This is nothing to do with bigotry or being anti-trans this is simply stating a fact

Sweden's National Board of Health banned the use of puberty blockers on minors under the age of 16 back in February 2022 because they such drugs do in fact cause health problems in minors, when even one of the most left-leaning governments in the European Union bans puberty blockers that is definitely saying that there is something wrong with giving such drugs to kids: https://segm.org/Sweden_ends_use_of_Dutch_protocol

Intresting

I agree, but that decision to relegated should remain in the medical community and not within the state as there may be legitimate reasons to subscribe hormones or puberty blockers to SOME individuals based on a case by case bases due to health reasons and NOT due to the fact they wish to be another gender.

It greatly concerns me that our government allowed some states to make a medical procedure illegal at the risk of potentially millions of lives without any regard for why those procedures may be necessary in regards to at least the health of the individual and not a blanket ban to score only cheap political points.

When it comes to the pro-trans side of the debate, the way I see it they have problem of having a blanket point of view to score political points. The act like the cases a few people that might need puberty blockers broadly means the same for everyone who might have some gender identity issues. They seem to have a blanket point of view rather than seeing things through a case by case basis. Just because a kid might like girly things despite being biologically male or like boyish things despite being biologically female doesn't necessarily mean they have gender disphoria, they just don't like everything all other boys and girls like and they are probably just going through a phase they might grow out of but when a person brings up such issues and makes such valid points or even points out the health problems puberty blockers can cause for a kid, they get deemed a "hateful anti-trans bigot Nazi who want transpeople dead". The problem with letting kids transition is that a kid is not ready to make such a life-changing at an early age. There is a good reason why we don't let minors make certain decisions because minors are still learning things, don't know everything and not fully prepared to take on a lot of things in the real world. We don't let people consent to sex until they reach a certain age therefore it's probably also not a good idea to let a minor make an even life-changing decision such as changing their gender and body. After all, puberty blockers do in fact cause developmental problems in minors, that's an objective truth. I think Sweden made a right decision for people's basic protection. We don't let minors drink alcohol or consume tobacco or cannabis because such drugs can cause developmental problems at an early age therefore it's not unreasonable to address the fact that puberty blockers cause such issues.

That's a nice rant there that didn't address anything I said. But thanks, I guess?

Did you notice that I agreed that we shouldn't allow puberty blockers for just trans children but rather keep them for other serious medical issues?

That is my problem with the modern Republican party. They'd rather ban a medical procedure than actually regulate it.

Rant? I wasn't ranting I was merely pointing out a problem with the leftist side of the debate. Yes I of course I noticed you agreed with me we shouldn't allow minors to have puberty blockers at whim, we should only allow such drugs for serious cases where the are needed but many other people on the left do not realize this basic fact, they usually shout down anyone who disagrees with them a "bigot", "transphobe", etc. and hurling such insults and buzzwords is not an argument. I also agree with you that blanket bans are also probably not a good idea.

It is a rant. And you're summarizing that rant in your reply while finally acknowlging I agree with you.

And while I appreciate you agreeing with me...

Saying: Drugs for children are bad mmkay!

Then me saying: Not all children but, mmkay!

Then you saying: Leftists call me hateful names that's how I justify my position that all drugs are bad mmkay!

And me saying: Cool rant. We shouldn't have blanket bans!

Then you saying: Blanket bans bad, yes... but leftists hurt my widdle feelings...

Is not an effective use of your argument.

Republicans DO have science on their side in this argument, but they're still proposing bad policy and legislation instead of addressing the actual issue. That is far more dangerous than an ignorant leftist. I rather speak to those in power than their voters. And agreeing to those challenging that power, with great risk to hundreds or thousands of children's ability to receive the care they need while doing away with elective care is essential to your argument.

Again, one only need to see the disastrous handling of abortion by state to see there may be severe costs to getting to that political endzone and celebrating too early. People's lives are at stake. Not these assholes who strawman your arguments and call you a transphobe or me a baby killer.

First, I did not say the leftists hurled insults at me personally, I said they irrationally act shitty towards other people who disagree with them instead of listening to a valid point another makes. You are strawmanning me like being like "wah leftists hurt my feelings" no, I am merely pointing out we should have a sane rational debate and listen to others when they make a good point and not irrationally try to shut down any point of view we disagree with. You are acting like I am making some emotional argument but the irrational leftists of which I speak are the ones making emotional arguments, viewing any point of view critical of their view as some "hateful attack". Also I do agree that Republican do have bad policies than can cause harm to others, just because I criticize a leftists harmful take on the situation doesn't mean I'm inclined to ignore the harm a republican policy can do, one doesn't override the other. I also think the Republican view on abortion policies can be harmful, the abortion debate is not a black-and-white issue and not all cases of abortion are doing it at whim just because the woman views doesn't want the baby, I know there are cases where the woman's life is legitimately in danger and needs the procedure.

Then focus on your argument and not how leftists argue. And that issue is not the sole province of leftists. I don't really care how other people argue nor the generalizations associated with them. I care how YOU argue. As you care how I argue.

We do appear to be on the same page at least, in regards to the medical side of this issue. Thank you.

Caring about how your opponents argue is important because debates are supposed to be made between people who have experience in debates, not by some random person who has no idea about the subject.

And ironic how you complain about generalizations considering that you generalize the Republican party claiming that "They'd rather ban a medical procedure than actually regulate it.". Which is absolutely false.

We never said that you couldn't be trans, we stated that children cannot be trans because aside from being too young and not being able to give informed consent it can cause hormone problems that can badly affect their bodies. But despite this many blue states, specially California, allow children to transition despite them being too young!

"They'd rather ban a medical procedure than actually regulate it."

Oh, you don’t know. Abortion is banned in 15 states with no exceptions.

That’s not a generalization. It’s a fact.

https://www.poynter.org/fact-checking/2022/post-roe-v-wade-state-bans-no-exceptions-rape-incest/

And you keep referring to me as if I am transitioning trans or a kid. I’m neither.

It is fair to examine your opponents ability to debate, but throwing your anecdotal experiences in debating and generalizing or implying me as one of those same people is irrelevant.

You’re basically crying victim to win an argument. Yet we’re not even arguing.

Tsk. Thou doth protest too much despite supposedly reaching a reasonable conclusion.

Can you show me examples of when puberty blockers would be a life saving medical necessity? Millions of lives? I'd like to read the details of these bans to see if there is any accommodation for these millions of kids dying from lack of puberty blockers

No of course not!

Of course I can. Try reading sometime. Thanks!

Puberty blockers were used long before the trans population explosion, my dude.

That post adds nothing.

He asked for links.

Put up or s*ut up.

What does your comment add exactly?

I reckon, nothing. Might want to read beyond your poor attempts to comment snipe.

Thanks for playing!

Yes, I can. Puberty blockers have been induced in children that go into puberty far too early (usually under 8) as well as conditions to treat other health conditions that may worsen due to natural puberty such as cancer and other diseases.

Links please, I believe you but let's see the science.

If you believe me then I don't really see the point but here are some articles addressing this.

https://theeverydaymagazine.co.uk/opinion/interview-evaluating-the-use-of-hormone-blockers-in-children-under-16

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/precocious-puberty

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/precocious-puberty/diagnosis-treatment/drc-20351817#%3A~%3Atext%3DTreating%20central%20precocious%20puberty%26text%3DThis%20treatment%2C%20called%20GnRH%20analogue%2Cbe%20given%20at%20longer%20intervals.

I also add that the only cancers I could find in regards to puberty blockers (hormone blockers, in general) are actually used to treat prostate and breast cancer. Significantly rare cases (if at all) are diagnosed in children so I may have been in error. Regardless, I don't support the current Republican solution to simply ban them from use in children in general but rather for elective reasons or without an underline medical condition beyond gender dysphoria.

But if pushed, I honestly don't think it's the governments job to interfere with ANY medical treatment at all.

I appreciate the links, very helpful. I'm with you that medical treatments need to be case by case, I don't support government supporting nor banning unrestricted use of any medical treatment that might be used to actually save lives and not harm people, especially children.

:0)

Check this out, a pro-abortion democrat whining about a study that refers to babies as babies: imgflip.com/i/6e41n1

Its not even a meme, its just them whining over a scientific paper lol.

:0)

Agreed. We can allow, perhaps even encourage, kids to be trans without encouraging physical medical intervention. (I specified physical, because talk therapy is still a good idea, as long as the therapist doesn't have an agenda in either direction).
I believe that in many children/teens it is a phase, especially since it is accepted right now. There is nothing wrong with phases. It helps children to explore who they are. Maybe it will stick, and maybe it won't. As long as it's just clothes and words (name and pronouns) if they feel they made a mistake, they can take it back. But it helps to let them go through it.
I also think going through puberty helps shape who we become. How many little boys think girls are icky only to realize how much they like them thanks to hormones.

Being anti elective (as opposed to due to a physical health necessity) hormone treatment is not anti-trans.

Left wing hypocrisy as usual

Check this out, a pro-abortion democrat whining about a study that refers to babies as babies: imgflip.com/i/6e41n1

Its not even a meme, its just them whining over a scientific paper lol.

Shouldn’t be transitioning period