Saturday, February 15, 2020

Questions

Is “putting children in cages” something that would disqualify someone from being elected president?

If a hospital treats a patient based on their gender identity, rather than their biology, can they be sued for malpractice?  

Does talking about women servicing someone  sexually disqualify that person from serving in elected office?

5 comments:

Marshal Art said...

Question one requires a specific definition for the word "cages" before an answer can be provided. An enclosure of chain link fencing is just a chain link enclosure or else my neighbor's backyard is really a huge cage. With just that clarification in mind, temporarily housing children in chain link enclosures within a warehouse-like building to protect them while determing what to do with them is not a reason to disqualify a candidate for president. Indeed, it could be among the many reasons to reelect him.

I don't believe a hospital should be held responsible for the stupid demands of idiots. Then again, those who think they're of the sex opposite theirs are mental cases, so it's a tough call.

Craig said...

Art,

Your request for a definition is interesting in this context, for now I’ll leave it alone.

I agree, but you know there’s someone out there who’d sue.

Marshal Art said...

I missed the third question. Did you add it later?

Anyway, that question requires more details in order to respond. In general, I'd say no, it doesn't disqualify them in my mind.

Craig said...

I added it later. I’ll just say this, it’s about being consistent,

Craig said...

1. If putting children in cages, however defined, disqualifies someone from being president, then P-BO should have been disqualified and Biden should be out as well.

2. Since biology (you know, hard science) dictates that men and women get different drug dosages, among other things, then it’s probable that they’ll dose someone based on their pretend sex rather than their real sex. If something bad happens because of this, the hospital will likely get sued.

3. By the Dandards we hear, yes. But no call for Bloomberg to step down. Is this hypocritical, of course. Are we surprised, not at all.