-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Illegal in a Homeless Shelter Gets Trans Surgery Funded by Taxpayers
- Thread starter Saucy
- Start date
- Feb 10, 2013
- 42,546
- 23,275
- 30
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Celibate
- Politics
- US-Republican
People can have different perceptions. It doesn’t automatically make it false.
Upvote
0
Nithavela
you're in charge you can do it just get louis
- Apr 14, 2007
- 32,074
- 23,721
- Country
- Germany
- Faith
- Other Religion
- Marital Status
- Single
I can't remember the last time I was "bombarded" by LGBTQ+ stuff. I can count the number of visble transgender people I have met on one hand, and while I met a few more homosexual ones, I almost exclusively wouldn't have known unless they told me at some point. In fact, this forum is the only place where I am constantly made aware of the "issue".
Upvote
0
- Feb 10, 2013
- 42,546
- 23,275
- 30
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Celibate
- Politics
- US-Republican
If anything, I encounter it more on the news and on here rather than real life, but know a few cares where it was a bit over the top.
Peace
Upvote
0
MarkSB
"I'm distracting you, you big turd blossom!"
- May 5, 2006
- 1,142
- 962
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Hey Mr. Sauce - it's been a while. I remember you from my days back on the Singles sub-forum. How's it going?
One thing to point out here, since I think you raise an interesting point: During the battle between the Democrats and MAGA Republicans over the extension of the enhanced ACA subsidies, the Democrats stated that undocumented immigrants do not receive federal funding for health care. While the state of California does receive Medicaid funding from the federal government, the portion of the Medi-Cal program that covers undocumented immigrants is paid for solely by the state. So the claim that the federal funding is not used to cover illegal immigrants is not a lie. Also keep in mind that the stand off last year was over subsidies for ACA marketplace plans, which undocumented immigrants are not eligible for.
I think where the "debate" comes in (if there is even a debate to be had) is that under Trump, the federal government is now trying to say that because federal funding goes to California to provide Medicaid to U.S. citizens who live in the state, and because that funding frees up money in California's state budget, that when California uses its state budget to pay for healthcare for undocumented immigrants that we might as well say that the federal dollars are paying for it. It's a pretty wonky argument if you ask me. States should be allowed to manage their budgets in a manner that they determine to be best for their local communities - and if the voters of California want their taxes to go toward healthcare for undocumented immigrants, then I don't see why the federal government should try to stop them. Is the federal government saying that if the funds went toward something else, like tax breaks to data centers, then they would be fine with it? That's a level of micromanagement that I don't think the founders intended when they decided to keep power decentralized.
There might be an argument to be had here, if blue states were consuming more federal dollars than red states, but that is not the case - quite the opposite, in fact:
From 2018 to 2022, individuals and organizations from blue states contributed nearly 60% of all federal tax receipts but only received 53% of all federal contributions to states in the form of either direct payments, grants, contracts, or wages. Meanwhile, red states were only responsible for 40% of federal tax receipts but received 47% of all federal contributions to states. A 7% differential that in effect equates to a more than $1 trillion transfer payment from blue states to red states, amounting to $4,300 per capita, compared to the instance where their respective fair shares were paid. [LINK]
If this were something that were happening in my state, then (depending on other factors) I might be inclined to care. But the fact that it's in California and that they're doing it with their state funds pretty much makes it a non-issue. At some point, Americans are going to have to learn to "live and let live". If California wants to spend their state funds to provide health care (including gender affirming care) for illegal immigrants, than all the power to them. I think that's their decision to make, and their right as a state.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
- Feb 10, 2013
- 42,546
- 23,275
- 30
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Celibate
- Politics
- US-Republican
Upvote
0
