The libs are turning kids gay?

ChemEAg08 said:

---

Bubblez said:

---

I trust the American Academy of Pediatrics on these issues much more than Greg Abbott or Ken Paxton to have an opinion on what is proper medical care.

---

I trust the Bible more than both.

---

as is your right.

but you do not have the right to enforce your belief on others.

Frederick Palowaski said:

---

Bubblez said:

---

I trust the American Academy of Pediatrics on these issues much more than Greg Abbott or Ken Paxton to have an opinion on what is proper medical care.

---

You sound like a person that has your preferred pronouns next to your name on LinkedIn.

---

I'm certainly not a pronoun person, but I'm not going to get in the way of medical care decisions made by doctors patients and parents backed by a highly respected professional medical association. This isn't some rouge quackery treatment.

Bubblez said:

---

This isn't some rouge quackery treatment.

---

larry culpepper said:

---

but you do not have the right to enforce your belief on others.

---

ummm...

Bubblez said:

---

I trust the American Academy of Pediatrics on these issues much more than Greg Abbott or Ken Paxton to have an opinion on what is proper medical care.

---

https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article-abstract/148/4/e2020039339/181264/Pubertal-Suppression-Bone-Mass-and-Body?redirectedFrom=fulltext

Osteoporosis and Vit D deficiency anyone? Congrats.

Captain Pablo said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

CanyonAg77 said:

---

Bubblez said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Bubblez said:

---

The legislature had the opportunity to take this up last term, but couldn't muster the votes. So Abbott tries the dictatorial approach he liked so well with his Covid executive orders.

---

Always funny seeing a liberal complaining about "dictatorial approach" when that is what your party does 24/7.

---

Its funny how conservatives claim they do not want government to insert itself between the doctor and the patient, and feel parents should have final say over their own children, but here they are, getting in the way of both.

---

I would get in the way of a parent hitting their kid, starving their kid, or raping their kid, and be damn proud of it.

This is just a variation of that "getting in the way".

---

I understand you dont agree with it, but gender affirming care can be life saving for some kids. Gender dysphoria is a serious mental condition. Minors commit suicide in huge numbers because they believe they were born in the wrong body and hate themselves for it. Sometimes medical professionals prescribe reversible hormonal therapies to help them transition and when they do so, they report much better mental health and happiness. Naturally, suicides go down.

Abbott and Paxton think they know better than these parents and their doctors, and they are being these families' strict father laying down the law.

Bottom line is it's no one's business what these families do, and it's wrong to forcibly remove these kids from the home and throw them into a broken foster system on this basis.

---

Please provide some reliable data on these "huge numbers"

Thanks

---

here is one study

https://neurosciencenews.com/transgender-youth-puberty-blocker-depression-20144/

hormonal treatments correlate with improved mental health in people with gender dysphoria.

WHOOP!'91 said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

CanyonAg77 said:

---

Bubblez said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Bubblez said:

---

The legislature had the opportunity to take this up last term, but couldn't muster the votes. So Abbott tries the dictatorial approach he liked so well with his Covid executive orders.

---

Always funny seeing a liberal complaining about "dictatorial approach" when that is what your party does 24/7.

---

Its funny how conservatives claim they do not want government to insert itself between the doctor and the patient, and feel parents should have final say over their own children, but here they are, getting in the way of both.

---

I would get in the way of a parent hitting their kid, starving their kid, or raping their kid, and be damn proud of it.

This is just a variation of that "getting in the way".

---

I understand you dont agree with it, but gender affirming care can be life saving for some kids. Gender dysphoria is a serious mental condition. Minors commit suicide in huge numbers because they believe they were born in the wrong body and hate themselves for it. Sometimes medical professionals prescribe reversible hormonal therapies to help them transition and when they do so, they report much better mental health and happiness. Naturally, suicides go down.

Abbott and Paxton think they know better than these parents and their doctors, and they are being these families' strict father laying down the law.

Bottom line is it's no one's business what these families do, and it's wrong to forcibly remove these kids from the home and throw them into a broken foster system on this basis.

---

It definitely is the state's business to protect children from their parents' bad decisions in some cases, like sterilizing them for life because they wear and Elsa dress at 8 years old. They can be coddled while they pretend to be a firetruck, a dog, a horse, a cowboy, an indian, a princess, a knight etc without changing their lives. No physical transitioning is a good thing before they are an adult and can make that decision for themselves, IMO.

---

But, should these children be removed from the house and placed in foster care? And the parents prosecuted?

I obviously disagree with you on the transgender issue, but this whole Abbott order takes it several steps further. He wants the parents prosecuted for child abuse, which means the kids would be removed from the home and placed in a broken foster system. Do you agree with that?

that's where it gets very controversial and divisive. I can think of many parent behaviors that straddle the line between bad parenting and child abuse. Such as drinking too much, verbal abuse, corporal punishment, or intensely religious parents intimidating or scaring their children...

I think Abbott and Paxton really just have it out for trans people and are doing what they can to legislate them out of existence.

larry culpepper said:

---

Captain Pablo said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

CanyonAg77 said:

---

Bubblez said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Bubblez said:

---

The legislature had the opportunity to take this up last term, but couldn't muster the votes. So Abbott tries the dictatorial approach he liked so well with his Covid executive orders.

---

Always funny seeing a liberal complaining about "dictatorial approach" when that is what your party does 24/7.

---

Its funny how conservatives claim they do not want government to insert itself between the doctor and the patient, and feel parents should have final say over their own children, but here they are, getting in the way of both.

---

I would get in the way of a parent hitting their kid, starving their kid, or raping their kid, and be damn proud of it.

This is just a variation of that "getting in the way".

---

I understand you dont agree with it, but gender affirming care can be life saving for some kids. Gender dysphoria is a serious mental condition. Minors commit suicide in huge numbers because they believe they were born in the wrong body and hate themselves for it. Sometimes medical professionals prescribe reversible hormonal therapies to help them transition and when they do so, they report much better mental health and happiness. Naturally, suicides go down.

Abbott and Paxton think they know better than these parents and their doctors, and they are being these families' strict father laying down the law.

Bottom line is it's no one's business what these families do, and it's wrong to forcibly remove these kids from the home and throw them into a broken foster system on this basis.

---

Please provide some reliable data on these "huge numbers"

Thanks

---

here is one study

https://neurosciencenews.com/transgender-youth-puberty-blocker-depression-20144/

hormonal treatments correlate with improved mental health in people with gender dysphoria.

---

The suicides in huge numbers

Prove it

larry culpepper said:

---

ChemEAg08 said:

---

Bubblez said:

---

I trust the American Academy of Pediatrics on these issues much more than Greg Abbott or Ken Paxton to have an opinion on what is proper medical care.

---

I trust the Bible more than both.

---

as is your right.

but you do not have the right to enforce your belief on others.

---

So why do we have the right to legislate anything? Might as well leave disputes between only the parties directly involved by your logic.

larry culpepper said:

---

CanyonAg77 said:

---

Bubblez said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Bubblez said:

---

The legislature had the opportunity to take this up last term, but couldn't muster the votes. So Abbott tries the dictatorial approach he liked so well with his Covid executive orders.

---

Always funny seeing a liberal complaining about "dictatorial approach" when that is what your party does 24/7.

---

Its funny how conservatives claim they do not want government to insert itself between the doctor and the patient, and feel parents should have final say over their own children, but here they are, getting in the way of both.

---

I would get in the way of a parent hitting their kid, starving their kid, or raping their kid, and be damn proud of it.

This is just a variation of that "getting in the way".

---

I understand you dont agree with it, but gender affirming care can be life saving for some kids. Gender dysphoria is a serious mental condition. Minors commit suicide in huge numbers because they believe they were born in the wrong body and hate themselves for it. Sometimes medical professionals prescribe reversible hormonal therapies to help them transition and when they do so, they report much better mental health and happiness. Naturally, suicides go down.

Abbott and Paxton think they know better than these parents and their doctors, and they are being these families' strict father laying down the law.

Bottom line is it's no one's business what these families do, and it's wrong to forcibly remove these kids from the home and throw them into a broken foster system on this basis.

---

Can it also be life ruining for some number of other kids? What ratio of saving/ruining is acceptable to you?

larry culpepper said:

---

WHOOP!'91 said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

CanyonAg77 said:

---

Bubblez said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Bubblez said:

---

The legislature had the opportunity to take this up last term, but couldn't muster the votes. So Abbott tries the dictatorial approach he liked so well with his Covid executive orders.

---

Always funny seeing a liberal complaining about "dictatorial approach" when that is what your party does 24/7.

---

Its funny how conservatives claim they do not want government to insert itself between the doctor and the patient, and feel parents should have final say over their own children, but here they are, getting in the way of both.

---

I would get in the way of a parent hitting their kid, starving their kid, or raping their kid, and be damn proud of it.

This is just a variation of that "getting in the way".

---

I understand you dont agree with it, but gender affirming care can be life saving for some kids. Gender dysphoria is a serious mental condition. Minors commit suicide in huge numbers because they believe they were born in the wrong body and hate themselves for it. Sometimes medical professionals prescribe reversible hormonal therapies to help them transition and when they do so, they report much better mental health and happiness. Naturally, suicides go down.

Abbott and Paxton think they know better than these parents and their doctors, and they are being these families' strict father laying down the law.

Bottom line is it's no one's business what these families do, and it's wrong to forcibly remove these kids from the home and throw them into a broken foster system on this basis.

---

It definitely is the state's business to protect children from their parents' bad decisions in some cases, like sterilizing them for life because they wear and Elsa dress at 8 years old. They can be coddled while they pretend to be a firetruck, a dog, a horse, a cowboy, an indian, a princess, a knight etc without changing their lives. No physical transitioning is a good thing before they are an adult and can make that decision for themselves, IMO.

---

But, should these children be removed from the house and placed in foster care? And the parents prosecuted?

I obviously disagree with you on the transgender issue, but this whole Abbott order takes it several steps further. He wants the parents prosecuted for child abuse, which means the kids would be removed from the home and placed in a broken foster system. Do you agree with that?

that's where it gets very controversial and divisive. I can think of many parent behaviors that straddle the line between bad parenting and child abuse. Such as drinking too much, verbal abuse, corporal punishment, or intensely religious parents intimidating or scaring their children...

I think Abbott and Paxton really just have it out for trans people and are doing what they can to legislate them out of existence.

---

Endangering your child can get them taken away from you, whether that's drinking too much or being addicted to drugs. That in and of itself isn't sufficient, but the behaviors related to such conditions can and do get your kids taken away.

Spanking or being too religious is overboard, but allowing to transition is A-OK. Got it...I think we're done here.

Bubblez said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Bubblez said:

---

The legislature had the opportunity to take this up last term, but couldn't muster the votes. So Abbott tries the dictatorial approach he liked so well with his Covid executive orders.

---

Always funny seeing a liberal complaining about "dictatorial approach" when that is what your party does 24/7.

---

Its funny how conservatives claim they do not want government to insert itself between the doctor and the patient, and feel parents should have final say over their own children, but here they are, getting in the way of both.

---

When schools take the initiative to plant the seed and encourage the kid to start treatment, then we have a problem.

Bubblez said:

---

I trust the American Academy of Pediatrics on these issues much more than Greg Abbott or Ken Paxton to have an opinion on what is proper medical care.

---

You shouldn't.

It's an extremely politically driven organization that's ejects representative leadership.

I know their current President well, and have seen first hand how that group balances evidence based healthcare vs political motivations. She is pretty die hard liberal and almost got mutiny when they came out mid 2021 and said kids need in-person school

larry culpepper said:

---

but you do not have the right to enforce your belief on others.

---

bullcrap.

That is the entire point of elections, especially as far as Democrats are concerned.

Bubblez said:

---

I trust the American Academy of Pediatrics on these issues much more than Greg Abbott or Ken Paxton to have an opinion on what is proper medical care.

---

I am reminded of another procedure that once was commonly used by medical professionals in an attempt to "help" their troubled patients:

From Wikipedia:

Many doctors, patients and family members of the period believed that despite potentially catastrophic consequences, the results of lobotomy were seemingly positive in many instances or, were at least deemed as such when measured next to the apparent alternative of long-term institutionalisation. Lobotomy has always been controversial, but for a period of the medical mainstream, it was even feted and regarded as a legitimate last resort remedy for categories of patients who were otherwise regarded as hopeless.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobotomy#cite_note-39][36][/url] Today, lobotomy has become a disparaged procedure, a byword for medical barbarism and an exemplary instance of the medical trampling of patients' rights.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobotomy#cite_note-FOOTNOTERaz2009116-3][3][/url]

So I offer the following rebuttals:

• The argument that doctors should be the ultimate authority with respect to patient care has been proven to have its own risks over time. A more recent example of the Appeal to Authority fallacy that has been used by the medical community to the detriment of individuals and society can be easily found in our own Dr. Fauci.
• The concept of medical barbarism and trampling of patients' rights by families and the medical community is nothing new, as referenced above.
• The concept of "do no harm" is what I believe is the driving factor behind this legislation - not some sort of "Gender phobia". It drives home the concept that a child or teen should not be placed in a position to start down a path that becomes irrevocable and has lifelong consequences. It does not ban medical transitioning in its entirety - it simply protects a patient's right to decide for themselves after they have developed the ability to make a reasoned and informed decision for themselves.

C@LAg said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

but you do not have the right to enforce your belief on others.

---

bullcrap.

That is the entire point of elections, especially as far as Democrats are concerned.

---

Yeah this crap is what leftists say when they try to box conservatives into a corner. And sadly some conservatives fall for it.

C@LAg said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

but you do not have the right to enforce your belief on others.

---

bullcrap.

That is the entire point of elections, especially as far as Democrats are concerned.

---

Ok, I've accepted long ago that conservatives are not serious at all about small government, because "small government" implies that you have to live and let live, even if people are doing something you disagree with. And that is incompatible with the values of the GOP in 2022. They want government to be small for themselves and big for everyone they don't like.

It's why culture war issues and social issues are still a big deal. Why did the right fight so hard against gay marriage and legal weed? Because they don't approve of it, even though their lives are completely unaffected by others rights to engage in that. You think trans children should be ripped away from their parents and thrown into a broken foster system because the parents are giving them hormonal treatments you don't like. I think you are wrong for that, even if you think those treatments aren't good.

I also think parents that feed their kids junk food all the time and let them sit in their rooms playing video games all day are creating unhealthy obese kids and that gets close to child abuse but I'm not such a cruel person that I think they should lose their kids.

Abbott and Paxton hate trans people and want to legislate them out of existence. It's why he passes these asinine laws that are truly solutions in search of a problem. And wastes state resources by having to enforce and defend them. "Small government" my ass.

MAPS belong on walls with lead nails

jrdaustin said:

---

Bubblez said:

---

I trust the American Academy of Pediatrics on these issues much more than Greg Abbott or Ken Paxton to have an opinion on what is proper medical care.

---

I am reminded of another procedure that once was commonly used by medical professionals in an attempt to "help" their troubled patients:

From Wikipedia:

Many doctors, patients and family members of the period believed that despite potentially catastrophic consequences, the results of lobotomy were seemingly positive in many instances or, were at least deemed as such when measured next to the apparent alternative of long-term institutionalisation. Lobotomy has always been controversial, but for a period of the medical mainstream, it was even feted and regarded as a legitimate last resort remedy for categories of patients who were otherwise regarded as hopeless.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobotomy#cite_note-39][36][/url] Today, lobotomy has become a disparaged procedure, a byword for medical barbarism and an exemplary instance of the medical trampling of patients' rights.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobotomy#cite_note-FOOTNOTERaz2009116-3][3][/url]

So I offer the following rebuttals:

• The argument that doctors should be the ultimate authority with respect to patient care has been proven to have its own risks over time. A more recent example of the Appeal to Authority fallacy that has been used by the medical community to the detriment of individuals and society can be easily found in our own Dr. Fauci.
• The concept of medical barbarism and trampling of patients' rights by families and the medical community is nothing new, as referenced above.
• The concept of "do no harm" is what I believe is the driving factor behind this legislation - not some sort of "Gender phobia". It drives home the concept that a child or teen should not be placed in a position to start down a path that becomes irrevocable and has lifelong consequences. It does not ban medical transitioning in its entirety - it simply protects a patient's right to decide for themselves after they have developed the ability to make a reasoned and informed decision for themselves.

---

You don't have access to hindsight in making medical decisions, so whatever the accepted practices of today are, those should be free from government interference. Like everything, medicine does evolve, but that should be driven by the professionals in the medical community, not politicians.

Quote:

---

You don't have access to hindsight in making medical decisions, so whatever the accepted practices of today are, those should be free from government interference. Like everything, medicine does evolve, but that should be driven by the professionals in the medical community, not politicians.

---

I think this is a point worth hammering home. You don't have to like these treatments, but these parents are following the advice of medical professionals. You cannot call that child abuse.

Also, think about how extreme and harsh it is to remove a child from the home because the parents followed what are accepted medical procedures.

If studies later come out that invalidate all of this and it is no longer accepted medical procedure, I will probably change my view.

larry culpepper said:

---

Quote:

---

You don't have access to hindsight in making medical decisions, so whatever the accepted practices of today are, those should be free from government interference. Like everything, medicine does evolve, but that should be driven by the professionals in the medical community, not politicians.

---

I think this is a point worth hammering home. You don't have to like these treatments, but these parents are following the advice of medical professionals. You cannot call that child abuse.

Also, think about how extreme and harsh it is to remove a child from the home because the parents followed what are accepted medical procedures.

If studies later come out that invalidate all of this and it is no longer accepted medical procedure, I will probably change my view.

---

So, whatever you can get a Dr. to agree to is OK? You can find Dr.s who ascribe to Sharia who will sign off on female genital mutilation? All good. Euthanasia, fine. Dr.s are humans with agendas and are not gods.

I can see making life-altering decisions for your child in cases of dire need, but this is not that. You can let them pretend to be the other gender and let them know they can transition for real if they want when they are adults. That seems good enough for everyone.

WHOOP!'91 said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

Quote:

---

You don't have access to hindsight in making medical decisions, so whatever the accepted practices of today are, those should be free from government interference. Like everything, medicine does evolve, but that should be driven by the professionals in the medical community, not politicians.

---

I think this is a point worth hammering home. You don't have to like these treatments, but these parents are following the advice of medical professionals. You cannot call that child abuse.

Also, think about how extreme and harsh it is to remove a child from the home because the parents followed what are accepted medical procedures.

If studies later come out that invalidate all of this and it is no longer accepted medical procedure, I will probably change my view.

---

So, whatever you can get a Dr. to agree to is OK? You can find Dr.s who ascribe to Sharia who will sign off on female genital mutilation? All good. Euthanasia, fine. Dr.s are humans with agendas and are not gods.

I can see making life-altering decisions for your child in cases of dire need, but this is not that. You can let them pretend to be the other gender and let them know they can transition for real if they want when they are adults. That seems good enough for everyone.

---

This not just one quack doc prescribing horse medication. This is an accepted standard of care supported by an American medical society . Any treatments that do venture outside of the practices that have been accepted at that time can be looked at closer.

larry culpepper said:

---

Quote:

---

You don't have access to hindsight in making medical decisions, so whatever the accepted practices of today are, those should be free from government interference. Like everything, medicine does evolve, but that should be driven by the professionals in the medical community, not politicians.

---

I think this is a point worth hammering home. You don't have to like these treatments, but these parents are following the advice of medical professionals. You cannot call that child abuse.

Also, think about how extreme and harsh it is to remove a child from the home because the parents followed what are accepted medical procedures.

If studies later come out that invalidate all of this and it is no longer accepted medical procedure, I will probably change my view.

---

What is with your insistence on letting minors transition? Why can't they wait until they are 18 to make that choice?

Also, why do you need an all-mighty doctor to tell you mutilating children's genitalia is wrong before you'll believe it?

Bubblez said:

---

WHOOP!'91 said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

Quote:

---

You don't have access to hindsight in making medical decisions, so whatever the accepted practices of today are, those should be free from government interference. Like everything, medicine does evolve, but that should be driven by the professionals in the medical community, not politicians.

---

I think this is a point worth hammering home. You don't have to like these treatments, but these parents are following the advice of medical professionals. You cannot call that child abuse.

Also, think about how extreme and harsh it is to remove a child from the home because the parents followed what are accepted medical procedures.

If studies later come out that invalidate all of this and it is no longer accepted medical procedure, I will probably change my view.

---

So, whatever you can get a Dr. to agree to is OK? You can find Dr.s who ascribe to Sharia who will sign off on female genital mutilation? All good. Euthanasia, fine. Dr.s are humans with agendas and are not gods.

I can see making life-altering decisions for your child in cases of dire need, but this is not that. You can let them pretend to be the other gender and let them know they can transition for real if they want when they are adults. That seems good enough for everyone.

---

This not just one quack doc prescribing horse medication. This is an accepted standard of care supported by an American medical society . Any treatments that do venture outside of the practices that have been accepted at that time can be looked at closer.

---

Yeah, we saw how the quack docs prescribing horse medication went. I am surprised you would use that as an example, because a lot of data shows the "horse medicine" - ivermectin - is effective against COVID. Yet between doctors and pharmacists, it was called "horse paste" and made difficult to get prescribed and filled.

That's how much I trust doctors now. Too many of them are agenda-driven. I have zero doubt you can doctor shop until you get one that says it's a good idea to surgically transition your 10 year old. I will never agree that any sort of physical alteration is a good idea until one is an adult and have nobody to blame for their regrets but themselves.

Some Junkie Cosmonaut said:

---

What is with your insistence on letting minors transition? Why can't they wait until they are 18 to make that choice?

---

Because based on what I've read so far, and firsthand stories from parents of trans minors, hormonal therapies are a legitimate therapy for minors with gender dysphoria. If they are at puberty age and have been evaluated by a psychologist and it was verified that yes, they clearly are gender dysphoric, then it is completely up to them and the parents how they treat. Hormonal treatments are accepted medical procedures and are reversible if discontinued.

I think if they are sure at that point, waiting until age 18 just delays the inevitable, and will probably result in further deteriorating mental health for the minor. In other words, it is cruel to not let them make this decision with their families.

I do think that young children should not. Age 5 is clearly too young.

Quote:

---

Also, why do you need an all-mighty doctor to tell you mutilating children's genitalia is wrong before you'll believe it?

---

How many times to I have to say this? It's pissing me off at this point. NO GENITALS ARE BEING MUTILATED. MINORS CANNOT GET SEX CHANGE SURGERY.

Do I need to say it louder for the people in the back?

I'm not letting you or anyone else get away with this straw man. It's only brought up because any reasonable person would agree genital mutilation is bad. that is NOT what is happening with hormonal treatments. Sorry to take away your talking point.

larry culpepper said:

---

CanyonAg77 said:

---

Quote:

---

But you and everyone here already knew that. You are just saying "mutilation" because it gets more reactions.

---

Chemical mutilation is still mutilation.

Puberty blockers do long term damage. You can't simply change your mind and expect the original plumbing to revert to normal.

---

whatever you may think, parents who take the advice of medical professionals and give their kids these medication are not child abusers, and should not have their children taken from them. Abbott's order goes way too far.

---

Explain to me how puberty blockers do not affect a child long-term?

larry culpepper said:

---

Some Junkie Cosmonaut said:

---

What is with your insistence on letting minors transition? Why can't they wait until they are 18 to make that choice?

---

Because based on what I've read so far, and firsthand stories from parents of trans minors, hormonal therapies are a legitimate therapy for minors with gender dysphoria. If they are at puberty age and have been evaluated by a psychologist and it was verified that yes, they clearly are gender dysphoric, then it is completely up to them and the parents how they treat. Hormonal treatments are accepted medical procedures and are reversible if discontinued.

I think if they are sure at that point, waiting until age 18 just delays the inevitable, and will probably result in further deteriorating mental health for the minor. In other words, it is cruel to not let them make this decision with their families.

I do think that young children should not. Age 5 is clearly too young.

Quote:

---

Also, why do you need an all-mighty doctor to tell you mutilating children's genitalia is wrong before you'll believe it?

---

How many times to I have to say this? It's pissing me off at this point. NO GENITALS ARE BEING MUTILATED. MINORS CANNOT GET SEX CHANGE SURGERY.

Do I need to say it louder for the people in the back?

I'm not letting you or anyone else get away with this straw man. It's only brought up because any reasonable person would agree genital mutilation is bad. that is NOT what is happening with hormonal treatments. Sorry to take away your talking point.

---

You continually ignore the basic premise. Should we do this? Is it right? Is it sound medicine that corrects a disorder under the premise of do no harm?

The answer is it is obviously not sound medicine. The ends do not justify the means, and even the ends aren't well documented. We aren't just a bunch of beans to be counted with the only consideration being dead or alive. We have an obligation to orient society around the truth. Transgender affirmation is junk science. It completely ignores any moral and societal impacts in favor of activist politics, and it exploits vulnerable, mentally I'll people in the process.

You can spare us the "small government" arguments because they don't hold any kind of water. Society has always had the obligation to legislate right and wrong. Your supposed definition of small government is just anarchy.

Stop bean counting and actually look at what you're saying.

Kvetch said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

Some Junkie Cosmonaut said:

---

What is with your insistence on letting minors transition? Why can't they wait until they are 18 to make that choice?

---

Because based on what I've read so far, and firsthand stories from parents of trans minors, hormonal therapies are a legitimate therapy for minors with gender dysphoria. If they are at puberty age and have been evaluated by a psychologist and it was verified that yes, they clearly are gender dysphoric, then it is completely up to them and the parents how they treat. Hormonal treatments are accepted medical procedures and are reversible if discontinued.

I think if they are sure at that point, waiting until age 18 just delays the inevitable, and will probably result in further deteriorating mental health for the minor. In other words, it is cruel to not let them make this decision with their families.

I do think that young children should not. Age 5 is clearly too young.

Quote:

---

Also, why do you need an all-mighty doctor to tell you mutilating children's genitalia is wrong before you'll believe it?

---

How many times to I have to say this? It's pissing me off at this point. NO GENITALS ARE BEING MUTILATED. MINORS CANNOT GET SEX CHANGE SURGERY.

Do I need to say it louder for the people in the back?

I'm not letting you or anyone else get away with this straw man. It's only brought up because any reasonable person would agree genital mutilation is bad. that is NOT what is happening with hormonal treatments. Sorry to take away your talking point.

---

You continually ignore the basic premise. Should we do this? Is it right? Is it sound medicine that corrects a disorder under the premise of do no harm?

The answer is it is obviously not sound medicine. The ends do not justify the means, and even the ends aren't well documented. We aren't just a bunch of beans to be counted with the only consideration being dead or alive. We have an obligation to orient society around the truth. Transgender affirmation is junk science. It completely ignores any moral and societal impacts in favor of activist politics, and it exploits vulnerable, mentally I'll people in the process.

You can spare us the "small government" arguments because they don't hold any kind of water. Society has always had the obligation to legislate right and wrong. Your supposed definition of small government is just anarchy.

Stop bean counting and actually look at what you're saying.

---

At this point we're going in circles. You are asking a moral question rather than a legal one. The fact is, hormonal treatments are accepted in the medical community. You just find it morally wrong.

And I think we are asking different questions too. The question is not "should we do this?" The question is "should parents who allow this kind of treatment lose their right to be that child's parents?" It's a different and much harsher question.

Abbott, and clearly the majority of F16, say yes. Thankfully, the Third Court of Appeals struck down this nonsense.

ETA: this is like "should you smoke marijuana" vs "should you be imprisoned for smoking marijuana?" You can answer no to both questions and be logically consistent.

larry culpepper said:

---

Kvetch said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

Some Junkie Cosmonaut said:

---

What is with your insistence on letting minors transition? Why can't they wait until they are 18 to make that choice?

---

Because based on what I've read so far, and firsthand stories from parents of trans minors, hormonal therapies are a legitimate therapy for minors with gender dysphoria. If they are at puberty age and have been evaluated by a psychologist and it was verified that yes, they clearly are gender dysphoric, then it is completely up to them and the parents how they treat. Hormonal treatments are accepted medical procedures and are reversible if discontinued.

I think if they are sure at that point, waiting until age 18 just delays the inevitable, and will probably result in further deteriorating mental health for the minor. In other words, it is cruel to not let them make this decision with their families.

I do think that young children should not. Age 5 is clearly too young.

Quote:

---

Also, why do you need an all-mighty doctor to tell you mutilating children's genitalia is wrong before you'll believe it?

---

How many times to I have to say this? It's pissing me off at this point. NO GENITALS ARE BEING MUTILATED. MINORS CANNOT GET SEX CHANGE SURGERY.

Do I need to say it louder for the people in the back?

I'm not letting you or anyone else get away with this straw man. It's only brought up because any reasonable person would agree genital mutilation is bad. that is NOT what is happening with hormonal treatments. Sorry to take away your talking point.

---

You continually ignore the basic premise. Should we do this? Is it right? Is it sound medicine that corrects a disorder under the premise of do no harm?

The answer is it is obviously not sound medicine. The ends do not justify the means, and even the ends aren't well documented. We aren't just a bunch of beans to be counted with the only consideration being dead or alive. We have an obligation to orient society around the truth. Transgender affirmation is junk science. It completely ignores any moral and societal impacts in favor of activist politics, and it exploits vulnerable, mentally I'll people in the process.

You can spare us the "small government" arguments because they don't hold any kind of water. Society has always had the obligation to legislate right and wrong. Your supposed definition of small government is just anarchy.

Stop bean counting and actually look at what you're saying.

---

At this point we're going in circles. You are asking a moral question rather than a legal one. The fact is, hormonal treatments are accepted in the medical community. You just find it morally wrong.

And I think we are asking different questions too. The question is not "should we do this?" The question is "should parents who allow this kind of treatment lose their right to be that child's parents?" It's a different and much harsher question.

Abbott, and clearly the majority of F16, say yes. Thankfully, the Third Court of Appeals struck down this nonsense.

Keep in mind Abbott couldn't even pass this **** in an overwhelmingly Republican Texas legislature. So he has to go full gestapo tyrant on all these trans families to appease his base. No, I won't stop calling out the right for their "small government" BS. Harassing families and spending millions of taxpayers dollars to enforce and defend culture war bull**** is as big government as it gets.

---

So you're for the abolition of CPS? Because apparently the state can't have an interest in "private" family matters?

What you're saying is complete BS and legally incorrect. If you have a problem with Abbott having this power, then you need to write to your local legislator and tell them to revoke it. I'm going to guess that the 3rd circuit is going to be overruled in due time.

What do you think the point of laws are? You cannot separate the legal from the moral. Justice is a moral principle. Again, you're just trying to avoid the reality that you're supporting medical barbarism under the false guise of "small government." Limited government doesn't mean no government. State and local governments are exactly where issues like this one are supposed to be decided.

ETA: this is nothing like smoking weed. Almost 0 parallels other than BASIC ideas of government interest.

And you think the state should enforce YOUR version of morality. Laws sometimes reflect morality (like when an act infringes on another person's rights or hurts another person), but we dont legislate every moral issue, nor should we. Strip clubs, porn, cigarettes, cussing, being an a-hole to people, and living unhealthy lifestyles are legal.

No I'm not for the abolition of CPS. They serve a good purpose. I'm just saying hormonal treatments are not child abuse. Often these kids coming from loving families, and ripping them from these families and throwing them into a grossly underfunded and broken foster system is cruel, and evil.

I'm sorry you disagree with that.

The goaltending for child sexual mutilation simply because the Democrats have decided it is the current crisis which they must go all in on is sickening and astounding at the same time.

We see this time and time again. Democrats declare some issue, usually to create a new victim group and enrage their NPCs, and suddenly it is the #1 crisis on Earth. Never mind inflation, the invasion at the southern border, Russia threatening nuclear war, energy prices skyrocketing, etc. etc. etc.

No, the most important issue to the leftists is whether or not we need to castrate little boys and damage boys and girls by pumping them full of dangerous drugs.

It will be interesting to see the response when the sudden crisis is the need to remove the social and legal stigma of "minor attracted persons."