Unfortunately I suspect the American right, much less America as a whole, is still very far from being able or willing to countenance a ban on circumcision. Still I think this is a positive step (one of many that must be taken) in the right direction, further building up on the foundation laid by the other red states that have already banned/restricted 'gender affirming' horrorshows (IIRC South Dakota or Florida was the most recent one before this?)
If signed by Lee, the bill will ban such procedures as mastectomies on girls who come to believe they are boys and make it illegal to give children cross-sex hormones and puberty blockers.
This is more significant, because this is done a lot more by these creeps who realize that it looks bad to outright mutilate minors (of course, they do that as well, but less often).
If there's one lesson the Farms have taught me which has nothing to do with maintaining opsec online, it's that perverts rarely limit themselves to one degenerate fetish. It's almost always an absolute clusterfuck of multiple horrible fetishes - few people can 'just' be a furry or a tranny (or both for that matter), they're also more often than not a pedophile, into femdom, into scat and waterworks, etc.
Feel good legislation that has enough loopholes in it that the people making millions off of mutilating children will still be able to make money.
We need better politicians. We need a real opposition party. The RNC has been a wholly-owned subsidiary of the DNC (and by proxy Woke Inc.) for the last couple decades.
It bans "child genital mutilation" but then in the description of the act only lists things that can be done to girls.
Not sure what the point of striking out the word FEMALE was in that case since someone could still perform any sorts of male circumcision or butchery and argue that it's legal since it's not defined as genital mutilation.
The list in the bill actually includes quite a few things that can be done do males, such as castration. It also isn't exclusive, it's listing particular examples. I could argue in court that male circumcision is included.
I could see that argument -- my main concern is that it's not explicitly listed as a form of genital mutilation in the paragraph where they define "genital mutilation."
Unless I missed something, which is entirely possible because it's written in legalese.
Unfortunately I suspect the American right, much less America as a whole, is still very far from being able or willing to countenance a ban on circumcision. Still I think this is a positive step (one of many that must be taken) in the right direction, further building up on the foundation laid by the other red states that have already banned/restricted 'gender affirming' horrorshows (IIRC South Dakota or Florida was the most recent one before this?)
This is protect the favored form of religious child mutilation.
This is more significant, because this is done a lot more by these creeps who realize that it looks bad to outright mutilate minors (of course, they do that as well, but less often).
Now Tennessee can run a predator catching ring to trap the troons willing to ship prescription hormones to children
Bonus: according to lolcow Anthony 'Erin' Reed, whose 300+ page thread on Kiwifarms highlights (among other things) how he's been legally banned from his wearing ex-wife's clothes, the TN legislature has also passed a ban on drag queen BS as well today. No more drag queen story time, groomers!
He's banned from wearing his ex-wife's clothes only if he parades himself in front of children.
One wonders why they always want an audience of children for their perversions.
If there's one lesson the Farms have taught me which has nothing to do with maintaining opsec online, it's that perverts rarely limit themselves to one degenerate fetish. It's almost always an absolute clusterfuck of multiple horrible fetishes - few people can 'just' be a furry or a tranny (or both for that matter), they're also more often than not a pedophile, into femdom, into scat and waterworks, etc.
To be fair, the rare troon who isn't a complete degenerate is also unlikely to land on the Farms. Not that I have encountered on either.
Now we just gotta do people that'll just fly their kids to California to get it done
TN should refuse to allow banks who fund this to operate in TN.
The exact same way CA refuses banks who fund guns to operate in CA.
Obama started operation chokepoint. Conservatives need to use their rules or lose the fight.
Feel good legislation that has enough loopholes in it that the people making millions off of mutilating children will still be able to make money.
We need better politicians. We need a real opposition party. The RNC has been a wholly-owned subsidiary of the DNC (and by proxy Woke Inc.) for the last couple decades.
Get on Idaho's level, Tennessee. Imagine still allowing social transitioning or surgery on teenagers. The only thing we have left is circumcision.
Edit: actually i read the bill again, and I think it also bans małe circumcision.
It bans "child genital mutilation" but then in the description of the act only lists things that can be done to girls.
Not sure what the point of striking out the word FEMALE was in that case since someone could still perform any sorts of male circumcision or butchery and argue that it's legal since it's not defined as genital mutilation.
The list in the bill actually includes quite a few things that can be done do males, such as castration. It also isn't exclusive, it's listing particular examples. I could argue in court that male circumcision is included.
I could see that argument -- my main concern is that it's not explicitly listed as a form of genital mutilation in the paragraph where they define "genital mutilation."
Unless I missed something, which is entirely possible because it's written in legalese.
Yeah, generally speaking, "including" isn't exclusive in legalese, but it's up to interpretation.
Look at the last names of those opposing this and then scratch your chin.
When do I have to stop?
So does this effectively ban elective circumcision or no?
Don't worry it still allows your favorite form of mutilation favored by the more feminine way.
It's just the phrasing, the bill bans procedures such as (that is, including) mastectomies for girls as an example.
It's not. Mutilation of the breasts removes a primary bodily function. It's worth mentioning.
But yes, I agree that mutilation of the penis is far more damaging and life-altering.