ThreePointTakedown

Its quite clear that you don't understand. Having to confront anything traumatic or traumatizing from your past is difficult. Threatens to open up more wounds. This I feel is where I lose you. Talking about feelings and trauma. Toxic responses to those subjects will continue to keep people from being able to confront them and begin to heal. As a country, our parents(framers) didn't really know what they were doing. This new thing came about and they were just trying to make it work. The practices of the day were arcane and backwards. We know better now. But sweeping it under the rug and pretending it never happened because you feel bad is not a solution. Your 'devil's advocate' response is not surprising. Making yourself feel better in knowing the horrible things your family was responsible for is a trauma response. I'll bet you don't even realize you're doing it. If you talk to someone they can point out that it is pretty common and not in and of itself bad. Just doesn't help in healing.

Not sure what you mean. Don't bring up bad things from the past or in fact DO those things because 'the more you know'?

I know. Asking for someone to tell me what they mean by a thing instead of assuming. What an idiot? Am I right?! Heaven forbid we talk about the same thing using the same terms.

Common defense from people trying to unburden their conscience. 'I am not responsible for the horrible things done in the past. My decedents stole from their decedents, but I owe them nothing despite the wealth and privilege I now enjoy, because they didn't ask for it back soon enough.' To answer your first question, we do. We know what happened. We know the effects. We know who was responsible. We live with the wealth they stole. Now the people they stole it from are asking for help(by coming to our house and asking for some of the wealth we stole). You want to kick them out. That is a heartless and ignorant thing to do. Will we need to sacrifice and suffer a bit in order to make things right? Probably. Can the crimes of the past ever be adequately remedied? Maybe, but first we need to take the first steps. I don't envy the governors of the border states. They have been otherizing people at the border for decades and now they can't change their minds for fear of being laughed at on a message board. Its the 'sunken cost' fallacy. Its what everyone does on this board when they know they're wrong. Lash out and make more and more ridiculous arguments because they are no longer trying to convince the other person. They are just trying to hold on to a belief that is close to slipping away. Reckoning with one's bigotry or simple misinformation can be powerful. What are you afraid of that gets you so riled up? What is the scenario you play in your head that gets you to write all this?

I'm sorry my point makes yours moot. That's all I can say at this time. That you feel comfortable invoking hitler I feel you are unable to absorb things because you're too busy defending yourself to yourself.

I don't disagree with the fact that many people are coming. I get that. But the border has been and will almost certainly remain 'open' in the sense that people are allowed through for one reason or another. It was like that for Republican and Democratic Presidents, alike. Is it only recently that an 'open'(vs closed) border has become a real issue with you or has it always been that way? If so, why do you think that is?

That tracks. No. 2 was a 'How' question. But I guess you answered it anyway.

What is border policy? Is it truly 'open' as you say? Where can I read that?

Or they had to reach into the closet and get the funeral outfit they hoped they wouldn't need to wear so soon. Protecting girls from a new boogieman has been the motivation of some horrible laws. This is no different. I'll bet you can think of a few others? Eh.. Eh.. Wrong side of history, yet again. So you're saying our culture has taught and rewarded some people for being overly zealous on a sports field/court/pitch and others suffer the consequences for it? Shocking.

From what I've read: Prohibits: counselors and educators from concealing or encouraging adolescents to conceal their feelings of gender dysphoria from their parents. referrals for medicalized treatments for minors with Gender Dysphoria Medicaid from covering the cost of SRS for minors. any requirement for private insurers to cover medicalized treatments for gender dysphoria in adolescents. hormone blockers for Gender Dysphoria prior to the age of 18. cross-sex hormones for youth experiencing gender dysphoria prior to the age of 18. surgical interventions or Sex Reassignment Surgery (SRS) for minors. this one is, in my opinion the most controversial, and I get it. It is rare, but still should be an option. Threatens to: remove the licensure of physicians who provide this care and threatens them with civil lawsuits. The American Academy of Pediatrics approves of the care. How would/could law makers know better? Withdraw public funds from any hospital at which gender affirming care occurs That doesn't punish anyone for no reason whatsoever. Either way, it works to chill/prohibit someone from attaining or providing the care. Which will put people in danger. The more barriers there are the less inclined people are to try to do the work. Doctors will hesitate and parents will hesitate. Which means who is in danger? KIDS! Despite the small number of kids are you ok with them being at elevated risk for self harm?

Its already happened. (tip of the cap) Cherrio!

So, someone has a different opinion and they need to leave? That tracks. How scared are you to have a conversation? I understand my privilege. I am happy to do a little extra to help people who, through no fault of their own, need a hand. If you only care about you and yours, fine. Then say it? You've all but done that already. This is why other countries don't like us. You think we can exist separate and apart from the world because we're so great. A mistaken moral superiority that we(and I mean YOU) have. Which blinds you to any blemish in our history that might threaten the opinion you hold of an otherwise flawed country. “I imagine one of the reasons people cling to their hates so stubbornly is because they sense, once hate is gone, they will be forced to deal with pain.” ― James Baldwin, The Fire Next Time

Do you understand the procedures, protocols, and treatments for the people in these situations? What they go through? Their state of mind and how they view the world? Or their opinion of how the world views them? Because prescribing drugs to children happens all the time. You're no upset about the others, just these. And I find it funny that you ignored the last thing I wrote, probably because it makes your point moot, and repeated yourself as if in a rage-induced fugue state. See this is where I think you're confused. If you don't understand the thing you are talking about its ok to ask questions or look things up. Firstly, the law is banning mental health care for these conditions, in addition to other medical procedures and protocols, which is just stupid. Its an over reach and the very thing they would rail against in any other situation. So, hypocrites. Mental health care is not experimentation. Helping someone through a tough part in their lives is never a bad idea but to deny them that is cruel. None of this is experimentation. If you want to stick your fingers in your ears and scream 'EXPERIMENTING ON KIDS!' over and over, fine. But you ARE wrong! No amount of yelling will change that. All the medicines and treatments have been done/used before and the effects and side effects are known. Don't get me wrong you can have genuine objections to all the parts, that make up medical care for people in these situations. I don't think you currently have a genuine objection. I have no doubt if you learned about it more, you might be able to describe a procedure or protocol that you object to and why. Your reasoning, general as it is, tells me you know only what you've been told or read in sensationalized headlines and little more. It also tells me that you don't know and/or cannot sympathize with anyone in this situation, parents or kids. So your icky feelings about it have won out rather than learning and understanding.

Personal responsibility gets brought up as defense in a number of issues. I never understood it. Well I think I kinda do. You just don't care. That's ok. You don't have to. I'm not saying you do. But then say it. Be honest. Its happened before. Brexit just happened a few years ago. They said, 'screw it, we're out, you're on your own.' They were wrong and continue to be punished, economically, for allowing themselves to be tricked by racists bigots. That's why I'm not jazzed about that way of thinking. If half the record profits from the inflation crisis was taken and used to help the countries in central and south america with the issues that cause many migrants to head north, we might not have an issue with the border. Also, those companies would probably have a good amount more people that could afford to buy their products. As it stands, they jacked up prices because they could, bought back stock and continue to shove it in our faces that they are the only game in town and there isn't anything we can do about it. Sorry, ranted there for a min. Back to my point. If you want to be isolationist, then just say it. Then I'll ask 'what should be the criteria for letting people in at all?' To which you will say... Then I'll say, 'when has that ever been the criteria for letting people emigrate to this country?' And you'll say.... Then I'll say, 'how is this not a knee jerk reaction that might not be but could be construed as racist?' Then you'll say.... Then I'll say, 'oh'. 'I'll never understand the logic people on here use and say these poor people are leaving a country that is so bad, and it is so bad because of the US, but they want to get to the US??' The country they are leaving may not have had their issues caused by policies of our country today. But more than zero of them have been effected by us in negative ways. Some of those consequences persist today. Also, people who are leaving for whatever reason, pick your poison, may not be aware that WE were the cause of some of their country's issues. Should that matter? Do they need to pass a social studies test to determine their motivations? 'Our government are a bunch of idiots about a lot of things, and we need to make changes, but holy crap, we are a GREAT country and there is a reason so many people want to come here unvetted. Letting people in without any sort of vetting process is essentially wanting us to be like the very countries these people are trying to leave.' Agreed to the first bit, but to say we are a GREAT country considering how badly we treat the rest of the world smacks of your narrow sightedness. At no point did we hesitate to break promises to people when it was financially advantages to us. We expanded our territory to annex mineral deposits, huge tracks of land we turned into a dust bowl, and islands in the pacific that were militarily important. That you try to justify these horrible acts by saying that we are great. Fails to admit, or learn at all, what this is all built on. Am I privileged to live here at this time? Oh yea. I understand how hard things were 100 years ago for everyone. Knowing what I know now, I would not choose to do it. I admit that. But it seems that your opinion lacks even a bit of acknowledgment to the obviously terrible things in our history when we were NOT GREAT!

I'm having a difficult time understanding what it is you are trying to say. Please elaborate on all of your points? You would rather I stop responding about my desire to help people create better lives for themselves? Why is that?

Do you understand what a 'straw man' is? You created one so let me try. By your logic, we should never try anything new when we learn new information because you don't like the idea of experimenting. In that case, could we have ever accomplished anything in the medical field, ever? Hint: No. Could we have done, achieved, discovered, or cured anything in the history of ever? Hint: Again, no. If the topic makes you feel uncomfortable, that's a valid reason. It doesn't and shouldn't hold any water with regards to the medical decisions people make for themselves. You have failed to show that allowing them to attain their chosen health care track causes or might cause more harm than not. Keeping in mind there are none/zero/0 medical treatments without side effects.

Can you challenge my opinions without trying to assume my intent? Doesn't seem like it. It seems as if you're trying to avoid traps or having to do any work to back your opinion. If you're uninterested in providing the reason for your opinion and some clarifying information, why join the conversation? At this point you know where this goes: You state opinion. I ask why that is and add my own opinion. You say, 'its pretty obvious.' I say, 'doesn't seem like it.' You say, 'I rest my case.' in so many words and resort to assuming my intent. How many subjects has this played out on in the last two weeks? Ask ChatJBT? J or m. You said, 'I rest my case' without offering any clarity or response to the post. As if its just self evident that your opinion is proven. It seems like you're worried about where the conversation is going. So lead it instead of rage-quitting because of whatever reason.

Whatever helps you sleep at night

Own goals are great when you can get them.

Did you not understand what I said? I'll bet you don't. Since you can't admit you do. Because then you deliberately ignored it. I'll assume you don't. Want me to explain it... slowly?

Are you coming to someone else's defense to get more attention? That's healthy.

Thanks for the update

Senate Banking Committee "Did the New Deal, as has sometimes been charged, exacerbate and extend the Great Depression? Hardly. The regulatory state provided protections that benefited all Americans. The administration could have treated business interests better, but they were often responsible themselves for the antagonism 6 that persisted throughout the 1930s. Fiscal policy would certainly have worked better had it been better understood. The fact that we were slow to embrace Keynesian theory is one of the disappointments of the decade." Could it have been handled better? Of course. Had anything like this happened before in the history of the world? Debatable. Was it a failure? Nope.

Word salad garbage, to rationalize away your reason for honestly contributing. Not shadow of doubt. Any proof that isn't just opinion. I am interested in opinions as much as to determine if someone is honest in how they came about them. If they aren't going to be honest or are unwilling to share the pedigree, there is no reason to continue. As these are sensitive issues, I can understand how difficult it might be to have an unpopular opinion and not wanting to share it. Mine are, seemingly, unpopular here. That may be due to the population that choose to frequent this site. I am not shy about my opinions and my reasons for having them.

All of these points are fair. If this study and the conclusions are true. There should be no reason to ban the process or practice altogether. This is more information that parents and kids could use to make their health care decisions decisions. Medications have side effects. We know this. What is gained by forcefully discontinuing this practice across the board? Along with any mental health care they could use/benefit from? Seems cruel and ignorant to ban something that so few people utilize and benefit from(medical/mental health care).