Another “quick takes” on items where there is too little to say to make a complete article, but is still important enough to comment on.
The focus this time: You will be made to affirm transgenderism.
First, a little mood music:
Doctor’s are supposed to “first do no harm” and refuse to harm a patient even if the patient wishes for it. Doctors in California, now, must put aside their faith in order to validate the sympathetic magic of those who believe that by mutilating their bodies they will transform into the opposite sex.
“A Catholic hospital known as Dignity Health refused to perform a hysterectomy on a transgendered male, as against Catholic moral teaching. The patient sued for discrimination, but the case was dismissed on the basis that the hospital was legally following its faith principles. Alas, a Court of Appeals reversed, reinstating the case to the active docket. Why am I not surprised?
“Dignity Health’s faith-based policies require that the institution “protect and preserve the bodily and functional integrity” of patients and that the “functional integrity” of the patient “may only be sacrificed to maintain the health or life of the person when no other morally permissible means is available.”
“Dignity Health also forbids any sterilization procedure, as against Catholic moral teaching. Surgeries that would have that effect are permissible only to cure or alleviate “a present and serious pathology.” Obviously, the hysterectomy would render the transgendered patient sterile.
“But the Court of Appeals ruled that under California law, this can constitute illegal discrimination. From Minton v. Dignity Health:
“’The pleading alleges that Mercy allows doctors to perform hysterectomies as treatment for other conditions but refused to allow Dr. Dawson to perform the same procedure as treatment for Minton’s gender dysphoria, a condition that is unique to transgender individuals. Denying a procedure as treatment for a condition that affects only transgender persons supports an inference that Dignity Health discriminated against Minton based on his gender identity. This is true even if the denial was pursuant to a facially neutral policy.’
“In other words, a Catholic hospital can potentially be held to account for refusing to violate Catholic dogma by removing a biologically healthy organ — thereby, sterilizing the patient — as a “treatment” for a biologically non-pathological condition.”
One would expect a women-only rape-relief shelter to not allow men. Of course, that intention was to help biological females who have been raped by biological males to have a space where they don’t have to feel threatened by males. Of course, oh-so-woke Vancouver believes that transgendering is more important than preventing actual rape culture.
“This week, staff of the Vancouver Rape Relief and Women’s Shelter (VRRWS) in British Columbia found messages such as ‘Kill TERFS,’ ‘F*** TERFS,’ and — what else? — ‘Trans women are women’ scrawled across their windows and walls. (‘TERF,’ for ‘trans-exclusionary radical feminist,’ is a generally derogatory term for feminists who do not believe certain things about transgenderism.) This is not the first time something like this has happened. Three weeks ago, a woman seeking the shelter’s services was alarmed to find a dead rat nailed to the front door.
“’The women who come to our support groups are rape victims and battered women,’ says Hilla Kerner, VRRWS’s spokeswoman, who has worked at the shelter for 14 years. ‘One of them said to me, “Haven’t we suffered enough?”’”
Nothing says “rape culture” like forcing real women to handle and wax the scrotum of a “trans-woman”.
“A Brazilian immigrant living in Canada was forced to close up her small business after refusing to wax the male genitals of transgender LGBT activist Jessica Yaniv, formerly known as Jonathan Yaniv.
“Citing discrimination based on gender identity, Yaniv filed a complaint with the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal seeking financial restitution. The activist has filed complaints against 15 other estheticians with the tribunal, claiming “gender identity” discrimination, as well, The Daily Wire reported last year. It was not until Wednesday, however, that Yaniv’s identity was allowed to be disclosed.
“According to The Post Millennial, Marcia Da Silva claims that she refused to service the complainant ‘due to safety concerns raised by her husband and alleged harassment on Yaniv’s part and not because of the claimant’s identity.’
“During tribunal proceedings on Wednesday, Da Silva said the complaint from Yaniv forced her to close shop, the outlet noted.”