Active Users
Currently 1 user(s) logged on.

Subscribe to our mailing list

* indicates required
Email Format


Make a New Account



Forget your username or password?

Red Mass Group on Facebook

About Us
How To Format Posts
Email Us
RSS Feed
RMG Store
Fair Use Policy
RMG Mobile Site


Advanced Search

Event Calendar
October 2015
(view month)
* * * * 01 02 03
04 05 06 07 08 09 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31
* * * * * * *
<< (add event) >>

Blog Roll
Massachusetts Conservatives Boston Maggie
The Capitol View Live
Critical Mass
FreeRepublic - Massachusetts
Miss Kelly

Mass Video Blogs Catch of the Day Video

Blue Mass Group
Left in Lowell
Hester Prynne
Mass Marrier

Non-Partisan Massachusetts Blogs
Preti Minahan
Mass Politics Profs

Garrett Quinn
Beacon Hill Institute Blog
Pioneer Institute Blog
Campaign For Liberty
Cato at Liberty
Young Americans for Liberty

Hyper Local
My Dedham
Universal Hub
View From Plymouth Rock
Worcester Herald

Mass. Media
The Lone Republican
Pundit Review
Dan Kennedy's "The Scrum"
WGBH's Adam Reilly
WGBH's "Beat The Press">
WGBH's "Greater Boston">
David Bernstein at Boston Magazine
NECN's "Broadside: with Jim Braude"

Ace of Spades
Big Hollywood
Daily Beast
Daily Kos
Daily Paul
Flynn Files
Hot Air
Little Green Footballs
National Review
Reason - Hit & Run
Red State

We don't have to pay no $2 Million to sex change lawyers!

by: John Howard

Mon Dec 31, 2012 at 18:08:55 PM EST

I was surprised to see this headline on the front page of the Boston Globe today:

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.

John Howard :: We don't have to pay no $2 Million to sex change lawyers!
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.

Tags: , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Come on, even Warren was smart enough to oppose this (0.00 / 0)
Why is there silence from everyone on this issue? We should be loudly opposing the liberal progressive core belief in sex changes and postgenderism, and telling the state to appeal this on principle, that there is no right to be either sex.

I fear that Ed and Brock are failing to oppose postgenderism in some misguided belief that the public is for free sex change surgeries and postgenderism, but remember that even Elizabeth Warren came out against Judge Wolf's ruling during the election, angering many LGBT supporters.  

Stat Counter

Red Mass Group is owned and operated by Robert Eno. It is not authorized or paid for by any candidate or committee.
Powered by: SoapBlox