The Political Discussion Thread

[Gatefan1976]

I'd tell you the same for Tr#$%$p but then condolences to your kin would be in order before you finished the list

Clinton: 1.25 million hits in the news section
Trump: 7.36 million hits in the news section.

[Gatefan1976]

Who is running the white house??

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/0...-ethics-239011

Yep, the poor and middle class just got sold out to Corporate America, lock, stock and barrel.

[Coco Pops]

Who is running the white house??

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/0...-ethics-239011

Yep, the poor and middle class just got sold out to Corporate America, lock, stock and barrel.

Wow........ Who needs ethics anyway?

[Gatefan1976]

Wow........ Who needs ethics anyway?

The excuse of "it's not a lot of people" would be statistically reasonable in a fully staffed white house (which is some thousand odd positions), not so much in a situation where you have only had 60 odd appointments. 20% of them having waivers is a touch extreme.

[SoulReaver]

Clinton: 1.25 million hits in the news section
Trump: 7.36 million hits in the news section.

fake news!
we need a wall to keep those fake news out of the web
a uge wall

[SoulReaver]

Yep, the poor and middle class just got sold out to Corporate America, lock, stock and barrel.

actually they were sold on the november 8th 2016

[Coco Pops]

The excuse of "it's not a lot of people" would be statistically reasonable in a fully staffed white house (which is some thousand odd positions), not so much in a situation where you have only had 60 odd appointments. 20% of them having waivers is a touch extreme.

Pesky ethics. Let's ban that.

[Falcon Horus]

By your own admission, we cannot change the physical sex we are born as.

Indeed. The chromosomes only on the cellular-level -- you know before there's even talk of anything resembling a human. That mass of gelatenous blob -- actually not a clue if it's gelatenous. It looks like jello in those petridishes... but anyway...

I'm not saying that the "mental" sex of a person can't be wrong; a F personality born into a male body or the other way around. That can happen. All I'm saying is that whatever someone is, we can't change it.

So, they are not deluding themselves then?

The outside can be changed. The body in this case.
On a cellular-level, our genetic make-up is always going to be stuck in whatever way it set itself -- unless we change it from the start, at the very beginning when two organisms meet, the egg and the sperm.

It's like a sculptor who changes the body of a slab of marble -- instead of David, it's Lisa. But it's still marble.

...can have whatever they want done to their body surgically, hormonally, or whatever, but if they claim they have changed their sex, they are deluding themselves. You can cut the gonads off, use the tissue to create female plumbing, trigger breast development with hormones, and all the other things we do today, but the body itself is still the same gender it was born as.

Now that we've established that colorful fact, is it therefore appropriate to treat as their new identity or will you let their birth sex determine their identity instead? Are we to treat them as (new) female or male? What determines the way we interact with them on a social level?

that doesn't do the person with the crossed mental sex any good does it? No matter what, we do NOT have the technical ability to change someone's physical gender. Someone can go through life pretending they have changed their sex to match their mental sex, but the hard cold truth is that they are lying to themselves because we can't do it.

So, in your opinion, our genetics is what defines us?

I never gave it much thought. I am a male, easily confirmed by the presence of some organs and the absence of others. It wouldn't matter in the slightest if I "felt" female or not, because I have no say in the matter. It's beyond my ability to change, so why worry about it? I am what I am.

We all are just that.

We'll see about that.

Yeah, rules need to be followed.

You should be happy to know you'll be joining Nigeria and Syria.

alrite some1 should simply his question
@FH: can you choose to become an XY?

The hormones my mother produced during her pregnancy determined my XX chromosomes. Though they didn't know that until I was born. Before that, I was already designated as a boy. They were having a son -- I guess I gave them half that.

Shall we start a new thread for it then!?

LOL!! Would be fascinating to see where that could lead, but I have a feeling it would go the same way as the religion-threads.

That bolded part is KEY though. SINCE THEY ARE NOT IN THE US, how are they therefore "Within our jurisdiction"??

There was a part which touched upon that particular part too:

It doesn’t matter, whether the Muslims in question are citizens or noncitizens, green card holders, visa holders or refugees. The Equal Protection Clause explicitly prohibits “deny[ing] to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” The Supreme Court made this clear in Plyler v. Doe, when it protected the rights of non-citizen children in Texas, striking down a denial of school funds to the children of undocumented parents. This means that all foreign travelers on U.S. soil—those waiting at U.S. airports, for example—are protected.

14th Amendment Equal Protection Clause:

The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment prohibits states from denying any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law. In other words, the laws of a state must treat an individual in the same manner as other people in similar conditions and circumstances. A violation would occur, for example, if a state prohibited an individual from entering into an employment contract because he or she was a member of a particular race.
The clause is not intended to provide equality among individuals or classes but only equal application of the law. The result of a law, therefore, is not relevant so long as there is no discrimination in its application. By denying states the ability to discriminate, the Equal Protection Clause is crucial to the protection of civil rights.
Generally, the question of whether the Equal Protection Clause has been violated arises when a state grants a particular class of individuals the right to engage in an activity yet denies other individuals the same right. There is no clear rule for deciding when a classification is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court has dictated the application of different tests depending on the type of classification and its effect on fundamental rights.

And how many muslim countries are NOT affected by it? Therefor how can it be seen to ban only muslims?

Does it matter which aren't? You're still targetting pre-dominantly Muslim countries, 7 of them.
Saudi-Arabia, from which the 9/11 terrorists hailed was not affected. Heck, #45 is good friends with them, it seems.

AAnd since they were attacking us BEFORE we went into iraq/afgan (COLE, 9/11, the Embassy bombings in Africa etc), how is 'our going in under false pretenses" even material to their hating us??

You seem to suffer from short-term history memory. We've been in their backyards for decades, messing around with them for one reason or another.

AYou're assuming the Arab spring would have even STARTED had we not done what we did in iraq/afgan/egypt..

It might, it might not have. The regions are a powder keg so who knows what would have happened.

What about her poor judgement in regard to e-mail and the numerous other scandals she has been hip-deep in? That's not why you lost?

So, it's OK for Trump to his private cellphone and to give out his number to world leaders?

B-b-but emails....

Go find a google machine and enter "list of hillary clinton scandals".

Trump's will crash your search within the milliseconds you're hitting the search-button.

Clinton: 1.25 million hits in the news section
Trump: 7.36 million hits in the news section.

actually they were sold on the november 8th 2016

The 9th -- elections were the 9th.

[Annoyed]

Who is running the white house??

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/0...-ethics-239011

Yep, the poor and middle class just got sold out to Corporate America, lock, stock and barrel.

It is becoming clear that Trump is not as good a fit for the office as I and others assumed. But what choice did we have? That whiny blonde idiot who would just continue the path the previous idiot started us down?

Obama did not have this nation's best interests in mind, and in fact undercut us on the international level every chance he got. He actually apologized for being american numerous times on his "world apology tour". The TPP and climate deals were decidedly AGAINST this country's best interests, and he signed on to them eagerly. He outright refused to enforce immigration laws because he didn't agree with them, and in doing that, betrayed the oath of office he swore to. You can make whatever claims you want, but Obama's motivation and goes were clearly not the best interests of the US.

And Hillary would have just been an extension of that. So, really, what choice did we have?

Really, for a moment, imagine yourself being more of the political stripe I am, believing as I do. What other choice was there? Could you have voted for Hillary?

[jelgate]

You should of picked one the other 16 Republicans who wasn't a moron

[Falcon Horus]

He outright refused to enforce immigration laws because he didn't agree with them, and in doing that, betrayed the oath of office he swore to

You do know deportation was never as high as it was under Obama, right?

Also, GOP+Trump doesn't have the interest of you or your fellow Americans in the highest esteem. Their own interest, and the rest of you can go take a hike and fend for yourself.

[SoulReaver]

The hormones my mother produced during her pregnancy determined my XX chromosomes. Though they didn't know that until I was born. Before that, I was already designated as a boy. They were having a son -- I guess I gave them half that.

I'll make you feel fully XX if you wish

[Annoyed]

So, they are not deluding themselves then?

No, not when it comes to what they themselves think they ought to be. If someone thinks their mental state is F, for example, who the hell is anyone else to tell them differently?

The outside can be changed. The body in this case.
On a cellular-level, our genetic make-up is always going to be stuck in whatever way it set itself -- unless we change it from the start, at the very beginning when two organisms meet, the egg and the sperm.

It's like a sculptor who changes the body of a slab of marble -- instead of David, it's Lisa. But it's still marble.

The delusion comes into play when people claim to have changed their sex, for the simple reason that it's not possible to do so at this point in time. How hard is that to understand?

And the sculpture might be David or Lisa, but its still HUMAN.

Now that we've established that colorful fact, is it therefore appropriate to treat as their new identity or will you let their birth sex determine their identity instead? Are we to treat them as (new) female or male? What determines the way we interact with them on a social level?

Here we begin stray into the realm of opinion, rather than cold hard fact. Otherwise known as fuzzy subjects.
There are other physical differences besides the obvious; plumbing, breasts, hair, etc. that are also dictated by XX or XY, such as our brains being wired differently. Men and women's brains are wired differently, and I believe operate differently. Can that be changed? With no hard data either way that I'm aware of, we don't know that much about the workings of the mind, this has to fall to opinion rather than fact.

My opinion is that you play the cards you were dealt, but I'm not a cross. Or at least don't consider myself as one. Maybe I wouldn't accept that if I was, maybe I wouldn't. But that is my opinion.

So, in your opinion, our genetics is what defines us?

Undeniably. People don't like to think about this, because it destroys the concept of us having control of our lives, which is unacceptable to most, but the cold hard truth is that the course of our lives is to a large extent charted at the instant the sperm and egg combine and produce life. It is at that point that our genetics are determined.

Barring accident or violence, our lifespans, what diseases we are going to get or are more susceptible to, our intelligence level (or lack thereof) other handicaps we are born with, physical attributes, skills and aptitudes, our appearance, level of attractiveness, gender, and almost every other aspect of our physical selves are determined 9 months before we are born. Yes, we can try to take whatever actions, zig and zag to try to take the best path or avoid obstacles, but the general course of our lives is laid out at conception. We don't get a say in the matter.

Oh, and here's a thought that will rattle your cage. Please understand that this is not meant in a mean or hurtful manner. What if being a "cross" is simply another form of genetic handicap?

Here's another cage rattler for you, just in case the cage hasn't fallen apart yet

Consider raw luck; where you are born, whom you are born to, when you are born (wartime or peace/prosperity) and other completely uncontrollable acts of fortune. Accident, what opportunities come your way, whatever. You could have just as easily been born to Jewish parents in WWII Germany, and ended in one of Hitler's atrocities, or as a male in the US, drafted into the service for Vietnam and killed in some jungle. It's all dumb luck.

Combine that with the genetic roll of the dice, and you realize that we as individuals have almost no control over our ultimate destinies. Every day I live I think of this and silently express internal gratitude that my own circumstances have been better than the majority of humans ever born.

Yeah, rules need to be followed.

I don't think either the TPP or the Paris environmental deals were in the best interest of our country, nor was proper procedure followed by the prior sorry excuse for an administration in agreeing to them, so regardless of the technicalities, I support Trump's decision to bail on them. If we need to tell someone to go put something where the sun don't shine to undo this, I have no problem with that.

[garhkal]

Pesky ethics. Let's ban that.

Judging by the # of dems recently done for corruption bribes etc, it certainly doesn't look like they have any ethics.. (and yes i know some GOP have also been done)..

There was a part which touched upon that particular part too:

And that's what i am not understanding.. HOW can our 14th amendment 'equal protection clause' protect THOSE NOT EVEN IN The us?

Does it matter which aren't? You're still targetting pre-dominantly Muslim countries, 7 of them.

IMO yes. Just like if you say i am being racist, cause i didn't let THAT black man get a job but i let 20 other black men get a job..

So, it's OK for Trump to his private cellphone and to give out his number to world leaders?

B-b-but emails....

If he's being contacted by them, yes. If he's using it to store classified data, HELL no.

[Coco Pops]

You should of picked one the other 16 Republicans who wasn't a moron

This


Why was Trump the only Republican choice?