Originally Posted by JoeBob
This puts a little different light on things. It looks like there was no good choice between these two nuts. And no, the kid is not in danger of chemical castration. That will still take the consent of both parents.
The jurors found in favor of the mom, handing her the right to dress young James as a girl, to force others to treat him as a girl and ultimately, potentially, to chemically castrate him with the administration of puberty blockers and hormones.A court document at a time that the parents were joint managing conservators, listed a number of exclusive rights the court was granting Anne Georgulas. Among them, the exclusive right, after notifying the father, to consent to medical, dental, and surgical treatment involving invasive procedures” and psychiatric and psychological treatment of the children.So you're wrong again.


Originally Posted by JoeBob
You’re literally dumber than schit.
The arrogance of some shysters always shines through.Everyone else is to blame except the legal system,the other shysters or the judge..LOL


Originally Posted by JoeBob
First of all, you should be thankful that the judge has some sense.Second of all, there is nothing that the governor, the attorney general, or Senator Cruz can do to a district judge in Texas.

Your claim the judge has some sense is again not even remotely accurate and another attempted spin of the actual events.The judge was pressured by 200,000 signatures on a petition to the governor to intervene.She was also swayed by comments from senator Cruz and the attorney general of Texas.
Several state representatives vowed to draft legislation that would protect children against hormonal treatments for gender dysphoria because of the this case.Representatives Jared Patterson and Cody Harris both voiced their support for such legislation in replies to Krause.Rep. Chip Roy sent a letter about the issue to U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr, the director of the National Institutes of Health, and the director of the National Drug Control Policy, asking for a federal study on individuals who undergo sex-reassignment surgery or hormone treatment before the age of 18, and the potential harmful consequences of such procedures.All of this was made public before this judges decision.Now who's dumber than s h i t? LOL


Originally Posted by JoeBob
Thirdly, THE FATHER ASKED FOR A JURY TRIAL. He wasn’t forced to a jury trial, HE ASKED FOR IT. And no, despite all the fricking fake news, the jury NEVER ruled that mom could proceed with medical treatment without the father’s consent. They gave her sole managing conservatorship but the judge was ALWAYS going to get to make the conditions about any medical treatment.

More bull s-h-i-t from our resident clown. James Younger’s mother Dr.georgulas, argued that the child is a girl named Luna and a jury gave her the decision making authority.Georgulas argued the child should wear dresses and be considered a girl named Luna at school.A court document at a time that the parents were joint managing conservators, listed a number of exclusive rights the court was granting Anne Georgulas. Among them, the exclusive right, after notifying the father, to provide medical,dental and surgical treatment involving invasive procedures and psychiatric and psychological treatment of the children.


Originally Posted by JoeBob
Now what actually happened is actually better than that even. Joint managing conservatorship is the default position in Texas. In order for someone to get sole managing conservatorship, a number of conditions must be proved. A motion was made by the father’s counsel and the judge apparently ruled that jury had erred in its determination and concluded something not supported by the evidence as presented.

The judge was under pressure from the outraged public and the governor.Judge Cooks also issued a gag order against Jeffrey Younger, which meant he is not allowed to discuss the case with members of the press.This is an act of a coward.Cooks final decision was made because of public outrage,nothing more.


Originally Posted by JoeBob
I’ve said since I heard about this case that no court in Texas was going to let a mom force a seven year old into a sex change, and it didn’t. Now, in my opinion the court could have gone farther further and restricted mom’s visitation.

You never stated this new opinion in any previous post so why should anyone believe you now.You're still responsible for posting utter bull s h i t in falsely claiming, that a member of the jury made statements concerning this case.In fact is was fake news posted to another forum .

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." **Edmund Burke**

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." **Benjamin Franklin**