Challenges to inmates' gender cases costly to Bay State
Legal bills could total $2 million
The Globe's slant on the story is that the state is stupid for challenging the court rulings that the state must pay for sex change surgeries for inmates, when it only drives up the legal costs, and they should have settled long ago. It's still good that they reported how much the taxpayers will have to pay if the state doesn't win these cases, but it's bad that they seem to be conspiring with the state in failing to protect the taxpayers interests by winning these cases. They imply that the state is making a strong case, but the state isn't even challenging the idea that sex change surgeries are medically necessary and that there is a constitutional right to change sex, they are only arguing that "the courts have failed to recognize DOC's legitimate safety and security concerns or to give due deference to the fact that the DOC has and continues to provide adequate medical treatment to inmates. We also strive to be responsible stewards of the public funds."
I think that's a losing argument, and the state lawyers know it, but they know the taxpayers will write a $2 Million check if they make a losing argument, and the longer they draw it out the more everyone gets paid.
We need to reject the claim that there is a right to be either sex or reproduce with people of either sex; there is not, there is only a right to be a man or a woman, not both. There is a right to privacy, and a right to dress and live and present themselves as either gender, but not to actually become the other sex or reproduce with the same sex. In fact, attempting to reproduce as the other sex or with the same sex ought to be prohibited, and it can be prohibited, as there is no right to attempt it. We have to show that it is not medically necessary for people to be enabled to change sex and reproduce as the other sex, and then we won't have to pay those legal bills and won't have to pay for sex change surgeries or even the hormone therapies.
In addition to not being medically necessary to be allowed to conceive offspring as the other sex, it is also not a right under the "pursuit of happiness clause" that has to be allowed if science can do it.
Here is a comment on HuffingtonPost article about Transgender rights claiming that we have to let transgendered people and same-sex couples conceive offspring together:
EVERY human on the planet has the right to equality and happiness. And if that means that two women want a child of their own DNA, and science figure out how to do it? Then they can. Same for two men. So long as the child produced is healthy, that's all that matters.
And, did you know - there are species on the planet that spontaneously change their sex? Fish, frogs, worms, snails, mollusks - they can all change gender, some at will. Did you know that the male seahorse carries the babies and gives birth? Please tell me how 'nature' is rigidly binary again.