What purpose would the sex field on a birth certificate serve if it can contain whatever the fuck you want rather than the sex you were assigned at birth? It’s called a birth certificate, and this is why it lists sex, not gender.
The position you are presenting here is simply not consistent with what @Atamasama described as the usage of the terminology on the “woke left” (their term, not mine, although they also put it in quotes):
Not gonna bother trading barbs with a liar who lies about me so easily. I was asked whether I support a hypothetical law - I made it crystal clear I opposed it, and then more lies.
OK bud. Next time you want to complain about the way Maher paints the far left, try to pick a position where you don’t clearly agree with Maher’s caricature of a leftist.
I wouldn’t support that legislation, because I think it’s useful to include it, but I don’t object to changing it after the fact as California does.
Yeah, I used “woke left” as that’s the language Maher uses when complaining about these things. He uses it as a pejorative.
More lies about me. I explicitly said the opposite. Not sure how the lies come so easily.
Also, there seem to be a LOT of folks happy to drop stupid amounts of money on Vegas shows during the holiday season (including some spread-age), and these guys’ agents aren’t about to let them leave that kind of money on the table.
Sad to see Babale join ranks with Steophan as someone who can lie so easily, so routinely, and so baselessly about other posters.
Oh, I guess you didn’t say:
Oh, wait - you did.
What Maher criticized is the idea that you can, on a birth certificate, put no gender at all and just say “We’ll see”. He was WRONG, because he said the California law allows for that, and it does not.
But here, you take a stance more extreme than California’s law. California law allows the birth certificate to be changed to nonbinary after the fact. You express support for the parents deciding that “no gender” is printed on the birth certificate.
Hence, while Maher is wrong about what California’s law is, he is right about criticizing people (like you) who want to go too far.
Hope that clarifies, but I expect you’ll just screech “liar” again rather than engaging with anything I said.
After your false fantasies about me, you asked me if I supported removing the sex box from birth certificates. I very clearly indicated that I opposed this. Then you doubled down on your fantastical lies.
You’re just another internet liar. You don’t have to be this way. This is a choice you’re making.
You very clearly indicated that you would render the field completely useless by letting parents put in “any or no gender”, correct.
You very clear indicated that you’d support exactly what Maher described: putting no gender on the birth certificate and saying “we’ll see”.
Maher was wrong about this being allowed in California, but clearly he’s right about people supporting this.
You’re smarter than this; you know exactly what you’re doing here.
Fuck you, liar. Still making up words, different than the ones I actually posted.
You asked a question and I answered. And now you’re lying about my answer. Government shouldn’t get to see inside my kid’s underwear.
Oh, in that case, you need to change your password, because someone used your account to post this:
“Government” doesn’t see inside your kid’s underwear nor fill out a birth certificate. A doctor does that, when your kid isn’t wearing any underwear because they just popped out you or your partner.
I’ve got a question for you - and it’s a serious question. Why would it be a dumb idea to take sex off the birth certificate? It’s not like “sex” is particularly effective as an identifying characteristic - there are plenty of people with “F” on their birth cerficate who look like men and vice-versa. And I’m not talking about transgender people- I’m talking about people who have “F” on their birth certificate and due to their body shape, hairstyle, choice of clothing and accessories are frequently taken for men. I have a friend who I once ran into at an event with someone who resembled her .I asked if that was her brother- it was her sister. I was of course embarassed but my friend said it happens all the time. She was wearing jeans, a golf shirt, sneakers, had a unisex hairstyle, wasn’t wearing any jewelry, didn’t have a purse of any sort. I’d bet she gets funny looks when she shows people her driver’s license and I’m sure some of them think she changed the gender marker on the license and /or birth certificate.
Because your sex has legal implications, so there should be official government record of your sex.
Thank you for quoting my actual words, in which I clearly disagreed with your hypothetical law. Those are different words than the fantastical lies you used.
You’re really weird, you know? Are you sure you’re not a Republican? It seems like you might have the same interest in government involvement in children’s genitalia.
What legal implications does my sex have? I can’t think of any except maybe which jail/prison I go to, which isn’t something most people need to worry about.
It could be relevant to cases of discrimination, to joining teams or clubs or signing up to schools, to benefiting from scholarships or other programs, and so on.
Sounding like DemonTree influenced someone more than they influenced DemonTree.
Doh, I forgot one! Steophan, Babale, and DT. Routine, easy, and apparently shameless liars about other posters.