Convicted killer: California will pay for his sex-change
By Jon Rappoport
Rodney Quine, 57, is serving a life-without-parole sentence for murder, kidnapping, and robbery. He now calls himself Shiloh Heavenly Quine.
He has been battling for the right to obtain full sex-change procedures from the state of California; he has won his case; and now he has received the surgery, paid for by the state.
After long opposition, California corrections officials finally gave in.
The legal basis for Quine’s claim? The Eighth Amendment to the US Constitution: “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”
Presumably, it is the “cruel and unusual punishment” phrase that is considered relevant and binding.
In order to bolster that claim, there would need to be an official designation of “transgender person.” However, from the state’s point of view, a person simply saying he is transgender or wants to be transgender is sufficient to establish that he IS transgender. Whether or not he carries biological or genetic factors that could, possibly, dispose him to want to change his sex, those factors aren’t necessary.
Therefore, when Quine claims he wants to be female, this is enough to invoke the “cruel and unusual” designation. He is in prison. He is under the absolute authority of the state of California. He wants to become female. If the state didn’t pay for the full medical procedure, the state would be punishing him beyond an allowable Constitutional limit.
That’s quite a stretch.
It permits a prisoner’s subjective opinion to carry the day—in this case, a convicted kidnapper’s and murderer’s opinion.
This is moral relativism at its finest. The state of California must honor the opinion, assertion, and values of a convicted killer, and pay for it with tax dollars.
To justify and elevate a person’s subjective opinion and assertion, there is a medical condition called gender dysphoria. But on examination, this turns out to be a “feeling.”
WebMD: “People who have gender dysphoria feel strongly that they are not the gender they physically appear to be. For example, a person who has a penis and all other physical traits of a male might feel instead that he is actually a female. That person would have an intense desire to have a female body and to be accepted by others as a female. Or, someone with the physical characteristics of a female would feel her true identity is male. Feeling that your body does not reflect your true gender can cause severe distress, anxiety, and depression. ‘Dysphoria’ is a feeling of dissatisfaction, anxiety, and restlessness. With gender dysphoria, the discomfort with your male or female body can be so intense that it can interfere with the way you function in normal life, for instance at school or work or during social activities.”
In our society, this feeling (accompanied by a vapid medical label) is now considered sufficient to force the state to pay for radical medical procedures that will satisfy an intensely unhappy person serving a life sentence for murder.
It’s clear that an agenda is operating here. If this prisoner, Quine, will have his sex-change paid for by the state, then why can’t any person in California demand the state pay for the same medical treatment?
To take this even further, why should we stop at the issue of gender dysphoria? It’s merely a social and political movement that has gained enough support to exert influence over government decisions. Why can’t ANY individual’s feeling, reflecting ANY preference or desire, win the approval of the state and its funding apparatus?
If a person claims he can’t function in a place that has refused to declare itself a sanctuary city, why can’t he demand the state pay for his relocation to San Francisco?
If a person declares he can no longer retain his sanity in a state that voted for Trump in the election, why can’t he obtain funding from that state or the federal government so he can move to New York?
—“But gender issues are more real, more basic, more compelling.” Are they? By what standard? It all comes back to an individual and what he says he feels. From that basis, a social movement has developed—what used to be called a pressure group.
I’m sure, with some funding from George Soros or another humanitarian saint, a movement of people who are afflicted with “non-sanctuary city disorder” could band together, and they could, over time, make a compelling case for state-sponsored relocation to a more amenable social climate.
In case you hadn’t noticed, society has turned into a “tolerance scoreboard.” Under the unspoken rules of political correctness, citizens are pressured to give assent to the most outrageous demands, even to the extent of funding them with their taxes. This abject acceptance is part of the “progressive agenda.”
On the other hand, zero tolerance is deployed to oppose, neutralize, and punish trivial or even constructive actions. A child comes to school with a pop-tart and chews it into a shape resembling a gun and all hell breaks loose. A homeowner grows vegetables on her front lawn and local officials issue a fine and a cease and desist order. A homeowners’ association in Southern California orders the wife of a Marine to take down an American flag she placed in a “common area,” where residents have placed signs and other types of flags.
This is operant conditioning. “Accept these behaviors. Reject those behaviors.”
And now a prisoner serving life in California will have his demands met.
Stand up and salute a victory for “social awareness.”
Filed under: Uncategorized Jon Rappoport has worked as a free-lance investigative reporter for over 30 years. http://nomorefakenews.com/