because theyre discriminating on the basis of their transgender status, which can be interpreted as sex/gender based discrimination, although that interpretation itself is something that will need to be ruled on by this case indirectly. Many states' laws including the one being challenged here do not equally apply to all people, only transgender people specifically, which under that interpretation would be unconstitutional.
Puberty blockers are allowed for precocious puberty, and if girls can access pb, males should be allowed the same. I don't think this argument will withstand scrutiny, but we will see what the court thinks.
@@ZacharyC2000 It is a funny argument since they are arguing it is unfair sex stereotyping to deny males the medicine to feminize themselves (i.e block male secondary characteristics), and yet this push for puberty blockers is based on obvious sex stereotyping. No one changes sex, in reality, it is just about "appearances." The underlying medical harm is serious, and they will deny it.
It's discriminating based on sex because if you were born male and identify as male, you can get puberty treatment that could make your voice lower or do other things that make you have puberty. However, if you were born a girl and identify as a boy, you can't get these medications. I believe that's discrimination.
Because the meds are not banned for both sexes but rather banned for the sex that the medication is deemed 'inconsistent'. That's at least the argument as I understand. So males can get testosterone still but females cannot. I assume some work vice versa
Tell me exactly why people cant wait until they are 18 or over to make these kinds of changes to their life. Minors brains are not developed enough to understand the pros and cons of making this kind of decision
Is this real life? How can the newest justice even vote on this..I was under the impression she didn’t know what a “woman” is and this lady is throwing that word around a lot. The world is laughing at us, justifiably.
This particular argument is just about the drugs. Clearly, when you can rebrand an old drug for a new use there is a potential for profit. Doctors in the USA are being sued over this but Im not aware of any pharmaceutical companies being held to account.
“Medical necessity” is so loose. There are medical doctors and mental health practitioners that make an absolute full career out of “affirming care”, and keeping kids sick. It’s ridiculous. Look how this nonsense caught fire just over the last 15 years. It’s terrible.
Yes, and they will talk about "heightened scrutiny," which I presume means a more rigorous process before recommending puberty blockers, and yet, in reality, as you point it, "affirming care" is just a corrupt system, and they hand out puberty blockers like candy.
A parent allows their minor child to smoke cigarettes,drink alcohol and drive,so then should the government say “ oh it’s ok then ,because the parents say it’s ok “ ? Just asking
She actually said to the judges that puberty blockers have no permanent effect on individuals that take them lol....wow.... Let's hope the judges have done some research or that the other side will correct the record on that subject.
Let kids be kids your Honor. Please for the future of the children. They need help, not affirmation. Investigate why some of these kids or their parents are pushing for destroying them.
Banning it for females and not males defines seems like sex discrimination to me. There is no chance if it wasn’t the other way around people in the west wouldn’t be throwing a shit fit and rightly so. Crazy mutilating males against their consent is seen as something acceptable.
Even as a biologically Jewish individual, I am actually against circumcision and neither of my sons are. Even by biblical standards, it’s outdated. Paul literally speaks about it in the NT. When my husband and I discussed it while trying for our first child, he actually likened it to the ridiculous gender surgeries.
Sx should be a discriminate determining factor in certain arenas. The medical arena is absolutely one where biological sx matters. Because bio sx speaks directly to how one needs to be medically treated in MANY instances.
@@dylansmith1833so should children be allowed to smoke cigarettes and drink alcohol if parents say it’s ok ,or does the government have the right to say “ no you can’t allow the kid to do those things because the kid isn’t mature enough “ 🤷♂️
@ if a child wants to smoke cigarettes drink alcohol and drive and gets support from their parents to do so,should then the children be allowed to do that 🤷♂️
1:56:34 I’m totally confused. Why does one statute have to cover every possible medical case? I thought the idea was to address wasn’t isn’t addressed elsewhere?
If there was recourse for people who have the surgery and take the drugs and then discover that they were not the opposite sex and have live long injuries who is responsible for the damage done to the minor?
Their parents, and then the state that allowed parents to make such a decision. The lawsuits we are starting to see are against doctors, arguing the child and parents were not sufficiently apprised of the risks, ie could not provide informed consent. I’m not sure there have been any filed against parents yet - likely because there is nothing to gain financially by doing so.
Because the Tennessee law bans the use of hormone treatments that differ from the sex of the recipient. Boys can't get estrogen and girls can't get testosterone, hence sex based.
This is easily resolved linguistically. Prohibit giving hormones that an individuals body would not produce on its own, recognizing that biological disfunction might interfere with the production of those chemicals.
I lost my uncle due to an aggressive cancer that was not "approved" in the us.. but was in China.. i think patient care is a tricky thing, but there should be guidelines, not lawmakers stopping medical..chemo can and will kill someone.. but it can also save... there can not be a complete ban on the drug...
That is indeed the goal of the bill at question. To not interfere with other treatments. Unfortunately the argument made would result in a total ban on the chemicals in question for minors.
@@nanetteparratto-wagner1127 Giving a drug to a boy, who has a medical condition; is in no way similar to denying a drug to a healthy child that will damage her body forever. What part of that seems hard to grasp?
Where is the sex discrimination. This is about idealogy about mental disorders. As far as when they brought up about sex discrimination on testosterone, it's a mute point because it is literally about to different things, so there no discrimination there.
![BLACK BAG - Official Trailer [HD] - Only in Theaters March 14](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Du0Xp8WX_7I/mqdefault.jpg)
How is it possible that this is in question? A child does NOT have the maturity and mental capacity to realize the decision he/she is making. WTH?
They need this ban to not go through....how else are they then going to convince us 5 years from now that minors can consent to sx with adults??
How are they discriminating based on sex when it’s banned for males and females under age 18.
because theyre discriminating on the basis of their transgender status, which can be interpreted as sex/gender based discrimination, although that interpretation itself is something that will need to be ruled on by this case indirectly. Many states' laws including the one being challenged here do not equally apply to all people, only transgender people specifically, which under that interpretation would be unconstitutional.
Puberty blockers are allowed for precocious puberty, and if girls can access pb, males should be allowed the same. I don't think this argument will withstand scrutiny, but we will see what the court thinks.
@@ZacharyC2000 It is a funny argument since they are arguing it is unfair sex stereotyping to deny males the medicine to feminize themselves (i.e block male secondary characteristics), and yet this push for puberty blockers is based on obvious sex stereotyping. No one changes sex, in reality, it is just about "appearances." The underlying medical harm is serious, and they will deny it.
It's discriminating based on sex because if you were born male and identify as male, you can get puberty treatment that could make your voice lower or do other things that make you have puberty. However, if you were born a girl and identify as a boy, you can't get these medications. I believe that's discrimination.
Because the meds are not banned for both sexes but rather banned for the sex that the medication is deemed 'inconsistent'. That's at least the argument as I understand. So males can get testosterone still but females cannot. I assume some work vice versa
It is absolutely laughable that this is even being discussed at the highest court in the country. What a joke we've become.
What's with this "assigned at birth" B.S.? You're either revealed to be a boy or a girl--not assigned those designations.
Tell me exactly why people cant wait until they are 18 or over to make these kinds of changes to their life. Minors brains are not developed enough to understand the pros and cons of making this kind of decision
Go get ‘em Judge Alito! Expose her lies.
Is this real life? How can the newest justice even vote on this..I was under the impression she didn’t know what a “woman” is and this lady is throwing that word around a lot. The world is laughing at us, justifiably.
Need to know who is funding those arguing for surgery!
This particular argument is just about the drugs. Clearly, when you can rebrand an old drug for a new use there is a potential for profit. Doctors in the USA are being sued over this but Im not aware of any pharmaceutical companies being held to account.
Why are they indulging in the newspeak of "assigned at birth" and "cis"??
They are already captured.
“Medical necessity” is so loose. There are medical doctors and mental health practitioners that make an absolute full career out of “affirming care”, and keeping kids sick. It’s ridiculous. Look how this nonsense caught fire just over the last 15 years. It’s terrible.
Yes, and they will talk about "heightened scrutiny," which I presume means a more rigorous process before recommending puberty blockers, and yet, in reality, as you point it, "affirming care" is just a corrupt system, and they hand out puberty blockers like candy.
A parent allows their minor child to smoke cigarettes,drink alcohol and drive,so then should the government say “ oh it’s ok then ,because the parents say it’s ok “ ?
Just asking
You have to start adding captions with names or annotating the corner with the name of the Justice who is speaking
Sex isn’t assigned at birth, it’s observed, full stop!
She actually said to the judges that puberty blockers have no permanent effect on individuals that take them lol....wow....
Let's hope the judges have done some research or that the other side will correct the record on that subject.
Wait till there adult
Let kids be kids your Honor. Please for the future of the children. They need help, not affirmation. Investigate why some of these kids or their parents are pushing for destroying them.
Stop the grooming of our children and destroying them in every way! Let them be kids!
I cannot see 81 comments
Switch to the category of newest
Google is hiding tons of comments
Click newest, not top
Must be the censors making sure we don't get offended.
Can't wait to hear what KBJ has to say about this when she can't even define what a woman is.
Ban circumcision for minors
Banning it for females and not males defines seems like sex discrimination to me. There is no chance if it wasn’t the other way around people in the west wouldn’t be throwing a shit fit and rightly so. Crazy mutilating males against their consent is seen as something acceptable.
Even as a biologically Jewish individual, I am actually against circumcision and neither of my sons are. Even by biblical standards, it’s outdated.
Paul literally speaks about it in the NT.
When my husband and I discussed it while trying for our first child, he actually likened it to the ridiculous gender surgeries.
Question: would giving testosterone to a male cause sterilization? Would it for a female?
Sx should be a discriminate determining factor in certain arenas. The medical arena is absolutely one where biological sx matters. Because bio sx speaks directly to how one needs to be medically treated in MANY instances.
Sotomayor should not be on that bench.
I am at work so I have to come back .I pray that this ban becomes Federal Please let kids be kids .🙏🙏🙏🙏
It’s NO ONE’S business except the child and their parents! This is yet again more governmental control
@dylansmith1833 Wrong, Trump by Executive Order will ban trans Surgery and prison any medical professional who violates it.
@@dylansmith1833so should children be allowed to smoke cigarettes and drink alcohol if parents say it’s ok ,or does the government have the right to say “ no you can’t allow the kid to do those things because the kid isn’t mature enough “ 🤷♂️
@ if a child wants to transition and gets support from their parents, then leave them alone. It’s no one else’s business!
@ if a child wants to smoke cigarettes drink alcohol and drive and gets support from their parents to do so,should then the children be allowed to do that 🤷♂️
1:56:34 I’m totally confused. Why does one statute have to cover every possible medical case? I thought the idea was to address wasn’t isn’t addressed elsewhere?
If there was recourse for people who have the surgery and take the drugs and then discover that they were not the opposite sex and have live long injuries who is responsible for the damage done to the minor?
I feel like it would be a combination of the parents and doctors. The doctor’s defense would probably be “oh but the parent consented.”
Their parents, and then the state that allowed parents to make such a decision. The lawsuits we are starting to see are against doctors, arguing the child and parents were not sufficiently apprised of the risks, ie could not provide informed consent. I’m not sure there have been any filed against parents yet - likely because there is nothing to gain financially by doing so.
Because the Tennessee law bans the use of hormone treatments that differ from the sex of the recipient. Boys can't get estrogen and girls can't get testosterone, hence sex based.
Why not regulate ages but not ban😊
This is easily resolved linguistically. Prohibit giving hormones that an individuals body would not produce on its own, recognizing that biological disfunction might interfere with the production of those chemicals.
1:21:06 It’s not science.
Someone should fix this audio. It sounds like they are recording with a tin can.
Hope you all have a wonderful Christmas hannuka
Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization 2022 as a precedent.
I lost my uncle due to an aggressive cancer that was not "approved" in the us.. but was in China.. i think patient care is a tricky thing, but there should be guidelines, not lawmakers stopping medical..chemo can and will kill someone.. but it can also save... there can not be a complete ban on the drug...
That is indeed the goal of the bill at question. To not interfere with other treatments. Unfortunately the argument made would result in a total ban on the chemicals in question for minors.
It's okay talk when they want free flying of the Dixie flag. And bc hate groups adopted it. It was removed
So sex discrimination sometimes is legal in the minds of some people. 🤦
No your just wrong. Some ppl clearly. But this is not the case they are what they were born as. Period.
The same rules for every person is not discrimination.
@@nanetteparratto-wagner1127 Giving a drug to a boy, who has a medical condition; is in no way similar to denying a drug to a healthy child that will damage her body forever.
What part of that seems hard to grasp?
you're asking too much from people who aren't mentally capable of defining "woman"
Where is the sex discrimination. This is about idealogy about mental disorders. As far as when they brought up about sex discrimination on testosterone, it's a mute point because it is literally about to different things, so there no discrimination there.