Kentucky’s ban on gender-transition care takes effect as federal judge lifts injunction

[Bradskii]

Do you have any facts that are actually relevant that you would like to present; or might you be content with making unsubstantiated cheap shots?

Yeah. The facts are one should ensure what one posts is factually accurate. By means of a link to an authoratitive source if challenged. It adds weight to one's argument. Else one might make an assumption, be proved wrong and lose credibility.

It really aids discussion and threads aren't diverted by people having to correct errors. And trust me, one learns a lot into the bargain.

 

[BPPLEE]

Yeah. The facts are one should ensure what one posts is factually accurate. By means of a link to an authoratitive source if challenged. It adds weight to one's argument. Else one might make an assumption, be proved wrong and lose credibility.

It really aids discussion and threads aren't diverted by people having to correct errors. And trust me, one learns a lot into the bargain.

Really everyone knew what he meant when he brought up leaches
this is much ado about nothing

 

[BPPLEE]

Ah, leeches. You want to buy some? They have a special on large ones at the moment. Five for only $83! Now that's a good deal.

Medical Leeches for Sale

Medical Leeches for Sale

www.medicalleeches.com

And so you know that it's not some quack treatment:

Leech therapy | Sydney Children's Hospitals Network

www.schn.health.nsw.gov.au

Question: Why don't people check the validity of what they post before they post it so they don't look foolish?

Looking back there was nothing wrong with my post. Maggots aren’t leec and maggots eat dead tissue. This is like arguing with someone over grammar and avoiding the issue that was being discussed.

 

[KCfromNC]

This ban is supported by Jordan B. Peterson's work.

A single opinion, as opposed to medical consensus. Got it.

Do you think then that the government should then lift the ban on lobotomies?

If you want to advocate for this, go ahead. But it should probably be in a thread where it is on topic.

 

[HARK!]

A single opinion, as opposed to medical consensus. Got it.

Oh, argumentum ad populum. Got it.

 

[HARK!]

If you want to advocate for this, go ahead. But it should probably be in a thread where it is on topic.

In case you didn't read the OP; this is my thread. I decide the topic.

Thanx!

 

[DaisyDay]

Really everyone knew what he meant when he brought up leaches
this is much ado about nothing

The ones who answered that post knew what he meant and also knew that he was mistaken.

 

[BPPLEE]

The ones who answered that post knew what he meant and also knew that he was mistaken.

Well let’s have him do 50 push ups and get 10 lashings.

 

[pgp_protector]

mu·ti·late​

(myo͞ot′l-āt′)
tr.v. mu·ti·lat·ed, mu·ti·lat·ing, mu·ti·lates
1. To injure severely or disfigure, especially by cutting off tissue or body parts

Mutilate - definition of mutilate by The Free Dictionary

I wouldn't accept a lobotomy either; no matter how much some doctor tried to persuade me that it was right for me.

oh circumsision, I know I never asked to have that done to me.

 

[BPPLEE]

oh circumsision, I know I never asked to have that done to me.

Huge difference between cutting some skin off and cutting the whole thing off

 

[pgp_protector]

Huge difference between cutting some skin off and cutting the whole thing off

One is asked for one wasn't.

 

[BPPLEE]

One is asked for one wasn't.

Sue your parents then

 

[Belk]

In case you didn't read the OP; this is my thread. I decide the topic.

Thanx!

I checked with the admins on this. You set the OP but the administrators (I'm assuming not you due to conflict of interest) determine if a post is on topic or not. Not the OP.

 

[Bradskii]

Oh, argumentum ad populum. Got it.

That only relates to the size of the group, not the credentials of the group.

 

[HARK!]

I checked with the admins on this. You set the OP but the administrators (I'm assuming not you due to conflict of interest) determine if a post is on topic or not. Not the OP.

Either the question you asked didn't provide enough context; or you didn't properly understand the answer.

If you believe that I have violated the rules; this is not the place to discuss that.

 

[HARK!]

That only relates to the size of the group, not the credentials of the group.

So what? My source has the credentials.

 

[Bradskii]

So what? My source has the credentials.

Nobody was denying that. But multiple credentialed sources trumps the opinion of one. As has been explained, that is not a fallacy.

 

[Belk]

Either the question you asked didn't provide enough context; or you didn't properly understand the answer.

Oh? Very well? You are stating it is up to the OP to determine exactly what is or is not on topic in a thread?

If you believe that I have violated the rules; this is not the place to discuss that.

I made no claims of you not following the rules.