LPGA Female at Birth

[shortstop20]

It's not your life, get over it.

[The Road Dog]

Frankly this is an ignorant post. There are people who genetically have DNA that make them sexually ambiguous. Also, if someone is not sexually comfortable in the body they were born with they have the right to change this. Why should they live their entire lives as a lie based on how they feel sexually?

The ignorance is yours sir or ma'm, being "sexually comfortable" is not a right. It is especially not a right when in order to be comfortable you must spend a priestly sum of your money or the taxpayer's money to have a surgical procedure done by a team of Dr.s. Your post is the ignorant one, and what's worse you are proud of it and demand to be accepted. I wrote I was educated prior to the PC revolution, I'll add I will never accept your insane definitions of what is right or normal.

[RubxQub]

Originally Posted by The Road Dog

The ignorance is yours sir or ma'm, being "sexually comfortable" is not a right. It is especially not a right when in order to be comfortable you must spend a priestly sum of your money or the taxpayer's money to have a surgical procedure done by a team of Dr.s. Your post is the ignorant one, and what's worse you are proud of it and demand to be accepted. I wrote I was educated prior to the PC revolution, I'll add I will never accept your insane definitions of what is right or normal.

Yikes...

Sorry, dude, you're way off on this one.  I'm sure you're the type of person that hates it when someone tells you what you can and can't do with your money, right?  Where do you get off telling someone else what to do with theirs?  I'm sure you're the type of person that hates being told what to think or what to do, right?  Where do you get off defining what is right or wrong for others?

Get off your high horse and open your eyes.

[Chas]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shorty

Apparently she isn't really good enough to contend on the LPGA Tour anyways.

Exactly. Which is why they passed it/dropped the rule. People think there'll be a conga line of guys lining up to have a bit of snipping,tucking and implanting, thinking they'll clean up on the LPGA Tour. It won't happen. None of them would be good enough and if anyone was, the rule would still be in place.

What kind of an excuse is that for allowing as nonsensical and unfair a change in the rules as this?

The LPGA has made itself a laughing-stock.  Who's been talking about a "conga line" of transgenders?  [that would be a conga line of Straw Men .. ]  If even a few transgenders take advantage of this rule in the future, I'm talking about decent, competitive golfers not publicity hounds or worse, then the consequences for actual females (please reviewer the science of genetics fellas .....) on the tour could be serious.

The joke's on the LPGA, but I'm thinking that some of the players are not exactly laughing.

[ghalfaire]

While I can't say getting old is a lot of fun I have to say I enjoyed growing up in simpler times.

[The Road Dog]

Originally Posted by RubxQub

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Road Dog

The ignorance is yours sir or ma'm, being "sexually comfortable" is not a right. It is especially not a right when in order to be comfortable you must spend a priestly sum of your money or the taxpayer's money to have a surgical procedure done by a team of Dr.s. Your post is the ignorant one, and what's worse you are proud of it and demand to be accepted. I wrote I was educated prior to the PC revolution, I'll add I will never accept your insane definitions of what is right or normal.

Yikes...

Sorry, dude, you're way off on this one.  I'm sure you're the type of person that hates it when someone tells you what you can and can't do with your money, right?  Where do you get off telling someone else what to do with theirs?  I'm sure you're the type of person that hates being told what to think or what to do, right?  Where do you get off defining what is right or wrong for others?

Get off your high horse and open your eyes.

Please point out the instance of my referring to "wrong" in my post. If you can't do that then maybe you can locate the point where I intimate someone can't have an operation?

There is a major difference between saying something is a "right" and it is right. My post pointed out that technology cannot create a right for any one. The concept is very simple, your basic rights don't require any action to be taken by someone else in order to exist or be recognized by you.

For example, the right to breathe, is entirely something you do alone.  What would be the case if you accidentally choke on a piece of food. All of a sudden your ability to breathe is impeded, you still have the right to breathe, but not the ability.  Now the Doctor standing next to you recognizes what is happening and administers the Heimlich maneuver on you, did he do that because you have a right to medical help? Hell no, he did it because he is compassionate. Could he be punished if he didn't help? No because you don't have any right to his help.

When you start talking about gender reassignment surgery the amounts of money it requires are very high. If you have it and want to spend it it's your business.  If you don't have have it, all of a sudden the concept of rights comes into the conversation.

Go educate yourself and stop trying to be dramatic, feigning outrage because you misunderstand a post

[RubxQub]

Originally Posted by The Road Dog

Please point out the instance of my referring to "wrong" in my post. If you can't do that then maybe you can locate the point where I intimate someone can't have an operation?

There is a major difference between saying something is a "right" and it is right. My post pointed out that technology cannot create a right for any one. The concept is very simple, your basic rights don't require any action to be taken by someone else in order to exist or be recognized by you.

For example, the right to breathe, is entirely something you do alone.  What would be the case if you accidentally choke on a piece of food. All of a sudden your ability to breathe is impeded, you still have the right to breathe, but not the ability.  Now the Doctor standing next to you recognizes what is happening and administers the Heimlich maneuver on you, did he do that because you have a right to medical help? Hell no, he did it because he is compassionate. Could he be punished if he didn't help? No because you don't have any right to his help.

When you start talking about gender reassignment surgery the amounts of money it requires are very high. If you have it and want to spend it it's your business.  If you don't have have it, all of a sudden the concept of rights comes into the conversation.

Go educate yourself and stop trying to be dramatic, feigning outrage because you misunderstand a post

I'm referring to your tone more than anything.  It's clear to me the difference between "what's right" and "a right".

The person you originally replied to said "they have the right to change this"...which didn't mean to imply "a right", just simply "if they want to change it, there is nothing saying they can't."  The problem is that you seem to be really bummed out that if someone wants to do this, it's going to cost them an arm and a leg to get it done....but who cares?  It's their money, let them do what they want.  I don't see anyone stating that the government needs to financially support any individual who feels they need this surgery done, you brought that up on your own from what I can see by implying "a right".

My issue with your response is that you're quick to toss the "ignorant" line and clearly have an issue with people these days and "their PC ways".  Just doesn't seem like you have an opinion as much as you have a statement of fact that you'd like to push on the heathens who don't know any better, you know?

Your tone is just way off for any rational discussion to be had.

[The Road Dog]

Originally Posted by RubxQub

I'm referring to your tone more than anything.  It's clear to me the difference between "what's right" and "a right".

The person you originally replied to said "they have the right to change this"...which didn't mean to imply "a right", just simply "if they want to change it, there is nothing saying they can't."  The problem is that you seem to be really bummed out that if someone wants to do this, it's going to cost them an arm and a leg to get it done....but who cares?  It's their money, let them do what they want.  I don't see anyone stating that the government needs to financially support any individual who feels they need this surgery done, you brought that up on your own from what I can see by implying "a right".

My issue with your response is that you're quick to toss the "ignorant" line and clearly have an issue with people these days and "their PC ways".  Just doesn't seem like you have an opinion as much as you have a statement of fact that you'd like to push on the heathens who don't know any better, you know?

Your tone is just way off for any rational discussion to be had.

Okay, now we are making progress, and this despite your thinking my "tone"  is "way off".  My point is a simple one, technology makes gender reassignment surgery possible. I make no inference as to whether I approve or disapprove of someone choosing to undergo such a procedure, not my business if they do. My point is that no one has any business declaring such a procedure as being a right. The poster I directed my comment to did in fact state "they have the right".  You may understand this point but I know there are hundreds of people who do not and therefore are demanding that someone foot the bill for their procedure. That is not something I am comfortable with as those people will vote for someone who will eagerly pursue federal, state, or local tax money to satisfy them in return for those votes.  It happens, just like it does for Viagra or Cialis, and more recently coverage of pre-existing conditions (see the new Healthcare Law). These are not good things for me, my children, grandchildren and society at large.

Oh, and what is wrong with a statement of fact?

[MSchott]

Originally Posted by The Road Dog

Quote:

Originally Posted by RubxQub

I'm referring to your tone more than anything.  It's clear to me the difference between "what's right" and "a right".

The person you originally replied to said "they have the right to change this"...which didn't mean to imply "a right", just simply "if they want to change it, there is nothing saying they can't."  The problem is that you seem to be really bummed out that if someone wants to do this, it's going to cost them an arm and a leg to get it done....but who cares?  It's their money, let them do what they want.  I don't see anyone stating that the government needs to financially support any individual who feels they need this surgery done, you brought that up on your own from what I can see by implying "a right".

My issue with your response is that you're quick to toss the "ignorant" line and clearly have an issue with people these days and "their PC ways".  Just doesn't seem like you have an opinion as much as you have a statement of fact that you'd like to push on the heathens who don't know any better, you know?

Your tone is just way off for any rational discussion to be had.

Okay, now we are making progress, and this despite your thinking my "tone"  is "way off".  My point is a simple one, technology makes gender reassignment surgery possible. I make no inference as to whether I approve or disapprove of someone choosing to undergo such a procedure, not my business if they do. My point is that no one has any business declaring such a procedure as being a right. The poster I directed my comment to did in fact state "they have the right".  You may understand this point but I know there are hundreds of people who do not and therefore are demanding that someone foot the bill for their procedure. That is not something I am comfortable with as those people will vote for someone who will eagerly pursue federal, state, or local tax money to satisfy them in return for those votes.  It happens, just like it does for Viagra or Cialis, and more recently coverage of pre-existing conditions (see the new Healthcare Law). These are not good things for me, my children, grandchildren and society at large.

Oh, and what is wrong with a statement of fact?

Sir, who are these 100's of people asking for someone to pay for these procedures? You are making this a political issue and it is a personal issue. Of course someone has the right to gender reassignment surgery if they care not comfortable with who are they are sexually. you certainly don't have the right to deny them.

[Chas]

Don't you guys think you're getting diverted from the recent decision by the LPGA?  Should someone with XY chromosomes be playing competitively against XX's (or vice versa)?

Perhaps there should be another professional golfing association, for people with X? chromosomes ..... run by the ?PGA, perhaps.

[Splifton]

Originally Posted by Old1964

. . . What if Sergio wanted to have gender reassignment?

I thought he already did????  The way he has been playing the last couple of years you would think so....

[The Road Dog]

I'd say quite a few guys don't understand rights. Not having a right to something doesn't mean you cant buy it, it just means it isn't someone else's obligation to provide it. Also recognizing something isn't a right doesn't mean you are denying someone of anything either.  But yes we are way off topic and I'm done with it.

[Chas]

I was done with this thread also but I will post again once to say that you have made the key distinction, Road Dog.

[Radford Wooly]

Originally Posted by colin007

GAAAAHHH!!!!!

Thanks, Now I'm going to have NIGHTMARES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[plugged]

Well, let's see.  If this freak were good enough to play, it would have a male strength/size advantage over any woman, the ratings for every LPGA tournament would plummet from their already dismal levels, and revenues from spectators would fall.  All to appease a segment of society defined solely on behavior and that numbers no more than 2-3% of the population.

Yeah, that makes sense.