56
When did attorneys become qualified to determine appropriate treatments for medical diagnoses?
If Alito and Thomas can master the field of history in such a short time, what makes you think they can’t do the same with the field of medicine‽
Eyes and brains?
To opponents it's not a medical diagnosis, it's a choice. Same for anything other than cis people, except the notion of people transitioning is far, far worse.
They believe that a person chooses to be gay, but at least that choice is reversible, fixable. If it's a choice, it's not a choice a child can make. And teens are certainly impressionable.
Once you truly internalize where conservatives are coming from, it pretty much explains all these views. Almost forgot, we gotta throw in the child molester thing. What a win that propaganda turned out to be.
We can talk all night about how stupid these views are. Turned a friend around years ago by simply asking, "If it's a choice we all have, when did you make yours? Because Wonder Woman comics got me a hardon when I was 5."
Thanks for this comment, I hadn't thought about it this way before. I had realised about how being gay is framed as a thing you do rather than a thing you are, because I have a friend who is an ex-benedictine monk, and they explained about how their vow of chastity meant they were basically "one of the good ones". A large part of why they left was because their rhetoric was "everyone has sinful desires in them and turning away from those is an important challenge", but the unspoken part was that his gayness made his desires extra bad, like there was just some innately bad thing in him.
And of course they would apply this same logic to gender. As you say, it makes more sense when you try to see it from their angle. I think that's important to do if we hope to ever refute them
We really need an amendment or two around medical care. However, the same problem preventing that is what is causing the need in the first place: Republicans in national and state legislatures. The judiciary sucks right now, but it's really not their job to do anything but evaluate whether this is constitutional and it likely is (in a post-Dobbs world). I'd love to see the right to privacy ruling come back, but that's not happening. All of those assumptions can be changed with dedicated, long-term strategic voting and a bit of luck with justice health. Please vote.
Edit: Somebody replied and I have you blocked. Just don't want you to have to wait for a response. Lemmy should really just hide my comments from you so we don't run into this issue, but such is life.
They're gonna pull the same state's rights bs
this post was submitted on 24 Jun 2024
56 points (96.7% liked)
politics
18930 readers
3175 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS