Another Attractive Republican Candidate Prepares to Run for President

Reddit? You are talking trolls and you think THEY are the “left”?

 

A pet skunk would be better…..

 

Then I think you've found your candidate!

 

Why you sound like an old Midwest Republican!

 

At least the pet rock won't try to overthrow democracy, aka pulling a Trump.

 

I think looking at anonymous online posters is a very bad way to judge a group. Instead why not talk to people you know and interact with in real life. Your work place alone alone would have a huge cross section of people from all political walks of life. I am sure relatives and friends have different political views. These real life people would give you a much better example on what people with different political leanings believe. I think what you will find online are the examples we see highlighted in the news and on social media are an extreme outlier group. Especially in anonymous environments where many people say things just to troll others.

 

It would be cool if we could get those folks back

 

I am still blown away by the insane arrogance of non-medical people telling doctors, patients and parents how to treat a difficult psychiatric condition. A rational person would be like, "Wow that sucks I'm glad that my kid doesn't have that issue."

Uh yeah, that's not how it works. If it is rarely happening, it's an issue for medical board discipline and lawsuits. I've definitely seen a 5 year old who already knew they wanted to be the other gender and never changed in the next 12 years and counting (a relative of mine), but there was no indication for any surgical or hormonal intervention at that age.

 

Well it used to be that we didn't have "activists" to push particular scientific facts that are overturning previous scientific facts. It used to be a scientific fact that humans were divided into two sexes, and that people couldn't switch genders like changing underwear and if they thought that they were mentally ill.

In other words, I've zero interest in hearing from the "I can't tell what a woman is" crowd about what is science and what isn't.

 

Science is our most powerful tool for telling us how things are. It does not tell us how things should be. Gender is cultural. It always has been. You are offended by changes in culture, not science. If your question is focused on natural human reproduction, then biological sex is going to be relevant, but that's about it.

The culture of medicine is highly logical and ethical. The question for a medical condition is what medical intervention leads to the best outcomes from the patient's perspective. The standard of care uses science to evaluate outcomes, and some of those outcomes are based upon what patients later report. The standard of care supports gender-affirming therapy as the best option, generally, for addressing gender dysphoria. It never needed to be political.

 

This discussion has been had multiple times on this forum, and you are simply not talking about science, you are talking your particular dogma, which doesn't have a basis in science, but more ideology. "Gender" separate from sex, is simply referring to the definitive object used in nouns in many languages, it's not sex junior.

As far as the thread topic goes, I'll just put you down as on team Hutchinson.

 

Science isn't relevant to the question. That's the point. This is culture. But as far as medical treatment goes, they follow the outcomes, and that's appropriate. They don't need cultural warriors getting between doctors and patients.

 

That I agree with Jack. The Republicans must decide whether they want to make a statement or do they want to win in the general election.

 

For the primary? Sure. I agree that the GOP may be so far gone that they would choose Trump as their nominee once again, even if he's indicted on multiple charges. I hope there's still something to salvage from the party, but you may be right that they are beyond redemption.

 

Interesting isn't it how all these people are putting their hat in the ring. Like they were waiting for the shoe to drop.

Makes me wonder if the Republicans where behind the indictment.

 

"Science isn't relevant to the question" says guy who first brought in the muh science excuse.

 

Neither are you “talking science” and as the person who has been doing the scientific research into this I can tell you right now that unless you are factoring in the role of EDCs to your cognitive map regarding this situation you are not informed on the subject

 

if there are doctors acting unethically then there is or rather should be a process for that

 

No idea what you're talking about.

 

The GOP hates Trump. He threatens their establishment. They want a George Bush style supplicant that they can control. The Democrats are the exact same thing. I call them both the uniparty.

They perform stunts like roe v Wade overturning to manipulate people. The culture war is just a distraction while the uniparty seeks to take your independence.

Look at the speaker of the house fiasco.

Step out of yourself out of the tribalism. I know it's hard it is for me too you'll see.

 

The science indicates that helping a girl try and look sort of like a boy while sterilizing her and disfiguring her and not changing her sex at all leads to a similar suicide rate.

Intervening is a natural progression of a person's life to try and help them to pretend to be something they're not it's absolutely unethical and there's no science behind it.

Further there's a lot of propaganda associated with this that it's reversible that you can change your mind no it isn't.

 

Show the studies please.

 

Do you want it so you can read it and understand it or do you want it so you can say nuh uh and post some lesser biased study of a smaller group over a shorter period of time?

 

Depends on the quality of the study/studies, and if the data is appropriately interpreted given the methods. Though no, I wouldn't put a lesser study as a counterexample. It would be a study that is better in at least some way, if I did post a counterexample.

 

The only thing (as far has I've seen) you've contributed to the topic is "but what about intersex?"

So you're not in a position to make a judgement on someone else's "cognitive map."