SC Senate Passes Bill Banning Affirmative Care For Minors

[rjs330]

Or you are harming them with shame and condemnation. If we want to make sins into law, how much time should an adulterer get?

You are making statements concerning things I never said. In fact you and I are on the same page. I've made that precise argument concerning passing laws based upon scriptural principles.

 

[rjs330]

Who's experimenting?

I cannot believe you asked that question.

The Cass Report included this.

• While a considerable amount of research has been published in this field, systematic evidence reviews demonstrated the poor quality of the published studies, meaning there is not a reliable evidence base upon which to make clinical decisions, or for children and their families to make informed choices.
• The rationale for early puberty suppression remains unclear, with weak evidence regarding the impact on gender dysphoria, mental or psychosocial health. The effect on cognitive and psychosexual development remains unknown.

In other words it's experimental.

 

[Ana the Ist]

So is the person who hates the concept of transgender

I don't know who this person is....nor have I met anyone who says "I hate the concept of transgender". I don't know who is supposed to answer for this person.

experiencing harm

Nope.

or are they just angry *snip*

That's clearly a loaded question....again, I've never heard anyone say "I hate the concept of transgender" so I can't really answer from the viewpoint of this imaginary person.

Why would it be harmful to accept people for who they are?

It isn't.

As an atheist, do you want to live under laws created by the church?

No.

Perhaps it's better to have secular laws or no?

If you think secular = "disagreement with Christians" you're wrong. Secular nations and Christian nations alike agree on a whole cornucopia of laws from murder to theft.

The problem here is that a bunch of people who can't justify their beliefs or make a rational argument or debate openly without prejudice or attacking someone's character have decided that anyone who disagrees with them has to stay silent... or they're doing some kind of imaginary "harm" ....are trying to push their moral views on others because it gives them an undeserved sense of righteousness.

Everyone is entitled to their opinions and no one is harmed by words. Nobody needs to be told what words they should use by anyone else nor does anyone have any reason to believe themselves morally superior to anyone else.

 

[rjs330]

Yup. Nothing like rank amateurs to tell us what's what. Who needs experts when we have the people who have opposed LGBTQ to rights every step of the way to tell us, yet again, how they know more then everyone else.

Did you totally miss the part where professionals ARE the ones driving the changes? One would have to be pretty uninformed anymore not to know this. I going to go out on a limb here and day I doubt very much that experts in Europe are a bunch of people who are opposed to LGBT rights. And I would bet they aren't a bunch of rank amatures either. Do you consider them as such?

A new organization has formed among therapists. It's called Therapy First. Right now they have over 300 therapists. They all oppose Affirmitve Care therapy due to the lack of evidence and the evidence that medicalization is harmful. Do you consider them rank amatures and against LGBT rights?

I'm also sure that Dr. Cass is a quack who opposes LGBT rights as well?

Would that be accurate in your estimation? Or are you just lost on real arguments so you have to make broad meaningless accusations?

 

[rjs330]

“Yes, your brain may be ‘defective’ because it’s convinced that the body it’s housed in has ‘the wrong parts’, but there’s good news!, the treatments will be widely available once you turn eighteen!, until then look in the mirror and try to feel more ‘at home’ in your body!”
What mercy is that?

I would like a number of times we have address this argument before you recognize it's been addressed already. This isn't the first time you asked this question. And everytime it's answered you go silent.

I think it's because you actually know that's not what anyone has said. This is just rephrasing of rhe old "just get over it" accusation, which is also nothing anyone else has ever said.

Can you come up with something real?

 

[rjs330]

Every drug and procedure has to have a beginning. If the results are positive, they do it more and more. If it is not doing what was predicted, they do it less and less. I'm not averse to letting puberty kids take hormones but I do think one should be 18 before surgical intervention.

So now you agree it's experimenting is being done? Im.really confused. You asked the question earlier making it sound like you do t think experimenting on kids is being done. And now you are saying that it's okay that's it's being done.

Or are you saying it isn't being done, but should be?

 

[Ana the Ist]

Did you totally miss the part where professionals ARE the ones driving the changes? One would have to be pretty uninformed anymore not to know this. I going to go out on a limb here and day I doubt very much that experts in Europe are a bunch of people who are opposed to LGBT rights. And I would bet they aren't a bunch of rank amatures either. Do you consider them as such?

A new organization has formed among therapists. It's called Therapy First. Right now they have over 300 therapists. They all oppose Affirmitve Care therapy due to the lack of evidence and the evidence that medicalization is harmful. Do you consider them rank amatures and against LGBT rights?

I'm also sure that Dr. Cass is a quack who opposes LGBT rights as well?

Would that be accurate in your estimation? Or are you just lost on real arguments so you have to make broad meaningless accusations?

The sad state of political discourse on the left has essentially reduced every single issue to....

1. Figure out what sort of bigot you can accuse someone of being without ever addressing their argument.
2. Call them a bigot.
3. Repeat steps 1 and 2.

It doesn't matter what the issue is....it doesn't matter what evidence you have....it doesn't matter if you actually educated yourself on the topic instead of just pretending to understand it....

The one thing you can count on is the left won't change this 3 point process.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Every drug and procedure has to have a beginning.

Right but we don't test them out on children.

That's pretty unethical don't you think? We aren't talking about a problem that the child is going to die from. No EMTs are arriving on the scene of a unconscious 12yo saying "Get the testosterone fast! This kid's got late stage transgenderism! We need to use whatever goofy pronouns he makes up for the next 12 hours or he/she/they/ze/zam/zippo is done for!"

If it is not doing what was predicted, they do it less and less.

There's no prediction. There's quite literally no understanding of whatever is supposed to happen. All we know is that it seems to be permanently sterilizing a lot of children.

I'm not averse to letting puberty kids take hormones

Why?

 

[rjs330]

The sad state of political discourse on the left has essentially reduced every single issue to....

1. Figure out what sort of bigot you can accuse someone of being without ever addressing their argument.
2. Call them a bigot.
3. Repeat steps 1 and 2.

It doesn't matter what the issue is....it doesn't matter what evidence you have....it doesn't matter if you actually educated yourself on the topic instead of just pretending to understand it....

The one thing you can count on is the left won't change this 3 point process.

Boy this really seems the truth here. Everyone who is opposed to Arrimatuve care and medicalization is either a rank amature or a lgtq bigot or both.

And it's pretty obvious they have no clue what they are talking about and would prefer to stick to the 3 points instead of finding out what's already been discovered by the scientific and therapeutic community of experts.

 

[rjs330]

Right but we don't test them out on children.

That's pretty unethical don't you think? We aren't talking about a problem that the child is going to die from. No EMTs are arriving on the scene of a unconscious 12yo saying "Get the testosterone fast! This kid's got late stage transgenderism! We need to use whatever goofy pronouns he makes up for the next 12 hours or he/she/they/ze/zam/zippo is done for!"

Lol!

 

[Ana the Ist]

Boy this really seems the truth here. Everyone who is opposed to Arrimatuve care and medicalization is either a rank amature or a lgtq bigot or both.

I can still remember when the left debated issues. I swear...that was a real thing that existed in the past. Now...

Reasonable question? Those cause harm, bigot.

And it's pretty obvious they have no clue what they are talking about and would prefer to stick to the 3 points instead of finding out what's already been discovered by the scientific and therapeutic community of experts.

It's the main reason I don't post evidence up front anymore. I used to do it automatically...assuming that claims might get challenged and people would want to see evidence for them.

These beliefs have nothing to do with evidence.

 

[Pommer]

Can you come up with something real?

I’m told here nearly every day that your God is “real”.

 

[Ceallaigh]

“Yes, your brain may be ‘defective’ because it’s convinced that the body it’s housed in has ‘the wrong parts’, but there’s good news!, the treatments will be widely available once you turn eighteen!, until then look in the mirror and try to feel more ‘at home’ in your body!”
What mercy is that?

And what should be done for children with body integrity identity disorder (BIID), also known as body integrity dysphoria?

I'm not expecting anyone answer that one.

 

[KCfromNC]

There are no facts yet. The only way to establish fact regarding outcome, is to perform radical experiments on children and see how they turn out ten to twenty years later.

Have you ever used a medicine or had a procedure that didn't have a multi-decade track record? Even just once?

 

[KCfromNC]

Those patients have been adults. It's whole different situation starting it out on children.

Imagine medical research has developed a new treatment for cancer. Initial studies show it is effective, and this is borne out over 5 years of additional research. Should we get the government involved to make using that treatment on children illegal because it doesn't have a 20 year track record of no negative side effects?

 

[KCfromNC]

I do because every fetus develops into a child.

This is the same reason we should let infants drink and drive cars. Not at the same time, of course, but as something which will develop into adults we need to treat them as such now.

Not to mention how we let fetuses vote, because "every" one of the develops into an adult.

 

[KCfromNC]

Once again I refer you to what other countries have done in regards to this.

Ah yes, the common conservative rallying cry of "our government needs to follow the lead of European countries on national health care decisions".

 

[KCfromNC]

Then why is the rest of the world abandoning it? No there are facts to this. Apparently you are continuing to ignore them. I wonder why.

Hey look, empty assertions followed by pretending there's something wrong with me for questioning them.

That's not the way to make people think a post has anything of substance to say.

 

[KCfromNC]

They banned the treatment because of the recommendations of people who went to medical school.

The article linked in the OP seems to disagree :

“There are some things in the nature of creation — male and female is one of them — that gets beyond what you believe and I believe,” Republican Sen. Richard Cash said on the Senate floor before debate began Thursday. “It’s rooted in creation; it’s rooted in the creator and those who opposed that are opposing in some sense the nature of creation itself.”​

​

and

​

Doctors and parents testified before committees in both the House and Senate that people younger than 18 do not receive gender-transition surgeries in South Carolina and hormone treatments begin only after extensive consultation with health professionals.​

​

They said the treatments can be lifesaving, allowing young transgender people to live more fulfilling lives. Research has shown that transgender youth and adults are prone to stress, depression and suicidal behavior when forced to live as the sex they were assigned at birth.​

​

 

[Belk]

The experts amputate the healthy limbs of adults with body dysphoria. Should the law allow them to amputate the healthy limbs of children?

The answer to that regarding those arguing against the law, is yes. The law should allow the experts to amputate the healthy limbs of children who have body dysphoria.

Is this somehow supposed to be a refutation that the same people who opposed every hint at progress for LGBTQ are the ones once again opposing this? Crying wolf once again is not exactly a new story.