Court: Transgender Illegal Immigrant Felon Can't Be Deported

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Reallyfolks

You dont get much more clear than what I asked for, it wasn't an and question.

It was two questions. Here is what you said:

It's really simple you made the statement that similar cases have been dismissed. Can you cite those cases and were those cases ruled on by a court that has the same weight as appeals court.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Two questions, separated by an "and".
Could I cite those similar cases? Yes.
Were they ruled on by equal courts? No, as was readily apparently in the article. Which I happen to know you actually did read.

Your premise that the decision will lead to asylum being granted to convicted pedophiles has not been supported.

Cite equal cases denied by equal authority or admit you were wrong


Play all the games you want pick out the question you want, doesnt matter....feel free to try another point, this didn't go your way

a reply to: Reallyfolks

Cite equal cases denied by equal authority or admit you were wrong

When I am wrong I say so. In this case, I wasn't.
In order to have been wrong I would have had to claim that the lower cases were equal. I didn't make that claim.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Reallyfolks

Were those similar cases with a federal court of appeals?

No.

edit on 9/7/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Reallyfolks

Cite equal cases denied by equal authority or admit you were wrong

When I am wrong I say so. In this case, I wasn't.
In order to have been wrong I would have had to claim that the lower cases were equal. I didn't make that claim.

Didn't say you claimed it. I'm saying you couldn't produced what was asked. Simple. Good reason you can't. Doesn't exist, which goes back to my initial question of how this will set the standard that has nothing to do with transgendered people but is similar in all other ways (illegal, convicted felon, claims torture)

a reply to: Reallyfolks

I'm saying you couldn't produced what was asked.

For the last time:
It was two questions. Here is what you said:

It's really simple you made the statement that similar cases have been dismissed. Can you cite those cases and were those cases ruled on by a court that has the same weight as appeals court.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Two questions, separated by an "and".
Could I cite those similar cases? Yes. And I did.
Were they ruled on by equal courts? No, as was readily apparently in the article. Which I happen to know you actually did read.

Posted earlier, much earlier. Before I cited those cases.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Reallyfolks
You: Were those similar cases with a federal court of appeals?
Me: No.

edit on 9/7/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Reallyfolks

I'm saying you couldn't produced what was asked.

For the last time:
It was two questions. Here is what you said:

It's really simple you made the statement that similar cases have been dismissed. Can you cite those cases and were those cases ruled on by a court that has the same weight as appeals court.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Two questions, separated by an "and".
Could I cite those similar cases? Yes.
Were they ruled on by equal courts? No, as was readily apparently in the article. Which I happen to know you actually did read.

You can keep highlighting that all you want. Your word games are boring me. You jump between that when you want to prove the use of and, then you jump to the overall question , then when you can't do anything with the overall question you go back to the and question.


Cite equal cases denied by equal authority or admit you were wrong


This was it, your word games are old, you are all over the map, you jump between questions if you get stuck. You can't provide what was asked for. Do you have anything else new to add?

a reply to: Reallyfolks

This was it, your word games are old, you are all over the map, you jump between questions if you get stuck.

No. I have been saying the same thing the whole time.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Reallyfolks

This was it, your word games are old, you are all over the map, you jump between questions if you get stuck.

No. I have been saying the same thing the whole time.

Easy to follow the thread and see it, deny away. Again do you have anything new to add?

a reply to: Reallyfolks

Easy to follow the thread and see it, deny away.

Can you show me where I said the lower court decisions were equal to the appellate court? I can't seem to find it.

Ah Phage, I wonder if its possible to post an original thought without purposely trying to antagonize another member.

a reply to: Konduit

I do it quite often actually.
But I don't hold much truck with willful ignorance and bigotry (and false claims about what I've said). When that stuff appears I do tend to get testy.

a reply to: HomerinNC
I wonder why oh why might anyone seek out a life of being in a country that classes them as "illegals" and whereby you would be constantly looking over your shoulder. That's so silly, just travel legally for gods sake!!
Do you really have any clue what it's like to require asylum? Your naive post makes me think not and I genuinely hope to high heaven that you never do. Peace and love

a reply to: WP4YT
So let me get this straight because this person prefers to be a woman more than aman, this somehow qualifies you to describe her as an "it"? Must make you feel good to hate on someone you don't know. I don't know you and I really don't agree with your attitude on this subject but I'm sending out nothing but positive vibes in the hope that one day a situation may fall into your lap to make you realise that everyone is human no matter what choices they make and you my friend are no better or no worse than anyone else unfortunately mate

a reply to: HomerinNC

While we are at it everybody who lived anywhere who did anything should go back to where they come from.

If that were to happen then we'd all be shipped to Africa, except for the creationists-they'd have to be forcibly removed.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Reallyfolks

Easy to follow the thread and see it, deny away.

Can you show me where I said the lower court decisions were equal to the appellate court? I can't seem to find it.

Didn't say you did, I said you keep jumping back and forth. So unless you are going to now post something new then I will guess the only goal now is to continue the word games and ...check mate...game over.

a reply to: Phage

Can you show me where I said the lower court decisions were equal to the appellate court? I can't seem to find it.

If you looked in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a used lavatory with a sign saying 'Beware of the leopard' you might have found it.

That's where most logic is found, including my own.

a reply to: HomerinNC

I want to hear Trumps reaction to this so bad, PC withheld.

Wait, are you saying that when it comes to Transgender rights, those who identify as such are actually safer and have it better off in the United States than other countries?

I thought Americans were a bunch of backwards, homophobic bigots who clung to their guns! This can't be right!

a reply to: JadeStar

The definitions are 'overly simplistic' only because they don't support your agenda. Think about what you just said. "Those definitions are overly simplistic..." If he definitions don't support your argument, change them until they do. That is the very core of the liberal political rationale. You don't get to redefine things until you win. Or if you can have that bizarre entitlement, so can I.

LIke Phage saying "gender is complicated." Its not complicated unless you are trying to make it something its not supposed to be. One is male, the other is female. That is pretty simple. It only gets complicated when you have men who think they are women and women who think they are men trapped in the wrong body. If you are in a man's body guess what - you are male. You may not be manly, but you are male.

The reality is that you aren't a woman trapped in a man's body. You are a man who would feel better acting like a woman. You are NOT a woman. You may think you feel like one, but you don't know for sure because YOU ARENT FEMALE. That would be like a man saying he KNOWS what it is like to give birth. Even if it was described to him absolutely perfectly he still wouldn't know what it was like. For that matter, he wouldn't know if it was described perfectly or not since he has no FEMALE perspective to use for comparison. Its a bunch of crap.

Just because you think you are more female than male, you identify with women more than men, you want to be female, you like to pretend you are female, you imagine yourself as female, you 'identify' as female (the new gender buzzword), that does not make you female. It makes you a guy with an identity issue.

Oh, comparing transvestites to historical re-enactors is just sick.

FFS, it's not our job to take care of every poor such and such. Take your problems elsewhere, we have enough of our own. It'd be one thing if they weren't a felon, are the Dems trying to turn the US into a penal colony?

a reply to: EKron

I saw differing opinions for some terminology so, to avoid speaking from a platform of being uninformed, I went to a dictionary and used the definitions I found there. And for that I am ignorant? Why? Because the definitions don't fit your politically correct perspective that anything gay is automatically ok and anyone who disagrees to even the slightest degree is, "transphobic". as you put it?

Once again, if the definition doesn't work for you, just change it until it does, then call anyone who doesn't agree with your changes ignorant and try to portray yourself as somehow being more enlightened because you like to redefine the world in a way that satisfies you whenever you feel like it.

"...this is ATS and our motto is deny ignorance." You should try using real definitions instead of making up definitions that conveniently support your argument. If denying ignorance is truly your motto, surely you must agree that you cant just make up new definitions for words and expect everyone else to blindly accept your agendized bisection and reassembly of clearly defined and generally accepted terminology.