Thursday 11 December 2014

Why I haven't Blogged about Politics recently




First Dog On the Moon captures it exactly. Every Night Something Atrocious.

7 comments:

beneficii said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
beneficii said...

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/frc-spox-proposes-constitutional-amendment-ban-recognition-gender-reassignmenta

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to prohibit recognition of change of sex of non-intersex persons and to prohibit the use of funds or law to require the provision of sex change services.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the conventions of three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:

``Article--

``Section 1. A person who has XY chromosomes and is born with a phallus measuring at least one inch in length shall thereafter be recognized as male in all public documents and a person who has XX chromosomes and is born with a vulva shall thereafter be recognized as female in all public documents, regardless of any attempts to modify the appearance or function of any part of the body, whether by use of hormonal replacement therapy, genital surgery, or any other chemical or surgical process or procedure.

``Section 2. A person who does not meet either definition in the First Section of this Article shall have the sex determined according to law and medical practice.

``Section 3. No public funds shall be appropriated and nothing in this Constitution shall be construed to require public funds to be used to attempt a process or procedure to modify the appearance or function of any part of the body that is designed to imitate the opposite sex of a person meeting either the male or the female definition in the First Section of this Article, neither shall law or regulation be used to require the provision of funds of corporations or private businesses or persons, including insurance companies, for the same, except insofar as to enforce legal contracts between non-governmental parties."

Zoe Brain said...

As long as they pay for the karyotypes themselves, as well as serving the jail sentences for molesting newborns in order to measure their genitalia....

beneficii said...

Kosilek just lost:

https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2014/12/16/federal-appeals-court-overturns-ruling-ordering-sex-change-surgery-for-mass-prison-inmate/WqBuLuGI14yZ6nVoFCIfjK/story.html

The next step for her is applying for a writ of certiorari from the Supreme Court, but I don't see certiorari being granted. Kosilek will never undergo SRS.

Zoe Brain said...

It's worse than just that. Using this case as precedent, prison authoriries can shop around, and if they can find a single quack who says insulin isn't needed to treat diebetes, they can refuse to supply it.

Moreover, courts of appeal can now second-guess judges on the facts and review de-novo whenever they like.

As one dissent said - the verdict was decided before the trial.

beneficii said...

"It's worse than just that. Using this case as precedent, prison authoriries can shop around, and if they can find a single quack who says insulin isn't needed to treat diebetes, they can refuse to supply it."

Not really. What this case hinged on was whether the court-appointed expert witness considered the prison's expert's opinion to be as valid as though who ordered Kosilek's surgery. The court-appointed expert witness did consider prison expert's opinion to be as valid. In the eyes of the Court, that means there are multiple ways to deal with Kosilek's GID and the prison ultimately gets to choose.

Zoe Brain said...

In a case like this, one so severe, no, there is no other way.

The Court-appointed witness answered general questions about Gender Dysphoria, they never examined the patient.

It would be like asking an ENT specialist what the appropriate treatment for a sore throat would be - and getting a range of answers. From a salt gargle to surgery, depending.

Then the court ignoring the visible signs of oesophogeal cancer pointed out by the independant expert and favouring the opinion of the homeopath quack hired just to give the "salt gargle" opinion - which they do for all cases, regardless of circumstances.

Hence the dissent: if a prison authority doesn't want to give some particular treatment, they can go quack-shopping. Just don't let the court appointed physician examine the patient.