>>You keep refering to >YOU<.
>>That >YOU< were ready.
>>That >YOU< would not be >>traumatized.
>>It's always about >YOU<.
Then you say:
I've talked about my own situationYes. That is what I said in the part that you quoted.
I said you were talking about you. >YOU< were talking about >YOU<.
Did you miss where I said that?
I've mentioned other countries.Yes you did. And I explained why what happens in other countries is not relevant. That was the whole point of the "okay" vs "legal" bit that took so long to hammer through your head. (and it seems as if it STILL hasn't gotten through).
I've mentioned other states.Yes you did. See my reply to the preceeding quote. "okay" vs "legal".
I've mentioned articles where leading researchers are asking similar questions.And now you retreat to outright LIES.
Go ahead, POST THE NAME of any of the "leading researchers" who are "asking similar questions".
Since you've "mentioned articles" by them, you should NOT have a problem doing that, should you?
Seems like you are wrong to me. <shrug>Whatever. We'll see when you can post any NAMES from those "leading researchers".
And because I KNOW YOU'RE GOING TO TRY IT......
Posting the name of someone who says that other, un-named, people are asking such questions is NOT posting the name of someone who is asking such questions.
Go ahead. Prove me wrong.