prosperity and Socialism with Chinese Characteristics, Zulu is an authority on what precisely constitutes Zulu patrilineal indigenous shamanism, etc. maybe one or more of them are slightly inconsistent, but they are the ones who define and implement them.

Many of the basic ideas that animated the human rights movement developed in the aftermath of the Second World War and the events of the Holocaust,[6] culminating in the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Paris by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948. Ancient peoples did not have the same modern-day conception of universal human rights.

The human rights enshrined in the UDHR, the Geneva Conventions and the various enforced treaties of the United Nations are enforceable in law. In practice, many rights are very difficult to legally enforce due to the absence of consensus on the application of certain rights, the lack of relevant national legislation or of bodies empowered to take legal action to enforce them.

The UN promulgated, defines, believes, and occasionally implements human rights laws.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

More comments

because OP said β€œservices aren’t human rights” when the guys who created the term say they are. Maybe human rights are BS, but claiming that they don’t mean that is just idiotic and illiterate

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

the guys who created the term say they are

are you actually so fricking stupid that you think The Guys Who Invented Human Rights represent some kind of final authority on the matter, or are you just 14?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

human rights are bad. But human rights are just a sort of thing that means free education and NGO aid. There’s no β€œactual and real human rights” that the UN is betraying with their heresy any more than there’s an β€œactual Ten Commandments” that God is still hiding from us. Free birth control and malaria nets still are human rights, what else is a human right then

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Augustus Caesar is an authority on what the Divine Cult of Augustus is, and what the Commands of the Sun God are. You may not follow them, but there’s no TRUE commands of Sol to follow that are the real ones. He’s right about what Augustus Says, the UN is right about Human Rights. But Augustus’s Commands don’t stop being something just bc u don’t follow them, and human rights still means free education and democracy.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Nobody can claim to be the final authority on a philosophical concept. There is no factual definition of 'human rights' because it's a nebulous, debatable concept.

Which is why the UN's website being plastered with a bunch of politically-motivated, logically-inconsistent word vomit is meaningless.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

More comments

legal counsel for accused is a right, as is equal protection and speedy trial, all are and require services

This is enabled by the fact that the court must just straight up dismiss your case if they can't accommodate it. So the right holds, the state just has a huge incentive to make sure that they can actually try cases.

ditto for military and police protection

What right are you even referencing here? The state controversially maintains the ability to conscript basically for this reason.

food and water are also β€œβ€β€rights””” international nonsense law wise

This is more nonsense of the "healthcare" as a right variety.


:#marseytwerking:

:marseycoin::marseycoin::marseycoin:
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

So... if you don't see state protection as a right, you must be cool with me coming in, cumming in your bussy, raping your sister-wife, and taking all your funkos? Or is someone supposed to stop me? For free?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Are you under the impression that, if somebody comes in your house and murders your family, you would be able to sue the government for failing to recognize your human rights? Are you actually r-slurred?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

yes if the government fails to adequately β€œprotect your rights to a fair investigation” or β€œtampers with the evidence to protect the criminal” you can sue them. What even is a right? Who cars?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Which of those things has anything to do with failing to protect you from violent crime?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

you can literally sue EMTs for not treating you if you’re very in danger. And what does that have to do with rights?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Before there was an organized police force in the united states there was the second amendment. But seriously, you understand that police don't actually have an obligation to intervene right? This right that you think exists doesn't. I think you're confusing a lot of things about how the legal system works.


:#marseytwerking:

:marseycoin::marseycoin::marseycoin:
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

that’s a bit confused. It’s true that there wasn’t β€œa single organized police force” or a modern one but there were absolutely sheriffs and magistrates with local very concentrated power and they absolutely exercised authority and violence to enforce for instance local morals (depends) so it’s not like the US was totally anarchist, just it’s hard to have a big concentrated power in the days when the Pony Express was still a century and a half away

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The courts didn't act as interventionist agencies. They dealt with the fallout after the fact. It was common to have something like a court put together a warrant or bounty and rustle up a militia like group to enforce its edicts. The state did have violence at its disposal but it was absolutely not attempting to stop crime directly or criminals in the act. Which is my whole point, the state clearly cannot guarantee that you don't come to harm, and that's fine, the police are useful for other tasks, it just makes it not a right.


:#marseytwerking:

:marseycoin::marseycoin::marseycoin:
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

If we had hypercourts that could decide things instantly they would intervene. That’s not happening ever though, as the other hypercourts could just do crimes as fast. Courts often issue injunctions to pause and intervene before they decide. Other government organs intervene constantly. I don’t see what this hasn’t to do with rights. The stage constantly directly stops crime and criminals in the act, epa, atf, whatever

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

how can you seriously argue that something not being universally guaranteed but merely enforced after the fact makes it not a right? Everything else is like that, poor enforcement doesn’t make something not exist

Also the state absolutely does attempt to stop violent criminals in the act. β€œConspiracy to <x> charges”, etc. this also happened in the past, if there was some plan to steal something the sheriff could try and stop it.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

how can you seriously argue that something not being universally guaranteed but merely enforced after the fact makes it not a right

Because that's just literally not what the word means. I genuinely think you just don't know what words you're using.


:#marseytwerking:

:marseycoin::marseycoin::marseycoin:
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

More comments

Is that a yes? You're cool with me doing all the things I mentioned?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

No, I would kill you dead 4 seconds into the attempt. Committing a crime is not a violation of my rights, what authority could possibly guarantee such a right? If not one can guarantee it what good is it?

A right is not "we'll try our very best to have this outcome", it's an order of things guaranteed by the collective violence of society. Something that cannot be guaranteed because it is not at the whim of the people, such as your ability to do me harm, cannot be a right.


:#marseytwerking:

:marseycoin::marseycoin::marseycoin:
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Aquota pictured trying to stop me from stealing all his funkos, because it's his right to own them.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I genuinely have no idea what this is even supposed to critique. You are claiming I'm a consoomer type because I correctly pointed out that the cops were never going to intervene in my defense anyways? Does this make sense in your head and you're just totally incapable of articulating it or were you not even attempting to convey a coherent idea?


:#marseytwerking:

:marseycoin::marseycoin::marseycoin:
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

More comments

the reason we have smooth and complex economies is not your gun or self defense it’s cops and feds and laws and contracts. State protection is a service the government grants, how is it different from other ones

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Honestly, the largest source of social order comes from most people's informal rules and formal rules imposed by numerous non-government organizations, groups, and ideas/ideology.

How those compare to government's effect has been largely unresolved.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

More comments

I don't know why you think this is an argument against anything I said.


:#marseytwerking:

:marseycoin::marseycoin::marseycoin:
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

More comments

see my other reply above. I agree that International Rights are gay, but nobody else does.

This is enabled by the fact that the court must just straight up dismiss your case if they can't accommodate it.

Negative rights and the Night Watchman state are neither perfect nor great. Governments today provide a LOT of services, and it’s hard to imagine a state without a β€œcall 811 for cable and pipe info before digging ” (although it really should be a website...) or the guys who mandate you follow building codes or go to jail (or the NSF). I don’t see any reason positive rights in a practical sense are taboo even if they’re dumb in a theoretical one

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

see my other reply above. I agree that International Rights are gay, but nobody else does.

Literally everyone does, hence why they ignore them entirely. China has accurately called them total bullshit.

Negative rights and the Night Watchman state are neither perfect nor great.

Negative rights are the only legitimate rights. No one has advocated for the night watchman state here and I do not advocate for it.

Governments today provide a LOT of services, and it’s hard to imagine a state without a β€œcall 811 for cable and pipe info before digging ” (although it really should be a website...) or the guys who mandate you follow building codes or go to jail (or the NSF). I don’t see any reason positive rights in a practical sense are taboo even if they’re dumb in a theoretical one

I'm not arguing against providing services, the state acts as a mechanism for solving many game theoretical problems that arise among free citizens. When incentives align such that there is a gain to be made through coordinating through a government I think it is good that this happens. I only oppose calling these services rights, in part because it erodes the status of actual rights as idiots think the """""""""""""""""right""""""""""""""""""" to healthcare is the same order of things as the right to free association, free speech and self defense.

If the calculous of incentives changes and we as a people decide to discontinue the 811 number then your rights have not been violated.


:#marseytwerking:

:marseycoin::marseycoin::marseycoin:
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

negative rights are the only legitimate rights

This is a libertarian slash ancap argument hence night watchman state. If state only enforced rights and only negative rights, then that’s quite limited.

game theoretic problems

Also other stuff that isn’t game theory like providing water and courts!

I agree that they aren’t rights fwiw. But nothing is, and in particular if human rights are meaningful then healthcare and food can easily be human rights.

811 number

(If it isn’t replaced by a fricking website which it already should have been, hey there’s ur startup idea if not already done lol) But then I’ll lose electricity and water and lots of rights to property and negative rights will be violated. How can we prevent this hm

Also: satellite based location demonstration. Either β€œreverse gps” where sattelites light triangulate a pulse from you or just something boring for if ur in generally the right area. If ur in the right place then u can see pipe locations. Not rly workable because you can just fly there or be nearby. Still a website where there’s a big database of all pipes and if u have the rights to an area it’s one click away? And no calling and waiting 2 days! Yay

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

If state only enforced rights and only negative rights, then that’s quite limited.

The state does things other than protect rights. A state can do something with no relation to a right. If a state issues me a ticket fir J walking there was absolutely no right involved at all in the action.

Also other stuff that isn’t game theory like providing water and courts!

Those are trivially game theoretical. Courts are pretty much a central case of game theory, they act with the rest of the rule structure as an oracle. It's game theoretically necessary for a state body to serve this function because a private version would have perverse incentives.

Water is a tragedy of the common bulwark. Left to the private sector you'd either have massively redundant systems built or a natural monopoly. Gane theory says a central nonprofit authority is more optimal.


:#marseytwerking:

:marseycoin::marseycoin::marseycoin:
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

β€œChina” (some diplomats) have condemned the concept. Other people who also are β€œChina” regularly condemn the US for breaching international human rights and calls for adherence to Chinese interpretations and implementations of international human rights. Which are arguably dismantling it, maybe, or just replacing it with a Bilateral Human Rights with Chinese Characteristics untainted by western idiocy.

In recent years, the Chinese government has become considerably more active in a wide range of United Nations and other multilateral institutions, including in the global human rights system. It has ratified several core U.N. human rights treaties,[1] served as a member of the U.N. Human Rights Council (HRC), and seconded Chinese diplomats to positions within the U.N. human rights system. China has launched a number of initiatives that can affect human rights: It has created the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) under the mantra of promoting economic development, and it has become a significant global actor in social media platforms and academia.

This new activism on issues from economics to information by one of the most consequential actors in the international system, if underpinned by a serious (albeit unlikely) commitment among senior Chinese leaders to uphold human rights, could have been transformative. But the opposite has happened.[2] Particularly under President Xi Jinping’s leadership, the Chinese government does not merely seek to neutralize U.N. human rights mechanisms’ scrutiny of China, it also aspires to neutralize the ability of that system to hold any government accountable for serious human rights violations.[3] Increasingly Beijing pursues rights-free development worldwide, and tries to exploit the openness of institutions in democracies to impose its world view and silence its critics.

https://hrw.org/news/2020/09/14/chinas-influence-global-human-rights-system#

Serious rights-violating governments will know they can rely on Beijing for investment and loans with no conditions. People around the world will increasingly have to be careful whether they criticize Chinese authorities, even if they are citizens of rights-respecting democracies or in environments like academia, where debate is meant to be encouraged.

How dare China give loans without checking for human rights first! And international censorship, huh. They must be stopped!

News headlines aren’t everything. China may oppose human rights, or may simply support Bilateral Constructive Criticism Human Rights, and they would probably be happy with a Chinese-led rework of the concept, even if it’s called β€œinternational mutual recognition for common prosperity among equals”. The US does not β€œignore human rights law entirely”, lol, and clearly China isn’t exactly either.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Why do you think this is interesting? referencing the elements in china that call them bullshit is just to illustrate that this is inherently a political football with no substance. It's an illusion, it means nothing.


:#marseytwerking:

:marseycoin::marseycoin::marseycoin:
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

oh yeah that’s basically what I was arguing with that rant. Human rights are the UN’s and more generally west’s stuff and China prefers its own bits

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Paags are happiness and happiness is a human right. Government supplied paag harems when?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

zoz

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

zle

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

zozzle

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

What do you think rights are? Rights are something civilization/society gives itself, it can be whatever we decide it to be.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

It's my human right to punch a nazi.

R-slur.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Pinkie seriousposters OUT :puke:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Enjoy the drama you idiot. Pearls before swine indeed.


:#marseytwerking:

:marseycoin::marseycoin::marseycoin:
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

God I hate lefties. How can service from someone else be a human right you absolute fricking brainlet?

Lolbert r-sluration. In MY rDrama.net?!?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Are you illiterate or do you just pretend to be?


:#marseytwerking:

:marseycoin::marseycoin::marseycoin:
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I'm not the one making r-slurred lolbert arguments that rely upon ridiculous pedantries. And if you weren't aware, hospitals are already obligated to serve people in emergencies regardless of ability to pay, so we've already determined their right to choose who to serve is already outweighed by the allegedly nonexistent right to healthcare.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

If you go to the nearest hospital and they don't treat you because they literally don't have any beds available, can you sue them for violating your rights?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Amazing how all the countries that consider healthcare a right they don't have a problem of getting constantly sued due to a lack of available care even when there is a a shortage. Im an r-slur but trying to argue about the meaning of a word in this argument is just a way to intentionally distract from the point at hand.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Dang maybe that's because there are no countries that consider health care to be a human right?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

... dude please google that

Please

https://americanbar.org/groups/crsj/publications/human_rights_magazine_home/the-state-of-healthcare-in-the-united-states/health-care-as-a-human-right/

http://blog.hawaii.edu/aplpj/files/2019/05/APLPJ_-20.2_Brack_.pdf

The Chinese government is clear about the right to healthcare its role in the provision of healthcare services and essential medicines. China has ratified several international treaties that guarantee the right to health, including the ICESCR in 2001.109 In addition, there are multiple provisions in the 1982 Chinese constitution that address health: Article 21: The state develops medical and health services, promotes modern medicine and traditional Chinese medicine, encourages and supports the setting up of various medical and health facilities by the rural economic collectives, state enterprises and institutions and neighborhood organizations, and promotes health and sanitation activities of a mass character, all for the protection of the people's health.110

Citizens of the People's Republic of China have the right tomaterial assistance from the state and society when they are old, ill or disabled. The state develops social insurance, social relief and medical and health services that are required for citizens to enjoy this right.111 In addition to these constitutional provisions, various statutes and regulations address the protection of labor, women, and the environment that offer additional health-related guarantees.112 And in a 2009 policy document, Opinions on Deepening Pharmaceutical and Healthcare System Reform, the Chinese government declared healthcare to be a basic right and further claimed that the state had the ultimate responsibility to provide healthcare to its citizens.113

  1. The health of all citizens shall be protected by the State. The right to healthcare is explicit but extremely vague. Such language might have reduced this important right to little more than aspirational words, but fortunately, international law further substantiates this right. South Korea generally has a positive reputation for signing and following international human rights law. In addition to ratifying the ICESCR, South Korea has ratified three other treaties that contain provisions that support a right to healthcare.161 South Korea has seriously endeavored to follow the obligation to provide the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health to all its people, achieving results that set the standard for other low to middle-income, rapidly industrializing states. In 2015, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (β€œOECD”) ranked South Korea among the top third of states that provide access to care for 95 - 100% of its population.162 But this universal right to healthcare was instituted in a system that relied heavily on private insurers and healthcare providers.

19% of countries had some sort of right - https://tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/17441692.2013.810765#.UehiPWSgk3Y - lol

They do. You r-slur.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

This is a really long way of saying you don't frick.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

TΓ rd

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

If the cops kill you and then you sue them and it gets dismissed for a stupid reason, can you sue them? No? Then there’s no right to not die.

But there’s also a thing called β€œtriage” where EMTs have to treat severely injured or risk if dying people and you can sue them for failing to do that. This is seriously enforced. So there is a right to treatment?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Whether or not there are legal consequences for your rights being violated has nothing to do with whether your rights are violated. Legal institutions are imperfect. This doesn't impact the philosophical question of what is and isn't a right.

No, there is no right to treatment, which is what I literally just said.

Read a fricking book.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Me: β€œyou may have a right, roughly, as much as to anything else, to government assistance against harm, and you can be said to have a right to medical treatment as much as to life or counsel”

You:

Are you under the impression that, if somebody comes in your house and murders your family, you would be able to sue the government for failing to recognize your human rights? Are you actually r-slurred?

So you argued you need legal consequences for there to be a right.

Yet now you say the opposite - β€œWhether or not there are legal consequences for your rights being violated has nothing to do with whether your rights are violated. Legal institutions are imperfect. This doesn't impact the philosophical question of what is and isn't a right”

No, there is no right to treatment, which is what I literally just said

EMTs and hospitals are legally required to treat you if they can.

And for if they can’t, ”Whether or not there are legal consequences for your rights being violated has nothing to do with whether your rights are violated. Legal institutions are imperfect. This doesn't impact the philosophical question of what is and isn't a right”

Healthcare can be a right

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

...

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

if a virus (an external living agent) breaches the NAP (infects your trachea and nasal mucosa) the government (a nurse funded by federal insurance) will defend your rights to freedom and life (provide you with IV fluids) and prosecute the virus attacking you (give others a vaccine and give you IV antivirals) and set up a security perimeter to ensure the suspect can’t leave the area (masks, filtration, lockdowns). Negative rights rock don’t they

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

That is a privilege conditional on the nearby operation of a hospital with excess capacity. Rights are nonconditional.


:#marseytwerking:

:marseycoin::marseycoin::marseycoin:
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

If rights are unconditional then why does r*pe still happen? You have a right to not be r*ped. I guess they are conditional

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

There is no "right to not be r*ped". That's not what a right it that's what a law is. Something being against the law to do to you is not a right to that thing. Your random interactions with other citizens isn't dictate by rights, it's dictated by laws.


:#marseytwerking:

:marseycoin::marseycoin::marseycoin:
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

what the frick is a right? Who cares? R*pe bad. Court punish r*pe. Prison go. Where is the β€œright” helping?

Similarly, speech suppress bad. Government speech suppress illegal. If speech suppress, court rule bad. Where is this right?

Also you do have a right to not be r*ped by most natural or negative rights concepts? NAP, you don’t have the right to harm another, etc.

What is a right?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

What is a right?

This does seem to be our problem. Please read the other comments.


:#marseytwerking:

:marseycoin::marseycoin::marseycoin:
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

More comments

Okay, cool story bro. So if someone were to instead say "healthcare is a right necessary entitlement everyone should be able to receive depending on availability" would you stop pedantic lolbert cute twinkry?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

dang Im an r-slur but words have meanings or something

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I could also go into not how everyone defining rights exactly the same as stupid amerimutts do.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I'd prefer "A good society is one where reasonable resources are devoted to minimize easily preventable human suffering" make no guarantees beyond that.


:#marseytwerking:

:marseycoin::marseycoin::marseycoin:
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

drones spraying a mix of carfentanil/diacetylmorphine across all major cities followed by mass nukes and stripping the atmosphere of oxygen would take care of that

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

didn't apply any reason whatsoever

I mean yeah there you go

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.


Link copied to clipboard
Action successful!
Error, please refresh the page and try again.