Liberal Insanity - San Francisco To Cover the Cost of Sex Reassignment Surgeries...

Oh, really? There are no property taxes or fees on services in San Francisco?

Stop talking about stuff you know nothing about.

 

Those links are from 2009 and 2011.

In the modern day, Gov. Jerry Brown won passage of a tax-hike proposition that stabilizes the budget and prompted S&P to say they will upgrade the state's bond rating if the revenue boost holds.http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-11-09/even-california-shows-halo-with-insatiable-demand-muni

Oh, and the link notes that California's debt is rated A- -- not junk status, which is "BB" or lower.

Any other falsehoods you want to try out?

 

Did you actually read the article...they're not paying for surgeries. FFS.

 

Did you?

"San Francisco is on its way to becoming the first U.S. city to provide and cover the cost of sex reassignment surgeries for uninsured transgender residents.
"

 

Yes in 1 mere year I am sure Brown has turned it all around!

 

This might not be a disgracefully idiotic question if this procedure benefited any of the recipients, when in fact it's a thoroughly diabolical form of medical malpractice which ought to be punishable by immolation.

If these people feel "mental distress" without the surgery, just imagine what they'll feel if they ever come to the realization that they permanently mutilated themselves to achieve a goal which is based on a lie. The vast majority will avoid that realization at any cost, which means they will insist that others see them as normal rather than as the freaks they have been deceived into becoming, and will enlist the aid of O'Brienesque authorities to enforce their will on the rest of society.

 

I care. It's evidence of liberal lunacy. A great cautionary tale.

Of course they're not sure where the money comes from. Liberals don't actually plan things like this. We have to "pass it before we find out what's in it" just like Obamacare. We're just supposed to vote for something on faith, all the details come later.

They're gutting education around the State. Are you saying that doesn't affect San Francisco? Why does a school need to be gutted just so San Fransisco residents can have a free sex change if they want it?

 

Now we have that settled. California isn't bankrupt.

 

Right... because I don't view gays in the same "they are deviant freaks" way you do, the question is "disgracefuly idiotic". Got it.

Live and let live, O judgmental one who thinks he knows what goes on in other people's heads better than they do.

 

We're going to pay every cent.

 

What next? Will Texas pay for surgery to restore conservatives to Neanderthals?

 

California, like most states, is constitutionally required to balance its budget. It will do so, as it does every year.

 

Well, you're not. The fleeting minority of rich people will do that.

 

Or Obama voters back to apes



I wonder who she voted for?

 

Obviously you didn't get it, since I said nothing about "gays".

Oh sure, as if you believe in that, when you spend 90% of your time here trying to get people to disbelieve their "lying eyes".

 

Coming from someone who believes redistribution of wealth is to counteract rich people's "greed", I find this hilarious.

 

I hope you're right.

But I don't think you are.

Not if we keep chasing businesses out of the state with regulation and tax increases and spending money on stupid (*)(*)(*)(*) like the bullet train. And the Dems have a super majority in the legislature now.

 

Um... what?

 

Then just stay out of it!

What is the matter with you and BIll O'Reilly?...getting all outraged over stuff that happens there, and you don't live there, or pay for what happens there!

Buzz off!

 

I don't have to live there to make fun of it.

 

we will ultimately be forced to bail out Cali.

I might move to SF. I don't want my Willy lopped off but maybe they can add some to it so my wife could enjoy a foot long before we both die

 

A 5 dollar foot long?

 

Well said Brewskier. This is a dangerous precident to set.

Your comparison with hair treatment is 100% accurate as well. We can not differentuate in any way whos "mental distress" is relevant and who's is not, or if ones is more so than anothers. If we are to offer up this kind of treatment for one such topic, like sex reassignment then we really cannot turn away the balding man, or the Iguana necked woman who wants her dewlap removed. brow lifts, tummy tucks...you name it. Everything is now on the table...and if it is NOT, then people need to stop and think as to why this imbalance would be justified.

 

Earlier you were saying something about the state of CA having to pay, or something to that effect, did I misunderstand?

 

As far as my California tax dollars that I pay....I would love to have them go to pay for gender reassignments, because I approve of them the same way I approve of public parks and libraries