WDSmart

Wow. Follow the science. LOL The new basic response to your posts: Considering you dont know the difference between men and women LOL..... I'm saying, and "science" and biology are saying, that all people cannot be "simply" divided up into two categories: male and female. Some are born with a physical (both external and internal), hormonal, and psychological mix of genders. You are saying, and many in our society are saying, there are just two categories, and everyone has to belong to only one of them. So, I ask you again, what do you think is or should be the specific test to define someone's gender?

I disagree with the first part of your statement but agree with the last part.

Under the circumstance that it is desired by the minor and recommended by a doctor (psychologist), But I don't know if there is any instance of this in very young minors. I'd think this procedure would only be an option for minors above 15 or 16 years old. However, gender-related behaviors start appearing when they are only two or three years old. That's probably a mix of hormones and parental/societal expectations.

"Boys are boys, and girls are girls. It is simple, alright - simple-minded.

If Harris wins, Americans win. Legal immigrants can become citizens, and illegal immigrants are dealt with by the justice system.

Who needs to be removed is Trump! He needs to be removed from civil society and sent to prison.

Yes! The most important thing I that Trump does not get re-elected and spends the rest of his life in a prison somewhere.

I looked all of these up online in respect to how Harris and Walz are associated with them. I do think that each one of these under the right circumstances are "good" things.

So, you are saying that a "child" under 18 has to accept whatever gender they have been assigned (presumably, at birth on their birth certificate)? What if their parents object to that? What if they are born a "girl," and their parents want them to be a "boy," so dress them and treat them that way? Are you saying in a case like that, the child shouldn't be removed and placed in protective care? And, when they turn 18, will you then allow them to decide their own gender? The castration example was made to get you to think about this in a different way,in a way that is the reverse of the only one way you see it. You see it as a boy wanting to be a girl (or a girl wanting to be a boy), but you don't see it as parents wanting to change or disrupt their child's gender because of their beliefs.

Yes.

Lock them up!

Wow! I didn't know this...

I agree with your statement above. But that just makes the violation of free speech legal. It does not change the fact that it is a violation of free speech. It's like refusing to allow White people to vote is racist, but it might be legal if permitted by the "law of the land."

Lock him up!

Why would you think removing a child from parents who do not accept the child's choice of gender? Would you feel the same way about parents who want to castrate their son to prevent him from becoming a fully functioning adult male?

Wow!

She didn't say anything "Free speech" is defined by the Oxford Online dictionary as "the right to express any opinions without censorship or restraint," so it doesn't have to actually be speech. It can be any form of the expression of opinions - like waving a flag or writing posts.

Any bets that this fellow is under the impression that this either occurred in the USA or that the US Constitution applies outside of its borders? I suppose the WD stands for "Weren't Dat"? I say it's a "violation of free speech." If free speech is not protected in Australia, then a violation of free speech by the government is allowed. I have since seen that in Australia, Hezbollah is listed as a "terrorist organization," so that is why the display of their flags is illegal.

All that sounds good to me. Why do you oppose such things?

What we call our "five senses" are the only things you can depend on. Your intelligence is a grouping of concepts that are products of your intellect and, as such, are delusions.

I do that to an extent, and I've found CNN to be very reliable. I don't keep an open mind on things like child molestation and Trump.

Yes, you can vary your sources, but how do you actually know what is fact and what is not? How do you decide?

They may be weak choices, but ANYONE would be better than Trump!

@Yagoda, I am living in a different reality than others. I am 78 years old. I've seen a lot of things most people have not. I think the best issue you raised in your post was about Censorship. All this information we get every day from Internet sources like FB/Meta, Instagram, X, and AseanNow Forums is doing a lot of damage to our society. The problem is no one knows for sure what they can believe! An example is the terrorist attacks on 9-11 that destroyed two buildings in NYC and damaged the Pentagon. Now, do I know for sure that they really happened? No, I don't. I'd never seen the Two Towers before the alleged attack and have never been to NYC since to see that they are now gone. I only believe that because I take the word of the many of those who have reported on it. It could actually all be a hoax. But I do believe it happened. So, what else should I believe that I see reported on the Internet or on TV? Most of us have a few sources that we trust and believe whatever that source reports. That source for me is CNN. Just how this can be ameliorated, I don't know, but I do think it's very important that we try to come up with something that will at least warn people about possible fraudulent news.

This could take a while.... Experimental genital mutilation of children I really don't know what you mean by this, but I would disagree with any "experimental" mutilations being done on anyone. I'm sure Harris has not suggested she is for anything like this. I don't even think circumcisions should be done, although I, myself, have been circumcised. Leaving viable aborted babies to die I disagree with this and am positive both Harris and Walz do, too. The recent law in Minnesota doesn't allow this in spite of the reports otherwise. Removing children from parents who oppose trans programming I disagree with this, and I am sure Harris does, too. A fully open border I disagree with this, and I am sure Harris does, too. Taxpayer funding of boobs for trans prisoners I disagree with this, and I am sure Harris does, too. I've never heard of this before. Kneeling during the anthem I don't care anything about this, and I am sure Harris doesn't, either. No No to Deportation I disagree with this unless it's done according to the law. Legal immigrants should not be deported. Ban on fracking I'd be for this, but Harris has softened her stance on this, to my regret. Ban on stoves and ACs I disagree with this, and I am sure Harris does, too. I've never heard of this. The green new deal I'm for this. Censorship I am against this if it refers to expressing your opinion. I know something has to be done about all the false information posted on the Internet, but I don't know what. I don't think prohibiting will work because then it's just up to someone else to decide what is true and what is false. Social media is and will continue to present us with a big, big problem. Higher inflation I'm against this, but social issues are more important to me than economic ones. War I'm against this unless it is the last and only option. Iran I think they should be treated like any other country. I know they are being drawn into war with Israel, and I think we should stay out of this conflict as far as aiding either side with weapons or money. We should just try to help negotiate a ceasefire. Anti-semitism I am not anti-Jew or anti-Arab/Muslim and am not anti-Israeli or anti-Palestinian, but I think neither side is willing to live together in a two-state solution. I think we should not support either side and, as I said above, help either side as far as aiding either side with weapons or money. We should just try to help negotiate (force, if necessary) a ceasefire. anti-catholicism I am anti-religion, so in a way, I am anti-Catholic - at least as far as allowing any religion to impose it's version of morality on others. Violence against women I am against that, of course, and I'm sure Harris is too, but I probably don't know what you really mean by this. Men in womens sports I think as long as we have sports segregated into "men" and "women," that should be enforced - both ways. I don't think women should be allowed to participate in men's sports as they have in the past, like in golf. I think there needs to be a medical test to determine gender where that is challenged. What that test should be, I don't know, but I do think trans people (going both ways) should be allowed to compete if they pass that test. Rioting This is, of course, against the law. I oppose it. So, I hope that answers your questions, but it probably will create others...