According to the standard definition of the word “ownership”, it’s perfectly fine to say that you own a car that you want to sell or that you don’t like at all. That’s English language.
It means that I am not defining the word “ownership” the way you do. In other words, it means I am not speaking the same language as you do. In even more different words, it means I am speaking English language (whereas you’re speaking an odd version of it.)
I don’t care what kind of language you’re speaking, but when trying to interact with other people, make sure you’re aware of the possibility that other people are speaking a different language (e.g. an official one.)
The fact that someone is speaking an official language (and not your own strange version of it) does not mean they are childless, that they hate their parents or that they adopt a particular position on parenting. It simply means they speak an official language.
Yes, that’s true, in your own version of English language.
It makes sense to say that John owns his body. What that means is that John’s brain controls John’s body e.g. determines the movements of John’s limbs.
On that day, let’s make something up that your grandfather always did, like popping his cheek with his index finger.
On the day he died, you’re walking down the sidewalk and some random stranger pops their cheek with their index finger. That person was technically not them!!!
It was your grandfather!!
In fact Urwrong, that kind of stuff happens to YOU constantly!! You just don’t know it, just like the person on the sidewalk didn’t know it.
When you have “the spiritual eye”, you always know who’s possessing you or someone else. You do not have the spiritual eye.
I agree with Urwrong and Fixed, more than I do with everyone else here, in that if Ownership means security and accountability, then ownership it has to be, but it’s still not the word I would use.
You can’t even put two sentences together without contradicting yourself. The argument put forth by the people your defending is that there is no accountability from parent to child. A parent can rape and murder their child because they OWN them! No consequence.
You pay no attention to the more nuanced arguments of guardianship or custodianship (which implies rights for the child as well)
I repeat, to Urwrong and Fixed, in that parents are accountable for their children’s well-being, and that I was the first to mention custodianship and guardianship in this thread, but someone is claiming otherwise, but why?
I think that The Twit is the pedophile I once banned, and he is now trying to justify his position, because time and fate have now caught up with him, and he is scared.
MagsJ, I don’t have sex when there is a universe with zero sum realities, which may very well mean that I never have sex. Pedophile? That would fucking suck for someone to be a pedophile, for them and the children. Fortunately I don’t have that affliction.
Lol… this guy is digging though… I said custodian and guardian and much more besides, so why man is pausing on the ‘ship’ part? like it’s a pivotal point to his entire argument?
MagsJ. We used terms like this independently of each other. I’m not trying to dig here.
You never used the word custodian in this thread, I just looked it up.
Custodian is actually a better legal word than guardian.
Again, I’m not digging here…
When you are in police custody it is not their job to die to keep you from going to prison (guardian) it is their job to make sure your rights are respected.
I’m not a pedophile, I stated as much. Even if I was one, who gives a fuck, because I don’t have sex, nor am I particularly interested in seeing nude women in a zero sum world.
I’m not reporting you yet. If you keep this up. I will report you.
