Roderic O’G: Transgender issues added to primary curriculum

Those statements are based entirely upon what you believe. Other people who don’t share your beliefs, naturally enough don’t share your opinions. The State recognises that a compromise is necessary in the accommodation of everyone in Irish society, and it does so through Irish law, as opposed to getting bogged down in the nitty gritty. It’s the responsibility of the Courts to interpret Irish law in circumstances where there is a disagreement over how it applies. That’s why nobody has to agree with you, and your agreement isn’t required for this to be true either -

18. (1) Where a gender recognition certificate is issued to a person the person’s gender shall from the date of that issue become for all purposes the preferred gender so that if the preferred gender is the male gender the person’s sex becomes that of a man, and if it is the female gender the person’s sex becomes that of a woman.

https://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2015/act/25/section/18/enacted/en/html#sec18

Well, if we agree on the legal defintions being used, what's the issue?

You've answered you own question here: What should children be taught?

What it means to be transgender.

Now beyond that, I can't answer as I'm not transgender.

Why is it contentious? (Not saying it isn't asking genionely: wy?)

Thank you. That's an eye opener for me, particularly the NCCA document relating to primary schools.

Those are all arguments you need to present to the relevant legal authorities. not to me.

Beyond that, the rest of your argument appears to be that you believe should be seen as fact and any discussion in the classroom should be based on what you personally think.

That's because you see everything as "ideology'. Ever think something can be explained or taught without it being an ideology?

I'm not saying you shouldn't discuss them - just not wit me. You might as well complain to me about the law of gravity.

If the law says the person's sex changes, but you say it doesn't; why should I beleive you and not the law? What do you want me to do or explain or debate here....?

If you ge tcaught speeding and you say the law is wrong, you're still going to get a ticket.

Its not contentious though. The state has accepted trans people exist and legally recognise them. This idea that its contentious that trans people exist isnt true.

It's true in terms of what actually happens. You can disagree with a certificate meaning what it means, but you can't disagree that the law accepts it as valid.

Again - you sound like someone who will tell the cop that the speeding law is wrong and thinks it'll get them out of a ticket.

I'm not talking about what the law says is and is not possible, I'm talking about what the law says is legally recognised and if the law changed to not recognise transgender identitues, then so be it - it would still be the law.

Guess who is not saying the law is wrong, they're saying they know more about the law than the law does.

We're not arguing biology. I never questioned or debated biology.

We're arguing law.

If you want to argue law, tell me you want to argue law.

If you want me to argue biology, tell me you want to argue biology.

Pcik one.

Either way, tell me what your opinoin is based on.

Bizarre.

Kids are turning up at third level with woeful literacy skills.

Yet, without any broad public demand (much less a mandate), this wretched government proposes the introduction of a bewildering, dubious and potentially harmful ideology at primary level.

The same deranged mode of governance is seen in other aspects.

This government is hostage to extremists, ideologues and external influences. It has abandoned common sense, foresight and prudence for progressivist posturing.

Our policy makers have overlooked the basics in favour of pushing ideological nonsense and we will pay painfully for it as a society.

That's interesting. So if someone identifies as as particular sex (not just gender). They are it. And their physical body, chromosomes are then irrelevant in Irish law after that point?

No, there are exemptions, but Irish law also recognises that everyone has the right to freedom of expression, freedom of belief and conscience and so on, and again there are limitations to those rights. It arises in relation to abortion and assisted human reproduction for example, but how it applies would depend upon the specifics of each and every individual circumstances.

Plus you can also rewrite history by getting an updated birth cert in your preferred sex/gender.

That’s not rewriting history. The original record of the event is maintained, and an amendment is added. Rewriting the initial record to reflect a historical fact, is considerably more difficult to do -

https://www.decisis.ie/mothers-incorrect-name-on-daughters-birth-certificate-could-be-amended-now-that-the-mistake-as-to-her-true-name-had-been-discovered/

At some point then, will it become taboo to refer to some people as Trans? Because if they are 100% the sex they identify with, there's nothing different about them. Although other categories for pangender, non-binary people and so on also exist. Shouldn't the law at this point make room for more than 2 sexes/gender? or None? Since people already identify as this.

I’ve no idea, seems unlikely though, but as for whether or not Irish law should at this point make room for more than two sexes/gender or none, there’s already people working on that -

The Review Group recommended extending legal gender recognition to non-binary people, while also recognising the complexity of the issue and acknowledging that a comprehensive impact analysis may be required. An interdepartmental group has been established that is tasked with carrying out this impact assessment and submitting a report to Government for consideration by the end of 2020. In the meantime, Government Departments and other public bodies will take positive steps to improve the position of non-binary people.

https://www.gov.ie/en/press-release/43aef0-minister-doherty-publishes-her-report-on-the-review-of-the-gender-re/

I wonder how medical textbooks should refer to what were previously know as Male and Female anatomies?

Good question, there have been a number of classification systems proposed throughout history in biology, anatomy and physiology to choose from, it’s not as though anyone is limited to using only one classification system when there are already many available, and that’s notwithstanding the idea that there couldn’t be more devised in the future as our understanding of nature evolves -

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxonomy_(biology)

Way to avoild simpe answers.

A person can not change their sex or a person cna not change their gender?

You want to debate Biology? Link to sience that backs you up. Or am I "capitulating" to science as well?

Law - link to law that says you have to right to not recognise the law.

If by "capitulating" you mean pointing out a legal document, thjen so be it, but it's a weird defintion of "capitulating".

@jmayo - yes and I'm sure that they will agree on what the deifition of a woman is for the purposes of education and not to stiffle debate.

I've never argued they can change their sex - there's a reason it's called transGENDER and not transSEX.

The issue here is that when someone disagrees with you, you switch from gender to sex and then try to claim that the other person was arguing changing sex; and then when you get cornered, switch back to gender as if it was that all along you were talking about.

Regarding the law - you have the right to argue, but not declare that you're above it or that it doesn't apply to you.

Regarding the last paragrpah: I'm avoiding it for reasons stated: it adds nothing to the debate and takes the whole thing off topic, as stated back at te start.

--

The thing is that you accept people can trasnition gender but don't want it in the classroonm, but then complain that people are teaching about trasnitiong sex; which you don't like because it's not biologicially possible - correct?