Oh Please.

A convicted murderer in Massachusetts is suing the state, claiming that  its denial of his requested sex-change operation violates the 8th Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment.  The AP asks: “Should a murderer serving life in prison get a sex-change operation at taxpayer expense?”

Um, NO.  Experts for the petitioner, a man named Robert Kosilek (who now calls himself “Michelle”), claim that the sex-change operation is “as much a medical necessity as treatment for diabetes or high blood pressure.”

Oh, right.  Whatever.  Actually, it’s nothing like diabetes or high blood pressure.  If Kosilek and other prisoners making similar requests get their way, many law-abiding citizens of Massachusetts will have less money to attend to their legitimate health expenses, or those of their children.  Every dollar taken from them for the care of these criminals is one less dollar they might spend on their own lives.  Are the taxpayers supposed to buy Kosilek lipstick and heels too?  After all, it’s cruel and unusual to deny a woman her Manilo Blahnik pumps.

This is absurd.  Kosilek has already been provided—courtesy of taxpayers—expensive hormone treatments, laser hair removal, psychotherapy, and psychotropic drug treatment.  Gosh, I wish I could get free hair removal: shaving my legs and tweezing my eyebrows is such a pain.

If Kosilek has someone on the outside willing to subsidize his mental illness, then fine: let him have it.  But law-abiding people who work for a living should not have to pay for an operation that isn’t covered by any insurance policy.   “Transgender” advocates point to the fact that Kosilek has twice attempted suicide because this operation is being withheld from him.  Well hey, there’s no arguing the guy is crazy: he murdered his wife for spilling tea on him and now is under the delusion that he’s a woman.  What’s next: free plastic susrgery for Crazy Louie in the State Hospital because he believes he’s Napoleon and “has the wrong face”? 

What a crock.  You couldn’t pay me enough to live in Taxachusetts.

Advertisements

~ by lewdandlascivious on June 26, 2007.

7 Responses to “Oh Please.”

  1. Great post. 🙂

    There’s a reason I left Massachusetts. This is part of it.

    Then-Gov. Romney signed a bill into law that will mandate that MA residents have health insurance or pay into an uninsured pool. MA already has the highest premiums in the country. This isn’t just hardworking people paying for his frivolity; this is hardworking people giving him better treatment than they get.

    Basic rule for cruel & unusual punishment: if people out of prison can’t afford it, you don’t get it for free. That’s just common sense.

  2. “Basic rule for cruel & unusual punishment: if people out of prison can’t afford it, you don’t get it for free. That’s just common sense.” AMEN!!!

    This is just unbelievable! It amazes me the kinds of lawsuits that go on in this country! I think lawyers willing to handle cases like this ought to get thrown in jail! Maybe that would keep these stupid cases from popping up. 😉

  3. […] ever cease to be amazed at the frivolous lawsuits that pop up in this country!  I just read this post over on The Queen of Swords’ blog and it reminded me of a lawsuit I heard about a couple of […]

  4. Is a sex-change operation a matter of life and death or cruel and unusual punishment within a prison? It depends. Perhaps, if the prison contains a large population of male, sexual predators infected with HIV/AIDS who attempt to daily gang rape the prisoner in question, then the answer is yes. If not, then the answer is no. It all depends on context.

  5. Why, so they could represent themselves pro se from jail for plasma TVs?

    Stupid question: what is the point of incarceration if one has the same benefits as those who are not incarcerated? Heck, if I ever want plastic surgery, should I go to jail?

  6. Mom, that’s a good idea. I’m a (soon-to-be) lawyer, but I wouldn’t mind seeing some charlatans put in the brig.
    Ortho, Constitutional rights do not depend on hypotheticals and outlandish fact situations–that’s what makes them fundamental rights. Also, one of the main arguments of the Dept. of Corrections (in other words, the people in the know) is that giving the prisoner the operation would make him a MORE attractive target for rape.
    At any rate, his claim is that of a right guaranteed by the Constitution, which means that it should be honored no matter what his circumstances. His claim is asinine.

  7. I think that if prisoners ever do get out of prison and get a job, any medical expenses incurred during incarceration should be garnished from their wages. They’ve done nothing to deserve getting any of their medical bills paid at my expense. Or, if they are earning money while incarcerated, it should go towards any incurred medical bills.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: