Why You Should Have Your Eye On Florida
- Thread starter ObsidianJones
- Start date
That's not the point. The point is finding excuses not to give a shit, like I said before. Beyond that, tstorm just wants to flood the discourse with so much noise it's impossible to differentiate it from signal.
The reality is that seemingly pointless cruelty like this attack on trans kids is always its own point. It's about punishing people for not conforming to a heteronormative worldview. That it causes so much suffering is a feature, not a bug. Because no matter how good you profess to be, we all have a dark little voice in our own minds that celebrates when we see someone getting what we believe they deserve.
Because it doesn't say what you want it to. Like, look at this:
" In other words, in rare circumstances, some of the procedures you list are borne out of medical necessity. For example, a minor male with testicular cancer may need an orchiectomy. This opinion does not address or apply to medically necessary procedures. "
You took a blanket "this opinion does not address or apply to medically necessary procedures" with an example given, and decided that only that example was the exception. Look, I countered an argument you made concisely with the text we're both referencing! It's not that hard, unless you're making content up, which you are, which is why you can't cite anything.
It then spends 12 pages saying that things like gender dysphoria doesn't count as medically necessary. I can't quote that, because forum limits don't let me paste all that text, and you won't accept summarizations or paraphrasing because semantics, else you'd already have those statement directly from the horse's rancid mouths.
And then you'd directly lie about ongoing legal battles in very obvious ways for unknown reasons
You're summaries are all incorrect. I haven't lied about anything. If you cannot back these claims up, why do you continue to make them?
Texas DFPS is already investigating families for having trans kids and the state of Texas is already being sued over this letter, you're wrong.
A family was investigated when a DFPS employee reported herself under the directive. Nobody was arrested, nobody was charged, no families were separated, nobody was accused of child abuse. An investigation was started, and then blocked by a judge pretty much immediately. Feel free to point out the lie (there isn't one).
An investigation was started in order to accuse and then arrest and charge a family for child abuse, because as per Ken Paxton, any number of gender therapies must be investigated for child abuse. They're looking for child abuse. You're wrong.
Republican stealth tactics are getting more numerous as times go on. I hope Biden and Harris have a plan for the 2022, and 2024 elections other than Trump bad. Because I don't think Trump will win in 2024 or be the republican nominee. I think Desantis will be the nominee or maybe Glen Youngkin and combine that with the supreme court, we could be looking at a horrid rollback of LGBTQ rights, and other social issues, along with economic issues like business deregulation.
The problem with republicans is that they are increasingly adopting democratic counterculture tactics. Case in point the Hill's Rising, and Breaking Points. Despite their thin veneer at being more woke, and progressive they are designed to get you to not vote democrat, and all of the first, second, and third-order effects that would entail. And they are working polls on democrats are getting lower, and lower.
We need to counter this somehow, but ultimately it's the self-interested voters that decide, and that's a receipt for disaster.
The problem with republicans is that they are increasingly adopting democratic counterculture tactics. Case in point the Hill's Rising, and Breaking Points. Despite their thin veneer at being more woke, and progressive they are designed to get you to not vote democrat, and all of the first, second, and third-order effects that would entail. And they are working polls on democrats are getting lower, and lower.
We need to counter this somehow, but ultimately it's the self-interested voters that decide, and that's a receipt for disaster.
But that's the problem, isn't it?
Non-republicans do not have the blind loyalty of the Republicans. Sure, they will vote Blue-ish, but if they really don't like a candidate or if they don't feel the candidate has reached out enough to them, they will not vote. See Hillary.
The Backbone of the Republican Party is a largely unworldly person who would boo Jesus Christ is he came down with a Bernie T-shirt. If it's not their trusted news source, it's lying filth that THEY WANT YOU TO BELIEVE. This Backbone doesn't need to get things done. In fact, just beating the Democrats is getting it done. We see how the American Farmer suffered under Trump and they still largely wanted to give him another term.
What counter is there for the willfully ignorant? What plan is there that can politicize their fellow citizens' lives? The Party that was so against Death Panels and the idea that the Government would choose who lives or dies... has no problem going maskless with a pandemic that is about to reach one million deaths here in the United States. Covid is the number 3 leading cause of death here.
The people who were so mortified about the very idea of the Government getting together and deciding who would get aid and who would let people die just up and decided to ignore something so fatal because their leaders decided it was fake news. And by the time they all got around to admitting it's truth, they did it with a wink and a jack off gesture. Like "Sure. We HAVE to say it... But come on!"
There is no strategy to win over the majority of those who convinced themselves that they are morally superior. No frontal one, anyway. There is no time to make fake facebook accounts and make up stories. And besides, for that to work, one already has to have a predisposition to want to believe the worst.
That's one problem.
The other problem is that Non-Republicans just want shit done. Well, how can you do that when you have two sleepers and a senate that is bound and determined to make everything fail because they know they aren't the Party of Burden. They are the Party of Anti-Democrat. They succeed when A.) Democrats fail and B.) Things are Blamed on the Democrats.
There is no win scenario via actual democratic action. You just have to actually hope on "Trump And Republican Bad".
Wouldn't even have to wear the Bernie shirt. "A brown guy who won't shut up about the poor? Get him outta here!"
They are looking for child abuse, yes. I did not say otherwise. Again, a child covered in bruises is not necessarily abused, but is reason to check in on them. All of the verbiage out of Texas is coated in "can", "may", or a million qualifiers. They don't ever say that gender transition is child abuse, only that it could be. Unless they stumble their way into an outlandish case of a child being transitioned against their will, nobody is going to be charged.
Welcome to the problem, and why a worker has already been suspended for asking for clarification on the law.
I also liked how earlier you said the DFPS officer "reported herself". She reported herself, by asking for clarification if they had to investigate every instance, even times when the minor has been put on reversible hormone blockers because it's been deemed medically necessary. The answer as per Paxton and Abbott is yes, they have to be assumed to be child abusers. So they suspended her, tried to seize her daughter's medical records, and you're okay with this dystopian treatment.
Are child abuse cases worked totally differently in the US than the rest of the world? Do they normally start on a single piece of evidence to do a full on investigation? Are bruises reporting to police immediately like this?
It's different state to state, but you don't report to the police, you report to child protective services if you have reasonable suspicion a child is being abused. It's not a criminal investigation, they cannot arrest you, they just do a look in to ensure the safety of the child. The police in Texas aren't even involved in this, it's a matter of the Department of Family and Protective Services.
Does Texas normally change the rules around bruising (going on your example) and classing it as child abuse? Because, using your example, they've gone from potential reporting of 'suspicious behaviour' to mandatory reporting of any brusing
It was never potential reporting of anything. It's always mandatory reporting of suspected abuse. The only people effected by this change would be the imaginary people who already thought gender transition is abusive but were not reporting it to the authorities. Professionals and sometimes volunteers that work with children are mandatory reporters, and are obligated to report any suspected child abuse to protective services. I've done this training in Pennsylvania while working with the Boy Scouts, it looks like Texas law operates the same , if someone in a role working with children suspects the child is being abused they have to report directly to protective services within 48 hours.
The question that was asked of the AG was if gender transition procedures constitute child abuse, with an explicit rider that sometimes procedures are medically necessary. The AG responded that elective medical procedures with risks of bodily harm (including sterilization) could be child abuse. To the disdain of the other people arguing with me, the opinion at no point says any specific thing automatically is. In fact, if gender transition treatments can be child abuse, the rhetorical implication of that statement is that they also could not be child abuse, otherwise they would have used the word "is". And if it can go either way, it falls back onto the judgment of individuals whether they believe there might be abuse. Why my example is so relevant, a bruised child does not necessitate calling CPS if you don't suspect they came from abuse. Which means the suggestion that everyone is mandated to report all trans kids is overblown nonsense.
Abbott letter to Masters
www.documentcloud.org
You're wrong, again, as everyone has told you multiple times.
"A number of", "a variety of". You gotta play "spot the qualifiers" with this sort of thing.Abbott letter to Masters
You're wrong, again, as everyone has told you multiple times.
No I don't because neither the governor nor the attorney general are. You might notice in my quote of the governor referencing the AG paper very un-qualified statements like "it is already against the law" and "imposes reporting". There are no uncertain terms here, they only exist in your head.