AndrewJRenko wrote: » ... What celebrities/left leaning media people where wheeled out on Prime Time specifically to give their wholly inexpert views?
AndrewJRenko wrote: » And same for the whole gay thing, presumably? Let's make sure that teenagers don't feel accepted or anything?
jmayo wrote: » Eh how many times was Liam Cunningham, an actor, on various current affair shows voicing his supposed expert opinion on immigration and migrants ? From recollection he was on current affairs programs a couple of times.
jmayo wrote: » A few things that leap out for me from all the recent debates. Children should not be transitioned, they are not capable of making that decision.
AndrewJRenko wrote: » Eh, he wasn't on Prime Time. And immigration is not abortion or marriage equality.
ceadaoin. wrote: » It's a trans charity that actively campaigns for children to be able to transition. The woman in charge took her child to Thailand at the age of 16 for surgery. This is and was illegal in the UK, and is now illegal in Thailand. that's not ok. If you look into these things you'll find there's usually more to it than someone being a bigot.
tritium wrote: » Though tbh being anything beyond supportive and there for teens on their sexuality is also a no no for me. The analogy in your example would be actively taking your kids to gay bars/ strip clubs to make sure they got a full experience nice and early rather than actually making sure they had the information to make their decision in a measured way rather than rush in without time to build experience and understand their feelings properly.
Joeytheparrot wrote: » Mermaids does not actively csmpaign for children to transition. You are just making that up.
Rory28 wrote: » You must have a low opinion of us if you think that is what being gay means. Jaysus
AndrewJRenko wrote: » Not transitioning IS making a decision - a decision to spend those critical teenage years in a gender that is wrong for you. Are they capable of making that decision?
jmayo wrote: » The transgender debate seems to be getting quite nasty.
Gravelly wrote: » Jaysus your poor back will be broken from moving those goalposts.
tritium wrote: » Who the hell gave you the right to tell anyone what the hierarchy in social issues should be? If anything immigration is a far more immediate and life or death question for a greater number of people.
Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: » I’ll cede one thing. The laws haven’t caused much issue here yet but we don’t seem to have the level of trans activism that the US or U.K. has. It’s relatively easy to predict the outcome of cases though. Unless self id is unconstitutional then a trans woman is a legal woman. Ergo any discrimination against that legal woman in favour of a biological woman would be unlawful. This could include sports and existing most women spaces. I can’t see any way around this unless justices overrule the law on some ground but that itself would be condemned as discriminatory, and I don’t think it will happen.
Gravelly wrote: » You'd want to tell their Chief Executive that, she seems to take a different view:
jmayo wrote: » Eh how many times was Liam Cunningham, an actor, on various current affair shows voicing his supposed expert opinion on immigration and migrants ?
Riskymove wrote: » Just on this, Liam Cunningham is an Ambassador for World Vision and has made numerous trips to area where there are refugeeshttps://www.worldvision.ie/campaigns/liam-cunningham-in-uganda I think it's fair enough he be considered well up on the issues around refugees
jmayo wrote: » Eh how many times was Liam Cunningham, an actor, on various current affair shows voicing his supposed expert opinion on immigration and migrants ? From recollection he was on current affairs programs a couple of times. The transgender debate seems to be getting quite nasty. Watching documentary on British TV channel a while back, a debate being held had bouncers trying to keep one gang of loonies out and ended up with police being called. And there seems to be real hatred amongst some trans people for anyone who isn't and you end up with the lunacy where some ones complain women from birth can't now speak for females. :rolleyes: A few things that leap out for me from all the recent debates. Children should not be transitioned, they are not capable of making that decision. Former males should not be allowed compete in physical sports against born females. We should not be creating a myriad of gender descriptions to suit everyone and anyone. Adults can transition all they want. Good luck to them.
seamus wrote: » You think most women are anti-trans?
AndrewJRenko wrote: » Equality law really isn't 'fairly easy "to predict. If it were easy, there wouldn't be teams of opposing lawyers fighting it out at the WRC each day.
freshpopcorn wrote: » Well I started the thread because I saw the article online regarding the Primetime debate. I think we're having this debate because we need to find the right way to go forward for our country. People are generally unsure of what the whole thing entails and how a young kid may decided they want to change gender. What age can they start the process? How will this matter be discussed in school? When do you say yes/the doctor says yes to your kid changing gender? What are the consequences? We all knew guys who may have being a bit feminine or girls who were masculine grow up or may have being ourselves. Will it be sold to these people they may have gender issues in the future.
Joeytheparrot wrote: » Given that over 1000 women in Ireland signed a letter telling terfs where to go I would doubt that anyway.
Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: » Is Linehan anti-trans? That’s a genuine question, I don’t know an awful lot about his Twitter outbursts on the topic. It’s just, if he is expressing reservations about things like pre-teens being given medication to block puberty or questioning whether young teenagers should undergo sex-change surgery, that doesn’t necessarily indicate that he is anti-trans, does it? Has he gone farther than this, made openly anti-trans statements?
Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: » I think you may be mistaken as to the size of the female population.
pumpkin4life wrote: » No it isn't. This is completely wrong. A treatment that causes 40% to attempt suicide is a massive failure by any standard. If Graham Linehan gets more people to realize how sinister this stuff is, then good for him.
Topgear on Dave wrote: » "Removal of the sterilisation clause is key" That is quite an amazing and horrifying statement.
Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: » Yes, its less harmful.