What about the format do you think Maher originated?
Yes, that’s why I said he mixed up what the actual law was and what proposals for legal changes were:
That said, he’s not wrong about two things: that people did and do want to remove sex from birth certificates, and that this is a stupid idea that will hurt us in elections.
Lol now we’re giving Bill Maher the credit for inventing podcasts?
Man his fanboys are dedicated that’s for sure.
He is wrong. What he said was totally, factually false. Your link is to something entirely different than his actual words.
And the idea that he “originated” this format is so absurd and laughable that I can only recommend you remove your head from Maher’s ass.
You are right, the specific claim he made - that the law in California took sex off the birth certificate - is incorrect.
What is not incorrect is the idea that many people who are to the left of the Democratic party mainstream do support taking sex of the birth certificate.
So just so we are clear; you think that it’s a dumb idea and if PA or CA or any other state did take sex off the birth certificate, you’d oppose that idea, right?
That’s a question for @Atamasama as well.
The California bill that allows residents to obtain gender-neutral birth certificates was the first of its kind when it was signed into law by Gov. Jerry Brown in October 2017. “Gender identification is fundamentally personal,” the bill reads, “and the state should endeavor to provide options on state-issued identification documents that recognize a person’s accurate gender identification.”
These L.A. parents don’t want to assign a gender to their baby, so the government did it for them - Los Angeles Times (latimes.com)
I don’t watch or listen to a lot of podcasts so I may have to withdraw that claim. What I meant was that, in contrast to the HBO show, the podcast consisted of Maher and his guest having drinks, Maher possibly smoking a joint, and just chatting over dim lamplight with no particular time limit. I just think it’s a neat idea, and didn’t seem to me like a typical subject-focused podcast.
Thank you for a link that, again, demonstrates that Maher was spreading lies with utterly no self awareness.
I’ll note that your flippant claim, with no evidence and now, admitted, no basis at all, that Maher originated this format, is like a little baby junior version of Maher’s own arrogant bullshit. Congrats for emulating your idol so closely!
How would you even know what a typical podcast is?
Maybe you should take some of the criticism you, perhaps correctly, leveled at @Stranger_On_A_Train and apply that to yourself.
Luke 4:23
Thank you for proving that you can’t read. California (optionally) issues birth certificates in which “sex” is marked as “X”. How was Maher lying?
Maher’s actual words: “It was a law here in California. Don’t put sex on the birth certificate.”
Those words are lies. Your link demonstrates the lie. You’re an illiterate, Maher huffing dweeb.
Maher implied that California just removed sex from the birth certificate, which was not done.
What iiandyiiii conveniently ignores is the fact that there was quite a bit of support for such a law; and what he is a giant hypocrite about is the fact that he undoubtedly would agree with such a law, which is why he is avoiding answering the question of whether he would oppose this if it was the case.
Imagine if you will a Kansas Republican, who supported the 2022 abortion ban, but who when asked “why do Kansas Republicans oppose abortion access” responds with “What do you mean, you liar? Did we ban abortion? No? So why do you say we oppose it?”. Andy is doing the equivalent of that.
Someone here is fantasizing about what’s going on in the heads of strangers, but I’m inclined to ignore it.
You’re welcome to voice your opposition to taking sex entirely off the birth certificate at any time. If any such opposition existed, that is.
For the record, parents, not government, should decide what gender (or no gender) is printed on birth certificates.
I recommend keeping one’s fantasies to one’s self. Or maybe intimate partners - YMMV.
“Don’t put sex on the birth certificate” describes exactly what California parents are able to ask for. I’m not arguing about whether this is right or wrong, but this is certainly very far removed from the idea that sex is fixed at birth and invariant. Maher has his issues and I don’t always agree with him, but accusing him of “lying” in this case is just stupid.
Cool, thank you very much for confirming that Maher was right - you do take things too far.
Maher didn’t say “parents can ask for it”, you buffoon, Maher said it was California law that there would be no sex on birth certificates.
Especially when you’re going to come out and say that you support the thing that Maher is accusing you of supporting 
Another lie about me! What a shock. Especially when I just said, in crystal clear language, that the gender box should remain on birth certificates, and it should be up to parents, not government, to decide what goes in it.
The exact quote was “Don’t put sex on the birth certificate - we’ll see”. That is in fact exactly what the California law allows parents to choose to do, isn’t it?