http://www.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/04/22/sex.change.benefits.ap/index.html?s=7

Your taxes could be going to pay for someone to have a sex change. If I were you I'd literally go Ballistic. For the first time I'm ashamed to have been born in Sunny California. What a crock of shit.

That's gotta be uconstitutional, being forced to pay for cosmetic surgery, because some little faggot wants to be a girl. It would be cheaper to kill the guy, and would put him out if his "pain" as well. How about you guys pass a bill making it legal to kill people who want sex changes? What a fucked up state, how can you live there?

Hell it's already in place! What the fuck are you people thinking? For 14 freaking people. 14 freaking people! It not only benefits transgenders which isn't so bad, but also to drag queens, queers, people that are just fucked up in the head. You are dishing out $37K so someone can replace there peter for a vagina. Now I'm pretty sure that Cali has homeless people that would like a bite to eat perhaps a place to stay. Or maybe even a needy person that would do very well in college. But no, let's do it to make 14 people more fucked up then they already are in hopes that they feel better. In the meantime we'll let the bum down the road under the bridge starve to death and the kid work all his life at burger king making minimum wage.

[This message has been edited by The Real (edited 04-23-2001).]

I agree but that is goverment for ya.

they have extra money and they look in to the stupidest most undeserving cause and give to that in hope that the public will some how support there kindness.

or maybe they put a bunch of causes in a hat and whatever one they draw gets money.

------------------
cogito, ergo sum

"It really is a civil rights issue," said Marcus Arana, a transgender San Francisco Human Rights Commission discrimination investigator. "We have an insurance issued that will pay for a hysterectomy in Mary but not in Marcus, and will pay for hormone therapy in Mary but not in Marcus."

That's from the site, defend that Spiffy. Civil Rights, ugh.

maybe if it was needed medacaly but whats the chance of that happening again?

------------------
cogito, ergo sum

Me? Defend that? Yeah right. The most insane thing about it has nothing to do with the proposal, though- it's that, according to the article, no one has publically spoken against it, and the only opposition has been "primarily from Texas". Am I the only one who has a *really* difficult time believing that's true, and not a media-spawned pile of bullshit designed to make anyone against it look like a complete homophobe?

You mean I can get my very own vagina for free?! Alright!!!

*starts packing his bags*

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Real:
http://www.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/04/22/sex.change.benefits.ap/index.html?s=7

Your taxes could be going to pay for someone to have a sex change. If I were you I'd literally go Ballistic. For the first time I'm ashamed to have been born in Sunny California. What a crock of shit.

That's gotta be uconstitutional, being forced to pay for cosmetic surgery, because some little faggot wants to be a girl.
[This message has been edited by The Real (edited 04-23-2001).]

---

I dont know how much of this you heard. being that I live in San Francisco i can tell you that that isnt what they are talking about. It specifically says "No Cosmetic Surgery" they are talking about Hermaphrodites whi have both sex orans who want to choose what sex.

But it isnt going to pay for hormones for breast enlargment or breast implants. Nothing surgical for cosmetic reasons.

Are you sure? The way I heard it was for SF city workers who's insurance would cover sex-change operations.

Thank you, Wolf

Changing a penis into a vagina is cosmetic surgery. And nor does it cover transgenders, but anyone who even so much as feels they should have been born the other sex. Any two bit draq queen can get a sex change, the bill footed by SF. I don't have a problem with hermaphrodites, such a thing is very rare. But it pisses me off that anyone who wants one can get one. This also walks all over the freedom of religion. I for one don't believe such a thing is in the least bit right, but if I lived in SF I'd be forced to pay for such a thing. I'd be MADE to do it, such a thing is tyranny and it's just one more thing the govt would like to force onto you, because a MINORITY group wanted it done. I bet the majority of CA is against such a thing, yet it passed. Why even vote?

Ahh... how does this go against freedom of religion?

If you don't support homosexuality why should you be forced to support it? If for in fact you believe it's wrong in whatever diety you worship, the govt is making you support something you don't believe in. Hence you right to religion is gone.

I realize that.. but this is a lot different than simply supporting or not supporting homosexuality (which, btw, how exactly does one "support" it? I know a lot of people who don't give two shits about anyone's sexual preference, but I don't know anyone who says, "I want my kid to be gay!"). This is, plain and simple, the government paying for something that is in no way necessary for anyone to live.

I understand girls, I relate well to girls, but I was born in a guy's body, yanno? Even if I wanted to be a chick (and, when I hear about some of the idiotic shit guys I know do, it's embarassing to be of the male gender), I'm not one, and if for any reason I felt an unquenchable need to become one, it should be supported and paid for by me and me alone, especially since there's nothing life-threatening about simply being a man.

What I find laughable is the argument that Lokil quoted: "'It really is a civil rights issue,' said Marcus Arana, a transgender San Francisco Human Rights Commission discrimination investigator. 'We have an insurance issued that will pay for a hysterectomy in Mary but not in Marcus, and will pay for hormone therapy in Mary but not in Marcus.'"

Well, duh! Why would a guy need hormone therapy or a hysterectomy? Now, if a guy becomes a girl and THEN needs them, that's an argument that holds a little more weight- I could understand if people complained if a girl who used to be a guy can't get the same treatment a girl who's always been a girl gets. That's not the issue here, though- this revolves around the actual change. Therefore, making points about hysterectomies and such is irrelevant.

In addition: "'We have transgender people living and working among us,' Leno said. 'They deserve the same dignity and respect as every other citizen. One way is to make sure the city provides equal benefits for equal work.'"

I can completely agree with the statement- there are transgender people working and living among us, they do deserve the same respect as anyone else (unless they're assholes, of course), and they do deserve equal benefits for equal work. But, sorry, I fail to see how not getting a gender-change operation paid for by insurance is unequal treatment.

In a way, I feel the need to apologize for picking at what you said, but we're on the same side here, and I'm trying to help. This is not a religious issue on the whole (if it is for you personally, that's different), and by saying it is, you're punching a hole in your own argument. (Not that it seems anyone here cares to debate on the side of the city..)

I'm all for it. The more freaks about, the more I blend in.

No it's not religious on the whole, prolly not even on the half. But it does come up.
Or atleast I brought it up. If forces one to support homosexuality in by making the citizens pay for a surgery to a gay person, an unecessary surger. I can understand the transgender thing, that's fine, because it must be a living hell to go through life like that.

Both sexes do very stupid things. From my perspective I'd say women do it more so, but looking from an open mind, it's probably very close to being equal.

I dont know for sure. I know i heard "Cosmetic Surgery" will not be included. but then again how reliable is the local news source. It doesnt matter either way. It sucks that not every person in the san francisco area can get state assisted health care but if someone wants to commit an unatural act like chopping off their wee wee is pretty fucking pathetic to me. Like i was talking about in another post. The city pitched in for an animal hotel but there are people dying on the streets of san francisco. There are a lot of Good people in San Francisco but it bogles the mind of how people seem to have more love for dogs or other animals then their fellow human.

My two cents:

The article was poorly written - i don't feel informed.

I'm pretty sure the health plan does not cover cosmetic surgery but I imagine the patient needs either a demanded surgery by either a physician (they got two thingies) or by a psychologist who deems it necessary for their emotional survival.

That does not mean I agree, I'm just pointing out that it may not be as bad as it seems.

The quote mentioned above refers to a quasi-specific instance which I may be able to describe. Mary is a woman who needs hormone treatment (menopause or whatever) and she gets it funded by the state, but Marcus was born a man and paid for his own sex change but NOW that he needs hormones he cannot get the money he needs. This is still not fair to the taxpayer or the homeless dude, but at least its a reason.

SEE! This is why I hate mass-media. It's worthless.

One final thing: Imagine you spent your life savings because you were a woman in a man's body and wanted to change. So you do. Then you get breast cancer and the state won't fund your insurance because you are were a man. You die.

Real, whilest your redneck leanings are at many times endearing, in this aspect they just piss me off.

quote:

---

If you don't support homosexuality why should you be forced to support it? If for in fact you believe it's wrong in whatever diety you worship, the govt is making you support something you don't believe in. Hence you right to religion is gone.

---

I don't support every single action this goverment takes, in fact I'm opposed to quite a lot of it. You don't selectively pay taxes in this country, thats just not how it works. I'm all for another form of government, but until Homosexuality becomes a recognized religon yer full-a-shit on this point, pacifist's still pay taxes that go to the pentagon...

That, plus the fact that the city workers are paying for it with a rise in insurance premiums, makes me think that you should take your argument, fold it up into a nice pointy star, and shove it up your ass.

quote:

---

And nor does it cover transgenders, but anyone who even so much as feels they should have been born the other sex. Any two bit draq queen can get a sex change, the bill footed by SF

---

READ THE FUCKING ARTICLE YOU REFFERED TO!!!

quote:

---

The coverage extends to hormone treatment and medical matters such as mastectomies or breast cancer. It will not cover cosmetic procedures and can only be used after a doctor deems treatment medically necessary. Employees first must go through an extensive medical review process that takes up to six months.

---

I'm not gonna even start on your backwards ass views on homosexuality, just try and not be a total fucking nazi when you go about spouting the fine mix of feces and vomit that you refer to as an opinon next time please....

[This message has been edited by Jadedfool (edited 04-27-2001).]

There was a great article in The Metro Times (a local paper) a while back about transsexuals. Oddly enough, the old joke line 'I'm a lesbian with a penis' holds true foe some of these people. There are men that are attracted to women, but don't feel like they should be men. The opposite is true too.

If I ever claim to understand people, please shoot me, as I've clearly gone mad.

------------------
I would rather be a smartass than a dumbass