RE: Transexuals
April 15, 2016 at 8:07 pm
(This post was last modified: April 15, 2016 at 8:08 pm by paulpablo.)
(April 15, 2016 at 7:54 pm)SteelCurtain Wrote:(April 15, 2016 at 7:21 pm)Sterben Wrote: Sorry about the typo, I thought I proofread it fully. It would not be right to discriminate in any of these cases, how would you purpose to keep bigots out of businesses? While your thinking about that, let me ask you a other question. Would you classify a sex-change operation has cosmetic surgery? John who feels he is really a woman on the inside, this has been bothering him for a while and is affecting his work. He wants to get breast implants and hormone therapy, should his employers health insurance cover such a operation? A female employee could easy claim the size of her breasts are to small and is affecting her work performance. Should both be covered by there HMO or PPO? Their both trying to get "Cosmetic" surgery's. Should both be covered, or do both get denied there surgery's? Does the requests fall under a medical need? If you were the underwriter for the company's health plan, would you deny both of them, or approve both? Since both fall under "Cosmetic".
I think you're doing it on purpose now, so whatever.
I didn't propose to keep bigots out of business. They are there. Instead of protecting the business, you protect the people who are being discriminated against. The same arguments were used in the South in the 50's-60's when segregation was made illegal. More commonly businesses would lose patronage if a black person was seated at the lunch counter because the law protected that black person from being kicked out of the business for being black. So racist white people would come in, see the black people in the store, and leave for another place. This happened until it didn't.
Social change isn't always easy, but a lot of the times it's necessary.
As far as the example of the surgery, you have literally no understanding of the process for getting a sex reassignment surgery. You can't just walk into a plastic surgeon's office and ask them to turn you into a woman. It takes years of therapy, both hormone and mental/emotional, before a doctor will perform a SRS. At that point, it is medically indicated as the best treatment option. If your HMO or insurance options include certain elective options, then no, SRS shouldn't be excluded. The same would go if a person had serious emotional issues with breast size. If she went through years of therapy and her doctor recommended that an augmentation was medically indicated, then yes, that should be covered like any other elective procedure. If elective procedures are not already covered, then this is a moot point. Some companies just have shitty insurance. They can continue to have shitty insurance if they prefer that. The employee makes that decision when they join the company.
It's not a case of protecting the business vs protecting the people being discriminated against.
It's either letting businesses hire who they want or having governments force them to hire people.
Calling the absence of interference against someone protecting them is like a mafia style philosophy.
Abaris pointed out, erroneously, that I'm saying this because I'm for or against choice or being open for choice or something which isn't the case. I'm just pointing out that I don't the the word protection fits into what you're describing.
Also it was laws that drove a lot of the segregation before the anti segregation laws. Because before that you had the Jim crow laws so in my opinion that's just the government pandering to what people want, which would have happened naturally anyway in a free market society.
Are you ready for the fire? We are firemen. WE ARE FIREMEN! The heat doesn’t bother us. We live in the heat. We train in the heat. It tells us that we’re ready, we’re at home, we’re where we’re supposed to be. Flames don’t intimidate us. What do we do? We control the flame. We control them. We move the flames where we want to. And then we extinguish them.
Impersonation is treason.