Search results

Rei's All Out Unofficial You choose whether I use Nagato or Gyojin, post your bio and I'll take first move.

You dumb as rocks fam

LOL are you ****ing dumb? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homonym

Which brings me to my earlier points. Fact is, someone who adopts a child should never be treated the same as a biological parent in legal matters because they are not their biological parent. That's a fact, there's no way around it.

You're really slow to the catch, aren't you?

Except it does. That's what separates wild animals and humans. Murder, rape, and torture are illegal because how we feel and believe.

I believe that a male-to-female transition should be respected. If you haven't undergone the transition, then you get the luxury/effect someone who has did.

I read it once and it was clear he was talking about moral(right or wrong) being homophones with moral(message behind a story). That conversation was stupid as **** because it was clear what he was talking about, but you acted like he was speaking Latin just to be difficult.

Because being talked about is always a good thing

So, in one case, someone can be treated as something they biologically are not in legal matters, but in another case, someone shouldn't be treated as something in legal matters because they are not that thing biologically. Logic.

Okay then. So let me ask you this: Should a person who adopted a child never be treated the same way a biological parent would in legal matters because no matter what measures that person takes, they will never be that child's biological parent?

So the answer is yes, it doesn't matter what measures he takes, he will never biologically be a woman and therefore should never be treated as a biological woman in legal matters. This is your view, yes or no? I'm asking this for a reason, so when you reply, kindly just reply with either yes...

Lemme use your own post for a sec.

Dude. YOU were the one saying that no matter how much she feels as a woman, she isn't a woman. I never said the feeling was enough, YOU were the one saying it wasn't. I was quoting YOU.

Nope because he hasn't made the transition. He isn't an actual transsexual yet. Did you just try to chastise me for ducking your question and proceed to duck mine? At least try to hide your hypocrisy.

No because he hasn't made the *** change transition. Now answer mine.

Okay. So you're saying that no matter how much she feels the same as a woman, because she isn't a biologically a woman, she shouldn't be treated the same as a woman in legal matters. Correct?

I can just as easily say you're spouting nonsense. Debating is easy when you aren't arguing and just going "You're wrong because you are" over and over. And I'm sure you think you're actually a good debater.

You didn't counter them at all. You just repeat your own points over and over while either misunderstanding the arguments you reply to or just repeating yourself completely. That actually doesn't though. Women being more likely to be less dangerous than men doesn't mean there aren't still...

You're exactly in the same both as him since you're both incapable of understanding arguments, so you repeat the same things over and over like parrots. Even in this post, you still say the same the same thing again as before you can't understand my argument. Good luck. You're gonna need it.