I love the response you’re getting. A wholesome community until you have a different opinion. This is how you know Lemmy is simply comprised of the top crust layer of Reddit. The worst it had to offer.
No. But the offer is appreciated all the same. I know you would love it more if you only engaged with people who think exactly like you, and only have the opinions and conclusions you do. It feels good to constantly have your ideology and agenda confirmed. Makes you feel superior.
A wholesome community until you have a different opinion.
“Please tolerate my intolerance! You have to support me wanting people removed from the public! I’m normal!! You need to treat me equal while I don’t treat people equal, or you’re being hypocritical!!!”
In just one example- A cisgender person will have no trouble getting things like testosterone or estrogen if their doctor says they need it. Trans people are losing that right.
This is not debatable. In the US, the constitution does not guarantee a right to healthcare. No federal or state laws guarantee a right to healthcare. Even though the federal government offer several healthcare related program (medicare, medicad, etc…) but they are not required under any federal law to do so.
To answer your question, yes, I do believe legal citizens should have a right to healthcare. A person should not go bankrupt because they contracted cancer.
So, when you make a statement saying T people are being denied a right to healthcare, you’re spreading misinformation. They have the same rights as myself and every other legal citizen.
I would be equally outraged if the government decided a specific racial group, for example, was told they don’t have the right to an attorney when being prosecuted. Because that would be being denied an actual right that everyone else enjoys.
The paradox of tolerance is a philosophical concept suggesting that if a society extends tolerance to those who are intolerant, it risks enabling the eventual dominance of intolerance, thereby undermining the very principle of tolerance. This paradox was articulated by philosopher Karl Popper in The Open Society and Its Enemies (1945),[1] where he argued that a truly tolerant society must retain the right to deny tolerance to those who promote intolerance. Popper posited that if intolerant ideologies are allowed unchecked expression, they could exploit open society values to erode or destroy tolerance itself through authoritarian or oppressive practices.
This paradox raises complex issues about the limits of freedom, especially concerning free speech and the protection of liberal democratic values. It has implications for contemporary debates on managing hate speech, political extremism, and social policies aimed at fostering inclusivity without compromising the integrity of democratic tolerance.
Above room temperature IQ shit, please use the brain I assume you’re equipped with, but my faith in that is dwindling.
Show solidarity by not considering “think of the children” transphobia as simply a “different opinion.” It’s not far from considering homosexuals “sick in the head.”
I’m not attempting to help or not help anyone. That’s not my job. But I won’t stifle my words or yours because someone, somewhere thinks it might be “harming” someone.
I wish you had more empathy, but I’ll just have to hope that your words don’t harm anyone, then. The depression and suicide rate for trans people is high for a reason.
When that opinion is deeply harmful, is directly contrary to all scientific evidence, results in actual groomers (not trans people) being able to take advantage of ignorance, and is generally used by bigots as a wedge to repress sexual education well beyond teen years–yeah this is the response you get
Basically what you’re saying is, conversation and opposing virepoints is harmful. Which is a fascist view.
I’m all for people making their own choices. But teaching children about sexuality is wrong, let alone assuming a child has the mind to transition their gender. This is sick in the head.
OP’s opinion about teaching young children, too young to grasp the concept of sexuality being wrong is simply their opinion. Many children grow out of gender identity disorder once they reach a certain age (not all, but many).
Your “science” is hotly contested around the world. Simply because you’ve chosen to accept a particular conclusion doesn’t mean everyone has to.
I’m not addressing the grooming nonsense or “used by biogts” comment as they are simply left wing talking points.
I do not suspect I’ll find meaningful dialog here as too many of you are hateful and close minded leading to an inability to have conversation that doesn’t include insults and name calling. Cheers.
It’s not fascist to oppose intolerance. You are attacking people’s core identities; their right to exist. It’s not an attack on you when people defend themselves from you. We’re not discussing our favorite movies here. Some other examples of harmful lies:
“People with dark skin are dumb”
“Women are too emotional to make their own decisions”
“Poor people don’t deserve clean air, water and food”
“Being queer is a mental disorder”
“Many children grow out of gender identity disorder once they reach a certain age” (seriously, this is totally made up. Less than 5% of people do this and many of those only detransition because of the hate they encounter)
Climate change is hotly contested too. That doesn’t mean the people contesting it have any valid points. People who are actually invested in evidence-based research, not those trying to cobble together post-hoc justification for their fear, have a general consensus that giving children a basic understanding of what is and isn’t sexually appropriate makes them much safer. And if a child asks whether it’s okay to like either gender, it’s easy to simply answer “yes.”
“Many children grow out of gender identity disorder once they reach a certain age”
I was curious about this and looked it up. Philip had a good comment on it. TL;DR, the studies people use for this claim are deeply flawed and should not be used as legitimate evidence. At least I know where transphobes are getting this claim from now.
I love the response you’re getting. A wholesome community until you have a different opinion. This is how you know Lemmy is simply comprised of the top crust layer of Reddit. The worst it had to offer.
Here’s an idea for you: leave.
No. But the offer is appreciated all the same. I know you would love it more if you only engaged with people who think exactly like you, and only have the opinions and conclusions you do. It feels good to constantly have your ideology and agenda confirmed. Makes you feel superior.
No, I don’t mind your difference in opinion, I’m more concerned with your vitriolic attitude, personally.
“Please tolerate my intolerance! You have to support me wanting people removed from the public! I’m normal!! You need to treat me equal while I don’t treat people equal, or you’re being hypocritical!!!”
“if you oppose my views, you’re a bigot, and I don’t debate bigots, hence I won’t debate you. I win”
See, I can put words in quotation marks too. Look how cool we look.
Opposing the views that trans people exist and that their rights matter does, indeed, make you a bigot.
Of course they exist. You can literally see them. And they have the same rights as I do, assuming they are a legal citizen of the USA.
No. No they don’t. Trump has ensured that.
This is from 19 days ago and he has done a lot more since.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/6-ways-trumps-executive-orders-are-targeting-transgender-people
In just one example- A cisgender person will have no trouble getting things like testosterone or estrogen if their doctor says they need it. Trans people are losing that right.
I doubt there is a federal, state, or local law, or in the constitution that states you have a right to getting testosterone or estrogen.
Sorry… you think medical care isn’t a right?
And if not, don’t you think maybe it should be?
This is not debatable. In the US, the constitution does not guarantee a right to healthcare. No federal or state laws guarantee a right to healthcare. Even though the federal government offer several healthcare related program (medicare, medicad, etc…) but they are not required under any federal law to do so.
To answer your question, yes, I do believe legal citizens should have a right to healthcare. A person should not go bankrupt because they contracted cancer.
So, when you make a statement saying T people are being denied a right to healthcare, you’re spreading misinformation. They have the same rights as myself and every other legal citizen.
I would be equally outraged if the government decided a specific racial group, for example, was told they don’t have the right to an attorney when being prosecuted. Because that would be being denied an actual right that everyone else enjoys.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
Above room temperature IQ shit, please use the brain I assume you’re equipped with, but my faith in that is dwindling.
Oh, wow, a concept someone conceived.
I don’t see an opposing view as intolerance, thus your link is moot.
When the original viewpoint is that trans people exist and are valuable, opposition to that viewpoint is most certainly intolerant.
You know Garak is gay, right?
I’m not sure what I’m supposed to do with this information.
Show solidarity by not considering “think of the children” transphobia as simply a “different opinion.” It’s not far from considering homosexuals “sick in the head.”
No one was talking about gay people. This is the problem when you try to lump a bunch of alphabet letters into the same group. They’re not a monolith.
No, they’re not, but the people who want to oppress them and wipe them from existence don’t care about that. Don’t help them.
I’m not attempting to help or not help anyone. That’s not my job. But I won’t stifle my words or yours because someone, somewhere thinks it might be “harming” someone.
I wish you had more empathy, but I’ll just have to hope that your words don’t harm anyone, then. The depression and suicide rate for trans people is high for a reason.
“I’m not queerphobic, I’m just a plain and simple tailor…”
When that opinion is deeply harmful, is directly contrary to all scientific evidence, results in actual groomers (not trans people) being able to take advantage of ignorance, and is generally used by bigots as a wedge to repress sexual education well beyond teen years–yeah this is the response you get
Basically what you’re saying is, conversation and opposing virepoints is harmful. Which is a fascist view.
OP’s opinion about teaching young children, too young to grasp the concept of sexuality being wrong is simply their opinion. Many children grow out of gender identity disorder once they reach a certain age (not all, but many).
Your “science” is hotly contested around the world. Simply because you’ve chosen to accept a particular conclusion doesn’t mean everyone has to.
I’m not addressing the grooming nonsense or “used by biogts” comment as they are simply left wing talking points.
I do not suspect I’ll find meaningful dialog here as too many of you are hateful and close minded leading to an inability to have conversation that doesn’t include insults and name calling. Cheers.
It’s not fascist to oppose intolerance. You are attacking people’s core identities; their right to exist. It’s not an attack on you when people defend themselves from you. We’re not discussing our favorite movies here. Some other examples of harmful lies:
“People with dark skin are dumb”
“Women are too emotional to make their own decisions”
“Poor people don’t deserve clean air, water and food”
“Being queer is a mental disorder”
“Many children grow out of gender identity disorder once they reach a certain age” (seriously, this is totally made up. Less than 5% of people do this and many of those only detransition because of the hate they encounter)
Climate change is hotly contested too. That doesn’t mean the people contesting it have any valid points. People who are actually invested in evidence-based research, not those trying to cobble together post-hoc justification for their fear, have a general consensus that giving children a basic understanding of what is and isn’t sexually appropriate makes them much safer. And if a child asks whether it’s okay to like either gender, it’s easy to simply answer “yes.”
I was curious about this and looked it up. Philip had a good comment on it. TL;DR, the studies people use for this claim are deeply flawed and should not be used as legitimate evidence. At least I know where transphobes are getting this claim from now.
Go cheers yourself with your lies.