Sean Mooney

Without looking specifically at the arguments laid out by the lawyers I know that gender affirming care as a term is a wide umbrella that refers to a number of things. This is the forum where it always gets boiled down to "sex changes." On your last paragraph- I am not someone who believes in legislating to the exceptions....but I realize I might be alone in my thoughts on that in any number of cases

I have chosen leftist media? That is news to me.

When have I ever said that? I would never just paint a wide brush to say everyone at one place is a "bastion of journalistic integrity"

The BLM riots? That's what you were referring to? A movement that was roughly based around "defund the police" for some people that I did not agree with? It isn't that I don't remember it. I didn't understand the connection you were making. Settle down junior!!

I have zero idea what you are talking about

Who did I hail? I'm glad though you got to stump for your Russian loving boy again.

You are a strange person.

Nope- I've stayed on my course- I think this policy is a good compromise to cover all bases. I'm not for minors to get sex change operations. You all can argue into whatever realm you want to with that

You seem to be drifting towards "I want people to be the way I want them to be." That is not going to get us anywhere

The percentage is small. I disagree that it affects a large portion of the population. Also, they aren't necessarily mentally ill. But even if they are- gender affirming care is about mental help as well. We should allow that. But either way- Let's get back to the main point of the thread though- This is a good policy and covers a lot of bases. Good on the LPGA for this

Let's get back to the main point of the thread though- This is a good policy and covers a lot of bases. Good on the LPGA for this

- Of course no court hears every case. They are still just doing their job of hearing cases. Transgender is a big picture thing right now because of the amount of oxygen it is given. So they are hearing it and will vote it down. The system works. - Are you on the left? Because you said this: "I'm fascinated that you think it's a nothingburger that SCOTUS is considering making it a constitutional right for minors to get irreversible sex change operations. "......you only singled out one aspect of gender affirming care- notably it is the one aspect that is the most controversial. But I'm glad to see that you are agreeing that the people who want to make it solely about sex changes- both right and left- are dopes.

Good addition to the discussion at hand. Hope you didn't hurt any brain cells.

I just want more rock and jock rules in my sports. There should be a golden football that you can put into play that scores you like 12 points on a touchdown

Imagine this guy is a military man, he bitches incessantly about being a real man, and how wimpy people in the political realm are.....and then he has to have his mommy go on TV to vouch for him

That's the funniest part of this all.

How do you feel about his alias jbycho?

I look forward to the multiple times that a team sends their slugger up to the plate only for them to roll one over to the shortstop to end the game.

It's not that I think it's a nothingburger. It's simply that I think the amount of time and oxygen we spend on this issue far outpaces the actual amount of people it affects. Yes a court case was brought and the Supreme Court is hearing it, but that's because what the Supreme Court is designed to do- here legal challenges and either uphold or oppose them. The larger point for me is- if you decided tomorrow that you wanted to go through surgery to make yourself a pelican I don't think we should spend a ton of time building laws around preventing avian/man combinations. Additionally it isn't just about sex change operations- gender affirming care can be mental support groups and the like. It isn't solely sex change operations despite what the media wants to reduce it to. And again all the people in here are doing is obfuscating from the point. I think the LPGA decision is about as good as you are going to get in this situation. They are basically saying "We only want women competing in these events" while building in one caveat that might allow like a very very minor population to be a part of it but gives them enough cover to say "Hey- we are being sensitive to transgender women." And that is what I was responding to in your post which is why I bolded it. How many people do you think will decide they want their boy to be a girl by the age of 8 because they really love golf? I 100% do take into account the naturally born females and I've understand the situation they are put in. That's why I love the statement the LPGA put out. I think they perfectly threaded the needle here on this to take everyone into consideration and build as fair a policy as possible in the current climate.

That's not a question. It's a statement of fact. All I can say is- yes there is a case going on. I've also said I think this stuff affects a small part of the population and to me personally- it's a waste of time. I don't agree with gender affirming care for minors and thus think this is all silly. So now my question I suppose.

So you agree it is silly to spend this much time on something that affects like a small miniscule fraction of the population? Good. Question for the people that apparently missed what I said- how many people do you think will be wanting to play golf for the life and be under 8?

Typical MAGA douche.....get presented with facts and try to deflect off of them. The articles state about COVID. The research done in the articles shows it. Not my fault you can't read.

You are a moron "Show me links cause I don't know how to use Google." "Here are some links" "No not links like that" Seriously- get fvcked

https://apnews.com/article/global-elections-2024-incumbents-defeated-c80fbd4e667de86fe08aac025b333f95 https://abcnews.go.com/538/democrats-incumbent-parties-lost-elections-world/story?id=115972068 Eat a diseased puzzy!

I would venture a guess that is probably less than a fraction of a fraction of a percent of the population. Like we are talking numbers that are in the single digits. I know the counter argument will be "well one is too many." To which I say- look if a parent allows their kid to do it, that's on them. Also, I don't think we need to be writing off people because of something maybe like 5 people will do.