New bill in South Carolina would amend the constitution to define "gender" as "biological sex…

[Ivy]

New bill in South Carolina would amend the constitution to define "gender" as "biological sex assigned at birth" for ALL laws/regulations.

 

They are also talking about ending "Informed Consent"

 

 

 

[awkward-yet-sweet]

Wow. Hopefully this bill is so extreme that it goes nowhere. If it does pass, I expect the courts will strike it down.

[Marcie Jensen]

Wow, indeed. This can't be constitutional on the federal level, and as I remember my civics from high school, state constitutions can't be in conflict with the federal constitution. I hope this doesn't get out of committee.

[Carolyn Marie]

1 hour ago, awkward-yet-sweet said:

Wow. Hopefully this bill is so extreme that it goes nowhere. If it does pass, I expect the courts will strike it down.

 

That has been, and will continue to be, our last, best hope for protection and succor from all these nonsensical, noxious pieces of (insert vulgarity here) legislation.

 

Carolyn Marie

[Astrid]

So once again, science is pushed aside by gerrymander-elected "representatives" who haven't thought things through.  Intersex people don't need to exist, because they were assigned to be M or F by a doctor who made a guess soon after birth, so no need to ever change that, right?  These legislators conflate gender and sex to be synonymous, and the fact that science has shown that they clearly are not is ignored by them, because they hold a debate-proof majority and their conservative beliefs are not to be questioned; rather, these beliefs are to be forced on everyone who lives in their state.  The floggings will continue until morale improves, to borrow a famous line about another tyrant.

 

They're coming for us.

[Astrid]

12 minutes ago, Carolyn Marie said:

If it does pass, I expect the courts will strike it down.

 

You'd think.  Then again, the Supreme Court only yesterday heard arguments about the Independent State Legislature theory, that purports that state legislatures do not need any checks and balances from courts due to their own interpretation of one word, legislature, in a part of the constitution -- in this case, about ridiculously drawn district boundaries that favor one party over another.  And the plaintiffs would like to extend that to other areas as well, including the LGBTQIA+ community.  Three of the most conservative Supreme Court justices seemed to embrace this race to end democracy (yikes!).  Three other conservative justices seemed to have reservations about it, but did not reject it in entirely.

 

An impartial court would strike such laws down.  The question we currently face is how impartial are our courts?

[VickySGV]

If all the science books on Trans people were turned to stone and they were required to have those books fall on their heads in order for them to hold office, each one would be unaffected and the books turned to gravel from hitting the heads.  They are ruled by simplistic religious beliefs from 10K years ago (The Adam/Eve story was in Sumerian stories before the Hebrew's took it in) that to intelligent people laid the foundation for scientific investigation which is wonderfully rich in discovery, but by no means simple and by no means complete, which the fourth grade Sunday School information is.

[Ivy]

More escalation in Texas.  They're not through yet.

[VickySGV]

One is greater than many thousand in that state it seems.  How big a liar was the blogger to (pronoun unknown) therapist that said they were, or is this a  parent that took part in the ROGD fiasco of a mock scientific publication?  Parental ownership of children is a real thing in the parent's eyes.  Dog's and cats and cattle are on the same plane to them.

[Vidanjali]

 Here's the SC bill text. 

 

"the context of reproductive potential or capacity"? What is this, animal husbandry? 

 

Sex chromosomes: male or female? That leaves the many individuals who don't have XY or XX unaccounted for. 

 

Moreover, I am not aware that it's standard practice to check the sex chromosomes at birth nor to conduct scans on internal genetalia. To wit, many people do not know they're actually intersex until they undergo medical testing/scanning for something unrelated. 

 

And what about those with ambiguous genetalia? I shudder to think. 

 

"psychological, chosen, or subjective experience of gender" in that order, right? Read "crazy, snowflake, or here we'll throw a token bone maybe your individual experience is a thing, albeit necessarily invalid. 

 

The depth of ignorance is unspeakable. 

[VickySGV]

1 minute ago, Vidanjali said:

Moreover, I am not aware that it's standard practice to check the sex chromosomes at birth nor to conduct scans on internal genetalia. To wit, many people do not know they're actually intersex until they undergo medical testing/scanning for something unrelated. 

 

And what about those with ambiguous genetalia? I shudder to think. 

 

If the bill had to require public money to cover those issues of testing, it would have a very short life and disastrous on their political careers, especially if the politicians had to take the tests to stay in office.  I had to have a complete genetic panel done for a double parent gene variation in regard to my blood structure.  I may add that a high number of Trans people vs the cis population also have that same blood gene variation.  Another lesser panel done by the University of California at Los Angeles focused on an issue of Testosterone receptors that were deformed and did not process T effectively, although I was not sterile. I do not see them making the state liable for the money to do that testing though.

[VickySGV]

It bothers me that he may be a couple of IQ points above the people in his district,  He probably also had a great campaign contribution from one of the national H8 law organizations that seem to come up with a ton of money. 

[Ivy]

1 hour ago, Katie23 said:

What is more amazing is that with his limited background in healthcare (as in none), he is the chairman of the medical affairs committee.

It figures.  Actually having a clue about what you're talking about makes you "woke" or something like that.

 

The Democrat governor is the only thing stopping this in NC.  And that hinges on 1 vote in the statehouse now.

Sorry, but I'm not optimistic.

 

Why do these people hate us so much?  It's irrational.

If anything the midterms just made things worse.  They're trying to outdo each other with their oppression, all the time congratulating themselves on their self-righteousness.

 

Sorry for the rant…  But there it is.

[Ivy]

2 hours ago, Katie23 said:

I am glad all of my stuff was taken care of before this initiative.

I'm in NC.  This was the main reason I wanted my name and gender (ID) change done now.  My Birth Certificate is in NY, so I might still have time for that one.  

 

Again I ask, What is the actual reason for doing this s**t?  Was the republic in danger or something?   I must have missed it somehow.  Are you a cis-gender dude?  (or woman)  Fine… enjoy your life!  I'm happy for you…. really, I am.  Just please leave me the heck alone.

[Ivy]

2 hours ago, Katie23 said:

He is a graduate of Bob Jones University.

This explains a lot.

 

Anybody remember Steve Tylor?  Maybe some of y'all Christians?  Only slightly related, but Bob Jones U at the time - back in the day.  It was referring to inter racial dating being prohibited.

 

 

[Ivy]

No offense intended.  I just stayed up past my bedtime.   Sometimes you gotta look over us old gals.

[awkward-yet-sweet]

Ugh... I came back and found a whole crap ton of stuff to be offended by in this thread.  🙄 

 

Personally, I hold to religious beliefs from 10,000+ years ago with pride...including Adam and Eve and the literal 6 day Creation.  My husband is a member of the Sons of Confederate Veterans.  Faith, family values, and historical traditions aren't what yields extreme legislation such as this, and saying so is to paint some communities with a very broad brush. 

[VickySGV]

Topic moved from news to Politics since even some of my own comments have turned that way.  We are a diverse group and need to keep that in mind. 

[Heather Nicole]

2 hours ago, awkward-yet-sweet said:

My husband is a member of the Sons of Confederate Veterans.

 

So...your husband wants to enslave black people?

 

You are aware, that whas the whole point of the confederacy, right?

[awkward-yet-sweet]

10 minutes ago, Heather Nicole said:

 

So...your husband wants to enslave black people?

 

You are aware, that whas the whole point of the confederacy, right?

 

Apparently you're not aware that Sons of Confederate Veterans has members of multiple ethnicities.  There are black members of my husband's SCV chapter.  It is a historical/genealogical organization, not a political movement.  A lot of what they do is to help preserve gravesites and battlefields. 

[Marcie Jensen]

9 hours ago, Katie23 said:

Yeah, but according to some Republicans, it is okay to suspend portions of the Constitution as they see fit...

Democrats feel the same way; just on different issues. TBH, both major parties are, imho, flip sides of the same coin. I don't like either one and this bill is just another example of why. 

[Marcie Jensen]

4 hours ago, Heather Nicole said:

 

So...your husband wants to enslave black people?

 

You are aware, that whas the whole point of the confederacy, right?

While slavery was at the heart of the Civil War, the issues of the time were far more complex and included both states' rights and economics/industrial development. To learn about the causes, I would suggest reading James Macpherson's book Battle Cry of Freedom, which is the best history of the Civil War, including the causes leading up to it and the immediate aftermath. It won a pulitzer is quite an eye opener. another book that delves into the causes of the Civil War that I can recommend is War to the Knife (I don't recall the author) that deals with the events in the 1850's in Kansas that many argue was where and when the Civil War began.

 

And, in full disclosure, I grew up in Johnson County Kansas--on the border with Missouri--and had a great-great-great (?) uncle from Concordia MO who was home on leave from the Union Army and killed by Quantrill's raiders. Also, my great-great grandfather ran a station on the underground railroad and was later wounded at Gettysburg fighting for the North.  My family also has relatives that fought for the Confederacy, though we don't talk about them much.The point being this is personal as it is for many people in this country. Had I been alive then, I would have fought for the Union; not because it's perfect but because not only is slavery wrong, but because the ideals of what it stands for stand above all other forms of government.

 

The Sons of Confederate Veterans are a service organization, as @awkward-yet-sweetpoints out; similar in function to the Daughters of the American Revolution. Ripping into folks' heritage and faith as justification for one's own positions merely adds fuel to the fire. As do personal attacks and insults on politicians and sitting SCOTUS members we don't agree with. 

 

I will refrain from delving into creation stories and so on. The topic is simply too broad to go into here, and this isn't the right thread anyway. All I will say is that to condemn an entire faith because of the beliefs of one or two groups is rather narrow minded and is identical, intellectually, to the very sort of bigotry said group is accused of. This applies to Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, et al.  I seem to recall, and I may be wrong as I've slept since then, a course in rhetoric that I took in seminary where one of the main points was that when one's argument descends into name calling and vitriol it has no merit.

 

My apologies if this offends anyone. That said, it seems as if this thread has veered from its original purpose and is descending into invective. Again, my apologies.

[Ivy]

Yikes.  From the trans-wars to the civil war.

I didn't mean to offend anyone with the Steve Taylor song.  I just remembered it was a Bob Jones thing at the time.  Unless I'm mistaken, they did change that policy eventually.

 

As for religious things, people can believe what they want.  It's pretty much beliefs anyway.  There's not a lot of proof for any of it.  My own beliefs have evolved over the years.  There are things I used to believe strongly that I now think are BS.  But to be honest, I can't really prove the stuff I believe now either, so….    

I just have to go on my own experience.

 

People yelling about XX or XY chromosomes think they're being scientific, but they've closed their minds to all the complexities that are still being uncovered daily.  I think closing your mind is a kind of death.

 

When I started this thread, I was mostly concerned with another anti-trans bill, and it's possible affects on our lives.  I live about a dozen miles from SC so I do pay attention to what happens there.  As of now in NC, we still have a democrat governor.  The republicans lack 1 vote of a super majority in the state house.  I'm not so stupid as to think that all the democrats support us.  But at least there is still lip service.

 

Well, it's beginning to look like I might have survived another year.  At least I have managed to have my name officialized…  And my ID gendered correctly.  And that's something to be grateful for heading into the winter solstice.

[awkward-yet-sweet]

13 minutes ago, Ivy said:

As for religious things, people can believe what they want.  It's pretty much beliefs anyway.  There's not a lot of proof for any of it.  My own beliefs have evolved over the years.  There are things I used to believe strongly that I now think are BS.  But to be honest, I can't really prove the stuff I believe now either, so….    

I just have to go on my own experience.

 

I've noticed that people of faith use the word "belief" quite differently than others.  For me, what I believe is the core of my world...it isn't something optional or added on to my life.  It is the entirety of existence, a framework for everything.  Belief doesn't rule out science - it provides a base for it, and people of faith literally started much of the modern scientific method. 

 

I noticed at least one case where Christian folks accidentally offended a trans person by stating they "believe" themselves to be a gender other than how they were born.  It was misinterpreted as a slight, when it was in fact an acknowledgement that the person's gender identity was part of the core of who they are. 

 

Back to the main issue of the thread - I don't understand why a gender issue has to be dealt with in a state's constitution.  That's not really what constitutions are for.  Constitutions are to explain the purpose of government, describe how that government is to function, and then to limit the powers of that government.  Constitutions may include a description and protection for specific personal rights.  Putting gender issues or abortion into a constitution seems to be outside the scope of that document. 

 

I see multiple ways that this weird proposed piece of legislation can fail even if it passes.  And the governor will veto.  Does the legislation have enough support of overcome a veto?  I would hope not.  If it overcomes a veto, there's multiple courts that can take care of it.  Thankfully, checks and balances in our system keep the vast majority of bills from getting through.  A government functions best when it functions least.

 

[awkward-yet-sweet]

I'd love to see something bigger come out of the gender identity issue.  I'd love to see major pushback against the government getting to define and label us.  We shouldn't have to be classified by gender, race, skin color, eye color, and pinned down to an address.  I'd love to see the government get out of marital issues entirely - abolish it as an institution and leave it as an issue of faith or private contract.  I'd love to prevent the government from defining the nature of a family and limited who can be considered my family. 

 

In short, government has too much power, and that power continues to grow.  Trans rights are just one facet of the struggle for human liberty.