Woodznutz
Platinum Member
- Dec 9, 2021
- 26,442
- 13,118
- 973
So, corrupting kids is acceptable?thats your problem,, you didnt think,,,
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
So, corrupting kids is acceptable?thats your problem,, you didnt think,,,
no you didnt,,I went over it pretty carefully.
That community used to be called an insane asylum, where they couldnt do harm to their own bodies or others.....Trannies 'need' to be accepted as normal by truly normal people. Thus the dustup. The fact is that there are enough of them to have their own community and society without being a pain in the ass for everyone else.
"Teach a man to fish, and that's all he'll want to do."
That assumes my stance which I have not stated. It does not answer the question.how many women or young girls being raped would it take for you to stand against it??
Trannies endanger other people, especially children...how?no you didnt,,
that would mean you dont accept anyone 100% if you didnt want them to put other people in danger,,,
depends on what nation we're in, or in what part of the USA we're in. Is the one being raped a relative of the rapist, or a wife of a rapist?how many women or young girls being raped would it take for you to stand against it??
Why is it your responsibility or my responsibility to give them what they 'need'? They represent less than 1% of the American population. Nobody cares what they do in private. But does their 'need' require for women to accept emotional discomfort, fear, actual danger however small risk that might be? Does it require us to give up our resources for them to have what they 'need' to transgender? Is their 'need' greater than our 'need'?Trannies 'need' to be accepted as normal by truly normal people. Thus the dustup. The fact is that there are enough of them to have their own community and society without being a pain in the ass for everyone else.
A stance like a Cowgirl?That assumes my stance which I have not stated. It does not answer the question.
Pretty much what I meant.no you didnt,,
that would mean you dont accept anyone 100% if you didnt want them to put other people in danger,,,
thats why I asked the question,,That assumes my stance which I have not stated. It does not answer the question.
Boo hoo over discomfort. Most women I know are not snowflakes.Why is it your responsibility or my responsibility to give them what they 'need'? They represent less than 1% of the American population. Nobody cares what they do in private. But does their 'need' require for women to accept emotional discomfort, fear, actual danger however small risk that might be?
and that doesnt make sense,,, cause it would mean you dont accept anyone,, unless youre OK if they put someone elsein danger,,,Pretty much what I meant.
If they stick to their own kind they're not in much danger. Of course, they have their internal squabbles.Why is it your responsibility or my responsibility to give them what they 'need'? They represent less than 1% of the American population. Nobody cares what they do in private. But does their 'need' require for women to accept emotional discomfort, fear, actual danger however small risk that might be? Does it require us to give up our resources for them to have what they 'need' to transgender? Is their 'need' greater than our 'need'?
And yes this does fall within a certain kind of discrimination of who 'needs' what and how much should society accommodate such 'need'.
I don't accept anyone 100 percent, not even my own kids.and that doesnt make sense,,, cause it would mean you dont accept anyone,, unless youre OK if they put someone elsein danger,,,
thats on you not me,,I don't accept anyone 100 percent, not even my own kids.
Along those same lines, in a "The Good Doctor" episode, a state prisoner was brought in for a necessary medical procedure. He had a gross deformity on his brow and one of the doctors wanted to fix that while they had him under anesthesia for the other problem. There was a spirited debate about doing unnecessary surgery at public expense as the brow problem was not medically necessary but purely cosmetic.Trannies 'need' to be accepted as normal by truly normal people. Thus the dustup. The fact is that there are enough of them to have their own community and society without being a pain in the ass for everyone else.
If LGBTQXYZ's need their own schools, I will chip in.Why is it your responsibility or my responsibility to give them what they 'need'? They represent less than 1% of the American population. Nobody cares what they do in private. But does their 'need' require for women to accept emotional discomfort, fear, actual danger however small risk that might be? Does it require us to give up our resources for them to have what they 'need' to transgender? Is their 'need' greater than our 'need'?
And yes this does fall within a certain kind of discrimination of who 'needs' what and how much should society accommodate such 'need'.
I am discussing the matter to get a lot of input. Because these are not easy questions and they do illustrate how conflicted we can be because none of us see every issue in the same way.thats why I asked the question,,
and you are currently discussing the matter to get your input,,
But you included an exception in that you don't want them influencing the kids. Perhaps you can clarify that.thats on you not me,,