johnnybangkok

So let's get this straight. You post a highly contentious topic of 'why is the dem party so toxic' and get your usual fan boys to jump in with their usual partisan nonsense but when someone rightly points out the hypocracy of what you are saying (in a calm and non-confrontational manner) you immediately resort to type calling them 'losers' and 'extreme left'. I would suggest it's YOU that's the extremist here - unable to put together any coherant argument other than what you hear from Fox News which is roughly 'we won, you lost, what a loser!' like a 12 year old kid. You exemplify identity politics in everything you post but fail to see your own indoctrination. And don't get me started on your inability to put together a proper paragraph or understand the 'Paste as plain text instead' button at the bottom of the box.

God here we go again. No one is 'mutilating children'. The age for a sex change in the US (much like most of the western world) is 18. That is NOT a child. That is an adult. You know this (I've certainly pointed it out to you before) but you refuse to listen to facts, prefering sensationalist nonsense to try and score points. And whilst we are on the subject, the Dems also wanted to 'stop illegal immigrants at the border' but just couldn't handle the sheer volume. But perhaps you would like to comment on the FACT the Dems deported more illegal uimmigrants than even Trump. 'US immigration authorities last year deported the largest number of undocumented immigrants in nearly a decade, surpassing the record of Donald Trump's first term in office. More than 271,000 immigrants were deported from the US over the last fiscal year, according to a report released by the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency on Thursday. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c36e41dx425o

Can I request Silent Night then? Literally.

Bob gets chatting to some idiot in the bar. Said idiot espouses his own, personal view on a matter. Said idiot now represents all Thai males. You really need to change the record.

Agreed. Was just suggesting one that I know personally about but whatever it is, the poster needs to seek professional help.

You may be suffering from intrusive thoughts which is a psychological condition that produces unwanted thought, image, or ideas, making the thinker feel uncomfortable. These thoughts pop into the brain on their own, and they're not something a person is trying to think about. I know you mentioned not wanting to see someone about this but I highly recommend you do. A close friend of mine suffered from this to the point he took his own life. Now I’m not saying for one moment you have this or the outcome will be as nearly horrific but you really should go and get checked out from a qualified individual rather than the armchair doctors (including myself) on AN.

As people of your ilk are prone to do, you are conflating 'theory' - "a supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something, especially one based on general principles independent of the thing to be explained' to scientific theory - "an explanation of an aspect of the natural world and universe that can be repeatedly tested and corroborated in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results.' If you think gravity is just a theory try jumping off a building. If you think that the earth is just a theory then just ask a pilot or an astronaut or even my 6 year old kid who seems to know more than you do.

So what would you have prefered, the police waiting until he actually killed some people first? Their job is to prevent crime, which is exactly what they did.

Be better

First I would prefer absolutely no outside donations to any political parties ever, so we agree on that. I cannot comment on the 'tax dodging Cayman islands hedge fund' but it seems to be a very good example of why both foreign individuals AND foreign corporations should be banned if it turns out to be true. But the reason why Musk and his ilk shouldn't be allowed is obviously because if you let one do it then others will follow; Saudi Sheiks (although they influence in other ways), religous extremists, other billionaires currying favour to their own ends - you would end up like America where essentially the government is bought and paid for by self interest groups such us Musk, the NRA, oil companies and many, many similar corporations. Their staggering wealth buys influence often at the detriment of ordinary people and that's plain wrong and shouldn't ever be allowed in the UK. Unions are quite a different thing altogether but I also don't think they should be allowed to donate but firstly they are at least British (a big point) and they represent working class British citizens so their self-interest is the interest of their membership. No-one should be allowed to pay political parties and neither should they be able to give gifts or expensive overseas trips but this has been tabled before and didn't succeed so I'm not going to hold my breath. Money should not play a part in policy but whilst there are glaring loop-holes such as the one this article highlights, then this looks likely to continue.

Who wants to bet that Musk will be out before he's even 'in'? Knowing Trumps hatred of anyone who gets more publicity than him, Musk would do well to keep his trap shut!

And you are just the worse winners ever! Talk about gloating.

No they can't. As mentioned numerous times, the minimum age in most countries for a sex change is 18 when most people are considered adults. You are conflating a sex change with taking puberty blockers - two very different things.

Great post and yes, as I've repeatedly said, this complicated issue should be viewed as a medical situation rather than political but that seems to be the world we now live in - people forced to be something they are not because some politicians want to score some points. All those shouting for kids not to be given puberty blockers (and they have to get them BEFORE puberty sets in hence why it's done so young) forget the many major psychological issues it creates and the ensuing problems thereafter. The good news though is theres been many coming out to say there hasn't been a significent rise in suicides because of the ban (https://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/news/clinical-areas/mental-health-pain-and-addiction/expert-discredits-claims-of-link-between-puberty-blockers-ban-and-suicide/) so at least that's something.

I'm not entirely sure I agree with your assertions here. Puberty blockers were introduced in the early 90's so have been used with very little controversy for over 30 years. It's only been the recent politicalisation of it mostly by right wing politicians in an every increasing attemp to insert even more identity politicis into the public discourse that's it's now become a 'thing'. The 'hardcore supporters of trans rights' you mention have only had to become more 'hardcore' to combat this extremism. You've seen it before with the Suffragettes and the Civil Rights Movement and more recently MeToo and BLM - people are forced into becoming 'hardcore' when their rights are being eroded and the trans movement is certainly under assault right now.

More identity politics........how very mature of you.

I think your self-perceived 'gotcha' moment is highlighting the very point that's being debated. If your article is correct (big IF) then it's not from a person but rather a corporation which seems to be the issue as mentioned in the post above '...............................he could channel funds through one of his UK-based companies. This loophole has prompted the Electoral Commission to call for tighter regulations to ensure donations from foreign individuals or entities are restricted to money generated within the UK.' Foreign donations, whether they be an individual or a corporation have no place in UK politics.

Another good reason to not subscribe to that disgrace of a social network.

I cannot find a single thing to support this assertion so either post a link or withdraw your comment. Quire rightly, foreign citizens are barred from directly donating to political parties in the UK (and it's rigourously checked by The Electoral Commission) so unless you have some corroborated evidence (which I very much doubt), then you're just spreading conspiracy theories. https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/full-guidance/political-party-donations-and-loans-great-britain

BodyDysmorphicdisorder (BDD), or body dysmorphia, is a well documented mental health condition that's been around for many, many years. The question of course is since a sex change is a permanent condition with no going back, at what age should it be allowed? In the vast majority of countries you can only get a full sex change when you are 18 and above (a sensible age when most are considered adults) but the controversy comes with puberty blockers in teenagers as young as 10 which I think most sensible people think is far too young. Places like the UK have now banned puberty blockers for under 18's but the point though is this should be medical considerations NOT a political one as extreme cases of BDD can lead to suicide. It's just not as straight forward as everyone makes out and the demonising from mostly the right isn't helping. I personally think the age should be 18 BUT with exceptions in a small amount of cases. This won't work of course because any ambiguity will just feed the haters so keep it at 18 and just keep your fingers crossed it doesn't lead to an uptick in teen deaths.

I think this is fair enough. All outgoing POTUS's are lame ducks if they don't get re-elected so Biden is just a bit more 'lame' than most. The guy's 82. He's done his bit for country over the 50 years he has been in politics so let him just fade into the night as he rightly deserves.

I rest my case

I understand the emotions involved in these matters but the death penalty isn't justice - it's revenge and retribution. No government should be carrying out revenge against their own citizens.

So many think the cost savings on 'feeding, security & medical expenses' when in reality it is exactly the opposite. 'The death penal­ty is far more expen­sive than a sys­tem uti­liz­ing life-with­out-parole sen­tences as an alter­na­tive pun­ish­ment. Some of the rea­sons for the high cost of the death penal­ty are the longer tri­als and appeals required when a person’s life is on the line, the need for more lawyers and experts on both sides of the case, and the rel­a­tive rar­i­ty of exe­cu­tions. Most cas­es in which the death penal­ty is sought do not end up with the death penal­ty being imposed. And once a death sen­tence is imposed, the most like­ly out­come of the case is that the con­vic­tion or death sen­tence will be over­turned in the courts. Most defen­dants who are sen­tenced to death essen­tial­ly end up spend­ing life in prison, but at a high­ly inflat­ed cost because the death penal­ty was involved in the process.' https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/costs