The Majority Report with Sam Seder Thread

[FAH1223]

This is Sam’s girlfriend

 

[storyteller]

Mike from PA popped in to MR. He looks sooo different . Still has good insights though

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

Mike from PA popped in to MR. He looks sooo different . Still has good insights though

after wanting Harris to fail, now he’s got all the answers

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

Stupid regressive trans related interview today just whining about this non issue and denying reality. It’s a fake issue. They’re tying themselves into knots just to creatively excuse this insanity. No one who listens to this doesn’t think they’re just engaging in playground imaginary wishcasting.

 

[Loose]

Stupid regressive trans related interview today just whining about this non issue and denying reality. It’s a fake issue. They’re tying themselves into knots just to creatively excuse this insanity. No one who listens to this doesn’t think they’re just engaging in playground imaginary wishcasting.

Go get you a transgender women so you can't stop lusting about them online daily.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

Go get you a transgender women so you can't stop lusting about them online daily.

theres no difference to you

 

[storyteller]

Stupid regressive trans related interview today just whining about this non issue and denying reality. It’s a fake issue. They’re tying themselves into knots just to creatively excuse this insanity. No one who listens to this doesn’t think they’re just engaging in playground imaginary wishcasting.

The "fake issue" is a literal case on the Supreme Court docket that could have repercussions about discrimination cases going forward and potentially cutting into previous successful discimination cases. On top of that, it's another case of Science vs Conspiracy Theorists.

You obviously just saw the title of the episode and went into full bigot mode, because your post doesn't demonstrate any knowledge about what they actually discussed.

 

[storyteller]

For anyone that actually wants to look at the case:

Supreme Court to Hear Case about Bans on Gender-Affirming Care for Transgender Youth on Wednesday

One of the term’s highest profile cases, U.S. v. Skrmetti could have broad implications nationwide, say BU LAW professors

www.bu.edu

This is the Supreme Court case that prompted the interview. It's worrisome, because the case pits state lawmaker conspiracies against a broad medical consensus. So, this case is similar to the overturning of Roe v Wade in a way. It's conspiracy theorists (apparently Nap included) against empirical evidence and scientific consensus.

“The thing that I have been curious about going into Wednesday’s argument is how much of the research and data the justices are going to look into, because a lot of the state’s claims rest on undermining the science and medical aspect of this medical care,” says Michael Ulrich, an assistant professor of health law, ethics, and human rights at BU’s School of Public Health and School of Law.


Ulrich says he’ll be listening for if, or when, the justices push back on medically inaccurate or misleading claims by Tennessee’s lawyers. “Even the simplest look into all of the state’s explanations and justifications—they really start to fall apart fairly easily,” says Ulrich, whose work has included this issue since at least 2021.

Another line of argument Ulrich will be listening for is how the court distinguishes this type of medical care from other types of care, if it does at all. “We’ve seen this with abortion, where it’s treated as separate from healthcare,” he says.


Huberfeld, too, sees parallels in the battle over reproductive freedom.


“There are similar patterns to the way that—for lack of a better way of putting it—more controversial kinds of care are being treated by these states,” Huberfeld says of gender-affirming care and reproductive care. “But the politicization of healthcare, while it’s not new, has intensified, and the willingness of state regulators to make decisions about what healthcare providers can do does not bode well for the practice of medicine nationwide.”

This sort of political interference in medicine “has become easier for states to do after the Dobbs decision,” Huberfeld says, referring to the 2022 Supreme Court decision that overturned Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey.


Both Huberfeld and Ulrich say that pinpointing certain types of medical care as acceptable or not acceptable opens up a dangerous precedent.


“It’s hard to see, then, why that would not apply to other areas of medicine that states could just say, ‘We don’t like this,’ or ‘We don’t like the intent that you have behind this type of treatment,’” Ulrich says, “and that really opens the door to legislating healthcare and medicine and what treatments are available and who they’re available to. It becomes really, really dangerous.”

This is a key implication of the case in the medical science context. The case is very much real, the side defending trans-rights is firmly based on scientific and academic research, and Nap's "imaginary wishcasting" claim is pure projection or an example of him being such a bigoted reactionary that he read the headline and based his post on guessing what the discussion was about rather than paying attention to the topic.

 

[storyteller]

This is a great example of "stop using right-wing memes for your own goofy attacks, when there are actual serious issues we could be discussing."

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

For anyone that actually wants to look at the case:

Supreme Court to Hear Case about Bans on Gender-Affirming Care for Transgender Youth on Wednesday

One of the term’s highest profile cases, U.S. v. Skrmetti could have broad implications nationwide, say BU LAW professors

www.bu.edu

This is the Supreme Court case that prompted the interview. It's worrisome, because the case pits state lawmaker conspiracies against a broad medical consensus. So, this case is similar to the overturning of Roe v Wade in a way. It's conspiracy theorists (apparently Nap included) against empirical evidence and scientific consensus.



This is a key implication of the case in the medical science context. The case is very much real, the side defending trans-rights is firmly based on scientific and academic research, and Nap's "imaginary wishcasting" claim is pure projection or an example of him being such a bigoted reactionary that he read the headline and based his post on guessing what the discussion was about rather than paying attention to the topic.

The problem is that dems refused to reign this trans nonsense in, now republicans will over correct.

You had the chance

 

[storyteller]

The problem is that dems refused to reign this trans nonsense in, now republicans will over correct.

You had the chance

The problem is that you called the interview imaginary wishcasting based on a fake issue. Meanwhile, the interview was about a Supreme Court hearing that's taking place today and an issue with a complete scientific consensus backing it.

The dems should have reigned bigoted losers, not people who think Trans people should be treated like human beings.

 

[Black Panther]

This is a great example of "stop using right-wing memes for your own goofy attacks, when there are actual serious issues we could be discussing."

Heard this one this morning. Dude said the NAACP issuing a travel advisory for Black people traveling to Florida as an example of "far left insanity".

 

[storyteller]

Heard this one this morning. Dude said the NAACP issuing a travel advisory for Black people traveling to Florida as an example of "far left insanity".

It's beyond frustrating watch the "enlightened centrist" types browbeat their strawman versions of the left. They have to take rare examples or reach super hard just to try and win arguments that people aren't really having.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

The problem is that you called the interview imaginary wishcasting based on a fake issue. Meanwhile, the interview was about a Supreme Court hearing that's taking place today and an issue with a complete scientific consensus backing it.

The dems should have reigned bigoted losers, not people who think Trans people should be treated like human beings.

Theres nothing bigoted about this argument. They are being treated as humans. The problem is that trans activists have waded into spaces they had no place trying to seek parity.

 

[storyteller]

Theres nothing bigoted about this argument. They are being treated as humans. The problem is that trans activists have waded into spaces they had no place trying to seek parity.

I see you're still just talking instead of looking up the Supreme Court case, or the interview YOU posted, or the article I posted. The issue being discussed, is about treating them like human beings instead of discriminating against them. It's literally about parity.