XPost: can.politics, comp.os.linux.advocacy, or.politics   
   XPost: sac.politics, talk.politics.guns   
   From: tcoop@uraniumone.com   
      
   On 26 Apr 2025, doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The Doctor) posted some   
   news:vujes1$1d9n$2@gallifrey.nk.ca:   
      
   > In article <25fq0k1jlvubo35m4lah3dmmagibvco3c2@4ax.com>,   
   > Joel   wrote:   
   >>doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The Doctor) wrote:   
   >>>In article <8fcq0k5c7bs7uvje0fnqqrpfud9ba079ag@4ax.com>,   
   >>>Joel   wrote:   
   >>>>pothead  wrote:   
   >>>>>On 2025-04-25, Joel  wrote:   
   >>>>>> slothe  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>On 25 Apr 2025, a425couple  posted some   
   >>>>>>>news:qiOOP.2639593$OrR5.2009332@fx18.iad:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Simply amazing!   
   >>>>>>>> I want it all!   
   >>>>>>>> I want it both ways!   
   >>>>>>>> And I want all of you to pay for it!   
   >>>>>>>> ---------- Court - OK, sounds fine to us.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>That's ridiculous.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> They may have accidentally done the right thing.  This particular   
   >>>>>> surgery is just fucking insane but it seems to be the wish of the   
   >>>>>> person acquiring it - I could never advise anyone to modify their   
   >>>>>> genitals but if they choose that they choose with free will to   
   >>>>>> pretend that God screwed up and it requires a knife to the balls.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>Looks like the insult "go fu%k yourself" has taken on a whole new   
   >>>>>meaning.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>ROTFLMAO!   
   >>>>   
   >>>>They would need a partner, not being able to use the penis to   
   >>>>penetrate their own makeshift vagina.  I say if a person is   
   >>>>delusional enough to think they're bigender and should literally   
   >>>>have surgery to have both parts, let them.   
   >>>   
   >>>What does this have to do with Canadian Politics?   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>Are there not trans people in Canada, as it happens?   
   >>   
   >>--   
   >>Joel W. Crump   
   >>   
   >>Amendment XIV   
   >>Section 1.   
   >>   
   >>[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall   
   >>abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the   
   >>United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of   
   >>life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;   
   >>nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal   
   >>protection of the laws.   
   >>   
   >>Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent.  States are   
   >>liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.   
   >   
   > And US laws have no implication in Canada.   
      
   It would be a better 51st candidate state if they did!   
      
   You moose-kissers get a free pass for Marie-Pierre Bouchard   
   because she's funny and looks good in a swimsuit.   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)