Nashville Trans School Shooter’s Manifesto Reveals She Made a 10 Minute “Final Video”, Where is It?

[JoeB131]

My reaction to a particularly fucked-up form of mental illness that is being forced into our society, and which we are being coerced into treating as normal and proper, does not constitute “obsession¨

Yeah, it kind of does. You don't know any trans people personally, you have almost no interaction with them, and yet you think this is the biggest crisis facing the country, to hear you tell it.

Barret and Thomas both know the difference between men and women, which makes them far more intelligent than any fucked-up freak that doe snot know, or that denies this difference.

No, applying bronze-age superstitions to complex psychological issues is not intelligent.

It is truly bizarre when fucked-up mental cases such as yourself try to use your madness as evidence of your intellectual superiority over sane people. If you were sane, then you would understand this.

I will be the first one to admit, I get some joy out of watching religious assholes squirm that their bigotries are no longer policy...

But trans people are a thing, and they deserve decent treatment.

Now, here's the thing. I actually think you belong to a deranged cult started by sexual deviants, but at the end of the day, different strokes for different folks. So if a future evangelical government decided to turn Utah into a cult deprogramming camp, I would be totally against that.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Yeah, it kind of does. You don't know any trans people personally, you have almost no interaction with them, and yet you think this is the biggest crisis facing the country, to hear you tell it.

Don't need to know someone with a specific mental illness, to recognize that certain behaviors and beliefs are proof of a mental illness.

You have to be pretty seriously fucked in the head, not to know the difference between men and women.

No, applying bronze-age superstitions to complex psychological issues is not intelligent.

The distinction between men and women is a matter of hard, objective, observable facts.

To believe that a man can be a woman, or that a woman can be a man, is much farther removed from any reality that the very most extreme, distorted mockeries that you spew about religion.

But trans people are a thing, and they deserve decent treatment.

They're batshit crazy, and need to be treated exactly as such.

Anyone who believes their delusions, who demands that their delusions be treated as having any connection to reality, is as fucked up as they are.

 

[JoeB131]

Don't need to know someone with a specific mental illness, to recognize that certain behaviors and beliefs are proof of a mental illness.

50 years ago, homosexuality was considered a mental illness.
100 years ago, women having opinions was considered a mental illness. They called it 'Hysteria".

To believe that a man can be a woman, or that a woman can be a man, is much farther removed from any reality that the very most extreme, distorted mockeries that you spew about religion.

Believing that the Native Americans were Hebrews, the Garden of Eden was in Missouri, and you can baptize dead people is totally removed from reality.
On the other hand, Transgender people exist. They've been documented.

They're batshit crazy, and need to be treated exactly as such.

why, because you have a sexual hangup? This kind of sounds like your problem.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

On the other hand, Transgender people exist. They've been documented.

So do people with all sorts of other severe mental illnesses.

That crazy people exist does not prove them to not be batshit crazy.

Certainly, one has to be severely fucked in the head to believe that a man can be a woman, or vice versa.

 

[SweetTea]

Except that's exactly what your side wants to do, isn't it?

Come on; you guys are tossing out precedents that have been on the books for decades because they don't conform to your political idealogy.

Nope. Overruling was Roe v Wade was the correct decision based on the Constitiuion. The precedent was wrong and it was fixed.

A Supreme Court run by today’s Democrats would destroy the rule of law. They rule lock-step and right down the party line on every single issue.

Nope, I just don't see these "dangers". My father was an immigrant and my wife is an immigrant. Immigrants make America better.

Right, you don’t see the dangers because you are blind to reality. Did your parents sneak over the border or come to Paris Island? You don’ see a difference? My wife is an immigrant as are her parents. They are fervently against illegal immigration and believe people should be vetted before being admitted. That is a common sense approach. They live in reality, not your fantasy land where all people coming here just want a piece of the American dream.

In a well-oiled machine, we should have been able to walk down to the DMV the Monday after our wedding, and got her a new ID with her new name and her new address on it. INSTEAD, we had to wait two weeks to get an appointment, only to be told we needed a bill with her name on it at our current address. That's taken another few weeks, and now we have to wait another three weeks to get back to the DMV.

That is what you get in a Democratic run city. They hire 2 incompetent people to dig the ditch, which takes them 3 times as long as it should, and 2 more incompetent people to fill it back up, all on YOUR dime. Woefully inefficient and expensive. It is not our fault that you dimwits can’t get your act together. If voter id laws were passed in your area, they would likely just ignore them anyway. They don’t care about election security, just putting another dim-witted Democrat in office.

 

[SweetTea]

On the other hand, Transgender people exist. They've been documented.

And? There are people that believe they should be able to marry their pets. Should we legally allow them to do so and condone their behavior? Should we teach our children about them and their acts in schools, after all, they do actually exist. Animal rights activists would likely have a fit.

Funny thing is that with Progressivism, this will be ok at some point. 1000 years ago allowing 2 men to marry would have been no less ridicilous. Fast forward to today and it is evidently ok.

 

[JoeB131]

So do people with all sorts of other severe mental illnesses.

That crazy people exist does not prove them to not be batshit crazy.

Certainly, one has to be severely fucked in the head to believe that a man can be a woman, or vice versa.

Except you haven't proven they are "crazy", just different. Again, this seems to be more about your hangups than anyone elses.

 

[SweetTea]

Except you haven't proven they are "crazy", just different. Again, this seems to be more about your hangups than anyone elses.

Granted, relative to you, they may not be so crazy, but to us sane, unindoctrinated folks, they have a mental illness that needs to be treated, not affirmed. The problem is that our medical and science communities have been infiltrated by politics and they are no less immune from partisan thinking than anyone else.

 

[JoeB131]

Nope. Overruling was Roe v Wade was the correct decision based on the Constitiuion. The precedent was wrong and it was fixed.

Actually, if Roe was wrong, then Griswald was wrong, and states should be able to ban contraception as well. The thing about Roe was that at the time, it wasn't controversial. The abortion laws on the books were meaningless because women and their doctors regularly ignored them, and the police didn't get involved unless the doctor screwed up and maimed the woman. Roe just treated it as another medical procedure and such mistakes would be treated as malpractice.

Then the Evangelicals (who up to that point considered abortion to be a "Catholic" issue) needed an issue to get asses back into pews when they lost the fight over segregation. So you had this silly notion that the GOP would pay lip service to overturning Roe while appointing sensible judges who upheld it. That is until Trump just appointed the three craziest people he could find to the court.

A Supreme Court run by today’s Democrats would destroy the rule of law. They rule lock-step and right down the party line on every single issue.

You mean... they support what people voted for? GASP!

Right, you don’t see the dangers because you are blind to reality. Did your parents sneak over the border or come to Paris Island? You don’ see a difference? My wife is an immigrant as are her parents. They are fervently against illegal immigration and believe people should be vetted before being admitted. That is a common sense approach. They live in reality, not your fantasy land where all people coming here just want a piece of the American dream.

My grandparents (my dad was a baby) came here at a time when you just needed to get here and you were admitted. Four years after he arrived, my grandfather got his US Citizenship. There was no ******* crazy fill out seventy pages of documents and wait years for an immigration judge to hear your case.

On the other hand, I am up to 67 pages of documents I've had to provide to my attorney merely to get my wife's status changed from a work visa to a marriage visa.

That is what you get in a Democratic run city. They hire 2 incompetent people to dig the ditch, which takes them 3 times as long as it should, and 2 more incompetent people to fill it back up, all on YOUR dime. Woefully inefficient and expensive. It is not our fault that you dimwits can’t get your act together. If voter id laws were passed in your area, they would likely just ignore them anyway. They don’t care about election security, just putting another dim-witted Democrat in office.

See, Partisan Robot, you can't help yourself. Actually, the DMV worked just fine when Jesse White of Tumbler fame ran it. I think that Covid in part broke their operation, but the bigger problem is that Alexi Ginnoulous isn't a good manager. I doubt that DMV runs any better in Jesusland, given how much I hear wingnuts on this board whine about the DMV like they were re-enacting the dentist scene in The Marathon Man.

And? There are people that believe they should be able to marry their pets. Should we legally allow them to do so and condone their behavior? Should we teach our children about them and their acts in schools, after all, they do actually exist. Animal rights activists would likely have a fit.

Since a pet cannot consent to a marriage, that would be silly. Why do you clowns always try to compare something to something else that is not related.

Yes, kids should be taught that LGBTQ people exist and they have all the rights they have, even if it makes Baby Jesus cry.

Funny thing is that with Progressivism, this will be ok at some point. 1000 years ago allowing 2 men to marry would have been no less ridicilous. Fast forward to today and it is evidently ok.

1000 year ago, you could be burned at the stake for witchcraft for having a mole in the wrong place on your body.

Not sure what your point is here, other than it's kind of stupid to make laws based on religious superstitions.

So here's the basic argument against Gay Marriage by the right.

1) I think it's Icky.
2) God says it's bad.

Neither of these are rational.

 

[JoeB131]

Granted, relative to you, they may not be so crazy, but to us sane, unindoctrinated folks, they have a mental illness that needs to be treated, not affirmed. The problem is that our medical and science communities have been infiltrated by politics and they are no less immune from partisan thinking than anyone else.

Again, how is it a mental illness? Are they incapable of paying the bills, going to work, meeting their commitments, or honoring contracts?

You guys don't have a "Science community" because, by and large, you don't believe in any science that contradicts the Bible. (And the Bible is thoroughly debunked by a whole bunch of science. )

 

[SweetTea]

You mean... they support what people voted for? GASP!

WOW…this not at all the job of the SCOTUS. You are very, very confused.

Since a pet cannot consent to a marriage, that would be silly. Why do you clowns always try to compare something to something else that is not related.

And men can’t be women just by cutting of their penis. That is kind of the point. They are both silly, but your agree with one of them.

Yes, kids should be taught that LGBTQ people exist and they have all the rights they have, even if it makes Baby Jesus cry.

Then they should be taught about all sorts of deviant behavior. Why pick and choose?

Again, how is it a mental illness? Are they incapable of paying the bills, going to work, meeting their commitments, or honoring contracts?

There are plenty of people with various levels of mental illness that pay bills and work, etc. That is immaterial to the fact that they have a mental illness.

 

[JoeB131]

WOW…this not at all the job of the SCOTUS. You are very, very confused.

I agree, it's not the job of SCOTUS to accomplish in the court what your side can't get done at the ballot box. If you guys wanted to get rid of Roe, you could have introduced an amendment stating that life begins at conception. You never did that.

And men can’t be women just by cutting of their penis. That is kind of the point. They are both silly, but your agree with one of them.

The thing is, gender identity goes beyond genitalia. There have been brain studies on transgender that have proven the brains of transgender women are closer to cisgender women and different from cis-gendered men.

Causes of gender incongruence - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

A 2016 review reported that early-onset androphilic transgender women have a brain structure similar to cisgender women's and unlike cisgender men's, but that they have their own brain phenotype.[3] It also reported that gynephilic trans women differ from both cisgender female and male controls in non-dimorphic brain areas.[3] The available research indicates that the brain structure of androphilic trans women with early-onset gender dysphoria is closer to that of cisgender women than that of cisgender men.[3] It also reports that gynephilic trans women differ from both cisgender female and male controls in non-dimorphic brain areas.[3] Cortical thickness, which is generally thicker in cisgender women's brains than in cisgender men's brains, may also be thicker in trans women's brains, but is present in a different location to cisgender women's brains.[3] For trans men, research indicates that those with early-onset gender dysphoria and who are gynephilic have brains that generally correspond to their assigned sex, but that they have their own phenotype with respect to cortical thickness, subcortical structures, and white matter microstructure, especially in the right hemisphere.[3] Hormone therapy can also affect transgender people's brain structure; it can cause transgender women's brains to become closer to those of cisgender women, and morphological changes observed in the brains of trans men might be due to the anabolic effects of testosterone.[3]

Then they should be taught about all sorts of deviant behavior. Why pick and choose?

Only deviant in your mind, buddy. It seems to me the only reason why you guys bring up bestiality is because you can't make an argument against LGBTQ that doesn't make you come off like a flaming bigot.

Now, here's the thing. I'm in a mixed-race marriage. (I'm white, my wife is Asian). Up until 1969, such a marriage would have not only been considered deviant but against the law in many states. Until SCOTUS actually voted to overturn such laws in Loving v. Virginia.

There are plenty of people with various levels of mental illness that pay bills and work, etc. That is immaterial to the fact that they have a mental illness.

It also means they can't and shouldn't be discriminated against. Do you go around telling your coworker who is depressed to "Be happy, it's all in your head"? Of course not, that would be cruel. Nor should you go around making loud noises behind your coworker with an anxiety disorder.

 

[SweetTea]

I agree, it's not the job of SCOTUS to accomplish in the court what your side can't get done at the ballot box. If you guys wanted to get rid of Roe, you could have introduced an amendment stating that life begins at conception. You never did that.

Roe v Wade was decided by the Supreme Court so it makes sense that it would be revisited by the same court.

Only deviant in your mind, buddy.

No, deviant by definition.

It also means they can't and shouldn't be discriminated against. Do you go around telling your coworker who is depressed to "Be happy, it's all in your head"? Of course not, that would be cruel. Nor should you go around making loud noises behind your coworker with an anxiety disorder.

I never said they should be persecuted, but what you want is for us to teach children that it is ok and normal, which it is not. Just like someone with depression or anxiety should be treated, so should someone with a transgender disorder. The very definition of disorder is “An ailment that affects the function of the mind or body.”

 

[JoeB131]

Roe v Wade was decided by the Supreme Court so it makes sense that it would be revisited by the same court.

No, the court should respect their own precedents... Otherwise, the Democrats should just stack the court with enough liberal justices to keep you from doing anything stupid.

I never said they should be persecuted, but what you want is for us to teach children that it is ok and normal, which it is not. Just like someone with depression or anxiety should be treated, so should someone with a transgender disorder. The very definition of disorder is “An ailment that affects the function of the mind or body.”

I agree, they should be treated. Treatment includes hormone therapy and corrective surgery. See, that was simple.

And make sure the kids aren't bigots about it.

 

[SweetTea]

No, the court should respect their own precedents... Otherwise, the Democrats should just stack the court with enough liberal justices to keep you from doing anything stupid.

But I thought you were a Progressive? Oh wait, you only want things to progress as you see fit. Got it.

Democrats are evil and naïve, so why on earth would we want them to be solely in charge of our nation? We wouldn't last 5 years as a country with them in charge. You and many others like you nothing more than useful idiots that the Democrats in control are using to promote their globalist, one world government views.

I agree, they should be treated. Treatment includes hormone therapy and corrective surgery. See, that was simple.

That isn't treatment, that is making their ailment worse. That is like giving a bi-polar person medicine to allow them to perpetually enjoy the high they have during their manic episodes as opposed to giving them medicine to put them on an even keel.

 

[BackAgain]

Maybe she forgot to hit “record.”

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Except you haven't proven they are "crazy", just different. Again, this seems to be more about your hangups than anyone elses.

I don't have to prove it. It's obvious.

Believing something that is obviously, provably false, dening realioty tyhat one can directly observe, is prima facie proof of seriosu mental illness.

Anyone who is at all sane can clearly see what the difference is between a man and a woman, and understands why this difference is important. You have to be seriously fucked in the head to look at someone who is obviously male, to be aware that that person was born with male genetics, male morphology, and a male reproductive system, and to believe that that person is, in any way, female.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

To claim that someone who is, in every rational, objective sense a man, is somehow a woman is certainly beyond an extraordinary clai8m, and your side that insists on pushing this absurd claim cannot even support it with an ordinary level of credible evidence, much less the extraordinary level of evidence that it would take to get any sane person to respond to this claim in any other way that to flat-out reject it as the insane nonsense that it clearly is.

 

[SweetTea]

I don't have to prove it. It's obvious.

Believing something that is obviously, provably false, dening realioty tyhat one can directly observe, is prima facie proof of seriosu mental illness.

Anyone who is at all sane can clearly see what the difference is between a man and a woman, and understands why this difference is important. You have to be seriously fucked in the head to look at someone who is obviously male, to be aware that that person was born with male genetics, male morphology, and a male reproductive system, and to believe that that person is, in any way, female.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

To claim that someone who is, in every rational, objective sense a man, is somehow a woman is certainly beyond an extraordinary clai8m, and your side that insists on pushing this absurd claim cannot even support it with an ordinary level of credible evidence, much less the extraordinary level of evidence that it would take to get any sane person to respond to this claim in any other way that to flat-out reject it as the insane nonsense that it clearly is.

Sadly, you can't reason with crazy people like JoeB131 . They simply aren't capable of rational thought.

 

[JoeB131]

But I thought you were a Progressive? Oh wait, you only want things to progress as you see fit. Got it.

Well, I don't want them to REGRESS.

You see, I'm not so much a progressive as a pragmatist. You can't really outlaw abortion. Women will get abortions because a woman who doesn't want to be pregnant will find a way to not be pregnant. One only needs to look at the Philippines, a country that has the kinds of laws you guys want, and how they have more abortions than the US has despite only having 1/3rd our population.

Democrats are evil and naïve, so why on earth would we want them to be solely in charge of our nation? We wouldn't last 5 years as a country with them in charge. You and many others like you nothing more than useful idiots that the Democrats in control are using to promote their globalist, one world government views.

Democrats gave us a middle class. Enjoying time this weekend. Thank a Democrat. Republicans, if they had their way, would have a country of the very rich and mostly poor. It's why the national poverty map is poorer in the red areas.

That isn't treatment, that is making their ailment worse. That is like giving a bi-polar person medicine to allow them to perpetually enjoy the high they have during their manic episodes as opposed to giving them medicine to put them on an even keel.

How does that make it "worse", exactly? Seems to me if they are more comfortable in their own skin, that improves their situation. The problem people like and Mormon Bob has is your discomfort.

Sadly, you can't reason with crazy people like @JoeB131 . They simply aren't capable of rational thought.

Hating on people is "rational" to you? Really?

 

[SweetTea]

You can't really outlaw abortion. Women will get abortions because a woman who doesn't want to be pregnant will find a way to not be pregnant.

For starters, overturning Roe v Wade did not outlaw abortion. Using your line of reasoning, I guess we can't really outlaw drugs or murder either since people continue to do both.

. It's why the national poverty map is poorer in the red areas.

We've been through this. Poor areas in red states vote heavily Democrat. Wealthy areas vote heavily Republican. On one hand you claim that Republicans are for the rich but then it's the poor that vote for them. You can't have it both ways.

Hating on people is "rational" to you? Really?

You hate on Christians every single day.