General Discussion

Think. Again.

(21,243 posts)

11. Yes, I understand trump is wrong (as usual)...

Sat Jan 25, 2025, 12:53 PM

Jan 25

...but that doesn't relieve people who are filling out legally binding documents from having to answer truthfully, and since the president of the U.S. has declared that sex is determined "at conception", a moment when all fertilized zygotes are understood as being female, does that mean everyone has to identify themselves as female when attesting legally to their sex?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

2 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Bettie raging moderate

58 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Believe it or not, this IS a serious question... [View all] Think. Again. Jan 25 OP

My husband and I agree, we are now in a same sex marriage. Raine1967 Jan 25 #1

Not only definitions but the line between satire and reality, while on shaky ground for some time, has completely Amaryllis Jan 25 #26

Could this be the reason I turned out Gay? William769 Jan 25 #2

Well, since we all started out the same Bettie Jan 25 #23

Yep, I've always thought that pansexual is the pure orientation... Think. Again. Jan 25 #32

If that is true, why are do so many people have a strong attraction to a particular gender even when it makes life Martin68 Jan 25 #47

All very good questions... Think. Again. Jan 25 #51

In truth dweller Jan 25 #3

I stand corrected! Think. Again. Jan 25 #4

And what does one do if they have one of the many... 3catwoman3 Jan 25 #5

Your example was one of the main reasons the "X" designation was added to the passport under the Biden administration BumRushDaShow Jan 25 #38

Yeah, it's more complicated than that. MineralMan Jan 25 #6

Yes, I understand trump is wrong (as usual)... Think. Again. Jan 25 #11

But, it would be incorrect to mark Female, since the genetic genotype is the MineralMan Jan 25 #17

Does trump's order supercede all other indications... Think. Again. Jan 25 #19

In my opinion, it does not. Also in many other opinions. MineralMan Jan 25 #21

Not according to the National Library of Medicine... Think. Again. Jan 25 #25

I would make a slightly different argument caraher Jan 25 #33

I'm all for that! Think. Again. Jan 25 #35

Don't tell Trump the NLM is still online!! TommyT139 Jan 25 #37

Damn, that's a very good point. Think. Again. Jan 25 #44

The Executive Order does not mention "genotype", however (or "gene" or "genetic") muriel_volestrangler Jan 25 #54

The failure to recognize non-binary genotypes RandomNumbers Jan 25 #40

Yeah, but it's more than that. MineralMan Jan 25 #42

Thanks for clearing up this misconception Retrograde Jan 25 #50

The Guardian asked the question as well. Raine1967 Jan 25 #7

That is not accurate. KentuckyWoman Jan 25 #8

Fertilized zygotes begin as female ("at conception").. Think. Again. Jan 25 #9

I guess that's new to me. KentuckyWoman Jan 25 #10

Here ya go... Think. Again. Jan 25 #12

So we aren't really talking about the same thing KentuckyWoman Jan 25 #27

Yes, my concern is that trump's order... Think. Again. Jan 25 #28

Colbert's take... digsub Jan 25 #13

That EO is so absurd and non-scientific, it's impossible to enforce. yardwork Jan 25 #14

Yes, but what legal jeopardy does that put... Think. Again. Jan 25 #16

Nobody knows, I guess. yardwork Jan 25 #18

I agree. unfortunately... Think. Again. Jan 25 #22

And this is known as the "zygomatic process". Right. maggots? GreenWave Jan 25 #15

Surely you don't expect him to know anything at all about biology MLWR Jan 25 #20

Nope, I don't .... Think. Again. Jan 25 #24

Breaking it down to zygotes? czarjak Jan 25 #29

Yes, trump's order specifies that our sex is determined "at conception", therefore, zygotes. Think. Again. Jan 25 #30

Just. Wow. czarjak Jan 25 #31

ive been pondering that for a while now. AllaN01Bear Jan 25 #34

Maybe he's trying to tell us something? Think. Again. Jan 25 #36

Yea! rubbersole Jan 25 #39

When I have to respond to a MAGA moron on this subject... GiqueCee Jan 25 #41

(Could this be the basis of a legal argument against trump's new rule?) Wiz Imp Jan 25 #43

There are no laws that state that EOs must be scientifically accurate. LeftInTX Jan 25 #45

Now we're bordering on actual, certifiable, insanity. Think. Again. Jan 25 #46

In this case, the science provides a valid legal basis for striking down the executive order. Wiz Imp Jan 25 #49

I agree with that. They must be constitutional. I don't agree with this EO. Hopefully it will be struck down. LeftInTX Jan 25 #52

The "poorly educated" win again. nt Jit423 Jan 25 #48

Yep. Think. Again. Jan 25 #53

Does that mean every gender specific facility is now mixed? MichMan Jan 25 #55

I think it means that all American citizens are now classified as female by law. Think. Again. Jan 25 #56

Until recently, the Texas Democratic Party required a male and female representative for each district in our SDEC LeftInTX Jan 25 #57

The irony is... Think. Again. Jan 25 #58