These treatments must be outlawed in America as well. The treatments are child abuse!! I can’t imagine what history will make of this horrible practice.
Remember Starmer is under orders to attack children and he will do that whatever the high court says. The grown man knows the world he lives in and in this world Starmer is a puppet and the high court will be ignored with total impunity. There is no rule of law in the UK as the cases against Assange, Richard D Hall and many many others have surely shown us by now.
"Gender-affirming care" is the sterilization of "generations of imbeciles" that SCOTUS Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote about while upholding the landmark eugenics case of Buck v. Bell in an 8-1 decision a century ago. Never overturned, even raised as defense in the Nuremberg trials for the crimes against humanity committed under the Third Reich. Their Master Race Final Solution was *inspired* by US law as conferred under Buck v. Bell.
That is what the trans genital mutilations and puberty blockers are about. Eugenics. By 'imbecile' don't get hung up on the definition of intelligence you have. The Germans didn't. Their definition included those who lacked common sense, high and low IQ. Eugenics practices include euthanasia along with sterilization. "Mercy killing." Of imbeciles, disabled, asocials - a common 'diagnosis' for political opponents who defied Nazi rule - along with Jews and Gypsies. Six-million+ "mercy killings." Eugenics. Countless more sterilizations. Of 'imbeciles.'
During WWII the US Supreme Court tweaked Buck v. Bell without overturning it. They added a test for voluntariness. Consent. How consent was gained wasn't specified. Coercion, duress. And deceit, psychological manipulation, clever marketing, like a Madison Avenue ad agency campaign to sell sterilizations to 'imbeciles' remains lawful to this day under Buck v. Bell.
Which is what "Gender-affirming" care is. A clever Madison Avenue makeover of "sterilization of imbeciles." By Mad Men (for those who remember the popular HBO series.)
Eugenics. Made "sexy." The UK courts seem to be taking a step back, even as US courts double-down or blind-eye it. And remember the euthanasia arm of eugenics remains active, engaged, Canada's MAiD "Death with Dignity" - another Madison Avenue makeover of government-sanctioned murder - still sells euthanasia to any buyers. "Can't pay rent? Boyfriend dumped you? Lost your smart phone? Our doctors are ready to help you transition with dignity! By lethal injection, or genital mutilation - you decide!" Voila!! Consent to Buck v. Bell eugenics!
"Gender-affirming care" and "Death with Dignity" are crimes against humanity insulated by clever linguistics of a marketing campaign designed by clever Mad Men hired by the same powerful eugenicists who have wanted a final solution to the overpopulation of "imbeciles" and "useless eaters" they believe plague the world for over a century. Believing themselves gods, redesigning the human race in their image. Who "have no use for God," as many have publicly stated. A God the eugenicists assert "makes mistakes putting little boys in little girls bodies." Or whatever blasphemous claptrap they peddle to justify mass murder, mutilations and sterilizations. That's the cold, hard truth of it.
Note: Medical Doctors were the executioners of choice in the Third Reich. Dr. Victor Brack's favorite quote, "the needle belongs in the hands of a doctor" uttered as he witnessed the first gas chamber executions of 'undesirables.' Obviously for sterilizations, too.
History repeats:
Why did so many German doctors join the Nazi Party early?
International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, October 3, 2012
"During the Weimar Republic in the mid-twentieth century, more than half of all German physicians became early joiners of the Nazi Party, surpassing the party enrollments of all other professions. From early on, the German Medical Society played the most instrumental role in the Nazi medical program, beginning with the marginalization of Jewish physicians, proceeding to coerced “experimentation,” “euthanization,” and sterilization, and culminating in genocide via the medicalization of mass murder of Jews and others caricatured and demonized by Nazi ideology. Given the medical oath to “do no harm,” many postwar ethical analyses have strained to make sense of these seemingly paradoxical atrocities. Why did physicians act in such a manner? Yet few have tried to explain the self-selected Nazi enrollment of such an overwhelming proportion of the German Medical Society in the first place."
And...:
Useless Eaters: Disability as Genocidal Marker in Nazi Germany
The Journal of Special Education/Catholic Culture, 2002
It is important to note that the enactment of prejudice against people with disabilities in Nazi Germany could not have succeeded without the complicity of the medical and adjunct professions. Power over life and death was placed firmly in the hands of physicians who became white-coated executioners, having long abandoned the "do no harm" clause of the Hippocratic Oath. Currently, there is evidence of the medical community's again being willing agents in hastening the deaths of people deemed not viable, including people with disabilities, through familiar methods for ending the lives of terminally ill people, such as starvation and death by thirst. Furthermore, there is evidence that "do no harm" is now viewed as a somewhat quaint throwback to a distant, less sophisticated era. For example, many physicians no longer take the Hippocratic Oath before beginning their careers, and many standard hospital treatment protocols now stipulate that staff physicians may override next-of-kin requests for patient treatment if the physician decides that treatment will likely be ineffective (Smith, 2000). Once again, patients, including those with disabilities who are terminally ill, now bear the responsibility of justifying their existence and their need for treatment. This being the case, and with the clear understanding that not all physicians put the greater good ahead of their individual patients, there should at least be some debate about what this means for people with disabilities, many of whom rely extensively on the assumption that their physicians have their best individual treatment interests at heart and will treat them regardless of utilitarian arguments to the contrary."
They do NOT take the Hippocratic Oath! That's considered a relic of past times. They let us think they do. Pacifies us. An important lie of omission:
Culture of death : the assault on medical ethics in America
"Smith warns that future troubles could be tied to the fact that only 14% of doctors today report having taken the Hippocratic oath to “do no harm.” Smith even recounts episodes of doctors recommending that the old or sick be denied basic treatments which might potentially save life. This enlightening book unmasks unexpected occurrences in the present practice of medicine, and shines light into a future that many of us might not like."
However the British Medical Association appears to want to reject this decision. What is the matter with our Doctors? Their propensity to dispense expensive unsafe and ineffective drugs is disgraceful.
During my brief period of psychiatry residency in Germany (one year before relocating to the US for family reasons) I steered clear of puberty blockers because nobody knew their long-term effects. I would not refer anyone younger than 26 for surgery because we were beginning to learn that most of the patients were actually Kinsey Scale 4 and higher. I gladly referred patients to others if they wished.
I certainly don't trust this Labour government and suspect this issue will get weaponized, despite Cass, though Starmer may realise which way the wind is blowing by now. Nor did I trust the Tories, but here they made the right decision.
These treatments must be outlawed in America as well. The treatments are child abuse!! I can’t imagine what history will make of this horrible practice.
Remember Starmer is under orders to attack children and he will do that whatever the high court says. The grown man knows the world he lives in and in this world Starmer is a puppet and the high court will be ignored with total impunity. There is no rule of law in the UK as the cases against Assange, Richard D Hall and many many others have surely shown us by now.
"Gender-affirming care" is the sterilization of "generations of imbeciles" that SCOTUS Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote about while upholding the landmark eugenics case of Buck v. Bell in an 8-1 decision a century ago. Never overturned, even raised as defense in the Nuremberg trials for the crimes against humanity committed under the Third Reich. Their Master Race Final Solution was *inspired* by US law as conferred under Buck v. Bell.
That is what the trans genital mutilations and puberty blockers are about. Eugenics. By 'imbecile' don't get hung up on the definition of intelligence you have. The Germans didn't. Their definition included those who lacked common sense, high and low IQ. Eugenics practices include euthanasia along with sterilization. "Mercy killing." Of imbeciles, disabled, asocials - a common 'diagnosis' for political opponents who defied Nazi rule - along with Jews and Gypsies. Six-million+ "mercy killings." Eugenics. Countless more sterilizations. Of 'imbeciles.'
During WWII the US Supreme Court tweaked Buck v. Bell without overturning it. They added a test for voluntariness. Consent. How consent was gained wasn't specified. Coercion, duress. And deceit, psychological manipulation, clever marketing, like a Madison Avenue ad agency campaign to sell sterilizations to 'imbeciles' remains lawful to this day under Buck v. Bell.
Which is what "Gender-affirming" care is. A clever Madison Avenue makeover of "sterilization of imbeciles." By Mad Men (for those who remember the popular HBO series.)
Eugenics. Made "sexy." The UK courts seem to be taking a step back, even as US courts double-down or blind-eye it. And remember the euthanasia arm of eugenics remains active, engaged, Canada's MAiD "Death with Dignity" - another Madison Avenue makeover of government-sanctioned murder - still sells euthanasia to any buyers. "Can't pay rent? Boyfriend dumped you? Lost your smart phone? Our doctors are ready to help you transition with dignity! By lethal injection, or genital mutilation - you decide!" Voila!! Consent to Buck v. Bell eugenics!
"Gender-affirming care" and "Death with Dignity" are crimes against humanity insulated by clever linguistics of a marketing campaign designed by clever Mad Men hired by the same powerful eugenicists who have wanted a final solution to the overpopulation of "imbeciles" and "useless eaters" they believe plague the world for over a century. Believing themselves gods, redesigning the human race in their image. Who "have no use for God," as many have publicly stated. A God the eugenicists assert "makes mistakes putting little boys in little girls bodies." Or whatever blasphemous claptrap they peddle to justify mass murder, mutilations and sterilizations. That's the cold, hard truth of it.
Note: Medical Doctors were the executioners of choice in the Third Reich. Dr. Victor Brack's favorite quote, "the needle belongs in the hands of a doctor" uttered as he witnessed the first gas chamber executions of 'undesirables.' Obviously for sterilizations, too.
History repeats:
Why did so many German doctors join the Nazi Party early?
International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, October 3, 2012
https://sci-hub.se/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlp.2012.09.022,
"During the Weimar Republic in the mid-twentieth century, more than half of all German physicians became early joiners of the Nazi Party, surpassing the party enrollments of all other professions. From early on, the German Medical Society played the most instrumental role in the Nazi medical program, beginning with the marginalization of Jewish physicians, proceeding to coerced “experimentation,” “euthanization,” and sterilization, and culminating in genocide via the medicalization of mass murder of Jews and others caricatured and demonized by Nazi ideology. Given the medical oath to “do no harm,” many postwar ethical analyses have strained to make sense of these seemingly paradoxical atrocities. Why did physicians act in such a manner? Yet few have tried to explain the self-selected Nazi enrollment of such an overwhelming proportion of the German Medical Society in the first place."
And...:
Useless Eaters: Disability as Genocidal Marker in Nazi Germany
The Journal of Special Education/Catholic Culture, 2002
https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=7019
"Complicity of the Medical Professions
It is important to note that the enactment of prejudice against people with disabilities in Nazi Germany could not have succeeded without the complicity of the medical and adjunct professions. Power over life and death was placed firmly in the hands of physicians who became white-coated executioners, having long abandoned the "do no harm" clause of the Hippocratic Oath. Currently, there is evidence of the medical community's again being willing agents in hastening the deaths of people deemed not viable, including people with disabilities, through familiar methods for ending the lives of terminally ill people, such as starvation and death by thirst. Furthermore, there is evidence that "do no harm" is now viewed as a somewhat quaint throwback to a distant, less sophisticated era. For example, many physicians no longer take the Hippocratic Oath before beginning their careers, and many standard hospital treatment protocols now stipulate that staff physicians may override next-of-kin requests for patient treatment if the physician decides that treatment will likely be ineffective (Smith, 2000). Once again, patients, including those with disabilities who are terminally ill, now bear the responsibility of justifying their existence and their need for treatment. This being the case, and with the clear understanding that not all physicians put the greater good ahead of their individual patients, there should at least be some debate about what this means for people with disabilities, many of whom rely extensively on the assumption that their physicians have their best individual treatment interests at heart and will treat them regardless of utilitarian arguments to the contrary."
They do NOT take the Hippocratic Oath! That's considered a relic of past times. They let us think they do. Pacifies us. An important lie of omission:
Culture of death : the assault on medical ethics in America
Wesley A Smith, 2000
https://archive.org/details/cultureofdeath00wesl
Smith's Follow up book:
Culture of Death, The Age of "Do Harm" Medicine
Discovery Institute, 2016
https://www.discovery.org/b/culture-of-death/
"Smith warns that future troubles could be tied to the fact that only 14% of doctors today report having taken the Hippocratic oath to “do no harm.” Smith even recounts episodes of doctors recommending that the old or sick be denied basic treatments which might potentially save life. This enlightening book unmasks unexpected occurrences in the present practice of medicine, and shines light into a future that many of us might not like."
However the British Medical Association appears to want to reject this decision. What is the matter with our Doctors? Their propensity to dispense expensive unsafe and ineffective drugs is disgraceful.
During my brief period of psychiatry residency in Germany (one year before relocating to the US for family reasons) I steered clear of puberty blockers because nobody knew their long-term effects. I would not refer anyone younger than 26 for surgery because we were beginning to learn that most of the patients were actually Kinsey Scale 4 and higher. I gladly referred patients to others if they wished.
I certainly don't trust this Labour government and suspect this issue will get weaponized, despite Cass, though Starmer may realise which way the wind is blowing by now. Nor did I trust the Tories, but here they made the right decision.