Conquer Club

rdsrds2120 wrote:jimboston, keep any more transphobia out of this thread. It will not be tolerated.

--rdsrds2120

F**K O*F

Ban me!

thegreekdog wrote:

jimboston wrote:

Woodruff wrote:

jimboston wrote:

Symmetry wrote:JB, your bile at transgendered people in this thread has kind of burned out. Don't keep bumping this thread anymore. Folks have explained why you're wrong, many of which are sympathetic in various ways to your weird hatred.

Don't be silly.

I don't hate transgendered. I just don't want to pay for their fetish.

Actually, those two sentences together really are, in my opinion, a view of hatred. Perhaps you didn't mean to call it a fetish?

Perhaps I am expanding the "definition" of the term fetish a bit.

I'm not expanding it as much as the judge in the case expanded the idea of what is or isn't "crual and unusual".

See what you did there? Instead of discussing whether it was appropriate for the government to pay for the surgery, your opinions are now invalidated because you used the word "fetish" (and I suppose other words, since I saw a big, red, bold edit up in one of those posts). Now the attention is on something other than what we were discussing before. Awesome.

Sorry.

It's just so stupid on the face of it... I can't both to argue the logic, since there is none.

Woodruff wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:See what you did there? Instead of discussing whether it was appropriate for the government to pay for the surgery, your opinions are now invalidated because you used the word "fetish" (and I suppose other words, since I saw a big, red, bold edit up in one of those posts). Now the attention is on something other than what we were discussing before. Awesome.

I don't know that his opinions are invalidated, but it does perhaps make me question the rationale being them a bit more than I might otherwise have (even though his end-conclusion isn't dissimilar to mine).

See the thing is that the "you're a bigot" argument is just another example of the "race card".

These ulta-Libs are trying (apparently successfully) to distract from the main point.

I don't go out looking for Tranpeople to beat-up. I don't go out looking for Tranpeople to insult. I don't look at Tranpeople funny when I see them walking down the street. I'm not a hateful person.

However I also should not be forced to pay for their decisions.

That pisses me off. So f*ck them!

If super-mod RDRS bans me... well so be it.

BYE.

You won't be seeing me again.

jimboston wrote:

Woodruff wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:See what you did there? Instead of discussing whether it was appropriate for the government to pay for the surgery, your opinions are now invalidated because you used the word "fetish" (and I suppose other words, since I saw a big, red, bold edit up in one of those posts). Now the attention is on something other than what we were discussing before. Awesome.

I don't know that his opinions are invalidated, but it does perhaps make me question the rationale being them a bit more than I might otherwise have (even though his end-conclusion isn't dissimilar to mine).

See the thing is that the "you're a bigot" argument is just another example of the "race card".
These ulta-Libs are trying (apparently successfully) to distract from the main point.
I don't go out looking for Tranpeople to beat-up. I don't go out looking for Tranpeople to insult. I don't look at Tranpeople funny when I see them walking down the street. I'm not a hateful person.
However I also should not be forced to pay for their decisions.
That pisses me off. So f*ck them!

Uh...I didn't call you a bigot. I don't think you're a bigot. But the statements of yours that I did point out would seem to call your motivations into question a bit, in my view.

Woodruff wrote:

jimboston wrote:
See the thing is that the "you're a bigot" argument is just another example of the "race card".
These ulta-Libs are trying (apparently successfully) to distract from the main point.
I don't go out looking for Tranpeople to beat-up. I don't go out looking for Tranpeople to insult. I don't look at Tranpeople funny when I see them walking down the street. I'm not a hateful person.
However I also should not be forced to pay for their decisions.
That pisses me off. So f*ck them!

Uh...I didn't call you a bigot. I don't think you're a bigot. But the statements of yours that I did point out would seem to call your motivations into question a bit, in my view.

I was quoting you and Greek... but primarily addressing the comments of others.

I was posting fast... as I expect a ban any moment.
Once that comes I am gone for good.

I have no problem with Transpeople.

However, we as a society have taken things too far.
(I was going to say we've taken "acceptance" too far, but people will jump on me and call me a bigot for that.)

What I mean (when I say society has taken things "too far") is that the idea that we should even consider this guy's request... and give the idea of the State paying for his surgery consideration, thus validating the argument... is in my mind already taking things too far.

Once we (society) accepts the premise that this is a "legitimate medical need"... on par with broken bones, heart disease, and infections.... we have already lost the argument. Of course if you out this condition on par with valid medical needs then you essentially HAVE to provide treatment.

(Though of course we could argue about what the treatment should be... but then we're making the wrong argument. You've already lost.)

I am NOT saying that transpeople are bad. I am NOT saying that they shouldn't be allowed to do whatever they want to do to/with their own bodies. I am NOT saying I hate or dislike transpeople. (Though I DO reserve the RIGHT to associate with and socialize with people I want, who share similar lifestyles, values, etc.) Of course I think transpeople should be free to do whatever they want...SO LONG AS THEY DON'T INFRINGE ON MY LIFE OR RIGHTS. I am moderately Libertarian. So f**cking do whatever you want... just don't bug me.

Once this guy asks me to PAY FOR THIS "TREATMENT" then he is infringing on my life and my rights... and so YES, I am going to tell him to **** Off!

I don't think that a decision to modify one's body is a medical necessity.... and I DO NOT CARE if some doctors call this a "condition" and consider body modification a "treatment". It's absolutely NOT A MEDICAL NECESSITY.

I shouldn't pay for it.

The thing is with all your huffing and puffing JB you seem to be in the minory, not only on these forums but in the political mode of your home state as well(liberal). Maybe you should consider moving to Albania where you might be more happy?

Funkyterrance wrote:The thing is with all your huffing and puffing JB you seem to be in the minory, not only on these forums but in the political mode of your home state as well(liberal). Maybe you should consider moving to Albania where you might be more happy?

Apparently not only do you type a lot of stupid nonsense... but you also don't know how to read polls.

I'm not in the minority.

jimboston wrote:

Funkyterrance wrote:The thing is with all your huffing and puffing JB you seem to be in the minory, not only on these forums but in the political mode of your home state as well(liberal). Maybe you should consider moving to Albania where you might be more happy?

Apparently not only do you type a lot of stupid nonsense... but you also don't know how to read polls.

I'm not in the minority.

Let me get this straight...
You are arguing that Mass. is not a liberal state? You're kidding right?
If you are talking about polls regarding this specific case they don't mean squat lol. What matters is the infrastructure currently in place.

jim, we get it, ok? You think you know better than medical professionals what is and is not a legitimate condition. You've made your point. Being a know-it-all even if you have no fucking clue is normal behaviour on the internet.

I'm still going to trust the medical opinion of a physician who's studied medicine over your medical opinion.

Funkyterrance wrote:

jimboston wrote:

Funkyterrance wrote:The thing is with all your huffing and puffing JB you seem to be in the minory, not only on these forums but in the political mode of your home state as well(liberal). Maybe you should consider moving to Albania where you might be more happy?

Apparently not only do you type a lot of stupid nonsense... but you also don't know how to read polls.

I'm not in the minority.

Let me get this straight...
You are arguing that Mass. is not a liberal state? You're kidding right?
If you are talking about polls regarding this specific case they don't mean squat lol. What matters is the infrastructure currently in place.

Nice how you respond with nonsense that doesn't have anything to do with your initial point.

Good move.

MeDeFe wrote:jim, we get it, ok? You think you know better than medical professionals what is and is not a legitimate condition. You've made your point. Being a know-it-all even if you have no fucking clue is normal behaviour on the internet.

I'm still going to trust the medical opinion of a physician who's studied medicine over your medical opinion.

Let me ask you... is Gender Identity Disorder a medical or mental condition.

Please answer the specific question asked.

MeDeFe wrote:jim, we get it, ok? You think you know better than medical professionals what is and is not a legitimate condition. You've made your point. Being a know-it-all even if you have no fucking clue is normal behaviour on the internet.

I'm still going to trust the medical opinion of a physician who's studied medicine and who has a vested financial interest in the surgery happening over your medical opinion.

Fixed.

jimboston wrote:

MeDeFe wrote:jim, we get it, ok? You think you know better than medical professionals what is and is not a legitimate condition. You've made your point. Being a know-it-all even if you have no fucking clue is normal behaviour on the internet.

I'm still going to trust the medical opinion of a physician who's studied medicine over your medical opinion.

Let me ask you... is Gender Identity Disorder a medical or mental condition.

Please answer the specific question asked.

Mental conditions fall within the parameters of medical conditions. Perhaps you meant "physical" instead of "medical"?

thegreekdog wrote:

MeDeFe wrote:jim, we get it, ok? You think you know better than medical professionals what is and is not a legitimate condition. You've made your point. Being a know-it-all even if you have no fucking clue is normal behaviour on the internet.

I'm still going to trust the medical opinion of a physician who's studied medicine and who has a vested financial interest in the surgery happening over your medical opinion.

Fixed.

Even with that potentially being true, it still would make more sense to go with the medical opinion of the physician, wouldn't it?

Woodruff wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

MeDeFe wrote:jim, we get it, ok? You think you know better than medical professionals what is and is not a legitimate condition. You've made your point. Being a know-it-all even if you have no fucking clue is normal behaviour on the internet.

I'm still going to trust the medical opinion of a physician who's studied medicine and who has a vested financial interest in the surgery happening over your medical opinion.

Fixed.

Even with that potentially being true, it still would make more sense to go with the medical opinion of the physician, wouldn't it?

Sure. But the issue is not whether the doctor is correct; the issue is whether the state should pay for it. And the potentially self-interested doctor made that determination.

If I can also interject a pet peeve of mine - Doctors are trusted experts in the sense that some people will literally do anything a doctor says. And doctors have lots of power for that reason. So I hate it when doctors act in a manner that makes them scumbags. Which is what I think this is.

thegreekdog wrote:

Woodruff wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

MeDeFe wrote:jim, we get it, ok? You think you know better than medical professionals what is and is not a legitimate condition. You've made your point. Being a know-it-all even if you have no fucking clue is normal behaviour on the internet.

I'm still going to trust the medical opinion of a physician who's studied medicine and who has a vested financial interest in the surgery happening over your medical opinion.

Fixed.

Even with that potentially being true, it still would make more sense to go with the medical opinion of the physician, wouldn't it?

Sure. But the issue is not whether the doctor is correct; the issue is whether the state should pay for it. And the potentially self-interested doctor made that determination.

If I can also interject a pet peeve of mine - Doctors are trusted experts in the sense that some people will literally do anything a doctor says. And doctors have lots of power for that reason. So I hate it when doctors act in a manner that makes them scumbags. Which is what I think this is.

I agree with you. On all counts.

Woodruff wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

MeDeFe wrote:jim, we get it, ok? You think you know better than medical professionals what is and is not a legitimate condition. You've made your point. Being a know-it-all even if you have no fucking clue is normal behaviour on the internet.

I'm still going to trust the medical opinion of a physician who's studied medicine and who has a vested financial interest in the surgery happening over your medical opinion.

Fixed.

Even with that potentially being true, it still would make more sense to go with the medical opinion of the physician, wouldn't it?

I agree, the physician also has his reputation to consider. It's not just all about performing as many surgeries as they can lol.

Funkyterrance wrote:

Woodruff wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

MeDeFe wrote:jim, we get it, ok? You think you know better than medical professionals what is and is not a legitimate condition. You've made your point. Being a know-it-all even if you have no fucking clue is normal behaviour on the internet.

I'm still going to trust the medical opinion of a physician who's studied medicine and who has a vested financial interest in the surgery happening over your medical opinion.

Fixed.

Even with that potentially being true, it still would make more sense to go with the medical opinion of the physician, wouldn't it?

I agree, the physician also has his reputation to consider. It's not just all about performing as many surgeries as they can lol.

Oh, I'm sure the physician does think it's medically necessary. I'm not suggesting that the doctors are all sitting around thinking up ways they can make more money. The question is not whether the physician think it's medically necessary (although apparently that has become the question). The question is whether the state should pay for it. And the determination of whether the state should pay for it should not be made by a doctor.

Woodruff wrote:

jimboston wrote:

MeDeFe wrote:jim, we get it, ok? You think you know better than medical professionals what is and is not a legitimate condition. You've made your point. Being a know-it-all even if you have no fucking clue is normal behaviour on the internet.

I'm still going to trust the medical opinion of a physician who's studied medicine over your medical opinion.

Let me ask you... is Gender Identity Disorder a medical or mental condition.

Please answer the specific question asked.

Mental conditions fall within the parameters of medical conditions. Perhaps you meant "physical" instead of "medical"?

Thank you, I don't think I would have put it that succinctly.

Woodruff wrote:

jimboston wrote:

MeDeFe wrote:jim, we get it, ok? You think you know better than medical professionals what is and is not a legitimate condition. You've made your point. Being a know-it-all even if you have no fucking clue is normal behaviour on the internet.

I'm still going to trust the medical opinion of a physician who's studied medicine over your medical opinion.

Let me ask you... is Gender Identity Disorder a medical or mental condition.

Please answer the specific question asked.

Mental conditions fall within the parameters of medical conditions. Perhaps you meant "physical" instead of "medical"?

I was thinking about the wording of this last night.

Let me rephrase... is Gender Identity Disorder a Psychological/Psychiatric condition or a Physical condition?

Surely the state has made a decision to defer to the doctors it employs as to what is or isn't necessary. If an illness of any kind is politically unsavoury to the politicos in charge, should it go untreated when diagnosed and treatment is recommended?

The state already has an obligation to pay for medical treatment of those that it imprisons. The deciders of what or what isn't proper medical treatment shouldn't depend on politicians, but on medical diagnosis by medical professionals.

Symmetry wrote:Surely the state has made a decision to defer to the doctors it employs as to what is or isn't necessary. If an illness of any kind is politically unsavoury to the politicos in charge, should it go untreated when diagnosed and treatment is recommended?

The state already has an obligation to pay for medical treatment of those that it imprisons. The deciders of what or what isn't proper medical treatment shouldn't depend on politicians, but on medical diagnosis by medical professionals.

Why?

thegreekdog wrote:

Symmetry wrote:Surely the state has made a decision to defer to the doctors it employs as to what is or isn't necessary. If an illness of any kind is politically unsavoury to the politicos in charge, should it go untreated when diagnosed and treatment is recommended?

The state already has an obligation to pay for medical treatment of those that it imprisons. The deciders of what or what isn't proper medical treatment shouldn't depend on politicians, but on medical diagnosis by medical professionals.

Why?

Why what?

Do you object to the state paying for the medical expenses of its prisoners? The alternative is a gulag.

Or do you object to medical professionals deciding what is or isn't medically necessary?

Symmetry wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

Symmetry wrote:Surely the state has made a decision to defer to the doctors it employs as to what is or isn't necessary. If an illness of any kind is politically unsavoury to the politicos in charge, should it go untreated when diagnosed and treatment is recommended?

The state already has an obligation to pay for medical treatment of those that it imprisons. The deciders of what or what isn't proper medical treatment shouldn't depend on politicians, but on medical diagnosis by medical professionals.

Why?

Why what?

Do you object to the state paying for the medical expenses of its prisoners? The alternative is a gulag.

Or do you object to medical professionals deciding what is or isn't medically necessary?

The issue is not whether the prisoner gets treatment. The issue is whether the state pays for the treatment. I think the government is fully able to and should be fully able to determine whether it must pay for the treatment, whether the doctor says it's necessary or not.