I listened to the June 3rd Senate hearing on “Protecting Children from Irreversible Gender Transition Procedures” held by the Senate HELP (Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee.
Yes, it's only the rights of parents who think the "right things" according to the current affirming fad. Ie not the rights of the parents at all, but of those who have imposed their drastic approach, without evidence that it is even likely to help more than harm, on half of the US. I wish someone had played the WPATH talk which said to bring in CPS (I think I got that right) and ask what they think of that.
The same argument goes for the AAP. And California...
You are 100% correct, and this should be obvious. However, once the notion that there is such a thing as a "trans child" colors everything, nobody can see the obvious truth.
I mean, I struggle to agree that society needs to allow parents to refuse to provide time-honored treatments that are known to save the lives of children with well understood medical conditions. (See an episode of Family Guy - in my opinion one of the best episodes from a social commentary perspective - where a child has a very treatable form of cancer and the parents want to pray the sickness away and refuse treatment, but Lois convinces them that perhaps their prayers have brought the doctors and treatments to them.)
So, if one thinks being a "trans child" is a REAL condition, and that the ONLY treatment, and a very EFFECTIVE AND BENEFICIAL treatment, is to lie to the child about their sex and then use chemicals and surgeries to alter the child's body to appear the opposite sex - an admittedly insane notion with no basis whatsoever in reality - then one might conclude that parents who refuse this treatment are SUPER BAD and STUPID and, most importantly, ABUSIVE. Therefore, one might conclude that these parents should be overridden in the best interests of the child.
Of course, if things are the other way around, and these ":treatments" are the real abuse, then it would stand to reason that outlawing the "treatments" is in the best interests of all children, and parents who push for these treatments are advocating for abusing their own children. However, we never get to that discussion because people never get passed the notion of the "trans child."
"If he is so convinced of his principled stance, why wasn’t Senator Bernie Sanders defending my constitutional right to make decisions for my child before the school intervened, causing him irreversible damage? If parental rights are the reason to support gender affirming care, then parental rights must also be allowed for those who oppose to it"
This comment is right on point. Sanders is a wolf in sheep's clothing. He made his reputation pandering to idealistic progressives who think socialism will save the world, while occasionally endorsing something that makes him look reasonable, humane, and ready to work across the aisle. Bernie is not defending the constitutional right to make decisions for our own children because it would mark him as having serious doubts about the supposed efficacy of trans medicalization for children. It would mark him as -- heaven forbid -- a right-winger, a MAGA in progressive clothing, a traitor to the biggest virtue-signaling cause of the century. He can't risk that.
That sounds unbearable but thanks for reporting on it. Shannon Minter is a women in medical drag who has been part of the legally trans initiatives since the late 1990s. She is an egregious driver of the gender cult. https://margox.substack.com/p/legally-trans
She's also dumb as a sack of hammers. Go listen to Andrew Sullivan's interview with her last summer or autumn on the Dishcast. Nothing she says makes a lick of sense, but she's pushed out there because a tiny, bearded lady is much less threatening/uncanny than the giant men in frocks and nail polish:
Absolutely. "If parental rights are the reason to support gender affirming care, then parental rights must also be allowed for those who oppose to it."
That is why I wrote this "Code of Parental Rights":
Yes, it's only the rights of parents who think the "right things" according to the current affirming fad. Ie not the rights of the parents at all, but of those who have imposed their drastic approach, without evidence that it is even likely to help more than harm, on half of the US. I wish someone had played the WPATH talk which said to bring in CPS (I think I got that right) and ask what they think of that.
The same argument goes for the AAP. And California...
You are 100% correct, and this should be obvious. However, once the notion that there is such a thing as a "trans child" colors everything, nobody can see the obvious truth.
I mean, I struggle to agree that society needs to allow parents to refuse to provide time-honored treatments that are known to save the lives of children with well understood medical conditions. (See an episode of Family Guy - in my opinion one of the best episodes from a social commentary perspective - where a child has a very treatable form of cancer and the parents want to pray the sickness away and refuse treatment, but Lois convinces them that perhaps their prayers have brought the doctors and treatments to them.)
So, if one thinks being a "trans child" is a REAL condition, and that the ONLY treatment, and a very EFFECTIVE AND BENEFICIAL treatment, is to lie to the child about their sex and then use chemicals and surgeries to alter the child's body to appear the opposite sex - an admittedly insane notion with no basis whatsoever in reality - then one might conclude that parents who refuse this treatment are SUPER BAD and STUPID and, most importantly, ABUSIVE. Therefore, one might conclude that these parents should be overridden in the best interests of the child.
Of course, if things are the other way around, and these ":treatments" are the real abuse, then it would stand to reason that outlawing the "treatments" is in the best interests of all children, and parents who push for these treatments are advocating for abusing their own children. However, we never get to that discussion because people never get passed the notion of the "trans child."
"If he is so convinced of his principled stance, why wasn’t Senator Bernie Sanders defending my constitutional right to make decisions for my child before the school intervened, causing him irreversible damage? If parental rights are the reason to support gender affirming care, then parental rights must also be allowed for those who oppose to it"
This comment is right on point. Sanders is a wolf in sheep's clothing. He made his reputation pandering to idealistic progressives who think socialism will save the world, while occasionally endorsing something that makes him look reasonable, humane, and ready to work across the aisle. Bernie is not defending the constitutional right to make decisions for our own children because it would mark him as having serious doubts about the supposed efficacy of trans medicalization for children. It would mark him as -- heaven forbid -- a right-winger, a MAGA in progressive clothing, a traitor to the biggest virtue-signaling cause of the century. He can't risk that.
That sounds unbearable but thanks for reporting on it. Shannon Minter is a women in medical drag who has been part of the legally trans initiatives since the late 1990s. She is an egregious driver of the gender cult. https://margox.substack.com/p/legally-trans
She's also dumb as a sack of hammers. Go listen to Andrew Sullivan's interview with her last summer or autumn on the Dishcast. Nothing she says makes a lick of sense, but she's pushed out there because a tiny, bearded lady is much less threatening/uncanny than the giant men in frocks and nail polish:
https://andrewsullivan.substack.com/p/shannon-minter-on-trans-life-and
I cannot stand either one of them and have listened to plenty of each. I might require CPR if I had to listen to both together!
I like Sully. He gets good guests & has a wide-ranging intellect. Most of his interviews are very informative.
Absolutely. "If parental rights are the reason to support gender affirming care, then parental rights must also be allowed for those who oppose to it."
That is why I wrote this "Code of Parental Rights":
https://eyesopenmom.substack.com/p/code-of-parental-rights