Can we have gender choice without ethnicity choice? Apparently Trump is against both.

[BrokeLoser]

President Trump says we can’t have either.
Does it seem fair that he can tell us we can’t decide our own biological makeup?
DAMNIT....I was hoping for some free college for my white kids...I planned to identify as a tax exempt species myself. This sucks!
Bad move President Trump....you just lost that huge LGBTQ’ers following you had.
‘Transgender’ Could Be Defined Out of Existence Under Trump Administration
‘Transgender’ Could Be Defined Out of Existence Under Trump Administration

 

[emilynghiem]

If people want to recognize it as a medical condition, it can be documented by a doctor as other conditions that require special accommodations. When you apply for disability and accommodations or benefits, this requires medical examination and records to justify claims and special handling.

This would prevent people from abusing claims to stop the threat of criminals or sick people taking advantage to gain access to girls' locker rooms or restrooms for abusive intent. Same with standard safeguards policing against people abusing handicap access if they aren't really disabled.

 

[emilynghiem]

If people want to recognize it as a medical condition, it can be documented by a doctor as other conditions that require special accommodations. When you apply for disability and accommodations or benefits, this requires medical examination and records to justify claims and special handling.

This would prevent people from abusing claims to stop the threat of criminals or sick people taking advantage to gain access to girls' locker rooms or restrooms for abusive intent. Same with standard safeguards policing against people abusing handicap access if they aren't really disabled.

 

[emilynghiem]

President Trump says we can’t have either.
Does it seem fair that he can tell us we can’t decide our own biological makeup?
DAMNIT....I was hoping for some free college for my white kids...I planned to identify as a tax exempt species myself. This sucks!
Bad move President Trump....you just lost that huge LGBTQ’ers following you had.
‘Transgender’ Could Be Defined Out of Existence Under Trump Administration
‘Transgender’ Could Be Defined Out of Existence Under Trump Administration

If people want to apply for special accommodations, medical examination and records should be required as with other conditions requiring accommodations. This is to prevent abuse, including anyone who isn't really transgender trying to justify access to girls' locker rooms or restrooms for criminal intent. Similar to standard safeguards policing people against abusing handicap parking if they aren't really disabled. There are already laws against discrimination against disabilities. So the same process can be used here without creating more classifications that are diverse and unique for each individual case.

 

[BrokeLoser]

If people want to recognize it as a medical condition, it can be documented by a doctor as other conditions that require special accommodations. When you apply for disability and accommodations or benefits, this requires medical examination and records to justify claims and special handling.

This would prevent people from abusing claims to stop the threat of criminals or sick people taking advantage to gain access to girls' locker rooms or restrooms for abusive intent. Same with standard safeguards policing against people abusing handicap access if they aren't really disabled.

The problem is; these would be the same “doctors” who have been examining patients and diagnosing all who come through the door with glaucoma so they could smoke and possess weed.

 

[Slade3200]

President Trump says we can’t have either.
Does it seem fair that he can tell us we can’t decide our own biological makeup?
DAMNIT....I was hoping for some free college for my white kids...I planned to identify as a tax exempt species myself. This sucks!
Bad move President Trump....you just lost that huge LGBTQ’ers following you had.
‘Transgender’ Could Be Defined Out of Existence Under Trump Administration
‘Transgender’ Could Be Defined Out of Existence Under Trump Administration

Is this the same Trump that said he was cool with Jenner using the ladies bathroom at Trump tower during the campaign? So he is either cool with transgender identifications or cool with men using the ladies room, right?

 

[emilynghiem]

If people want to recognize it as a medical condition, it can be documented by a doctor as other conditions that require special accommodations. When you apply for disability and accommodations or benefits, this requires medical examination and records to justify claims and special handling.

This would prevent people from abusing claims to stop the threat of criminals or sick people taking advantage to gain access to girls' locker rooms or restrooms for abusive intent. Same with standard safeguards policing against people abusing handicap access if they aren't really disabled.

The problem is; these would be the same “doctors” who have been examining patients and diagnosing all who come through the door with glaucoma so they could smoke and possess weed.

Dear BrokeLoser
which is another reason why it makes sense
to separate health care plans and terms "per party".
Give taxpayers a choice of WHICH doctors under WHICH plans
terms and policies they want to fund and be under. Elect and vote
on that through your own party of choice, and that's enough people
statewide and nationwide to get group discount rates and manage
entire hospital districts under a collective system of registering members,
including donors, investors, and administrators who all believe in the same standards.

Then you can recognize transgender, or pot smoking, etc.
but agree to pay for all the consequences and costs of those choices.

And leave others to pay for plans that require spiritual healing
to cure addictions and thus lower the costs of therapy and treatment.

Govt cannot force anyone to practice healthier habits including
healing prayer that has been used to cure cancer, diabetes, and even
schizophrenia for FREE. That has to remain individual choice for
spiritual healing to work, it has to be freely chosen because the therapy
is based on forgiveness which can never be forced or it isn't real and fails.

So give taxpayers a choice of which health plans and policies
match their beliefs. And the LGBT can have whatever they believe in.
And so can prolife Christians. End of civil war over this mess!

 

[Slade3200]

If people want to recognize it as a medical condition, it can be documented by a doctor as other conditions that require special accommodations. When you apply for disability and accommodations or benefits, this requires medical examination and records to justify claims and special handling.

This would prevent people from abusing claims to stop the threat of criminals or sick people taking advantage to gain access to girls' locker rooms or restrooms for abusive intent. Same with standard safeguards policing against people abusing handicap access if they aren't really disabled.

The problem is; these would be the same “doctors” who have been examining patients and diagnosing all who come through the door with glaucoma so they could smoke and possess weed.

Dear BrokeLoser
which is another reason why it makes sense
to separate health care plans and terms "per party".
Give taxpayers a choice of WHICH doctors under WHICH plans
terms and policies they want to fund and be under. Elect and vote
on that through your own party of choice, and that's enough people
statewide and nationwide to get group discount rates and manage
entire hospital districts under a collective system of registering members,
including donors, investors, and administrators who all believe in the same standards.

Then you can recognize transgender, or pot smoking, etc.
but agree to pay for all the consequences and costs of those choices.

And leave others to pay for plans that require spiritual healing
to cure addictions and thus lower the costs of therapy and treatment.

Govt cannot force anyone to practice healthier habits including
healing prayer that has been used to cure cancer, diabetes, and even
schizophrenia for FREE. That has to remain individual choice for
spiritual healing to work, it has to be freely chosen because the therapy
is based on forgiveness which can never be forced or it isn't real and fails.

So give taxpayers a choice of which health plans and policies
match their beliefs. And the LGBT can have whatever they believe in.
And so can prolife Christians. End of civil war over this mess!

That’s a great concept and something that I believe would be great to provide for suplimental care, kind of like dental, optical etc. however there needs to be something that covers everybody for primary care needs right?

For instance you don’t want people buying a plan that doesn’t cover cancer and then people get cancer and are stuck with no coverage. Or if somebody gets sick with a rare illness etc. thoughts?

 

[emilynghiem]

If people want to recognize it as a medical condition, it can be documented by a doctor as other conditions that require special accommodations. When you apply for disability and accommodations or benefits, this requires medical examination and records to justify claims and special handling.

This would prevent people from abusing claims to stop the threat of criminals or sick people taking advantage to gain access to girls' locker rooms or restrooms for abusive intent. Same with standard safeguards policing against people abusing handicap access if they aren't really disabled.

The problem is; these would be the same “doctors” who have been examining patients and diagnosing all who come through the door with glaucoma so they could smoke and possess weed.

Dear BrokeLoser
which is another reason why it makes sense
to separate health care plans and terms "per party".
Give taxpayers a choice of WHICH doctors under WHICH plans
terms and policies they want to fund and be under. Elect and vote
on that through your own party of choice, and that's enough people
statewide and nationwide to get group discount rates and manage
entire hospital districts under a collective system of registering members,
including donors, investors, and administrators who all believe in the same standards.

Then you can recognize transgender, or pot smoking, etc.
but agree to pay for all the consequences and costs of those choices.

And leave others to pay for plans that require spiritual healing
to cure addictions and thus lower the costs of therapy and treatment.

Govt cannot force anyone to practice healthier habits including
healing prayer that has been used to cure cancer, diabetes, and even
schizophrenia for FREE. That has to remain individual choice for
spiritual healing to work, it has to be freely chosen because the therapy
is based on forgiveness which can never be forced or it isn't real and fails.

So give taxpayers a choice of which health plans and policies
match their beliefs. And the LGBT can have whatever they believe in.
And so can prolife Christians. End of civil war over this mess!

That’s a great concept and something that I believe would be great to provide for suplimental care, kind of like dental, optical etc. however there needs to be something that covers everybody for primary care needs right?

For instance you don’t want people buying a plan that doesn’t cover cancer and then people get cancer and are stuck with no coverage. Or if somebody gets sick with a rare illness etc. thoughts?

Dear Slade3200
For areas that ALL people, parties and taxpayers agree on supporting and funding/terms, yes, that can be made state or national policy. The original plan for "insurance for all" involved CATASTROPHIC conditions only. Not ALL health care and decisions to be federalized.

Separate groups of people under separate plans
can STILL receive federal money for emergency assistance,
including disabled elderly vets, etc. And these groups decide
their own terms for using their emergency budget for THEIR members.

So again, you sign up for whichever plan covers you the best,
and you pay your taxes toward that. If we all agree on things
such as military or elderly care, then that can go into a uniform policy.
And leave out the areas like abortion that people disagree about funding
or defunding.

So both major parties would likely agree to include emergency or catastrophic coverage.
But I'm guessing the conservative plan would place Vets first, then elderly and disabled,
before others with ability to work and pay back certain amounts of loans or costs, where
microlending could be involved so it isn't handouts.
And the liberal plans might defund areas like the death penalty or military spending,
and direct their taxes toward health care, education and housing for disadvantaged.

 

[Slade3200]

If people want to recognize it as a medical condition, it can be documented by a doctor as other conditions that require special accommodations. When you apply for disability and accommodations or benefits, this requires medical examination and records to justify claims and special handling.

This would prevent people from abusing claims to stop the threat of criminals or sick people taking advantage to gain access to girls' locker rooms or restrooms for abusive intent. Same with standard safeguards policing against people abusing handicap access if they aren't really disabled.

The problem is; these would be the same “doctors” who have been examining patients and diagnosing all who come through the door with glaucoma so they could smoke and possess weed.

Dear BrokeLoser
which is another reason why it makes sense
to separate health care plans and terms "per party".
Give taxpayers a choice of WHICH doctors under WHICH plans
terms and policies they want to fund and be under. Elect and vote
on that through your own party of choice, and that's enough people
statewide and nationwide to get group discount rates and manage
entire hospital districts under a collective system of registering members,
including donors, investors, and administrators who all believe in the same standards.

Then you can recognize transgender, or pot smoking, etc.
but agree to pay for all the consequences and costs of those choices.

And leave others to pay for plans that require spiritual healing
to cure addictions and thus lower the costs of therapy and treatment.

Govt cannot force anyone to practice healthier habits including
healing prayer that has been used to cure cancer, diabetes, and even
schizophrenia for FREE. That has to remain individual choice for
spiritual healing to work, it has to be freely chosen because the therapy
is based on forgiveness which can never be forced or it isn't real and fails.

So give taxpayers a choice of which health plans and policies
match their beliefs. And the LGBT can have whatever they believe in.
And so can prolife Christians. End of civil war over this mess!

That’s a great concept and something that I believe would be great to provide for suplimental care, kind of like dental, optical etc. however there needs to be something that covers everybody for primary care needs right?

For instance you don’t want people buying a plan that doesn’t cover cancer and then people get cancer and are stuck with no coverage. Or if somebody gets sick with a rare illness etc. thoughts?

Dear Slade3200
For areas that ALL people, parties and taxpayers agree on supporting and funding/terms, yes, that can be made state or national policy. The original plan for "insurance for all" involved CATASTROPHIC conditions only. Not ALL health care and decisions to be federalized.

Separate groups of people under separate plans
can STILL receive federal money for emergency assistance,
including disabled elderly vets, etc. And these groups decide
their own terms for using their emergency budget for THEIR members.

So again, you sign up for whichever plan covers you the best,
and you pay your taxes toward that. If we all agree on things
such as military or elderly care, then that can go into a uniform policy.
And leave out the areas like abortion that people disagree about funding
or

What’s your ultimate goal with this idea. To provide more people with more coverage or to lower costs?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

If people want to recognize it as a medical condition, it can be documented by a doctor as other conditions that require special accommodations. When you apply for disability and accommodations or benefits, this requires medical examination and records to justify claims and special handling.

This would prevent people from abusing claims to stop the threat of criminals or sick people taking advantage to gain access to girls' locker rooms or restrooms for abusive intent. Same with standard safeguards policing against people abusing handicap access if they aren't really disabled.

Furthermore, it should be classified as a psych disorder, not a physical one.

 

[emilynghiem]

If people want to recognize it as a medical condition, it can be documented by a doctor as other conditions that require special accommodations. When you apply for disability and accommodations or benefits, this requires medical examination and records to justify claims and special handling.

This would prevent people from abusing claims to stop the threat of criminals or sick people taking advantage to gain access to girls' locker rooms or restrooms for abusive intent. Same with standard safeguards policing against people abusing handicap access if they aren't really disabled.

The problem is; these would be the same “doctors” who have been examining patients and diagnosing all who come through the door with glaucoma so they could smoke and possess weed.

Dear BrokeLoser
which is another reason why it makes sense
to separate health care plans and terms "per party".
Give taxpayers a choice of WHICH doctors under WHICH plans
terms and policies they want to fund and be under. Elect and vote
on that through your own party of choice, and that's enough people
statewide and nationwide to get group discount rates and manage
entire hospital districts under a collective system of registering members,
including donors, investors, and administrators who all believe in the same standards.

Then you can recognize transgender, or pot smoking, etc.
but agree to pay for all the consequences and costs of those choices.

And leave others to pay for plans that require spiritual healing
to cure addictions and thus lower the costs of therapy and treatment.

Govt cannot force anyone to practice healthier habits including
healing prayer that has been used to cure cancer, diabetes, and even
schizophrenia for FREE. That has to remain individual choice for
spiritual healing to work, it has to be freely chosen because the therapy
is based on forgiveness which can never be forced or it isn't real and fails.

So give taxpayers a choice of which health plans and policies
match their beliefs. And the LGBT can have whatever they believe in.
And so can prolife Christians. End of civil war over this mess!

That’s a great concept and something that I believe would be great to provide for suplimental care, kind of like dental, optical etc. however there needs to be something that covers everybody for primary care needs right?

For instance you don’t want people buying a plan that doesn’t cover cancer and then people get cancer and are stuck with no coverage. Or if somebody gets sick with a rare illness etc. thoughts?

Dear Slade3200
For areas that ALL people, parties and taxpayers agree on supporting and funding/terms, yes, that can be made state or national policy. The original plan for "insurance for all" involved CATASTROPHIC conditions only. Not ALL health care and decisions to be federalized.

Separate groups of people under separate plans
can STILL receive federal money for emergency assistance,
including disabled elderly vets, etc. And these groups decide
their own terms for using their emergency budget for THEIR members.

So again, you sign up for whichever plan covers you the best,
and you pay your taxes toward that. If we all agree on things
such as military or elderly care, then that can go into a uniform policy.
And leave out the areas like abortion that people disagree about funding
or

What’s your ultimate goal with this idea. To provide more people with more coverage or to lower costs?

BOTH. By reorganizing, and having accountability to pay for programs, then we'd have to look into the most cost effective measures. So the solutions would get promoted. Then with the shortfall in budgets between people with self sufficient plans and people without, we can set up microlending or business loans and charity grants, where groups with longterm solutions can apply to get help from more successful groups. But not through forced taxation, this would be voluntary investment so there would be incentive to have better plans that attract funding and support. Not just garbage promises that don't hold up. These have to be solid plans based on proven working models before investors and donors would agree.

 

[TheDude]

President Trump says we can’t have either.
Does it seem fair that he can tell us we can’t decide our own biological makeup?
DAMNIT....I was hoping for some free college for my white kids...I planned to identify as a tax exempt species myself. This sucks!
Bad move President Trump....you just lost that huge LGBTQ’ers following you had.
‘Transgender’ Could Be Defined Out of Existence Under Trump Administration
‘Transgender’ Could Be Defined Out of Existence Under Trump Administration

I'm laughing my ass off at "we can't decide our own biological make-up". How fucking stupid OP.

 

[emilynghiem]

If people want to recognize it as a medical condition, it can be documented by a doctor as other conditions that require special accommodations. When you apply for disability and accommodations or benefits, this requires medical examination and records to justify claims and special handling.

This would prevent people from abusing claims to stop the threat of criminals or sick people taking advantage to gain access to girls' locker rooms or restrooms for abusive intent. Same with standard safeguards policing against people abusing handicap access if they aren't really disabled.

Furthermore, it should be classified as a psych disorder, not a physical one.

Dear Bootney Lee Farnsworth
1. In cases of spiritual issues, this would be resolved by spiritual healing therapy whether the person comes out straight, gay or transgender, the dysfunction would be healed.
2. In cases of chemical or neurological imbalance that is physical and does not respond or change with therapy, this can be treated as medical.
3. In either case, since people have beliefs on both sides that are faith based, that cannot be regulated by govt. People have rights to their beliefs without discrimination. So we should set up separate tracks for managing these beliefs,
and prevent from imposing one or the other on taxpayers who disagree. Let each fund the policies they believe in, and since these are faith based, govt cannot discriminate, punish, establish or prohibit these that are the choice and responsibility of people to practice for themselves. Not impose beliefs on others.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Well, I'm black. So....




So was Jesus. (and I am dead serious. Fuck you if you think otherwise. Dude was black.)

 

[Norman]

President Trump says we can’t have either.
Does it seem fair that he can tell us we can’t decide our own biological makeup?
DAMNIT....I was hoping for some free college for my white kids...I planned to identify as a tax exempt species myself. This sucks!
Bad move President Trump....you just lost that huge LGBTQ’ers following you had.
‘Transgender’ Could Be Defined Out of Existence Under Trump Administration
‘Transgender’ Could Be Defined Out of Existence Under Trump Administration

Bunch of people at the border who don't identify as Americans. Thankfully it's very possible for them to identify as living in America.... so they can get in?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

1. In cases of spiritual issues, this would be resolved by spiritual healing therapy whether the person comes out straight, gay or transgender, the dysfunction would be healed.

I was strictly referring to transgender. It is gender dissociation which is a result of a psychiatric disorder involving chemical imbalances. Which is both medical and psych. It's a mental health disorder, not one that requires genital surgery. That was my point.

 

[Slade3200]

The problem is; these would be the same “doctors” who have been examining patients and diagnosing all who come through the door with glaucoma so they could smoke and possess weed.

Dear BrokeLoser
which is another reason why it makes sense
to separate health care plans and terms "per party".
Give taxpayers a choice of WHICH doctors under WHICH plans
terms and policies they want to fund and be under. Elect and vote
on that through your own party of choice, and that's enough people
statewide and nationwide to get group discount rates and manage
entire hospital districts under a collective system of registering members,
including donors, investors, and administrators who all believe in the same standards.

Then you can recognize transgender, or pot smoking, etc.
but agree to pay for all the consequences and costs of those choices.

And leave others to pay for plans that require spiritual healing
to cure addictions and thus lower the costs of therapy and treatment.

Govt cannot force anyone to practice healthier habits including
healing prayer that has been used to cure cancer, diabetes, and even
schizophrenia for FREE. That has to remain individual choice for
spiritual healing to work, it has to be freely chosen because the therapy
is based on forgiveness which can never be forced or it isn't real and fails.

So give taxpayers a choice of which health plans and policies
match their beliefs. And the LGBT can have whatever they believe in.
And so can prolife Christians. End of civil war over this mess!

That’s a great concept and something that I believe would be great to provide for suplimental care, kind of like dental, optical etc. however there needs to be something that covers everybody for primary care needs right?

For instance you don’t want people buying a plan that doesn’t cover cancer and then people get cancer and are stuck with no coverage. Or if somebody gets sick with a rare illness etc. thoughts?

Dear Slade3200
For areas that ALL people, parties and taxpayers agree on supporting and funding/terms, yes, that can be made state or national policy. The original plan for "insurance for all" involved CATASTROPHIC conditions only. Not ALL health care and decisions to be federalized.

Separate groups of people under separate plans
can STILL receive federal money for emergency assistance,
including disabled elderly vets, etc. And these groups decide
their own terms for using their emergency budget for THEIR members.

So again, you sign up for whichever plan covers you the best,
and you pay your taxes toward that. If we all agree on things
such as military or elderly care, then that can go into a uniform policy.
And leave out the areas like abortion that people disagree about funding
or

What’s your ultimate goal with this idea. To provide more people with more coverage or to lower costs?

BOTH. By reorganizing, and having accountability to pay for programs, then we'd have to look into the most cost effective measures. So the solutions would get promoted. Then with the shortfall in budgets between people with self sufficient plans and people without, we can set up microlending or business loans and charity grants, where groups with longterm solutions can apply to get help from more successful groups. But not through forced taxation, this would be voluntary investment so there would be incentive to have better plans that attract funding and support. Not just garbage promises that don't hold up. These have to be solid plans based on proven working models before investors and donors would agree.

I’m not seeing how this can both lower costs and increase care. You can reduce costs by reducing coverage but that reduces the amount of provided care. If we want a system where if people get sick they get treated no matter what is wrong with them then don’t we need a more dynamic system than what you are talking about? Don’t we also want to promote preventative care to reduce the more expensive treatments for the more severe cases?

To me reducing costs by reducing care and coverage is not a good solution. With our nations wealth we should be able to treat our people when they are sick or injured. We need to go after the cost of care and promote better, cheaper, quicker and more widespread care products and services.

 

[emilynghiem]

1. In cases of spiritual issues, this would be resolved by spiritual healing therapy whether the person comes out straight, gay or transgender, the dysfunction would be healed.

I was strictly referring to transgender. It is gender dissociation which is a result of a psychiatric disorder involving chemical imbalances. Which is both medical and psych. It's a mental health disorder, not one that requires genital surgery. That was my point.

I agree that it does not necessarily require surgery or transition physically.
Where I disagree is that not all cases are purely medical/physical disorder.

Some cases are spiritually where a personality of a female is born in a male body
or vice versa. The issue is in the SPIRIT first, not just chemical or neurological.

So that is where spiritual healing would determine which cases are which.
I would use that to diagnose all such cases, then figure out from there how to help people deal with their situations. As long as they are healed, then their decisions are not made out of dysfunction, but as part of their spiritual path in life. That cannot be dictated by medicine any more than dictating whether to be circumcised, or whether to be euthanized, etc which is up to people's beliefs about these things. People need to have access to spiritual healing to resolve all conflicts and then they can make the right decisions for themselves.

 

[emilynghiem]

Well, I'm black. So....




So was Jesus. (and I am dead serious. Fuck you if you think otherwise. Dude was black.)

I understand he spoke Aramaic.
I am guessing he was Middle Eastern in appearance.
Technically we all came from Africa, so that means Jesus, too I suppose!