New here?
Create an account to submit posts, participate in discussions and chat with people.
Sign up
35
and this is why they DIDN'T rig the current election (pomf2.lain.la)
posted 1 year ago by GoldenInnosStatue on scored.co (+0 / -0 / +35Score on mirror )
29 comments
Permalink
Mirrored from scored.co
You are viewing a single comment's thread. View all
1
MI7BZ3EW on scored.co
1 year ago 1 point (+0 / -0 / +1Score on mirror ) 1 child
> genital mutilation with parents consent

This is a trojan horse. Right now they are doing transitions without consent. And note that rarely, rarely do BOTH parents consent to this sort of thing. Making teachers tell parents they are transitioning their kids will be a BIG win.

Besides, many states are declaring transitioning as medical malpractice. All it takes is one word from the FDA and it's all over. (Oh, they already banned those drugs for transitioning? WEIRD!)
Permalink Reply
Mirrored from scored.co
0
SectionApeRiot on scored.co
1 year ago 0 points (+0 / -0 ) 1 child
Problem is there are plenty of cases of single mothers pushing their children into it and there's no father in the picture to object. We shouldn't be pushing further left with "well as long as the parents consent". It should be a resounding "absolutely no child will be mutilated, with or without parental consent". The right has been giving inches like that for decades (centuries really) and it never goes back, it just stays there until the left goes further and the right gives a few more inches. Next thing we know we're miles down the road.

I didn't find anything about FDA banning "transitioning" drugs. Are they banned or just not approved? It'd be great if they are.
Permalink Reply
Mirrored from scored.co
0
MI7BZ3EW on scored.co
1 year ago 0 points (+0 / -0 ) 1 child
You missed the point.

That means we need to go to the NATURAL mother and the NATURAL father and have them sign a form saying that they permit transition. That's what "consent of the parentS" means.

If the mother remarries, it doesn't matter. Until the new father adopts the kid and the natural father relinquishes his rights to the new adopted father -- he has to sign off on everything.

This is HUGE because it also means women can't transition kids without dad knowing about it!
Permalink Reply
Mirrored from scored.co
0
SectionApeRiot on scored.co
1 year ago 0 points (+0 / -0 )
There's a fair number who don't know who the father is, father gave up rights, woman went to a sperm bank, or the woman didn't put him on the birth certificate at all. The last one seems to be becoming more common to get more welfare, maybe? I know of at least three women that have done it for welfare and free healthcare. One case was done, I think, so the father wouldn't have to pay child support if something happened. Well, they split and now he has no legal right over the child. I'm sure he could probably try to pursue rights through a DNA test, but he won't.

It'll also depend on how they move forward with it. Parental consent can be interpreted as one or both parents.

But that's also part of my point. If it's so rare to get both parents approval, why not just try to make it outright illegal, with or without the parent(s)? No one, not even the parents, should have the authority to mutilate their child. It's just the slow march further left. Doing half measures and compromises so that people think something is being done when really they're just normalizing what would have been unthinkable a few years before. It's what's gotten us here.
Permalink Reply
Mirrored from scored.co
Toast message