Conquer Club

Federal Judge Orders State to Pay for Sex Change

\\OFF-TOPIC// conversations about everything that has nothing to do with Conquer Club.

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Is it right for the Federal Gov't to force Massachusetts to Pay for Inmates Sex Change?

 
Total votes : 0

Re: Federal Judge Orders State to Pay for Sex Change

Postby thegreekdog on Wed Sep 19, 2012 7:29 am

PLAYER57832 wrote:
jimboston wrote:
Vartiovuori wrote:So... Jimboston claims that Sexual Dysmorphism isn't a legitimate condition and it shouldn't be treated and calls everyone disagreeing with him idiots. Natty dread disagrees with Jimboston and claims that everyone who doesn't is a bigot, and possibly also a racist and worse! PLAYER57832 takes a moderate stance, provides well-though-out and interesting arguments and gets flamed by both sides. Am I missing something here?

As for my stance, I'd like to agree with Natty, but the way he argues makes that really hard to do. Surprisingly I tend more towards PLAYER57832's stance.


I claim that believing you're a woman, when you were born a man is a problem. I don't think it should have a name. Most people would just say "that's fucked up" and leave it at that. I'm not saying it's not an issue... I'm not saying it shouldn't be "treated". I am saying that it is not a "medical condition" that should be treated with tax payer dollars ever.

Yes... anyone who doesn't agree with me is an idiot.

Except, the judge did not rule on that issue. The doctor did.


The doctor ruled in his own self-interest.

It would be like if I said, "Yes, you need to do this tax planning and the state needs to pay for it. Trust me, I'm a doctor (of taxes baby!)."
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegreekdog
 
Posts: 7245
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Federal Judge Orders State to Pay for Sex Change

Postby jimboston on Wed Sep 19, 2012 8:06 am

PLAYER57832 wrote:
jimboston wrote:
Vartiovuori wrote:So... Jimboston claims that Sexual Dysmorphism isn't a legitimate condition and it shouldn't be treated and calls everyone disagreeing with him idiots. Natty dread disagrees with Jimboston and claims that everyone who doesn't is a bigot, and possibly also a racist and worse! PLAYER57832 takes a moderate stance, provides well-though-out and interesting arguments and gets flamed by both sides. Am I missing something here?

As for my stance, I'd like to agree with Natty, but the way he argues makes that really hard to do. Surprisingly I tend more towards PLAYER57832's stance.


I claim that believing you're a woman, when you were born a man is a problem. I don't think it should have a name. Most people would just say "that's fucked up" and leave it at that. I'm not saying it's not an issue... I'm not saying it shouldn't be "treated". I am saying that it is not a "medical condition" that should be treated with tax payer dollars ever.

Yes... anyone who doesn't agree with me is an idiot.

Except, the judge did not rule on that issue. The doctor did.


Doctor's can be idiots too.
User avatar
Private 1st Class jimboston
 
Posts: 5252
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:45 pm
Location: Boston (Area), Massachusetts; U.S.A.

Re: Federal Judge Orders State to Pay for Sex Change

Postby PLAYER57832 on Wed Sep 19, 2012 8:02 pm

thegreekdog wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:
jimboston wrote:
Vartiovuori wrote:So... Jimboston claims that Sexual Dysmorphism isn't a legitimate condition and it shouldn't be treated and calls everyone disagreeing with him idiots. Natty dread disagrees with Jimboston and claims that everyone who doesn't is a bigot, and possibly also a racist and worse! PLAYER57832 takes a moderate stance, provides well-though-out and interesting arguments and gets flamed by both sides. Am I missing something here?

As for my stance, I'd like to agree with Natty, but the way he argues makes that really hard to do. Surprisingly I tend more towards PLAYER57832's stance.


I claim that believing you're a woman, when you were born a man is a problem. I don't think it should have a name. Most people would just say "that's fucked up" and leave it at that. I'm not saying it's not an issue... I'm not saying it shouldn't be "treated". I am saying that it is not a "medical condition" that should be treated with tax payer dollars ever.

Yes... anyone who doesn't agree with me is an idiot.

Except, the judge did not rule on that issue. The doctor did.


The doctor ruled in his own self-interest.

It would be like if I said, "Yes, you need to do this tax planning and the state needs to pay for it. Trust me, I'm a doctor (of taxes baby!)."

No, more like an attorney saying "I studied the law, passed the bar... I suspect I know a tad more than you about the law". And, its why attorneys are hired to fight legal cases instead of plumbers or astrophysicists. (unless, of course, they happen to also be attorneys)
Corporal PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Federal Judge Orders State to Pay for Sex Change

Postby PLAYER57832 on Wed Sep 19, 2012 8:05 pm

jimboston wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:
jimboston wrote:
Vartiovuori wrote:So... Jimboston claims that Sexual Dysmorphism isn't a legitimate condition and it shouldn't be treated and calls everyone disagreeing with him idiots. Natty dread disagrees with Jimboston and claims that everyone who doesn't is a bigot, and possibly also a racist and worse! PLAYER57832 takes a moderate stance, provides well-though-out and interesting arguments and gets flamed by both sides. Am I missing something here?

As for my stance, I'd like to agree with Natty, but the way he argues makes that really hard to do. Surprisingly I tend more towards PLAYER57832's stance.


I claim that believing you're a woman, when you were born a man is a problem. I don't think it should have a name. Most people would just say "that's fucked up" and leave it at that. I'm not saying it's not an issue... I'm not saying it shouldn't be "treated". I am saying that it is not a "medical condition" that should be treated with tax payer dollars ever.

Yes... anyone who doesn't agree with me is an idiot.

Except, the judge did not rule on that issue. The doctor did.


Doctor's can be idiots too.

Yes, but your argument was that the judge was acting extra-legally, not that the doctor authorized treatment with which you disagreed.

I don't agree with the doctor, but the judge had to rule on the law, not his own medical opinion.
Corporal PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Federal Judge Orders State to Pay for Sex Change

Postby BigBallinStalin on Thu Sep 20, 2012 8:27 am

PLAYER57832 wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:
jimboston wrote:
Vartiovuori wrote:So... Jimboston claims that Sexual Dysmorphism isn't a legitimate condition and it shouldn't be treated and calls everyone disagreeing with him idiots. Natty dread disagrees with Jimboston and claims that everyone who doesn't is a bigot, and possibly also a racist and worse! PLAYER57832 takes a moderate stance, provides well-though-out and interesting arguments and gets flamed by both sides. Am I missing something here?

As for my stance, I'd like to agree with Natty, but the way he argues makes that really hard to do. Surprisingly I tend more towards PLAYER57832's stance.


I claim that believing you're a woman, when you were born a man is a problem. I don't think it should have a name. Most people would just say "that's fucked up" and leave it at that. I'm not saying it's not an issue... I'm not saying it shouldn't be "treated". I am saying that it is not a "medical condition" that should be treated with tax payer dollars ever.

Yes... anyone who doesn't agree with me is an idiot.

Except, the judge did not rule on that issue. The doctor did.


The doctor ruled in his own self-interest.

It would be like if I said, "Yes, you need to do this tax planning and the state needs to pay for it. Trust me, I'm a doctor (of taxes baby!)."

No, more like an attorney saying "I studied the law, passed the bar... I suspect I know a tad more than you about the law". And, its why attorneys are hired to fight legal cases instead of plumbers or astrophysicists. (unless, of course, they happen to also be attorneys)


*le sigh*
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: Federal Judge Orders State to Pay for Sex Change

Postby thegreekdog on Thu Sep 20, 2012 8:56 am

PLAYER57832 wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:
jimboston wrote:
Vartiovuori wrote:So... Jimboston claims that Sexual Dysmorphism isn't a legitimate condition and it shouldn't be treated and calls everyone disagreeing with him idiots. Natty dread disagrees with Jimboston and claims that everyone who doesn't is a bigot, and possibly also a racist and worse! PLAYER57832 takes a moderate stance, provides well-though-out and interesting arguments and gets flamed by both sides. Am I missing something here?

As for my stance, I'd like to agree with Natty, but the way he argues makes that really hard to do. Surprisingly I tend more towards PLAYER57832's stance.


I claim that believing you're a woman, when you were born a man is a problem. I don't think it should have a name. Most people would just say "that's fucked up" and leave it at that. I'm not saying it's not an issue... I'm not saying it shouldn't be "treated". I am saying that it is not a "medical condition" that should be treated with tax payer dollars ever.

Yes... anyone who doesn't agree with me is an idiot.

Except, the judge did not rule on that issue. The doctor did.


The doctor ruled in his own self-interest.

It would be like if I said, "Yes, you need to do this tax planning and the state needs to pay for it. Trust me, I'm a doctor (of taxes baby!)."

No, more like an attorney saying "I studied the law, passed the bar... I suspect I know a tad more than you about the law". And, its why attorneys are hired to fight legal cases instead of plumbers or astrophysicists. (unless, of course, they happen to also be attorneys)


Okay, let me posit the following alternative scenario for you:

There is a plumber (Bob), the government, the judge (Your Honor), and a homeowner (Jim). Jim and the government have an agreement that states that Jim is permitted to have the government pay for any plumbing services that are deemed necessary by a plumber. So Jim calls up Bob to look at his house and Bob says, "Yeah, this looks really bad. You're going to need to pay me $10,000 to fix the plumbing here." Jim goes to the government and says, "Give me $10,000 so I can pay Bob because Bob says I need to have my plumbing fixed." The government says, "No way. That's ridiculous." Jim goes before Your Honor with his case. Jim calls Bob to the stand. Your Honor asks Bob, "Is it necessary for Jim to pay you $10,000 to fix the plumbing?" Bob says, "You bet it's necessary. I'm a plumber. I'm the expert." Your Honor, being of sound mind, asks, "Are you sure it's necessary or are you just acting in your own self-interest?" Bob replies, "So what if I am? I'm still the expert."

Jim gets $10,000 from the government. Jim pays $10,000 to Bob. Who wins? Bob, the guy who made the decision to do the plumbing services in the first place.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegreekdog
 
Posts: 7245
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Federal Judge Orders State to Pay for Sex Change

Postby jimboston on Thu Sep 20, 2012 12:38 pm

PLAYER57832 wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
The doctor ruled in his own self-interest.

It would be like if I said, "Yes, you need to do this tax planning and the state needs to pay for it. Trust me, I'm a doctor (of taxes baby!)."


No, more like an attorney saying "I studied the law, passed the bar... I suspect I know a tad more than you about the law". And, its why attorneys are hired to fight legal cases instead of plumbers or astrophysicists. (unless, of course, they happen to also be attorneys)


Player... you completely ignored Greek's point about "the state" having to pay for it.

... oh and also Lawyers regularly make recommendations that ultimately benefit them. They are people... they may do something they think is right, but subconsciously they (often) guide people in directions that benefit them.
User avatar
Private 1st Class jimboston
 
Posts: 5252
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:45 pm
Location: Boston (Area), Massachusetts; U.S.A.

Re: Federal Judge Orders State to Pay for Sex Change

Postby jimboston on Thu Sep 20, 2012 12:44 pm

PLAYER57832 wrote:
jimboston wrote:Doctor's can be idiots too.

Yes, but your argument was that the judge was acting extra-legally, not that the doctor authorized treatment with which you disagreed.

I don't agree with the doctor, but the judge had to rule on the law, not his own medical opinion.


No... that is not my argument. My argument is BOTH of those statements and more.

My argument is...

1) I don't think this is a "condition" that can be "cured" like a broken bone or infection.
(Even if you believe it's a real condition... it's mental, not medical.)
2) I don't think there is imminent danger to the convicted criminal if treatment is post-poned till after he is released.
(Obviously if there is a REAL medical issue like a broken bone or infection, you have to get treatment or it's likely to get worse. Not the case here.)
3) I don't think there is anything in the law that says we have to force PEOPLE to PAY for this guy's "treatment".

Please don't put words in my mouth.
User avatar
Private 1st Class jimboston
 
Posts: 5252
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:45 pm
Location: Boston (Area), Massachusetts; U.S.A.

Re: Federal Judge Orders State to Pay for Sex Change

Postby BigBallinStalin on Thu Sep 20, 2012 9:13 pm

thegreekdog wrote:
Okay, let me posit the following alternative scenario for you:

There is a plumber (Bob), the government, the judge (Your Honor), and a homeowner (Jim). Jim and the government have an agreement that states that Jim is permitted to have the government pay for any plumbing services that are deemed necessary by a plumber. So Jim calls up Bob to look at his house and Bob says, "Yeah, this looks really bad. You're going to need to pay me $10,000 to fix the plumbing here." Jim goes to the government and says, "Give me $10,000 so I can pay Bob because Bob says I need to have my plumbing fixed." The government says, "No way. That's ridiculous." Jim goes before Your Honor with his case. Jim calls Bob to the stand. Your Honor asks Bob, "Is it necessary for Jim to pay you $10,000 to fix the plumbing?" Bob says, "You bet it's necessary. I'm a plumber. I'm the expert." Your Honor, being of sound mind, asks, "Are you sure it's necessary or are you just acting in your own self-interest?" Bob replies, "So what if I am? I'm still the expert."

Jim gets $10,000 from the government. Jim pays $10,000 to Bob. Who wins? Bob, the guy who made the decision to do the plumbing services in the first place.


The REAL myth is that this is the real thinking.

Ironic... those claiming that "taking and giving" is "wrong" are the very ones who consider it absolutely correct for them to take profits generated by their workforce, and never mind if they have enough to life upon or not. THAT is the real "taking", and a minimum wage, rules mandating reasonable working conditions, etc all made sure those things happened.

The good guys don't need regulating, but regulations are needed so the "bad guys" don't outcompete the "good guys" by not paying workers reasonably, not providing safe working conditions, etc.

Behind all this rhetoric is the reality that MOST people go to work, punch a clock and want little more than to come home safely to a modest, but decent home they are buying, decent food on the table and good education for their kids. Calling that scenario greedy is a bit like the fire blaming the kettle for being black.
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: Federal Judge Orders State to Pay for Sex Change

Postby Funkyterrance on Thu Sep 20, 2012 11:15 pm

jimboston wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:
jimboston wrote:Doctor's can be idiots too.

Yes, but your argument was that the judge was acting extra-legally, not that the doctor authorized treatment with which you disagreed.

I don't agree with the doctor, but the judge had to rule on the law, not his own medical opinion.


No... that is not my argument. My argument is BOTH of those statements and more.

My argument is...

1) I don't think this is a "condition" that can be "cured" like a broken bone or infection.
(Even if you believe it's a real condition... it's mental, not medical.)
2) I don't think there is imminent danger to the convicted criminal if treatment is post-poned till after he is released.
(Obviously if there is a REAL medical issue like a broken bone or infection, you have to get treatment or it's likely to get worse. Not the case here.)
3) I don't think there is anything in the law that says we have to force PEOPLE to PAY for this guy's "treatment".

Please don't put words in my mouth.


So you would prefer the guy was treated with solely psychiatric help instead? That may end up costing more in the long run.
You don't think it is a real condition? I don't think the guy would fake a thing like this, considering the cure...
He may be in imminent danger if he truly believes he is a woman trapped in a man's body. How would you feel if you woke up tomorrow and were trapped in a woman's body? No way you would think of offing yourself if you thought there was no way to reverse it?
According to the information given, there is a law saying the guy deserves treatment, otherwise the case would never have come to trial or more importantly he wouldn't have won.
I think it's funny how some people think that the legal system should magically change once something happens that they don't agree with. You live in the USA so you implicitly agree to any rulings, like it or not. Talk about diseased minds...
User avatar
Colonel Funkyterrance
 
Posts: 2494
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 10:52 pm
Location: New Hampshire, USA

Re: Federal Judge Orders State to Pay for Sex Change

Postby jimboston on Fri Sep 21, 2012 7:22 am

Funkyterrance wrote:
So you would prefer the guy was treated with solely psychiatric help instead? That may end up costing more in the long run.


Sure... he can participate in group therapy in prison. I got no problem with that.
I certainly don't think we should provide specialized individual psychiatric care to murderers.

Funkyterrance wrote:You don't think it is a real condition? I don't think the guy would fake a thing like this, considering the cure...


A) No I don't. Not at least in the same sense that cancer is a medical condition or a burst appendix is a medical condition.

B) I never said he was "faking" it. I believe that he believes he's a "woman in a man's body". Of course the facts of life state that he's a man [edit]. Just because someone believes that they are something doesn't make it so.

I bet there are thousands of people who think that they are Jesus reincarnated. Does their honest intense believe make it true? Does their honest intense believe require that I bend knee to worship these deluded people?

Funkyterrance wrote:He may be in imminent danger if he truly believes he is a woman trapped in a man's body.


How so? From himself??? That's a false argument. From other inmates??? A red herring.

Funkyterrance wrote:How would you feel if you woke up tomorrow and were trapped in a woman's body?
No way you would think of offing yourself if you thought there was no way to reverse it?


False argument. Assuming he would want to kill himself if he couldn't get this "treatment"... that still does not make it reasonable to expect the taxpayer to foot the bill. What if I decide I want to kill myself because I can't provide for my family the lifestyle they "deserve". Let's say I am providing a nice middle-class life... but I see all my friends doing better, and I decide to kill myself cause I can't "keep up". Does this mean that the Gov't should provide me with the fund to allow me to "keep up" with the Joneses? No!

Funkyterrance wrote:According to the information given, there is a law saying the guy deserves treatment, otherwise the case would never have come to trial or more importantly he wouldn't have won. I think it's funny how some people think that the legal system should magically change once something happens that they don't agree with.


Ever hear the phrase "The Law is an Ass"?

Just because the doctors in this case and the legal system in Massachusetts made this ruling... this does NOT MAKE IT THE RIGHT ruling. In fact... as a citizen of this country (and state) it is at least my right (and possibly my obligation) to complain and argue against things the Gov't does that I don't like.

Funkyterrance wrote:You live in the USA so you implicitly agree to any rulings, like it or not.


THIS HAS GOT TO BE ONE OF THE STUPIDEST THINGS ANYONE HAS EVER 'SAID' ON HERE.

Please explain your logic here... LOL!

This has got t
Last edited by rdsrds2120 on Fri Sep 21, 2012 2:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: --
User avatar
Private 1st Class jimboston
 
Posts: 5252
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:45 pm
Location: Boston (Area), Massachusetts; U.S.A.

Re: Federal Judge Orders State to Pay for Sex Change

Postby Symmetry on Fri Sep 21, 2012 7:31 am

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 whom are sympathetic in various ways to your weird hatred, but can't go along with your phobias.

Don't be silly.

Sym
the world is in greater peril from those who tolerate or encourage evil than from those who actually commit it- Albert Einstein
User avatar
Sergeant Symmetry
 
Posts: 9255
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 5:49 am

Re: Federal Judge Orders State to Pay for Sex Change

Postby jimboston on Fri Sep 21, 2012 7:33 am

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.

Sym



I don't hate transgendered. I just don't want to pay for their fetish.
User avatar
Private 1st Class jimboston
 
Posts: 5252
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:45 pm
Location: Boston (Area), Massachusetts; U.S.A.

Re: Federal Judge Orders State to Pay for Sex Change

Postby Symmetry on Fri Sep 21, 2012 7:39 am

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.

Sym



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


You consider transgender issues to be a fetish? What do you mean?
the world is in greater peril from those who tolerate or encourage evil than from those who actually commit it- Albert Einstein
User avatar
Sergeant Symmetry
 
Posts: 9255
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 5:49 am

Re: Federal Judge Orders State to Pay for Sex Change

Postby BigBallinStalin on Fri Sep 21, 2012 8:50 am

Why didn't people raise money to pay for his surgery?

Wouldn't that have been a better option?
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: Federal Judge Orders State to Pay for Sex Change

Postby Woodruff on Fri Sep 21, 2012 10:52 am

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?
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class Woodruff
 
Posts: 5093
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am

Re: Federal Judge Orders State to Pay for Sex Change

Postby jimboston on Fri Sep 21, 2012 12:19 pm

Symmetry 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.

Sym



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


You consider transgender issues to be a fetish? What do you mean?


... a standard definition of the word fetish... the first one I found on an online definition search

fetĀ·ishā€‚ ā€‚[fet-ish, fee-tish]
noun
1. an object regarded with awe as being the embodiment or habitation of a potent spirit or as having magical potency.
2. any object, idea, etc., eliciting unquestioning reverence, respect, or devotion: to make a fetish of high grades.
3. Psychology . any object or nongenital part of the body that causes a habitual erotic response or fixation.

I think that believing oneself to be a woman (when nature has created you as a man) seems to be an idea that elicits unquestioning reverence" from the person with this "condition".
User avatar
Private 1st Class jimboston
 
Posts: 5252
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:45 pm
Location: Boston (Area), Massachusetts; U.S.A.

Re: Federal Judge Orders State to Pay for Sex Change

Postby jimboston on Fri Sep 21, 2012 12:20 pm

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".
User avatar
Private 1st Class jimboston
 
Posts: 5252
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:45 pm
Location: Boston (Area), Massachusetts; U.S.A.

Re: Federal Judge Orders State to Pay for Sex Change

Postby Funkyterrance on Fri Sep 21, 2012 12:30 pm

jimboston wrote:
Funkyterrance wrote:

Funkyterrance wrote:You live in the USA so you implicitly agree to any rulings, like it or not.


THIS HAS GOT TO BE ONE OF THE STUPIDEST THINGS ANYONE HAS EVER 'SAID' ON HERE.

Please explain your logic here... LOL!



I'm not sure you deserve an explanation since you are so loudmouthed that all you hear is yourself. You tell me what I said is one of the stupidest things anyone has ever said on the site and follow up with "please explain"? You're acting like a petulant kid.
I'm guessing you are the type of person who when an elected official does something that comes under public scrutiny you respond with: "Well I didn't vote for him".
User avatar
Colonel Funkyterrance
 
Posts: 2494
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 10:52 pm
Location: New Hampshire, USA

Re: Federal Judge Orders State to Pay for Sex Change

Postby rdsrds2120 on Fri Sep 21, 2012 2:04 pm

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

--rdsrds2120
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class rdsrds2120
 
Posts: 6274
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 3:42 am

Re: Federal Judge Orders State to Pay for Sex Change

Postby thegreekdog on Fri Sep 21, 2012 4:37 pm

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.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegreekdog
 
Posts: 7245
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Federal Judge Orders State to Pay for Sex Change

Postby Funkyterrance on Fri Sep 21, 2012 6:05 pm

Too bad, you were holding your own for a little while there. Got to control that temper, m8, now we've seen your cards.
I would like to come back to my "stupidest statement ever on cc". Would you not agree that that judge was appointed by a system that you inherently agree to by living in the USA/Mass. You can do your part to try and get something like this to not happen again but to argue that it was the "wrong" decision is incorrect, assuming you are willingly an American/Massachusetts citizen.
User avatar
Colonel Funkyterrance
 
Posts: 2494
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 10:52 pm
Location: New Hampshire, USA

Re: Federal Judge Orders State to Pay for Sex Change

Postby Funkyterrance on Fri Sep 21, 2012 6:12 pm

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.


Too bad JB, you were holding your own for a little while there. Got to control that temper, m8, now we've seen your cards.
I would like to come back to my "stupidest statement ever on cc". Would you not agree that that judge was appointed by a system that you inherently agree to by living in the USA/Mass. You can do your part to try and get something like this to not happen again but to argue that it was the "wrong" decision is incorrect, assuming you are willingly an American/Massachusetts citizen.
User avatar
Colonel Funkyterrance
 
Posts: 2494
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 10:52 pm
Location: New Hampshire, USA

Re: Federal Judge Orders State to Pay for Sex Change

Postby Woodruff on Sat Sep 22, 2012 12:07 am

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.


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).
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class Woodruff
 
Posts: 5093
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am

Re: Federal Judge Orders State to Pay for Sex Change

Postby jimboston on Sat Sep 22, 2012 6:51 am

Funkyterrance wrote:
jimboston wrote:
Funkyterrance wrote:

Funkyterrance wrote:You live in the USA so you implicitly agree to any rulings, like it or not.


THIS HAS GOT TO BE ONE OF THE STUPIDEST THINGS ANYONE HAS EVER 'SAID' ON HERE.

Please explain your logic here... LOL!



I'm not sure you deserve an explanation since you are so loudmouthed that all you hear is yourself. You tell me what I said is one of the stupidest things anyone has ever said on the site and follow up with "please explain"? You're acting like a petulant kid.
I'm guessing you are the type of person who when an elected official does something that comes under public scrutiny you respond with: "Well I didn't vote for him".


Because your comment is stupid.
User avatar
Private 1st Class jimboston
 
Posts: 5252
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:45 pm
Location: Boston (Area), Massachusetts; U.S.A.

PreviousNext

Return to Practical Explanation about Next Life,

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users