TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

SaintBio Archive

View 0 posts and 17 comments by SaintBio on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
54

This study seems really weak. Be careful with what you draw from it as 'fact'. You shouldn't blindly follow any study, even if it's conclusions support your worldview, until you look at the methodology. A few problems I caught: The study only looked at federal sentencing. This is problematic on two levels. First, federal crimes are an extreme minority. In 2017, there were 1,719 state prisons compared to 102 federal prisons. Out of the 2.3 million people incarcerated in the USA, only 225,000 are …
/r/MensRights16/12/18 05:13 AM
2

Typically, no. The court wants to look at the case before it, and the parties involved in it. If the woman wanted to later argue that the she shouldn't pay, the clinic should, the court would likely tell her that they don't care. The reason being, courts typically try to focus very narrowly on the matter before them. Whether or not the clinic is liable really wouldn't concern the court unless someone else brought the clinic before the court as a defendant (the man could have sued the woman and t…
/r/MensRights06/10/17 10:01 PM
-2

That's not true. A bank, or any other creditor, can't claim against the woman if it would deprive the child of its basic necessities. But, that's besides the point because you seem to believe that the bank and father are comparable in some way. They would never be considered commensurable plaintiffs by any court. The statutes that apply to them are even different (Family Code deals with parental obligations, while a number of other statutes concern creditors/debtors).
/r/MensRights06/10/17 09:41 PM
0

I guess I think you're naive for assuming that people are more likely to reject their own offspring than to find common ground with them, grow to care for them, and possibly love them despite their origin. I'd also say it's extremely reductive and naive to say it it all boils down solely to the woman. It's hard for my to grasp how divorced from humanity you are.
/r/MensRights06/10/17 09:34 PM
-2

That's true. I'd be curious what the data indicates but it's entirely possible that once the father is forced to pay for the child he'll accept that he's a father and act accordingly. May even come to care/love the child.
/r/MensRights06/10/17 09:32 PM
2

How is that fair to the child? The child didn't agree to any of this but now has to live a life without a father? What kind of scars does that leave, knowing your biological father wants nothing to do with you because of something that was not your fault. It's not as easy as saying it's unfair to the father, it's unfair to atleast two people. If you're going to say it's more unfair for one of them, to such an extend that we ignore the other one entirely, then you need to provide a strong substan…
/r/MensRights06/10/17 08:07 PM
1

That's what elections are for, tell your representative you don't approve of this kind of policy. It'll be a hard sell though. Oddly enough I bet liberal politicians would be more open to it than conservative ones, who'd be afraid of disrupting family units.
/r/MensRights06/10/17 08:03 PM
2

Majority of the world does not give legal recognition to surrogacy contracts.
/r/MensRights06/10/17 08:00 PM
3

That's not entirely accurate. Surrogacy contracts in most of the world are illegal. The majority of US states don't have any laws on the legality of surrogacy contracts. So, even if they're not banned you'd still have a hard time arguing that you have a binding contract. In other states, surrogacy 'agreements' are required to be altruistic. Meaning, no payment can be given for them (only support necessary for the child). But if there's no payment, there's no consideration, hence no contract, onl…
/r/MensRights06/10/17 08:00 PM
2

You didn't read the decision, clearly.
/r/MensRights06/10/17 07:50 PM
13

The 'strategy' here was to go after the only related party with assets that could pay for the child. He can't sue the woman for child support, obviously, and he doesn't want to pay. So, the only other party that was even remotely involved was the clinic.
/r/MensRights06/10/17 07:49 PM
5

What judgement has ever allowed a creditor (secured or not) to take precedence over the well-being of a child?
/r/MensRights06/10/17 07:44 PM
68

She was also the one who turned the three in. That goes a long long way to reducing her sentence.
/r/PussyPassDenied20/03/16 08:59 PM
16

"Method of murder: Stamped to death" OK...
/r/PussyPassDenied20/03/16 08:57 PM
5

It really depends on what type of Judge the person is. Many/most of judges are trained and believe that they are just there to uphold the laws, not create new ones. Even in common law systems this obtains most of the time.
/r/PussyPassDenied31/12/14 07:49 PM
1

It pretty much is the definition of the concept...
/r/MensRights25/11/12 03:16 AM
57

Up until December 2011 the FBI operated on the official policy that it was impossible to rape a man. I'd consider that pretty solid evidence of a one sided rape culture.
/r/MensRights24/11/12 06:00 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter