Are trans people? If so then I know something that's true. If not, then I was wrong about everything I thought I might know about them. I'm not for putting restrictions on people's lives. I would prefer that we could do what we want as long as we're not harming others. But it's mostly the Democrats restricting the freedoms of the people. Republicans some too, but less so, and are more freedom oriented in general. Kids can't know what's right for them and they can't decide; it's up to adults to take care of them.
Okay, I accept that you know one unbelievably trivial true fact. Yet, it is your "freedom-loving" Republicans who are restricting the right of parents to make medical decisions on behalf of their kids. How can parents take care of their kids if doing so is prohibited?
R’s are more “freedom oriented”…..that has to be one of the most absurd statements I have ever seen on Hip Forums. Really, really out of touch with reality.
"But it's mostly the democrats restricting the freedoms of the people." Yeah--well--maybe in the bizarro world of republican -speak. The liberalization ( the gaining of rights) of american society has been consistently facilitated by democrats in the 20th and 21st centuries as opposed to right wing (republican) forces whose ideas and methods that have now been fully exposed by the arrival of an authoritarian leader. The one who says "the press is the enemy of the people." The one who threatens jail / prison / banishment for those that disagree with him in any way, the ones who are changing laws to thwart the voting rights "of the people," the ones who do not believe workers have the right to organize to right the wrongs of employers, however egregious their actions, the ones who don't believe in regulations against businesses that take advantage of "the people". ETC-ETC-ETC-ETC-ETC-ETC! So , in fact ---any restrictions proposed by the left ( democrats) have been to curtail some so-called rights not of the people, but of those who would take advantage of --"the people." "They"--basically want any and all advantages ( and rights) to be weighted heavily in favor of those who are well connected and are not in favor of the rights of ---"the people."
You mean like feeding them proper nutrition, proving a feeling of security, lots of various learning experiences, teaching them skills, how to treat others, play on teams, keep them engaged, require chores, encouragement, have family time at home and family outings, to be grateful and appreciative... Oh wait, that's not prohibited, yet, it just takes love, dedication, caring, devotion, and putting the well being and development of one's children ahead of oneself. Like be privileged that way. You mean like putting them to work in factories to help support the family like in other countries? You mean like allowing them to prostitute? Like giving them unlimited screen time, leave them to their own devices while the parents do their own thing, let them stay out all they want, hang out with whoever, wear whatever they want, believe whatever they want, etc etc...
That's because liberals are different from leftists. Classic liberals are closer to libertarian. Leftists strive for control and regulation. Ask a Cubano, a Venezolano, a Ruso...
Authoritarians are not liberals and not leftists. Libertarians are more like so-called sovereign citizens,IMO.
Get a grip. man! If you have any reading comprehension at all, you know that I was referring specifically to "restricting the right of parents to make medical decisions on behalf of their kids." Address that issue. Don't try to change the subject. The Rs are fine with a parent's right to say "no" to their kids, but the parent is not allowed to say "yes", even when the doctors recommend it? In other words, The Party is the only entity that is allowed to make medical decisions on behalf of kids? That sounds more like fascism or Soviet communism than democracy.
In fact that kinda sorta what a key parental responsibility is, making medical decisions for their children. Try NOT doing it and see if fascist child protection services doesn't come and reassign them to guardians who promise to follow their plan. In many cases there's no actual decision except perhaps either get the jabs or decide to not send their kids to government schools. But if they get hurt or ill then they're expected to seek treatment. There's not a whole lot of options to decide among. They say they need to set a bone and put a cast, what is there to decide? Fix it or go down for child cruelty? Medical decisions... Should we keep the kid on a ventilator for life support, or is it time to pull the plug? Hmmm Gimme a break, man. Not a bone break though please.
I am glad you feel that way. So you must be happy that a court recently declared Florida's law banning transition medical care for children, since you agree that making medical decisions for their kids is a key parental responsibility. So why not just come out and say so,instead of all the diversionary tactics? Parents should be free to make these decisions, and governments should not be interfering in that process. If a parent, following medical advice, decides that hormone blockers are in their child's best interest, the state has no business saying otherwise. To interfere in that parent's right to decide is an unjustified and unconstitutional denial of freedom. You agree, correct?
Florida is about to get new management, after everyone flees the flooding. The real estate agents will demand it.
I'm not sure. We need an agreed upon working definition of "medical decisions" and "medical care" first. There's treatments of injuries and treatments of diseases which would be the typical understanding. However, you're suggesting hormone blockers which would seem to be outside of this scope. But i don't know if there's a usage on children outside of stunting the growth of a child. So I'll ask the pertinent question, what measurement would a doctor use to determine if these are required to correct a malady in a child?
The point is that it is not your decision to make. It is a decision for the parents, and them alone. Politicians have no business taking that decision away from them.
You think I'm a politician? Dowhaaa? Yes, avoiding the question and appealing to emotions... Lazy people caving to these tactics are eroding the fabric of society. By that I'm not meaning by this specific topic we've been discussing, but the tactics used when people for whatever reason don't want to have an honest factual discussion, they just want to get their way. That's how children naturally act and why parents are called to teach their children how to reason.
What measurement would a doctor use to determine if these are required to correct a malady in a child? Answer: $$$$$$$
Wondering if those parents pay out-of-pocket, or is this a subsidy driven industry ? Should I do something stoopid like purchase cigarettes or beer for the youngsters, I would be busted like no tomorrow. It seems medical profesionals have carte blanche to perscribe for those beneath the age of consent. those who may have trouble getting an asprin from the school nurse. In New Jersey, one has to be 24 yrs old to purchase cigs.
The medical profession is becoming just another franchise that the Tea Party can use and abuse. So long as the money does all the driving, you can forget anything remotely like ethics.
Bear in mind that consent in such cases is given by the parents, not the kids. You are advocating restricting a parent's right to make decisions on behalf of their children.
The Right has had a history of Genocide and World Wars ... I laugh at how "Righty Whiteys" are playing the victimhood card, like Neo Confederate AmeriKKKans today. There is a new Youth movement coming, that will not be divided by sex, sexual orientation, race, social class or political manipulation by media or spinsters.... a Wavokah ( a Great Awakening) is coming !!!! .... much like the 1960's !!!! Peace, Unity, Awareness is a threat that Corporations, Corporate Media, Hate Groups ( MAGA) .... Truth, Love, Tolerance, Peace, Justice and Equality, is a threat to the Right.