Flamecaller

Wow, you really are as arrogant as ever. Have you ever really thought about the ever side of the argument? Or do you like your lethal weapons too much? What on earth would you ever have to defend yourself from? Stop living in your action film world where you'll be invaded by China tomorrow and need to take to the streets in your Hummer's with your military issue weapons. The world doesn't work like that, America least of all. Your government has way too many failsafes for you to ever have to defend yourselves from some kind of tyrannical President, there's no way that could happen. This isn't the frontier days anymore. You know...It's cute how whenever you defend gun ownership, you're automatically a gun-toting redneck imbecile who has an arsenal comparable to the U.S. government. ...I have two guns. I have never fired either of them, nor any other gun. Ever. I don't care about them. At all. I'm not some pro-gun activist. But you people are talking about taking all guns away and trashing them. Know who that leaves with guns, then? OTHER COUNTRIES THAT DISLIKE US, and CRIMINALS. Good idea, guys. Perfect plan. Take away the guns to stop crime, only fail to realize that owning a gun would then be a crime...And criminals...Don't care about committing crimes... Well, you guy got me beat.

The earth does go through temperature cycles. Humans are not entirely responsible for the rise in temperature. But to claim that we have not played any part in it is absurd. And what part of my logic do you think is incorrect? You said that humans release lots of CO2, do you deny that CO2 traps heat the atmosphere? I was specifically referring to your claim that volcanoes are responsible for more CO2 in the atmosphere than humans. Luckily for the environmental cause that is unlikely to happen :roll: I beg to differ in that respect - and not just in regard to global warming. I read that thing about volcanoes somewhere and don't know if it's true, but it surely could be. Global Warming freaks act like Co2 is the bane of Earth. It isn't. Yes, we're certainly chuckin' lots into the atmosphere, but to think we're powerful enough to destroy the Earth by doing so is rather lame. The Earth is far more resilient than we think. ...And again, the sun is freaking out. It isn't us doing all this.

'Sactly. Seems these days, the pinnacle of existence for 15-25 year olds is getting smashed. These people can't think clearly about what they want for breakfast, let alone anything else.

This was your scientific theory. And *I* am spouting "utter [cabbage]"? That's laughable. Yes, we're releasing plenty of greenhouse gases, but why, even after I SAY IT HERE, are people still ignoring the fact that Mars has also heated up along with the Earth? Are you implying there are humans on Mars now? The world is simply heating too rapidly for it to be from us. In just several years it has gotten noticeably worse, even more-so than scientists predicted by assuming it was us doing the damage. It's clear what's going on here. The sun is acting up. I'd love to see the look on everyone's faces if the Earth just all of a sudden stopped all this stuff and went back to how it was. Surely you morons would say it was due to Al Gore's work and planting tree's. :lol: The bottom line is we need to worry about our environment, period, and stop logging the rain forests and crap, 'cause that won't help anything...However, humans are NOT the reason the world is fallin' apart.

You should be, there are always exceptions to everything. That's what makes us such a diverse species. I was actually one of those exceptions. My mentality and judgement hasn't changed since I was around 15 or 16. I was always the one my friends went to for advice (though they rarely listened and seemed to prefer making the mistakes I told them would happen) and even my adult friends would always marvel at how, for being so young, I seemed to be as wise and "experienced" as someone 3 or 4 times my age. Furthermore, I feel my life and my life-changing decisions have all gone well. Also, I've seen a few of my friends make major decisions like this at young ages and they are usually for the better. You don't have to be 40 years old to realize there's something different about your sexuality, mentality, etc. Being wise for your age or whatever doesn't mean you're old enough to make your own decisions, though. No one under 18 knows anything about like. I'm 20 and still learnin' and I'm mature for my age as well. My parents are both 40 and still are. To say "I'm 16, I know what I'm doing." is....Well, just not true.

A 16 year old cannot be trusted to make life-changing decisions...No offense to ya'll, but everyone under 18 is essentially life-[developmentally delayed]ed (they know nothing about it) and even people over 18 stay that way for a good, long while. There is no set age where you're old enough to be able to, but no one under 18 is, and I'm not afraid to generalize here.

And yet we cannot control mud-hut dwelling insurgents in Iraq, we can't fund our troops properly, etc... Clearly your budget has little to do with your success. I'm not saying America will ever be attacked...I'm fairly sure it will not be, but until then, we'd like to keep our guns just in case. There are many safe-guards to keep people from having guns, and *gasp* they work. Also, how many of the 11,000 are due to people getting guns when they weren't supposed to have them? Probably most. And do you know what? That'd happen ever if guns were illegal.

And can you back that statement up with a source, or are we talking completely and utter [cabbage] you might as well have made up on the spot? Oh please. The same statement (and the proof) has been posted here many, many times...And I think I can even remember you saying the SAME thing. Go look yourself. I read it "somewhere" and I'm not going to go confirm something just for you for a statement I made that was in tangent.

How can you be so sure? Currently, our government is doing exactly the opposite of what the majority desires it to do for a LOT of different things. In some things, they're not even consulting us and doing it behind our backs. We can hope it won't happen, but it's likely that some day we will have to fight again. You can call me paranoid, but I'll just call you oblivious.

The point of the second amendment is so that we can protect ourselves period. From anything we find as a threat. That includes our own government and others. Our second amendment rights are the only thing that make America safe from invasion. Anyone invading our country on foot would instantly be wiped out. If they defeated our military, they would have to deal with the civilians...And some civilians are just as well armed. I personally don't use guns, but even I have a couple. A shotgun and a .22 pistol. My friend is a gun fan and he has military issue Barrett weapons. The .50 cal sniper rifle and the M4 machine gun, for example. He's better armed than some of our soldiers, lol. Anyone who calls for the banning of any right in the constitution, in my mind, is stupid first and a enemy second. Stupid, because they don't know why it's important, and if they DO know why it's important, then they're obviously an enemy to the constiution. Our own President has said that there should be limits on our first amendment rights, and I personally consider him an enemy to our freedom, not a freedom fighter as he'd like to be seen as. If you think that our fore-fathers had the present in mind when they were writing the documents, you're VERY wrong. The were thinking about the future as well. Do some research and you'll see that if they were all still alive, America would be the greatest country in the world and we wouldn't have all these problems. Politicians today are running the country into the ground, and our fore-fathers are screaming and crying in their graves, because they actually fought for our freedom, whereas the politicians today are being given everything and taking it away from the rest of us. If it keeps going, we'll have to fight again. And the government *never* wins against the people. Laws are mere pencil on paper that mean nothing when everyone in your country is pissed off.

I like all the 'tards saying we don't need guns and that they should be banned. Just wait. We will need them someday, and you'd be slapping your forehead. The world isn't safe and harmonious just because you're safe on a daily basis.

There seems to be a lot of details missing from this, but it seems that it would tax the companies that take the resources. Of course, they would pass those taxes onto the public though. Indeed.

:lol: Sorry, there can be only one. And it is Al Gore. /weep

The word is "fortify". :P

Doing it for the sole reason of religion is likely a bad reason, but who is to say that's the only reason? As religious people, it's surely part of it, but if it were me, I'd be making sure they got help to make sure they knew what they were doing and not just being brain washed or making a mistake, plain and simple. No turning back from that surgery stuff. The OP sounds FAR, FAR too young to be making a decision to be getting hormone therapy when they're older. I don't know her exact age, but for all she knows, puberty could be messin' with her feelings. I didn't see her mention anywhere that she's always felt this way (maybe she did, I just didn't SEE it), so I dunno'. If that were the case, yea...Puberty does weird things. My sister thought she was a lesbian for like a year, now she's revolted by the thought of it. :lol:

What do you mean how does that work? Big business making a billion dollars and having 7% taken is far better than a single worker having 35% of his money stolen from him...Like it is now via the income tax. I was asking...Is this just a tax on big business's profits? If it is, why should I be concerned at all? I'd be concerned if they were taxing me individually for stuff being taken from the ocean (which...wouldn't even make sense, lol).

That being said, do you personally think a parent could not approve just because of religion? They're certainly capable and welcome to do that, but I'm not saying that isn't a stupid reason. ;)

That could be, I was just saying my argument isn't motivated by it. I find it hard to see why a parent would say they don't approve JUST because of religion, too. It's not like it's normal if religion didn't exist.

Hey, all I meant was that it seemed a bit drastic to use distressed in that case. I have no idea about any of this psychology stuff, hell, I probably couldn't even spell psychology right if it weren't for this spell check, so I don't even want to go there. I'd say it's beyond uncomfortable when you've forsaken your own parents advice and have already made up your mind about trying to change your sex. That's rather distressful in itself. So, if I had a "mental disorder" that my parents, new nothing about, only that it was against a religion that I didn't believe in anyway, and gave me "advice" that I flat-out wasn't allowed to be myself. Not "well, see if it's just a phase, and if it's not when your a bit older, we'll look into it", but not even bothering to learn about it, or give someone the chance to explain it to them, it is definately in my best interests to listen to them? (Oh, and, I don't want to sound like a [wagon] here, but are you someone's alt, cause you only joined a couple days ago and are already in a good debate, and can actually spell. : ) Has nothin' to do with religion. I'm certainly not a Christian psychologist myself who is just trying to push an agenda, lol. And I had another account here, but forgot the password. New account. :P

What I don't understand is why EA doesn't change how they do business. The gaming community is probably the only market in the world smart enough to not take your [cabbage], and thus, are not ones to be trifled with. People hate EA because they push out games that suck [wagon]. The first Madden through to the last one are all essentially THE SAME GAME, the rosters are just upgraded and they upgraded graphics accordingly on new systems. Nothing changed. No story-lines, no new game-play...nothing. Now, it's hard to make sports "new" since it's pretty straight-forward...It's just a sport, period, and that's what the customers want, but seriously...They're making people pay full-price for nothing new. It's ridiculous and that's why people hate them. Forget their hostile business tactics (snatching up other companies, buying huge amounts of competitor's stock, etc), because gamers likely don't care or don't even know about that crap. EA is one of the biggest gaming companies around. Second biggest now, I believe...THQ took them over for #1 if I'm not mistaken. Or maybe it was Activision...No matter, they lost the #1 spot because gamers are onto their [cabbage]. Like I said, you can't trifle with our market. We're not the general sheeps who buy everything you throw at them. We are the internet. We are legion. We are strong. :P

Hey, all I meant was that it seemed a bit drastic to use distressed in that case. I have no idea about any of this psychology stuff, hell, I probably couldn't even spell psychology right if it weren't for this spell check, so I don't even want to go there. I'd say it's beyond uncomfortable when you've forsaken your own parents advice and have already made up your mind about trying to change your sex. That's rather distressful in itself.

Lets nit-pick words more and address the points less. That sounds fun. ...

Well, it's your perogative to call the APA liars and go with your opinion. I've got nothing more to say. I'm not...We can all clearly see by the OP's first post that what they said was not accurate. If someone is willing to be as drastic as to get hormone injections or a sex change, they were clearly distressed about their situation.

"Most transgendered people do not consider their feelings to cause distress or be disabling." That's the biggest lie I've ever heard. This thread is a prime example of how every transgendered person lives. Only AFTER they've changed themselves into a fake former-self are they no longer "distressed". The same could be said for a psychotic person who is distressed by someone, then kills said person and now feels liberated, really... Still goin' with mental disorder. If only a small portion of people are experiencing it, it's a disorder. The very root of disorder is "dis" as in "no" and "order"...No order. The majority can be looked at as "orderly" because we're all pretty much the same, functionally. I have a hard time believing that something like Autism, which is a minority thing, is a disorder, but transgenderism is "natural" in any way.

I'm trained but I'm not an expert, what exactly is your point again? This is supposed to be a post about transgender, there's no need to go tangent just because you were proved wrong by calling it a disorder. ...I was "proved wrong"? By whom? You? That's certainly laughable. You "proved me wrong" by saying "This book and this doctor says it's not a disorder." even though if you clearly say the theory on what it is (being born female, but with a male brain) anyone would instantly say "yea, that's a disorder..." just like if you asked them "is being born female with a penis a disorder?" they'd say "Uhhh, yea..." Please, enlighten us, O' trained one. What exactly IS "transgender" caused by? Oh that's right...Your only other option is to say "it's completely natural!" when clearly it is not, or we'd all want a set of breasts to go with our male genitalia. Again, more propaganda on your part. "It's natural" you'd surely say, and if not, you'd say it's not natural, but we must accept it for what it is...Essentially agreeing with me and then throwing out common sense. I see no third option, perhaps you'd like to enlighten me. Open your magical psych book and tell us all that WE'RE the ones with the problem. Goes to show how messed up our society is. You try to get someone to REALLY think out what their doing and how their feeling before making any irreversible decisions, and you're immediately called a bigot and told to accept them for what they are. Fools. You seem to be mistaking 'abnormal' for 'disorder'. If anything abnormal was a disorder, then any trait expressed in low frequency in a human population, regardless of it's effects, would be considered a disorder. As disorder must cause distress or disability. Transgender dosen't neccesarily fulfill these requirements, but I suppose you could argue that it possibly can if the dysphoria is strong enough. I'd say this young girl is in quite a state of distress because of it. Certainly it is "abnormal", but that's by default because the majority are not like this...Hence, it's the opposite of the norm - abnormal. I say it's a disorder because it's your brain telling you that you're something you're not, when you clearly ARE what it's telling you you're not. And if it's really "I'm a female but my brain is male", then that is a birth defect or a disorder anyways. I don't mean to put her down by saying it's a disorder. She should consider herself lucky that she can live her life as normal as she can now. Some people get disorders they can't live normally with.