O'Gorman says children under 16 should be able to change their gender

  • Thread starter Deleted member 55906
  • Start date
D

Deleted member 55906

The new Children's Minister Roderic O'Gorman says children under 16 should be able to change their gender with the consent of their parents or guardians and GP.

Laws to make it easier for 16 and 17-year-olds to legally change their gender will be introduced by the new coalition under a commitment in the Programme for Government. The document also commits to examining the arrangements for children under 16 who may want to change gender.


Disgusting, who does he think he is?

If this was put to a referendum then I am sure the country would vote this filth down.

Why is this his priority? You would think that he would be more careful after the last week with fingers being pointed and here we are, literally one day later and he wants children to be allowed to be given irreversible surgery before they can even develop mentally.
 


Sync

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
31,577
I don't see the issue. Age of consent is 16, you can get married, join the army etc etc. It seems to be bringing this area into line with other areas which seems to make sense to me. It's not going to take long, it's a small alteration to existing legislation. Meh. I can't see anyone having a problem with it unless they already have a problem with 18 year olds being able to change it. Which is a different problem really
 

silverharp

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
18,911
I don't see the issue. Age of consent is 16, you can get married, join the army etc etc. It seems to be bringing this area into line with other areas which seems to make sense to me. It's not going to take long, it's a small alteration to existing legislation. Meh. I can't see anyone having a problem with it unless they already have a problem with 18 year olds being able to change it. Which is a different problem really
no it isnt , its 17



Legal age of consent

What is the legal age of consent?
The law says that a person must be 17 years of age to be able to consent to engaging in a sexual act. This means that a young person under the age of 17 is not legally old enough to consent to a sexual act even if they want to. Remember, it is a crime to engage in a sexual act with someone who has not, or cannot, give consent.
The age of consent is the same for all persons, regardless of gender or sexual orientation.
 

silverharp

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
18,911
One question, can it override parental wishes? if not then its just a bit of pandering, if yes then I would say its a bit more sinister. In Australia the radicals were trying to take the parents out of the decision making process in this universe of matters.
 
D

Deleted member 55906

One question, can it override parental wishes? if not then its just a bit of pandering, if yes then I would say its a bit more sinister. In Australia the radicals were trying to take the parents out of the decision making process in this universe of matters.
From what I can see, Under 16 need parental permission, over 16 are they can do as they please.

Whatever your views this is not something that should be the priority of the Children's Minister, especially during a pandemic.
 

Sync

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
31,577
One question, can it override parental wishes? if not then its just a bit of pandering, if yes then I would say its a bit more sinister. In Australia the radicals were trying to take the parents out of the decision making process in this universe of matters.
Depends on your definition of pandering. It's pandering as much as allowing 16 year olds marry with parental consent and 16 year olds join the army with parental consent is. That's what the agreed programme covers.

O'Gormon's an idiot, considering the bad press he's had over the last week, to then be pushing "And hey: This is the thin end of the wedge, let's talk about all the other stuff that's not in the programme for other ages that I'd like to do as well".

He needs to be smarter. Right now he doesn't seem like someone who's going to last.
 

silverharp

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
18,911
Depends on your definition of pandering. It's pandering as much as allowing 16 year olds marry with parental consent and 16 year olds join the army with parental consent is. That's what the agreed programme covers.

O'Gormon's an idiot, considering the bad press he's had over the last week, to then be pushing "And hey: This is the thin end of the wedge, let's talk about all the other stuff that's not in the programme for other ages that I'd like to do as well".
I had that thought, why is he coming out the gates with this? its either grade A persuasion and he just wants to get some name recognition out there or more likely they have let an activist become a minister which is a bad idea.
 

silverharp

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
18,911
From what I can see, Under 16 need parental permission, over 16 are they can do as they please.

Whatever your views this is not something that should be the priority of the Children's Minister, especially during a pandemic.
A kid between the ages of 16-18 need parental consent to travel abroad, get a passport , this will stick out like a sore thumb
 

Sync

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
31,577
16/17 you need permission. That's what the legislation deals with. So, in line with passport, army etc.

He's talking about under 16s though. Which has nothing to do with the legislation and will just aggravate some TDs who may have been leery about the actual legislation. Why? Because he hasn't done this before and doesn't seem to know how to set and control as message.
 

StarryPlough01

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2010
Messages
16,100
From what I can see, Under 16 need parental permission, over 16 are they can do as they please.

Whatever your views this is not something that should be the priority of the Children's Minister, especially during a pandemic.

It's about proposals from a Review Group looking at changes to Gender Recognition Act (GRT). Their recommendation is for a GP to agree and sign off for a minor - under 16 - to change gender. Minister for Children Roderic O'Gorman supports implementing the findings of "experts."

Who was on this Review Group of "experts"?

This sounds like a deal struck between FF/FG & GP.
 

Sync

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
31,577
Sounds like a Pedophiles dream.
I struggle to see how a 17 year old girl redefining as a boy makes them more vulnerable to a paedophile than a 17 year old waiting until they're 18 redefine as a boy. I'm sure you'll make a super cogent data driven argument as to why I'm wrong though.
 

benroe

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 29, 2011
Messages
14,520


Disgusting, who does he think he is?

If this was put to a referendum then I am sure the country would vote this filth down.

Why is this his priority? You would think that he would be more careful after the last week with fingers being pointed and here we are, literally one day later and he wants children to be allowed to be given irreversible surgery before they can even develop mentally.
We have a progressive party in government, what did you expect?
 

AyaanMyHero

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 25, 2017
Messages
1,571
And I thought Roderic would be focused on making it safer for kids to cycle to school. It's why he got a lot of votes.

I could not read the full article. What does it mean to change ones gender ? I assume, because GPs are involved, it does actually mean medical intervention of one sort or another i.e. it doesn't just mean one changes ones gender assignment on a passport.

My objection to this is that research into this area has been discouraged. Researchers coming up with the "wrong answers" have been attacked. Only an unthinking ideologue would make legal changes in that situation.

Also, I agree it is extremely badly judged in terms of timing to highlight this in the media. Another hint of someone who lives in an ideological bubble and thinks: "why would anyone object to my ideas ?". Amazing that nobody with sense advised Roderic against this publicity at this time. Greens are extremely naive but their government partners are less so.

We have trouble coming if people/organisations in ideological bubbles can get into power.
 

livingstone

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2004
Messages
27,348


Disgusting, who does he think he is?

If this was put to a referendum then I am sure the country would vote this filth down.

Why is this his priority? You would think that he would be more careful after the last week with fingers being pointed and here we are, literally one day later and he wants children to be allowed to be given irreversible surgery before they can even develop mentally.
Is the reason you need to lie about what is being proposed because you don't feel that the truth about what is being proposed is actually that bad?
 

silverharp

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
18,911
Parental consent isnt the be all either, there are idiot parents out there that would either encourage this or be led by the nose because they arent smart
 


New Threads

Most Replies

Top Bottom