DO THIS: Oppose Trump administration move to ban trans health care coverage in the ACA

[solarbird]

One of the reasons I’ve always – always – been opposed to single-payer health care in the US is because I knew that the moment it happened, the fundamentalist movement would move to ban anyone receiving funds from a single-payer system from providing abortion services, even to people who are paying entirely on their own. That’s at very least. Probably all care for LGBT people at all, I thought.

I was entirely correct.

The Trump administration have quietly dropped a set of regulatory rules changes which talk about a bunch of technical things and then at the bottom add in, “and no money for trans people” at the end.

Here’s where you tell them to go fuck themselves. Or, possibly more effectively or possibly not, that you stridently oppose this regulatory change.

Please do this now, and then pass it around. They aren’t getting nearly enough pushback on this, and there’s been no media coverage that I’ve seen.

It’s interesting that they aren’t promoting this one, but are burying it under a bunch of other language at the very end. It very much implies that they’re starting to feel like – aheh – trumpeting their raw hatred for LGBT people in general and trans people in particular isn’t working well for them, so maybe they need to do it a little more quietly.

Let’s show them that doesn’t help.

Thanks.

Posted via Solarbird{y|z|yz}, Collected.

Comments

[dewline]

In Canada - Alberta under Danielle Smith and her "United Conservatives", and Saskatchewan under Scott Moe's "Saskatchewan Party" being the current would-be exceptions - such discriminations are disallowed. I don't see how their attempts to invoke the Notwithstanding Clause as a shield against LGBTQ+ peoples' Charter rights can/should survive a proper court challenge. Alberta's got an election of their own coming up, so that should dispose of Smith's anti-human rights nonsense...

[solarbird]

Right, but we'd never have those protections. Not while the fundamentalist movement exists.

I was for a public option, and still am. Just not single-player, for [waves hands at everything] reasons.

[kayla_allen]

I have submitted a comment opposing the banning of sex-train modification/gender-affirming care, pointing out that the only reason for it being there is due to animus toward trans people. So far, most of the courts that have ruled on this are seeing this. Goodness knows what will happen when it gets to the SCOTUS, particularly with that awful and inexplicable ruling out of the 9th Circuit, of all places, saying, in effect that, "Making cisgender people uncomfortable is a good enough reason to exclude transgender people." What the heck were they thinking?

[solarbird]

Yeah, I leaned real hard on that too, adding the word "religious" for good measure. Also "hate" and afactual, if I remember right.

I've got more of these coming, I'm trying to shift way harder towards actions now.