Maybe you could keep in mind that this state also had trigger laws banning abortion as soon as roe was overturned. The stakes are much fucking higher for people that can get pregnant.
That's called having a preference, and a pretty normal one. If you do have OCD then I think you should consider not simplifying it to liking things to be clean and new looking, because I imagine if it's like mine it's far more complicated and debilitating.
Can't cosmetic surgeries can range from things like circumcision, fixing a deviated septum, and something like botox? They're often not seen as "necessary," but they can be recommended to improve quality of life. I think this gets conflated because maybe breast implants do drastically improve someone's quality of life, but doctors (I think) should err on the side of having a patient wait for more permanent procedures. It's still between the doctor and patient, ultimately, but in cases where a kid can't consent there can be valid arguments. I don't think circumcision meets that threshold a majority of the time, and even when it does it can usually wait.
I encourage you to look at experiments with kids involving altruism. The research suggests much of our fucked up nature is rather learned through the environment. The more we improve our environment, the more we'll likely see that altruism shine through. Not to say psychopaths don't exist, but they are extremely rare, and research demonstrates that they can live relatively well without acting on their impulses with proper treatment, too.
Wait, I don't want to confuse what the ruling actually means. Embryos are fertilized, so an egg going without fertilization and being passed through menstruation doesn't meet that definition. If it is fertilized and is still passed through menstruation (as what, a good quarter of pregnancies do?) then sure.
I'll be there first to point out hypocrisy and the authoritarian big government this would require to prove (and likely would affect minorities disproportionately), but I don't think it helps to distort what this law means. It very well could be a slippery slope towards it, and yes is still enormously stupid, but it doesn't meet the threshold of what you're arguing. Unless I've misunderstood the wording of the law?
Well we're also seeing a trend of younger men falling for the manosphere type bullshit. It's a weird divide. Lots of younger people in general are leaning more into socialism, too. But yeah sweeping generalizations either way aren't representative of reality
Internet. I've lived in rural areas most of my life and only in the last five years was able to start gaming with friends and watching unlimited video. I feel much less resentment that people don't want to visit me and am happier getting my social needs met in person by physically going out less often (I still get out once a week ish)
It's not a replacement for intimate relationships but any means, but I do think it can enhance them with healthy boundaries n whatnot. I went through a rough break up recently that's had me realizing I'd like a partner that's ok with me having space to chill with friends day to day but still making time for each other.
Lmfao I love that your argument for home schooling includes talking down on someone's intelligence for not being qualified to speak on child psychology. Yet you're advocating that people that aren't qualified should be allowed to teach their kids and don't yourself have a degree relating to the field
It surprises me he's trying again. He already ran for the state house iirc. Fucking hell.