The major focus looks to be about abortion on demand and contraceptives and pads for girls. Although no one proved it is an issue in the first place.
Parliament encourages member states to ensure sexuality education is taught comprehensively to primary and secondary school children, as SRHR education can significantly contribute to reducing sexual violence and harassment.
This part needs explanation cause I do not understand how abortion services decrease infant mortality
safe abortion services are important elements in saving women’s lives and reducing infant and child mortality.
Bill de Blasio put pedos next to elementary schools. The Tavistock Clinic was doing mass medical tranny experimentation on children, but was fortunately slapped down recently by reactionary judges. In Germany, Dr Kentler gave foster kids to pedos, and green movement founder Daniel Cohn-Bendit bragged about a child sex daycare.
Globohomo's chomopomo prophets openly talk about their love of pedos:
-Camille Paglia, Sexual Personae
-Pat Califia, The Aftermath of the Great Kiddy-Porn Panic of '77
-Allen Ginsberg, The Liberation is the Word, literary author, gay activist and founding member of NAMBLA
-Guy Hocquenghem, Sexual Morality and the Law, signer of the 1977 petition against age of consent laws
-Gayle Rubin, Thinking Sex, widely regarded as a founding text of Gay/Lesbian studies and Queer Theory
-David Thorstad, rage email, president of both the Gay Activists Alliance and Coalition for Lesbian and Gay Rights in NYC in the 1970s, founder of the North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA), compared being a pederast in the US with being "a Jew in Nazi Germany"
-Judith Butler, Undoing Gender, most influential living gender theorist. She sees incest taboo as working towards heteronormativity and asks that prohibition on incest be rethought to prevent the "violation" that is heteronormativity.
-John Money, Paidika: The Journal of Paedophilia, psychologist who forced a boy to be a girl and get humped by his twin brother after a botched circumcision. Both of the Reimer brothers committed suicide.
-Michel Foucault, The Danger of Child Sexuality, Pope of Chomopomo, most cited academic in grievance studies, signer of the 1977 petition against age of consent laws
Other notable globohomo clergy:
Judge Brett Blomme, organizer of Drag Queen Story hour, made child porn in his home.
Henry "Harry" Hay, pioneer in US Gay rights, founder of the first sustained gay rights group in the US. Supported NAMBLA (North American Man/Boy Love Association) and marched in the pride parade with a "NAMBLA walks with me" shirt.
Magnus Hirschfeld founder in 1897 of an institute deemed "the first advocacy for homosexual and transgender rights", considered homosexual "ephebophiles" as something common and nonpathological.
Simone de Beauvoir, lesbian feminist superhero second to none, of "every woman is homosexual by nature" fame, was one of the signers of the 1977 petition against age of consent laws demanding "recognition of the right of children and adolescents to maintain relationships with persons of their choice". It was in reaction to three men being taken to trial for grooming boys and girls under 15 years of age, but allegedly "without violence".
Harvey Milk, the first openly gay elected official in California, of Oscar winning biopic about his life, and has a Navy ship named after him. Milk took advantage of his work with at-risk youth to groom at least one 16yo runaway Jack Galen McKinley who had substance abuse problems and lived on the streets of NYC (where the age of consent was 17). Jack would end up comitting suicide years later.
Pedowood is just the tip of pomochomo media:
Victor Salva's rape of his 12 year old actor is defended by intelligensia allies like John Edgar Browning.
Wikipedia is more pozzed than Charlie Sheen:
Rodney Reed raped a 12 year old and wikipedia covered it up for Shaun King's BLM bullshit.
Plebbit is run by tranny pedos.
tl;dr Not fucking children is somehow child abuse.
Last updated 30 May 2021
They consider a fetus to be an inhuman clump of cells, more akin to a tumor, so excising it before it becomes an "infant" reduces infant mortality. Kind of an old language trick to justify murder.
Nature does not communicate itself through language; it uses movement to inspire our senses. Languages represent the suggested definitions of those within nature; which when consented to (by believing their suggestions) gives them the authority to define nature.
Fuck off tranny.
Nice; that's an insult seldom heard. Let's see...trans from either transfer (exchange; change) or transe (ecstasy), and sex (distinction between male and female aka natural opposites).
Exchange is either flow to form (need) or form to form (want in ignorance of need), ecstasy (trance; to stand affixed) represents the temptation of ignorance (want over need), and sex implies balance between opposites; hence choice between need and want. Interesting.
What are the implications of choosing to put these two words together?
Free will of choice used for adaptation to inspiration.
Comment Reported for: Rule 12 - Falsehoods
How am I supposed to tell?
All he's done here is say "fuck trannies" in a convoluted way.
This...
will only be applied to this...
when reported aka free will of choice is needed as consent to allow the persecution of others. Now what are the implications of leveraging the "falsehood" rule against me after calling me a so called tranny?
How did I do that by only quoting these terms from others?
Submission to orders meets the contradiction of free will of choice...tough job. If only free will could be used to not follow the suggested orders of others...but alas; 'ignorance is bliss' they say.
I'm not going to remove "fuck off tranny" as a violation of rule 15 because no one would want me to.
Want ignores need. What if a position like yours (governing the wants vs the don't wants of others), is used by the few to govern the collective ignorance of the many towards our needs?
If the allegation of "bot" let to you confirming that I'm "real"; then where would the allegation of "tranny" lead towards?
Nature has a language, it’s called genetics. Human language suggests definitions based off of categorization and rationalization, this prescribed language creates understanding. But genetics creates variances which we have to keep updating and categorizing as we learn the variations.
The genetic; from genesis (origin) of form represents flow, and the origin of flow/form represents energy aka the source of ALL information; communicated as flow to the form (ONE) within.
Suggestion requires consent by free will of choice (ONEs sole authority over self within ALL) and consent to the suggestions made by another ONE represents ONEs choice to ignore ALL.
Flow demands adaptation from form (our choice of need); while ignoring this for the suggestions of other form represents our chocie of want. Need (self sustenance of life); want (temptation luring towards death).
ALL (flow) represents predefined information; the ONEs (form) within cannot create new information; only transmute out of ALL perceived. Flow also represents the natural order upon form; it categorized us into ONE (potential) within ALL (potentiality).
Rational aka reason represents the conflict between truth and false; a fictitious conflict; caused by consent to believe that a suggested -ism is true/false; which then causes the conflict between those who believe true/false and those who don't believe it. For those who made the suggestion this represents control through division by suggestion.
Instead of reason (true vs false) utilize implication (if/then); which is in adherence to use being form within flow. it adheres to natural law (as defined by flow upon form) and is also taught in the so called talmud; which also uses talmudic reasoning to maintain the conflicts of reason through suggested contradictions (to both sides). All division by suggestion devices for mass population control.
Perception represents the input of inspiration; free will of choice between adherence to it (adaptation) and ignorance thereof (temptation) represents the transmutation of perceived inspiration into comprehended information aka from ALL perceived potentiality into ONEs comprehended potential.
Believing the suggested information by other ONEs (temptation) prevents ONEs growth of potential; because ONE represents a vessel of ALL and can only growth through choice based adherence to ALL. This is where the parasites operate as the happy merchants of temptations offering us endless suggestions.
Believing language only deceives us to perceive reality through the lens of words; defined by the free will of others. Branding form within flow tricks us to ignore being form within flow; in need of adaptation by choice of action to flow.
a) flow segregates ALL potentiality into individual ONE potential (form) as inspiration for the sustenance of form within flow. If everything would be the same; why would ONE struggle to sustain self within flow? b) adherence to the segregation of differences allows unity of potential (form) to recharge the loss of potentiality (flow). The parasite utilize division (reason) while mixing us together to destroy differences; which decreases perceived inspiration; which in return keeps the many ignorant and the few in control.
ONEs update represents adherence to perceived inspiration aka the choice of need (self sustenance) over want (ignorance); which builds comprehension (potential).
It's ALL predefined; the ONEs within lack comprehension, and trying to brand temporary form within ongoing flow is just ignorance towards self sustenance. Form cannot accumulate information without flow destroying it. We cannot unlock nature; each ONE of us needs to build his own comprehension, and the suggested information of others corrupts that into lack of comprehension.
Another suggested parasite inversion...we are tricked to consent to learn what others teach; yet under natural law to learn/teach represents the same action when applied to the sustenance of self...to teach self equals to learn for self and vice versa.
This one's definitely retarded.
This guy is high as shit
I still haven't figured out whether he's some kind of chatbot
hilarious if he is, kinda sad if he isn't
It's funny tho, seeing an NPC with a name like, "free will of choice."
I'm about 50% certain it's a chatbot, but the odd thing is its replies aren't instant. You'd think a chatbot would have instantaneous replies. On the other hand, I don't think I've ever seen it NOT reply to someone eventually, which would be the behavior of a bot, auto-replying and always getting the last word, but some people are like that too.
Its replies use wordplay on occasion, but at the same time exhibit zero knowledge of how language actually works on the general case.
a) no substance abuse on my end, and b) "high as shit"? Where do you think you got that figure of speech from, and what was there intent for suggesting it to you?
Funny how they can super quickly throw around baby murder and pedo shit, vote about them in 2 seconds, but they fuck around indefinitely and can't come to decisions on actual, important shit because it would go against libtard shit? Like "o noes, what do we do about the illegal terrorist horde, we can't stop that", but "yes, molest those children NAO".
Quite aside from all the rest of the madness, just look at this. Every sort of madness that a nutcase online screams out is just a few years away from being encoded in public policy.
Having a different opinion than they do is a form of violence.
What did you expect from an organization led by a woman? They always do this. This is why Le Pen is a bad idea.
Every time a woman gets power they plunder the vaults and throw the gains to their in-group for as long as they can hold it.
I don't think that's the problem. Which is why Le Pen is a great idea. In fact, can we make a bet about how her party voted on this? And how Macron's party voted?
The interesting thing is that you think that women have only one in-group, when there are many, and gender generally the least important of these to people.
Considering one side pretends to be against the EU and one is openly for it, that seems like a stupid bet. Macron's party would vote for anything the EU asked, even if it said add the line "Macron has an Oedipus complex" to the French anthem.
Your mistake is believing that she isn't the same shit and just acting like she won't do that.
There is scientific evidence that women's strongest bias is towards people of the same gender. Color, nationality or religion were weaker bonds.
It's a stupid bet because you would lose yet another one? So how do you justify supporting Macron over Le Pen? It seems to be that regardless of what you dislike, your dislike for wahmen is always greater.
I can't wait for Le Pen to become the first wahmen president of France, if she manages it. All the heads will explode. And yours too.
Based on what is she 'the same shit'? The French are generally pro-EU, so the anti-EU position of Le Pen is the best you're going to get on that.
Quite apart from the fact that with the replication crisis, all the P-hacking and outright fraud that is taking place, I don't accept anything of the social so called sciences as science, I am interested in what your source for this is.
Because as long as he's narrowly in power, he has to do at least some of what the people want instead of solely serving his female masters. If she wins, he will fall off the face of the earth and she will be in an effective one party system, like Boris Johnson. (look how much he sells out for women.)
As well as that, I don't trust her. I never will. Putting her in charge is just trading one female master for another.
I don't particularly like Wikipedia, but even they admit female in group bias exists.
I have never known politicians to do that.
Le Pen is nothing like Boris Johnson, whom you supported.
I was particularly interested in your earlier claim, not what Wikipedia says, that in-group bias regarding gender is stronger than nationality, religion etc.
Remember when he stood up to Islam for a few weeks?
Don't remind me. I should have joined the accelerationists and backed Labour. Then again, if they won and screwed up, Boris and the Conservatives would be even stronger. Rock and a hard place.
I had the data somewhere, but I can't find it now. Too many things on this phone.
Regarding abortion and infant mortality.
If you kill any child that has a higher than average chance of dying after birth while still in utero then they can't ever count as infant mortality.
One reason infant mortality is higher in the USA is because it is more common to give babies a chance at life than just kill them outright.
It's the last step before practicing outright eugenics.
Lets agree to disagree on this one.
He's just saying that it's a statistical trick the anti-lifers use: I don't think he's arguing that it's accurate.
Let me ask the anti-lifers this, from a scientific perspective:
If, on any planet other than this one, we were to discover anything even remotely approximating what takes place in the womb during pregnancy, would that not be the most revolutionary development in the entire history of human science?
But here on Earth we can have a cluster of self-replicating cells, lying in amniotic fluid, that consumes and expels nutrients, that moves of its own accord on contact and that rapidly grows into something that goes to sleep and wakes up and kicks and listens to music and recognizes the sound of its mother's voice and we're debating whether that's a life?
Of course it's a life. It's a life on the verge of becoming self-aware and killing it is murder.
(Emphasis mine). That's an odd claim. How does reciting the statement "some guys like taking it up the ass, some gals prefer eating oysters" reduce sexual violence? I don't necessarily see it raising sexual violence, it could but I don't see that as a guarantee, but how does it not only reduce sexual violence, but SIGNIFICANTLY reduce it?
Bobbit out there saying "well, I was going to cut off my husband's dick for fun, but then I remembered that gay porn exists, and somehow, that makes me not commit sexual violence against my husband!".
Oh, maybe they're the type who believe women can't perpetrate sexual violence, I'm sorry, I'll just create a sex-appropriate example, and make them an offensive stereotype to make sure they listen since racism and stereotypes are the only language the Left understands...
Jumbo Jim gets back from the oil rig on his Texan farm to his wife-slave he keeps in the kitchen. Not barefoot, though, no, he binds copies of The Handmaid's Tale to her feet, instead, so she treads on her favorite story every step. He was about to jam his fist up her vagina, when he remembered his Sexuality education in school, and stopped, because fisting is what those lez-bee-ans do, and he ain't that.
That sound about right? Really, I'm not seeing how "lesbians and gay people exist" as a statement or educational curricula note will lead to less rape. Significantly less rape, notably. Are most rapists suppressed gays and lesbians or something, who rape because they weren't taught that their Self existed? Is that the EU's claim?
EDIT: Yes, I acknowledge the phrase was full of weasel words: can and contribute to, which make the phrase literally meaningless, selling ice cream can significantly contribute to reducing murder, if the "can" is contingent on a very specific situation and the "contribute to" is tangential and tenuous, say if a single incident throughout history, someone dodged a murder attempt because they went to an ice cream shop instead of their usual restaurant, then the statement would be true, "Can", because it happened once, and "signfiicantly contribute to" because in that singular instance it was a decisive factor... But I was reacting based on what they WANTED me to believe they meant, not what they likely ACTUALLY meant, which was "they could dream up some ridiculous farce of a singular example in which it significantly matters".
It's not language for the rational, critical thinking individual. Anyone who has above-room temperature I.Q., can see it for what it is: child grooming.
For the normies, the idiots, and the "allies" unwilling to parent correctly, it's weasel words designed expressly to appeal to emotion. A fallacy most normies aren't prone to pick up on and will eat it up just like some of them are convinced that they should be okay with all the interracial agitprop in media because being against it might get them labeled as a "racist".
In this case, it's legislation that linguistically foists upon them the obligation to accept... "being gay is okay because otherwise you're a bigot who condones rape culture!".
Any parent worth their salt should pull their kid from school and teach them about all the ills that come with the Rainbow Reich society. But I fear that there are far and few between willing to do so these days.
It's the "Women's 1,000,000th hand out and Fuck You Hungary" bill.
That's exactly what it reads like to me.
Hopefully Hungary doesn't fold under pressure.
I always love the comments from "freewillofchoice". Yes, difficult, but fresh.
The only sexual education a six year old needs is "If an adult tells you to keep a secret from your parents, it's even more important that you tell your parents."
Good. Let the normies suffer if thats what it takes to wake them up.
I doubt 90% of Europeans know this passed.
They should have been paying attention
10 is age enough, keep the pedophiles away from the kids! Why do these people hate kids so much?