BallerStaf2003 said:

---

Yeah I definitely think a hugely successful artist being the first mainstream rapper that is his true authentic self (and being wildly successful)...

Is happier than a bunch of old dudes spending a lot of their energy hating on him on a message board. Actually, hating everyone that isn't them.

---

you are spending the same out of time and energy goaltending for him on a message board.

30wedge said:

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

30wedge said:

---

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

Good for him!

---

He just has to play the "woe is me" victim card. He is not alone though

---

We do have a hell of a number of woe is me posts and threads on this board.

Is kinda interesting where most of them come from.

---

Nobody is saying the crap he is, nobody is saying that they hated themselves because of their victimhood, nobody but this dude. But nice try at a goaltend though.

Have a great day!

---

I am not goal tending.

Just pointing out how many people on this board love to say how hard it is to be white and/or straight and/or male and/or Christian in America.

The victim game is endless. They are so picked on

Tanya 93 said:

---

30wedge said:

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

30wedge said:

---

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

Good for him!

---

He just has to play the "woe is me" victim card. He is not alone though

---

We do have a hell of a number of woe is me posts and threads on this board.

Is kinda interesting where most of them come from.

---

Nobody is saying the crap he is, nobody is saying that they hated themselves because of their victimhood, nobody but this dude. But nice try at a goaltend though.

Have a great day!

---

I am not goal tending.

Just pointing out how many people on this board love to say how hard it is to be white and/or straight and/or male and/or Christian in America.

The victim game is endless. They are so picked on

---

Yeah but they totally hate identity politics and people who whine about victimhood and fragile snowflakes who get worked up about pop culture nonsense and and and

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

30wedge said:

---

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

Good for him!

---

He just has to play the "woe is me" victim card. He is not alone though

---

We do have a hell of a number of woe is me posts and threads on this board.

Is kinda interesting where most of them come from.

---

This. There is nobody more emotional or woe is me than what I see on this board.

---

People like you are the ones that contribute to it.

There is nothing more amusing than watching posters complain so much about this board as they continually come back and always seem to find something wrong or negative.

If you ignored the people complaining about weirdos in the news many of those threads would sink to the bottom...but you can't avoid interjecting.

It's a self fulfilling prophecy.

Rhonda the Rash said:

---

For those saying he's dumb for standing up and being upset about how he has been treated for being gay...

---

Read the article.

It has absolutely nothing to do with allowing doctors to refuse treatment to homosexuals.

In fact it is against federal laws for Healthcare workers to do so.

What it does is allow doctors to refuse to provide treatment which would violate their religious views.

This means that patients can't force doctors to prescribe drugs to kids whose parents want to transition them to another gender or perform surgeries for gender transition purposes.

That is all this Bill is designed to do.

The bill very clearly states that it only applies to elective procedures which would cause a violation of a religious belief. Doctors have always (until the recent SJW Bake the Cake movement) had the ability to decide which elective procedures they wish to provide for patients. This law just protects doctors from frivolous retaliatory litigation.

Stop gaslighting and lying.

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Rhonda the Rash said:

---

For those saying he's dumb for standing up and being upset about how he has been treated for being gay...

---

Read the article.

It has absolutely nothing to do with allowing doctors to refuse treatment to homosexuals.

In fact it is against federal laws for Healthcare workers to do so.

What it does is allow doctors to refuse to provide treatment which would violate their religious views.

This means that patients can't force doctors to prescribe drugs to kids whose parents want to transition them to another gender or perform surgeries for gender transition purposes.

That is all this Bill is designed to do.

The bill very clearly states that it only applies to elective procedures which would cause a violation of a religious belief. Doctors have always (until the recent SJW Bake the Cake movement) had the ability to decide which elective procedures they wish to provide for patients. This law just protects doctors from frivolous retaliatory litigation.

Stop gaslighting and lying.

---

I may be wrong but what I saw is that anyone could refuse healthcare to all lgbtq by saying it's against their religion. People are just talking about transgender.

Rhonda the Rash said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Rhonda the Rash said:

---

For those saying he's dumb for standing up and being upset about how he has been treated for being gay...

---

Read the article.

It has absolutely nothing to do with allowing doctors to refuse treatment to homosexuals.

In fact it is against federal laws for Healthcare workers to do so.

What it does is allow doctors to refuse to provide treatment which would violate their religious views.

This means that patients can't force doctors to prescribe drugs to kids whose parents want to transition them to another gender or perform surgeries for gender transition purposes.

That is all this Bill is designed to do.

The bill very clearly states that it only applies to elective procedures which would cause a violation of a religious belief. Doctors have always (until the recent SJW Bake the Cake movement) had the ability to decide which elective procedures they wish to provide for patients. This law just protects doctors from frivolous retaliatory litigation.

Stop gaslighting and lying.

---

I may be wrong but what I saw is that anyone could refuse healthcare to all lgbtq by saying it's against their religion. People are just talking about transgender.

---

It actually says for any religious or moral issue. So who will be the first doctor to turn away a trump or Biden supporter for morality issues. Either of which would be wrong

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Rhonda the Rash said:

---

For those saying he's dumb for standing up and being upset about how he has been treated for being gay...

---

Read the article.

It has absolutely nothing to do with allowing doctors to refuse treatment to homosexuals.

In fact it is against federal laws for Healthcare workers to do so.

What it does is allow doctors to refuse to provide treatment which would violate their religious views.

This means that patients can't force doctors to prescribe drugs to kids whose parents want to transition them to another gender or perform surgeries for gender transition purposes.

That is all this Bill is designed to do.

The bill very clearly states that it only applies to elective procedures which would cause a violation of a religious belief. Doctors have always (until the recent SJW Bake the Cake movement) had the ability to decide which elective procedures they wish to provide for patients. This law just protects doctors from frivolous retaliatory litigation.

Stop gaslighting and lying.

---

I am not gaslighting at all.

Look at the wording. It is saying that doctors can turn away patients for religious or moral issues. It was motivated by hatred for lgbtq, it was justified because of transgender headlines and it will be back in the media when someone dies because the doctor available turned someone away because of "religious or moral" problems.

Rhonda the Rash said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Rhonda the Rash said:

---

For those saying he's dumb for standing up and being upset about how he has been treated for being gay...

---

Read the article.

It has absolutely nothing to do with allowing doctors to refuse treatment to homosexuals.

In fact it is against federal laws for Healthcare workers to do so.

What it does is allow doctors to refuse to provide treatment which would violate their religious views.

This means that patients can't force doctors to prescribe drugs to kids whose parents want to transition them to another gender or perform surgeries for gender transition purposes.

That is all this Bill is designed to do.

The bill very clearly states that it only applies to elective procedures which would cause a violation of a religious belief. Doctors have always (until the recent SJW Bake the Cake movement) had the ability to decide which elective procedures they wish to provide for patients. This law just protects doctors from frivolous retaliatory litigation.

Stop gaslighting and lying.

---

I am not gaslighting at all.

Look at the wording. It is saying that doctors can turn away patients for religious or moral issues. It was motivated by hatred for lgbtq, it was justified because of transgender headlines and it will be back in the media when someone dies because the doctor available turned someone away because of "religious or moral" problems.

---

This is a direct quote from the article:

The measure says health care workers and institutions have the right to not participate in non-emergency treatments that violate their conscience.

also from the article
Opponents have said types of health care that could be cut off include maintaining hormone treatments for transgender patients

This is what they care about.

Doctors should not be civilly or legally liable for providing drugs to enable someone's mental illness and that is what this bill is designed to prevent.

Once again. Stop gaslighting and lying. This bill has nothing to do with restricting homosexuals' access to care and everything to do with protecting doctors from civil suit for refusing to provide ELECTIVE treatment.

Doctors should never be forced to provide elective treatment that sets up a very slippery slope in which the patient gets to dictate treatment and that is never a good idea.

Rhonda the Rash said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Rhonda the Rash said:

---

For those saying he's dumb for standing up and being upset about how he has been treated for being gay...

---

Read the article.

It has absolutely nothing to do with allowing doctors to refuse treatment to homosexuals.

In fact it is against federal laws for Healthcare workers to do so.

What it does is allow doctors to refuse to provide treatment which would violate their religious views.

This means that patients can't force doctors to prescribe drugs to kids whose parents want to transition them to another gender or perform surgeries for gender transition purposes.

That is all this Bill is designed to do.

The bill very clearly states that it only applies to elective procedures which would cause a violation of a religious belief. Doctors have always (until the recent SJW Bake the Cake movement) had the ability to decide which elective procedures they wish to provide for patients. This law just protects doctors from frivolous retaliatory litigation.

Stop gaslighting and lying.

---

I am not gaslighting at all.

Look at the wording. It is saying that doctors can turn away patients for religious or moral issues. It was motivated by hatred for lgbtq, it was justified because of transgender headlines and it will be back in the media when someone dies because the doctor available turned someone away because of "religious or moral" problems.

---

Please don't lecture us on decisions by medical professionals as far as life and death. Your party is the party of baby killing.

You are not entitled to the labor of another, comrade.

Rhonda the Rash said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Rhonda the Rash said:

---

For those saying he's dumb for standing up and being upset about how he has been treated for being gay...

---

Read the article.

It has absolutely nothing to do with allowing doctors to refuse treatment to homosexuals.

In fact it is against federal laws for Healthcare workers to do so.

What it does is allow doctors to refuse to provide treatment which would violate their religious views.

This means that patients can't force doctors to prescribe drugs to kids whose parents want to transition them to another gender or perform surgeries for gender transition purposes.

That is all this Bill is designed to do.

The bill very clearly states that it only applies to elective procedures which would cause a violation of a religious belief. Doctors have always (until the recent SJW Bake the Cake movement) had the ability to decide which elective procedures they wish to provide for patients. This law just protects doctors from frivolous retaliatory litigation.

Stop gaslighting and lying.

---

I may be wrong but what I saw is that anyone could refuse healthcare to all lgbtq by saying it's against their religion. People are just talking about transgender.

---

So you didn't read the article you posted? You know the first amendment is still a thing. Sincerely held religious beliefs and all that.

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Rhonda the Rash said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Rhonda the Rash said:

---

For those saying he's dumb for standing up and being upset about how he has been treated for being gay...

---

Read the article.

It has absolutely nothing to do with allowing doctors to refuse treatment to homosexuals.

In fact it is against federal laws for Healthcare workers to do so.

What it does is allow doctors to refuse to provide treatment which would violate their religious views.

This means that patients can't force doctors to prescribe drugs to kids whose parents want to transition them to another gender or perform surgeries for gender transition purposes.

That is all this Bill is designed to do.

The bill very clearly states that it only applies to elective procedures which would cause a violation of a religious belief. Doctors have always (until the recent SJW Bake the Cake movement) had the ability to decide which elective procedures they wish to provide for patients. This law just protects doctors from frivolous retaliatory litigation.

Stop gaslighting and lying.

---

I am not gaslighting at all.

Look at the wording. It is saying that doctors can turn away patients for religious or moral issues. It was motivated by hatred for lgbtq, it was justified because of transgender headlines and it will be back in the media when someone dies because the doctor available turned someone away because of "religious or moral" problems.

---

This is a direct quote from the article:

The measure says health care workers and institutions have the right to not participate in non-emergency treatments that violate their conscience.

also from the article
Opponents have said types of health care that could be cut off include maintaining hormone treatments for transgender patients

This is what they care about.

Doctors should not be civilly or legally liable for providing drugs to enable someone's mental illness and that is what this bill is designed to prevent.

Once again. Stop gaslighting and lying.

---

When you call it a mental illness I am done debating. There were no lies. This board will flip when someone is legally denied service because of supporting trump for "religious or moral" issues that violate their conscience.

This is a bad bill that will lead to discrimination. If it was only about transgender issues it would have said so.

Rhonda the Rash said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Rhonda the Rash said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Rhonda the Rash said:

---

For those saying he's dumb for standing up and being upset about how he has been treated for being gay...

---

Read the article.

It has absolutely nothing to do with allowing doctors to refuse treatment to homosexuals.

In fact it is against federal laws for Healthcare workers to do so.

What it does is allow doctors to refuse to provide treatment which would violate their religious views.

This means that patients can't force doctors to prescribe drugs to kids whose parents want to transition them to another gender or perform surgeries for gender transition purposes.

That is all this Bill is designed to do.

The bill very clearly states that it only applies to elective procedures which would cause a violation of a religious belief. Doctors have always (until the recent SJW Bake the Cake movement) had the ability to decide which elective procedures they wish to provide for patients. This law just protects doctors from frivolous retaliatory litigation.

Stop gaslighting and lying.

---

I am not gaslighting at all.

Look at the wording. It is saying that doctors can turn away patients for religious or moral issues. It was motivated by hatred for lgbtq, it was justified because of transgender headlines and it will be back in the media when someone dies because the doctor available turned someone away because of "religious or moral" problems.

---

This is a direct quote from the article:

The measure says health care workers and institutions have the right to not participate in non-emergency treatments that violate their conscience.

also from the article
Opponents have said types of health care that could be cut off include maintaining hormone treatments for transgender patients

This is what they care about.

Doctors should not be civilly or legally liable for providing drugs to enable someone's mental illness and that is what this bill is designed to prevent.

Once again. Stop gaslighting and lying.

---

When you call it a mental illness I am done debating. There were no lies. This board will flip when someone is legally denied service because of supporting trump for "religious or moral" issues that violate their conscience.

This is a bad bill that will lead to discrimination. If it was only about transgender issues it would have said so.

---

Gender dysmorphia is defined as a mental illness.

It is debatable whether gender transitioning is a beneficial treatment for it, but people who choose to transition because they feel that they are trapped in the wrong body suffer from gender dysmorphia.

That is the definition of the mental illness. It is defined by the American academy of psychiatry as a mental illness.

The fact that my use of a medical term and scientific definitions offends you tells me all I need to know about your intentions here.

You just admitted that you did not read the article. Nor did you address the direct quotes I posted.

You are a liar and an ideologue who relies on dishonesty to avoid the inevitable cognitive dissonance that results from the fact that reality and facts do not support you ideology.

So go ahead and stop debating under the guise of me being beneath you.

We both know the only reason you refuse to engage in a discussion of the facts is because your beliefs collapse when confronted with facts. Your dismissal of me is really just a cover for you running away from a logical discussion and It is the cowards' way out. I would invite you to find some courage and engage in an exchange of facts anytime.

I suspect he won't enjoy the real event when he final has it in a few decades.

We are going to need more millstones

Clob94 said:

---

I'm completely out of popcorn.


Congratulations to everyone who got their dander up about this ****ing nimrod and his attention seeking idiocy.

He got you. He got you to do exactly what he wanted you to do.

Know how to get him back? Ignore him. He's the equivalent to the 3rd grade snot nosed brat who pulls girls pigtails in class.

Treat him as such. Ignore him into irrelevance.

---

I see your point and it seems consistent with the "libertarian" mindset that has got us to this point in the first place. We didn't just wake up one day and tolerate "****** story time" and all the other weird stuff going on these days. They were introduced slowly over time. But a continued "tolerance" of all the things that don't affect you personally is a bad solution and is just going to make our society decay further.

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

Canyon99 said:

---

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

It's a play on how people told him he was going to hell his entire life for being gay, so he shot a video where he went and had sex with the devil.

It being posted on here is pretty much exactly the reaction he wanted.

---

Uh okay so he is just trolling folks? That lil nas x is one hilarious dude.

---

I think it's more for him to take power back from all the people that judged him.

I can't speak for him, but it seems he gives zero f's and is letting people know.

---

So as a Christian, straight, white, conservative male, do I get to act like an a-hole to take back power from those that judge me? Because I know for a fact I'm judged based on all those adjectives.

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

Canyon99 said:

---

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

It's a play on how people told him he was going to hell his entire life for being gay, so he shot a video where he went and had sex with the devil.

It being posted on here is pretty much exactly the reaction he wanted.

---

Uh okay so he is just trolling folks? That lil nas x is one hilarious dude.

---

I think it's more for him to take power back from all the people that judged him.

I can't speak for him, but it seems he gives zero f's and is letting people know.

---

You have as much evidence for his motives than I have to claim he's a satanist trying to blaspheme God in a majority Christian nation. I'm not claiming his motives, however. The act itself of making this shoe brand is perverse enough without knowing the motive

Proper Twelve said:

---

Clob94 said:

---

I'm completely out of popcorn.


Congratulations to everyone who got their dander up about this ****ing nimrod and his attention seeking idiocy.

He got you. He got you to do exactly what he wanted you to do.

Know how to get him back? Ignore him. He's the equivalent to the 3rd grade snot nosed brat who pulls girls pigtails in class.

Treat him as such. Ignore him into irrelevance.

---

I see your point and it seems consistent with the "libertarian" mindset that has got us to this point in the first place. We didn't just wake up one day and tolerate "****** story time" and all the other weird stuff going on these days. They were introduced slowly over time. But a continued "tolerance" of all the things that don't affect you personally is a bad solution and is just going to make our society decay further.

---

Everytime the other track is taken it just empowers the "rebel" in society and completely backfires.

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Proper Twelve said:

---

Clob94 said:

---

I'm completely out of popcorn.


Congratulations to everyone who got their dander up about this ****ing nimrod and his attention seeking idiocy.

He got you. He got you to do exactly what he wanted you to do.

Know how to get him back? Ignore him. He's the equivalent to the 3rd grade snot nosed brat who pulls girls pigtails in class.

Treat him as such. Ignore him into irrelevance.

---

I see your point and it seems consistent with the "libertarian" mindset that has got us to this point in the first place. We didn't just wake up one day and tolerate "****** story time" and all the other weird stuff going on these days. They were introduced slowly over time. But a continued "tolerance" of all the things that don't affect you personally is a bad solution and is just going to make our society decay further.

---

Everytime the other track is taken it just empowers the "rebel" in society and completely backfires.

---

That's debatable. The fact of the matter is that societies have always had boundaries on behavior. These are almost universally linked to religious norms. This current experiment we are trying for the last 40 or so years of "let's just tolerate everything as long as it's not hurting anyone physically" has, in my estimation, caused a terrible decay of our society.

ChemEAg08 said:

---

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

Canyon99 said:

---

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

It's a play on how people told him he was going to hell his entire life for being gay, so he shot a video where he went and had sex with the devil.

It being posted on here is pretty much exactly the reaction he wanted.

---

Uh okay so he is just trolling folks? That lil nas x is one hilarious dude.

---

I think it's more for him to take power back from all the people that judged him.

I can't speak for him, but it seems he gives zero f's and is letting people know.

---

So as a Christian, straight, white, conservative male, do I get to act like an a-hole to take back power from those that judge me? Because I know for a fact I'm judged based on all those adjectives.

---

Yeah your life is sooooo complicated and complex as a white Christian. How do you even manage in this country?

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

ChemEAg08 said:

---

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

Canyon99 said:

---

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

It's a play on how people told him he was going to hell his entire life for being gay, so he shot a video where he went and had sex with the devil.

It being posted on here is pretty much exactly the reaction he wanted.

---

Uh okay so he is just trolling folks? That lil nas x is one hilarious dude.

---

I think it's more for him to take power back from all the people that judged him.

I can't speak for him, but it seems he gives zero f's and is letting people know.

---

So as a Christian, straight, white, conservative male, do I get to act like an a-hole to take back power from those that judge me? Because I know for a fact I'm judged based on all those adjectives.

---

Yeah your life is sooooo complicated and complex as a white Christian. How do you even manage in this country?

---

Back at all gays and blacks.

Would you mind explaining in detail what you know about ChemEAg08's life then?

You apparently get to speak for him/her.

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

Cassius said:

---

Muslims throw gays off bridges to their deaths.

Christians say gays are going to hell if they don't repent of homosexuality.




Gays react and lash out by mocking Christ and Christianity. They remain silent on Islam.

---

Um there's at least two posters here thst think gays should be put to death on this thread alone if they do anything in public.

---

Duh. They're Muslims.

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

ChemEAg08 said:

---

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

Canyon99 said:

---

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

It's a play on how people told him he was going to hell his entire life for being gay, so he shot a video where he went and had sex with the devil.

It being posted on here is pretty much exactly the reaction he wanted.

---

Uh okay so he is just trolling folks? That lil nas x is one hilarious dude.

---

I think it's more for him to take power back from all the people that judged him.

I can't speak for him, but it seems he gives zero f's and is letting people know.

---

So as a Christian, straight, white, conservative male, do I get to act like an a-hole to take back power from those that judge me? Because I know for a fact I'm judged based on all those adjectives.

---

Yeah your life is sooooo complicated and complex as a white Christian. How do you even manage in this country?

---

I haven't read the whole thread. Did we at least make it to page 3 before the race card was dropped?

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

Yeah your life is sooooo complicated and complex as a white Christian. How do you even manage in this country?

---

And there it is. Double standards are perfectly acceptable as long as they conform to the preferred narrative of the Left.

With zero evidence to support it, all intersections other than straight white men are placed in a defined pecking order based on presumed levels of victimhood.

And all degrees of poor behavior and poor decisions can be ignored as long as they invoke the "correct" victimhood dynamics.

FrioAg 00 said:

---

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

Yeah your life is sooooo complicated and complex as a white Christian. How do you even manage in this country?

---

And there it is. Double standards are perfectly acceptable as long as they conform to the preferred narrative of the Left.

With zero evidence to support it, all intersections other than straight white men are placed in a defined pecking order based on presumed levels of victimhood.

And all degrees of poor behavior and poor decisions can be ignored as long as they invoke the "correct" victimhood dynamics.

---

Perhaps you could enlighten me with the specific examples of institutionalized bigotry that white Christian men (the majority in this country) face.

I love being white, and I recognize some things are over correcting against whites, but to compare your struggle to that of a gay or blacks person is absolutely ridiculous.

Lol, there is no enlightening a closed mind.

I tell you what - I'll share some thoughts at the straight pride parade during white history month.

FrioAg 00 said:

---

Lol, there is no enlightening a closed mind.

I tell you what - I'll share some thoughts at the straight pride parade during white history month.

---

Do me a favor, find a black employee at work and tell them how much you relate to their struggle in life bc of your life as a white Christian.

Then compare experiences.

Let me know how it works out for you!

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Rhonda the Rash said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Rhonda the Rash said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Rhonda the Rash said:

---

For those saying he's dumb for standing up and being upset about how he has been treated for being gay...

---

Read the article.

It has absolutely nothing to do with allowing doctors to refuse treatment to homosexuals.

In fact it is against federal laws for Healthcare workers to do so.

What it does is allow doctors to refuse to provide treatment which would violate their religious views.

This means that patients can't force doctors to prescribe drugs to kids whose parents want to transition them to another gender or perform surgeries for gender transition purposes.

That is all this Bill is designed to do.

The bill very clearly states that it only applies to elective procedures which would cause a violation of a religious belief. Doctors have always (until the recent SJW Bake the Cake movement) had the ability to decide which elective procedures they wish to provide for patients. This law just protects doctors from frivolous retaliatory litigation.

Stop gaslighting and lying.

---

I am not gaslighting at all.

Look at the wording. It is saying that doctors can turn away patients for religious or moral issues. It was motivated by hatred for lgbtq, it was justified because of transgender headlines and it will be back in the media when someone dies because the doctor available turned someone away because of "religious or moral" problems.

---

This is a direct quote from the article:

The measure says health care workers and institutions have the right to not participate in non-emergency treatments that violate their conscience.

also from the article
Opponents have said types of health care that could be cut off include maintaining hormone treatments for transgender patients

This is what they care about.

Doctors should not be civilly or legally liable for providing drugs to enable someone's mental illness and that is what this bill is designed to prevent.

Once again. Stop gaslighting and lying.

---

When you call it a mental illness I am done debating. There were no lies. This board will flip when someone is legally denied service because of supporting trump for "religious or moral" issues that violate their conscience.

This is a bad bill that will lead to discrimination. If it was only about transgender issues it would have said so.

---

Gender dysmorphia is defined as a mental illness.

It is debatable whether gender transitioning is a beneficial treatment for it, but people who choose to transition because they feel that they are trapped in the wrong body suffer from gender dysmorphia.

That is the definition of the mental illness. It is defined by the American academy of psychiatry as a mental illness.

The fact that my use of a medical term and scientific definitions offends you tells me all I need to know about your intentions here.

You just admitted that you did not read the article. Nor did you address the direct quotes I posted.

You are a liar and an ideologue who relies on dishonesty to avoid the inevitable cognitive dissonance that results from the fact that reality and facts do not support you ideology.

So go ahead and stop debating under the guise of me being beneath you.

We both know the only reason you refuse to engage in a discussion of the facts is because your beliefs collapse when confronted with facts. Your dismissal of me is really just a cover for you running away from a logical discussion and It is the cowards' way out. I would invite you to find some courage and engage in an exchange of facts anytime.

---

You fail to mention that the APA approved treatment for gender dysphoria is transitioning.

Maybe I suck at reading comprehension, but would mind explaining to the board how you know ChemEAg08's life may have had less trials vs a non-white, non-straight, non-Christian person?

I'll hang up and listen whey you specifically explain how one person you don't know at all personally had it worse or different vs your cadre of victims.

Thanks

Again, you're pre-judging people by variables like skin color - which by definition is racist.

And for the record, I'd have a pretty easy time relating my experiences to a lot of black folks, mostly because the neighborhood I grew up in was vast majority black. I'd have no problem relating to the struggles of poverty and what it was like to live in a self-built home on cinder blocks BEHIND a trailer park. And I would not just relate to Inwood and Acres Homes, I'd rather swap stories with them the year Big Ike went deep in the playoffs because I was there on the sidelines and I was in the school parking lot for the after-game celebrations.

Oh, and if I were starting a conversation with a black person at work, the odds would be pretty good that I was the one who hired, or promoted or mentored them.

But you just go on voting the way you vote, believing the reality you believe, and holding firm to all your bigoted views about all white conservative men. I'm not going to stop you from being wrong.

Or another idea... maybe I shouldn't wait. I could just go upstairs and have a conversation with one of my black children or my black daughter-in-law. Would that work for you?

It probably wouldn't be the conversation you'd hoped for. All of them are believers, vote conservatively and are dead-eye marksmen. None of them are victims of a damned thing.