RE: Another Outrage

RE: Another Outrage (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

DomKen -> RE: Another Outrage (6/29/2014 8:29:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail how about boi and gurl? Or baby? Yea because there is nothing a kid likes more than to be refered to as a baby. I made that mistake when my nephew was about 3 and he let me know in no uncertain terms that he was not a baby, he was a little boy. But what the hell. Maybe it's time to push people to stop using gender until the kid hits high school. We can refer to them as it's and only buy gender neutral clothing. Maybe insist they all cut their hair the same so one doesn't appear more feminine than the other. That should really drive the public support behind tgs. I mean it's bad enough that so many people think it's a mental disease, lets show them that just how wacked out it can really be. You do understand I'm only talking about holding back until the child is old enough to communicate? or are you unable to think at all?

DesideriScuri -> RE: Another Outrage (6/29/2014 8:46:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail how about boi and gurl? Or baby? Yea because there is nothing a kid likes more than to be refered to as a baby. I made that mistake when my nephew was about 3 and he let me know in no uncertain terms that he was not a baby, he was a little boy. But what the hell. Maybe it's time to push people to stop using gender until the kid hits high school. We can refer to them as it's and only buy gender neutral clothing. Maybe insist they all cut their hair the same so one doesn't appear more feminine than the other. That should really drive the public support behind tgs. I mean it's bad enough that so many people think it's a mental disease, lets show them that just how wacked out it can really be. You do understand I'm only talking about holding back until the child is old enough to communicate? or are you unable to think at all? Riiiight, because as soon as they can communicate, they understand the differences between the genders and sexual orientations. [8\|]

igor2003 -> RE: Another Outrage (6/29/2014 8:52:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail how about boi and gurl? Or baby? Here's a wild idea...Why not let the parents decide whether they want to call a newborn with a penis a boy and a newborn without a penis a girl? Then, later, if the toddler starts showing characteristics of the opposite gender they can decide what to do about it. What a concept!

thishereboi -> RE: Another Outrage (6/29/2014 10:01:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail how about boi and gurl? Or baby? Yea because there is nothing a kid likes more than to be refered to as a baby. I made that mistake when my nephew was about 3 and he let me know in no uncertain terms that he was not a baby, he was a little boy. But what the hell. Maybe it's time to push people to stop using gender until the kid hits high school. We can refer to them as it's and only buy gender neutral clothing. Maybe insist they all cut their hair the same so one doesn't appear more feminine than the other. That should really drive the public support behind tgs. I mean it's bad enough that so many people think it's a mental disease, lets show them that just how wacked out it can really be. You do understand I'm only talking about holding back until the child is old enough to communicate? or are you unable to think at all? Communicate as in mama and dada or communicate as in give an informed explanation of what gender the feel best represents them and why. And what do we call them in the meantime? Is big brother going to provide a list of gender neutral names as well? You are the one who is not thinking here.

DomKen -> RE: Another Outrage (6/29/2014 10:33:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail how about boi and gurl? Or baby? Yea because there is nothing a kid likes more than to be refered to as a baby. I made that mistake when my nephew was about 3 and he let me know in no uncertain terms that he was not a baby, he was a little boy. But what the hell. Maybe it's time to push people to stop using gender until the kid hits high school. We can refer to them as it's and only buy gender neutral clothing. Maybe insist they all cut their hair the same so one doesn't appear more feminine than the other. That should really drive the public support behind tgs. I mean it's bad enough that so many people think it's a mental disease, lets show them that just how wacked out it can really be. You do understand I'm only talking about holding back until the child is old enough to communicate? or are you unable to think at all? Communicate as in mama and dada or communicate as in give an informed explanation of what gender the feel best represents them and why. And what do we call them in the meantime? Is big brother going to provide a list of gender neutral names as well? You are the one who is not thinking here. The name part is problematic, although there are many cultures where children are given new names once they reach different stages of life so it is not insurmountable. However as I've pointed out the most recent research indicate gender dysphoria does manifest very early so we would not be expecting this to be an issue after the child starts speaking.

Musicmystery -> RE: Another Outrage (6/29/2014 1:31:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: igor2003 quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail how about boi and gurl? Or baby? Here's a wild idea...Why not let the parents decide whether they want to call a newborn with a penis a boy and a newborn without a penis a girl? Then, later, if the toddler starts showing characteristics of the opposite gender they can decide what to do about it. What a concept! Why don't we cut off their genitals at birth, and then, when they're 12, let them choose which reconstructive surgery they prefer. Because that will validate a few trans-gender attitudes. or.....perhaps not.

MercTech -> RE: Another Outrage (6/29/2014 2:47:45 PM)
At one time, you only got a SSN when you were old enough to work and pay taxes. In any event; they didn't bother even allowing you to apply for one until age 13 (back in the early 70s). Then, there was an audit looking for welfare fraud and there were several cases of people passing kids around when caseworkers came by so several families could claim six or more children. In typical knee jerk reaction to a problem caused by the few; there was a bureaucratic decision that all kids would now be required to have a SSN assigned before they were allowed to go to public school. (this happened in the early 80s) Gad, it was a mad scramble to get SSN applications for all those school age kids that a year before couldn't even apply for one. Now, they just assign a SSN when the birth is registered. Yes, oh ye biblical fanatics, the number of the beast is applied at birth. <this is warped humor for those that don't recognize it.> ____________________________________ As to cutting genitals at birth.. males born in the 50s automatically were circumcised unless the parents vociferously objected and filed paperwork holding the hospital blameless over ignoring a basic personal health and sanitation issue. __________________________ Somehow this thread reminds me of the infamous George's Tavern in Memphis. There were doors marked "Men", "Women", and "Other"... but they all opened into the same large washroom with multiple stalls.

Musicmystery -> RE: Another Outrage (6/29/2014 2:53:53 PM)
Ah...no. Not at all. In fact, born long before then, my siblings and I all had SS#s at an early age--and opened bank accounts with them. Under the 1935 law, what we now think of as Social Security only paid retirement benefits to the primary worker. A 1939 change in the law added survivors benefits and benefits for the retiree's spouse and children. In 1956 disability benefits were added. Keep in mind, however, that the Social Security Act itself was much broader than just the program which today we commonly describe as "Social Security." The original 1935 law contained the first national unemployment compensation program, aid to the states for various health and welfare programs, and the Aid to Dependent Children program. http://www.ssa.gov/history/35actinx.html

DomKen -> RE: Another Outrage (6/29/2014 3:13:55 PM)
I applied for my SSN when I got my first job when I was 14 in 1981. My little brother had to do the same a couple of years later. I remember when the law got changed and kids got them at birth but cannot remember what year it was.

Musicmystery -> RE: Another Outrage (6/29/2014 3:21:41 PM)
Nonetheless, it's not true that you couldn't get them until age 13.

thompsonx -> RE: Another Outrage (6/29/2014 4:23:42 PM)
ORIGINAL: Sanity We had a TG fellow in an upscale office building I help manage who came out of the closet, which was cool. A large hairy fellow though, unattractive as a guy. Get the picture? Anyway, he began using the common womens room on his floor, which that womens room was shared by several different offices... It only took one encounter with one of the more well-to-do ladies on the floor in that restroom for it to be decided at higher levels that this particular womens room would now be exclusively that particular TG's restroom, and all the ladies on the floor received electronic key cards to access a secure but vacant floor where they could use the restroom without having to share it with someone who was physically very male Guess what - that never made the news, national or local Is that because you just made it up? Ever wonder why no one takes the shit you post seriously?

thompsonx -> RE: Another Outrage (6/29/2014 4:40:45 PM)
ORIGINAL: Sanity How many people are in California? How many schools? How many students? And you can state with absolute authority that there has never been one problem. If you could find one you would have posted it but you didn't so you obviously are full of shit. It is my opinion that you are just DK being DK because I know for a fact that I would have tried to shower with the cheerleaders if there was even a small chance. That you would shower with someones daughter against her will is to be expected out of someone like you. The only question here is would you cut your dick off to shower with her? Because that is what we are talking about.

thompsonx -> RE: Another Outrage (6/29/2014 4:43:00 PM)
ORIGINAL: Sanity Thats a thread all its own, and a very complex subject that would be time intensive for me to lay out here in one post, and with the low brows on the left such as thompson, DK, MM etc who seem to dominate here (using the term loosely now), I am not feeling that working hard to construct a post is worth much effort here. That is a crock of shit. You cant string a few words together to make a cogent thought let alone defend the moronic bullshit you post.

thompsonx -> RE: Another Outrage (6/29/2014 4:45:56 PM)
ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri The SSN is used for tax purposes here. Which would be a - wait for it - tax purpose! It is a primary id which is what she was talking about. Do you just open your mouth to change feet?

DomKen -> RE: Another Outrage (6/29/2014 9:08:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Nonetheless, it's not true that you couldn't get them until age 13. But you had to apply for it before you started working at least until roughly the late 80's.

tj444 -> RE: Another Outrage (6/29/2014 10:28:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 I think its outrageous that a baby leaves the hospital with a SSN applied for/assigned to him/her... I'm curious. Why do you think that outrageous? there is no reason at all for a baby to need one at that age and it sets up children for identity theft which can go on for many years before the kid finds out his/her credit rating, job prospects, insurance rates, ability to rent, etc are screwed up.. I didn't have a SIN (Canada's "SSN") until I was 17 & living on my own and had my first job, until you are working there is no need for it.. And in Canada the SIN is to be used only for tax purposes, it is not a national identity number/card there like it is here.. The SSN is used for tax purposes here. quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen It used to be that way here. Then they required that every kid have a SSN if you wanted to claim the kid as a dependent. Which would be a - wait for it - tax purpose! (ETA: Fixed a typo.) Well, it's stupid for the govt to require it for a child.. its not for the tax purpose of the child, its for the tax purpose of the adult (which will already have one).. the childs name, sex and birth date & place of birth should suffice.. I just looked at Canada's Canada Child Tax Benefit form and no where do they ask for a SIN for the children..

Musicmystery -> RE: Another Outrage (6/30/2014 5:17:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Nonetheless, it's not true that you couldn't get them until age 13. But you had to apply for it before you started working at least until roughly the late 80's. But since that wasn't the point I was making, you're talking to the Voices again. He maintained you couldn't apply. Not true. quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 Well, it's stupid for the govt to require it for a child.. its not for the tax purpose of the child, its for the tax purpose of the adult (which will already have one).. the childs name, sex and birth date & place of birth should suffice.. I just looked at Canada's Canada Child Tax Benefit form and no where do they ask for a SIN for the children.. It isn't exclusively either one. It's also for disability and death benefits. quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Under the 1935 law, what we now think of as Social Security only paid retirement benefits to the primary worker. A 1939 change in the law added survivors benefits and benefits for the retiree's spouse and children. In 1956 disability benefits were added. Keep in mind, however, that the Social Security Act itself was much broader than just the program which today we commonly describe as "Social Security." The original 1935 law contained the first national unemployment compensation program, aid to the states for various health and welfare programs, and the Aid to Dependent Children program. http://www.ssa.gov/history/35actinx.html

MercTech -> RE: Another Outrage (6/30/2014 5:27:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Nonetheless, it's not true that you couldn't get them until age 13. Hmm, yep, I was wrong. They must have rejected the one I sent in when I was 12 for some other reason. I thought it was my young age. I stand corrected.

Musicmystery -> RE: Another Outrage (6/30/2014 5:32:56 AM)
No worries. Sorry the peanut gallery decided to blow it out of proportion.

MercTech -> RE: Another Outrage (6/30/2014 6:00:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery No worries. Sorry the peanut gallery decided to blow it out of proportion. Yep. My point was that before you had to PROVE your kids were actually existing by having a SSN; you didn't get a SSN until you got a real paycheck job that had withholding taken out. I wonder if anyone has ever prosecuted a kid for not paying self employment tax when he did yard work for the neighbors? I should hush or the nanny state may realize they have lost millions over the years by not taxing the kid with the lawnmower.

Page: << < prev 3 4 5 [6] 7 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625