The Ohio Senate has voted to override Gov. Mike DeWine’s veto against Ohio House Bill 68 in a 23-9 vote. This bill would ban transgender minors from receiving gender-affirming medical care and prevent transgender girls from taking part in girls’ and women’s sports.
The Ohio House voted to override the veto on Jan. 10.
The bill restricts the use of puberty blockers, hormone therapy or surgeries for transgender youth. The bill does not restrict the use of this care on non-transgender youth, and specifically includes an exception for intersex youth with ambiguous or abnormal sex characteristics.
You have become the nanny state. Remember when you thought parents knew best for their children.
The sick fucks in the Left forced this, jv. And you can’t speak to the merits of this bill, you just want to think you’ve caught conservatives in some type of hypocrisy. You look stupid right now.
You know what’s going to come from this veto override… Lawsuits. Demand to redraw maps. Riots.
These treatments have sterility as a primary effect. The practical effect of this is familial genocide.
This issue will not die while Democrats are liberal and religious factors want to make laws that cover everyone instead of just following church laws for themselves and their sect brethren.
It is another perfect forever issue, just like abortion. Right and wrong exist on the issues, but liberal and religious views each have their own set of facts and values that they feel make them right and the other side wrong and always will.
T, what are the religious views on this? I don’t believe Transgenderism was addressed anywhere in the bible. IMO this isn’t and shouldn’t a religious discussion. It feels more like a conservative agenda outside the church.
Clearly my point was that for as much as Conservatives preach about personal responsibility and parental rights, they sure seem quick to try and restrict those rights. It isn’t like they completely restricted the use of hormone blockers for safety sake (they are safe and have been for decades) they are restricting them for a subset of people they don’t agree with. Meanwhile Ohio has NO restriction on “conversion therapy” that almost ALL medical professionals agree is not safe, nor effective.
Um… “So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.” First chapter in the Bible.
Craig, do we really want to get into a literal interpretation of the bible? Did God have tattoos? Piercings? How about a pacemaker, artificial limbs? Are these all things we should outlaw because God didn’t make them in his image? See how this spirals.
By all arguments, transgender people are moving from one gender to another. Nothing that isn’t in the bible. **shrug**.
Saying “I wish I hadn’t gotten this piercing when I was young” or “I regret getting the tattoo” are quite a bit different than “I sure wish I hadn’t had my dick cut off when I was 14.”.
Jason, the actual gender affirming surgeries don’t usually start until people are 17 or 18 years old. This is restricting (completely reversable) gender affirming CARE and drugs that block puberty and hormones. And those surgeries can not be done without a parent’s consent and psychological evaluations.
Making up boogeymen to fight is what they are doing.
As usual, JonnyV prefers not to make distinctions.
Conservative people do NOT allow parents to rape or otherwise abuse their chiklren–so “conservatives” actually DO limit parental activities.
Since Tranny-surgery is major surgery and–in fact–radically violates nature’s laws, just as does raping your own child or beating them repeatedly. Conservatives will prevent doctors and parents from proceeding with same. You understand that, right?
Hormone blockers are used in diagnosed cases which require treatment, not for options like uprooting nature with major surgery. No different than using narcotics for diagnosed real pain vs. for having a fun toot. You understand that difference, right?
Medical professionals don’t like conversion therapy because it does not involve medical professionals who therefore cannot make MONEY on that stuff. Since no medication nor major surgery nor drug therapies are involved, one questions how it can be “unsafe.” But I’m sure there’s a “study” out there put together by LBGTQXYZSJ++ which shows “harm.” Methods and calculations are……….ahhh……….unavailable for peer review, of course.
“Since no medication nor major surgery nor drug therapies are involved, one questions how it can be “unsafe.””
So you are denying the existence of PTSD??? Good to know.
It must be nice to so easily “other” people who don’t for into your ideals. Conservatives do beat and rape their children. As do liberals. As do religious figures.
FWIW my wife and I looked into hormone blockers for my special needs daughter when she started menstruating at age 9. It isn’t until recently, 3 years later she can mostly deal with her own pads.
Natures laws are BS made up crap that religious people use as excuses they have no logistical answer for. By your logic all medicines are violating natures laws. Go throw that Viagra away. Nature didn’t intend for old men to get boners.
Umnnhhh…nope.
Nature’s laws are …………nature’s laws. We don’t manufacture them. Gravity, acceleration, color spectrum, XY/XX….sorry, pal, none of them have a Jewish, Muslim, or Christian patent.
Your daughter’s condition happens to be one which IS treated with puberty blockers. You could look it up.
And PTSD’s relationship to homosexuality? Stretching a bit again, we see.
Finally, I don’t need Viagra, unlike low-testosterone IT dweebs.
>Clearly my point was that for as much as Conservatives preach about personal responsibility and parental rights, they sure seem quick to try and restrict those rights.
A little more revisionist history, I see. This issue became a major political issue precisely because school counselors were NOT telling parents about their own children and Planned Parenthood still keeps all of their patient’s activities confidential from parents regardless of the child’s age. Changing public bathrooms to omnisex for anyone, perverts included, that wanted to use the little girl’s room is and was part of the same issue.
Taking the parents out of the decision making process (purposely done this way to make it a political issue that Dems could leverage young people votes on) was precisely what made this a political football in the first place. If parents were making the decision for 13-17 year olds getting sex-change medical work, it would probably never have become an issue.
Parenting rights should specifically be restrictive concerning the minor until the child is ready (or just 18) to make important decisions for themselves…if you are a good parent.
>Jason, the actual gender affirming surgeries don’t usually start until people are 17 or 18 years old.
The key terms here are “17” and “usually” and have nothing to do with cases where any of the related treatments are necessary for health reasons other than ‘I wanna be a girl or boy’. Choosing such operations by preference are for adults.
>Conservatives do beat and rape their children. As do liberals. As do religious figures.
True, so because of this no parents should have any rights to raise their children, the State should? That is, in effect the point you are making here, intentional or not. Neither Conservatives nor Liberals support child abuse, so what other point could you be making here?
>Jason, the actual gender affirming surgeries don’t usually start until people are 17 or 18 years old.
The key dispute terms here are ‘usually’ and ’17’. Sex change treatments for people with preference issues (not health needs) are for adults, not minors. No one here is suggesting that adults should not have the right to change their sex as often as they can afford it.
>T, what are the religious views on this?
The interpretational conflict I alluded to above concerning the new ban in Ohio is that each side cherry picks which rights they want to give to parents or give to the children without including the parents. The religious right, and conservatives in general tend to believe that the parent should always be involved until the minor is no longer a minor, under the roof and supported by the parent(s), and does not concern any possible abuses by the parent.
The liberal side concerns power and manipulation, imo, as they tend not to make actual sense, but let’s pretend they do make sense for a moment. Liberals support (at least with their votes) omnisex public bathrooms because of transgenderism, they believe minors should make their own decisions on their bodies including abortion, sex change concerns and sports sex-mixing and can leave the parent out of it. There are other issues that liberals believe the schools should control the child behavior without parent consideration as well.
By comparison, there is no question in any thinking person’s mind that conservatives fight for parental rights on virtually any issue concerning it. The only scrap of an argument on this issue for you here is for the parents who actually support their child getting a sex change while still a minor. That is what you are saying conservatives are being hypocritical about. Most conservatives would argue that sex changing a minor is child abuse and/or child mutilation (liberals don’t). Thus, like all other child abuses, it should be banned. You seem to have entirely missed that point, so I don’t know if it will sink in this time either, but there you go.
T, You missed a step in the conversation here:
“>Conservatives do beat and rape their children. As do liberals. As do religious figures.
True, so because of this no parents should have any rights to raise their children, the State should? That is, in effect the point you are making here, intentional or not. Neither Conservatives nor Liberals support child abuse, so what other point could you be making here?”
Dad29 likes to “other” anyone that he doesn’t agree with. Saying that conservatives don’t beat their children (because he is conservative), which is patently false. My point was that anyone can and does. It had nothing to do with taking away anyone’s rights.
FWIW. I am ok with restricting the rights to an actual surgery from a minor without their guardian’s consent. I’m fairly certain it was that way anyway with all elective surgeries. That isn’t what this bill does. This bill blocks parents’ rights completely. If a parent thinks that this is the best after talking with their children, they should be allowed to make that decision. Even at the age of 17. If you can sign up for the military at the age of 17 with a parent’s consent, then I think gender affirming surgery should be allowed as well. Historically the military has done way more harm to young adults than transgender surgeries. I don’t believe there were any voluntary gender surgeries performed before the age of 17 being done anyway.
If a parent thinks that hormone blockers to suppress puberty is the best decision after talking with their younger child, giving them a more informed choice when they get older… then that should be on the table. Conservatives simply want to try and eliminate Trans people’s choice… because they think this aligns with some made up “woke” ideology. When in actuality they are making the more cruel and BIG GOVERNMENT decision, because it plays to their scared base. This has nothing to do with child abuse. You can draw almost straight parallels to the gay panic of the 80’s. Much like Democrats use abortion as a wedge issue, conservatives need to have a big scary group to point at, and now it is trans people.
FYI. The bathroom scenario doesn’t really happen. It is another bogeyman used to scare people. It happens no more than a straight person going into a bathroom. Or a gay person going into a bathroom to attack a child. It’s a bullsh*t argument. If you were really concerned about this happening, there would be single occupancy bathrooms with locked door enforcements.
>Dad29 likes to “other” anyone that he doesn’t agree with. Saying that conservatives don’t beat their children (because he is conservative), which is patently false. My point was that anyone can and does. It had nothing to do with taking away anyone’s rights.
You misread Dad29’s comment:
>Conservative people do NOT allow parents to rape or otherwise abuse their chiklren–so “conservatives” actually DO limit parental activities.
He said conservative people do not allow parents to abuse (they do not agree with making legal any aspects of abuse), not that as an entirety no conservative has ever been an abuser, not in there at all. The implication there was that liberals, by being pro child preference sex changes would let parents abuse their children by his conservative definition. He does indeed “other” a lot, but not here. That was just you reading what you expected.
>I don’t believe there were any voluntary gender surgeries performed before the age of 17 being done anyway.
Then why is there legislation being proposed and why are you opposed to it? This legislation does only include minors, not 18 year olds. If you think 17 is the one grey area where libs and cons disagree, that is not what you have been saying. As a note, in the 5 year study on sex change operations that I found, there were 48,000 done in the US over that time, about 1200 of which were minors.
The biggest irony here is that I am sure Ohio had possibly none of those and doesn’t currently even need the law. But as long as libs push transgenderism as ‘cool’ in school, the numbers will increase across the whole country, not just the coasts.
>Conservatives simply want to try and eliminate Trans people’s choice…
Conservatives simply want to try and eliminate Trans children’s choice until they are adults… (Fixed it for ya)
>This has nothing to do with child abuse.
In a court of law I would say “objection, hearsay and opinion”, not fact. Kids dealing with the growth of emotional maturity and puberty are the most highly suggestable demographic by a wide margin. I am not saying that I am right and you are wrong, I am saying it is a foolish lie for you to say that it is obviously and patently false that convincing a child to go through with a sex change treatment is NOT abuse. It is an opinion based topic, you may have yours and go bugger yourself if you think I can’t have mine or that mine is provably wrong. Or go ahead and prove that not one mother or father in the US had nefarious or manipulative goals in mind when they helped their child decide to have themselves mutilated.
> The bathroom scenario doesn’t really happen. It is another bogeyman used to scare people.
Interesting, you are saying that a man who feels like a woman, but still has male parts cannot or does not really go into the women’s bathrooms? Look up the National Center for Transgender equality treatise on Transgender People and Bathroom Access and repeat that.
The first paragraph title is: “Transgender-inclusive policies are not a safety risk”
Then the first line: “If they were, we would know by now, as transgender people have been using public bathrooms and locker rooms for decades.”
I wonder what that means, if you are correct.
>Much like Democrats use abortion as a wedge issue, conservatives need to have a big scary group to point at, and now it is trans people.
Except that liberals created the issue out of whole cloth, not conservatives. As of last census, transgenders are a very small group to point at (about 1.03%). Now after being taught that it is cool to be trans in schools, about 5% of youth identify as transgender. The number mysteriously goes down as kids become adults and have to start making a living, though.
>If you were really concerned about this happening, there would be single occupancy bathrooms with locked door enforcements.
How could ‘we’ pass this when there are liberal areas in the country that already have omnisex bathrooms and according to the national center for Transgender equality, have used them according to their feelings instead of their parts for decades? Granted all the areas are on the east and west coasts so it is a good bet that neither you nor I have ever been directly witness to it.
Of course, you deny they even exist (a major part of the liberal mantra) so this aspect of the discussion is over, I am sure.
Thx, T. But don’t get too worked up about JonnyV’s preposterous claims, nor his inability to read, nor his totes screwy “logic”
He WILL not be corrected.
T and Dad29, you are correct in that I misread his comment, missing the “allow”. But even with that said, I disagree with his statement that they don’t allow it. The point I made still holds in that they allow it as much as any other group.
And as I said, I don’t agree with taking away a parents rights to work with professionals to prescribe puberty blockers. This is a non invasive or harmful treatment with minimal side effects. They passed a law with a sledgehammer when they could have used a scalpel. Many transgender youth use these while they figure their lives out and they help make future decisions and transitioning easier.
And finally, I was specifically talking about the “perverts” comment. That portion is the bogeyman. A pervert is gonna pervert regardless of who they are or whatever useless bathroom rules there are. Frankly I don’t care what bathroom a person uses, you can probably count the number of sexual attacks that happen in public bathrooms on one hand in the last 5 years, by any people.
I bet the open number of gay individuals went up as well as it became more acceptable publicly as well. I am sure there are some kids who are experimenting and finding themselves, being a teen can be confusing and difficult. My guess would be that the actual number is higher than the census, but lower than most think. Cross dressing has been a documented thing for centuries.
You are truly a stone-headed twit, jonnyv.
Here’s the dictionary definition of “ALLOW” used as a verb: to permit something to happen or to exist
So you now claim that ‘conservatives permit child abuse and/or rape to happen’? REALLY???
It is true that self-identifying LBGTQXYZSJ Americans have increased from about 3.6% of the population to 7.2% in the last several years. But the glam aspect has something to do with that, too.
Yes. Dad29, they allow it as much as any other group. The point is that NO ONE actively allows it. And by framing it as “your side” does, makes the assumption that the “other side” doesn’t. Pretty simple concept. No single group has the authority to say that they are “protecting the kids” from child abuse. It is a stupid statement.
The “glam” aspect? That is hilarious. I know 3 open trans individuals personally, all M to F (and a few more via FB, but they are friends of friends). I don’t think that any of them would say it is a glamourous life and hardship they have experienced. One of the women in her 50s who transitioned 2 decades ago had her entire family abandon her after her transition. A lotta fun there. Super glamourous.
And for every person who may define themselves as LGBTQ+ and are not 100% sure on their identity, there are probably dozens who are still afraid to come out for fear of reprisal or scorn.
SIDE NOTE: Interesting story about 2 of the M to F transitions. Both transitioned before meeting each other, then met each other and are now in a committed gay relationship for the past decade or so down in Kansas City area. Who woulda guessed.
It is impossible to hold an intelligent discussion with someone who cannot or will not understand English.
>But even with that said, I disagree with his statement that they don’t allow it. The point I made still holds in that they allow it as much as any other group.
Okay here is the tsunami we think you seemed to have missed. Conservatives above have attempted to make the point that ‘choice’ surgeries on minors should not be considered until they are no longer a minor and that to have those surgeries with or without the help of their parents is effectively mutilation as the child does not have the maturity to make that decision yet (and if the parent makes it an abuse concern should be investigated). Under that premise parents who would vote against legislation like that being enacted in Ohio would in effect be abuse supporters.
Your segues such as drug therapies that delay physical maturation, treatments under this umbrella that are health related, that conservative parents can be abusers too, etc are simply not germane. Maybe you can come up with an argument that discusses the points in this post, but to date you have not.
Dad29’s last comment has merit here. You are refusing to discuss the actual point in this post. You have generalized your arguments so much that they do not relate to the post or initial commentary. You do that a lot too.
The actual dispute should have been about what constitutes abuse, not the all encompassing liberal come back, “Conservatives do it too!” It kinda proved that you did not really get the conversation on this one.
>SIDE NOTE: Interesting story about 2 of the M to F transitions. Both transitioned before meeting each other, then met each other and are now in a committed gay relationship for the past decade or so down in Kansas City area. Who woulda guessed.
So two guys both liked women sexually and so they became women to ‘love’ women? That is indeed a trip. My personal story is weirder. I have a god child born Donna. At 14 she changed her name (not legally, just to her friends and family) to Don and wanted to be a ‘He’. At 15 he had a girlfriend and was thinking sex-change. Later that year he had a boyfriend and did not want a sex-change (but the boy liked Don as a ‘He’…not really ever sure what that meant as there had never been any physical ‘alterations’). At 17 he had a girlfriend again, but seemed happy to be in a gay relationship where he was the man in it. At 19 he changed his name again, to Ric, but there has been no talk of any operation since he has been an adult. Now his Mom loved that he ‘went gay’ after pushing it on Ric for years, so she never supported the sex change as she wanted another lesbian in the family, where Dad did not care other than that they had very poor healthcare coverage so payment was the issue for him. It is a bit of a messed up raging liberal family. I have never expressed an opinion to any of them except Ric because it is not my place, but it happens that I was against surgery before they were 18 and expressed a ‘your choice’ opinion after that, so in effect, my opinion followed the bill. I did change the names above…
One of the women in her 50s who transitioned 2 decades ago had her entire family abandon her after her transition. A lotta fun there. Super glamourous.
Mental disease is always ugly.
Dad29, you are right mental disease is ugly. Imagine a mentally unstable person trying to crawl thru a window after being told not to and getting justifiably shot in the capital. Mentally diseased she was.
T, I completely disagree that I haven’t addressed the issue. The original post talks about the bill being passed. I have clearly said that they used a political motivated sledgehammer to pass legislature that is harmful and takes away the rights of parents. While they could have just passed a bill to restrict these surgeries for minors, they went further to deny any care for transgender youth. Even safe and arguable helpful hormone therapies & puberty blockers that make transitioning easier after they are 18.
Because as much as you want to focus on the surgery portion, this is also about the drug therapies. In fact, probably more so considering the TINY number of surgeries that happen with minors compared to the drug therapies. The statistics that I found were there were a total of 56 genital surgeries of minors from 2019 to 2021 and about 900 “top” surgeries. Statistically that is probably less than 10 surgeries in all of Ohio the past 3 years.
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-transyouth-data/
And if you want to discuss what constitutes abuse (not the point of the post, but sure), you would be HARD PRESSED to say that the drug therapies fall into that category when they are diagnosed by a physician, usually AFTER psychological examinations of the minor and done with the consent of the child and parents. All in an attempt to make the subject feel more “normal” and themselves. Yet, the Republicans had no problems throwing that in there as some sort of virtue signaling.
And that is ultimately the problem with this bill. It isn’t helping anyone. It is trying to restrict rights. These minors that are diagnosed with gender dysmorphia or even the ones that are NOT and are just looking for solutions to help them and think that THIS might be the answer (right or wrong) are being restricted because the Republicans are trying to fight some made up “woke agenda”.
Imagine a Capitol Cop casually leaving his pistol in the men’s room.
A Capitol Cop who angrily fired several rounds towards his own car after his son went for a joyride.
A Capitol Cop who committed second-degree murder while imagining that his life was in danger from a girl coming through a window.
Yes, mental disease–particularly paranoia–is ugly.
From your link> Hormone treatment may leave an adolescent infertile, especially if the child also took puberty blockers at an early age. That and other potential side effects are not well-studied, experts say.
Yup, perfectly safe. Not well studied, but perfectly safe.
My info was from a 5 year study, an AP article from NBCnews.com (not Fox). It doesn’t want to link, but if you enter this in the internet, it pops up:
“Gender-affirming surgeries in the US nearly tripled before pandemic dip, study finds”
The numbers are significantly higher, but maybe they used more info than form just covered medical expenses.
I will give you that you addressed the issue better than I thought at first, but the segues and sidetracks are still plentiful.
I have never disagreed that a Republican backed bill is trying to further their agenda, or at least trying to block the Democrat agenda. There is no such thing as quality legislation coming from the national or State Governments at this time. The Democrats push their agendas at the cost to everyone, whether they wanted it or voted for/against it. That is SOP@usgov.com and Republicans need to reciprocate or go away.
Of course, steps beyond even current Gov SOP are the Biden era norm, courts, Governors, and Presidents pretending to be legislatures and all. We still have 3 different branches of Gov, just none of them are sticking to their assigned jobs anymore.
The segues and sidetracks ARE plentiful, mostly due to Dad29 and mine bickering back and forth over stupid words and phrases being used.
Pooor, Pooooor, JonnyV. *Snif*
Waste of time. Jv is more disconnected from reality than Governor Evers suing for the legislature blocking government functions… All while issues more vetos that any other governor.
He’s more disconnected than the Liberal insurrectionist Supreme Court that’s agreed to take up said lawsuit.
He could actually LEARN something about tranny-dom and “glam”–not to mention the MD’s who are making bank on this disorder, if he read the NY Times instead of watching MSNBC.
Ace provides some good stuff: http://ace.mu.nu/archives/408171.php
Dad29, I can totally count on you to link to some totally sketch website that uses LGBTQ slurs. What a worthless link. No better way to completely nuke any sense of competency on an issue.
My guess is if I dig on that site long enough, I will find some sort of Taylor Swift / NSA / Joe Biden / NFL conspiracy as well.
Jason, how many times have I told you. The ADULTS are talking, go sit down at the kids table and eat your veggies.
Yah, that link to the NY Times is just………..a step too far.
Can’t refute the facts? Smear the messenger!!
>Joe Biden / NFL conspiracy as well.
No links there, Joey’s handlers have already declined using the Super Bowl as a re-election stage for him. Our best hope for a better tomorrow is death of our leading candidates through old age. Just plain old senility counts a lot less to one side than I would ever have been able to imagine.
death of our leading candidates through old age
OK, I’ll play. Both of them drop dead in a week.
Who are YOUR nominees?
Dad29, yes I will smear the messenger when they use slurs. As far as the NYT article, I am SURE there are kids who have regretted their choices and decisions as teens. It comes with the territory. I know people who regretted joining the army when they were 17 as well. ***shrug***.
As far as Dems that I think would run if Biden suddenly was unable to run.
Newsom, Mayor Pete, Ro Khanna, & Mark Kelly all are potential players. Personally, I would like to see Mark Kelly or Ro Khanna.
Reps: DeSantis & Haley clearly would attempt to take the reigns, but also Glenn Younkin, Mike Lee, Chris Sununu, Rand Paul would be tolerable, I don’t know enough about the younger R’s.
Personally, I would like to see some younger GenX and Millennials start to step forward. I think that people should be allowed to elect anyone legally qualified to represent them, but man would I be happy to see anyone over 70 out of office.
Sorry Dad29, I don’t know. I don’t really examine Republicans or Democrats that are not going to make it to the ballot anyway so I am ignorant. I just know what both of the current candidates that will be on the ballot stand for and the baggage that we will see ad nauseum when one is elected.
Biden has shown clear signs of onset dementia and could not be a worse candidate in the coming times of clear global distress ahead.
Trump is just about a perfect likeness of the wild west image that much of the older world abroad grew up with, he is hated by both Dem and Rep politicians and so won’t be able to get much done, he has no real friends in the rest of the world (though Dems will call him a Putin friend despite being pretty demonstrably false) to help ease tensions and seems barely tolerated by 40+ percent of the US.
Really, outside his brash and trashy personality, I liked a lot of the things he did in his first term. However, you know that half the population will be trying to impeach him from day 1, and I think the US will be in a significantly worse position after 4 more years of Trump.
I would likely vote Libertarian again no matter who else is on the ballot, but I have voted for other parties before and would again if there was one worthy of respect as a solid mind and a decent personality. I think we need a Statesman for the next 4 years, someone respected abroad, but I don’t know who that is.
>Personally, I would like to see some younger GenX and Millennials start to step forward. I think that people should be allowed to elect anyone legally qualified to represent them, but man would I be happy to see anyone over 70 out of office.
On this we partially agree. TERM LIMITS, TERM LIMITS, TERM LIMITS!!!
Maybe I am just looking at this wrong. Once a politician has made more than 1 million dollars from politicking, it must be his/her last term?
JonnyV, nobody asked you for your opinion on candidates. And nobody really cares.
Great part is… I don’t need your permission to respond. It’s an open forum.