He said he has delivered babies, which proves that no one is actually transgender, somehow.
Sen. Roger Marshall (R-KS) introduced a bill this week to legally erase transgender people, entitled the “Defining Male and Female Act of 2024.” He claimed that the bill will stop what he called the Biden administration’s attempt to “replace biological sex with dangerous radical gender ideology.”
The bill is a long list of terms and definitions, where words like “father” and “girl” are defined with the words “male” and “female.” Those two words are then defined as “an individual who naturally has, had, will have, or would have, but for a congenital anomaly or intentional or unintentional disruption, the reproductive system that at some point produces, transports and utilizes [sperm or eggs for male or female, respectively] for fertilization.”
Sometimes I’m surprised that acts like these don’t incite violence against the responsible politician.
For someone who had their existance threatened it could be possible to frame it as an advanced form of self defense. Of course not everyone would see it that way, but I’m thinking it would be likely that at least some people come to that conclusion.
I doubt a court would. Your gender or sex is not considered existence.
IANAL, but I’d also guess linking gender to existence or threat. May harm the trans community more than help. As the separation of born sex vs gender is not legally clear. So such a claim may cause more issues with the right to change than it protects. At least without some serious changes in the law as stands.
The only way to make “I assassinated a politician whose ideology I resent” legally defendable would be massive popular support. “Some people” isn’t enough if you risk serving as scapegoat to have your entire community labeled as terrorists. The dilemma of violent action is that you need enough people behind you to become a credible threat before you start threatening.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !politics@beehaw.org
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it’s a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
Where possible, post the original source of information.
If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
Sometimes I’m surprised that acts like these don’t incite violence against the responsible politician.
For someone who had their existance threatened it could be possible to frame it as an advanced form of self defense. Of course not everyone would see it that way, but I’m thinking it would be likely that at least some people come to that conclusion.
I doubt a court would. Your gender or sex is not considered existence.
IANAL, but I’d also guess linking gender to existence or threat. May harm the trans community more than help. As the separation of born sex vs gender is not legally clear. So such a claim may cause more issues with the right to change than it protects. At least without some serious changes in the law as stands.
The only way to make “I assassinated a politician whose ideology I resent” legally defendable would be massive popular support. “Some people” isn’t enough if you risk serving as scapegoat to have your entire community labeled as terrorists. The dilemma of violent action is that you need enough people behind you to become a credible threat before you start threatening.