[matthew28845]

Do No Harm, which the author's a part of, is an alt-right group intending to "fight against identity politics" in healthcare, with one of the sections on their website being "Protecting Minors from Gender Ideology." That sure explains a lot about the contents of the article...

[AbrahamParangi]

Those opinions are modal American opinions. Affirmative action is not popular, and in general people don’t like policies which favor or discriminate on the basis of race.

I think you may quite fairly disagree, or claim that the author is not representative of black physicians, or anything else — but discounting them by their associations and other political beliefs which are actually very common is not a real argument.

You’re just saying they’re a “Bad” person and so can’t be trusted. I think you should debate ideas, not people. Otherwise it’s just tribal politics.

[kirkules]

Didn't read the article because i don't care to bother with the paywall, but if its title is related to any arguments within, then the comment you're responding to actually does address the main idea.

The title is an argument from authority against mandated implicit bias trainings, and GP's point attacks that authority.

[temp2022account]

To be fair I see many americans who prefer it when their laws don't care about your race or gender, and most people would abhor laws that make it easy for 3rd parties to come in and muck around with a child's ideas of race and gender. Heck I wouldn't even be a fan of a political group that marketed hair dye to 12-year-olds.

I recommend you walk around an american city and talk to them sometime, you'll learn way more than on the internet.