The Problem With State Bans on Gender Care
Welcome to Up for Debate. Each week, Conor Friedersdorf rounds up timely conversations and solicits reader responses to one thought-provoking question. Later, he publishes some thoughtful replies. Sign up for the newsletter here.
Question of the Week
I’m a longtime opponent of drug prohibition––as I wrote in a 2014 article, “it is immoral to cage humans for smoking marijuana.” One of my favorite writers, Ross Douthat, is out this week with a column arguing that pot legalization is a mistake. Where do you stand on the issue? Have you, your family, or your community been affected by marijuana for better or worse?
Send your responses to conor@theatlantic.com
Conversations of Note
On Wednesday, the states of Florida and Texas moved forward with new laws that ban minors from receiving medical treatments intended to affirm transgender identity, including doses of the hormones testosterone and estrogen and drugs that block puberty in order to delay its onset.
Readers of this newsletter are divided in their assessments of the nature of gender, the benefits and costs of gender-affirming treatments, and what hurdles, if any, ought to be cleared by patients who want them. And assorted liberal democracies, like the United States, Britain, Spain, and Sweden, differ in the best practices or official guidance put forth by medical authorities.
How should legislators respond amid ongoing debate?
In my estimation, the best approach is to err on the side of individual liberty rather than state coercion. Adults should be free to assess the
