VioletVortex
Well-Known Member
Talk about a right wing, authoritarian police state...
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Jail, fines. For using improper pronouns.
- Thread starter Twilight Hue
- Start date
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
I am characterizing what you claimed and posted from others on this "crusade" to reveal the jail time and fines of these laws. That has been your claims this entire time. I have been pointing out it didn't happen, even after your own source tested the law out, thought for sure he would face consequences, but nothing happened except for his own efforts into proving himself an ***.SW - this is about the fifth time that you've mischaracterized my position, despite my continued restatements. Why is that? It's almost as if you want to make a strawman
Ultimately, they'll face nothing because even if the jail time and fines were real and true as the doomsday prophets claim, the Supreme Court would inevitably strike it down.
Perhaps you're misattributing?
You've no idea what I read when I first saw this post.
I might have an idea!
Karl R
Active Member
Thanks for sharing the misleading clickbait.
From the text of the bill:
1439.51.
(a) Except as provided in subdivision (b), it shall be unlawful for a long-term care facility or facility staff to take any of the following actions wholly or partially on the basis of a person’s actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) status:
(1) Deny admission to a long-term care facility, transfer or refuse to transfer a resident within a facility or to another facility, or discharge or evict a resident from a facility.
(2) Deny a request by residents to share a room.
(3) Where rooms are assigned by gender, assigning, reassigning, or refusing to assign a room to a transgender resident other than in accordance with the transgender resident’s gender identity, unless at the transgender resident’s request.
(4) Prohibit a resident from using, or harass a resident who seeks to use or does use, a restroom available to other persons of the same gender identity, regardless of whether the resident is making a gender transition or appears to be gender-nonconforming. Harassment includes, but is not limited to, requiring a resident to show identity documents in order to gain entrance to a restroom available to other persons of the same gender identity.
(5) Willfully and repeatedly fail to use a resident’s preferred name or pronouns after being clearly informed of the preferred name or pronouns.
(6) Deny a resident the right to wear or be dressed in clothing, accessories, or cosmetics that are permitted for any other resident.
(7) Restrict a resident’s right to associate with other residents or with visitors, including the right to consensual sexual relations, unless the restriction is uniformly applied to all residents in a nondiscriminatory manner. This section does not preclude a facility from banning or restricting sexual relations, as long as the ban or restriction is applied uniformly and in a nondiscriminatory manner.
(8) Deny or restrict medical or nonmedical care that is appropriate to a resident’s organs and bodily needs, or provide medical or nonmedical care in a manner that, to a similarly situated reasonable person, unduly demeans the resident’s dignity or causes avoidable discomfort.
From the text of the bill:
1439.51.
(a) Except as provided in subdivision (b), it shall be unlawful for a long-term care facility or facility staff to take any of the following actions wholly or partially on the basis of a person’s actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) status:
(1) Deny admission to a long-term care facility, transfer or refuse to transfer a resident within a facility or to another facility, or discharge or evict a resident from a facility.
(2) Deny a request by residents to share a room.
(3) Where rooms are assigned by gender, assigning, reassigning, or refusing to assign a room to a transgender resident other than in accordance with the transgender resident’s gender identity, unless at the transgender resident’s request.
(4) Prohibit a resident from using, or harass a resident who seeks to use or does use, a restroom available to other persons of the same gender identity, regardless of whether the resident is making a gender transition or appears to be gender-nonconforming. Harassment includes, but is not limited to, requiring a resident to show identity documents in order to gain entrance to a restroom available to other persons of the same gender identity.
(5) Willfully and repeatedly fail to use a resident’s preferred name or pronouns after being clearly informed of the preferred name or pronouns.
(6) Deny a resident the right to wear or be dressed in clothing, accessories, or cosmetics that are permitted for any other resident.
(7) Restrict a resident’s right to associate with other residents or with visitors, including the right to consensual sexual relations, unless the restriction is uniformly applied to all residents in a nondiscriminatory manner. This section does not preclude a facility from banning or restricting sexual relations, as long as the ban or restriction is applied uniformly and in a nondiscriminatory manner.
(8) Deny or restrict medical or nonmedical care that is appropriate to a resident’s organs and bodily needs, or provide medical or nonmedical care in a manner that, to a similarly situated reasonable person, unduly demeans the resident’s dignity or causes avoidable discomfort.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Talk to all the authors of the articles, I didn't write any of it. Just shared what it says.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
As long as you recognize that you are misrepresenting it.
... without critical thought, apparently.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
We went over this in Icehorse's thread. People are so concerned about this, but it doesn't happen. Until there is verifiable proof this is going on (especially in the face of those never punished who were so sure they would be punished), it should be taken as nothing more than anti-trans rhetoric. Gay parents turn their kids gay and all that stuff, after all.
Karl R
Active Member
Have you considered using critical thinking when reading these articles?
Let's say you have a group that runs a number of nursing homes in California (like the Catholic church).
Let's that group has a history of openly, publicly, and strongly opposing GLBT rights (like the Catholic church's opposition to gay marriage).
Let's say California was about pass a law preventing nursing homes from evicting GLBT patients, or from withholding medical or non-medical care from those patients.
How would that organization go about preserving its ability to discriminate, while looking like it was the victim, rather than the victimizer?
To me, the obvious solution would be to take the strongest penalty in the proposed bill ($1,000 fine + 1 yr in jail), apply that to the smallest offense in the bill (willfully refusing to use the preferred pronouns), and then pretend that was what the entire bill was about.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
The penalty and jail time is still in the bill. Even if it's the maximum it still doesn't make it right. I can see the penalty, but why did they put jail time in there?
HonestJoe
Well-Known Member
Because beyond the small element the article you linked focused on, the bill also covers what could involve serious abuse of vulnerable patients. Like pretty much all criminal legislation, it will allow for a wide range of punishments which a judge (or sometimes jury) in individual cases can select from as appropriate for the level of seriousness and circumstances of the individual convictions in their case.
I’d be confident that nobody will be going to prison for “just” refusing to us a patients preferred pronoun.
Question (for whoever really cares enough to go look this up): What do California's other existing laws concerning discrimination on the basis of age, sex, race, ethnic origins, religion, marital status, etc., say about discrimination against those categories?
If the already-existing laws are significantly different, then there is a lot of room for discussion here. But, if the existing laws parallel this proposed legislation, there is much less to talk about, imo.
If the already-existing laws are significantly different, then there is a lot of room for discussion here. But, if the existing laws parallel this proposed legislation, there is much less to talk about, imo.
Karl R
Active Member
Ding, ding, ding!
HonestJoe nailed it.
My great aunt Louise and her partner, Karen moved into a nursing home when they were about 80. Louise was childless. She was suffering from Alzheimer's. Her nearest living relatives (her nephews) all lived over 1,000 miles away.
If they had been evicted (especially after their respective conditions deteriorated), how would they have found a new place ... when they were barely able to carry on a simple conversation? How would they have contacted relatives, when they didn't remember the names of those relatives, much less their phone numbers? How would they have sought justice, when they no longer had the capability to testify on their own behalf?
Evicting a vulnerable person can be a matter of life or death. Withholding medication can be a matter of life or death. Withholding non-medical care (like food) can be a matter of life or death. Do you really think a one year jail sentence is harsh or extreme, given the offense?
Regolith Based Lifeforms
Early Earth Was Not Sterile
I sure don't.
Guantanamo Bay would be good.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
For withholding medical treatment, you should be fined and jailed (and license to practice revoked), period, no ifs ands or buts, no defense, for whatever the reason. This should apply to medical practitioners who would withhold care from any patient, regardless of who the patient is as a person. More-or-less, it should be charged on a level that is about on par with murder or manslaughter, IMO.
VioletVortex
Well-Known Member
The supreme court is meant to function as an upholder of the constitution. If it actually abides by its purpose, than this cannot happen.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Provided the judicial branch doesn't play a role as the legislative branch and attempts to rewrite the Constitution and laws of the country.