ADVERTISEMENT

Boise St forfeits Mntn West volleyball tourny

I simply responded in kind. In fact, my comment was far more relevant than your question to Ida, because the trans lawyer in the video clip actually suggests 8 year-olds should have chemical and/or surgical castration.
Well, that is not what was said but we at least had a civil exchange which is progress for this board, and I thank you for that.

I am now really curious to read some of the oral argument and will do so just to see if some of the questions we raised were actually asked in court

First report from the Supreme Court arguments indicate the conservative majority is inclined to uphold the Tennessee statute for some of the same reasons I mentioned above, although Gorsuch did not ask any questions which the reporter found to be surprising.
 
Well, that is not what was said but we at least had a civil exchange which is progress for this board, and I thank you for that.

It is progress to see your civil conversation. Thank you.

And, we disagree. It IS what was said in the video. The trans lawyer claims that some people knew they were trans as early as 2 years old and had to suffer for 6-7 years before receiving relief. The “relief” at issue and just previously discussed by the trans lawyer as the issue in the case is medical intervention. Medical intervention is chemical and/or surgical. You have to remove the context of the discussion to conclude otherwise, as the law does not prohibit parents from portraying their children as trans. It’s a medical intervention issue.
 
Looks like the LPGA will be the ones going to the Supreme Court. They just put in a female at birth rule in today. I'm sure the one dude will sue them.
I saw that too, and the NCAA could do the same if they would get their thumb out of their back side. PS: The one dude will lose in court.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Caveman Catfan
Looks like the LPGA will be the ones going to the Supreme Court. They just put in a female at birth rule in today. I'm sure the one dude will sue them.
Now wait a second. Maybe Tiger could get the Majors record by switching over.
 
Anyone who supports this BS is evil, just plain evil ; there's no other way to say it.
My girlfriend is a life-long Democrat, AND she works with those who have psychological problems (she can diagnose and prescribe). And even she would say "these people are crazy".
 
  • Like
Reactions: wildcatwelder
God help us if there is ever a majority of these shameless radical lunatics on the SC.


I disagree with Sotomayor, but I don’t think she is talking about a haircut. She is trying to show that puberty blockers for the precociously developing child is permitted, but blockers for the child who wants to identify as a sex other than their genetic sex cannot get puberty blockers and that makes this discrimination based on sex. I think that is far closer to her intent than the haircut comment in the Tweet.

It’s a tortured analogy that the Court has created.

This law does not discriminate because it is equally applied to any child regardless of their sex or sexual identity. What if a girl wanted puberty blockers because she always wants to portray as a pre-pubescent girl, not a boy? This is not about sex, it is about age of consent and permanent harm.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tskware
Didn't I hear that Kamala wanted to pass regulation to make it possible for incarcerated inmates to get gender reassignment surgery and the Govt would pay for it? Your tax dollars hard at work.
A policy that was active under the Trump administration as well for those who don't know.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT