"rex hudson" <rexh@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:vdkubh$1l21j$3@news.mixmin.net...
> On 10/2/2024 4:53 PM, Joel wrote:
>> NoBody <NoBody@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>>> It's [GAC surgery] never done below the age of 16, rarely before
>>>>>>>>>> 18. This isn't a
>>>>>>>>>> real problem, just a rhetorical point for the phobes,
>>>>>>>>>> dishonestly.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Citations please?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I know what I'm talking about, I was referring to within the U.S.,
>>>>>>>> though, it should be noted.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So you can't support your claim??
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I defy you to refute it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Refute what? You've made an unsupported claim.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't do the homework of liberals.
>>>>
>>>> In other words, you can't hear a wise person when you see one.
>>>
>>> No, in other words, I don't do the homework of those who won't support
>>> their clams.
>>
>>
>> So, *you* won't do "the homework" of checking it out for yourself, you
>> want me to prove something I already know to be true. Fuck off and
>> die, burn in hell.
>
> What you "know" is generally well-lubricated delusion.

Objection.. No evidence has been entered that it's lubricated much less well
lubricated..

"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ne0sfj1a9vg6qva71j112ojsqu3kqoroco@4ax.com...
> rex hudson <rexh@lycos.com> wrote:
>
>>> So, *you* won't do "the homework" of checking it out for yourself, you
>>> want me to prove something I already know to be true. Fuck off and
>>> die, burn in hell.
>>
>>What you "know" is generally well-lubricated delusion.
>
>
> Spoken like a transphobe.

The way Joel uses transphobe

Transphobe - Assertion by Joel to anyone that shows him up.

"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ekusfjhmsvgklpo46bcfpnh9dfunue6jkf@4ax.com...
> NoBody <NoBody@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>>>>>>>It's [GAC surgery] never done below the age of 16, rarely before
>>>>>>>>>>>18. This isn't a
>>>>>>>>>>>real problem, just a rhetorical point for the phobes,
>>>>>>>>>>>dishonestly.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Citations please?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>I know what I'm talking about, I was referring to within the U.S.,
>>>>>>>>>though, it should be noted.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>So you can't support your claim??
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I defy you to refute it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Refute what? You've made an unsupported claim.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I don't do the homework of liberals.
>>>>>
>>>>>In other words, you can't hear a wise person when you see one.
>>>>
>>>>No, in other words, I don't do the homework of those who won't support
>>>>their clams.
>>>
>>>So, *you* won't do "the homework" of checking it out for yourself, you
>>>want me to prove something I already know to be true. Fuck off and
>>>die, burn in hell.
>>
>>Typical liberal - expect someone else to support or disprove their
>>claim for them because they're too lazy to appear credible by doing it
>>themselves.
>>
>>Finish with a hateful remark and get the perfect lib.
>
>
> I'll tell you why what I wrote is that of a "typical liberal" -
> because it was correct, based in knowledge.

And yet.. you can't support this "knowledge" you claim to possess..

"Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:ekusfjhmsvgklpo46bcfpnh9dfunue6jkf@4ax.com...
>> NoBody <NoBody@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>So, *you* won't do "the homework" of checking it out for yourself, you
>>>>want me to prove something I already know to be true. Fuck off and
>>>>die, burn in hell.
>>>
>>>Typical liberal - expect someone else to support or disprove their
>>>claim for them because they're too lazy to appear credible by doing it
>>>themselves.
>>>
>>>Finish with a hateful remark and get the perfect lib.
>>
>> I'll tell you why what I wrote is that of a "typical liberal" -
>> because it was correct, based in knowledge.
>
>And yet.. you can't support this "knowledge" you claim to possess..

Free hint, bozo, people younger than 16 *by definition* cannot consent
to radical surgery like this. My previous GF had received zero GAC of
any kind, but was hot anyway, the idea that GAC is required really is
imaginary, in fact in some cases a form of abusiveness. One's
identity as transgender has *nothing* to do with sex hormones or
genitalia.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:78gtfjppcnk5pvb2s0p8u3vkrkbauekb82@4ax.com...
> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>>"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:ekusfjhmsvgklpo46bcfpnh9dfunue6jkf@4ax.com...
>>> NoBody <NoBody@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>So, *you* won't do "the homework" of checking it out for yourself, you
>>>>>want me to prove something I already know to be true. Fuck off and
>>>>>die, burn in hell.
>>>>
>>>>Typical liberal - expect someone else to support or disprove their
>>>>claim for them because they're too lazy to appear credible by doing it
>>>>themselves.
>>>>
>>>>Finish with a hateful remark and get the perfect lib.
>>>
>>> I'll tell you why what I wrote is that of a "typical liberal" -
>>> because it was correct, based in knowledge.
>>
>>And yet.. you can't support this "knowledge" you claim to possess..
>
>
> Free hint, bozo, people younger than 16 *by definition* cannot consent
> to radical surgery like this.

Then prohibiting them from having it until they are 21 shouldn't be an issue
then.

> My previous GF had received zero GAC of
> any kind, but was hot anyway

So you liked his dick?

In article <vdmp2p$3r8lv$6@dont-email.me>, me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net says...
>
> "Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:78gtfjppcnk5pvb2s0p8u3vkrkbauekb82@4ax.com...
> > "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
> >>"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >>news:ekusfjhmsvgklpo46bcfpnh9dfunue6jkf@4ax.com...
> >>> NoBody <NoBody@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>>So, *you* won't do "the homework" of checking it out for yourself, you
> >>>>>want me to prove something I already know to be true. Fuck off and
> >>>>>die, burn in hell.
> >>>>
> >>>>Typical liberal - expect someone else to support or disprove their
> >>>>claim for them because they're too lazy to appear credible by doing it
> >>>>themselves.
> >>>>
> >>>>Finish with a hateful remark and get the perfect lib.
> >>>
> >>> I'll tell you why what I wrote is that of a "typical liberal" -
> >>> because it was correct, based in knowledge.
> >>
> >>And yet.. you can't support this "knowledge" you claim to possess..
> >
> >
> > Free hint, bozo, people younger than 16 *by definition* cannot consent
> > to radical surgery like this.
>
> Then prohibiting them from having it until they are 21 shouldn't be an issue
> then.
>
> > My previous GF had received zero GAC of
> > any kind, but was hot anyway
>
> So you liked his dick?
>
>

https://postimg.cc/tn4Mdwk7

"Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:

>>>> I'll tell you why what I wrote is that of a "typical liberal" -
>>>> because it was correct, based in knowledge.
>>>
>>>And yet.. you can't support this "knowledge" you claim to possess..
>>
>> Free hint, bozo, people younger than 16 *by definition* cannot consent
>> to radical surgery like this.
>
>Then prohibiting them from having it until they are 21 shouldn't be an issue
>then.

Bzzt.

>> My previous GF had received zero GAC of
>> any kind, but was hot anyway
>
>So you liked his dick?

I like any nice dick, including on men.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 10/3/2024 12:29 PM, Mike W wrote:
> In article <vdmp2p$3r8lv$6@dont-email.me>, me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net says...
>>
>> "Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:78gtfjppcnk5pvb2s0p8u3vkrkbauekb82@4ax.com...
>>> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>>>> "Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:ekusfjhmsvgklpo46bcfpnh9dfunue6jkf@4ax.com...
>>>>> NoBody <NoBody@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> So, *you* won't do "the homework" of checking it out for yourself, you
>>>>>>> want me to prove something I already know to be true. Fuck off and
>>>>>>> die, burn in hell.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Typical liberal - expect someone else to support or disprove their
>>>>>> claim for them because they're too lazy to appear credible by doing it
>>>>>> themselves.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Finish with a hateful remark and get the perfect lib.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'll tell you why what I wrote is that of a "typical liberal" -
>>>>> because it was correct, based in knowledge.
>>>>
>>>> And yet.. you can't support this "knowledge" you claim to possess..
>>>
>>>
>>> Free hint, bozo, people younger than 16 *by definition* cannot consent
>>> to radical surgery like this.
>>
>> Then prohibiting them from having it until they are 21 shouldn't be an issue
>> then.
>>
>>> My previous GF had received zero GAC of
>>> any kind, but was hot anyway
>>
>> So you liked his dick?
>>
>>
>
> https://postimg.cc/tn4Mdwk7

I've seen that picture on a Megan's Law site.

[Default] Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> typed:

>I like any nice dick, including on men.

That's the only place you'll find one, idiot.

Scout <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>
>
> "Leroy N. Soetoro" <democrat-insurrection@mail.house.gov> wrote in message
> news:lnsB1F1B9F5630EB6F089P2473@0.0.0.1...
>> https://nypost.com/2022/06/18/detransitioned-teens-explain-why-they-
>> regret-changing-genders/
>>
>> "I was failed by the system. I literally lost organs."
>
> You got exactly what you demanded....

If a person was lied to by bad actors and got unneeded botched surgery, and
only then realized her mistake, don’t you think bad actors still have to be
punished?

Yeah, maybe they demanded it at some point. But hundreds and thousands of
young men and women (especially women) who were lied to that this will help
them with their mental issues are still victims.

Klaus Schadenfreude <klaus.schadenfreude.Zwergentöter.@gmail.com>
wrote:

>>I like any nice dick, including on men.
>
>That's the only place you'll find one, idiot.

Not true.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On Thu, 03 Oct 2024 20:42:55 -0400, Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:

>Klaus Schadenfreude <klaus.schadenfreude.Zwergentöter.@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>>I like any nice dick, including on men.
>>
>>That's the only place you'll find one, idiot.
>
>
>Not true.

Hillary's dick is bigger than Donald's.

--

One more reason to not vote for Trump in 34 days.

25) Trump recognized Israel's occupation of the Golan
Heights, which is considered illegal under international law.

[Default] Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> typed:

>Klaus Schadenfreude <klaus.schadenfreude.Zwergentöter.@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>>I like any nice dick, including on men.
>>
>>That's the only place you'll find one, idiot.
>
>
>Not true.

100% factual and true.

[Default] Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> typed:

>On Thu, 03 Oct 2024 20:42:55 -0400, Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Klaus Schadenfreude <klaus.schadenfreude.Zwergentöter.@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>>I like any nice dick, including on men.
>>>
>>>That's the only place you'll find one, idiot.
>>
>>
>>Not true.
>
>Hillary's dick is bigger than Donald's.

And you've sucked both of them

On Thu, 03 Oct 2024 07:07:37 -0400, Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:

>NoBody <NoBody@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>>>>>>>It's [GAC surgery] never done below the age of 16, rarely before 18. This isn't a
>>>>>>>>>>>real problem, just a rhetorical point for the phobes, dishonestly.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Citations please?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>I know what I'm talking about, I was referring to within the U.S.,
>>>>>>>>>though, it should be noted.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>So you can't support your claim??
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I defy you to refute it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Refute what? You've made an unsupported claim.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I don't do the homework of liberals.
>>>>>
>>>>>In other words, you can't hear a wise person when you see one.
>>>>
>>>>No, in other words, I don't do the homework of those who won't support
>>>>their clams.
>>>
>>>So, *you* won't do "the homework" of checking it out for yourself, you
>>>want me to prove something I already know to be true. Fuck off and
>>>die, burn in hell.
>>
>>Typical liberal - expect someone else to support or disprove their
>>claim for them because they're too lazy to appear credible by doing it
>>themselves.
>>
>>Finish with a hateful remark and get the perfect lib.
>
>
>I'll tell you why what I wrote is that of a "typical liberal" -
>because it was correct, based in knowledge. You demanding evidence of
>something, you can easily verify yourself, is hypocrisy from the
>"typical right-winger" who would never ask right-wing figures for
>evidence, of their outlandish bullshit. You're a joke.

Your a ridiculous individual who thinks someone else should verify
your claims for you. You are also incorrect in your use of
hypocritical. If I make a claim I will back it up if asked. I don't
stomp my feet and act like a child.

In short, you can't be taken seriously.

On Thu, 3 Oct 2024 09:28:16 -0500, "Scout"
<me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:

>
>
>"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:ekusfjhmsvgklpo46bcfpnh9dfunue6jkf@4ax.com...
>> NoBody <NoBody@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>It's [GAC surgery] never done below the age of 16, rarely before
>>>>>>>>>>>>18. This isn't a
>>>>>>>>>>>>real problem, just a rhetorical point for the phobes,
>>>>>>>>>>>>dishonestly.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Citations please?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>I know what I'm talking about, I was referring to within the U.S.,
>>>>>>>>>>though, it should be noted.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>So you can't support your claim??
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I defy you to refute it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Refute what? You've made an unsupported claim.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I don't do the homework of liberals.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>In other words, you can't hear a wise person when you see one.
>>>>>
>>>>>No, in other words, I don't do the homework of those who won't support
>>>>>their clams.
>>>>
>>>>So, *you* won't do "the homework" of checking it out for yourself, you
>>>>want me to prove something I already know to be true. Fuck off and
>>>>die, burn in hell.
>>>
>>>Typical liberal - expect someone else to support or disprove their
>>>claim for them because they're too lazy to appear credible by doing it
>>>themselves.
>>>
>>>Finish with a hateful remark and get the perfect lib.
>>
>>
>> I'll tell you why what I wrote is that of a "typical liberal" -
>> because it was correct, based in knowledge.
>
>And yet.. you can't support this "knowledge" you claim to possess..
>
>

Because, as he demonstrated in this thread, he has no actual
knowledge.

On Fri, 04 Oct 2024 07:06:33 -0400, NoBody <NoBody@nowhere.com> wrote:

> If I make a claim I will back it up if asked.

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

--

Four more reasons to not vote for Trump in 33 days.

26) Trump broke the law by trying to withhold nearly
$400 million of U.S. aid for Ukraine in an effort to
extort a personal political favor from Ukraine's President Zelensky.
Trump wanted Zelensky to interfere in the 2020 election by announcing
an investigation into the Bidens. Delaying this aid to Ukraine
weakened Ukraine and strengthened Russia.

27) Trump personally attacked and ruined the careers of everyone
who stood in the way of his illegal Ukraine scheme, including
Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch and Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman.

28) To cover up the scheme, Trump ordered the White House and
State Department to defy congressional subpoenas.

29) For these reasons, on December 18th, 2019, Trump
became the third U.S. president to be impeached.
He was charged with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.

"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:d4utfjt7hp9igbdoevjfjonf6qfumqq347@4ax.com...
> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>
>>>>> I'll tell you why what I wrote is that of a "typical liberal" -
>>>>> because it was correct, based in knowledge.
>>>>
>>>>And yet.. you can't support this "knowledge" you claim to possess..
>>>
>>> Free hint, bozo, people younger than 16 *by definition* cannot consent
>>> to radical surgery like this.
>>
>>Then prohibiting them from having it until they are 21 shouldn't be an
>>issue
>>then.
>
>
> Bzzt.

The sounds of Joel's brain locking up.

>>> My previous GF had received zero GAC of
>>> any kind, but was hot anyway
>>
>>So you liked his dick?
>
>
> I like any nice dick, including on men.

well since you only find them on men, I would take that as a given.

Now, if only you could acknowledge that fact.

"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreude.Zwergentöter.@gmail.com> wrote
in message
news:d18ufj99ns5443ane52thdnilt1fikrab2@Rudy.Canoza.is.a.forging.cocksucking.dwarf.com...
> [Default] Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> typed:
>
>>I like any nice dick, including on men.
>
> That's the only place you'll find one, idiot.

I'm sure Joel's delusions will require him to disagree with you..

"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1geufjle70p4tvpt00amfphhuqgtii3dft@4ax.com...
> Klaus Schadenfreude <klaus.schadenfreude.Zwergentöter.@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>>I like any nice dick, including on men.
>>
>>That's the only place you'll find one, idiot.
>
>
> Not true.

And I called it.

"Governor Swill" <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:k04vfjt177h4l745h9j79tlce9mts14asj@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 03 Oct 2024 20:42:55 -0400, Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Klaus Schadenfreude <klaus.schadenfreude.Zwergentöter.@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>>I like any nice dick, including on men.
>>>
>>>That's the only place you'll find one, idiot.
>>
>>
>>Not true.
>
> Hillary's dick is bigger than Donald's.

Hillary is a bigger dick than Donald

"D. Ray" <d@ray> wrote in message
news:EbISvgJaigwuKDyvPcegnYFwDabrsnVx@news.usenet.farm...
> Scout <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Leroy N. Soetoro" <democrat-insurrection@mail.house.gov> wrote in
>> message
>> news:lnsB1F1B9F5630EB6F089P2473@0.0.0.1...
>>> https://nypost.com/2022/06/18/detransitioned-teens-explain-why-they-
>>> regret-changing-genders/
>>>
>>> "I was failed by the system. I literally lost organs."
>>
>> You got exactly what you demanded....
>
> If a person was lied to by bad actors and got unneeded botched surgery,
> and
> only then realized her mistake, don’t you think bad actors still have to
> be
> punished?

He is an adult responsible for his own actions.. if he wasn't then the
surgery should have been refused.

Which is why I say the age to undergo this should be 21.

NoBody <NoBody@nowhere.com> wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>>>It's [GAC surgery] never done below the age of 16, rarely before 18. This isn't a
>>>>>>>>>>>>real problem, just a rhetorical point for the phobes, dishonestly.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Citations please?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>I know what I'm talking about, I was referring to within the U.S.,
>>>>>>>>>>though, it should be noted.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>So you can't support your claim??
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I defy you to refute it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Refute what? You've made an unsupported claim.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I don't do the homework of liberals.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>In other words, you can't hear a wise person when you see one.
>>>>>
>>>>>No, in other words, I don't do the homework of those who won't support
>>>>>their clams.
>>>>
>>>>So, *you* won't do "the homework" of checking it out for yourself, you
>>>>want me to prove something I already know to be true. Fuck off and
>>>>die, burn in hell.
>>>
>>>Typical liberal - expect someone else to support or disprove their
>>>claim for them because they're too lazy to appear credible by doing it
>>>themselves.
>>>
>>>Finish with a hateful remark and get the perfect lib.
>>
>>I'll tell you why what I wrote is that of a "typical liberal" -
>>because it was correct, based in knowledge. You demanding evidence of
>>something, you can easily verify yourself, is hypocrisy from the
>>"typical right-winger" who would never ask right-wing figures for
>>evidence, of their outlandish bullshit. You're a joke.
>
>Your a ridiculous individual who thinks someone else should verify
>your claims for you. You are also incorrect in your use of
>hypocritical. If I make a claim I will back it up if asked. I don't
>stomp my feet and act like a child.
>
>In short, you can't be taken seriously.

I stand by what I asserted. They don't cut tits or cocks off of
people under 16.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

"Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:

>>>> It's [GAC surgery] never done below the age of 16, rarely before 18.
>>>> This isn't a
>>>> real problem, just a rhetorical point for the phobes, dishonestly.
>>>
>>>Frankly it should be illegal below 18. Under 18 it's child abuse. It is
>>>unnecessary and purely elective cosmetic surgery.
>>
>> Wrong.
>
>No, that's exactly factual.

16 and 17 year-old people are not children.

>>>If it must be done let the court ordered and the Court will need to pay
>>>for
>>>this massively expenses unnecessary elective cosmetic surgery and any
>>>future
>>>costs than may result from it.
>>>
>>>Between 18-21 I'm not sure how that would work, but if the parents say
>>>'no'
>>>then the above conditions above would apply.
>>
>> What do "parents" have to do with people over 18, retard?
>
>Because in all states 21 is the legal adult age were parents no longer have
>any responsibly towards their child.
>
>Now, if you can get all states to agree to 18, then we can lower it, but
>since you are talking a national policy here, we have to go with the
>highest.
>
>I find it interesting that an adult of your asserted superiority wouldn't
>know that.

So a state has some power over a 20 year-old? Fuck that.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On Fri, 04 Oct 2024 21:09:11 -0400, Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:

>"Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>
>>>>> It's [GAC surgery] never done below the age of 16, rarely before 18.
>>>>> This isn't a
>>>>> real problem, just a rhetorical point for the phobes, dishonestly.
>>>>
>>>>Frankly it should be illegal below 18. Under 18 it's child abuse. It is
>>>>unnecessary and purely elective cosmetic surgery.
>>>
>>> Wrong.
>>
>>No, that's exactly factual.
>
>
>16 and 17 year-old people are not children.

Two words: Bull shit.

>>>>If it must be done let the court ordered and the Court will need to pay
>>>>for
>>>>this massively expenses unnecessary elective cosmetic surgery and any
>>>>future
>>>>costs than may result from it.
>>>>
>>>>Between 18-21 I'm not sure how that would work, but if the parents say
>>>>'no'
>>>>then the above conditions above would apply.
>>>
>>> What do "parents" have to do with people over 18, retard?
>>
>>Because in all states 21 is the legal adult age were parents no longer have
>>any responsibly towards their child.
>>
>>Now, if you can get all states to agree to 18, then we can lower it, but
>>since you are talking a national policy here, we have to go with the
>>highest.
>>
>>I find it interesting that an adult of your asserted superiority wouldn't
>>know that.
>
>
>So a state has some power over a 20 year-old? Fuck that.

The State has some power over all of us and just because you think the age of
majority should be eleven doesn't mean everybody thinks so.

--

Four more reasons to not vote for Trump in 33 days.

26) Trump broke the law by trying to withhold nearly
$400 million of U.S. aid for Ukraine in an effort to
extort a personal political favor from Ukraine's President Zelensky.
Trump wanted Zelensky to interfere in the 2020 election by announcing
an investigation into the Bidens. Delaying this aid to Ukraine
weakened Ukraine and strengthened Russia.

27) Trump personally attacked and ruined the careers of everyone
who stood in the way of his illegal Ukraine scheme, including
Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch and Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman.

28) To cover up the scheme, Trump ordered the White House and
State Department to defy congressional subpoenas.

29) For these reasons, on December 18th, 2019, Trump
became the third U.S. president to be impeached.
He was charged with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.