***Official Political Discussion Thread***

[Belgium]

Far be it from me to try to figure out why Trump does anything that he does, but I do know that anybody who cares about Civil Liberties and Freedom should be happy to see Sessions ousted.

I am dumbfounded at how anybody who claims to be in support of the Constitution or holds Libertarian ideals could still support Trump.

I would assume that those people don't actually care about the Constitution or libertarian ideals. Kind of like how the GOP is the party of "family values". Reminds me of a certain part of the 2016 GOP platform, which I thoroughly examined during the election. It's ridiculous that they even put that part in there when their platform is littered with paragraphs explicitly advocating for discrimination against gays. While not as explicit, even in this part of the platform, right before the "we denounce ..." part, they allude to sexuality-based discrimination.

That God bestows certain inalienable rights on every individual, thus producing human equality; that government exists first and foremost to protect those inalienable rights; that man-made law must be consistent with God-given, natural rights; and that if God-given, natural, inalienable rights come in conflict with government, court, or human-granted rights, God-given, natural, inalienable rights always prevail; that there is a moral law recognized as “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God”; and that American government is to operate with the consent of the governed

 

[brendasdeadbaby]

Far be it from me to try to figure out why Trump does anything that he does, but I do know that anybody who cares about Civil Liberties and Freedom should be happy to see Sessions ousted.

I am dumbfounded at how anybody who claims to be in support of the Constitution or holds Libertarian ideals could still support Trump.

Ain't you the same fool that's against transgender's in the military and thinks it's a sickness talking about civil liberties and libertarian ideas

 

[gracian]

Ain't you the same fool that's against transgender's in the military and thinks it's a sickness talking about civil liberties and libertarian ideas

Yeah, I believe in Scientific fact and I don't support people with EXTRA needs and mental instabilities joining the military. Transgenders have the same Civil Liberties as anybody else. They shouldn't receive EXTRA special treatments or accommodations over others. That is the issue. If you like to wear dresses in your spare time and want to join, fine. If you require constant drugs to maintain your fantasy, then I don't support it.Do you believe that the military should have to allow wheelchair bound individuals the ability to serve? Should they build ramps into the tanks to accommodate them also? What about someone with diabetes that requires constant insulin injections?

 

[Belgium]

Yeah, I believe in Scientific fact and I don't support people with EXTRA needs and mental instabilities joining the military. Transgenders have the same Civil Liberties as anybody else. They shouldn't receive EXTRA special treatments or accommodations over others. That is the issue. If you like to wear dresses in your spare time and want to join, fine. If you require constant drugs to maintain your fantasy, then I don't support it.Do you believe that the military should have to allow wheelchair bound individuals the ability to serve? Should they build ramps into the tanks to accommodate them also?

But Trump announced a blanket ban, not a ban on combat roles. Should wheelchair bound individuals, such as injured combat veterans, be banned from serving an administrative role in the military?
I disagree with your rhetoric on transgenders in general but I can see where people are coming from with not wanting them in combat roles. However Trump announced a blanket ban, which bans them from any military position.

My country allows transgenders in the military. Never really heard complaints about it. The amount that actually want to join is very small and to my knowledge those are primarily administrative roles. For the record, the biggest party in our country is the conservative party NVA and our current federal government is center-right. Of course you have to take into account that the political spectrum is vastly different.
We have great health insurance so the DoD generally doesn't need to cover much medical costs. In some cases, the DoD can provide additional funding for certain parts of the transgender "transition process", but that all depends on the individual's medical file and is handled on a case by case basis. Generally there is no need for the DoD to interfere as our universal multipayer healthcare system can cover most of those costs. Our military does not offer specific psychological services to transgenders, they have to seek outside counsel for transgender-specific psychology services.

 

[brendasdeadbaby]

Yeah, I believe in Scientific fact and I don't support people with EXTRA needs and mental instabilities joining the military. Transgenders have the same Civil Liberties as anybody else.

Stopped reading here. no they don't

 

[gracian]

But Trump announced a blanket ban, not a ban on combat roles. Should wheelchair bound individuals, such as injured combat veterans, be banned from serving an administrative role in the military?
I disagree with your rhetoric on transgenders in general but I can see where people are coming from with not wanting them in combat roles. However Trump announced a blanket ban, which bans them from any military position.

My country allows transgenders in the military. Never really heard complaints about it. The amount that actually want to join is very small and to my knowledge those are primarily administrative roles. For the record, the biggest party in our country is the conservative party NVA and our current federal government is center-right. Of course you have to take into account that the political spectrum is vastly different.
We have great health insurance so the DoD generally doesn't need to cover much medical costs. In some cases, the DoD can provide additional funding for certain parts of the transgender "transition process", but that all depends on the individual's medical file and is handled on a case by case basis.

The military would still have to foot the bill for sex change operations and constant drugs correct?

Stopped reading here. no they don't

Name a right that you have, that a transgender individual doesn't have. They can join the military, as long as they don't require extra medical treatment. How would the military even know that they were transgender, aside from their clothes anyways? You can be turned down for many jobs for tattoos, piercings, clothing,etc. You aren't talking about Civil Liberties, you are requesting special privileges for a very marginal segment of society.

 

[IATT]

Jesus ole girl left dude when she was 9 months pregnant

You gotta be a special kind of ahole for that

 

[moonman818]

The military would still have to foot the bill for sex change operations and constant drugs correct?

I haven't been in the other thread but how do you feel about the military spending over 10x that on erection pills?

 

[brendasdeadbaby]

The military would still have to foot the bill for sex change operations and constant drugs correct?



Name a right that you have, that a transgender individual doesn't habe.

By federal law I cannot be discriminated against by employers and housing just to name a few because of my gender, ethnicity, sexual preference. There are no laws that protect transgenders at the federal level.

 

[Belgium]

The military would still have to foot the bill for sex change operations and constant drugs correct?

I'm not entirely sure but under your system I would assume yes. However the current cost seems rather negligible in the grand scheme of things and personally I would have no objections to that cost to provide equal rights. I'm of the opinion that if an individual has the right qualifications and passes the physical and mental tests, they should be free to serve. It's not like they're the only ones in the military with medical costs.
The coast guard has to spend more than that to protect Trump at Mar-A-Lago. If budgetary reasons are truly the reason then there's a whole lot of other things the admin. could be doing to cut costs they deem unnecessary.

Of course my perspective is a bit different as our military doesn't need to fund those things due to our healthcare system.

 

[EddieDoyers]

 

[americangenius]

Crazy to think that a tax break on just 400 already wealthy people can cost almost an entire country access to healthcare

 

[gry60]

Crazy to think that a tax break on just 400 already wealthy people can cost almost an entire country access to healthcare

If you look into the wealth distribution within the top 20%, a tiny number of people (we're talking less than 100 people) control most of the yellow area of the first graph.

 

[gracian]

I haven't been in the other thread but how do you feel about the military spending over 10x that on erection pills?

I don't support it. I don't really support a blanket ban either. I think that all soldiers should be held to the same standards and wear the same clothing/share the same bathrooms, etc. That would solve the problem. I do understand not allowing someone to serve who requires constant non medically essential drug use, extensive mental health services and potentially dangerous cosmetic surgery. Transgenderism is a mental disorder in the same way that body dysmorphic disorder or schizophrenia is.

 

[gracian]

By federal law I cannot be discriminated against by employers and housing just to name a few because of my gender, ethnicity, sexual preference. There are no laws that protect transgenders at the federal level.

They receive those same protections that you mentioned. You don't have the right to not be discriminated against for your clothing, preexisting mental conditions, tattoos or steroid usage.

 

[EddieDoyers]

Da 80% should pick up da bootstraps b
Just need da low overhead low rent apartment to sell da kicks for MSRP b

 

[Belgium]

Well this sure seems like "letting it fail" and selling the republican healthcare bill to the American people
How about taking the time in crafting a good healthcare bill that is in line with his healthcare promises. And more importantly, a bill that isn't a gigantic setback for the country and most of its citizens. When damn near every medical organization condemns your bill, the CBO gives it a bad score and your own party's majority doesn't support it, perhaps that's a hint to start over or make drastic changes instead of trying to sabotage the ACA in order to force an awful bill through.
http://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...csr-payments-if-healthcare-reform-isnt-passed

Trump threatens to end ObamaCare payments unless repeal passes

President Trump on Saturday threatened to end key payments to insurance companies made under Obamacare if a repeal and replace bill is not passed.

"After seven years of 'talking' Repeal & Replace, the people of our great country are still being forced to live with imploding ObamaCare!" the president wrote in a tweet.

"If a new HealthCare Bill is not approved quickly, BAILOUTS for Insurance Companies and BAILOUTS for Members of Congress will end very soon!" he added.

Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) fired back Saturday, saying Trump should "stop playing politics with people's lives and health care, start leading, and finally begin acting presidential."

"If the president refuses to make the cost sharing reduction payments, every expert agrees that premiums will go up and health care will be more expensive for millions of Americans," Schumer said in a statement.

Trump has previously threatened to withhold the payments, known as Cost Sharing Reduction (CSR) payments, which lower the amount individuals have to pay for deductibles, copayments and insurance.

The White House announced earlier this month that key ObamaCare subsidies to insurers would be paid this month, however the administration did not make a commitment beyond July.

Trump's comments come after Senate Republican efforts to repeal and replace ObamaCare failed in the early hours of Friday morning after three Republicans and all 48 Democrats rejected pared-down repeal legislation, known as a "skinny" bill.

The issue is of critical importance to Republicans in all three branches of government because the party campaigned for seven years to repeal former President Barack Obama's signature healthcare law.

 

[gracian]

I'm not entirely sure but under your system I would assume yes. However the current cost seems rather negligible in the grand scheme of things and personally I would have no objections to that cost to provide equal rights. I'm of the opinion that if an individual has the right qualifications and passes the physical and mental tests, they should be free to serve. It's not like they're the only ones in the military with medical costs.
The coast guard has to spend more than that to protect Trump at Mar-A-Lago. If budgetary reasons are truly the reason then there's a whole lot of other things the admin. could be doing to cut costs they deem unnecessary.

Of course my perspective is a bit different as our military doesn't need to fund those things due to our healthcare system.

"We already waste a lot of money, why not waste more." is not a good argument for anything.

Diabetes automatically disqualifies someone from military service, and transgenders require MUCH more health maintenance than someone with Diabetes does.

Mood disorders such as depression, bipolar disorder, psychoses, and other unspecified depressive issues are dis qualifiers as well.

Someone who is unhappy with the body that they were born into, to the point of wanting drugs and the amputation of functioning organs, is afflicted with a depressive order, and psychosis.

 

[aepps20]

Da 80% should pick up da bootstraps b
Just need da low overhead low rent apartment to sell da kicks for MSRP b

This is the mindset LIBBIES need to have fam. Save the 6 months, burn the COAL and let the good times ROLL.

 

[EddieDoyers]

Well this sure seems like "letting it fail" and selling the republican healthcare bill to the American people
How about taking the time in crafting a good healthcare bill that is in line with his healthcare promises. And more importantly, a bill that isn't a gigantic setback for the country and most of its citizens. When damn near every medical organization condemns your bill, the CBO gives it a bad score and your own party's majority doesn't support it, perhaps that's a hint to start over or make drastic changes instead of trying to sabotage the ACA in order to force an awful bill through.
http://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...csr-payments-if-healthcare-reform-isnt-passed

Trump is such a hack man. He's been acting like a crybaby ever since Obama roasted him in the Correspondants dinner. He's acting like Americans won't notice why their health care premiums spiked even more due to his stance.

 

[AEA18]

 

[aepps20]

Where was THIS guy when OBUMMER WAS RUINING EVERYTHING? LIBBIE CONJECTURE AND INNUENDO AT ITS PEAK.

 

[Belgium]

Atlanta news
Last game at Bobby Dodd before the move to the Benz Stadium lets close it out in style.

City news (ft. Spurs)

"We already waste a lot of money, why not waste more." is not a good argument for anything.

Diabetes automatically disqualifies someone from military service, and transgenders require MUCH more health maintenance than someone with Diabetes does.

Mood disorders such as depression, bipolar disorder, psychoses, and other unspecified depressive issues are dis qualifiers as well.

Someone who is unhappy with the body that they were born into, to the point of wanting drugs and the amputation of functioning organs, is afflicted with a depressive order, and psychosis.

Does the military not require physical and psychological testing to serve? There's numerous transgenders serving in the military already. If they can pass thorough psychological testing, why not?
Disqualifying people from the military for diabetes seems very excessive to me. Does that include type 2 diabetes?
As for the latter, it's a rather contested subject. Some studies say x, others say y. Some point to biological factors, others to environmental. I don't think there's conclusive evidence for either side. Belgium has a very high reputation in the medical world for our leading specialists, surgeons and medical research. They generally seem to be in agreement that there is no conclusive evidence to state either as fact. Their condition also doesn't necessarily mean they can't function well in society. While many struggle, there's also plenty who do well. Those who manage to get into our military for example. That's not exactly a position you can get into or maintain if you don't meet both physical and psychological requirements. Things like blanket bans put a blanket label on individuals who aren't necessarily unable to function in society. Like sexuality and race, they have their own specific law that protects them from baseless discrimination here.

Perhaps it's time to retire this topic or move it to the specific thread in question.

 

[RustyShackleford]

This dude in here now with this ****

 

[gracian]

Does the military not require physical and psychological testing to serve? There's numerous transgenders serving in the military already. If they can pass thorough psychological testing, why not?
Disqualifying people from the military for diabetes seems very excessive to me. Does that include type 2 diabetes?
As for the latter, it's a rather contested subject. Some studies say x, others say y. Some point to biological factors, others to environmental. I don't think there's conclusive evidence for either side. Belgium has a very high reputation in the medical world for our leading specialists, surgeons and medical research. They generally seem to be in agreement that there is no conclusive evidence to state either as fact. Their condition also doesn't necessarily mean they can't function well in society. While many struggle, there's also plenty who do well. Those who manage to get into our military for example. That's not exactly a position you can get into or maintain if you don't meet both physical and psychological requirements. Things like blanket bans put a blanket label on individuals who aren't necessarily unable to function in society. Like sexuality and race, they have their own specific law that protects them from baseless discrimination here.

Perhaps it's time to retire this topic or move it to the specific thread in question.

It is somewhat off topic. I didn't bring it in here. Someone else did. I was just replying. And yes, Type 2 diabetes is a disqualifier.