Remarkable Parallels

Quote: terapined

Why are you so against freedom

Ed you have gotten so weak in your responses any reasonable person knows it's just trolling

Folks in California are different.

So I'd look at California again (start with Scott Weiner) to address current sterilization politics of the transgender community.

--------------------------

The Horrifying American Roots of Nazi Eugenics

September 2003
.
.
.
Eugenics was the racist pseudoscience determined to wipe away all human beings deemed "unfit," preserving only those who conformed to a Nordic stereotype. Elements of the philosophy were enshrined as national policy by forced sterilization and segregation laws, as well as marriage restrictions, enacted in twenty-seven states. In 1909, California became the third state to adopt such laws. Ultimately, eugenics practitioners coercively sterilized some 60,000 Americans, barred the marriage of thousands, forcibly segregated thousands in "colonies," and persecuted untold numbers in ways we are just learning. Before World War II, nearly half of coercive sterilizations were done in California, and even after the war, the state accounted for a third of all such surgeries.
.
.
.
https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/1796

--------------------------------

Quote: DoubleGold

Folks in California are different.

So I'd look at California again (start with Scott Weiner) to address current sterilization politics of the transgender community.

--------------------------

The Horrifying American Roots of Nazi Eugenics

September 2003
.
.
.
Eugenics was the racist pseudoscience determined to wipe away all human beings deemed "unfit," preserving only those who conformed to a Nordic stereotype. Elements of the philosophy were enshrined as national policy by forced sterilization and segregation laws, as well as marriage restrictions, enacted in twenty-seven states. In 1909, California became the third state to adopt such laws. Ultimately, eugenics practitioners coercively sterilized some 60,000 Americans, barred the marriage of thousands, forcibly segregated thousands in "colonies," and persecuted untold numbers in ways we are just learning. Before World War II, nearly half of coercive sterilizations were done in California, and even after the war, the state accounted for a third of all such surgeries.
.
.
.
https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/1796

--------------------------------

Emphasis: Pseudoscience

there are parallels today. Yes to people in those days, just like today, it looks like real science. Obvious science, even. We must do something or the human race will decline! Those saying these ideas are too radical, and in any case there is certainly no Crisis? Well you had to shut those people up in those days too, they won't 'listen to the science'! [made some edits]

The crisis is people possibly wanting to do stupid stuff voluntarily that might be bad for them? That's the best argument anyone can make. And they're complaining that some parents want to be control of what their kids do as well?

And you're complaining because people want do stuff "voluntarily" because you think they believe stupid stuff "voluntarily."

And you're telling other people to do right now?

Pffft. Is this a joke? It's the best joke ever.

Quote: rxwine

The crisis is people possibly wanting to do stupid stuff voluntarily that might be bad for them? That's the best argument anyone can make. And they're complaining that some parents want to be control of what their kids do as well?

And you're complaining because people want do stuff "voluntarily" because you think they believe stupid stuff "voluntarily."

And you're telling other people to do right now?

Pffft. Is this a joke? It's the best joke ever.

I was trying to make a parallel with the claim that climate change has reached a Crisis

Quote: AZDuffman

So, they cannot buy a drink or cigarettes at 18 but they can go have their privates mutilated? That is a weird world we live in.

They should be 18 as well. There needs to be one consistent standard.

Quote: Gandler

They should be 18 as well. There needs to be one consistent standard.

One reason I disagree with you, is I think in this case the government's responsibility is to ensure people get the full package of information. The thing you object to is the irreversibility. The government's responsibility is only to make triply sure this information is made extremely clear and the individuals can't possibly declare that they were not informed with emphasis when the parent and child decide.

It's not to interfere with the ultimate decision they make affecting only them.

The anti-abortion people use delay to try to scuttle even the attempt. I have no problem with delay here, but I know also that not all children mature intellectually the same way and with proper evaluation professionals and the parent can do more than select an arbitrary age of legal maturity. We shouldn't either when we won't even know the circumstances.

Quote: rxwine

One reason I disagree with you, is I think in this case the government's responsibility is to ensure people get the full package of information. The thing you object to is the irreversibility. The government's responsibility is only to make triply sure this information is made extremely clear and the individuals can't possibly declare that they were not informed with emphasis when the parent and child decide.

It's not to interfere with the ultimate decision they make affecting only them.

While true, there does need to be some kind of legal line in the sand where we just accept people as an adult as a society. There is no practical way for a government to do a full psychoanalysis of every citizen and determine when they reach a mental stage to be considered an adult on a case-by-case basis. As a society, we just need to choose an age and stick with it.

Quote: rxwine

The anti-abortion people use delay to try to scuttle even the attempt. I have no problem with delay here, but I know also that not all children mature intellectually the same way and with proper evaluation professionals and the parent can do more than select an arbitrary age of legal maturity. We shouldn't either when we won't even know the circumstances.

That is certainly not me. Abortion is a medically necessary procedure (not always an operation, most are pharmaceutical) that should be available at any age for any reason (if anything it should be more accessible for people under 18 as it is generally more critical for younger people).
Abortion is very different than sex change surgery or even cosmetic surgery.


People on both sides are pretty much in full agreement that you should not be allowed to take out debt before 18 because it can have devastating effects on your life. If somebody can't be trusted to get a credit card with a 500-dollar limit at 17, they should not be trusted to make a choice with irreversible surgery. They can live their life and identify how they want as a kid, and at 18 decide if surgery is a path they think is right for them. I just don't understand why this is a controversial viewpoint.

Quote: Gandler

While true, there does need to be some kind of legal line in the sand where we just accept people as an adult as a society. There is no practical way for a government to do a full psychoanalysis of every citizen and determine when they reach a mental stage to be considered an adult on a case-by-case basis. As a society, we just need to choose an age and stick with it.

In general I don't disagree, but we're not requiring the millions of people who go to the DMV to get extensive psychological evaulations and extended prolonged counseling (though for some, that's probably a good idea actually) but just a very small segment of the population.

So, I still hold it as no need to apply the broad brush here.

Quote:

That is certainly not me. Abortion is a medically necessary procedure (not always an operation, most are pharmaceutical) that should be available at any age for any reason (if anything it should be more accessible for people under 18 as it is generally more critical for younger people).
Abortion is very different than sex change surgery or even cosmetic surgery.


People on both sides are pretty much in full agreement that you should not be allowed to take out debt before 18 because it can have devastating effects on your life. If somebody can't be trusted to get a credit card with a 500-dollar limit at 17, they should not be trusted to make a choice with irreversible surgery. They can live their life and identify how they want as a kid, and at 18 decide if surgery is a path they think is right for them. I just don't understand why this is a controversial viewpoint.

Where is your right to do that coming from because I just don't think you have more a right to make that call than the parents and doctors along with the child wanting it and an informed consent.

Irreversible effects occur to both potential male and females by 18. irreversible once developed (testosterone: Adam’s apple protrusion, voice changes, and male pattern baldness; estrogen: breast development. So it's not without lasting effects one way or the other if you wait. Some males start a receding hairline very early. You go through life with your voice in a certain range.