Posted on 05/08/2007 9:49:50 PM PDT by jdm
BERKELEY -- By a unanimous vote, the Berkeley City Council took the first step Tuesday night toward including sex change surgery in employee health care benefits.The proposal is modeled after a similar benefit in effect in San Francisco since 2001. The council ordered the city manager to create a feasibility study before the measure comes back to the council in six months for final approval.
The vote was cast without comment, in contrast to the media frenzy that broke out last week after the proposal was put on the agenda.
Councilman Darryl Moore, who co-sponsored the resolution with his colleague, Kriss Worthington, said his phone has been ringing off the hook with calls from news operations across the country.
"If this was 10 years ago, or if Berkeley was the first city to do this, I could understand the fuss," he said. "But this is 2007. It's no big deal."
Moore predicted only a handful of city workers will apply for the benefit.
"When they established the policy in San Francisco, there were dire predictions that people would move to the city in droves to take advantage of it," he said. "It never happened, and it won't happen here, either."
Former city council candidate Merrilee Mitchell opposed the proposal, likening the surgery to elective cosmetic procedures. But another former council candidate, George Beier, disagreed.
"It's not like getting a nose job or losing 40 pounds," he said. "It's like your sexuality -- it goes to the essence of who you are."
Moore introduced the proposal at the suggestion of a transsexual city worker, Lynn Riordan, who had the surgery in 2003. It cost $11,000, which she paid out of her own pocket.
(Excerpt) Read more at mercurynews.com ...
She’s so pretty...
Why support cosmetic surgery for sex workers when the new sex group identity we are supposed to accept is whatever “gender identity” someone wants to claim regardless of manner of dress or outward sex trait appearance.
If it is sufficent for a man to say “I’m a woman, let me use the women’s room”, then the government should not be paying for cosmetic surgery.
What if some woman says, “I feel I should be living as a blonde”. Should she be able to get the state to pay for a bleach job on her hair?
What about electrolysis?
Can a man claim a different ethnic identity and fill a job quota as a minority in mind?
Is that Rudy?
Apparantly, sex-change begins with castrating the tax payers.
To answer your question, yes.
Are the tax payers who are subsidizing this insanity ok with this? If so, who are we to judge. They get what they deserve, and all the drag queens they paid for.
Probably whether they like it or not.
Pingout tomorrow.
There’s a “moral hazard” in this scheme: if it passes, it won’t be long before the job queues at Berkeley city hall resemble a San Francisco parade. Transexuals will be crawling over each other to get a Berkeley city job (and that won’t be a pretty sight).
sex change surgery in employee health care benefits?
Now we are going to pay for these sickos to change their gender?
I live right nextdoor to Berkeley. Believe me, this town's taxpayers like nothing more than being castrated by their mayor and city council. Year after year, they elect the same kinds of wingnuts to office.
They've already got the jobs. The town is dominated by homosexuals. Sending your child to Berkeley public schools is exactly like sending him into a Polk Street bath house.
If this is covered, clear laser eye surgery should be. They know they can do this because not that many freaks will actually do it, but it’s a good headline maker.
Hey, how about covering free laser eye surgery for anyone? I’ll be on my way if you’re stupid enough to cover that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.