Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: June 3, 2024, 10:11 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Transexuals
RE: Transexuals
(April 12, 2016 at 3:35 pm)ApeNotKillApe Wrote: Treating people with emotional/mental disorder as inherently irrational, damaging to society, immoral or undeserving of consideration or accommodation as members of society. Legitimately delusional people all over the world get their own special buildings where they can go to talk to their respective imaginary friend and no one complains.

Ah, no. I am saying people with mental disorders/mental illness should not be in a position to make laws that allows them to indulge their disorder.
RE: Transexuals
(April 12, 2016 at 3:48 pm)Drich Wrote:
(April 12, 2016 at 3:20 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: Well, fuck Revelation.

One of the reasons you needn't worry about religion being outlawed is that there is a substantial number of people (religious folks and atheists alike) who understand the value of secularism in government and a vigorously defended 1st Amendment.

No need to thank me. But when the shit hits the fan, this atheist will join millions of other atheists to defend your religious freedom.
we are just one or two more 9-11's away from a ban on 'radical religion.' and because you P/C dolts have sold your common sense so that you can put a dress on and wander in the girls bathroom if you want, the term 'radical religion will slowly migrate to include' anything that is not all inclusive, or anything that is not 'P/C friendly.' like i said at the rate we are going.. 10 years tops.

I'm a hell of a lot less PC than you seem to think I am. What I am, however, is serious as a heart attack about the 1st Amendment. Don't expect me to support outlawing religion, radical or otherwise. I don't give a fuck how many towers fall. Freedom of conscience is non-negotiable.
RE: Transexuals
(April 12, 2016 at 3:41 pm)Whateverist the White Wrote: Tell you what, you can lock up the transsexuals unless we manage to lock up the folks with imaginary friends first.  Go!

Who said lock up? All I'm saying is tell them no, or escort thier ass out the bathroom if they get lost or confused.
RE: Transexuals
(April 12, 2016 at 3:47 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: It's your precious science too, Drich. Or have you gone full 18th Century in your living arrangements?

And if you don't blame the lawmakers, then who do you blame? The corporations? They are legitimate stakeholders in our society and government, just like individual citizens, and are free to move their operations where they wish. If that results in a loss of revenue for a state or locale, from the point of view of the corporation trying to effect some change, tough shit. Yes, the 'will of the people' was circumvented in this case . . . by the elected representatives who rolled over rather than dig in their heels to defend their 'principles'. Telling the film industry to fuck off was always an option. They didn't do that. Not the film industry's fault. That's on the elected representatives of the people.

That is why I said like 10 times IT SHOULD SCARE ALL OF US!!!
RE: Transexuals
(April 12, 2016 at 3:53 pm)Drich Wrote:
(April 12, 2016 at 3:47 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: It's your precious science too, Drich. Or have you gone full 18th Century in your living arrangements?

And if you don't blame the lawmakers, then who do you blame? The corporations? They are legitimate stakeholders in our society and government, just like individual citizens, and are free to move their operations where they wish. If that results in a loss of revenue for a state or locale, from the point of view of the corporation trying to effect some change, tough shit. Yes, the 'will of the people' was circumvented in this case . . . by the elected representatives who rolled over rather than dig in their heels to defend their 'principles'. Telling the film industry to fuck off was always an option. They didn't do that. Not the film industry's fault. That's on the elected representatives of the people.

That is why I said like 10 times IT SHOULD SCARE ALL OF US!!!

I don't disagree. I just think there are more pernicious examples than this.
RE: Transexuals
(April 12, 2016 at 3:53 pm)Crossless1 Wrote:
(April 12, 2016 at 3:48 pm)Drich Wrote: we are just one or two more 9-11's away from a ban on 'radical religion.' and because you P/C dolts have sold your common sense so that you can put a dress on and wander in the girls bathroom if you want, the term 'radical religion will slowly migrate to include' anything that is not all inclusive, or anything that is not 'P/C friendly.' like i said at the rate we are going.. 10 years tops.

I'm a hell of a lot less PC than you seem to think I am. What I am, however, is serious as a heart attack about the 1st Amendment. Don't expect me to support outlawing religion, radical or otherwise. I don't give a fuck how many towers fall. Freedom of conscience is non-negotiable.

Well I'm sure their will be a 'sympathizers' camp right next to the camp of concentration the 'radical religious' people will be sent to 'think about/concentrate' on how to be better citizens.

Maybe the sympathizers will be made to clean the ovens after they've been used.

Seriously though it is comming. ISIS and Radical Islam will pave the way, but the legislation will be used to force anyone in line who does not agree with the state.

Then their will be a 'test' meaning those who are with the state will have to get 'stamped' or tagged with some sort of bio chip maybe on the hand or forehead that will be needed to do business/live.
RE: Transexuals
(April 12, 2016 at 3:55 pm)Crossless1 Wrote:
(April 12, 2016 at 3:53 pm)Drich Wrote: That is why I said like 10 times IT SHOULD SCARE ALL OF US!!!

I don't disagree. I just think there are more pernicious examples than this.

Maybe a good idea for the next thread
RE: Transexuals
(April 12, 2016 at 12:17 pm)Drich Wrote:
(April 12, 2016 at 10:42 am)LadyForCamus Wrote: So...then what is the point of your post exactly?  You have no position at all?  I'm now completely at a loss for what the hell you are even saying other then, "ew, yucky."

At this point all I've done is ask a question, based on a clinically observed definition. Should mentally Ill people set policy for 99% of everyone else in society?

These are your exact words. You SPECIFICALLY ASKED about mental ill people setting policy. I did not make that up.
RE: Transexuals
well I crapped away my whole day but I am now current. If I missed your post just give me you post number and I will be glad to poop on it for you.
Big Grin
RE: Transexuals
(April 12, 2016 at 4:01 pm)BlackBird Wrote:
(April 12, 2016 at 12:17 pm)Drich Wrote: At this point all I've done is ask a question, based on a clinically observed definition. Should mentally Ill people set policy for 99% of everyone else in society?

These are your exact words. You SPECIFICALLY ASKED about mental ill people setting policy. I did not make that up.

yes i did.





Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)