What to call this thread?

Supreme Court hears case on religious objections to LGBTQ storybooks in public school​

Apr 21, 2025 7:03 PM EDT
WASHINGTON (AP) — A prince lassos a dragon, saving a knight in shining armor from certain death. But the prince slips and as he falls, the knight and his steed race to return the favor.
Then the two men fall in love.
That story, “Prince and Knight,” is one of five children’s books featuring LGBTQ characters and aimed at kindergarten through the fifth grade that have roiled a diverse suburban Maryland school district and led to a Supreme Court case that the justices will hear on Tuesday.


The United States Constitution's First Amendment enumerates our citizens Constitutional right to exercise religion. BUT !
It also protects us from religion. BUT !
"No right is absolute. Conversely, no government authority is absolute." lawyer, law Professor and former ACLU head Nadine Strossen
The purpose of school is education.

Are those opposed to these public school storybooks deliberate champions of ignorance? They want children to not even know? Setting them up for surprise / shock later in life?​

"The Bible contains six admonishments to homosexuals and 362 admonishments to heterosexuals. That doesn't mean that God doesn't love heterosexuals. It's just that they need more supervision." - Lynn Lavner

Lynn !
 
"The Bible contains six admonishments to homosexuals ....
And the majority of the "admonishments" to homosexuals (at least the ones the bible thumpers like to cite) are found in the Old Testament (Leviticus 18:22 for example).

First, why are those verses still valid if the rest of the laws (all 613 of them) laid down in the Old Testament are not. For that matter, Leviticus alone bans some 76 things calling many of them abominations.

Second, the original text referred to pedophilia, not to adult same sex relationships.

1745337862031.png
 
And the majority of the "admonishments" to homosexuals (at least the ones the bible thumpers like to cite) are found in the Old Testament (Leviticus 18:22 for example).

First, why are those verses still valid if the rest of the laws (all 613 of them) laid down in the Old Testament are not. For that matter, Leviticus alone bans some 76 things calling many of them abominations.
a·bom·i·na·tion (ə-bŏm′ə-nāshən)
n.
1. Abhorrence; disgust.
2. A cause of abhorrence or disgust.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition copyright ©2022 by HarperCollins Publishers. All rights reserved.

Yeah, the notion of fudge-packing a bloke seems abhorrent, disgusting to me. BUT !!
Perhaps the notion of a night (or a decade) of insuperable passion with an irresistible woman may seem equally abhorrent, disgusting to them. Your loss suckers!

Immaterial.
Stealing Bruce's Humvee is one of the 7 deadly sins.

The seven deadly sins are:
1.Gluttony
2.Anger
3.Envy
4.Greed
5.Lust
6.Pride
7.Sloth


That's entirely different from our God-given libido.
Blaming a gay guy for being gay is to the religious believer tantamount to blaming God for ostensible sin.
Was it Chris Hitchens that quipped: - Created sick, and commanded to be well - ?

"Second, the original text referred to pedophilia, not to adult same sex relationships." #682
It was different millennia ago.
We know better now.
There are things holy scripture seems to endorse which our culture & laws oppose. Good.
There may be a 1st Amendment / free exercise argument to be made to the contrary. But it's a losing argument.
Our society has an obligation to protect minors. Up yours NAMBLA !
 
Yeah, the notion of fudge-packing a bloke seems abhorrent, disgusting to me ....
A general comment - there is nothing that gays do that isn't common practice in the hetero community.

As for same sex porn there's plenty of lesbian porn out there ...
 
" - there is nothing that gays do that isn't common practice in the hetero community." S2 #684
... must restrain hetero joke ...
S2,
I think I've failed here. OF COURSE you're right. BUT !
My (apparently unsuccessful) intention was to redirect:
whatever consenting adults do, no matter how revolting or enviable, isn't anyone else' bidness. [but I'll pay top $dollar for the video ...] kiddin'

I have the uneasy feeling we fall for their trap by even addressing it their way. By debating their point, even to refute it, we lend it the appearance of legitimacy.

"As for same sex porn there's plenty of lesbian porn out there ..." S2
NO WHERE NEAR ENOUGH as far as I'm concerned !

No body appreciates a nice pair of tits more than wrinkly old sear.

tits01.JPG
 
Lena was competing in the Sons of Norway swim meet, where she came in last in the 100 meter breast stroke. She went to the judges and said,
"Oh say, I don't mean to complain, but I think the other women were using their arms."

You're my kind of gal Lena. Stop by my house.
Bring pizza.
And pajamas.
 

Patti Digh


We have a family wedding in New York to attend later this month. Logic would tell us to fly. It’s faster. Less time off work. Fewer days away from the dogs and the routines that tether our lives to something manageable. We’re busy—like everyone is busy—and flying is the clean, efficient, adult decision.

But we’re renting a car and driving. Thirteen hundred miles, give or take. Through red states and blue, past signs shouting for freedom and others quietly asking for dignity. We’re packing snacks and chargers and playlists. We’re taking turns behind the wheel. We’re driving because our son is autistic. And transgender.

We’re driving because the list of things I’m afraid of is longer than it used to be.

Once, my fears were more domestic: Would he make friends? Would he be invited to birthday parties? Would anyone come to his birthday party? Would he be bullied in high school? Would he always wear furry costumes to go outside? Would I live through his outbursts? Would we ever find a good therapist who understood both his neurodivergence and his gender identity, without forcing one to the sidelines in favor of the other?

But now? Now my fears wear heavier boots.

Will the TSA at the airport see a mismatch between his ID and his voice, his chest, his name, his gaze, and decide he’s a threat? Will he be on some registry that will “out” him as trans and cause them to disappear him at the TSA checkpoint? Will some algorithm, some overzealous agent, some “random” search mistake his stillness for defiance, his quiet for danger? Will someone think they’re doing the right thing by detaining him “just to be sure”? Will they confiscate his ID because it doesn’t match the gender assigned at birth? Will some policy, some petty cruelty disguised as protocol, turn an airport into a crucible?

I know how this sounds. I wish I didn’t.

I wish I were paranoid. But I read the news. I live in this country. And I know that the tenderest parts of my son—the ones I’ve spent a lifetime protecting—are precisely the ones that make him most vulnerable. I cannot risk the moment a routine screening turns into something irreversible.

We had the conversation, of course. “It’s probably fine,” I told my husband, John, not believing it. “I’m sure it’ll be okay,” I said again, as if repetition could manufacture certainty.

But then I imagined my son standing in that fluorescent-lit checkpoint, backpack on, trying not to attract attention. I imagined the questions. The looks. The way something ordinary can shift so quickly into something dangerous.

And then I knew: we’re driving.

It’s a decision that feels both cautious and defiant. Cautious because I’m trying to keep him safe in a country I no longer trust. Defiant because choosing the long way feels like a kind of refusal. A small, stubborn way of saying: you will not make me hand him over to your machines and your screens and your assumptions. You do not get to decide what parts of my child are allowed to move freely.

So we’ll take the back roads, if we have to. Stop at state parks. Eat sandwiches on picnic benches beneath trees older than the borders we’re crossing. We’ll listen to music, argue about where to eat, maybe talk about where we’re going—not just the wedding, but the wider “where”: as a family, as a nation, as people still trying to thread love through the eye of this needle.

My son is very funny, by the way. Deeply, dryly funny. And kind in a way that doesn’t announce itself. He notices birds I’d miss. He remembers things I say when I think he’s not listening. He is working so hard to become himself in a world that keeps telling him he shouldn’t exist.

He and his older sister are the people I want most to protect. And the people who teach me, daily, what courage really is.

Sometimes I imagine the story he’ll tell one day. Will he say, “When I was young, we drove because it wasn’t safe for me to fly”? Will he say it with a laugh, like a family myth? Or will he say it with a shadow in his voice—grown and worn by the parts I couldn’t shield him from—and add, “That’s the kind of country we lived in”?

What kind of country do we live in?

The one with bathroom bans and book bans? Where lawmakers debate whether he deserves to play sports, receive healthcare, or simply exist in peace? The one threatening to create autism registries? The one with hundreds of anti-trans bills, and whispers of mental health “wellness camps” that echo with dangerous, eugenic parallels?

Or do we live in the other one—the quieter, stubbornly kind one—where strangers say, “Thank you for loving him just as he is.” Where a teacher keeps their door open during lunch, sanctuary from a cafeteria that is too loud. Even the one where an ancient man in a grocery store asks out of curiosity, “Are you a boy or a girl?” and my son answers—radiant, unrattled—“Yes.”

The truth is: we live in both worlds. All the time now.

This is America now. A country where we are expected to pledge allegiance while memorizing exits. A place where we are expected to believe in freedom while mapping out escape routes. Where we pack bug-out bags in case it comes to that. Where the question is no longer Do I trust my country with my child? but How far am I willing to go to protect him from it?

So yes, we’re going to a wedding. And we’re driving. Because safety is no longer a guarantee but a choice—a daily, deliberate act. Because the road, however long, lets me keep him within reach. Because sometimes love looks like checking the tire pressure, downloading the map offline, and saying, We’ll get there—together.

And because when my son asks me someday, “What kind of country did we live in?” I want to be able to answer, hand on heart, The kind where we didn’t let fear name us. The kind where we didn’t let fear define who we got to be. The kind where we chose each other. Every time.
 
And more nonsense from RFK Jr ...

494646769_10228974865857267_6920735088257607151_n.jpg



Cary Gabriel Costello

oSsnredopt1ca415gym921Mi59g8ga4fc7tf04 gMfi 15:ulut6 gPi13 9 ·

Today, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, directed by conspiracy theorist RFK Jr., released 400 pages of
🐃
💩
with the title "Treatment for Pediatric Gender Dysphoria."

Here is how you can tell this is propaganda, and not legitimate medical science:

1. It has been repudiated by the American Academy of Pediatrics, which was not consulted in writing it.

2. It accuses the bulk of the American medical profession of practicing medicine without concern for the health of patients and without a basis in evidence, violating their professional obligations. "A central theme of this Review is that many U.S. medical professionals and associations have fallen short of their duty to prioritize the health interests of young patients."

3. It lists no authors. This is not how scientific reports work! There should be a list of the authors and their affiliations, documenting their qualifications.

4. Metadata (see the comments below) indicate that at least some of the document was written by a philosophy professor most known for his framing himself as a victim of progressives, because his position that gender is based on sex, sex cannot be changed, pronouns must match birth certificate sex, etc. is poorly received by other philosophers.

What this document represents is a cynical view of science that rejects actual empiricism, and instead treats science as a tool for manipulating people by dressing things up to look impressively science-y. True empirical science relies on a large pool of practitioners to evaluate evidence and come to a working consensus of what the evidence says and how it should be used. That's just a working consensus, because scientists are committed to a principle of skepticism that requires them not to take findings on faith, and to be open to new evidence. But we rely on these consensus assessments all the time, when we visit the doctor or drive over a bridge or check the weather.

People who cynically wish to use the language of science to subvert actual science exploit this principle of skepticism to cast doubt on findings that have proven convincing to most in a field. "Climate change is just a theory!" they say. Then they look for some fringe members of a field they can use, presenting them as the true authorities, though 95% of the scientists in that field say they are wrong.

In this case, however, we don't even have fringe doctors listed as authors. The document appears as if it emerged magically from the forehead of the HHS instead of being written by actual people. Who, from the metadata, appear to be a philosopher and some consultants, none of who are MDs.

But it's long! And contains Science Words! And lists a lot of sources, some of which can't be found when you check them, and some of which are the same old, much-critiqued fringe studies, and some of which are reasonable sources presented in a twisted fashion, and a bunch of which are just the Cass Report, the equivalent transphobic document to this one (of almost the exact same length!) that was authored in the UK in 2024 by people lacking clinical or research experience with trans youth. (The Cass Report has been much critiqued by medical doctors and researchers in the U.S., by the way.) At least the Cass Report listed actual authors! But neither that report or this HHS one were subjected to peer review by scientists in the field.

One more time, I will repeat: nobody performs genital surgeries on trans children. A very small number of chest reconstructions are performed on trans 16 and 17 year olds, but these only constitute 3% of the total number of these chest surgeries performed on minors. The vast majority of gender-affirming top surgeries are performed on cis boys who are unhappy with the amount of breast tissue they have developed. Nobody raises a fuss when the boys are cis that they are too young to consent to this gender-affirming treatment and call it "mutilation!" Similarly, the majority of youths prescribed puberty-suppressing medications are cisgender. We've been prescribing these meds for decades to youths to cis youths with early puberties or to intersex youths who didn't ask for such treatment, and nobody wailed that this was experimental or risky, as the HHS report does, until it was trans youth receiving the treatment.

And that is why the HHS "Treatment for Pediatric Gender Dysphoria" report is
🐃
💩
. It is transphobic propaganda that supports conversion therapy rather than gender-affirming care.
 
Posted on FB by an Australian friend

1746617566007.png

Mugsy Margarit

roSsdoentpa9l8f43m2i4u156htl0m215922l4cf307glchu8fh09f129g15 ·

The U.S. government has encouraged people to report on doctors in Canada who provide gender-affirming care to children—signaling a chilling new cross-border reach in its anti-trans agenda.

In mid April, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) posted a form on its website soliciting “tips” about the “Chemical and Surgical Mutilation of Children,” echoing the language of Donald Trump’s executive order attempting to block gender-affirming care to those under 19 years old.

The website promised to protect “whistleblowers” and contained a drop-down menu that included the provinces and territories of Canada, as well as Canada’s Armed Forces—effectively allowing reports to be filed against health care providers located north of the border.

When pressed for an explanation by Pivot and The Breach, the U.S. Health department removed Canada from the form. After repeated media inquiries, an HHS employee confirmed that Canada had been erased from the form without providing a reason for the initial inclusion or the removal.

Prior to the change, the department refused to answer direct questions about whether the inclusion of Canadian jurisdictions was deliberate, and, if so, why Canada was targeted.

Canada’s initial inclusion in the whistleblower form sparked fears that the reports could be used to establish watch lists, detain Canadian health care providers at the border, or even take legal action against Canadian health care professionals.

All of this could also make it harder for American citizens to obtain care in Canada, in particular to circumvent bans imposed in the United States on gender-affirming care.

It remains unclear whether HHS is actively investigating Canadian doctors. The department has not responded to follow-up questions. The Breach and Pivot have filed a Freedom of Information request to seek clarification.

In April, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) quietly posted a whistleblower form on its website for reporting health care providers—including those in Canada—who provide gender-affirming care to children. The Canadian jurisdictions were removed after repeated media inquiries from Pivot and The Breach.

Gender-affirming care for minors is legal and available in Canada, and the United States has “no legislative power” in Canadian jurisdictions, points out Florence Ashley, a lawyer and bioethicist.
According to the Government of Canada’s website, genital surgeries are never offered to people under the age of 18, in accordance with the standards of care of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health.

GrS Montreal, a clinic offering gender-affirming surgeries, states on its website that the minimum age for mastectomy (torso masculinization) is 16—also consistent with the association’s standards.

For children, gender-affirming medical care is typically limited to puberty blockers and hormones.

Canadian sovereignty challenged?

Trans rights activist Celeste Trianon said that the original version of the form amounted to a violation of Canada’s sovereignty.

“I believe this is the first time the United States has infringed on the sovereignty of Canadian doctors, certainly through a whistleblower form,” she said.

“HHS is trying to use its influence to attack health care providers, not just in the United States, but here in Canada as well. This isn’t just absurd; it’s a covert threat to trans people in Canada, including those who fled the United States because of Trump’s anti-trans policies, and we’re next.”

Trianon added the threat would likely spark greater outrage if it concerned a different community.

“If it were any other group being targeted, we would be in a moment of national scandal right now. But since trans people, including trans youth, are seen as disposable, our society chooses to ignore it all. When are we going to act? Standing up for the rights of trans people is defending our Canadian values.”

The trans right activist also pointed out that attacks on trans rights in the United States don’t stop with children and can have “collateral damage in adult access” as well.

In response to questions from Pivot and The Breach, the Quebec Ministry of Health stated that “the actions of the United States government regarding gender-affirming care for children do not influence the guidelines that Quebec has established for this care.”

Quebec also emphasized that, to date, no genital surgeries have been performed on minors, even as a committee has been established to assess exceptions.

A spokesperson from the Canadian Armed Forces said in a preliminary call on April 17 that “this maneuver does not make sense and [that] the United States has no legislative power here.

What other countries do and say does not influence us.”

In a follow-up email a week later, the Forces said: “Providing all members of the Defence team with a healthy, respectful and inclusive work environment, free from harassment, discrimination and bias, is a priority for our institution. Diversity of perspectives and lived experiences contributes to our success as an organization.”

A Health Canada spokesperson said the Canadian government is reviewing the matter further, following a request for comment.

A U.S. crackdown

The HHS whistleblower form followed an executive order from the Trump administration on January 28, 2025.

The order, which was called “Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation,” aimed at ending access to gender-affirming care for children, a focal point of Trump’s second presidential campaign. It is currently blocked in some states.

Most major medical associations in the United States, such as the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the American Psychological Association, support access to such care for minors and oppose restricting it.

An exodus of trans and non-binary Americans to Canada has begun to take shape since President Trump’s inauguration, with some even seeking asylum.

The McLean Clinic in Mississauga, Ontario, facilitates cross-border mastectomies for U.S. citizens. In a blog post published on April 14, 2025, the clinic wrote: “There’s a burgeoning trend showing many Americans crossing the border to get their top surgery procedure done in Canada.”

“The truth is that this isn’t surprising news anymore,” the blog post continued. “Year after year, the U.S. government reveals that an increasing number of citizens travel out of the country to seek medical treatment, including gender-reassignment procedures.”

The McLean Clinic declined to respond to requests for comment.

The recent attempt to target trans health care across the Canada-U.S. border mirrors the situation inside the U.S. around abortion access, where people seeking abortion procedures often travel between states to receive care where it isn’t banned.

Some states are reportedly seeking to make interstate travel for abortions illegal, creating what has been called a new legal minefield and abortion’s next battlefront.

In a similar vein, the United States may seek to criminalize minors who travel across the border into Canada to access gender-affirming care.

The Trump administration is also reportedly pressuring the United Kingdom to repeal certain laws protecting LGBTQ+ people, arguing that they limit freedom of expression, in exchange for a trade agreement.

With Canada locked into a tariff war with Washington, the country could face similar pressure tactics, despite Prime Minister Mark Carney’s support for trans rights.
 
Back
Top