by Providence Plantations and Rhode Island » Tue Jan 21, 2025 3:14 pm
by The One Galactic Republic » Tue Jan 21, 2025 3:28 pm
FREE LUIGI
UNMET AND OTHER NEOCON/FASCISTS DO NOT INTERACT, WE HAVE NOTHING TO TALK ABOUT. I know most people use this as a news ticker, but my nation has nearly no lore, so instead I'm just going to type stuff. I'm gay (although that should be obvious) my leftvalues says I'm a Centrist Marxist, I like music, and if you have any recommendations telegram me. Autism, ADHD, and LGBT. I'm also mostly cis, but there's definitely some gender fuckery going on in my brain. Just don't know what it is yet. Peace, Love, And Revolution. (Also, mods, if this is too long a sig, when you clean it up, can you also make it prettier? Thanks!)
by Providence Plantations and Rhode Island » Tue Jan 21, 2025 3:39 pm
The One Galactic Republic wrote:Seems good on first quick readthrough, and I definitely agree with the idea. Someone smarter than me will probably have actual advice on the proposal.
by Cessarea » Tue Jan 21, 2025 3:44 pm
by The Overmind » Tue Jan 21, 2025 3:50 pm
by Untecna » Tue Jan 21, 2025 4:13 pm
by Providence Plantations and Rhode Island » Tue Jan 21, 2025 4:27 pm
Untecna wrote:Opposed. Simone's draft is better, and the author has shown that they don't actually care about transgender people. Not to mention the near-obvious intent for the author to follow this up with something that abuses the requirement on medical definition.
by The Overmind » Tue Jan 21, 2025 4:29 pm
Providence Plantations and Rhode Island wrote:Untecna wrote:Opposed. Simone's draft is better, and the author has shown that they don't actually care about transgender people. Not to mention the near-obvious intent for the author to follow this up with something that abuses the requirement on medical definition.
As a member of the LGBTQ+ community, I do care deeply about transgender individuals. My opposition to Simone's proposal is simple; it is overly complicated and requires word gymnastics to go into effect. I believe that my proposal can protect transgender individuals' rights and very importantly can gain a strong majority of yay votes in the process. As for speculation on future resolutions, I have none planned regarding this topic, but saying I did, like the others they would have to go through the same approval/voting process.
I understand your opposition and I thank you for considering my balanced proposal.
by Providence Plantations and Rhode Island » Tue Jan 21, 2025 4:30 pm
The Overmind wrote:Providence Plantations and Rhode Island wrote:
As a member of the LGBTQ+ community, I do care deeply about transgender individuals. My opposition to Simone's proposal is simple; it is overly complicated and requires word gymnastics to go into effect. I believe that my proposal can protect transgender individuals' rights and very importantly can gain a strong majority of yay votes in the process. As for speculation on future resolutions, I have none planned regarding this topic, but saying I did, like the others they would have to go through the same approval/voting process.
I understand your opposition and I thank you for considering my balanced proposal.
lol, you do realize all of your responses to Simone's draft are still there advertising the truth of your intentions? You can't delete them, and they're quoted, so good luck editing them.
by Pathonia » Tue Jan 21, 2025 4:33 pm
by Comfed » Tue Jan 21, 2025 4:34 pm
by Untecna » Tue Jan 21, 2025 4:35 pm
Providence Plantations and Rhode Island wrote:Untecna wrote:Opposed. Simone's draft is better, and the author has shown that they don't actually care about transgender people. Not to mention the near-obvious intent for the author to follow this up with something that abuses the requirement on medical definition.
As a member of the LGBTQ+ community, I do care deeply about transgender individuals. My opposition to Simone's proposal is simple; it is overly complicated and requires word gymnastics to go into effect. I believe that my proposal can protect transgender individuals' rights and very importantly can gain a strong majority of yay votes in the process. As for speculation on future resolutions, I have none planned regarding this topic, but saying I did, like the others they would have to go through the same approval/voting process.
I understand your opposition and I thank you for considering my balanced proposal.
by The Overmind » Tue Jan 21, 2025 4:36 pm
Providence Plantations and Rhode Island wrote:The Overmind wrote:lol, you do realize all of your responses to Simone's draft are still there advertising the truth of your intentions? You can't delete them, and they're quoted, so good luck editing them.
That extreme proposal would only drive more hate towards the community, hence me strongly opposing it.
by Providence Plantations and Rhode Island » Tue Jan 21, 2025 4:39 pm
Comfed wrote:What, exactly, is the point of defining "all gender affirming care as official medical treatment," as you say in the preamble? You seem to think this is very important, but I can't discern why.
by Untecna » Tue Jan 21, 2025 4:41 pm
Providence Plantations and Rhode Island wrote:Comfed wrote:What, exactly, is the point of defining "all gender affirming care as official medical treatment," as you say in the preamble? You seem to think this is very important, but I can't discern why.
Allowing medical treatments, particularly those related to gender-affirming care, to be conducted outside the oversight of trained, licensed professionals poses serious risks to individuals' health and well-being. Just as abortion is recognized as a medical procedure that should be performed within the framework of regulated, professional care to ensure the safety of all individuals seeking such services, the same standard of care should apply to transgender individuals seeking medical transition. We must remain vigilant in preventing harmful, unregulated practices that could leave vulnerable communities exposed to exploitation or unsafe procedures. The intent is to protect individuals from the potential harms of unqualified, clandestine providers, and to uphold their right to care that is safe, ethical, and compassionate.
by Providence Plantations and Rhode Island » Tue Jan 21, 2025 4:44 pm
Untecna wrote:Providence Plantations and Rhode Island wrote:
Allowing medical treatments, particularly those related to gender-affirming care, to be conducted outside the oversight of trained, licensed professionals poses serious risks to individuals' health and well-being. Just as abortion is recognized as a medical procedure that should be performed within the framework of regulated, professional care to ensure the safety of all individuals seeking such services, the same standard of care should apply to transgender individuals seeking medical transition. We must remain vigilant in preventing harmful, unregulated practices that could leave vulnerable communities exposed to exploitation or unsafe procedures. The intent is to protect individuals from the potential harms of unqualified, clandestine providers, and to uphold their right to care that is safe, ethical, and compassionate.
Comfed, to be clear, this reasoning is not genuine. People who opposed gender-affirming care often say these same lines, just the same as abortion. It's an attempt to make it harder to get that care, not easier.
by The Overmind » Tue Jan 21, 2025 4:45 pm
Providence Plantations and Rhode Island wrote:Comfed wrote:What, exactly, is the point of defining "all gender affirming care as official medical treatment," as you say in the preamble? You seem to think this is very important, but I can't discern why.
Allowing medical treatments, particularly those related to gender-affirming care, to be conducted outside the oversight of trained, licensed professionals poses serious risks to individuals' health and well-being. Just as abortion is recognized as a medical procedure that should be performed within the framework of regulated, professional care to ensure the safety of all individuals seeking such services, the same standard of care should apply to transgender individuals seeking medical transition. We must remain vigilant in preventing harmful, unregulated practices that could leave vulnerable communities exposed to exploitation or unsafe procedures. The intent is to protect individuals from the potential harms of unqualified, clandestine providers, and to uphold their right to care that is safe, ethical, and compassionate.
by Untecna » Tue Jan 21, 2025 4:46 pm
Providence Plantations and Rhode Island wrote:Untecna wrote:Comfed, to be clear, this reasoning is not genuine. People who opposed gender-affirming care often say these same lines, just the same as abortion. It's an attempt to make it harder to get that care, not easier.
So you're okay with the idea of untrained individuals carrying out complex surgeries? That is what Simone's proposal would allow, albeit not intentionally.
by Providence Plantations and Rhode Island » Tue Jan 21, 2025 4:54 pm
Untecna wrote:Providence Plantations and Rhode Island wrote:
So you're okay with the idea of untrained individuals carrying out complex surgeries? That is what Simone's proposal would allow, albeit not intentionally.
Yet that doesn't happen. That's the thing, Providence. Your talking points, terrible as they are, have no basis. You're just inventing things to be angry at, to subsequently get attention with.
by Providence Plantations and Rhode Island » Tue Jan 21, 2025 4:55 pm
The Overmind wrote:Providence Plantations and Rhode Island wrote:
Allowing medical treatments, particularly those related to gender-affirming care, to be conducted outside the oversight of trained, licensed professionals poses serious risks to individuals' health and well-being. Just as abortion is recognized as a medical procedure that should be performed within the framework of regulated, professional care to ensure the safety of all individuals seeking such services, the same standard of care should apply to transgender individuals seeking medical transition. We must remain vigilant in preventing harmful, unregulated practices that could leave vulnerable communities exposed to exploitation or unsafe procedures. The intent is to protect individuals from the potential harms of unqualified, clandestine providers, and to uphold their right to care that is safe, ethical, and compassionate.
Defining GAHT, surgery, and puberty blockers as both treatments and elective measures does absolutely nothing to preclude their administration by trained medical professionals only.
by The Overmind » Tue Jan 21, 2025 4:56 pm
Providence Plantations and Rhode Island wrote:Untecna wrote:Yet that doesn't happen. That's the thing, Providence. Your talking points, terrible as they are, have no basis. You're just inventing things to be angry at, to subsequently get attention with.
I disagree. Horrible things happen in the void of bad regulation.
by Untecna » Tue Jan 21, 2025 4:56 pm
Providence Plantations and Rhode Island wrote:Untecna wrote:Yet that doesn't happen. That's the thing, Providence. Your talking points, terrible as they are, have no basis. You're just inventing things to be angry at, to subsequently get attention with.
I disagree. Horrible things happen in the void of bad regulation.
by Providence Plantations and Rhode Island » Tue Jan 21, 2025 4:57 pm
by The Overmind » Tue Jan 21, 2025 4:58 pm
by Pathonia » Tue Jan 21, 2025 4:59 pm
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement