WDSmart

I'm in favor of the death penalty for at least one person in the DC area... 😡

Would I retaliate? That would depend on a couple of things. 1. If there were other Thai men, friends of his, present, then no; 2. If I felt threatened and needed to defend myself, then yes.

My bank is Krungsri (Ahyudya), By "printed copies," I mean the staff prints out a year's worth of my statements on regular paper. This only takes about five minutes. This is in addition to the scanned copies of the pages in my passbook. The longest wait is for the letter. That usually takes an hour or so. I've heard from others that Bangkok Bank does take a lot longer to prepare these things.

Thanks! That's all I needed to know...

I've never heard this before, and I hope it isn't true.

I have a Type-O visa, and I have extended my stay using a Retirement Monthly Transfer for about a year now. At my Immigration office in Phetchabun, I need to: 1. Go to my bank the morning of the Stay Extension application; 2. Make a deposit (any amount will do); 3. Get my account book updated and copies of all the pages for the last year, even if some of them are on a prior account book; 4. Get printed copies of all my account transactions for the past year. (I highlight the monthly deposits on each page with a yellow highlighter); 5. Get a letter from the bank (which just verifies I have been a customer for the past year). That's the process I go through at my bank to verify my monthly deposits.

After rereading your post, I will comment on one more of your comments. When both a novice and a master chant a mantra, if they do it correctly, their thinking and delusion of self have been quiesced, so there is no more "himself" or others.

Again, for the sake of brevity and so as not to infringe too much on the topic of this forum, I'll only respond to your last remark. As I said in my last post, all concepts of the human intellect are delusions. Logic is just one of them. And, yes, when I use logic to explain a concept, or in this case, the delusory aspect of a concept, like logic, that, too, is a delusion. I gave you an example in my last post of how you could experience reality, not just form a concept of it. That was a slap in the face. Another one would be the taste of a lemon. I could go on and on about how a lemon tastes, but everything I could say or write would just be delusions created by my intellect. The only way for you to "know" what a lemon tastes like is to bite into one.

When Trump does anything, it's unfair...🥵

Logic is a construct of the human intellect, projected out onto reality in an attempt to understand it so it can be predicted and even controlled. Most of my IT career was spent creating data structures. And yes, they aren't reality; they are only models. Some of these models do "work," for the most part, just as the models logic creates work fairly well for everyday uses. Logic creates a model of reality, but this model is not a true depiction of reality itself. Reality is chaos. Logic is a structured model of reality, a delusion created by the human intellect and projected out onto reality. And, yes, I, being a human and having an intellect, use logic too. I use it to present models to others, but I know all the logical models I create are not a true depiction of reality. The only way to share reality is through experience, and by "experience," I mean what we later refer to as "sensual experience." Thinking will never reveal reality. An example would be if you asked me to explain reality and I slapped you in the face. The sensual experience you would have then would be reality.

I'll skip responding line-by-line to your post this time. We obviously have completely different beliefs about this. I'll only respond to the one above. Reality is not logical. Logic is a concept of the human intellect that we project out onto reality in an attempt to understand it so we can control it. The best examples of this are the geometric math we use to describe the universe. In reality, there are no straight lines, right angles, circles, or rectangles. All is chaos, and that also goes for logic. It's a delusion our intellect creates and projects out onto reality.

Yes, thinking logically restricts you. A filter is a restriction. An idea that can't survive scrutiny could be thought of as weak, but that doesn't mean it's not true. It could just be ahead of its time. The scientific method is a method based on logic and the belief in cause-and-effect, both of which are invalid when describing reality. You yourself know that many theories/rules based on the scientific method were "proven" wrong at a later date. Equating logic with the notion that there are only two sexes is indeed a categorical error. Logic is what creates categories, either/or, and filters out anything in between. Biology (as in biological sex) is a classification. Gender, yes, is an identity. Saying logic cannot fail has been proven wrong over and over again. Saying gravity is constant and "too restrictive" is not true if measuring your weight at sea level and on top of Mt. Everest. Analog has no restrictions of either/or or male/female. Analog is a curve between the two extremes. Quantum computing does run on bits just like a digital computer. Unlike the bits in a digital computer, which can only be in one of two states (binary, like either/or, male/female), quantum bits (qubits) also have two basic states (like either/or and male/female), but can exist in a superposition of those two states, which is somewhere in-between. Because quantum computers do still have bits, I would prefer creating AIs on an analog computer, which has no bits. Schrödinger's Cat is indeed an example of the filtering and characterization of logic. It's like assuming the cat has to be male or female, when those either/or's are not the only choice. My prior experience in AI does not prove I'm correct on everything, but it does indicate I've thought a lot about these topics before. "Ana" is a computer with an analog frontend and a digital backend. The digital backend is used for solving scientific/logical/mathematical problems, and the analog frontend is used to communicate with humans. The bottom line is logic restricts thought, but keeps it comfortable to deal with. Using it, you're just trying to believe you understand things that are not understandable.

Thinking logically is not all that it's cracked up to be. Thinking logically restricts your thinking to logic, so it restricts you from thinking more freely. This is exactly the same thing as thinking there are only two biological sexes. Thinking logically about this (either/or) removes any possibility that you could accept the premise that there are more than just these two. Another more current example is the difference between "digital" (binary) computing and what is now called "quantum" computing. In the past, the predecessor was called "analog" computing. It allows AI to come up with an answer that is not just either/or, yes or no, but somewhere in between. Forty years ago, when my professional title was "Head of AI and Predictive Analysis" at Teradata Corp, I proposed using analog computing in AI, but I never tried to develop this myself. However, in my own personal life, I have often used this type of reasoning. Today, that's called being "woke." In some of my SciFi books where an AI is one of the characters, I always indicate it is on an analog computer, or at least an analog front end. In fact, one of the AI's in my book is called "Ana" for that very reason.

I agree and have posted a similar comment here later.

LSD is one hell of a drug. I took it several times when I was in my 20s. That was over 50 years ago, before it was made illegal. I still believe my experience on LSD altered my life entirely, one aspect of which is that it "woke" me up...

I wish that were so, but there are, unfortunately, a lot of right-wing conservatives out there, and they are supported and encouraged by false or non-DEI information..

The problem is, not all people have only a penis or a vagina, and even those who do may have non-corresponding internal organs, the wrong DNA, and/or incompatible hormone levels. There is no "biological reality." There are only "biological standards."

They are not all wrong. They are classifying a newborn's biological sex as either male or female by examining its external reproductive organs, just as they're told to do. If that's going to be the determination, then that's that. What I keep saying is, IMO, there are other factors to consider: internal reproductive organs, chromosomes, and hormone levels, which won't really come into significance until puberty.

Yes, it's all in our imagination. Or better said, the separation of our concept of sex into two, either/or, classifications is not in accordance with reality.

I am 79 years old and have conducted extensive research on this topic. Nature (reality) is pure chaos. Any order we (humans) think we find in it is just some delusion we've created and projected out onto it.

How, then, do you determine someone's "sex"? I your post above, you suggest that it is determined by external physical characteristics. There are other characteristics that also determine the "biological sex" of someone. They are: - Internal physical (womb. ovaries) - Chromosones (XX or XY) - Hormones (estrogen/androgen) So, if SCOTUS defined the term "sex" as "biological sex," did it also spell out just how that would be determined?

Yes, you could call them that, but not all transvestites are transgenders. A transgender is someone who identifies with a gender not compatible with their biological sex classification. Not all transvestites do that.

Comments like this show that the alphabet supporters are equally as mentally ill/deranged….if not more so. After I posted this, I later decided it was not appropriate. Anything done would not have been a "gender-affirming" surgery. Because of the patient's indecision, it would have been a "gender-disaffirming" survey. What I believe the doctor should have done is nothing, at least until the patient decided on what gender he/she preferred to be.

It's not an opinion. It is a biological fact. There are no "biological facts," or, as an aside, any such thing as a "scientific fact." All these "facts" are just our opinion, delusions created by our intellect. Nature (biology) is never "either/or" or even logical. There are no rules. It is all just a smooth curve, not an either/or.

I also agree to disagree, but do appreciate your reintroduction of the word "tranvestite." I do, however, think a transvestite is not necessarily a transgender. As you said above in one of your defining characteristics, "Transvestites typically identify with the gender they were assigned at birth." Transgenders do not. That's what makes them transgender.