VERY TRUE

AND WE HAVE NO MEDICAL TECHNIQUE TO RETURN LE INDIVIDUAL TO THE PRE-PUBESCENT STATUS QUO SO THEY CAN MAKE THE ANABAPTIST REASONABLE CHOICE TO BE BAPTIZED AND CHOOSE THEIR FAITH

HOWEVER !

NEITHER HAD ANY OF THEM CONSENTED TO HAVE BEEN BROUGHT TO THIS HARSH AND CROOL WORL

REMEMBER THESE YOUNG WOMEN FROM THE ROE V WADE OVERTURN PROTESTS WHO WERE LIKE "WELL I WISH MYYY MOOOM ABORTED MEEE"

THEY HAD NO CHOICE

THEY WERE PRACTICALLY RAPED BY THEIR PARENTS

BUT !

WE DO HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY TO RETURN THEM TO THE PRE-BIRTH STATUS QUO !

AND I THINK IT IS OUR MORAL OBLIGATION TO RAISE THEIR AWARENESS OF THIS POSSIBILITY

AND OF THIS LINE OF REASONING

BEFORE ANY DISCUSSION ON CONSENT TO GENDERIDOO BE ENTERTAINED

THIS IS MORE IMPORTANT AND TAKES PRIMACY IN THE CHAIN OF REASONING

BECAUSE WHETHER YOU CONSIDER AN X-YEAR-OLD CAPABLE OF CONSENT TO WHATEVER, A ZERO-YEAR-OLD IF NOT CERTAINLY INCAPABLE OF CONSENTING TO BEING BORN, IS DEFINITELY AND ASSUREDLY INCAPABLE OF COMMUNICATING CONSENT OR LACK THEREOF CLEARLY ENOUGH TO BE UNDERSTOOD BY THE PROSPECTIVE PARENTS

HAVE YOU GUYS SEEN WHAT A BIRTH LOOKS LIKE? OH ITS INCREDIBLY TRAUMATIC FOR THE BABY, THERES BLOOD AND SCREAMING AND A MIDWIFE SLAPS THE BABY VIOLENTLY

ITS HORRIBLE

FEW PEOPLE WOULD BE WILLING TO GO THROUGH WITH THAT

AS SUCH I PROPOSE A COMPROMISE ON ALL GENDER TRANSITIONING ISSUES

1. ALL PERSONS WHO HAVE DISPLAYED PUBLIC SUPPORT OF LGBT AND OTHER SUCH GENDER AND CONSENT POLICIES, SHOULD BE PROVIDED BY THE STATE AND OR BY THE INDIVIDUAL CITIZEN, AN EXTREME-LATE-TERM POST-PARTUM ABORTION THAT WOULD RESET SUCH PERSON TO A PRE-BIRTH STATUS QUO WHERE THEY MAY CHOOSE TO BE BORN OR REMAIN UNBORN.

2. PEOPLE CONCERNED ABOUT CONSENT AND GENDER SHOULD AVOID CAUSING OR PARTICIPATING IN PREGNANCIES; IF THEY HAVE DISPLAYED PUBLIC SUPPORT OF SUCH POLICIES, THE STATE AND THE CITIZEN BODY SHOULD TREAT CONCEPTION OF A CHILD BY THAT COUPLE AS AN ACT OF RAPE UPON THE CHILD, NECESSARILY BEING INCESTUOUS AND PEDOPHILIC RAPE, AND MUST BE PROSECUTED AS SUCH TO THE FULL EXTENT OF THE LAW.

3. CONVERSELY, AS TO PROVIDE RESPECT TO THEIR CONSENT AND GENDER BELIEFS, PEOPLE WHO HAD IN THE PAST DISPLAYED PUBLIC SUPPORT FOR SUCH POLICIES, MUST BE INSULATED FROM SOCIAL PARTICIPATION IN THE CHILDBEARING AND CHILDREARING ACTIVITIES OF THOSE WHO WHETHER DUE TO PERSONAL OR RELIGIOUS CONVICTIONS, WERE UNABLE TO PUBLICALLY SUPPORT SUCH POLICIES IN THE PAST.

I THINK THAT WOULD BE A FAIRLY REASONABLE COMPROMISE AND A LOGICAL OUTWORKING OF "PUBERTY-BLOCKING" AS AN IDEA.

nostr:note1y6uf9huvjcq0a0kmpx45m9r5j7wvvqse40w9cwx0mpd8wx906maqwcyu47