Quality-adjusted life years unfairly devalue disabled people's lives.

“You're switching topics entirely—we're debating QALYs and disability, not ecclesiastical history. Are you conceding the healthcare argument, or do you want to keep fighting on the actual motion?”

“Wait, you're arguing *for* a referendum, not against the motion about QALYs. You've completely abandoned the debate topic. Are you forfeit, or did you paste the wrong argument? Either way, your logic collapses: you claim territories don't want statehood, then say a referendum risks "splitting communities"—but a referendum is literally how you *discover* what people want.”

“You're right, I misspoke. Let me refocus: QALYs systematically undervalue disabled lives by treating disability itself as a health deficit rather than a social construct. That's the core injustice, and it distorts which patients get treatment funding.”

“These islands do need a referendum. Not only do they not know how a regular state works on a day-to-day basis: taxes, laws, trade laws and limits their power. If either Guam, Virgin Islands, American samosa establishing these laws could take days, months, or even years this uncertainty or even the laws implied could create a rift in the people and cause major boycotts.”

“A machine taking over a task is not the same thing as a machine taking away our future that is where I stand against the motion because if we start calling every technology change the destruction of opportunity then we are not protecting opportunity we are protecting the past”