Discussion of religion in the context of LGBTQ+ rights is only allowed in the LGBTQ+ Rights and Religion Thread
.
Discussion of religion in any other context is off topic in all of the "LGBTQ+ rights..." threads.
Attempting to bait others into bringing up religion is also not allowed.
Edited by Mrph1 on Dec 1st 2023 at 6:51:29 PM
Back in July I embedded the court footage of the appeal hearings.[1]
The court threw out the lower ruling and said that under 16s are able to consent to puberty blockers.
I’d assume on the basis that we let under 16s consent to other medical treatments that are prescribed by a certified doctor.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranThere's a lot of "what the fuck were you people playing at" in regards to the Bell side's case.
Oh and one of the lawyers on that team has admitted publicly that this wasn't about trans kids, it was about overturning Gillick competence in all cases
.
Edited by Deadbeatloser22 on Sep 17th 2021 at 7:27:44 PM
"Yup. That tasted purple."Also, doctors, parents, and the minors in question apparently can't make an informed medical decision! No, you need to ask a judge. Who knows literally none of these people and is experienced in interpreting legalese, not the capability of medical practitioners.
I'm sure judges would be thrilled at having to deal with this, even if (as intended) it gets to them vanishingly less than such decisions are ever made. Which is probably one of the biggest roadblocks in question: you're trying to get a high court to agree to perpetually waste their own time playing doctor.
I don't think so? They're trying to overturn a... 40-year-old judicial decision, here? Remember, the UK is a Common Law country too (well, Scotland's even more complicated) and that's where the USA got it, so judicial precedent does set law when Parliament doesn't specifically codify it.† Ergo, they want to revise the law so that minors can't access contraception and abortion services (or puberty blockers or... basically anything that might have some definition of "lasting impact"; tbh you could probably extend that to most dental services) without judicial approval of their competence—the current settled law is essentially "that's what doctors are for, don't bring us into it unless all parties involved disagree" (again, IIRC).
† IIRC, most of our contract law and negligence is confirmed by judicial precedent, not legislation.
I don't think their behavior has anything to do with how litigation-happy Americans can be, it's just bigots trying to use judicial power to enforce their bigotry. They're just trying to use every tool available to advance their ideological goal of hurting trans people.
Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Sep 19th 2021 at 5:53:57 AM
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangI've seen it said
that Keira Bell will appeal to the UK Supreme Court, though the court's own website has no mention yet of the case. I don't know how often their permission to appeal page is updated.
The Lord Winston has been alternately vilified and deified online following his appearance last night on Question Time.[1]
The panel discussed the case of Kathleen Stock, a "gender critical" feminist, trustee of the LGB Alliance and Professor of Philosophy at the University of Sussex, some of whose students are campaigning for her to be fired.
Most of the discussion was over academic freedom, sensitivity to minorities and standards of political debate. Fiona Bruce asked Winston to comment on these points as a former Chancellor of Sheffield Hallam University, but he preferred instead to use his position as a biologist to weigh in on the specific issue that caused this latest controversy:
"I will say this categorically - that you cannot change your sex. Your sex actually is there in every single cell in the body. You have a chromosomal sex, you have genetic sex, you have hormonal sex you have psychological sex. They're all different. We are very confused about this unfortunately and regrettably it's got into this argument that people would now accuse me of being transphobic - "
"Well, I mean obviously there are trans people who say you absolutely can do that."
"Well unfortunately you can't say this publicly, this is one of the great problems. Even saying this on this program undoubtedly will result in me getting a huge amount of hate mail, it always does, but I do think it's a big issue about the attitudes - there are, of course, issues which are important about young people who are confused about their sex but we won't go down that route here - but it does affect a whole lot of issues in schools and elsewhere in our society. Of course we should accept people as they are. Overall I think it's a very sad thing that we can't discuss biological science without actually getting completely caught up emotionally with something which is really completely wrong."
"Well, as I say, there are people who would vehemently disagree with you so I'm just, you know, gonna make that clear."
"Yes, I know."
Edited by TommyR01D on Oct 15th 2021 at 3:08:12 AM
Except that chromasomes as the absolute determinant is also what the G Cs use.
"Yup. That tasted purple."Ok hang on:
chromosomal sex <- Fair enough, can't be changed. Doesn't actually matter a great deal in day to day life.
genetic sex <- Isn't this the same as chromosomal sex?
hormonal sex <- pretty sure this is what HRT is all about fixing, and seems to have the most effect on the body.
psychological sex <- pretty sure this just means gender.

[Great, a page topper]
The discussions I saw of the [Bell v. Tavistock appeal] hearings made me hopeful, but I'm still worried things could go wrong since that's the general direction of things this year.
Edited by ciyinwanderer on Sep 16th 2021 at 3:28:23 PM
This signature was thumped to preserve the dignity of the moderators.