Worst President of US

We were discussing just that, last night. The very things that Trump has his base wound up about are the very things he is doing.

Gaslighting in the extreme and his followers are blind to it. Some day they'll waken up and see but America may have slid further down the ladder of importance.

 

It would seem to me at least that we have more in common then you might think, finding common ground is the first step to understanding,

you are aware that cartels use intimidation and fear as tools and in Mexico as well as Columbia it is political

yes I will go a step further and say the president SHOULD be held to a higher standard as well as upholding our constitution

Immigration reform is needed for sure unfortunately the infrastructure of this country is in shambles, our roads power grids hospitals etc and until we get our act together and fix that shit allowing an open border is just shooting ourselves in the foot so to speak

no you do not have to defend yourself especially since I was not attacking....

its a funny thing I consider myself a moderate centrist , I dont like trump I would prefer he was not elected BUT on the other hand I dont think absolutely everything he does is bad wrong or incorrect, I may not agree or like the way its done but I try and keep an open mind he was elected by the majority however slim that may have been and as long as our checks and balances hold and I hope they do I think most of his more egregious shit will never come to pass.

when I come on here I am derided and largely disagreed with and I am fine with that and when ( since I am an avid outdoorsman) I go on hunting and fishing sites I am derided and largely disagreed with because its so far left here and right there and the fact is we ALL need to meet somewhere in the middle and get dialogues working again.

That is why I say your statement was sad

 

1% of our budget is a number most cant count to figuring out the what where and who is pretty fucking important

 

Also, free not to. Neither Moon Goddess nor anybody else on these Forums is obliged to hop thru anybody's hoops and answer or address questions they don't choose to.

 

...

 

I'm curious as to why having the government defining "sex as based on biology" is a big deal to you?. First of all, do you see a distinction between "sex" and "gender"? I think of sex is something nature defines:characteristics "which make someone biologically male or female, such as chromosomes, hormones, and reproductive anatomy." https://www.simplypsychology.org/sex-gender.htmlhttps://www.simplypsychology.org/sex-gender.html Nature doesn't dichotomize the categories. In admittedly rare cases, there are intersex individuals (hermaphrodites) who don't easily fit into the categories of "male" and "female". And thanks to the wonders of modern science, one's sex can be changed. Whether or not it should be is an open question. "Gender refers to the socially constructed roles, expectations, and behaviors that are often ascribed to the different sexes. Gender identity is a personal, internal perception of oneself and is based on socially constructed roles, behaviors, and customs."
"Real men don't eat quiche".
What’s the Difference Between Sex and Gender?
Sex vs. Gender: How They’re Different
Sex–gender distinction - Wikipedia
I recently finished a discussion on this site dealing phenomenon of drag queens and whether or not they should be reading to kids in schools. I argued that it wasn't an issue to go to the mat for, and got a significant amount of blowback. But there was a time when anti-cross dressing laws were on the books in a number of states in the U.S. (in New York, as recently as 2011) Arresting dress: A timeline of anti-cross-dressing laws in the United States Such legislation provided "a flexible tool for police to enforce normative gender on multiple gender identities, including masculine women and people identifying as transgender or gender non-conforming." But eventually it became "increasingly difficult to even define what 'cross-dressing' entailed from a law-enforcement perspective." Ibid. Such laws have been routinely thrown out of court since the sixties. There's that pesky U.S. Constitution again--the part where it says states can't deprive a person of "liberty" without due process of law. Until recently, at least, the Supreme Court has given a rather broad interpretation to "liberty" to give substantive, rather then merely procedural, import to due process where personal liberties. Is that something that bothers you? If so, why?

Or is it the physical aspect--sex, as opposed to gender--that you have a problem with. A growing number of "red" states passed laws requiring people to go by the sex stated on their birth certificates when using bathrooms. (I, myself, happen to go by the gender stated on mine, but would find it awkward to carry my birth certificate around with me just to use the john.) Or is the problem only with people who physically look like the sex opposite to the one labelled on the door that are the problem and should be carrying their birth certificates?

My MAGA friends are mainly concerned with formerly male-sexed folks who compete in women's sports. I might be possible to use chromosome or hormone testing to weed those out. Would that be necessary or desirable?

And of course religion often comes into play where issues of sex and gender are concerned. My Evangelical friends tell me that God created the first humans: "Male and female he created them." (Gen.1:7).(No Adam and Steve)! Jesus reaffirms this in Matthew 19:4-5: "Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,' and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'?" (Actually, there are those troublesome hermaphrodites. What to do with them? Typically, in our society, the parents make a decision early on to "fix" the ambiguity, although sometimes the kid regrets their choice of sex and would have preferred they chose the other. Then there are those who, for various reasons, feel that they are trapped in sex on their birth certificates and would really be more comfortable as the opposite sex. Both kinds make up the category we call "trans". Whether or not they should be allowed to change their sex or gender to suit their own preference lies at the heart of the controversy over the matter. In the U.S., the folks who favor getting the government off our backs and into our bedrooms are called "consevatives" The ones we call "liberals' tend toward the opposite position: regulate the economy, but allow individual freedom on personal matters.

My own experience in this area is limited. Personally,I like the sex I was born with, and have never wanted to try out apparel or roles belonging to the other one. I'm married to a woman I love dearly, and we have four kids--all sex and gender conforming. But I do know a few trans folks. One is a local physician, who started out as a masculine-appearing guy with an athletic build, originally married to another physician, a woman, with whom he had a couple of kids. He decided he was really a woman, and proceeded to have the surgery to make him one. His wife divorced him. Interestingly, he changed his sex, but retained his heterosexual interest in women, so he's now a lesbian.The others that i know are college students. one guy making the change to girl, 2 girls making the reverse transition. i'd say the transitions were successful in all three cases, I personally think it would be tragic if these kids were denied the hormones they need to maintain their chosen identities.

So I'm questioning why you want the government involved in such decisions--or do you? And how?

 

So you seem to have no problem with Trump ignoring the Constitution.
You have no problem with the richest man in the world having access to our SS numbers and bank records.
You have no problem with invading Mexico.
You have no problem with upsetting world health and by extension American health due to world wide travel.
You have no problem with upsetting legitimate foreign governments.
You have no problem with attacking worker and other public rights.
You have no problem with the consolidation of power in the Presidency.
You have little understanding of biology.
And you have no problem with Trump flooding the court system in an effort to overwhelm it with questionable cases in and effort to achieve the above.

Is that right?

No, that is not correct. You have made huge assumptions (I'm being liberal with the use of the word) to have come up with those conclusions.

 

Well said. You are one of the few voices of reason of this site. I also don't agree with everything President Trump has done, but I know of no one better to get us out of this mess that BOTH parties have gotten us in.

 

Thanks for your reply. It's as one sided as I've come to expect.

 

OOOOO scathing! hahahaha. ---The only commandment that I don't / haven't broken is the one about murder. But one is occasionally tempted, I must say.

 

...

 

Seeing Both Sides and Embracing a Fresh Perspective | Psychology Today

• With matters peculiarly human, what looks true can also be seen as false—it all depends on your viewpoint.

 

Depending on ones interpolation of the Ten Commandments, I may have broken all of them and probably will again.

 

I have expressed some disappointment in Republicans. But finger pointing gets us nowhere.

 

weeell there is something on that front

Trump says he spoke with Putin about ending war in Ukraine - ABC News

 

This may come as a surprise to you, but in large part--I really don't care about someones sexuality. I have zero issues with Homosexual people (Not saying Homosexuals are Trans, or visa-versa), I have some concerns about Gay/Transexuals as a group as related to an organization. I'm not in favor of the Pronoun thing---I see no need to announce "I like Vagina" in the signature line of my emails. I was not in favor of allowing a group to gather--when everyone else was locked down--to paint a rainbow street crossing. I am curious as to why Drag Queens read to Elementary School Children, but not Seniors in a Retirement Home. I am also against a person competing in sports against someone not born of the same Sex/Gender. I suppose I don't see a distinction of sex and gender. One can be a Male who loves Men, no sex/ Gender required, more than how he was born. (Male used as an example, same for Female). I do have concerns about children getting puberty blockers at such an early age. All major discissions are usually left up to the individual to be made after the age of 18. This is a HUGE decision made very early in a child's life, I fear sometimes made by a Parent rather than the Child.