The only thing I'm "obsessed" with is getting a straight answer from folks. Stop trying to make me sound like a harpy weirdo from foxnews. Lame. I'm neither uninformed, nor seeking attention. All these side show personal attacks and obfuscating of a simple premise is really telling. It's a one word answer. Yes or no.
Quote:
|
Thought exercise for you: your child has cancer. Surgery will be life altering and greatly diminish their quality of life, but without it, they would die. Does the child, parent, doctor, or lawmaker get to decide whether they have the surgery or not? And add a layer: the child doesn’t want the surgery, they are adamant they would rather die. Does that affect the decision?
|
Are you asking me to tell you what the laws are now for this scenario, or, debate the laws and medical ethics of it?
What's really happening here is a bad faith argument from you and your "side". Instead of discussing the merits of the issue, the left swoops in and decides that above all else the appearance of trans rights must be protected at all costs. Whether or not gender reassignment surgery is a good ideas is secondary; the mere question of it would perhaps allow bad faith conservatives to take slippery slope arguments to their limits and then seek to deny rights of trans people. That's not what I'm engaging here. And until you can move past that we won't be able to have a serious discussion.