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.

On 10/4/2024 4:06 AM, NoBody wrote:
> 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 [sic] a ridiculous individual who thinks someone else should verify
> your claims for you.

You don't set the rules.

> You are also incorrect in your use of hypocritical.

He is not.

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

You *never* back up your claims.

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.

Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
>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.

Free hint, claimed governor, I don't need your guidance, I'm the
authority. 16 is not in *every* sense, yet, adult, but it is in a
number of ways. It's not a child.

>>>>>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.

I never said anything about making the age of majority 11, silly
person.

--
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 10/4/2024 8:59 PM, Joel wrote:
> Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 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.
>
>
> Free hint, claimed governor, I don't need your guidance, I'm the
> authority. 16 is not in *every* sense, yet, adult, but it is in a
> number of ways. It's not a child.

It's 2024 and they most certainly are. Kids in this age group are the
worst ever raised in this country. They are social media products and
totally fucked in their heads.

>>>>>> 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.
>
>
> I never said anything about making the age of majority 11, silly
> person.

But you think about it, that's why you picked 11 specifically.

"Turegano <turegano"@x.com wrote:
>On 10/4/2024 8:59 PM, Joel wrote:
>> Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 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.
>>
>> Free hint, claimed governor, I don't need your guidance, I'm the
>> authority. 16 is not in *every* sense, yet, adult, but it is in a
>> number of ways. It's not a child.
>
>It's 2024 and they most certainly are. Kids in this age group are the
>worst ever raised in this country. They are social media products and
>totally fucked in their heads.

Whatever ...

>>>> 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.
>>
>> I never said anything about making the age of majority 11, silly
>> person.
>
>But you think about it, that's why you picked 11 specifically.

I never brought up anything about it, Swill did, it's right there in
the quoting, he spelled it as a word rather than typing it as a
numeral.

--
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.

Governor Swill wrote this post; take it under advisement:

> On Fri, 04 Oct 2024 21:09:11 -0400, Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> <snip>
>>
>> 16 and 17 year-old people are not children.
>
> Two words: Bull shit.

I dunno, some Republican states want 10-year-olds to carry their rapist's
child.

>>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.

<cola and other snippage>

The sigmonster sees all:

--
A woman physician has made the statement that smoking is neither
physically defective nor morally degrading, and that nicotine, even
when indulged to in excess, is less harmful than excessive petting."
-- Purdue Exponent, Jan 16, 1925

On Fri, 04 Oct 2024 20:49:27 -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.
>
>
>I stand by what I asserted. They don't cut tits or cocks off of
>people under 16.

My reply was misdirected. We agree on the issue.
My apologies for any confusion.

On Fri, 04 Oct 2024 23:59:05 -0400, Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:

>Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
>>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.
>
>
>Free hint, claimed governor, I don't need your guidance, I'm the
>authority. 16 is not in *every* sense, yet, adult, but it is in a
>number of ways. It's not a child.

Not sure why but Swilly is ignoring the fact that the legal defintiion
of an adult is someone over 18.

>
>
>>>>>>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.
>
>
>I never said anything about making the age of majority 11, silly
>person.

Well he is Swilly so there's that.

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

Most of those people are teenagers, but even if they’re not, they’re all
mentally not right and propagandised.

> if he wasn't then the
> surgery should have been refused.
>
> Which is why I say the age to undergo this should be 21.

Why 21? Mentally unstable people at that age don’t need help anymore and
should be allowed to ruin their life and body? Just because it makes some
Jewish surgeons and pharma companies richer?

Governor Swill wrote:
> 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.
>
what does it mean

On 10/5/2024 6:20 AM, NoBody wrote:
> On Fri, 04 Oct 2024 23:59:05 -0400, Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 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.
>>
>>
>> Free hint, claimed governor, I don't need your guidance, I'm the
>> authority. 16 is not in *every* sense, yet, adult, but it is in a
>> number of ways. It's not a child.
>
> Not sure why but Swilly is ignoring the fact that the legal defintiion
> of an adult is someone over 18.
>
>>
>>
>>>>>>> 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.
>>
>>
>> I never said anything about making the age of majority 11, silly
>> person.
>
> Well he is Swilly so there's that.

Swill knows the difference between a male and female. Joel does too but
he prefers to mislead his declining mental facilities.

On Sat, 5 Oct 2024 07:04:28 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote:
>Governor Swill wrote this post; take it under advisement:
>> On Fri, 04 Oct 2024 21:09:11 -0400, Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> <snip>
>>> 16 and 17 year-old people are not children.

>> Two words: Bull shit.

>I dunno, some Republican states want 10-year-olds to carry their rapist's
>child.

That's because MAGAs (the real GOP is dead) want to institutionalize child abuse
by repealing labor laws and child sexual protections. They believe children
should be regarded as property just like a woman, a shirt or a slave.

--
Although Trump is not among Project 2025'- 34 authors, more than half are appointees
and staff from his time as president; the words "Trump" and "Trump
Administration" appear 300 times in its pages. At least 140 former Trump
officials are involved in Project 2025, according to a CNN tally. It’s
reasonable to expect that a second Trump presidency would follow many of
the project’s recommendations.

Two more reasons to not vote for Trump in 31 days.

30) Even while he was being investigated for trying
to get Ukraine to interfere in the U.S. election, Trump
publicly called for China to interfere in the election.
Trump: "China should start an investigation into the Bidens."

31) Long before election day Trump started making
false claims that the election would be rigged.

On Sun, 6 Oct 2024 00:01:58 -0700, Colin Cash <ccash@stv.org> wrote:

>On 10/5/2024 6:20 AM, NoBody wrote:
>> On Fri, 04 Oct 2024 23:59:05 -0400, Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>>
>>> Free hint, claimed governor, I don't need your guidance, I'm the
>>> authority. 16 is not in *every* sense, yet, adult, but it is in a
>>> number of ways. It's not a child.
>>
>> Not sure why but Swilly is ignoring the fact that the legal defintiion
>> of an adult is someone over 18.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>> 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.
>>>
>>>
>>> I never said anything about making the age of majority 11, silly
>>> person.
>>
>> Well he is Swilly so there's that.
>
>Swill knows the difference between a male and female. Joel does too but
>he prefers to mislead his declining mental facilities.

I also know the difference between boys and men. Give me a hairy beast who
already knows his way around the block. Somebody else can teach the virgins.

--
Although Trump is not among Project 2025'- 34 authors, more than half are appointees
and staff from his time as president; the words "Trump" and "Trump
Administration" appear 300 times in its pages. At least 140 former Trump
officials are involved in Project 2025, according to a CNN tally. It’s
reasonable to expect that a second Trump presidency would follow many of
the project’s recommendations.

Two more reasons to not vote for Trump in 31 days.

32) After losing, Trump falsely claimed the election was stolen, even
though his own inner circle, including his campaign manager,
White House lawyers, and his own Justice Department, and attorney general
told him it was not. Barr: "The claims of fraud were bullsh*t."

33) Trump kept telling his Big Lie even after more than 60 legal
challenges to the election were struck down in court,
many by Trump-appointed judges.

"D. Ray" <d@ray> wrote in message
news:rjPWJnoisfTNvuXAneMEWhoKtYOKLCDp@news.usenet.farm...
> Scout <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> "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..
>
> Most of those people are teenagers, but even if they’re not, they’re all
> mentally not right and propagandised.
>
>> if he wasn't then the
>> surgery should have been refused.
>>
>> Which is why I say the age to undergo this should be 21.
>
> Why 21? Mentally unstable people at that age don’t need help anymore and
> should be allowed to ruin their life and body? Just because it makes some
> Jewish surgeons and pharma companies richer?

Because at 21 they are legally recognized as adults in every state and to
the federal government and no longer have any legal call upon their parents
for permission, aid, support or money.

It becomes their decision alone and as such they bear the entire
responsibility for the costs and consequences of their decision..

"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:j731gjtk3rtp4jkuqr21fvkd0mi21ivfn2@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. 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.

Your assertion is all it is. An assertion.

Meanwhile I refer you to Female Gender Mutilation practiced on females from
birth through 15 according to WHO

https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/female-genital-mutilation#:~:text=FGM%20is%20mostly%20carried%20out,rights%20of%20girls%20and%20women.

And lets not forget how Catholics castrated young boys...

According to Joel, these events were and are perfectly acceptable and should
be continue to be legal everywhere... just because.