interceder270

joined 1 year ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] interceder270 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's it? Jeez.

[–] interceder270 4 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Can you elaborate on what this rule change is or give me some information to research and learn more?

[–] interceder270 8 points 1 year ago (5 children)

I don't really buy the 'more medical research' argument. When is enough enough? Shouldn't there already be an abundance of cases where there are issues considering these procedures have been going on for decades?

I do, however, buy the significantly less popular argument that these kids might make the wrong decision and then come to regret it later. This goes both ways.

[–] interceder270 1 points 1 year ago

Can you tell me what you think these guarantees are?

[–] interceder270 5 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Have they really been 'blacklisted', or are they just unable to get certain procedures done?

[–] interceder270 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I think it's because people view hormonal treatment and sex changes as different than treatment for disease or injury.

They probably view it more as cosmetic treatment, like plastic surgery.

[–] interceder270 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Free market gave us: lead pipes, lead paint, leaded gasoline, asbestos, PFCs (forever chemicals) in water, chat for the kids to play on (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chat_(mining)), and countless (literally) other grievances all so people richer than us could be even richer.

What's not to like?

[–] interceder270 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

It’s like a child standing on train tracks with a train speeding toward them and the child expressing that they’d like to get out of the way while people telling them “No! You’re not old enough to make that decision!”

Awful analogy, even if your point is sound. We should focus on the topic at hand, instead of trying to pivot to literal life-or-death analogies. It's a tactic people use to derail discussion instead of engage in it. Now instead of focusing on the topic at hand, we need to focus on how accurate your analogy is. It's more fruitful to just leave the analogy at home and try to have your relevant arguments stand on their own.

Lots of people on these forums will disagree, though.

[–] interceder270 -3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Treating them with/for what?

[–] interceder270 2 points 1 year ago

That's a really good point. I assumed it was a specialty drink where you have to pay for refills.

I can easily see people going overboard with this if it's just a fountain drink like the rest of them.

view more: ‹ prev next ›