Gender Affirmation

Gender Affirmation gender affirmation is abuse perpetrated under the guise of kindness. The phrase is Orwellian gaslighting. It is, in fact, a rejection of gender identity. By using using hormonal and physical mutilation a mental problem becomes the locus of identity. This formerly rare disorder usually worked itself out with puberty. The use of puberty blockers prevents exactly the means by which a person can overcome this illness.

The rationale given, the ostensible frame, is to affirm people for who they are. It cloaks vile physical abuse in kindness. People are loathe to reject other people's sense of identity, so it has not been vigorously challenged.

Here are some analogies: If a person has a sprained ankle, we don't expect them to run races. To make them feel better, we paralyze them by breaking their spine. What, do you hate disabled people, bigot?

If a person has a paranoid delusion about people being out to get them, they are treated like outcasts. We see schizophrenics on the streets and the outcome seems unfair. Thus, we must accept their premise: we're all out to get them. We should tell them we want to implant nighmarish thoughts with a conspiracy of psychic demonism.

A child is sexually abused by an adult, thus develops unhealthy sexual habits, addictions and gets drawn into prostitution. The government must subsidize their pimps as a matter of compassion.

You see how insane it is.

Gender Affirmation

gender affirmation is abuse perpetrated under the guise of kindness. The phrase is Orwellian gaslighting. It is, in fact, a rejection of gender identity. By using using hormonal and physical mutilation a mental problem becomes the locus of identity. This formerly rare disorder usually worked itself out with puberty. The use of puberty blockers prevents exactly the means by which a person can overcome this illness.

The rationale given, the ostensible frame, is to affirm people for who they are. It cloaks vile physical abuse in kindness. People are loathe to reject other people's sense of identity, so it has not been vigorously challenged.

Here are some analogies: If a person has a sprained ankle, we don't expect them to run races. To make them feel better, we paralyze them by breaking their spine. What, do you hate disabled people, bigot?

If a person has a paranoid delusion about people being out to get them, they are treated like outcasts. We see schizophrenics on the streets and the outcome seems unfair. Thus, we must accept their premise: we're all out to get them. We should tell them we want to implant nighmarish thoughts with a conspiracy of psychic demonism.

A child is sexually abused by an adult, thus develops unhealthy sexual habits, addictions and gets drawn into prostitution. The government must subsidize their pimps as a matter of compassion.

You see how insane it is.

Early Musings on The Rule of Law

Karl Deinninger https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=231471

You should close this website and immediately navitate to Karl Denninger

The harassment and bullying of Churches, their leaders and members is a measure of the good faith in which authorities have implemented law. Apologies suffice for the illuminated leaders. For their hypocritical public indiscretions, redoubled devotion is considered suitable penance.

I take as a matter of record that these rules have been applied partially. In the case of Churches, we're seeing a vindictiveness and capriciousness with no natural endpoint.

The messaging has been "Common rules, laid out by authorities in the interest of public safety". It seemed to jibe with grade school civics and there didn’t seem to be an obvious rejoinder.


The Problem of Illegitimate Laws Which Seem Legitimated Under The Doctrine.

~~~~

The failure of laws to be equally enforced explicitly contravenes the logic of the doctrine as most people understand it. Many people are learning why the hard way.

However, arbitrariness in formulating orders can be just as essential. In extremis, the problem is identical to inconsistent application. Jurisdiction-wide edicts are well within the capability of despots.  Elastic laws which change weekly, with every pretextual contingency,  have the same trait of arbitrariness.

In effect, of course they cannot be applied consistently. For such "laws" to undermine the rule of law, they don't need to fail for lack of equal application.  Yes, even if it applies to everyone in all specified circumstances.  If the circumstances are specified for each new ad-hoc rule, there is no  meaningful difference in effect.

In the guise of "the rule of law" his unfair and unreasonable bullying will continue to be available to anyone cynical and connected enough to deploy the methods. Even if they were not calibrated precisely to deny equal recourse - which they are - the process of forming rules itself is compromising the legitimacy of our rulers.

It's not Churchgoers who have been lawless here, but the regime.