Dawn, I wish you had read the two other posts I had made to Shelley. Oz is not a place other than Kansas its shorthand for another country. And, I admit I am ignorant of US laws and institutions, probably as much as you are of Australian laws & institutions.
I hoped you had some sense of where I stand on things from other posts I have made. In short I was making a statement of where I stand on things political/social - NOT insulting transexuals. I wish you had challenged me on this and not just dived in & attacked me (I believe unjustly).
Re-reading my post I admit the "My post may offend some people" sounds smug - it was not my intention
My position is: That if anybody feels that they truely are born into the wrong sex - then they have every right to do somthing about it - whatever it takes. I am aware that it is a long, painful & costly journey, but it is that persons individual journey & though they are entitled to sympathy & support. They cannot expect as a God given right in all instances to expect other people to pay for it. And, that is what tax breaks are - somebody else has to step in and pay.
Leigh, you are stating the obvious to say that a persons posts give a wealth of information about them - I agree, I formed a definite opinion of you from your posts and I also am not at all offended by your take on things.
Two points you brought up. The first about income and deductions. I know this is a quibble but, you are mixing social costs and payments up with tax calculations These are always included with tax but are a different matter. Tax is based on income less the cost of earning it. Now you tell me what you do for a living and I will then lecture you on that topic - see how that goes over
I take your point about surgery for burns victims. I guess is a misunderstanding about terms. By cosmetic surgery I ment exactly that. Say a person had their nose torn off in an industrial accident, dog attack and the like. No society would be so heartless as not to allow a deduction for surgery to reduce such a disfigurement. Say a person had a deformed septum in their nose, such a thing may lead to sleep aponea, and indirectly injury to other people by that person falling asleep driving, looking after machinery etc. Surgery to correct this would reduce the chance of cost to society and so a deduction should be allowed - even thou the surgery as a side effect led to the person having a more pleasing looking nose. Those examples are reconstructive surgery. Cosmetic surgery is somebody getting a nose job so it looks as sexy as Britney Speers & then expecting society to step in & help foot the bill _ THAT is cosmetic surgery.
I consider that there is a whole continuum re gender reassignment - at one end people who are deeply affected & disturbed by their situation. At the other end (using your own words) those who only foray into a womans life is occasional or non existent. So where do we draw the line re reconstructive or cosmetic surgery? Your original post seemed to imply that all of it is reconstructive
