Should voting be mandatory?

[Crucible]

Agreed. No Holy Writ that. Good ideas? Equality before the law, unalienable rights, to check a few. Bad ideas? Those rights and that equality mostly reserved for the landed white guys, owning humans, and women as second class citizens.

Slavery is an ages old thing. It may not have been as benevolent as taking people from mud huts and given them full citizenry, but it was taking people out of mud huts nonetheless.

The reality there is deemed 'racist' out of envy in their history not being as illustrious as ours, so we neglect reality and shame our own lain:

~whatever~

And as far as abuse, well there's not an abused slave or immoral slaver alive today, so it's a needless discussion.

Also, how many wars did women fight in? How many of them went to the frontiers, or provided security and food?
They had it made, hombre. Stop spreading the lie that they were treated 'second class'.

 

[Town Heretic]

Slavery is an ages old thing.

True. And it took any number of forms. What Western civilization did with it was among the lowest, an evil expression of dehumanization for profit.

It may not have been as benevolent as taking people from mud huts and and given them full citizenry, but it was taking people out of mud huts into more current civilization.

Did you seriously play the, "better off here" card?

The reality there is deemed 'racist' out of envy in their history not being as illustrious as ours, so we neglect reality and shame our own

No idea what most of that was supposed to be about. Our shame was our practice and it took a dividing war to overcome. There is no real white or black history. It's an artificial designation. There's the tale of empires: Chinese, Roman, Moorish, etc.

I say unless there's a slave or slaver alive today, it's a pointless subject.

I'd answer the sins of fathers have a way of influencing a great deal that matters today.

Also, how many wars did women fight in

Many, one way or the other, but what does that mean? How many wars have you fought in? Is that the measure or right?

How many of them went to the frontiers, or provided security and food?

Many, as whole families uprooted for land and promise.

They had it made, hombre. Stop spreading the lie that they were made 'second class'.

It's not a lie. It's a fact. The law restricted their freedoms, which is why the law had to be addressed and altered. That was the point of the suffrage movement. It wasn't a social club.

 

[Crucible]

It's not a lie. It's a fact.

That's because people got what they deserved back then. I know that's a hard thing to imagine for many today, but that's how the world worked until, well, yall came along

 

[Town Heretic]

That's because people got what they deserved back then.

People got what they could take. If we got what we deserved none of us would be very happy.

I know that's a hard thing to imagine for many today, but that's how the world worked until, well, yall came along

I agree. Kings and despots with force of arms took what they wanted and doled out what they felt like. Until those who believed in something greater and better came along. That's an important truth of history.

 

[Crucible]

People got what they could take. If we got what we deserved none of us would be very happy.

You didn't understand the point, apparently.

Women didn't deserve the right to vote because they didn't build or participate in the country's founding and prominence.

In fact, the suffrage movement only started after the fact, when the country was compete and industrialized. All of a sudden women demanded a slice of man's masterpiece.

Feminism has simply messed up your brain into thinking something else of it is all- incidentally, that bit of insight came from men's rights women telling men as yourself that you've been taken for a fool

 

[Town Heretic]

You didn't understand the point, apparently.

Or I had my own to make.

Women didn't deserve the right to vote because they didn't build or participate in the country's founding and prominence.

Ignorant and wrong, as per my response.

In fact, the suffrage movement only started after the fact, when the country was compete and industrialized.

You write that as if it was a rebuttal. It isn't.

All of a sudden women demanded a slice of man's masterpiece.

No, they demanded the rights the Constitution advanced as unalienable.

Feminism has simply messed up your brain

No, but a lack of a solid education appears to have shorted your approach and understanding, both of history and how to think about it.

 

[Crucible]

Ignorant and wrong, as per my response.

Except it's not wrong, they served no purpose other than aiding the husband who provided the primary assets. They didn't forage the frontier, they watched the children while the men did it. They didn't build a thing, or fight a thing, or expand a thing.
And so they didn't vote upon those things.

No, they demanded the rights the Constitution advanced as unalienable.

That's how they justified it, that's not why they wanted it.

If I build something, what right does another have to dictate it?
Speaking from reality is wasted on yall :AMR:

 

[Town Heretic]

Except it's not wrong, they served no purpose other than aiding the husband who provided the primary assets.

Saying it's so doesn't make it so and even then there's a circle in your argument, since it was the restriction of right that relegated them to an active yet supportive role (and you seem to have a hard time even seeing that much of it).

They didn't forage the frontier, they watched the children while the men did it.

Riiiight. They sat in the cabin watching cable tv, right? No, they gave birth and mended clothes, fought beside and worked beside the men in their lives. You need a history lesson that you didn't get from actually sitting in your "cabin" watching tv. Frontier women were one of two things mostly, tough or dead.

They didn't build a thing, or fight a thing, or expand a thing.

Wrong on every count, though for all their effort they rarely owned a thing.

And so they didn't vote upon those things.

See: that circle of yours, supra.

 

[Tyrathca]

Except it's not wrong, they served no purpose other than aiding the husband who provided the primary assets. They didn't forage the frontier, they watched the children while the men did it.

You say that line it's a small thing to do. "Housekeeping" was a hugely time consuming job until the modern era and our technological automation and widely accessible schooling. Furthermore they often worked family farms just like the men.

Without them the man would have been stuffed.

And so they didn't vote upon those things.

So you believe in taxation without representation then?

Or do you propose that they shouldn't be alowed to contribute so you can perversely justify restricting their ability to contribute?

If I build something, what right does another have to dictate it?

YOU didn't build any of it. Just because a guy did something doesn't mean you get to take credit.

Regardless women have increasingly been building and contributing in the same areas men have so why not let them dictate it to?

Speaking from reality is wasted on yall :AMR:

You're just a hypocrite who knows little history but thinks himself an expert.

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

 

[Crucible]

^
Exhibit A:
Historically confused feminist who thinks women weren't given the right to vote simply because.

:yawn:

Someone doesn't understand that many rights were received by merit rather than by existing, as per a fundamental context of 'a right' versus 'a privilege'.

 

[Town Heretic]

^
Exhibit A:
Historically confused feminist who thinks women weren't given the right to vote simply because.

:yawn:

Someone doesn't understand that many rights were received by merit rather than by existing, as per a fundamental context of 'a right' versus 'a privilege'.

Exhibit B: your massive dodge of salient points. I'd go further, but your posts tend to define you and underscore a strange detachment from objective truth riding an as obviously strident, militant misogyny.

Good luck with that you ol dinosaur you. :e4e:

 

[Crucible]

You say that line it's a small thing to do. "Housekeeping" was a hugely time consuming job until the modern era and our technological automation and widely accessible schooling. Furthermore they often worked family farms just like the men.

Women didn't have the right to vote because they didn't deserve it. Stop trying to make the woman's role commensurate to what the men did with their sheer sweat and blood, and accuse them of being 'misogynists' because you can't accept reality.

Without them the man would have been stuffed.

Here's a like argument: Woman birth children, so without them men would be 'stuffed'.

A biological function doesn't grant one the keys to the kingdom.

Or do you propose that they shouldn't be alowed to contribute so you can perversely justify restricting their ability to contribute?
YOU didn't build any of it. Just because a guy did something doesn't mean you get to take credit.

Men built the street they protest men on. In a world of common sense, that is ludicrous- they lived in a world of common sense.

You're just a hypocrite who knows little history but thinks himself an expert.

Liberal derogatory statements have all collapsed into one single definition. Xenophobe means homophobe, hypocrisy means misogyny :chuckle:

I know history very well, and not the outrageously false revision of it you tell :wave:

 

[Crucible]

Exhibit B: your massive dodge of salient points. I'd go further, but your posts tend to define you and underscore a strange detachment from objective truth riding an as obviously strident, militant misogyny.

Good luck with that you ol dinosaur you. :e4e:

:yawn:

Exhibit C: A man stands on his homestead, overlooking the man on his own across the way. They are planning to vote, but unlike one, the other has a wife. The single man is beset by the fact that the other man has two votes and he has one, and he's going to bring it up to the man when they fight savages and illness forging the mountains.
He's going to recommend a law that women cannot vote.

I'm not a misogynist, you're just an idiot, you and everyone like you

 

[intojoy]

No women voting

 

[Tyrathca]

Here's a like argument: Woman birth children, so without them men would be 'stuffed'.

A biological function doesn't grant one the keys to the kingdom.

Did I mention a biological function? No. I talked of them performing a vital and time consuming task which men did not want to do and which women were bared from doing much else in most circumstances.

Men built the street they protest men on. In a world of common sense, that is ludicrous- they lived in a world of common sense.

Because in the past only men were allowed to build streets. Restricting their ability to contribute then using their restricted contribution as justification for restricting their ability to contribute. Do you see that this is circular logic?

Anyway in more modern and egalitarian days many of the roads people protest on are also made with both men AND women workers. Furthermore the old roads were built by men OTHER THAN YOU so by the same logic you have no right to protest in them either - you can't take credit for what other men did just because you have a Y chromosome.

Liberal derogatory statements have all collapsed into one single definition. Xenophobe means homophobe, hypocrisy means misogyny :chuckle:

No hypocrisy means hypocrisy. You didn't build the world you live in yet you think you have the right to have a say in it. Where as there are women who have helped to build the world we live in yet you think they don't deserve a say.

That is hypocrisy. You've decided you're better and more worthy than women because of what OTHER men have done. What exactly makes you specifically so deserving? What have you contributed that I can't find women have also done?

I know history very well, and not the outrageously false revision of it you tell :wave:

If you say so Mr Dunning-Kruger



Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

 

[Angel4Truth]

Women didn't have the right to vote because they didn't deserve it. Stop trying to make the woman's role commensurate to what the men did with their sheer sweat and blood, and accuse them of being 'misogynists' because you can't accept reality.



Here's a like argument: Woman birth children, so without them men would be 'stuffed'.

A biological function doesn't grant one the keys to the kingdom.



Men built the street they protest men on. In a world of common sense, that is ludicrous- they lived in a world of common sense.



Liberal derogatory statements have all collapsed into one single definition. Xenophobe means homophobe, hypocrisy means misogyny :chuckle:

I know history very well, and not the outrageously false revision of it you tell :wave:

Let me guess, you're currently single. Yes?

 

[Crucible]

Let me guess, you're currently single. Yes?

Women are solely responsible for having created this thing where any opposition to feminist bias means one is just single or had a bad relationship-
you see, this wasn't the case when all the married men in the world thought the same exact thing as I do, so how should it be different now?

I would tell you to stop manipulating men with such things, but it's just a part of your Eve and many men are Adam enough to fall into it. You all are obsessed with vanities and scandal, why don't you return to your soap operas :wave2:

 

[Angel4Truth]

Let me guess, you're currently single. Yes?

Women are solely responsible for having created this thing where any opposition to feminist bias means one is just single or had a bad relationship-
you see, this wasn't the case when all the married men in the world thought the same exact thing as I do, so how should it be different now?

I would tell you to stop manipulating men with such things, but it's just a part of your Eve and many men are Adam enough to fall into it. You all are obsessed with vanities and scandal, why don't you return to your soap operas :wave2:

Why would i return to what i was never part of to begin with? I rarely watch tv at all period.

But ill take this post as a "yes, im currently single" as your answer.

 

[Ktoyou]

Only for those who are able to define mandate. For me, it means going on a date, is that right?

 

[Ktoyou]

Women are solely responsible for having created this thing where any opposition to feminist bias means one is just single or had a bad relationship-

What about old widows who have soul, but no soles?