Originally Posted By Big Ragu You read that right. So Massechsetts tax payers have to pay for the sex change of a murderer says a judge. and some of you wonder why this once great country is no longer great. Some activist judge citing medical necessity(what BS is that!) thinks it is ok for others to pay for a murderer's confusion. If that person wants to be a heshe then that person should pay for it. I bet that juge was appointed by Obama. Figures!!!!
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder Here's the link to CNN's story: <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/04/health/massachusetts-sex-change-surgery-inmate/index.html?hpt=hp_t3" target="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/04/...pt=hp_t3</a> Here's a link to Chief Judge Mark Wolf, who made this ruling. He was appointed by Ronald Reagan in 1985. <a href="http://www.mad.uscourts.gov/boston/wolf.htm" target="_blank">http://www.mad.uscourts.gov/bo...wolf.htm</a> "Big Ragu", you're an idiot.
Originally Posted By fkurucz You'd think that the trolls would at least check the facts before posting their BS. It's a lot more fun, I suppose, to just assume that the judge was appointed by Obama.
Originally Posted By KCCHIEF I read this while on lunch today and about threw up I work in the medical field and I thought about all the elderly I see on a daily basis that cannot even afford their medicines... ridiculous .....
Originally Posted By DyGDisney Jumping to conclusions like the Big Ragu here has is a large part of the political problem in this country. Big Ragu says the judge was probably appointed by Obama. Big Ragu tells that to a fellow Tea-partier and that person takes it as fact and spreads it as such. Suddenly, Obama is wasting taxpayer money paying for transgender operations for incarcerated prisoners.
Originally Posted By DyGDisney I do have to add that I agree this is a waste of taxpayer money. This person is in prison for life for killing his wife, why does he need electrolysis. Ridiculous.
Originally Posted By The Big Ragu ok so I made a mistake! DO YOU GUYS HAVE TO JUMP DOWN MY THROAT. sorry I came on here. I am done. BYE
Originally Posted By planodisney Yes, they do have to jump down your throat, its what they do. But, can you please check your facts before you spread crap. Some of us get tired of defending people who are short on facts. Their side does it as well, believe me. BTW, anyone see Laurence Odouche accuse The senate minority leader of trying to tie President Obama to Tiger Woods when he made the dumb joke in his speach that Obama hasbeen working to get reelected, but working to make the PGA tour. He then went on to call him and all the speach writers rascist. I know most of you will never be able to see it, but this is just an over the top ridiculous example of what democrats do every day. it was just great to see one sooooo blatant that it cant be denied. If you beolieve marriage should be between one man and one woman, you are a gay hating, homophobe bigot. if you believe there is a problem with the welfare system, particularly after some of the changes recently made by this administration, you are a rascist who hates obama because he is black. If you are concerned about the mass amounts of for birth control abortions, which most are, then you hate women, are anti-women and should go back to the last century. dont you guys ever get tired of trying to destroy peoples character for political gain.
Originally Posted By planodisney That should have read, Obama WASNT working to get reelected but working to make the PGA tour. I forgot to mention that he then went on to say that he was trying to tie Obama to tiger in order for people to have the image in their head of obama running around like tiger. WOW!!!!!!
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "Yes, they do have to jump down your throat, its what they do. But, can you please check your facts before you spread crap. Some of us get tired of defending people who are short on facts. Their side does it as well, believe me." When someone post crap, as even you put it, as was done here, then yeah, you better believe throats get jumped. As for the rest of your post, meh.
Originally Posted By 182 "SPP for mayor." I think he has run for public office but won't talk about it.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <If you beolieve marriage should be between one man and one woman, you are a gay hating, homophobe bigot.> I don't think that. But I do think if that's your policy, you support something hateful and bigoted. Let me explain the distinction. I'm old enough to remember the 60's when some of my southern relatives (and that side of my family is huge, so there was wide disparity here) supported segregation. Some actually were (and still are) hateful, but more supported it simply because it was what they'd grown up with, it seemed to be "right," even their preachers told them it was what "God intended," and like most people they were wary of change. Why mess with what always seemed to "work" pretty well (at least for white folks)? I'm thinking of a couple of my aunts specifically. They were NOT hateful people. I would never call them bigoted people, full stop. But they supported a hateful and bigoted policy. (And later came to understand that.) Same with people who don't support equal rights for gay people. They may not be hateful or bigoted people full stop (and I would never say so without knowing them personally), but they do support hateful and bigoted policy. <if you believe there is a problem with the welfare system, particularly after some of the changes recently made by this administration,> Such as?? Specifics, please. Please don't tell me you drank the kool-aid on "Obama gutted the work requirement." That has shown to be flat-out false by every independent entity who looked at it. So what "changes made by the administration" are you talking about, exactly? <If you are concerned about the mass amounts of for birth control abortions,> I don't know anybody who supports abortion as a form of birth control. (Talk about mischaracterizing other people's politics!) In fact, every pro-choice person I know supports just the opposite - increased access to birth control as a way to reduce abortions. Properly used birth control just doesn't fail that often. Most abortions are sought by women who didn't use birth control properly, or at all. (Or the roughly 32,000 - almost 100 every day - rape victims who, yes, do get pregnant as a result.) And how many women would choose abortion - an invasive and often difficult procedure - when they could have chosen birth control before the fact... IF they were aware of how to use it (i.e. not subject to "abstinence only sex ed") and had access to it? Somewhere between "very, very few" and "none," I'd wager. All the data shows that young people who get abstinence-only sex ed do NOT have sex at lower rates... but they do use birth control at lower rates. This is a problem. We should stop being so squeamish about sex and birth control and make it so that knowledge about and access to birth control is the norm, as it is in most other advanced countries who have far lower abortion rates than we do.
Originally Posted By Big Ragu Can we please get back to this topic. So why are Massachusettes taxes paying for not only a murderer's confusion when they should be used for the death penalty. it is simple, if you murder then you should be killed also. That heshe should receive electrocution not electrolosis. Activist judges, I hope you will remember that a strong man doesn't need them around anyway.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox <<sorry I came on here. I am done. BYE>> Obviously not sorry at all, since you're still here.
Originally Posted By dshyates Donny, on this one I agree. Who would pay for his surgery if he hadn't killed someone? Not us. Is this going to be a way for poor TSs to get the surgery they desire?
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder What I think needs to be avoided here is making this a political issue. This is more of a matter of legislating away a court's obligation to make rulings such as these under laws as they're now written. Convicted felons already can't vote in most instances, and California, for example, just passed a set of pension reform laws that contained a provison that felons forfeit their pensions in most cases. Add something like this to the list and take care of the problem.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer It all boils down to whether or not you think that Gender Identity Disorder is a genuine medical problem. The judge was likely presented with evidence that the prisoner's disorder could be cured or alleviated by a sex change operation. We are required by law (and by ethics and for Christians who actually read the Bible by faith) to take care of prisoners and to take care of the sick. If the judge was presented with evidence that this was actually an illness and that it could be cured or mitigated with the surgery then he made the decision that the law said that he should make. My own opinion? It's a psychological issue, and should be treated as such. But I haven't put in the research or worked with patient with gender identity disorder to know as much about it as those who do.
