Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
I actually have a deviated septum so no go forget yourself.I'm talking about a seriously deviated septum, or like some sort of hugely uncomfortable skin condition - the specific details here are unimportant. If someone has a medical condition that causes them serious discomfort - but does not threaten their life - should they not be allowed treatment?
i dont mean to advocate for the actual revoking of legal rights for neo-national socialists, but im saying that society should vehemently reject national socialists. and although not legal, i am totally fine with them getting their asses kicked.But not getting your ass kicked is a legal right afforded to the rest of society. You can't pick and choose who gets protection from assault based on political views.
They aren't going to loving die if they don't hack their snake off Seventh
Life saving surgery =/= wanting to be something you are not.Maybe not the best brown townogy, let me try again - if someone is born with a deviated septum and is in constant discomfort, but it won't kill them, should their insurance not cover treatment?
if you're a neo-national socialist you dont deserve to feel safe in public. its that simple.I don't agree with this. Neo-national socialists deserve to be ostracized and criticized for what they believe, but it's not a good idea to selectively deprive legal rights from people with certain beliefs.
I'm also not paying for it through the taxesIt's no more subsidized than anything else, and the procedures are so rare anyway that the cost is negligible. Should we cut surgeries for people with obesity-related complications since they just ate themselves sick? Or should we deny lung transplants to people who smoked until their lungs fell apart? Applying these weird kinds of moral dualities to medical issues is a seriously dangerous slippery slope.
well of course none of them will say it word for word but this is an accurate representation of what I'm referring toSee, my only beef with this is that the phrase 'top feminist' means literally nothing. Feminism is a decentralized social movement, meaning there's no central authority telling feminists what to do/believe. So just because one feminist thinks one thing does not imply that any other feminist thinks the same.
Wanting to cut off your genitals is harmful.Because you lose organs? That seems like a malformed definition of 'harmful' when we're talking about surgery.
Someone gave him this at a rally a while back.He preaches about protecting everything, even groups that he's planning to forget over. Also, that flag is totally upside down btw.
Hes even been preaching about protecting the LGBT community from a "hateful and foreign ideology" (gee wonder what that could be)
So if anything hes a pretty pro-LGBT republican
[im g width=500]https://ih1.redbubble.net/image.218215369.1634/flat,800x800,075,f.jpg[/img]Cause it's not? For something to be a disorder, it has to actually cause them harm. What's harming them isn't their identity, but rather the fact that their identity is different than how they actually look. Hence why being transgender isn't a disorder but GID is.
that would be interesting to readIt would, yeah. Not gonna post any of it here unfortunately. I've been surrounded by liberals my whole life, so I'm pretty well-aware what the extremists are like in my side of the political spectrum. They make up a small minority, like anywhere else.
Oh so is it like therapy to help them through their mental illnessDSM-IV doesn't treat transgender identities as a mental illness, but gender identity dysphoria is classified as a disorder, for which HRT and surgery are treatments.
or you just argue too much in generalhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWdd6_ZxX8c
Does that mean if I cut my richard off my insurance pays for itIIRC, most transgender people don't even opt for bottom surgery.
did any of them end up calling you bigot, privileged or any other sort of ridiculous termOf course lol
I'd be fine with the LGBTQ+ community if it wasn't infested with idiotic feminists who think they deserve more rights than men and if they could show some decency and common sense.I can buy that feminists have a serious problem with conveying their ideas in an appealing way on the internet. And by that I mean, lots of them are annoying.
what the forget why are people so homophobic(?) towards usIf you aren't familiar with the people that post here, it's almost impossible to distinguish between who's actually a bigot and who's just posting inflammatory stuff for the lulz. I'm still not entirely sure what the actual breakdown is.
alright im sure it does buddyCan you elaborate at all?
care to list a few rights off for me?
[im g]http://i2.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/facebook/000/003/194/001.jpg[/img]I'm not even sure what you're mocking here. It's common knowledge that LGBTQ operates like a sociopolitical alliance.
If I recall correctly, he was to make gay marriage illegal. This is what I've heard, and that would be bad.His official position is that 'gay marriage was decided once and for all by the SC', so that implies that he isn't going to try to make it illegal.
weren't all references of lgbt issues basically thrown out from the white house webpageIt's sort of common practice to clean out the White House website between administrations. Now if those issues don't come up in a couple of months, we'll have reason to be concerned.
sounds like something an insecure person would say..........I don't even have a horse in this race lol
