Post count: 6231

Lol I read the article and don’t agree with it.

I understand the risk associated with suicide etc.

But instead of telling they can’t serve because of the data points, they should see how they CAN serve.

How we view transgender is what causes suicide. Society deems it weird or unusual so the person feels that.

Similar to homosexuality being frowned upon decades ago (and it still is).

So it is self-fullfiling that as we tell transgender that they have a disease/disorder that of course that would lead to depression, which leads to suicide.

I understand the argument, and I disagree with it for the reasons I outlined.

Regarding “you again don’t answer” bs… this happens all the time to me when I make points. People pivot off the main point, start a tangent, ignore the thread, or post an article without articulating their position. You Biggs, do this all the time. Even if your point is “correct” because you’ve flagged down an error within a bigger argument, that doesn’t equate to some total victory in the debate.

So in this instance the argument is whether Rand Paul has become a rank/file Trumpette instead of a Libertarian. Then I used Amash as an example of some that adheres to their libertarian principles… Rand does not.

So whether there are viable medical reasons for a transgender ban, the ban itself doesn’t align with Libertarianism.

THAT is the point. Of course there are two sides to the argument. Fair enough… but that point, right or wrong, doesn’t counter the ORIGINAL point.

This is a debate tactic, and one that you employ all the time. Then you try to get me to chase my tail on it.

There you go… the full answer.