3 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

False realities? This is legitimate debate and these are questions that are being discussed amongst all corners of society at this time. I suggest you take some time and explore the issue a little more detailed instead of reflexively falling back into your echo chamber.  The thing is, there are certainly a lot of questions on the subject.  You are trying to dismiss any alternative opinions and act as if the debate is settled because it suits your views when the reality of the situation is that it is far from settled (which is why you see legislatures taking up these issues. It is not because they want to hurt trans kids).   

 

This is not a legitimate debate. This is about a bunch of people who are weirded out that trans people exist trying to justify why they should be discriminated against and refused medical care. You act like "many people are saying" lends some legitimacy to your position, but it doesn't. This isn't a high school popularity contest. 

The questions you think are important have already been answered by people who know better. As I told Yabo, the existing system in place to handle people with gender dysphoria is not broken, is well-established, and it functions as intended. Kids with gender dysphoria are not getting handed out sex changes and they're not making decisions by themselves without professional and parental involvement. You think a bunch of random people who have no idea what they're talking about should have the right to step into all of that, inject their ignorance and make an already difficult situation even worse. I'm definitely going to have to continue to disagree with that. There is no legitimate debate to be had about how much you and people like you are hurting these people.

 

3 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

This is not just some issue that has been manufactured on the right to "stick to the libs" or in your mind "kill trans kids" which is the reflexive demagoguery that you tend to go to when you do not have a strong argument. You have essentially argued that I have pulled facts out of thin air with zero basis when in fact it is the opposite.

 

As I mentioned earlier, there is not a scientific consensus around gender affirming care worldwide. While the US is pushing the gender affirming care issue more forcefully, there has been strong pushback amongst the European medical community.

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2023-07-12/why-european-countries-are-rethinking-gender-affirming-care-for-minors

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2023/04/gender-affirming-care-debate-europe-dutch-protocol/673890/

 

We're talking about the US. For example, in your articles, one of the changes being implemented was more psychological care before the use of hormones. That's already done in the US. It sounds like parts of Europe are just getting closer to the system the US has long had, which again, functions extremely well. They are not, however, questioning the entire use of gender-affirming care for minors and young adults. The concensus is that gender-affirming care works, and polling of people who have received this care has consistently been overwhelmingly positive on the results. The only question is sometimes exactly what that care should entail on a case-by-case basis. The US system is very good at determing that. So no, these links do not support your case for bans, and none of the countries in question have banned gender-affirming care in the way that Republicans have or have promoted. 

 

3 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

So to take a position that the facts are settled and those who arguing against such proposals have zero basis in fact and science, is purely false. To dismiss any contrary opinion as just pulling facts out of thin air either demonstrates your own ignorance on the matter or your refusal to entertain any idea that is contrary to your perceived worldview.   

 

Again, the question is not about whether gender-affirming care works- it does- but exactly what that looks like for each individual and whether some nations- again, not the US- don't have enough checks in their own systems to ensure the best possible care and outcomes.

 

3 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

As I mentioned in my prior post, you have numerous medical professionals and experts in their field take the position that we should at least pause such treatments until we study them further and get a better understanding of them.  Just because this may "benefit" the Republican position that such gender affirming care may harm children does not mean it should be dismissed as false science, as you tend to do. At the very minimum, it should be considered and discussed in open debate and studied further. 

 

Except your own supposed evidence doesn't support the Republican position, so maybe you should go back to the drawing board on how you can justify harming trans people. There are legitimate parts of all this that can be debated, but not whether gender-affirming care itself should be banned. 

 

3 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Regarding the sports issue, where there are bans of males not being able to participate in female sports (i.e. Leia Thomas). The international track community and other international sports organizations have recognized that trans athletes must participate in the division that conforms to their biological sex. 

https://www.npr.org/2023/03/24/1165795462/transgender-track-and-field-athletes-cant-compete-in-womens-international-events#:~:text=World Athletics Council%2C the governing,through puberty as a male.

 

The World Athletics Council are not medical professionals. They are, like most people, simply reacting to political and social pressure from people who don't have any real understanding of the issue. First of all, there are very few trans athletes to begin with. In Ohio, I believe only 7 exist in middle or high school sports this season. Most schools and many districts have never had a single one, and it's not much more common at the professional level. Second, the few trans that exist in sports lose all the time in competitions. We hear all the time about when they win because that feeds into the narrative of competitions and the dreams of cis girls being destroyed left and right by the trans cabal, but trans women also just regularly lose. Third, the entire concept of "competitive advantage" is arbitrarily applied to begin with. Even among the cis population, there can be and are vast physical differences between individual competitors. Men can beat women, women can beat men. There was just a video that anti-trans people hated showing a professional female athlete easily beating a man in a race. Michael Phelps had a body that was much more physically built for swimming than his competitors, and he certainly was incredibly dominant. No one cared, but Leia Thomas has become the demon of women's swimming and part of the rallying cry against trans competitors. How we view competitive advantage is incredibly biased against trans people. If they don't lose 100% of the time, it means that they're destroying the sport, but we revere every cis athlete who far exceeded their own competitors. 

 

3 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

So again, there really is not yet a consensus around the sports issue (but I would contend that in this case, consensus is moving in favor of keeping biological males out of women's sports) so to dismiss the debate as settled is again a false premise. 

 

People being terrible and discriminatory against a minority is hardly new territory, especially on the conservative side of things. I expect that, in the future, this will be viewed no differently from all the other forms of bigotry you all once championed- well, still do in most cases.

 

3 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

You apparently cannot defend your position if you can't answer a simple question to try and get me to understand where you are coming from and find even a shred of common ground.  To address this, I have never advocated for bans on medical treatments. However, I do feel that reasonable restrictions on such treatments for minors are appropriate and does not affect the rights on privacy, liberty and happiness. For one, minors do not have the same rights under the Constitution that adults do. Even the most conservative Republicans do not argue that the procedure should be outlawed for a consenting adult. This is solely about minors who do not have the capacity under the law to make such decisions. There is a big difference. 

 

You say you haven't advocated for bans, but you sure do spend a lot of time arguing with me and others in favor of them and defending them from criticism, so forgive me if I think this is some classic gaslighting from you. 

 

Minors aren't making these decisions. How many times does this need to be repeated for you to stop making this dishonest argument? Minors are not walking into clinics demanding hormones and surgeries. They cannot even if they wanted to. No one is suggesting they should be allowed to do this, and that's not how the existing system works to handle gender dysphoria cases. The fact that you continuously engage in this type of false reality despite repeatedly being corrected just shows me you're not arguing in good faith.

 

3 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

I have never asked you to change my mind, nor do I expect to change your mind, but I do want to better understand your position and maybe see where I may have misunderstood the argument along the way. Neither of us are going to change our positions, but that does not mean that discussion cant lead to some common ground that may help understand the other better. 

 

There is no common ground here and there will not ever be any common ground so long as you continue to peddle discrimination under the guise of reasonable debate. You always trot out this stuff about "just trying to understand", but I've seen this way too many times to know how disingenuous it really is. Reason would support a system that allows parents and medical professionals to make decisions on what is best for a child with gender dysphoria, not the ignorant views of politicians or the public. Until you can understand that, we have nothing to agree on.

 

Edited January 12, 20241 yr by jonoh81

2 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Right wrong or indifferent, when it comes to children and minors, the government has always exercised influence in their decisions. There are laws that prevent children from buying and drinking beer, there are rules that prohibit minors from buying cigarettes. If a 7 year old was smoking cigarettes with her parents, you better believe the government and child protective services would be involved.  

 

So as much as the parties like to scream 100% parental rights whenever convenient, that has never been the case nor never will be. So at least recognizing that paradigm and the fact that children will always be treated as a different class than adults you have to give the benefit of the doubt to the fact that each side is relying on its own data and medical experts to do what they think is appropriate to protect children.  A blanket statement about Republicans not trusting medical experts is a completely false premise. They may not be trusting the "medical experts" that you would want to rely on, but that does not mean there are not "medical experts" who are qualified to provide a different opinion on an issue.  When it comes to the current debate, to claim that the "science is settled" on the matter is only just a method to close off legitimate discussion under a false and flawed pretense.

Drinking and smoking by minors was an actual problem with widespread legal availability of alcohol and cigarettes.  Is this a problem with counseling teens on sexual dysphoria?  No. So why is this legislation needed?  It's not.  That's what makes it overreaching and intrusive and unnecessary -- and yes, cruel, because you're denying someone medical care because you don't trust the medical profession (which to date has been handling this issue just fine).

 

And yes, Republicans do not trust experts.  They don't trust climate experts, they don't trust medical experts (COVID example), they didn't trust the nuclear inspectors in Iraq!  It's hard to not make a blanket statement on that issue when there are so few (none?) recent examples where Republicans "followed the science," so to say. 

 

Doctors are not routinely prescribing drugs to teens or performing surgery on teens without psychiatric counseling and careful consideration of all the unknowns and potential harms from gender-affirming drugs.  The only reason then to criminalize something that isn't happening would be because you don't trust the doctors to keep doing what their medical expertise tells them to do.

1 hour ago, jonoh81 said:

This is not a legitimate debate. This is about a bunch of people who are weirded out that trans people exist trying to justify why they should be discriminated against and refused medical care. You act like "many people are saying" lends some legitimacy to your position, but it doesn't. This isn't a high school popularity contest.

that is your go to statement to try and shut down debate when you do not have the answer. I am not acting like people "saying". There are legitimate medical organizations questioning this. Clearly, despite your wishing otherwise, the debate is not settled on the matter, as demonstrated by many doctors, scientists, and athletic councils. 

 

1 hour ago, jonoh81 said:

The questions you think are important have already been answered by people who know better. As I told Yabo, the existing system in place to handle people with gender dysphoria is not broken, is well-established, and it functions as intended. Kids with gender dysphoria are not getting handed out sex changes and they're not making decisions by themselves without professional and parental involvement. You think a bunch of random people who have no idea what they're talking about should have the right to step into all of that, inject their ignorance and make an already difficult situation even worse

You always discount any expert that may disagree with your opinion. An MD, DO,  PHD, etc that agrees with you is obviously the gold standard whereas an MD, PHD, DO, etc. who disagrees with your viewpoint is obviously a hack who does not know anything about anything.  These are not random people coming to their opinions, there are many medical professionals aligning on both sides of the issue. This issue clearly has a long way to play out.  The fact that you get so upset about this is curious to me since nobody who desires to transition is stopped from doing so in the United States. The only thing the law is urging is a little prudence on the issue, which in the grand scheme of things, prudence is not necessarily a bad thing. 

 

1 hour ago, jonoh81 said:

e're talking about the US. For example, in your articles, one of the changes being implemented was more psychological care before the use of hormones. That's already done in the US. It sounds like parts of Europe are just getting closer to the system the US has long had, which again, functions extremely well. They are not, however, questioning the entire use of gender-affirming care for minors and young adults. The concensus is that gender-affirming care works, and polling of people who have received this care has consistently been overwhelmingly positive on the results. The only question is sometimes exactly what that care should entail on a case-by-case basis. The US system is very good at determing that. So no, these links do not support your case for bans, and none of the countries in question have banned gender-affirming care in the way that Republicans have or have promoted. 

Really??? 

"From puberty blockers to cross-sex hormones to surgery, the rules across Europe tend to be either stricter than many jurisdictions in the U.S. or in the process of tightening. For example, Sweden’s National Board of Health and Welfare states children should not receive puberty blockers outside clinical trials, and they must be at least 12." This is not the case in the US. 

You point to consensus to try and shut out dissent, when in reality there is no consensus and it is nowhere near consensus. If you were talking about taking the measles vaccine, then you can argue there is consensus amongst experts (even though there will always be a few outliers), but when you are talking about gender affirming care, there is no consensus and to assert as much you are just making things up. 

1 hour ago, jonoh81 said:

Except your own supposed evidence doesn't support the Republican position, so maybe you should go back to the drawing board on how you can justify harming trans people. There are legitimate parts of all this that can be debated, but not whether gender-affirming care itself should be banned. 

I have never argued that you should harm trans-people. You somehow have manufactured that idea or concept in your head. Also, nobody has argued that sex transitions and gender affirming care should be banned, the only argument is how it should be handled when it comes to minors. There is a big difference there. 

 

1 hour ago, jonoh81 said:

The World Athletics Council are not medical professionals. They are, like most people, simply reacting to political and social pressure from people who don't have any real understanding of the issue. First of all, there are very few trans athletes to begin with. In Ohio, I believe only 7 exist in middle or high school sports this season. Most schools and many districts have never had a single one, and it's not much more common at the professional level. Second, the few trans that exist in sports lose all the time in competitions. We hear all the time about when they win because that feeds into the narrative of competitions and the dreams of cis girls being destroyed left and right by the trans cabal, but trans women also just regularly lose. Third, the entire concept of "competitive advantage" is arbitrarily applied to begin with. Even among the cis population, there can be and are vast physical differences between individual competitors. Men can beat women, women can beat men. There was just a video that anti-trans people hated showing a professional female athlete easily beating a man in a race. Michael Phelps had a body that was much more physically built for swimming than his competitors, and he certainly was incredibly dominant. No one cared, but Leia Thomas has become the demon of women's swimming and part of the rallying cry against trans competitors. How we view competitive advantage is incredibly biased against trans people. If they don't lose 100% of the time, it means that they're destroying the sport, but we revere every cis athlete who far exceeded their own competitors. 

whoa boy. This one is waay out there. 

The World Athletics Council may not be medical professionals, but they certainly are advised by medical professionals when they make such decisions. Let's keep that in mind.

 

Your point here is absurd and you want to have it both ways.  On one hand, you argue that this should not be an issue because there are only like 7 trans kids and it really does not affect anyone or it is not happening. If that is the case, then such a ban is a waste of time and energy and nobody should be upset by it because it does not affect anyone. which I then ask you, why are you so upset about this if it does not affect anyone?? To your point, this is no different than the legislature passing a law banning Conestoga Wagons from driving at night. 

On the other hand you vigorously argue that people should be allowed to compete based on the gender they choose despite what their body is built like. People often cite Michael Phelps as the example of somoene with genetic characteristics that help him perform. This argument has been proven to be bunk. Without spending time delving into the details of Michael Phelps, the reason why he won so many gold medals had much more to do with his passion and work ethic than it ever did with his body composition. Whatever competitive advantage he was perceived to have cannot be compared to the competitive advantage that Leia Thomas had over the women swimmers that he competed against. 

Also, just because a female can beat a male in some cases is a false equivalency.  An elite female track star will beat an average male track competitor. However, if you stack elite female vs elite male, the female will not be able to compete. That is the issue. Leia Thomas was an average at best male swimmer. He was always a good swimmer, otherwise he would never have made the men's team in Division 1 college athletics. It was not until he dropped down to the female division that he was able to dominate. 

 

2 hours ago, jonoh81 said:

Minors aren't making these decisions. How many times does this need to be repeated for you to stop making this dishonest argument? Minors are not walking into clinics demanding hormones and surgeries. They cannot even if they wanted to. No one is suggesting they should be allowed to do this, and that's not how the existing system works to handle gender dysphoria cases. The fact that you continuously engage in this type of false reality despite repeatedly being corrected just shows me you're not arguing in good faith.

Again, another strawman argument. Of course minors are not making this on their own. Their parents and some medical professionals who are enabling them to do so are influencing these decisions.  The question that is up for debate and the question that you really refuse to directly engage on is solely about the transitioning of minors being a good idea or at least exercising a bit of prudence and pumping the breaks on this for a time until they are of legal majority and better informed to make such a life altering decision.  We all know that sometimes teenagers make rash decisions and do not always have the wisdom in the heat of the moment to decide the best course for them. Many parents, while having the authority, may not exercise it with their children for various reasons. Pumping the brakes and slowing it down to allow the individual to make an informed decision is not the worst thing in the world. I am sure you can agree that making an informed decision about such a procedure is always a good thing.

 

2 hours ago, jonoh81 said:

There is no common ground here and there will not ever be any common ground so long as you continue to peddle discrimination under the guise of reasonable debate. You always trot out this stuff about "just trying to understand", but I've seen this way too many times to know how disingenuous it really is. Reason would support a system that allows parents and medical professionals to make decisions on what is best for a child with gender dysphoria, not the ignorant views of politicians or the public. Until you can understand that, we have nothing to agree on.

So, if I understand you correctly, what you are essentially saying is:

until I or anyone agrees with your viewpoint 100%, that person is always wrong and is a bigot and racist? there is no use debating your position or even trying to find common ground because your position is 100% right and anything position that strays from your viewpoint is just wrong and God himself would cast such people  who disagree with you into the deepest depths of hell. --- I am glad that you have cleared that up. 

This is real short and real simple. The GOP enshrined this in the Ohio Constitution. Do they think their bill banning access to healthcare for LGBT Ohioans will stand up in court?

 

LGBTQ Leaders in Ohio React to Anti-Trans Legislation

 

Leaders of LGBTQ+ organizations held a virtual press conference on Thursday to decry Ohio’s anti-trans legislation and executive orders to restrict health care. 

 

The coalition of local and national leaders urged state legislators to reject government overreach in health regulations and warned that proposed measures to limit access to gender-affirming care would have “devastating impacts on healthcare practices in Ohio and nationwide.”   

 

Held the morning after the Ohio House voted to override Governor DeWine’s veto of HB 68, leaders did not hold back on their reactions. 

 

“Equality Ohio is disgusted by the actions of the Ohio House of Representatives” said Siobhan Boyd-Nelson, co-interim executive director of Equality Ohio. “They once again ignored the voices of hundreds of Ohioans who testified against the bill and the clear message from Ohio voters this November. They will do whatever is necessary and harm whoever is necessary to protect their power.”

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/lgbtq-leaders-in-ohio-react-to-anti-trans-legislation-tbf1/

 

Ohioans Speak Out Against Anti-Trans Legislation

 

Ohio transgender adults are deeply concerned Gov. Mike DeWine’s proposed administrative rules would make it harder for them to access gender-affirming care.  

 

DeWine announced two proposed rules earlier this month that would collect data on transgender medical care and modify the treatment of those with gender dysphoria, including requiring patients under 21 undergo six months of counseling before receiving more treatment.

 

“Anytime the government is telling its citizens what they can and cannot do with their own bodies, it sets a very, very, very dangerous precedent,” said Vincent-Natasha Gay, a transgender adult who lives in central Ohio.

 

The rules are just proposals at this point and have not gone into effect. Ohioans still have time to submit comments regarding the proposed rules.  

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/ohioans-speak-out-against-anti-trans-legislation-ocj1/

 

On 1/12/2024 at 11:50 AM, jonoh81 said:

  On 1/12/2024 at 8:03 AM, Brutus_buckeye said:

You apparently cannot defend your position if you can't answer a simple question to try and get me to understand where you are coming from and find even a shred of common ground.  To address this, I have never advocated for bans on medical treatments. However, I do feel that reasonable restrictions on such treatments for minors are appropriate and does not affect the rights on privacy, liberty and happiness. For one, minors do not have the same rights under the Constitution that adults do. Even the most conservative Republicans do not argue that the procedure should be outlawed for a consenting adult. This is solely about minors who do not have the capacity under the law to make such decisions. There is a big difference. 

 

https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/ohio-michigan-republicans-in-released

 

Ohio, Michigan Republicans In Released Audio: "Endgame" Is To Ban Trans Care "For Everyone"

 

You were saying?

On 1/27/2024 at 6:01 PM, jonoh81 said:

 

 

https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/ohio-michigan-republicans-in-released

 

Ohio, Michigan Republicans In Released Audio: "Endgame" Is To Ban Trans Care "For Everyone"

 

You were saying?

Do believe any yahoo who has a microphone? 

 

1 hour ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Do believe any yahoo who has a microphone? 

 

 

In five months when legislation is introduced you'll be telling us how great the legislation is that these people introduce to ban all trans care in the state. I've seen this play before.

1 hour ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Do believe any yahoo who has a microphone? 

 

“Any yahoo” being the Ohio Representative who sponsored the legislation that we are discussing. 

7 minutes ago, ryanlammi said:

 

In five months when legislation is introduced you'll be telling us how great the legislation is that these people introduce to ban all trans care in the state. I've seen this play before.

I doubt the legislature would have the power to do so. You have constitutional issues when you are talking about consenting adults. Even if there may be a few legislators who may want to have that happen, it just isnt going to happen.

4 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Do believe any yahoo who has a microphone? 

 

 

lol... this is just pathetic. Just admit you were wrong like an adult. Pretending like water isn't wet and Republicans aren't bigots is not a good look. 

 

5 hours ago, jonoh81 said:

 

lol... this is just pathetic. Just admit you were wrong like an adult. Pretending like water isn't wet and Republicans aren't bigots is not a good look. 

 

 

Expecting people to "admit they are wrong" is an attitude one would expect from a petulant teenager.  We've always been above that, here.

8 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

I doubt the legislature would have the power to do so. You have constitutional issues when you are talking about consenting adults. Even if there may be a few legislators who may want to have that happen, it just isnt going to happen.

 

To play devil's advocate... our GOP wing of the state legislature hasn't much cared or abided by what any court has to say about its work product

36 minutes ago, YABO713 said:

 

To play devil's advocate... our GOP wing of the state legislature hasn't much cared or abided by what any court has to say about its work product

 

Another consequence of the 50% referendum.   Push comes to shove, it's not that hard to change the state Constitution.

43 minutes ago, E Rocc said:

 

Another consequence of the 50% referendum.   Push comes to shove, it's not that hard to change the state Constitution.

... this received 74% of the vote... so respectfully, no. 

8 hours ago, jonoh81 said:

 

lol... this is just pathetic. Just admit you were wrong like an adult. Pretending like water isn't wet and Republicans aren't bigots is not a good look. 

 

Because you like to believe any conspiracy theory out there? Just because someone with an R behind their name says something stupid?

The problem is that you troll Reddit pages for any obscure quote from an irrelevant Republican and try and apply it across the board. "look what this person said, see they all think that way."   That is quite disingenuous on your end. 

3 hours ago, E Rocc said:

 

Expecting people to "admit they are wrong" is an attitude one would expect from a petulant teenager.  We've always been above that, here.

 

I think you've got that backwards. Admitting one is wrong when they are is a sign of emotional and intellectual maturity. Doubling down against the facts is not, and the facts are that at least some in the Ohio Republican Party want to ban all gender-affirming care for adults, which is contrary to the claim that it was always and only about kids. 

Edited January 29, 20241 yr by jonoh81

2 hours ago, YABO713 said:

 

To play devil's advocate... our GOP wing of the state legislature hasn't much cared or abided by what any court has to say about its work product

It is apples to oranges (assuming you are talking about the redistricting argument). Despite what some of the MAGA corner may feel about the courts, if a Federal Court would step in, I highly doubt a low level legislator would put up a strong fight. Look at that county clerk in KY a few years back who would not certify gay marriages. She wanted to play stupid games with a Federal Court order and found out the hard way what happens.

1 minute ago, jonoh81 said:

 

I think you've got that backwards. Admitting one is wrong when they are is a sign of emotional and intellectual maturity. Doubling down against the facts is not, and the facts are that at least some in the Ohio Republican Party want to ban all gender-affirming care for adults, which is contrary to the claim that it was always and only about kids. 

I admit when I am wrong. There are idiots in both parties who propose stupid laws and often Unconstitutional proposals  (See AOC for example). I do not doubt that you have a few outlier Republicans who may want to ban all gender affirming care. If you read what I said, I was not disputing the garbage you posted. What I was disputing is that you take some outlier comment like that and act like it is the true official policy of the entire party and that the entire party thinks that way.  

That is why you are being disingenuous. 

6 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

It is apples to oranges (assuming you are talking about the redistricting argument). Despite what some of the MAGA corner may feel about the courts, if a Federal Court would step in, I highly doubt a low level legislator would put up a strong fight. Look at that county clerk in KY a few years back who would not certify gay marriages. She wanted to play stupid games with a Federal Court order and found out the hard way what happens.

 

Texas is directly defying the Border Control and the US Supreme Court and just about every Republican governor is supporting Texas. 

 

The same guy who wrote the bill banning all trans care for minors is on this call. This isn't a fringe group. This is the modern Republican party. And the next governor is going to be a MAGA lunatic. So they're not going to need a veto proof majority to pass a similar bill that bans trans care for everyone in the state.

 

But you can keep pretending you believe in the individual rights up until a bill blocking rights for individuals you don't like is introduced, and then it's more nuanced and actually a good thing.

6 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Because you like to believe any conspiracy theory out there? Just because someone with an R behind their name says something stupid?

The problem is that you troll Reddit pages for any obscure quote from an irrelevant Republican and try and apply it across the board. "look what this person said, see they all think that way."   That is quite disingenuous on your end. 

 

Sorry, what is the conspiracy theory you're talking about? These were Ohio and Michigan state representatives saying this, not random people. The entire Ohio GOP has shown complete willingness to harm trans people overall, so on what basis have they earned the benefit of the doubt when some of them are giving up the whole game plan? 

 

 

4 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

I admit when I am wrong. There are idiots in both parties who propose stupid laws and often Unconstitutional proposals  (See AOC for example). I do not doubt that you have a few outlier Republicans who may want to ban all gender affirming care. If you read what I said, I was not disputing the garbage you posted. What I was disputing is that you take some outlier comment like that and act like it is the true official policy of the entire party and that the entire party thinks that way.  

That is why you are being disingenuous. 

 

Immediately trying to turn this into another "both sides" post is about what I expected. 

 

On what basis should we believe that the views expressed on the link are outliers within the Ohio GOP after they just happily celebrated trashing care for trans kids and DeWine is going after adult care? I'm not just using their words, I'm using their actions.

2 minutes ago, ryanlammi said:

Texas is directly defying the Border Control and the US Supreme Court and just about every Republican governor is supporting Texas. 

 

Understand that Texas "defying" the Federal order is a stage show. When push comes to shove he backs down. The problem is that the Biden Admin has mishandled this in such a way that it allows the TX governor to turn it into a political issue at very minimal risk/cost to him while highlighting the lack of action at the border. It is mismanagement of the message by the Feds is all that is. 

 

4 minutes ago, ryanlammi said:

The same guy who wrote the bill banning all trans care for minors is on this call. This isn't a fringe group. This is the modern Republican party. And the next governor is going to be a MAGA lunatic. So they're not going to need a veto proof majority to pass a similar bill that bans trans care for everyone in the state.

1) That is speculation on who the new governor is. THat is still 3 years away, so you do not know. 

2) There are people who may push ideas and create policy that may generate appeal to a specific base but not really have a chance at being enacted. 

 

Regardless what a certain small subsection of people may think, that does not equal law. You still need to create a majority, and the majority of the Republican caucus would not be behind such a proposal right now.  

3 minutes ago, jonoh81 said:

 

Immediately trying to turn this into another "both sides" post is about what I expected. 

 

On what basis should we believe that the views expressed on the link are outliers within the Ohio GOP after they just happily celebrated trashing care for trans kids and DeWine is going after adult care? I'm not just using their words, I'm using their actions.

When you believe every conspiracy theory because the person saying it may have an R behind their name, that is your issue. I get you are bias, but the outright hatred you have for anyone who may consider themselves and have different political viewpoints from yours is pretty sad, and you seem unable to recognize that. 

 

Do not look at laws aimed at protecting children as the same as those limiting adults ability to make such a decision. While there are certainly a few outliers in the GOP caucus that may have concerns about the mental health of individuals who identify as trans, the majority of the sentiment is more libertarian on that issue when it comes to adults. There is a big difference between adult care and minors when it comes to the law and you need to understand those nuances

13 minutes ago, jonoh81 said:

 

Sorry, what is the conspiracy theory you're talking about? These were Ohio and Michigan state representatives saying this, not random people. The entire Ohio GOP has shown complete willingness to harm trans people overall, so on what basis have they earned the benefit of the doubt when some of them are giving up the whole game plan? 

 

 

The conspiracy theory is that you turn a comment from a small fringe and act like everyone who has an R behind their name is guilty of the same ideas by association. You do this all the time. There is a wide diversity of thought in the GOP caucus. Ideas are floated all the time there, just like they are in the Dem caucus. What you tend to do is conflate one small subsection group with the entire organization and act like somehow the entire group is subhuman in your views.  It allows you to easily discriminate and certainly you can see that you have a lot of anger and hatred toward an entire group, even when you do not know their views, it is only by some association you feel they have with some fringe poster on Reddit. 

21 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

The conspiracy theory is that you turn a comment from a small fringe and act like everyone who has an R behind their name is guilty of the same ideas by association. You do this all the time. There is a wide diversity of thought in the GOP caucus. Ideas are floated all the time there, just like they are in the Dem caucus. What you tend to do is conflate one small subsection group with the entire organization and act like somehow the entire group is subhuman in your views.  It allows you to easily discriminate and certainly you can see that you have a lot of anger and hatred toward an entire group, even when you do not know their views, it is only by some association you feel they have with some fringe poster on Reddit. 

For over 40 years, the Conservative Propaganda Machine has educated their followers in the most moronic political beliefs, and have encouraged the worst behavior. Now the Republican party is being led by a second generation who grew up ingesting that propaganda, and you believe it all. The only ones smart enough to not believe it are using the party as a platform for corruption and treason. It's no wonder that the GOP is completely falling apart, and threatening to take the nation with them.

Edited January 29, 20241 yr by Clefan98

Just now, Clefan98 said:

For over 40 years, the Conservative Propaganda Machine has educated their followers in the most moronic political beliefs, and have encouraged the worst behavior. Now the Republican party is being led by a second generation who grew up ingesting that propaganda, and they believe it all. The only ones smart enough to not believe it are using the party as a platform for corruption and treason. It's no wonder that their party is completely falling apart, and threatening to take the nation with them.

and you could make the exact same statement about the progressive base too.

 

Just now, Brutus_buckeye said:

and you could make the exact same statement about the progressive base too.

 

 

No you can't.

We already saw the destruction of the Republican party. It's gone. MAGA are just wearing the carcass of the GOP for brand recognition.

 

The GOP had been getting in bed with christofascist extremists for years...Trump just finally let them be ok with being the most outwardly vile, ignorant and repulsive people they could be. It had been culminating for years, and 2016 was simply the final nail in that coffin.

 

MTG, Gaetz, Bobo, Hawley, Lake...? Those aren't weights slowly dragging the GOP down. We're not witnessing the slow sinking of that ship. They're the norm. They are the ship now.

 

However you feel about the GOP, we need to let that go. Cuz there's no GOP anymore. They're just trying to fly a GOP banner because saying "MAGA Nazis" isn't as palatable.

 

Edited January 29, 20241 yr by Clefan98

3 minutes ago, Clefan98 said:

 

No you can't.

Then you are obviously not paying attention.

If you want examples, look to the push to EV's that is pushed by the left when infrastructure is not there.

Look to plastic bag bans that cause more pollution and higher prices that you would have otherwise had without them 

Look to many of the nonsensical economic proposals by those in the progressive camp (not not democrats) tend to propose with no basis on economic reality. 

 

There are a lot more. But when you make such an empty statement like that, you can easily apply it to progressives too.

 

Yes, there are a number of idiots on the far right flank who are detached from reality. There are just as many idiots on the left flank just as much attached from reality. You have a lot of people in the moderate middle on both sides of the spectrum who often have the workable ideas but they both are getting shouted down and shut out by the lunatic fringe on both ends of the political spectrum.

These are conversations largely about national politics. Certain individuals are banned from participating in these topics for trolling, so if you want to keep the conversation going about Republican party in general, please move it there. This is only about Ohio LGBTQ topics, so let's leave it there.

4 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

When you believe every conspiracy theory because the person saying it may have an R behind their name, that is your issue. I get you are bias, but the outright hatred you have for anyone who may consider themselves and have different political viewpoints from yours is pretty sad, and you seem unable to recognize that. 

 

Do not look at laws aimed at protecting children as the same as those limiting adults ability to make such a decision. While there are certainly a few outliers in the GOP caucus that may have concerns about the mental health of individuals who identify as trans, the majority of the sentiment is more libertarian on that issue when it comes to adults. There is a big difference between adult care and minors when it comes to the law and you need to understand those nuances

 

Again, what conspiracy theory are you referring to? I don't think you're using that term correctly, as it implies a fantastical, illogical or irrational claim without supportable evidence, and I'm not sure how that applies here whatsoever. The claim is certainly not irrational, fantastical or illogical as we have seen Republicans go after trans care and people repeatedly, both in rhetoric and actual legislation, and it is therefore a reasonable expectation to expect them to continue that pattern. This is especially true when they literally claim they will. 

 

Those laws don't protect children, though, as they were never in danger to begin with. We've been over this multiple times. 

Also, why should we expect Republicans to not go after adult care when they have repeatedly enacted legislation that goes against adults making their own decisions, such as on abortion, marijuana, voting, etc.?

 

 

2 minutes ago, jonoh81 said:

The claim is certainly not irrational, fantastical or illogical as we have seen Republicans go after trans care and people repeatedly, both in rhetoric and actual legislation, and it is therefore a reasonable expectation to expect them to continue that pattern. This is especially true when they literally claim they will. 

It is illogical and irrational on your end because 1) you take a statement of someone who is pretty right wing made somewhere on the internet and 2) you act like it is the stated policy of the Republican establishment when in fact that has never been the case. 3) you act as if the power brokers are secretly behind this and that there is the support to take such action when in fact, outside of may some small isolated corner, none exists. 

 

Just further playing this out to demonstrate how irrational this is, you need to have an idea that maybe a couple of fringe candidates may have be turned into a tangible policy that could garner a majority of support amongst all factions of the Republican Party and maybe some Democrats who may sign on to this.  Secondly, it would have to be written in such a way to pass legal muster. 

You have a blind spot, because in your mind all Republicans are the same, is that there are many competing factions within the party, same with the Democrats. You would need to create a policy that can get a majority of those to rally behind that would ban all transcare for adults who are of an age of consent. On top of that, you would have to not only ensure it complies with the Ohio Constitution, but also complies with the protections of the US Constitution to pass muster.

 

It is just not going to happen. Hence it is irrational to act as if there is any seriousness behind this. There is a key difference between policy designed to protect minors vs policy designed to protect consenting adults. 

Why is Brutus allowed to continue posting in this section of the forum? He clearly has zero interest in actually engaging in the conversation. He refuses to answer the very straightforward questions he is asked. He puts words in other’s mouths. He ignores every piece of evidence that doesn’t align with his priors.  He twists every argument into unsubstantiated “both-sides” nonsense. He bullies other forumers. He is very adapt in pushing things right up to the line but managing to stay just under the threshold for punishment. In what way do his comments contribute to anyone evolving their thinking about any of these topics?

 

This whole recent thread is prime example - he keeps pretending the intrusive, big-brother government policy proposals regarding trans adults are from some anonymous internet weirdos with no power, when they are in fact from the Ohio Rep that authored the most recent example of anti-trans legislation which is now law. 
 

And yes, I COULD just use forum tools to make it so I wouldn’t see his drivel, but then who would defend the people he attacks? I’m extremely thankful to the people who spend time pushing back on his nonsense - bad arguments should be challenged. But they shouldn’t have to waste their time with that. 

3 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

you act like it is the stated policy of the Republican establishment when in fact that has never been the case

 

You can keep lying all you want and keep making excuses for their attempt to overturn the election, constantly target trans kids through legislation across multiple states (as well as other members of the LGBTQ+ community), and ignore the will of the voters (Ohio’s Abortion Amendment and Recreational Marijuana)—but the reality is that these things are all happening and continue to happen. At this point your “both sides” schtick is just trolling and we all know you’re not discussing most (if any) topics in good faith. You’re either really committed to a bit, incredibly naive, or just dishonest.

 

Beautifully said, @Boomerang_Brian. If a user’s posting is considered to be too much trolling for the regular politics threads, why is it allowed here?

 

4 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

It is illogical and irrational on your end because 1) you take a statement of someone who is pretty right wing made somewhere on the internet and 2) you act like it is the stated policy of the Republican establishment when in fact that has never been the case. 3) you act as if the power brokers are secretly behind this and that there is the support to take such action when in fact, outside of may some small isolated corner, none exists. 

 

Just further playing this out to demonstrate how irrational this is, you need to have an idea that maybe a couple of fringe candidates may have be turned into a tangible policy that could garner a majority of support amongst all factions of the Republican Party and maybe some Democrats who may sign on to this.  Secondly, it would have to be written in such a way to pass legal muster. 

You have a blind spot, because in your mind all Republicans are the same, is that there are many competing factions within the party, same with the Democrats. You would need to create a policy that can get a majority of those to rally behind that would ban all transcare for adults who are of an age of consent. On top of that, you would have to not only ensure it complies with the Ohio Constitution, but also complies with the protections of the US Constitution to pass muster.

 

It is just not going to happen. Hence it is irrational to act as if there is any seriousness behind this. There is a key difference between policy designed to protect minors vs policy designed to protect consenting adults. 

 

You just keep repeating the same talking points.

I can't believe I gave you such an easy layup where you could just admit that there were, in fact, members of Republican leadership who do want to go after adult gender-affirming care, and to act like an empathetic human being just once and unequivocally state how you don't support that. You couldn't do it. Instead, you turned this into another long-winded defense and projection about how everyone else is just biased and delusional about Republicans despite them repeatedly showing us exactly who they are on this and endless other issues. How dare any of us question the sincerity of Republicans on LGBTQ+ issues. 

 

 

 

9 hours ago, jonoh81 said:

 

You just keep repeating the same talking points.

I can't believe I gave you such an easy layup where you could just admit that there were, in fact, members of Republican leadership who do want to go after adult gender-affirming care, and to act like an empathetic human being just once and unequivocally state how you don't support that. You couldn't do it. Instead, you turned this into another long-winded defense and projection about how everyone else is just biased and delusional about Republicans despite them repeatedly showing us exactly who they are on this and endless other issues. How dare any of us question the sincerity of Republicans on LGBTQ+ issues. 

 

 

 

what i said was that you get so caught up in what someone may say on a reddit or twitter feed when it has zero legs to actually create any policy from it and there is almost zero chance it could lead to substantive policy for a number of reasons I outlined above. I do not waste time on what some chucklehead thinks. He or she can think whatever they want.  You like to create guilt by association which is disingenuous on your end. You treat all Republicans as evil and that they all think alike. That is not the case, just like there are differing opinions in the Democratic caucus. 

 

My point was that finding something in a vacuum on the internet and applying it to all people of a group is disingenuous and wrong. It does not reflect the majority, it does not reflect actual policy positions of a group. It only reflects the opinions of a few chuckleheads. Until it turns into a tangible policy then it really is nothing.

 

14 hours ago, Gordon Bombay said:

 

You can keep lying all you want and keep making excuses for their attempt to overturn the election, constantly target trans kids through legislation across multiple states (as well as other members of the LGBTQ+ community), and ignore the will of the voters (Ohio’s Abortion Amendment and Recreational Marijuana)—but the reality is that these things are all happening and continue to happen. At this point your “both sides” schtick is just trolling and we all know you’re not discussing most (if any) topics in good faith. You’re either really committed to a bit, incredibly naive, or just dishonest.

 

Beautifully said, @Boomerang_Brian. If a user’s posting is considered to be too much trolling for the regular politics threads, why is it allowed here?

 

I have never been a troll. Despite what the mods may have thought in the politics thread, I have never trolled. While I may vehemently disagree in many areas and not back down, I do not troll people to get a rise out of them. Disagreement is not trolling. There is a difference. Brian seems to think that engaging in conversation and debate means agreeing with the majority of the forum's positions.  There is a difference. 

As to not get off topic anymore  on this matter, I am done defending myself on this issue.  

5 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

what i said was that you get so caught up in what someone may say on a reddit or twitter feed when it has zero legs to actually create any policy from it and there is almost zero chance it could lead to substantive policy for a number of reasons I outlined above. I do not waste time on what some chucklehead thinks. He or she can think whatever they want.  You like to create guilt by association which is disingenuous on your end. You treat all Republicans as evil and that they all think alike. That is not the case, just like there are differing opinions in the Democratic caucus. 

 

My point was that finding something in a vacuum on the internet and applying it to all people of a group is disingenuous and wrong. It does not reflect the majority, it does not reflect actual policy positions of a group. It only reflects the opinions of a few chuckleheads. Until it turns into a tangible policy then it really is nothing.

 

 

You're still doing it. 

 

I have no idea why you keep acting like actual Ohio representatives being recorded stating a goal on trans care is equivalent to an anonymous, random Reddit post. Oh wait, yes I do. At least we all know where you stand. 

42 minutes ago, jonoh81 said:

 

You're still doing it. 

 

I have no idea why you keep acting like actual Ohio representatives being recorded stating a goal on trans care is equivalent to an anonymous, random Reddit post. Oh wait, yes I do. At least we all know where you stand. 

As usual, you again know nothing of what you are talking about. 

3 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

As usual, you again know nothing of what you are talking about. 

 

Did you actually read the original article though? Because it is fairly hard to argue that its just some Republican back benchers that aren't guiding legislation or policy when you see some of the individuals who were included in the discussion. And you can say that the legislature wont go to this extent, but they did just overwhelmingly override a veto from a member of their own party, even after he signed executive orders as a compromise but it wasn't enough for the Republican legislature. So all signs are pointing towards this being where the Ohio Republican legislature is headed. 

 

And I will make this super simple for you. Here is the relevant section. I'll even bold it for you. You're welcome in advance. 

Quote

The discussion was hosted by Michigan state Rep. Brad Paquette (R-Niles) on the X social media platform and included Michigan Reps. Josh Schriver (R-Oxford) and Tom Kunse (R-Clare) as well as state Sens. Lana Theis (R-Brighton) and Jonathan Lindsey (R-Coldwater). Also featured was Ohio state Rep. Gary Click, sponsor of that state’s ban on gender affirming care, and anti-trans activist Prisha Mosley of Michigan.

 

https://ohiocapitaljournal.com/2024/01/29/michigan-and-ohio-gop-legislators-discuss-endgame-of-banning-all-trans-health-care/

DeWine Releases Updated Transgender Healthcare Rules

 

Adults wouldn’t have restricted access to transgender health care and transgender youth wouldn’t need to get medical consent from a bioethicist before starting treatment, according to Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine’s revised proposed administrative rules on transgender care. 

 

The Ohio Department of Health released the new proposed administrative rules last Wednesday after reviewing the thousands of submitted comments. DeWine laid out the original proposed rules on Jan.5 — a week after vetoing a bill that would ban gender-affirming care for trans youth.  

 

“Clarifying that these draft rules are not applicable to adult care was of critical importance and will be a massive relief to thousands of transgender people receiving care in Ohio who have spent the last few weeks scrambling to make contingency plans in case their care is cut off,” Equality Ohio Co-Interim Executive Director Siobhan Boyd-Nelson said in a statement.

 

“However, we continue to have deep reservations regarding the remaining provisions, and we maintain that the best course of action would be for both agencies to rescind the draft rules in their entirety.”

 

The revised rules have been submitted to the Common Sense Initiative (CSI) Office for review. People can submit comments on the revised rules by emailing [email protected] or [email protected] by Wednesday at 5 p.m. 

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/dewine-releases-updated-transgender-healthcare-rules-ocj1/

Lawsuit Filed by ACLU of Ohio Against Gender-Affirming Care Ban

 

The ACLU of Ohio and global law firm Goodwin have filed a lawsuit against part of a new law that bans gender-affirming care for transgender minors.

 

The lawsuit was filed last Tuesday in the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas on behalf of two families whose 12-year-old transgender daughters would lose access to gender-affirming health care. The lawsuit asks that the court strikes down the portion of House Bill 68 that prevents gender-affirming care before it goes into effect April 24.

 

The plaintiffs are asking the court to issue a temporary restraining order to stop HB 68 from taking effect and to declare the gender-affirming care ban unconstitutional.

 

“The ban on gender-affirming care will cause severe harm to transgender youth,” Freda Levenson, ACLU of Ohio’s legal director said in a statement. “These personal, private medical decisions should remain between families and doctors; they don’t belong to politicians. We will fight in court to ensure that trans youth and their parents can access critically important, lifesaving healthcare without government intrusion.”

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/lawsuit-filed-by-aclu-of-ohio-against-gender-affirming-care-ban-ocj1/

AG Dave Yost Fights to Keep Anti-Trans Laws in Ohio

 

Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost sued the U.S. Department of Education this week over recent changes to Title IX, the law that prohibits sex-based discrimination in schools.

 

The U.S. Department of Education released the new rules April 19 which will offer increased protections to LGBTQ+ students and staff. They are set to take effect Aug. 1 and will offer protections from discrimination based on gender identity and harassment protections for pregnant women and student parents.

 

“This regulation turns the statute upside down,” Yost said in a statement. “Title IX was meant to protect equal opportunity for women. This new rule says there are no opportunities that are exclusively for women and men who identify as women can use the programs and facilities designed for women.”

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/ag-dave-yost-fights-to-keep-anti-trans-laws-in-ohio-ocj1/

Courts Block A.G. Yost’s Anti-Transgender Healthcare Ban

 

The Republican dominated Supreme Court of Ohio has rejected a request by Republican Attorney General Dave Yost to immediately institute Ohio’s ban on gender-affirming healthcare and transgender female athletes.

 

Such writs are only “granted in limited circumstances with great caution and restraint.”

 

Yost had asked the Court to reverse the temporary restraining order by Franklin County Court of Common Pleas Judge Michael J. Holbrook, who ruled on April 16 that HB 68 violated Ohio’s “one-subject rule.”

 

“This Court is not able to discern the ‘primary’ subject of the bill,” Holbrook wrote in his decision about the bill addressing both healthcare and athletics. “The very title of the Act references two subjects.”

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/courts-block-a-g-yosts-anti-transgender-healthcare-ban-tbf1/

 

Transgender Candidates on Ohio Ballots Face Deadnaming Requirement on Petitions

 

Two candidates will appear on Ohioans’ ballots this November under the names they use in daily life but weren’t born with. Arienne Childrey and Bobbie Arnold, both trans women, went through the process to legally change their name, but an obscure provision in Ohio law requires them to list any prior names on their candidate petitions.

 

Although both candidates are Democrats running in safe Republican districts, their story highlights a blindspot in state law. The candidate declaration form makes no mention of the requirement. It leaves no space for previous names either. Meanwhile, for many people who transition, shedding their so-called “deadname” is both an affirmation of who they have become, and a way to protect their mental and physical health.

 

The incident has prompted competing legislative fixes. One measure, sponsored by Childrey and Arnold’s Republican opponents this November, would make protests easier by allowing voters of any party to challenge a person’s candidacy. Another, backed by Democrats, would create an exemption for candidates who changed their legal name through an Ohio court.

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/transgender-candidates-on-ohio-ballots-face-deadnaming-requirement-on-petitions-ocj1/

 

Advocacy Group Wants Equal Rights Amendment on Ohio Ballot, But Not This Year

 

A new committee is trying to get an equal rights amendment enshrined in the Ohio Constitution.

 

Ohio Equal Rights is in the early stages of trying to create a citizen-led ballot initiative that would constitutionally protect Ohioans from discrimination based on race, color, creed or religion, pregnancy status, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, age, genetic information, recovery status, familial status, military status, ancestry, national origin or disability. 

 

“Ohio currently lacks nondiscrimination policies in its Constitution, relying instead on legislation from an often unreliable legislature,” Ohio Equal Rights said on their website. “Recently, the LGBTQ+ community has faced significant discriminatory legislation with no statewide laws for their protection.”

 

The proposed amendment Equality of Rights Under the Law would also extend equal rights protections to marriage. 

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/advocacy-group-wants-equal-rights-amedment-on-ohio-ballot-but-not-this-year-ocj1/

 

🙄

Ohio’s Bathroom-Obsessed Republicans Pass Another Anti-Trans Bill Last Week

 

The Ohio House passed a bill late Wednesday night amid its last session before going on summer break that would ban transgender students from using the bathroom and locker rooms that match up with their gender identity.

 

House Bill 183 was added to Senate Bill 104 as an amendment on the House floor Wednesday night, then S.B. 104 passed as amended with a 60-31 vote. All House Democrats who were present voted against the bill. Republicans Jamie Callender and Gayle Manning also voted against the bill. 

 

State Sen. Jerry Cirino, R-Kirtland, introduced Senate Bill 104, which revises the College Credit Plus Program.

 

The bill heads back to the Senate to concur, but the lawmakers are now on summer break.

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/ohios-bathroom-obsessed-republicans-pass-another-anti-trans-bill-last-week-ocj1/

13 minutes ago, ColDayMan said:

🙄

Ohio’s Bathroom-Obsessed Republicans Pass Another Anti-Trans Bill Last Week

 

The Ohio House passed a bill late Wednesday night amid its last session before going on summer break that would ban transgender students from using the bathroom and locker rooms that match up with their gender identity.

 

House Bill 183 was added to Senate Bill 104 as an amendment on the House floor Wednesday night, then S.B. 104 passed as amended with a 60-31 vote. All House Democrats who were present voted against the bill. Republicans Jamie Callender and Gayle Manning also voted against the bill. 

 

State Sen. Jerry Cirino, R-Kirtland, introduced Senate Bill 104, which revises the College Credit Plus Program.

 

The bill heads back to the Senate to concur, but the lawmakers are now on summer break.

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/ohios-bathroom-obsessed-republicans-pass-another-anti-trans-bill-last-week-ocj1/

 

I entered into the College Credit Plus program when I was in high school to try to escape the bullying for being LGT even in a West-side suburb of Cleveland, represented by Gayle Manning. Very surprised to see her go against this, but she and her son seem to be some the least ghoulish GOP state legislators.

 

My rough experiences delayed me coming fully to terms with my current LGB[T] identity. I'm almost impressed they thought to close this "loophole." So much effort just to actively worsen the lives of young Ohioans.

 

I'm so tired.