Friday, November 18

Minnesota judge rules taxpayers must pay for sex-change operations for those who don't have the cash

This week a district court judge in Minnesota issued a "ruling"--quite literally--that forces state taxpayers to pay for "gender reassignment surgery" for people who want to be a different sex than they were born with, but can't afford it.

Hey, that's only fair, right?  I mean, if someone who can't afford something is unhappy or depressed by not being able to have taxpayers pay for what they want, it's only reasonable that a judge force taxpayers to pay for what the unhappy person wants, right?

If you're a hard-working American you may well think that's insane.  Unfortunately liberals and Democrats think it's just peachy.  As far as they're concerned your opinion as a taxpayer doesn't matter.

Goofy "rulings" like this happen because Democrats often rename things so they don't sound like what they really are--so that reading about such a "ruling" won't make voters so damn mad.

For example, Minnesota's largest paper--the Dem-fellating Star-Tribune--described the surgery as "gender transition," avoiding the more controversial term "sex-change operations."  Other articles have used "gender reassignment."

The ruling arises from a suit filed against the state by a 64-year-old woman who wants to be a man.  The Star-Trib says the ruling "allowed 'him' to proceed with surgery that state law had previously denied him.

This phrasing is totally misleading:  State law always allowed sex-change operations.  The person could have had one at any time she wanted.  Alas, she couldn't afford it, so demanded that taxpayers pony up the bucks.

The woman claimed that "the ability to have the surgeries is a matter of life and death.  Feeling you are in the wrong body can be devastating.”

In response to the lawsuit the state claimed its unwillingness to pay for the elective surgery was because of budgetary constraints, and that in any case the Obama administration had ruled that  Medicare will pay for such sex-change operations starting in January.  The judge ruled that budget concerns weren't relevant--meaning that if the state doesn't have enough money to pay for both medicine for poor people AND sex-change operations, it would simply have to do both things, money be damned.

You won't be surprised to learn that the lawsuit was filed by the state's ACLU, which claimed that the law discriminated against people who want taxpayers to pay for their sex change.

Of course the Dem-fellating Star-Trib phrased this as "discriminated against people who are transgender."  Notice how neatly that works to camouflage reality:  The ruling means the state will no longer be able to allocate or prioritize medical-care funding on a rational basis.  Which is just fine with the liberal morons who infest socialist-loving Minnesota.

After the ruling was issued, the state's Department of Human Services said it supported the decision.

“OutFront Minnesota is delighted by this ruling,” said Phil Duran, legal director of OutFront Minnesota. “And it could have broader impact on protection of transgender people in schools and other state government programs.”

Note carefully that phrase "it could have a broader impact on 'protection' of transgender people in schools and other state programs."  If you think they're done demanding taxpayer bucks you're naive.


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home