🚀 go-pugleaf

Well while you are on the subject, then we should include Willow who
got it paid for with government funds and continues the be the man who
would be welfare queen.

Insurance pays for having babies which is elective and life-style
based, so unless you have a problem with the Canadian system doing the
same thing as the city of SF or the State of California for that
matter, then what is your point?

Insurance is about shared risks.
We insure smokers.
We insure over-eaters.
We insure psychotics.
We insure people who have pre-existing conditions.

A few women get jobs for the insurance, have a baby and quit the job,
should we ban them as well? Should we cut people off before they get
laid off their jobs? Where do you stop?

Not everybody has the same history of being a sex tourist and getting
busted in a third-world country, or having a melt-down or having
stockholme syndrome and having a so-called sex-change prescribed as a
remedy for being a rape victim.

I would rather have to pay for SRS at $20k than a heart attack at
$40-100k for some self-detructive glutton to have multiple by-pass or
an alcoholic to get a new liver or a smoker to get a new heart and
lungs.

In the grand scheme of things what you are complaining about is
statistically insignificant.

If someone complains about indigents stiffing hospitals, it would be
considered hate speech by many, so I dare say that this is personal
about Usher. Why don't you keep it that way and keep it between you.

The only reason that I point things out about WA is that they are
trying to set them self up to be some sort of authority on the subject
of GID when they are a AGP.

Get a clue.