Fireballer

You keep saying this is a charge of impersonation, whatever that is. What Maryland statute covers that? You do know there’s additional charges, right? The verbiage “motivated by the race of the victim” is the qualifying language as a hate crime straight from Marylands AG website. Tim, you haven’t formed an opinion without research again, have you?

No he hasn’t. But thats a far cry from saying that it’s impossible for it to be a hate crime. And just because he doesn’t get charged with a hate crime, doesn’t mean that it doesn’t meet the elements to do so. Again, do you think that this persons participation in this crime was motivated by the victims race? Before answering, remember that any crime against the person can have a hate crime qualifier.

If there’s ever an idiot Olympics, you and Tim would tie for gold. It’s obvious you still haven’t even researched what he’s been charged with. It’s laughable that you’re trying to straddle the fence here now.

So where are you with this? Sure that this couldnt qualify as a hate crime anywhere in the country, or are you holding judgement since you haven’t seen evidence of it yet?

You still steadfast that this can’t meet the criteria of a hate crime?

Hate crimes can literally be any criminal offense against the person or property. Have you even taken the time to research what he’s been charged with, Tim?

What specific criteria in this situation exempts it from hate crime status?

What jurisdiction are you referring to?

Do you think this person’s participation in this crime was motivated by the victim’s race?

I’m sure Tim will be along shortly to tell us about the extensive research he’s done on why gender nonconformity was removed from the DSM in 2013.

Tim are you of the stance that no matter how harmful gender affirming care is proven to be for minors, that the families wishes should over ride that? In 10 years, if this is exposed as a terrible mistake, would your stance be a libertarian one, or would you wish that more was done to prevent it?

So, why don’t you default to the American experts that are critical of our trans care over the doctor you linked to?

Tim, in response to @jerryskids, you made a post dismissing medical experts from other countries. In support of your post, you posted a link to an opinion piece from….England. Nobody seriously thinks you’ve delved into any real info on this subject. You’re a headline chaser.

Let’s squat in that mofo.

Do you just find links and post them without vetting? Your link is not biased at all. Did you research the author? The guy who wrote is literally NOT IN THIS COUNTRY. You’re laughable https://hanemaung.weebly.com/

I don’t have time right now to put down all my thoughts, but society has generally accepted the fact that courts make decisions if someone isn’t old enough to consent or make an informed decision. And as far as “medical experts” are concerned, trans people aside, all you have to do is look at our USDA food guide to see that the health care industry doesn’t always have the end users well being as the priority.

Absolutely. The problem with Tim’s thinking as that he has to have faith in his institutions. He bases his opinion on those opinions of “medical experts”. These are the same people who will rubber stamp procedures for kids, recommend schools hiding things from parents, provide chest binders illegally for teen girls, and will tell you that your kid will kill themselves if you don’t let them transition. All of these “ medical experts” root their ideology on WPATH, which is a complete train wreck. None of this shat is close to being settled science, but these “experts” are more than happy to experiment on kids. At least now, I *hope*, the false narrative about puberty blockers being completely safe and reversible has died.

The jokes just write themselves. As usual, Tim is spot on. It’s just reading books. No attempt at manipulation. As I stated before, ideological grooming is the goal. Antifa/free Palestine/blm/lgbtq rights/etc are all the same commies.

I realize these kids could have been planted for this interview, but we know this is proibably the mentality of most of these folks.

No it won’t ever be the same. The N word is regarded how it is because it’s insulting and racist. There literally no reason to change the definition of man or woman. None.

As usual, your take is spot on. Comparing the use of man/woman, which has been used throughout all of recorded history, being the same as the N word is absolutely a great analogy.

Tim, societal norms are widely accepted as good and correct. It’s never been seen that way. It’s always been derogatory. Just because it may have been used more frequently by idiots, doesn’t make it a norm.

Yes, this is very good. Airlines fuking suck.