Put your unpopular opinions here and someone who disagrees will debate you

Author: AceDebatesStuff

Posts

Total: 499
#91
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@thett3
The claim is unsubstantiated. Professional organizations such as the Endocrine Society recommend against puberty blockers for children who have not reached puberty, and recommend that patients be at least 16 years old before beginning hormone treatments for feminization or masculinization of the body. The last step in transitioning to another gender, gender reassignment surgery, is only available to those 18 and older in the United States.


also, strangely, it would seem that this should be a private medical decision between the patient, their parents, and their doctor

if you don't want your own child to receive "hormone blockers" then, explain that to them yourself

there is no reason at all for the state to get involved with this in any way
#92
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,169
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@3RU7AL
there is no reason at all for the state to get involved with this in any way
That's oversimplifying it a bit. The state does get involved when there is a very strong claim of harm to the child. That also the root claim of anti-abortion stances.
#93
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@thett3
the result is an exponential growth in the number of youth identifying as trans
and ?

exactly what manner of "catastrophe" do you suppose this will manifest ?
#94
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
That's oversimplifying it a bit. The state does get involved when there is a very strong claim of harm to the child. That also the root claim of anti-abortion stances.
are the children claiming "harm" ?

are the parents of the children claiming "harm" ?

who has the legal standing to claim that someone unrelated to them is being harmed ?
#95
thett3
thett3's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,064
3
2
7
thett3's avatar
thett3
3
2
7
-->
@3RU7AL
and ?

exactly what manner of "catastrophe" do you suppose this will manifest ?
I do think this kind of thing and the numerous other stories readily available is a catastrophe and I make no apologies for opposing it: https://old.reddit.com/r/detrans/comments/t267iu/my_consent_was_not_informed/ 

Child abuse is everyone’s business. Bad things happening to vulnerable people is something that upsets me. Your ideological commitment to it being nobody else’s business is something I can understand but I ultimately disagree.  
#96
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@sadolite
The Congo, Venezuela to name a few
Is that where you live, or is there some other reason you care so much about what they’re doing?
#97
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Let us recall what I said and what it was in response to that stated this conversation:

The purpose of a corporation is to make a profit.
That is a common misconception.
The context of this was when I was asked why liberal principals aren’t used to manage corporations I pointed out how corporations are different from governments. Can you demonstrate that corporations are formed for any other purpose often enough for it to warrant a response within this conversation?
#98
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@3RU7AL
the key distinction is the frequency at which they can be voted out
No, the key distinction is their entire reason for existing.

many conservatives complain that government should run more like a corporation
When it comes to managing its finances we can have a reasonable discussion about how a government should operate. Your original comment was about  liberal values, which is an entirely different conversation.
#99
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,169
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@3RU7AL
That's oversimplifying it a bit. The state does get involved when there is a very strong claim of harm to the child. That also the root claim of anti-abortion stances.
are the children claiming "harm" ?

are the parents of the children claiming "harm" ?

who has the legal standing to claim that someone unrelated to them is being harmed ?
Legal standing is whatever a judge says it is. They made up the concept out of whole cloth. They would claim the government has a compelling and narrow interest in preventing the abuse of children. That's how social services work.

If children always knew when they were being harmed and reported it, they wouldn't need so much protection. They don't.

This is permanent mutilation before the age of maturity. I believe strongly that a great number of these children will decide between the ages of 25 to 35 that they were indoctrinated, lied to, and abused. They will suffer serious psychological harm. At @thett3 points out in there are already some examples.

I agree with your baseline bias though. It's a very slippery slope letting government (or anyone else) interfere with interactions that are fully consensual. In the case of children though the precedence has long been established that they are not responsible for their decisions. So long as society sends that message children will be traumatized by perceived harm that could have been avoided by adult veto no matter what those children agreed to at the time.

At this risk of triggering Incel-chud this is the reason underage sex is an inexcusable risk of harm. Children are sponges, you can indoctrinate them into almost anything if you start young enough. It's not something to experiment with lightly and permanent surgery which removes the opportunity to live a normal natural life sure as hell counts as something they may consider harmful later.

It would be interesting trying to formulate moral principles for this situation.
#100
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,169
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@Double_R
Can you demonstrate that corporations are formed for any other purpose often enough for it to warrant a response within this conversation?
I deny that any particular frequency is required to warrant making that point. I wouldn't have given such a silly example as the cotton candy if I was talking about prevalent examples.
#101
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,170
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
-->
@Double_R
Do you even have a point to make?
#102
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,071
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
What is "The State"?

A lot of people around here often refer to "The State" as if it's something that they are completely separate from.
#103
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
This is permanent mutilation before the age of maturity.
this claim is demonstrably false
#104
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@thett3
Bad things happening to vulnerable people is something that upsets me.
do you consider scolding "child abuse" ?

do you consider unrestricted screen-time "child abuse" ?

do you consider making a cabinet of candy and chips freely available "child abuse" ?
#105
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Double_R
When it comes to managing its finances we can have a reasonable discussion about how a government should operate. Your original comment was about  liberal values, which is an entirely different conversation.
you seemed to suggest that competency selection is ill served by democracy

would you be in favor of screening political (and or managerial) candidates with some sort of standardized intelligence exams ?
#106
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Legal standing is whatever a judge says it is.
not exactly

"legal standing" is required for one party to bring a case against another

the plaintiff must make some attempt to demonstrate how the activity of the accused has harmed them in some material way

for example

chris rock has legal standing to press charges against will smith

you do NOT have legal standing to press charges against will smith (unless you have also been assaulted by will smith)
#107
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@thett3
I do think this kind of thing and the numerous other stories readily available is a catastrophe and I make no apologies for opposing
(IFF) someone later regrets the consent of their younger selves (THEN) they have the option to sue those (parents and or doctors) who coerced them for "emotional trauma"

It is estimated that the number of detransitioners ranges from less than one percent to as many as five percent. [**]

it seems strange that anyone would focus on legislation for this one particular plight considering the rampant nature of far greater atrocities
#108
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@zedvictor4
"The State" as if it's something that they are completely separate from.
POLITIA = POLITICS = POLICE
#109
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
They would claim the government has a compelling and narrow interest in preventing the abuse of children.
the government has a compelling and narrow interest in very clearly DEFINING "the abuse of children"
#110
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
If children always knew when they were being harmed and reported it, they wouldn't need so much protection. They don't.
this isn't even close to being true

i personally know individuals who were quite brutally abused, and reported it to the proper authorities who promptly told them to "shut-up" and after being sexually assaulted by the police, then forcibly returned to their abusive parents
#111
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,170
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
No economic system is perfect.  They all have their Achilles heel. Capitalisms heel is the failure to enforce the rule of law. Fraud destroys capitalism. There is a relatively easy solution to this by making fraud a capitol offense. No one accidently commits fraud, not ever. Socialism and communism's heels are consolidation of all power which absolutely corrupts and is almost impossible to escape without millions upon millions of people dying. There is no perfect economic system, kill the people who ruin it with fraud and corruption. That's the solution. 
#112
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@sadolite
kill the people who ruin it with fraud and corruption. That's the solution. 
murder might not be the ONLY solution

Top 10 Least Corrupt Countries in the World (CPI 2021)

  1. (tie) Denmark - 88
  2. (tie) Finland - 88
  3. (tie) New Zealand - 88
  4. (tie) Norway - 85
  5. (tie) Singapore - 85
  6. (tie) Sweden - 85
  7. Switzerland - 84
  8. Netherlands - 82
  9. Luxembourg - 81
  10. Germany - 80
#113
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,170
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
-->
@3RU7AL
All of those countries are parasite countries and would not exist if not for the US flipping the bill to protect them militarily. They pay virtually nothing to protect their own national security. Not a single one of those countries could defend themselves in a war with a country like Iran, let alone fight two wars simultaneously.  Their so called success is fake and based on sucking off the US. See what wiouls happen if the US said you are on your own, we are done being the worlds police man. Maintain and build your own millitary. Better yet take over being the worlds police man while your at at. I don't want to here any fucking excuses as to why they cant.
#114
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@sadolite
to protect their own national security
from whom ?
#115
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@sadolite
with a country like Iran
somehow i doubt iran wants to invade singapore
#116
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@sadolite
parasite countries
sure, but it's still pretty embarrassing that the USA and UK can't even crack the top 10
#117
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,170
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
-->
@3RU7AL
Lets implement the US not paying for all those countries and suspending all foreign aid,  adopt Mexico's immigration policies and lets see who makes the top ten. Stop ignoring all the 800 fucking pound gorillas that bring this country down. Oh and a complete fucking fiscal audit of every fucking govt agency and any attempt by anyone to stonewall will immediately be removed and investigated for fraud and if found guilty fucking executed.  The govt and those who work for it should fear the fucking people not the other fucking way around. I would give full pardons to any govt official that rats out and shows proof of fraud by others. It';s time for the fucking govt to get kicked in the fucking balls and not the taxpayer.
#118
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@sadolite
scal audit of every fucking govt agency and any attempt by anyone to stonewall will immediately be removed and investigated for fraud and if found guilty fucking executed.  T
the keystone of corruption is the revolving door between "lobbyists" and "elected officials"

good luck blaming "immigration policy" for that one
#119
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,170
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
-->
@3RU7AL
So business as usual and blame capitalism for everything. Good plan

#120
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@3RU7AL
perhaps you're unfamiliar with the concept of epistemological limits
What are those?