Rand Paul questions Dr. Rachel Levine on puberty blockers for minors with gender dysphoria

It’s a question showcasing the hypocrisy of many who have remained silent or openly advocated for the government to have no say in child rearing now saying they demand government intervention.

You wouldn’t understand

 

Only for kids.

 

Biden's nominee is not, in fact the man promotes it vigorously.

 

I repeat a man is a man and a woman is a woman and one cannot change themselves into the other. And that is what this is about, the question to the gentlemen up for confirmation was should CHILDREN be allowed to demand sex change and should the government intervene on the parents to allow it. And yes gender and sex ARE the same thing at least until the left wanted to change the language to fit their agenda of telling that men who pretend to be women are actually women.

 

Do you compare removing the foreskin to removing the penis and taking hormones to suppress that natural hormones to mimic the female sex? Go back and read more slowly, it's a PARENTS decision and no nowhere I know of in any medical writings is circumcision considered abuse or mutilation. If the parents do not want to circumcise but the child wants to should the government intervene?

What does religious faith have to do with this at all. I was raised in a Methodist home, went to a Methodist church. I no longer follow that faith, it was not irreversible like the PHYSICAL mutilations and chemcial mutilations being discussed here.

But I can only assume you are taking the position that children SHOULD be able to make these decisions on the own and if the parents object the government should intercede on the rights of the parents. Gotcha.

 

The question that was posed to the gentlemen being questioned was whether the government should intercede over the wishes of the parents and the gentleman refused to answer.

What say you?

 

Apparently the gentleman up for nomination believes it's OK.

 

You prefer "he who pretends to be a she"? If the man a female?

 

He said “govt overriding the parents consent to give...”
Sounds like he’s asking the opposite of what you’re saying....but I don’t think minors should be getting these procedures, parental consent or not.

 

I disagree with her

 

I watched it live a few days ago and watched it again just now. This man is aware there's something curious about the momentum of transgenderism and he blatantly sidestepped the question.

The question was fair because we give too much agency to kids these days. I'm sorry but teens have to learn to wait until adulthood to make these calls. It's just that simple. You can't hold a parent liable for gender anxiety in later life unless they consent to a permanent surgical operation for a minor. It's their minor, they decide, end of story. Where helicopter parents are too controlling, tranny parents are too afraid to be the adults in their household.

Maybe the answer is a simple appeal to logic. Between the ages of 18 and 26, most people arrive to their permanent beliefs about the world. From this I gather that such a significant decision cannot be made prudently by a youngster. They need to have their life and decide for themselves, just later in life. Adolescence (or even pre-adolescence) is no time to make such a decision.

 

Male circumcision absolutely meets the definition of mutilation and some medical readings absolutely say this. It is starting to be banned slowly across the world unless a doctor recommends it. You are saying the parents should be able to make a decision in one direction without medical review but that neither doctors or parents should be able to go the other direction or the state will step in.

Again, it goes back to what you will allow in some cases but not in others.

That is in no way my position, children should not be allowed to undergo medical treatment without a dr or parental consent. What you are saying is that even with parental and medical consent that children shouldn’t be able to do it.

You want the state to be the absolute arbitrator

 

Now focus on the topic, here is what was asked

“Do you believe that minors are capable of making such a life-changing decision as changing one’s sex?” And this, “Do you support the government’s intervening to override the parent’s consent to give a child puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and/or amputation surgery of breasts and genitalia?”

He refused to answer, and in fact insulted the people he is to be working for. Should he be confirmed without responding?

Here is the press reaction and defense

“Exchange between GOP senator, transgender nominee draws fire from Democrats,” reports the Washington Post. “Rand Paul’s ignorant questioning of Rachel Levine showed why we need her in government,” opines a writer for the same publication.

“1st transgender nominee deflects inflammatory questions from GOP senator,” reports ABC News.
“Rand Paul Launches Into Transphobic Rant Against Trans Nominee,” opines The Daily Beast.
“Rachel Levine Responds to Rand Paul About Transgender Medicine,” reports the New York Times, neglecting to mention that Levine’s “response” was one of sheer evasion.

Do you agree?

Talk about burying the lede. Contrary to what progressive pundits insist, the real story of interest here is not Levine’s transgender status, but rather the fact that Levine refused to answer a crucial and highly topical question related to child welfare.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2021...ough Friday 2021-02-26&utm_term=NRDaily-Smart

Do you agree?

 

So you're agree on what is his apparent position and if in fact it is and he refuses to answer, so should he be confirmed? Should he be in such a position with that belief?

 

He asked from both ends. Do you agree with Levine's apparent answers to the affirmative?

 

I’d have to hear more about her position, I don’t like the refusal to answer.

 

I didn’t see an answer

 

Puberty blockers delay any final decision. They are very much different than sex surgery.

In any case, no one is talking about surgery on children except Rand Paul. And the child doesn't make the decision on puberty blockers or hormone treatments. The doctors and guardians do that, and they don't reach that decision easily.

The example that Rand Paul gave was a troubled, suicidal 16 year old that was given puberty blockers. She admitted that the treatments helped her a great deal. It wasn't until she was in his 20's that she got any surgery

 

Neither did I. While it was a trap question, mixing up a lot of stuff, it should have been in her ballpark to answer. I guess they are avoiding soundbites from an obviously antagonistic Senator.

 

And can cause PERMANENT changes in puberty as Sen. Paul noted and cited from a poor young woman who went through the hormone treatments and is now infertile. And yes I would venture to gamble that the majority of these children are troubled and remain troubled.

 

Why was it a "trapped question", it was a vital and necessary question the citizens of the country have a right to know the answer before a vote to confirm is taken so we can advise our members of Congress what we think about it. The only one giving a "sound bite" was Levine with the scripted pre-planned non-answer he gave.

 

I said apparent answers implied by his refusal to give one.

 

Senator Paul is an eye doctor. He is a quack when it comes to anything else. The woman he is quoting is infertile because of surgeries she had as an adult.

You may as well say that the woman drank Sprite as a child and now she is infertile. Zero correlation.

 

Because 90% of his preamble was about genital mutilation then quickly switched to puberty blockers as if they were the same thing.

 

I disagree that no answer = whatever answer is worst