What to call this thread?

Republicans don't care what people want!

0VxrLRj.png


 
Is this a punctuation problem? A unisex science kit for children? With hammers? That like to bust up beautiful things?

unisex.JPG
 
Re #46

It's just poorly phrased and simply means it's for both boys and girls. That is it's for all children and it's not just a "boy's toy" or a "girl's toy".
 
#47
Most likely.
None the less it may seem to nudge the term "unisex children" just a little deeper into the lexicon.

BTW when I find product promotional material from China it's often obviously a bad translation. Not sure if that's what happened here. But some product literature I've read seems to be translated not by sentence meaning, but word for word.
The results can be amusing.
 
- full stop -

We're falling for it !

By squandering time reacting to this artificial political nonsense we're not discussing issues of merit. What's the most recent date you encountered a constructive comment from a Republican politician on anthropogenic global warming?
Interestingly, Earth's human population has sidestepped our negligent politicians, and taken action on their own.
 
ps
I don't mean to be dismissive about legal marriage for 12 year olds. But realistically we must acknowledge it doesn't make sense.
- For some, puberty has not yet been reached at age 12.
- In conventional (1950's vintage) marriage the man is the breadwinner. But child labor laws would prevent that for a 12 year old husband, half a dozen years away from a high school diploma.
Marriage at age 12 may be understandable among (16th Century) royalty, solidifying alliances, etc. In the new millennium parental consent may be prerequisite. But wouldn't any parent that consents be automatically subject to child abuse / neglect charges?
 
http://www.cnn.com/
Montana Republicans call for censure of transgender lawmaker amid debate over ban of gender-affirming care for minors

Story by Rebekah Riess

If you are forcing a trans child to go through puberty when they are trans, that is tantamount to torture, and this body should be ashamed,” Zephyr said during her speech on the amendments on Tuesday. “The only thing I will say is if you vote yes on this bill and yes on these amendments I hope the next time there’s an invocation when you bow your heads in prayer, you see the blood on your hands.”

The Montana Freedom Caucus weighed in after Zephyr’s speech, calling for ...

 

Attachments

  • 1682164315532.png
    1682164315532.png
    68 bytes · Views: 0
by Rebekah Riess

"If you are forcing a trans child to go through puberty when they are trans, that is tantamount to torture, and ..." RR #54
What does "forcing a trans child to go through puberty when they are trans" mean?
Are they "trans" as soon as they decide they want gender reassignment surgery? Or only after the surgery is complete?

Being heterosexual is no panacea, involving a variety of vexations and adversities. A "trans child" may surely share many of those vexations and adversities, plus others in addition.
Human existence itself may be "tantamount to torture". But there are both ethical and legal questions about the merit of allowing minors to make such major decisions. Even if such individuals don't substantially revise their self-outlook they may benefit from a maturing worldview on what is appropriate.
 
Do you actually believe it was "the team" who refused to compete or the coaches? After all, it was a supposedly "Christian" school.

And it wasn't that long ago that women were complaining that black athletes had an unfair advantage.
 
"... doctors who provide gender-affirming care to trans youth" Bollinger #57
What does this mean?
a) Is "gender-affirming care" an Orwellian-scale euphemism for surgically converting a boy into a girl, or a girl into a boy?
b) trans "youth"? What is the age range at issue here?
c) What determinative discretion do / did the prospective patient's parents have, before this proposed legislation?
d) In law, when this legislation is enforced?

What ostensible benefit does this law impart to the People?
What is the real intent? Sadistic discrimination against a disempowered extreme minority?
 

 
Back
Top