Dont think that because a citizen opposing sex reassignment surgery for young folks that AUTOMATICALLY makes them "
That's just bunk. What IS NOT bunk is that the surgical decision IS about "cutting off little childrens' penises (or boobs)"
A judge is just a surrogate for the law AND to some extent -- community values. To have a law on this -- it can NOT BE EVEN a self declaration of which 39 genders the CHILD prefers. SO -- any activist judges that rule in favor of such surgery should have to take responsibility for the FUTURE OUTCOMES of that decision. And we KNOW the "regret rate" is AWFULLY damn high - if suicide doesn't end that life first.
So the community weighs in with equal weight on issues like this one. Sex reassignment surgery in MOST ALL parent minds is something left for a decision WITH a child's INFORMED and tested consent at LATER AGES....
There's a whole lot of years to contemplate regrets.
williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu
A new study from the Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law finds that 81% of transgender adults in the U.S. have thought about suicide, 42% of transgender adults have attempted it, and 56% have engaged in non-suicidal self-injury over their lifetimes.
While transgender and cisgender adults reported similar rates of hazardous drinking and problematic drug use, transgender people were significantly more likely to experience poor mental health during their lifetimes. Compared to cisgender adults, transgender adults were seven times more likely to contemplate suicide, four times more likely to attempt it, and eight times more likely to engage in non-suicidal self-injury.
I really have given up on California. It's doomed to a one party rule, totalitarian dystopia. So if they want to host trans surgeries for residents of states that prohibit them on the very young -- go for it. That's how freedom of choice should work over 50 states.
But ANY state has the right to pass legislation prohibiting gender surgeries as they see fit.