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.

--
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 Wed, 02 Oct 2024 19:53:43 -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.

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.

--
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.

"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreude.Zwergentöter.@gmail.com> wrote
in message
news:6fdofj5ks4aheqvhki8v4sje0f59aaub1o@Rudy.Canoza.is.a.forging.cocksucking.dwarf.com...
> [Default] "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> typed:
>
>>
>>
>>"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreude.Zwergentöter.@gmail.com> wrote
>>in message
>>news:0aqnfj9r6nfdjhhn70ce1ff0h4fa7d09l6@Rudy.Canoza.is.a.forging.cocksucking.dwarf.com...
>>> [Default] Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> typed:
>>>
>>>>>Meanwhile, let's just add this to the list of things you're delusional
>>>>>about.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Which is zero, in reality.
>>>
>>> You have no idea what reality is
>>
>>He probably thinks it is his delusions about it.
>>
>>I mean recently he's taken to claiming to be a biblical person.
>>
>>
>
> Couldn't he just go around and wave his Magic Jesus Wand and turn
> these kids into the sex they think they want to be?

You assume Joel's delusions have any basis in reality.....

"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreude.Zwergentöter.@gmail.com> wrote
in message
news:doaofjt6co75rd6gmqu5i2kg4kldq7mb9l@Rudy.Canoza.is.a.forging.cocksucking.dwarf.com...
> [Default] Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> typed:
>
>>Klaus Schadenfreude <klaus.schadenfreude.Zwergentöter.@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>>[Default] Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> typed:
>>>>"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.
>>>
>>>Correct. It's wrong, and any parent OR doctor even attempting to
>>>perform such surgery should be put to death.
>>
>>
>>Wrong,
>
> No, correct.
>
>> these are 16 and 17 year-old individuals who are strongly
>>identified as and supported as transgender.
>
> Wrong. They are children. Any tranny supporters who try to manipulate
> them and convince them to share the same mental illness you suffer
> from need to be tortured, tried, and put to death.
>
>> You can fuck right the fuck off.
>
> No, I don't think I will. Why don't you try to turn me into wine,
> instead, Jesus?

Na, Joel is the anti-Christ..

Otherwise he could simply have their gender be what they are.

Oh, but that's already happened.. a girl is in a girl's body and a boy is in
a boy's body...

Seems someone up there has already determined their gender, and it certainly
wasn't Joel.

"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b6nrfjp73rpfjqh5a22eo9j5hqm5c6eq1c@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.

Well since you're the one asserting it's true.. that should be very easy for
you to prove.

> Fuck off and
> die, burn in hell.

Is that what He said to you?

"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..

On 10/3/2024 4:00 AM, NoBody wrote:
> On Wed, 02 Oct 2024 19:53:43 -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.

As always, you won't do *your* homework. This is a lot like your "ABC hasn't
denied..." garbage.

Joel's claim is:

"It's [GAC surgery] never done below the age of 16, rarely before 18."

If you could find just *one* instance of it being done before age 16, or many
instances of it being done before age 18, you could totally demolish his claims
of "never" and "rarely." But you can't. You can't because:

1. He's right.
(https://www.hrc.org/resources/get-the-facts-on-gender-affirming-care)
2. You're too lazy and incompetent to undertake the search.

"Blue Lives Matter" <NoBody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:EMWKO.12244$9Rk4.9223@fx37.iad...
> On 10/1/2024 8:36 AM, scooter, the drunken Virginia camper and gutless
> chickenshit who is frightened to death of Rudy, lied:
>
>>
>>
>> "Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:kbpnfjtpqul18c9ptjhki32rguv5gief9l@4ax.com...
>>> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>>>> "Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:atbbfj560p2ebge86bmn36eapk28m6ib6m@4ax.com...
>>>>> Mittens Romney <robberbaron@invalid.ut> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm not God.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But His will will come to pass.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Look at my first and last initials below - I definitely am doing
>>>>>>> "His"
>>>>>>> will.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You are not of God, that much is evident.
>>>>>
>>>>> Guess again, I'm the second coming of Christ. The New Testament talks
>>>>> explicitly about me.
>>>>
>>>> That would be the anti-christ then.
>>>
>>>
>>> No, that's Trump.
>>
>> Trump isn't mentioned in the bible
>
> Actually, scooter, he is. Trump is the anti-christ.

No, Joel has already admitted to being the anti-christ

So if you're saying Trump is also mention that makes him Jesus Christ.

>

"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.

On 10/3/2024 7:19 AM, scooter, the drunken Virginia camper and gutless
chickenshit who is frightened to death of Rudy, lied:

>
>
> "Blue Lives Matter" <NoBody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:EMWKO.12244$9Rk4.9223@fx37.iad...
>> On 10/1/2024 8:36 AM, scooter, the drunken Virginia camper and gutless
>> chickenshit who is frightened to death of Rudy, lied:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:kbpnfjtpqul18c9ptjhki32rguv5gief9l@4ax.com...
>>>> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>> "Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:atbbfj560p2ebge86bmn36eapk28m6ib6m@4ax.com...
>>>>>> Mittens Romney <robberbaron@invalid.ut> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm not God.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But His will will come to pass.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Look at my first and last initials below - I definitely am doing "His"
>>>>>>>> will.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You are not of God, that much is evident.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Guess again, I'm the second coming of Christ.  The New Testament talks
>>>>>> explicitly about me.
>>>>>
>>>>> That would be the anti-christ then.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No, that's Trump.
>>>
>>> Trump isn't mentioned in the bible
>>
>> Actually, scooter, he is. Trump is the anti-christ.
>
> No, Joel has already admitted to being the anti-christ

No, scooter, Joel has not "admitted" that.

"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?

"Blue Lives Matter" <NoBody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:DRzLO.12784$9Rk4.10848@fx37.iad...
> On 10/3/2024 7:19 AM, scooter, the drunken Virginia camper and gutless
> chickenshit who is frightened to death of Rudy, lied:
>
>>
>>
>> "Blue Lives Matter" <NoBody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>> news:EMWKO.12244$9Rk4.9223@fx37.iad...
>>> On 10/1/2024 8:36 AM, scooter, the drunken Virginia camper and gutless
>>> chickenshit who is frightened to death of Rudy, lied:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:kbpnfjtpqul18c9ptjhki32rguv5gief9l@4ax.com...
>>>>> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>>> "Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:atbbfj560p2ebge86bmn36eapk28m6ib6m@4ax.com...
>>>>>>> Mittens Romney <robberbaron@invalid.ut> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'm not God.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> But His will will come to pass.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Look at my first and last initials below - I definitely am doing
>>>>>>>>> "His"
>>>>>>>>> will.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You are not of God, that much is evident.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Guess again, I'm the second coming of Christ. The New Testament
>>>>>>> talks
>>>>>>> explicitly about me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That would be the anti-christ then.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No, that's Trump.
>>>>
>>>> Trump isn't mentioned in the bible
>>>
>>> Actually, scooter, he is. Trump is the anti-christ.
>>
>> No, Joel has already admitted to being the anti-christ
>
> No, scooter, Joel has not "admitted" that.

Sure he did. He's certainly not Jesus Christ which limits the options of who
he could be.

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 10/3/2024 10:18 AM, scooter, the drunken Virginia camper and gutless
chickenshit who is frightened to death of Rudy, lied:

>
>
> "Blue Lives Matter" <NoBody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:DRzLO.12784$9Rk4.10848@fx37.iad...
>> On 10/3/2024 7:19 AM, scooter, the drunken Virginia camper and gutless chickenshit who is frightened to death of Rudy, lied:

>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Blue Lives Matter" <NoBody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>>> news:EMWKO.12244$9Rk4.9223@fx37.iad...
>>>> On 10/1/2024 8:36 AM, scooter, the drunken Virginia camper and gutless chickenshit who is frightened to death of Rudy, lied:

>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:kbpnfjtpqul18c9ptjhki32rguv5gief9l@4ax.com...
>>>>>> "scooter, the drunken Virginia camper and gutless chickenshit who is frightened to death of Rudy, lied:

>>>>>>> "Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:atbbfj560p2ebge86bmn36eapk28m6ib6m@4ax.com...
>>>>>>>> Mittens Romney <robberbaron@invalid.ut> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not God.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But His will will come to pass.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Look at my first and last initials below - I definitely am doing "His"
>>>>>>>>>> will.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You are not of God, that much is evident.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Guess again, I'm the second coming of Christ.  The New Testament talks
>>>>>>>> explicitly about me.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That would be the anti-christ then.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, that's Trump.
>>>>>
>>>>> Trump isn't mentioned in the bible
>>>>
>>>> Actually, scooter, he is. Trump is the anti-christ.
>>>
>>> No, Joel has already admitted to being the anti-christ
>>
>> No, scooter, Joel has not "admitted" that.
>
> Sure he did.

No, scooter, he did not.

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