Teaching Gay History in California

Teaching Gay History in California

There are 12512 comments on the EDGE story from Jul 9, 2011, titled Teaching Gay History in California. In it, EDGE reports that:

California lawmakers on Tuesday sent the governor a bill that would make the state the first requiring public schools to include the contributions of gays and lesbians in social studies curriculum.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at EDGE.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#12793 Jan 10, 2013
Same old irrational fear mongering.

We know child abuse is harmful. Accepting that gay people exist will not change that, just as accepting that straight people exist will not increase child abuse.

When faced with no rational argument, cry: "What about the CHILDREN!!!"

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#12794 Jan 10, 2013
Joe Balls wrote:
99.9% of the world's population have other things to worry about, and doesn't care if you live or die, get married, are beaten to death, or live happily ever after. They just don't like you constantly whining about it all day, every day.
Then why do so many spend so much time and money trying to prevent gay people from having the same rights they currently enjoy?

When those opposed to equal rights stop trying to harm gay people through denial of equality as well as through laws intended to harm, you will stop hearing about it. But as long as the unnecessary harm continues, you can expect to hear about it from those being harmed, from those who care about them, and those who care about liberty and justice for ALL.

Joe Balls

Since: May 11

Location hidden

#12797 Jan 10, 2013
Not Yet Equal wrote:
<quoted text>
Then why do so many spend so much time and money trying to prevent gay people from having the same rights they currently enjoy?
When those opposed to equal rights stop trying to harm gay people through denial of equality as well as through laws intended to harm, you will stop hearing about it. But as long as the unnecessary harm continues, you can expect to hear about it from those being harmed, from those who care about them, and those who care about liberty and justice for ALL.
You mean "special rights," don't you? I've never witnessed a gay person being denied their civil rights.

“Take Topix Back From Trolls”

Since: Dec 08

El Paso, TX

#12799 Jan 10, 2013
How could you? When you're not hiding behind a fake name and location you're no doubt hiding behind trees, bushes or buildings.
Joe Balls wrote:
<quoted text> You mean "special rights," don't you? I've never witnessed a gay person being denied their civil rights.

Joe Balls

Since: May 11

Location hidden

#12800 Jan 10, 2013
TomInElPaso wrote:
How could you? When you're not hiding behind a fake name and location you're no doubt hiding behind trees, bushes or buildings.
<quoted text>
LOL, and YOUR real name is TOM IN EL PASO?

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#12803 Jan 10, 2013
Brenda Lee Johnson wrote:
You dodged every question asked,ignored the consequences and replied with babble. In order for marriage to be segregated it would have to be refined! But refined as what? Who decides?
Marriage was male/female when your mother and father created your life; that's refined enough. There is no gender equality right in the US Constitution; our laws recognize human nature of male/female sexual differentiation.

.
Brenda Lee Johnson wrote:
I had thought you were objective but you are nothing of the sort. You seem big on the Pro-Homosexual talking points.
Nobody is objective; we all see the world through our own knowledge and experience.

There's nothing wrong with homosexuals or homosexuality but that's no reason to radically redefine the fundamental institution of marriage.

.
Brenda Lee Johnson wrote:
Gays have nothing in common with black civil rights. It takes a dam fool to try and make such of a twisted comparison.
I've never claimed same sex marriage is like civil rights; just the opposite. Changing the definition of marriage to satisfy sexual predilection is a special right not given in our Constitution.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#12804 Jan 10, 2013
The Lone Gunmen wrote:
Yes, tell us how black people integrating with white people leads to disease. Are Gay people discriminated against if no one knows their Gay? Black People can't hide their color!
^^I agree completely.

Same sex marriage would change the gender integrated institution of marriage to create a sinister new gender apartheid marriage. Down with segregation; if you like diversity keep marriage male/female.

“Take Topix Back From Trolls”

Since: Dec 08

El Paso, TX

#12806 Jan 11, 2013
Yes to both. I have a middle name for a reason.

In your case you have nothing related to balls.
Joe Balls wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL, and YOUR real name is TOM IN EL PASO?
Largelanguage

Wrexham, UK

#12810 Jan 11, 2013
TomInElPaso wrote:
How could you? When you're not hiding behind a fake name and location you're no doubt hiding behind trees, bushes or buildings.
<quoted text>
Whine whine whine!

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#12813 Jan 11, 2013
Gender segregation marriage is a step backward for civilization. Same sex marriage is like returning to antebellum morality.
The Lone Gunmen

United States

#12816 Jan 11, 2013
Here you go Horatio!

There is no more debate, the courts have ruled Gender Identity is a mental disorder!

---
Judge orders Mass. to pay for inmate’s sex-change surgery

In the first decision of its kind, a federal judge has ordered state officials to provide a taxpayer-funded sex-change for a transsexual prisoner, after finding that the treatment is the only adequate care for the inmate’s gender identity disorder.

District Court Chief Judge Mark L. Wolf said that the treatment for Michelle Kosilek, convicted of murder, had been prescribed by Department of Correction doctors. He said the only arguments for denying it were based on social bias against that type of surgery.

“This fact that sex reassignment surgery is for some people medically necessary has recently become more widely recognized,” Wolf wrote in a landmark 127-page ruling Tuesday.“Denying adequate medical care because of a fear of controversy or criticism from politicians, the press, and the public serves no legitimate penological purpose. It is precisely the type of conduct the Eighth Amendment prohibits.”

Kosilek, now in her early 60s, was born Robert Kosilek, but by 1990 was transitioning to a female identity. She strangled her wife, Cheryl, in Mansfield that year.
Related

Read the ruling (PDF)
6/13/00 | McGrory: A test case for a change

During her trial, Kosilek wore women’s clothes and has legally changed her first name to Michelle. She has been staying in a men’s prison in Norfolk while taking hormones and developing female physical qualities. Under Globe policy, Kosilek is being referred to as a woman because that is the gender with which she identifies.

The judge did not say who should perform the surgery or where it should be conducted, leaving those decisions to state officials. The cost of the surgery ranges from $7,000 to more than $50,000, depending on the extent of cosmetic work, according to informational surgery and transgender websites.

It was not clear how much postsurgery care would have to be provided, though the state would bear that cost as well.

Wolf’s decision is the first time a judge has ruled that the sex change was necessary for a prisoner suffering from gender identity disorder, though it follows a series of rulings in Massachusetts and across the country that have affirmed that some type of medical care is constitutionally required.

Last year, the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, the appellate court for much of New England, upheld a lower court decision ordering hormone treatment for a prisoner with gender identity disorder. Also last year, the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit struck down a Wisconsin law that prevented hormone treatment for inmates with the disorder.

Moreover, the US Tax Court in 2010 held that the costs of feminizing hormones and sex reassignment surgery for certain individuals were tax deductible, as they were necessary forms of medical care.

In Kosilek’s case, the care she has already received has been unsuccessful, she argued in court documents. When the case was first filed a decade ago, Wolf had ruled that treatment was necessary but stopped short of ordering the surgery. Kosilek sued again, saying the hormone treatments, laser hair removal, and psychotherapy she had received were insufficient to address severe anxiety and depression.

Kosilek has already tried to castrate himself and twice tried to commit suicide, once while taking the antidepressant Prozac. The Department of Correction’s own doctors have said that surgery is the only appropriate care for Kosilek.
The Lone Gunmen

United States

#12817 Jan 11, 2013
In his ruling Tuesday, Wolf said that the department was acting “deliberately indifferent” in failing to provide the surgery now that Kosilek has continued to suffer “intense mental anguish,” a violation of his rights against cruel and unusual punishment.

“Prisoners have long been held to have a right to humane treatment, including a right to adequate care for their serious medical needs,” Wolf said, citing US Supreme Court rulings.

Wolf issued his ruling after he had held a trial in 2006 and several follow-up hearings in the years after, with testimony from doctors and specialists and state prison officials.

A spokeswoman for the state Department of Correction said Tuesday only that,“We are reviewing the decision and exploring our appellate options.”

The department, under multiple administrations, has opposed the surgery since Kosilek first brought the case. State legislators have long fought against it as well, arguing that taxpayers should not be funding a prisoner’s decision for a sex reassignment.

On Tuesday, US Senator Scott Brown released a statement saying:“This is an outrageous abuse of taxpayer dollars. We have many big challenges facing us as a nation, but nowhere among those issues would I include providing sex-change surgery to convicted murderers.”

But transgender rights advocates welcomed Wolf’s decision, saying it recognized a standard of care set by national medical and psychological groups.

“These types of treatments are medically necessary, and we are looking forward to the day all transgender people can have full equal access to medically necessary care that they may need,” said Gunner Scott, of the Massachusetts Transgender Political Coalition.

Ben Klein, a senior attorney with Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders, added that Wolf recognized that there is a high standard he must follow in ordering the surgery, but that he found that it was met in the case of Kosilek.

“The real issue is that if the denial of health care amounts to cruel and unusual punishment, then there’s an obligation to provide that treatment,” Klein said.

Wolf, who was nominated to the bench by President Reagan in 1985, has been known for issuing controversial rulings based on law, but that often go against public opinion. He was the judge, for instance, who ordered a retrial last year in the sentencing of convicted serial killer Gary Lee Sampson, after finding that a juror withheld information about his past.

He is also the judge who held the hearings that exposed the FBI’s scandalous relationship with James “Whitey” Bulger, and he has vacated convictions after finding prosecutorial wrongdoing.

In his ruling Tuesday, the judge said he expected the Department of Correction to follow the same standards of care that it would for any illness, noting he recently oversaw an agreement the state reached with prisoners’ rights advocates to provide better mental health treatment.

One of Kosilek’s lawyers, Frances S. Cohen, called the judge’s ruling courageous, and said “it was entirely consistent with recent decisions that have held that medical doctors should make decisions with respect to treatment for gender identity disorder.”

Joseph L. Sulman, another attorney, said,“The law has always been in our favor, and we thought once the law was applied to the facts, the judge really only could reach one conclusion.”

He added that he anticipates the state will “promptly arrange for Michelle Kosilek to receive her treatment.”

Joe Balls

Since: May 11

Location hidden

#12818 Jan 11, 2013
Pay for the surgery, California's got PLENTY of money. The must have it, because they have all those working Mexicans taking over and killing off the blacks who never worked a day. Viva la Mexico!!
Worm

Miami, FL

#12823 Jan 12, 2013
Bad stuff!

“Take Topix Back From Trolls”

Since: Dec 08

El Paso, TX

#12824 Jan 12, 2013
The solution would be to stop having such thoughts. Speak to your psychiatrist about it. It's a really weird fantasy.
Goyim Matzo Balls wrote:
The thought of a Muslim man committing buggery on a Jewish man sickens me, just sickens me!

“Take Topix Back From Trolls”

Since: Dec 08

El Paso, TX

#12826 Jan 12, 2013
Show me one upper court decision that says that, then maybe we can discuss your foolish beliefs.

Your nothing but a Troll game player till then.
Terror With A Twist wrote:
<quoted text>
Still waiting for you to refute my assertion that it is a basic human right that all children should be afforded the companionship and normal natural environment of having a male father and female mother for parenthood.
Sh!tstain!

Joe Balls

Since: May 11

Location hidden

#12830 Jan 12, 2013
Gov Homo wrote:
Sh!tstain!
That's what they leave on the hotel mattress!

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#12832 Jan 12, 2013
There's nothing wrong with homosexuals or homosexuality but that's not a reason to radically change the fundamental social institution of marriage.

Traditional marriage is gender diverse; same sex marriage is gender segregated. If you like integration and inclusion, keep marriage one man and one woman.

“Post-religious”

Since: Apr 08

Location hidden

#12833 Jan 12, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
There's nothing wrong with homosexuals or homosexuality


Of course there isn't. Rational people already understand that.
Brian_G wrote:
but that's not a reason to radically change the fundamental social institution of marriage.
So we won't. Civil marriage isn't denied to homosexuals anyway. No state denies civil marriage on the basis of the sexual orientation of the partners. We'll simply stop using the sex of the partners as the sole legal basis for denying civil marriage.
Brian_G wrote:
Traditional marriage is gender diverse; same sex marriage is gender segregated. If you like integration and inclusion, keep marriage one man and one woman.
How about this:

There is no such legal construct as "traditional marriage", just as there is no such legal construct as "same-sex marriage" (or interracial marriage, or interfaith marriage, for that matter).

The legal construct is "civil marriage."

There is no legitimate governmental reason to deny civil marriage solely on the basis of the sex of the partners. Civil marriage can and does comprehend couples of the same sex and couples of the opposite sex. No segregation imposed; no diversity denied.

Joe Balls

Since: May 11

Location hidden

#12834 Jan 12, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
There's nothing wrong with homosexuals or homosexuality but that's not a reason to radically change the fundamental social institution of marriage.
What about AIDS? Most AIDS carriers are black AND gay, but it's spreading to other circles because they inter-mingle with women.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

US News Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 min Unreal 1,621,537
News White House will override Obama's climate plan 3 min WelbyMD 398
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 3 min Bongo 37,242
News 'It Stuns Me': Kelly Blasts Congresswoman for L... 5 min too much 61
News Barack Obama 8 min Lawrence Wolf 95
News Democrats Drop Congeniality as They Fire Away a... 14 min Katrina 77
News Trump's popularity is slipping in rural America... 21 min hawaiian punch 531
News McCain issues veiled criticism of Trump's Vietn... 35 min Retribution 27
More from around the web