On Tuesday, Iowa became the second state in the country to pass universal school choice, directly providing families with funds to support their children’s education. Arizona was the trendsetter for this new wave of educational freedom after Gov. Doug Ducey signed universal school choice into law on July 7, 2022.
Now the race is on to advance educational freedom, with several red states looking to follow suit. The significance of these developments can hardly be overstated. What was once a pipe dream for many education reformers — the enabling of school choice at scale during their lifetimes — is now becoming a reality.
Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds, true to her word, wasted no time in the 2023 legislative session by introducing the Students First Act in her Condition of the State address on Jan. 10. Within two weeks, the bill was signed into law. It took less than 24 hours for debate in the House and Senate, followed by Reynolds’ signing. The education savings account (ESA) program will provide parents with approximately $7,600 annually to allocate toward approved educational avenues. Most families are eligible in years one and two, and the benefit will be extended to all families statewide in year three.
Of course, powers beholden to leftist teachers unions should not be expected to go down without a fight. Even in pioneering state Arizona, new Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs seeks to undo its universal school voucher expansion law in her 2023 budget proposal. With Republicans controlling both state legislative bodies, her proposal will likely go down with the same fate as her massively failed veto referendum that sought to stop the law from taking effect while she was secretary of state last fall. For a politician, Hobbs is remarkably insensitive to the views of Arizona voters, 67 percent of whom support the state’s ESA program (the number jumps to 77 percent of Arizona parents of school-aged children).
States with a Republican governor and GOP majorities in both their House and Senate, on the other hand, are leading the charge across the United States to empower parents with options. The goal is universal school choice — through ESAs — to provide flexibility for families to select their desired educational avenue. Funds can be spent on school tuition, homeschool expenses, online learning, tutoring, special needs therapy, learning materials, and other education-related expenses.
ESA programs not only afford parents options outside of government-run, union-controlled public schools, but they save the state money because typically only a portion of the student state funding is provided. For example, in Arizona, instead of upwards of $12,000 spent per student within the public system, the ESA provided to families is only $7,000.
As the race to pass universal school choice picks up speed, several states could be heading to the home stretch in the coming weeks and months.
Utah is positioned extremely well to join the universal school choice ranks as the House and Senate have both passed the “Utah Fits All Act” as of January 26. If signed into law by Gov. Spencer Cox, families would have access to roughly $8,000 each year for educational expenses.
Florida is historically a national leader in school choice, with almost half its students learning in an option outside of their assigned traditional public school. Current legislation is calling for universal school choice. With Republican lawmakers holding supermajorities in both the House and Senate, and Gov. Ron DeSantis at the helm, it’s only a matter of time.
Oklahoma is a contender in the educational freedom race. The Education Freedom Act is currently in the Senate, which has a 40-8 Republican supermajority. The House has an 81-20 supermajority. Once the bill hits educational freedom champion Gov. Kevin Stitt’s desk, it will be signed into law. It will grant all families statewide access to an ESA based on the state’s per-pupil education expense. State Superintendent Ryan Walters is a fierce supporter of empowering Oklahoma families with educational freedom to select the schools that will best serve their children.
Texas, traditionally lagging behind other red states on school choice, is not to be counted out this session in advancing ESAs. In May 2022, Gov. Greg Abbott urged lawmakers to empower parents through state funding following students. As the months passed, the groundwork was laid, including debunking the notion that school choice does not benefit rural areas or that it hurts rural school districts.
West Virginia was the national leader prior to Arizona passing universal school choice in 2022. In West Virginia, roughly 93 percent of students have access to the Hope Scholarship to date. There is the possibility to expand it to 100 percent of the state’s children within the next three years. Despite the state’s families having negligible educational freedom options until 2019, West Virginia is now among the leaders.
Indiana has efforts underway to expand the state’s existing ESA program to all students statewide while also increasing the grant amount from 90 percent of the per-student state funding to 100 percent. That would translate to an average of $7,500 allocated per student for educational expenses of the parents’ choosing.
Arkansas shouldn’t be overlooked this session. Newly elected Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders has stated her support for plans to “empower parents with more choices … so no child is ever trapped in a failing school.”
The tide is turning, and the implications are tremendous. No longer will families be at the mercy of government-run, union-controlled traditional public schools. Parents in an increasing number of states will be empowered as decision-makers in their children’s education.
The question is: Which state will be next to achieve universal educational freedom?
Dr. Keri D. Ingraham is a Fellow at Discovery Institute, Director of the American Center for Transforming Education, and a Visiting Fellow at Independent Women’s Forum.
It’s the first one since the Supreme Court in June 2022 struck down Roe v. Wade, the 1973 ruling that legalized abortion. Instead of the latest protest against Roe’s cruelty and unconstitutionality, this month-long observance and the annual March for Life on January 20 will be celebrations.
We still have much to do to protect innocent human life from the abortion industry. The battle is underway state by state and even city by city.
But Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization is a game changer. The highest law of the land as interpreted by the highest court in the land is no longer hostile to the pro-life viewpoint. It’s no longer defensible to pretend that a baby in the womb is not human and is therefore disposable. Those who continue to advocate for abortion must make the immoral case that some human lives are not worth protecting. That should be a steep hill to climb in a nation with a Christian heritage.
Like slavery, abortion violates the moral law given us by our Creator. God’s law states that all human life is sacred because we are made in His image. Many of America’s founders, including Declaration of Independence author Thomas Jefferson, a slave owner, predicted that slavery’s inherent conflict with God-given liberties would one day end it. It took a terrible civil war, but slavery was finally abolished.
The arguments for abortion are also unsustainable. That’s why the pro-life movement has never given up. Pro-life doctors, nurses and scientists have been reminding everyone that at the moment of conception, a new human life springs into being with his or her unique genetic code.
So what if academia, Hollywood, the media and corporate America use their enormous clout to push the fiction that human life is not in fact human? Proverbs 31:8 admonishes those of us who have voices to “speak out for those who cannot speak.”
We must tell the truth, promote adoption, provide more help to mothers who keep their babies, and shore up marriage, the surest family structure in which a child can thrive.
We need to make sure that the legal system, as the enforcement arm of the representative democratic republic in which we live, is no longer abused to justify the taking of innocent human life.
This means persuading millions of our fellow Americans that abortion is not the answer to an unwanted pregnancy. It means letting women who have had abortions know that Jesus offers forgiveness, peace, and new life.
I recall vividly the day that my wife, Bonnie, and I saw the film “Silent Scream” at a theater in Orlando around 1990. This powerful movie depicts a fetus — a tiny human being — desperately trying to avoid the abortionist. Few people can watch it and walk away unaffected.
Our growing faith and clarity about abortion were driving forces in the creation of an investment fund, in 1994, for Bible-believing Christians, Timothy Plan, which pioneered Biblically Responsible Investing.
Other powerful films have also carried the pro-life message. In 2018, Timothy Partners, Timothy Plan’s advisor, bought out a theater in Orlando to show the movie “Gosnell” to our local community. Starring Dean Cain, the film exposes the evils committed by Kermit Gosnell. He was a West Philadelphia-based doctor convicted of murdering infants who were born alive and of manslaughter for the death of a woman patient.
In March 2019, our firm bought out seven theaters in Orlando to show the movie “Unplanned.” It’s about the story of former Planned Parenthood clinic director Abby Johnson, who became a pro-life champion. We gifted 500 tickets that were snapped up within 24 hours. At the movie’s conclusion, we asked the audience to remain for a couple of minutes while we introduced the directors of 11 pro-life, crisis pregnancy centers that we support.
I am sharing this to encourage others to use whatever tools and influence they have to steer us toward a truly pro-life culture in which all lives are deemed sacred.
The end of Roe is a huge victory we should celebrate. It is also a clarion call to “speak out for those who cannot speak.”
Art Ally is the founder of the Timothy Plan family of Biblically Responsible Investing funds.
It seems like every time I turn around, an editor assigns me a story related to the mental health crises of our children. Most of the health experts I speak to correlate Covid lockdowns and our children’s fragile state. Closing schools played a major role in this phenomenon, but what if other crucial factors are being overlooked?
Another story, seemingly unrelated to the mental health crisis, is making the rounds in the corporate press. Church attendance is on a rapid decline. The “nones,” survey respondents who say they have no religious affiliation, are the fastest-growing group in the United States every year. We now have a generation of adults that grew up not attending worship services weekly, and they are raising their children in a similar fashion.
The “nones” seem to prefer a parenting style that says: “We’re fine without church and worship and religious instruction and institutions, thank you very much.” But they are not fine. Their children are not coping and managing the day-to-day stresses and inconveniences thrown at them. They are fragile and increasingly so.
The “nones” will tell you it is because we need to better embrace children’s differences and preferences (like their pronouns) while empowering them with positive affirmations and encouraging personal acceptance through self-esteem workshops. We clutter their calendars with sports, theater, STEM clubs, and dance classes. If none of that pans out, we allow our kids to self-medicate with hours spent on social media.
Parents will do all of this, but won’t take their families to church. Yet research shows that children who attend weekly worship services have higher GPAs, score higher on standardized tests, and are less likely to be held back a grade. They also are more likely to achieve a bachelor’s degree in college.
So why aren’t parents taking their children to weekly worship?
When surveyed, parents often respond that their children and teens do not want to attend worship. This democratic approach to family decision-making only seems to apply to church attendance, however. For other important decisions like wearing a seatbelt or vaccinations, parents balk at giving their children voting privileges. A child’s vote carries more weight when it aligns with a parent’s desire to stay home in pajamas on a Sunday morning.
Why should church attendance be considered a powerful tool for parents to boost their children’s mental health? We can look to the research for the answer.
In a 2018 study, Harvard’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health found some surprising benefits to children and adolescents who attend weekly worship. It turns out that children and teens who attend church grow up to be young adults with higher rates of reported happiness and life satisfaction. They were less likely to suffer from anxiety and depression, less likely to use illicit drugs, and less likely to engage in early sex and contract sexually transmitted infections.
In addition, these same young adults were more likely to embrace volunteering and reported feeling a sense of mission and purpose than their non-church-attending counterparts.
With all of these positive outcomes for children who attend weekly worship, should we be surprised that children who do not have a similar structure in their lives experience an inverse phenomenon? Is it any wonder that anxiety and depression among children and teens are on the rise when every day, their still-forming brains are bombarded with information about doom and destruction while they drown in a sea of gender confusion and racial animus?
We think we can combat all the negativity by telling children: “You are perfect! You are awesome! You keep being you!” We put these pithy platitudes on T-shirts and backpacks and stickers with unicorns and rainbows. At the end of a bad day, our kids know that this is no substitute for the real deal.
Each of us knows these sentiments are superficial. We are poor, miserable sinners in need of forgiveness. Where do we go with all our baggage when the church is not an option? We go to therapists and pharmacists, but trends show that the last place parents want to go is the place actually offering a solution.
What could families find at church that they won’t find anywhere else? Hopefully, something that is woefully lacking in the world around them: the truth.
Newsflash, kids! You are not perfect! You know that mean thing you did to your classmate in the cafeteria? That was a sin. And that nasty thought you had about that person? That was a sin. And the snide comment you made to your mom when you were hangry? Yep. Are you starting to see a pattern here?
Good news: you’ve come to the right place! Jesus came for sinners. As a matter of fact, the church is filled with them. Each week, they come to hear the message that even though we are sinful human beings, Jesus died for those sins. When we confess those nasty thoughts and horrible things we did, we can receive forgiveness — a clean slate!
Will we mess up again on Monday? Of course. But that’s why we can look forward to church. Can we try harder to be better people? Kinder people? Yes, we can. Does our forgiveness depend upon what we do and how we perform each week? Nope. You are forgiven because God loves you that much, so much that he sent his son to take the punishment that should have been yours and mine.
Imagine what a burden could be lifted from our children if they had a place to go each week that offered them that grace. How much better could they cope with a bad day, knowing that each moment offers a fresh start? How much more resilient could our children become?
Parents, we put our children at a disadvantage when we do not give them the very thing they need for their mental and spiritual health. It is time to put a new priority on the family calendar every Sunday. If we won’t do it for ourselves (and we should), let’s do it for our children. The next generation depends on it.
Mary Rose Kulczak is a writer for various parent and child publications. She is a wife and mother of three sons, and currently resides in Saline, Michigan.
In 2010, Bill Gates famously articulated a four-part equation to reducing the world’s carbon output. Seemingly bizarrely, his first component was reducing the population — through vaccination. “The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s headed up to about nine billion,” bemoaned Gates in his now infamous TED Talk. “Now, if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by, perhaps, 10% or 15%.” Until recently, I thought this must have been a gaffe. After all, how could vaccines reduce the world’s population? Well, enter the COVID jabs – if you even want to call them vaccines – and we might have our answer.
Questions about fertility issues, stillbirths, and neonatal deaths began to be raised last winter when Scotland experienced a month of higher infant mortality than at any time over the past three decades. Then in the spring of 2022, roughly nine months after most young adults were jabbed with the COVID shots, COVID data analysists began noticing unusual drops in birth rates. The hope was that these numbers were just short-term aberrations due to some unknown transient cause. But months later, the evidence is growing too strong to ignore, suggesting a much longer-term problem, which bizarrely has garnered little concern from policymakers, governments, the medical establishment, or the media. It ranks alongside “died suddenly” both in terms of its magnitude to humanity and the shocking degree of silence in response.
In fact, some media outlets were even celebrating the low birth rates without expressing any curiosity as to the sudden cause. While it’s impossible to prove definitively that the correlation equals causation, it’s stupefying that these shots are not under suspicion given that they are already tied to heart problems, blood clots, massive inflammatory syndromes, and menstrual irregularities and that the lipid nano particles are deposited largely in the ovaries and the testes.
When you are dealing with 1-in-1,000-year anomalies, it takes a civilization-changing event to account for the anomaly. COVID itself cannot be a factor in the sudden drop, because the birth rates were not declining nine months after COVID hit or even in the first year and a half. The other culprit could have been lockdowns, which perhaps disrupted travel, relationships, and cohabitation. But if that were the case, by now we should be seeing a bounce-back effect. Instead, as my friend “Gato Malo” points out on his Substack, the numbers are getting worse.
Sweden is a perfect country to study because it never locked down and should not have been affected socially by the lockdowns. Yet not only did the Swedes experience a sharp decline in births nine months after their vaccination program, the numbers are further deteriorating over time. According to Statistics Sweden, live births are down 8.1% for the year (8.7% per capita), but as Gato observes, the worst month was October 2022 (the most recent month with data), which saw a 13.2% per capita decline. What on earth could explain the fact that this trend is getting worse, other than … you know what? He collated the data from 25 years, and this data, which is in plain sight, raises the question of why there is no policy concern whatsoever.
He further demonstrates that the plummeting birth rates correlate perfectly with the uptake of the vaccines in Sweden among the childbearing population.
Furthermore, any hypothesis as to the cause of the plummeting birth rates would also have to logically account for the rise in neonatal deaths. For example, lockdowns would not explain why the babies being born are experiencing more health problems. The spike protein embedded in the babies’ blood, however, would. Israeli researcher Josh Guetzkow obtained neonatal death data from Israeli health insurance fund Maccabi, which covers 25% of Israelis. He found a tripling of neonatal deaths in two of the quarters post-vaccination.
The timing is very peculiar, according to Guetzkow:
In February, 2021, the Israeli Ministry of Health started to officially recommend COVID-19 vaccines for pregnant women in their 2nd and 3rd trimesters, so the timing of the second quarter spike would coincide with women being jabbed later in their pregnancy 2-4 months prior.
The 4th quarter spike coincides with the booster vaccination campaign in Israel in August and especially September — a drive that aggressively targeted pregnant women. Unfortunately the health insurer claimed not to have information on the vaccination status of pregnant women, so we are not able to differentiate by vaccination status.
This clearly rules out COVID as the culprit, because the neonatal deaths in the earlier quarters in 2020 were low. He goes on to note that this data complements earlier findings he publicized from two major Israeli hospitals showing a sudden increase in stillbirths, miscarriages, and abortions (collectively, SBMA) around the same time. The insurance data does not illuminate the vaccination status of the mothers suffering these reproductive problems, but his earlier data showed a 34% higher rate of SBMAs in Rambam hospital in Haifa among vaccinated women through October 2021.
Obviously, we all understand that you can’t definitively prove causation from correlation, but the lack of any curiosity from the medical community or the government is appalling, especially when the mechanism of action of the spike protein can logically cause these complications (including low sperm count and motility). We have now entered a new era of “speed of science” in which governments can foist novel products upon our bodies with multiple glaring and blaring safety signals setting off alarm bells all over the world, yet until we can prove conclusively the therapeutics are responsible for 100% of the anomaly, they will continue to be promoted. That is completely backward and represents a flagrant violation of the Nuremberg Code.
In a sane world, the makers of these therapies would be behind bars, but instead they are getting a promotion to concoct even more products with this same dangerous technology. Last week, the U.K. announced the formation of a 10-year partnership with Moderna to invest in more R&D for mRNA technology and to build a vaccine manufacturing center that can produce 250 million vaccines a year, particularly for the very problematic RSV shot the company is planning to release next year. In the irony of all ironies, the U.K.’s Health Security Agency will be overseeing this partnership. The UKHSA was the first health surveillance body in the world that published comprehensive weekly COVID updates showing negative efficacy of the shots almost a year and a half ago.
Typically, failure of a corporate partner is an impetus for a government to break the partnership. In the case of vaccines, however, the more they fail, the more they are elevated, subsidized, and even mandated. Unless their definition of failure is the opposite of how humanity would define it.
Like Blaze News? Get the news that matters most delivered directly to your inbox. SIGN UP
Schools across America are affirming the gender dysphoria of children without parental consent. While some educators have been exposed for intentionally confusing children on matters of sex and identity, entire school boards are doubling down, with some battling in court to keep facilitating students’ so-called transitions without telling parents.
When Jennifer — who omitted her surname for the sake of her child’s privacy — caught her school covertly transitioning her 10-year-old daughter; she rescued her little girl and began homeschooling.
In many similar cases, the cards appear stacked against parents, particularly those unable to homeschool but wary of strangers confusing their kids and putting them on paths to sterile, drug-dependent, and disenchanted lives.
Jennifer recognized that while her little girl was spared, she wouldn’t be the last targeted; that educators, school administrators, pharmaceutical companies, psychologists, and other power- and profit-incentivized parties were just getting started. Recognizing that other parents may need help and that this is a battle worth winning, Jennifer and other parents are now going on the offensive.
TheBlaze recently spoke to Jennifer about the fight her volunteer organization, Partners for Ethical Care, is taking to the loose coalition of bad actors apparently eager to transmogrify children, usurp parental rights, and turn a profit at the expense of innocence.
What are the details?
In November, Jennifer told Wesley Yang, who runs the Substack “Year Zero,” about how her school first socially transitioned her 10-year-old daughter without informing her.
“The school was using a name that she made up, so not her name that was given to her, and different pronouns,” said Jennifer.
Jennifer’s daughter no longer used the girl’s bathroom. Had she been 13 or older, she would have been able to use boy’s facilities without Jennifer knowing, but as she was still only 10 at the time, she instead used the office washroom.
A school therapist would regularly meet with Jennifer’s daughter, ultimately in excess of five hours.
In these meetings, the therapist would reportedly employ biologically inaccurate pronouns in reference to the little girl and egg on the child’s temporary identity crisis.
One teacher went so far as to suggest that Jennifer’s little girl be assigned to a boys’ cabin at camp.
For the most part, the school elected not to keep Jennifer’s family in the loop.
“It just felt so much like an injustice,” she told TheBlaze. “I knew I was gonna try to do whatever I could to push back against it.”
Despite fearing that Child Protective Services might break up her family, citing her refusal to accommodate the so-called transition, Jennifer ultimately pulled her daughter out. CPS fortunately never came, and Jennifer now homeschools her child.
Her daughter’s previous confusion, exacerbated by her LGBT friend group and by social media, dissipated over time.
While her battle for her daughter’s well-being was over, Jennifer’s war against the “medicalization of children” was just beginning.
Partners for Ethical Care
While Jennifer and her family enjoyed the requisite stability to homeschool, she recognized that not all parents have that as an option. She also suspected that soon, CPS and other state agencies would be weaponized against families antipathetic to the medicalization of their children.
“I do remember at some point, my mother’s saying to me, ‘This is so huge. … What are you going to be able to do?’ I said I don’t know, but if I don’t, who will do something?” said Jennifer. “Everything has to start somewhere, right?”
Jennifer noted that at the time, she wasn’t aware of some of the other groups committed to protecting children from the transsexual agenda but is now well acquainted with the work of Stephanie Davies-Arai of Transgender Trend and others in the U.S. extra to the “vast underground network of parents” committed to the fight.
Jennifer recalled the sentiment early on: “We’re like, let’s start this organization. Let’s fight. Let’s fight the medicalization. … We were looking to create awareness because there didn’t seem to be much outside of our tiny bubble. And to gather stories to potentially help [in legal efforts].”
The group they founded is called Partners for Ethical Care.
“No child is born in the wrong body” is the understanding underpinning the work undertaken by the volunteers behind PEC, all committed to stopping the “medicalization of children.”
As part of its campaign to raise awareness, PEC shares testimonials on both its website and podcast from families adversely affected by transsexual ideology as well as from those who have “desisted” (i.e., ended social and or medical transmogrifications.)
PEC also provides parents with resources detailing methods by which they can opt their kids out of gender education programs and find “gender-critical” therapists as well as what to look out for in the way of deceptive practices widely employed by school administrators and educators.
The awareness and resource campaign is critically important, suggested Jennifer, since the fight against the medicalization agenda targeting minors and the true nature of the underlying problem is “under a media blackout, especially in left-wing media, mainstream media.”
Jennifer highlighted three major ways parents can confront this threat posed to their children.
First, she suggested that parents should regulate and monitor their kids’ interactions online.
“The biggest thing is for parents to keep their kids off the internet for as long as possible,” she said. “My daughter did learn some of these things in an online forum — a drawing forum.”
Whether it’s on Discord or in online games, “The internet is a predator’s playground right now.”
According to Jennifer, both predators and the ideologically-motivated seek out the vulnerable online.
Narrowing kids’ exposure to content that inspires and promotes gender dysphoria online is important but only a partial measure.
Second, Jennifer suggested that parents need to stand up for their kids in their school districts.
Any ground conceded by parents regarding how their children are to be raised is ground that will ultimately be taken by bad actors. Thus, parents need to keep “standing up for their kids and trying to change the harmful policies” in schools.
“I will say it’s scary for a lot of people to go up [against school boards and educators],” she said, noting how parents critical of transsexual bathroom policies and the crimes they enabled in Loudon County, Virginia, “got framed as terrorists.”
Jennifer suggested that the PEC, like the parental rights movements combatting transsexual propaganda and policies in Virginia and the coalition of Muslim and Christian parents who recently sued a school board in Ohio, are not, contrary to the suggestion of some LGBT activists, “powered by hate.”
“We are not getting paid. We’re doing this out of love. We’re doing this because we care that much,” she said.
Like Blaze News? Get the news that matters most delivered directly to your inbox.SIGN UP
Parents Defending Education, a grassroots parental rights group, obtained and released a North Carolina school board presentation that detailed the district’s transgender policy, which explained how faculty should hide a student’s gender identity from the student’s parents.
On August 17, the Charlotte-Mecklenburg School District Board of Education met to view an 84-slide presentation that covered a wide range of topics, including student discipline, teacher salaries, and the district’s transgender policy. The presentation used CDC statistics to estimate that of the district’s 2,146 students, approximately 43, or 2%, likely identify as transgender. The school board also estimated that of those 43 transgender students, 15 had likely attempted suicide. According to district policy, children can request to change their names and pronouns without parental approval. Teachers are not permitted to share a child’s gender identity with the child’s parents or peers without express permission from the student.
“Preferred name can be changed at student’s request – parent/guardian consent not needed,” the presentation stated.
The policy asked educators to consider that a student’s parents may disapprove of the student’s gender identity, which could lead to abuse, neglect, dependency, depression, anxiety, substance abuse, self-harm, and suicide.
“There is never a justification for a policy that calls for the deliberate withholding and concealment of information from parents about their own child,” Erika Sanzi, director of outreach for Parents Defending Education, told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “This policy is based on an ideology; it has no place in schools.”
Educators must refer to students by their preferred names and pronouns, although the policy noted that “inadvertent slips or mistakes” are excusable. However, when speaking to parents, teachers are instructed to use the student’s legal name unless the child has stated otherwise.
Students are permitted to use the bathrooms and locker rooms that match their gender identities, the policy noted.
When going on field trips, educators are asked to “consider the transgender student’s privacy and comfort” and whether sex segregation is necessary. Teachers are also asked, “What will you do if you go to a place that enforces sex stereotyping?”
According to district policy, school staff must follow the students’ lead on the confidentiality of their gender identities.
“In deciding whether to involve a student’s parents or guardian in developing a plan, school staff should work closely with the student to assess the degree to which, if any, the parent or guardian will be involved in the process and must consider the health, wellbeing and safety of the student,” the policy stated. “Currently no duty for school to report transgender status to parents.”
The Charlotte-Mecklenburg School District Board of Education did not respond to a request for comment, the DCNF reported.
WASHINGTON — A new survey reveals that most Americans support religious liberty protections for medical professionals and institutions opposed to participating in procedures that violate their beliefs and commitment to “do no harm,” even as younger Americans express more skepticism about religious liberty protections.
The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty unveiled the top findings of its 2022 Religious Freedom Index at its headquarters Tuesday. The fourth annual survey, conducted in conjunction with Heart and Minds Strategies, is based on responses collected from 1,004 adults in the United States from Sept. 28 to Oct. 5. The full report is slated for release Wednesday.
As Becket Fund for Religious Liberty President and CEO Mark Rienzi explained, the Religious Freedom Index asks “the same questions year after year [to] a big number people to get a sense of how the American people are feeling about religious liberty for themselves, for other people, for people of minority faiths, [and] people of faiths that they don’t necessarily share.”
One question on the survey asked respondents to react to statements related to religious objections to assisted suicide, abortion and sex change procedures within the medical community. Seventy-three percent of those surveyed agreed that “individual physicians should be allowed to opt out of assisted suicide, elective abortion, or sex change procedures” if performing such procedures goes against their religious beliefs or their commitment to “do no harm.”
When asked if they believed that “hospitals and healthcare systems which have ethical objections or are run by religious organizations should be allowed to refuse to perform elective abortions,” 62% answered in the affirmative. Additionally, a majority (59%) of those surveyed believed that “medical students should be able to opt out of instruction regarding physician-assisted suicide, elective abortions, and sex change procedures during training.”
Only half of respondents expressed support for allowing “hospitals and healthcare systems with religious objections to assisted suicide, elective abortions, and sex change procedures” to “only employ medical professionals who agree with that position.”
Achieving 74% support, the most popular idea introduced in the Religious Freedom Index states that “Patients and families should have access to healthcare facilities that share their beliefs about controversial procedures such as assisted suicide, elective abortion, or sex change procedures.”
The release of the 2022 Religious Freedom Index comes after the Biden administration has found itself in court over a mandate it issued forcing medical organizations to perform gender transition surgeries. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit struck down the mandate and the Biden administration did not appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, leaving the decision in place.
Last year’s survey included a question measuring support for “freedom for healthcare workers with religious objections to abortion to not participate in abortion procedures.” Seventy-five percent of respondents either completely or mostly accepted allowing healthcare workers to opt out of performing abortions if they could not do so in good conscience.
At the same time, 44% of those surveyed believed that hospitals and healthcare systems run by religious organizations should have the ability to “set policies and standards that reflect the organization’s religious beliefs.”
The questions about the conscience rights of hospitals and healthcare workers constitute a small fraction of the inquiries posed to Americans in this year’s Religious Freedom Index. As in previous years, the survey asked Americans for their views on religion and policy, religion in action, religion in society, religious pluralism, church and state and religion sharing.
Based on responses to a series of questions, Becket calculated a dimension score on a scale of 0 to 100 for each of the subcategories examined, with 0 indicating “complete opposition for the principle of religious freedom at issue” and a score of 100 demonstrating “robust support for the same principle.” The Religious Freedom Index is a composite score calculated after combining the dimension scores.
Heart and Mind Strategies CEO Dee Allsop elaborated on the dimensions examined in the Religious Freedom Index at the event Tuesday. According to Allsop, questions about religious pluralism examine respondents’ views about “freedoms to choose your religion, and to be able to pray and pursue your beliefs.” The religious sharing dimension measures Americans’ beliefs pertaining to the ability to “talk about and preach about your faith.”
Questions about church and state survey public opinion about “government being involved in religion and religion in government.” The religion in society dimension seeks to determine “whether or not religion is part of the problem or part of the solution” to societal problems.
The religion and policy dimension queries respondents for their views about marriage and whether or not religious beliefs “should be guiding the way that we vote.” The religion in action dimension is based on responses to questions about whether or not there should be “freedom for people of faith to follow their own religious beliefs when they’re at work and in their profession.”
As panelists explained at the press conference, the overall Religious Freedom Index stood at 68 this year, showing no change from 2021. However, the changes in the index dimension scores from 2021 varied widely.
As in previous surveys, respondents demonstrated the highest level of support for religious pluralism. The dimension score for religious pluralism came in at 84 in 2022, an increase from 80 in 2021. The dimension scores for religious sharing and religion in action barely budged from 71 to 72 and 67 to 68, respectively.
On the other hand, support for religion in society, religion and policy, church and state and religion in action declined compared to last year. The dimension score for religion and policy dropped by three points from 68 to 65 between 2021 and 2022. The religion in society dimension score also decreased by three points, from 65 to 62.
Mirroring the results of previous surveys, the dimension dealing with church and state received the lowest score in 2022, dropping from 58 to 56 over the past year.
A group of panelists, moderated by Becket Law Executive Director Montse Alvarado, discussed the findings from the Religious Freedom Index and their implications for American society as a whole at the event Tuesday. With the U.S. Supreme Court case 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis case in the news, Americans indicated that they “overwhelmingly support” the right of a photographer not to participate in a same-sex wedding if doing so conflicts with their religious beliefs, regardless of what those beliefs are.
The 303 Creative case centers on Colorado-based website designer Lorie Smith, who is challenging Colorado anti-discrimination law out of concern that it would force her to create websites for same-sex marriages in violation of her religious convictions about marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Oral arguments in the 303 Creative case took place Monday.
One panelist, Nick Tomaino of The Wall Street Journal, expressed gratitude for “the durable support for people like Lorie,” noting that the Religious Freedom Index found “about seven in 10 people thinking that Lorie Smith and others like her should be able to practice their faith.” At the same time, he highlighted a trend from the survey revealing that “Gen Z women aren’t registering their support.”
Other panelists also cited Gen Zers’ beliefs about religious freedom issues as a cause for concern going forward. Stephanie Slade of Reason Magazine pointed to statistics illustrating “abstract” support for religious liberty among the youngest Americans that fades when respondents are presented with a specific example: “Among Gen Z, you have a very high number (86%) who say … they support freedom of people or groups to choose not to participate in actions or work that violate their sincere religious beliefs and conscience.”
“When you put a specific example to them and you ask ‘should an individual physician, for example, be able to opt out of providing, say, being involved in abortion or physician-assisted suicide’ or something like that, support drops 50% among the Gen Z cohort,” she said.
Another panelist, Josh Good, director of the Faith Angle Forum at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, attributed the hostility toward religious liberty among younger Americans to a “blind spot when it comes to religion” in American newsrooms. Tomaino suggested that having “religious practitioners in newsrooms” could help address this “blind spot.”
Tomaino contended that “there might be a caricature that newsrooms treat religion as something of a strange species.” Alvarado lamented the Religious Freedom Index’s finding that “37% of Americans had never heard of pregnancy centers being in any way being affected by post-Roe reality,” such as vandalism and bombings, as a consequence of media bias.
Alvarado and Slade suggested that had these people known about the targeting of pro-life pregnancy centers following the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which determined that the U.S. Constitution did not contain a right to abortion, they would have become more sympathetic to arguments in favor of religious liberty.
“Story selection is a form of bias,” Slade asserted. “These stories are not getting the coverage that they deserve and they are not getting the coverage they would get if … when there are, in some cases, violence or any kind of harassment or attacks on an abortion provider, for example, these same journalists would know that this is a story and it deserves coverage and it’s a big deal.”
According to Slade, “In a healthy media ecosystem, we need people who are going out and just reporting the facts that are true.” She portrayed the current state of American media as focused on “the pure outrage-inducing opinion cable news-style journalism as opposed to reporting the facts,” where journalists see themselves on an “existential mission to represent the good against the evil.”
Slade also acknowledged that the irreligiosity of Gen Z compared to other generations might also play a role in their apparent hostility toward religious liberty: “Gen Z is much less religious themselves, they’re much less likely to think that religion’s part of the solution rather than part of the problem.”
“They’re much less supportive of freedom for people to run their businesses the way they want, for religious nonprofits to make employment decisions based on the tenets of their faith, which is a really important part of being a faith-based nonprofit, they’re much less likely to … support freedom to believe that certain behaviors are sinful.”
After Slade reiterated that Gen Z has “less sympathy and understanding of the value of religion in society,” Tomaino pointed to academic influence as a reason why. “The water they swim in universities tends to be overtly hostile to the faith,” he concluded. He circled back to the role the media plays in shaping public opinion: “Having news coverage of the positive contributions that faith organizations make is especially important.”
When Tomaino clarified that “males registered slightly more sympathy to religious causes” than females, Alvarado responded, “they’re more religious themselves.” Alvarado and the other panelists repeatedly stressed the importance of religious liberty in a pluralistic society, with the Becket Fund Executive Director sharing a quote from noted theologian Rabbi Jonathan Sacks: “The Tree of Liberty has religious roots and don’t think that you can sever those roots and have the Tree of Liberty survive.”
For his part, Good offered up his opinion that “People being more religious, not less religious, is the key to understanding pluralism better.”
Discussing other takeaways of the 2022 Religious Freedom Index, Allsop noted that when asked if “religion is part of the solution to the problems we face in our society or part of the problem,” respondents were split down the middle. This constituted a dramatic drop from the 61% who saw religion as a solution to societal problems in 2021.
“Catholics in particular and non-Catholic Christians overwhelmingly say that they feel completely or a good amount accepted in our society,” he said. Stressing that feelings of acceptance were “not quite the same for those that are religious, non-Christians,” he reported that “less than half of them are feeling that high level of acceptance in our society.” Additionally, 89% of Americans agree that “sacred sites and religious practices of Native American Indians ought to be protected.”
When asked about the First Amendment, “Less than half of Americans recognize that freedom of religion is one of the protected rights in the First Amendment,” Allsop added. “Most Americans, even though they can’t find it in the First Amendment, they nevertheless feel that religious freedom plays a really important role and provides an important good in our society.”
About a year and a half ago, I noticed that my son — let’s call him Andy — was putting rainbow stickers on his phone. And a friend alerted me that Andy rebuked her daughter in a group chat for being “so cisgender.” I did some delicate digging, and it became clear: My child, then 13, was flirting with going “trans.”
He’s not alone. The number of transgender-identifying kids is up 20 to 40 times since a decade ago, to 1.5 percent of all teens. And the gender facilities that say they are the experts have been unmasked. Videos and statements have revealed that doctors in these so-called clinics are willing to give 15-year-old girls double mastectomies and call it treatment.
I wasn’t about to send my son off for experimental medical interventions that didn’t treat any underlying psychological issues. In this, I think I’m representative of the silent (and bullied) majority. Still, what could I do?
The first thing I had to do was to realize that the gender cult is powerful, and I can’t control the choices and feelings of my kid. I had to accept my limits, but that didn’t mean I was helpless. Parents are still the most important influence on their kids.
Finding a New School
I was lucky: My son was at a private school that did not push kids, behind their parents’ backs, into exploring alternate sexualities and getting “treated” by lifetime medicalization. If my son had been at a trans-affirming school — which means just about any public school — I would have been undermined at every turn.
At this school, however, he did have a cohort of “rebel” friends who all seemed to identify themselves as gender-questioning. And the school itself was not academically challenging enough for Andy. So I focused on academics, and we looked for a new school that would be a better fit on that score — and still supportive of my values. Finding one gave him a fresh start and a new peer group.
Building Real Identity
Next, I decided I would not provoke Andy by debating gender and trans issues. Maria Keffler in her book “Desist, Detrans, and Detox” reminds parents that transgenderism in adolescents is less about sex and more about identity, identity, and identity. A few decades ago, Andy probably would have worked through his teenage crises by going goth or arguing with me about religion. These days, becoming one of the letters in LGTB is the shortcut to being interesting, not “basic.”
Well, I didn’t want to make gender-bending the way he was going to differentiate himself from his parents. If he had been openly claiming a different so-called gender identity, maybe I would have been more confrontational about it. But since he was just flirting with being trans, not yet eloping, I decided not to make the topic of the sexes even more important than it already was. Instead, I focused on helping him build an identity in a healthy way.
I made it a priority to compliment him, every day, praising him for all the good things he is. Every time I “caught him” being funny, smart, helpful, generous, thoughtful, or kind, I noted it out loud. Every day, multiple times a day. I tried to help him see that these things are more important to his identity than some exotic “gender.” I also tried to help him feel more at home in his skin. He was given lessons in a sport he enjoys, so he could experience his body being strong and agile. Whatever reduced his alienation from his body, I encouraged.
Next, I focused on building our relationship. I asked a lot of open-ended questions, and I made goofy jokes. We laughed a lot. I learned about him and signaled that I was interested in learning more. De-escalating tension and increasing the joy between us was key.
If Andy wanted to wear a vintage shirt that looked like it belonged on a French aristocrat from a few centuries ago, I just shrugged and let it pass. As long as what he chose was somewhere within the boundaries of socially acceptable male clothing, I didn’t make a fuss. After all, being a man (or a woman) is large enough to encompass differences in style, personality, and interest. It’s the trans movement that stereotypes the sexes, telling us that a sensitive, artistic boy must actually be a girl. Nonsense! My son could be a man and wear pastels.
When opportunities arose in everyday life, I pointed out the differences between men and women. In talking about school athletics, I would casually observe, “Oh, in high school, the athletic teams are divided by sex, because by puberty, boys develop more muscles and have more lung capacity than girls.” I never made these into arguments, just objective remarks.
In fact, we didn’t talk about so-called gender much, although I was prepared to. I coached myself on how to respond with neutrality and interest. I was determined only to ask questions. “I’m not clear how, if gender is socially constructed, that it is also an infallible identity deep inside the person?” “Help me understand. If gender is fluid and changeable, why should people get surgeries to alter their bodies permanently?” Books and essays pointing out transgenderism’s inconsistencies helped me clarify my thoughts. Still, I vowed I would only provide my own answers when Andy asked me a question — only, that is, when he was truly curious about my thinking.
I did take Andy to one talk on gender by a speaker who was calm and sympathetic but still supportive of my values. When he asked why he had to go, I simply said, “It’s an important topic, and this point of view is not well-represented in the culture.” Afterward, when I asked him what he thought, he said, “It was fine,” in a tone of voice that indicated the opposite. I dropped it; the talk still gave him a lot to chew on, even if he didn’t want to admit it.
One other piece was key: technology. Much trans proselytizing happens online, with anonymous adults love-bombing vulnerable kids. These adults sell the idea that acceptance can be found only in their new trans family and not in their real home. Some parents need to take drastic steps regarding their kids’ online presence. Fortunately, the screen problem was one I had been addressing for a long time, so I could be more moderate.
Andy did not have a smartphone, although even flip phones these days have internet browsers. I gave him a new phone designed for kids, one that had some carefully curated apps but no internet browser. For computer time, he was limited to an hour a day, and I trusted the internet filters I managed on his computer to keep him off the porn sites and the sexually explicit forums that cater to trans-questioning kids. All that limited (but didn’t eliminate) his exposure to pro-trans pressure. As a bonus, I got a much more cheerful kid at home who wasn’t always in front of a screen.
The point of all of this was threefold: to be the good guy, to distract him from all gender talk all the time, and to provide other identity options than the trans one.
Upping My Parenting
Lastly, I played the long game. Even when I didn’t believe it, I kept repeating to myself that the universe wouldn’t give me a kid that I couldn’t care for. That I had his best interests at heart — and online trans gurus didn’t — and I could wait this out with patience. I prioritized him when we had downtime in the evenings, not my phone. And I did the things I needed to, like sleeping enough and getting my own support system, so I could be available to him. Should I have been doing all of this all along as a parent? Well, of course, and in fact, it’s not like I had to do a total 180 when this emergency happened. Some of these things I was already doing, sort of. But I still needed to level up my parenting.
This summer, when he decorated a new phone, there were no rainbow stickers on it.
I wouldn’t say we are out of the woods, but he seems uninterested in the whole gender question. His wardrobe choices are less outrageous, and he’s not anxious, angry, and approval-seeking. Instead, he’s engaged and happy at school and at home, and he doesn’t need to be “different” according to the trans script. He’s happier being different just as himself. That makes me one happy parent.
This byline marks several different individuals, granted anonymity in cases where publishing an article on The Federalist would credibly threaten close personal relationships, their safety, or their jobs. We verify the identities of those who publish anonymously with The Federalist.
Wisconsin’s premier children’s hospital has had its fair share of scandal, particularly with regard to religious liberty and leadership, but the bar just keeps getting lower: Children’s Wisconsin is now hiring trans activists as chaplains and “spiritual care interns.”
Children’s staff members were first notified of such new hires when fliers were posted around the inpatient units advertising, “Meet Your New Chaplain: Kate Newendorp.” The first tip-off to Newendorp’s beliefs about the sexes was featured prominently on the posters, with a proclamation of her pronouns as “she/her/hers” and those of her fiance, a female who goes by “they/he.”
“Working in a pediatric hospital is a dream come true!!” Newendorp is quoted on the flier. “I am so excited to be working alongside everyone and am pumped to be part of the team. Think of me as your friendly next-door neighbor!”
The poster is just your garden-variety job announcement, but a deeper dive shows that Newendorp’s social Marxist views aren’t confined to a push for preferred pronouns. The new chaplain is all-in for transgender surgeries, abortion, and a rejection of religious teaching when it cuts against her personal comfort.
Despite biblical Christian doctrine affirming the sanctity and humanity of life in the womb, the existence of only two distinct sexes, and the immorality of same-sex relations in both the Old and New Testaments, the new “chaplain” proudly rejects all of this.
“Love Jesus. Be gay. Get ordained,” she wrote on Facebook in June, with pictures of herself in rainbow garb. “What better way to celebrate Pride than being ordained?! Many thanks to my church and classis for being willing to stand for queer folks being included in ministry and for allowing me to follow God’s call.”
Several months later, on Oct. 17, 2022, after announcing her engagement to her female fiance who identifies as transgender, the Children’s Wisconsin “chaplain” spouted off about her church online. “Also, your casual reminder that my validity as an ordained minister is currently under review by my denomination because of the love I feel for my fiancé. Do better Church, because I’m not going anywhere. I was called,” she wrote.
Newendorp doesn’t just reject biblical relationships in her own life; she’s a full-fledged left-wing activist who twists religion to advance her preferred leftist policies. Her Twitter bio announces that she’s a “Chaplain desiring to shake things up” and says she’s “Daydreaming about … a time where God isn’t referred to with male pronouns.” On Facebook, she shared a blasphemous poem called “Jesus at the Gay Bar”:
But she’s also used her religion card to proclaim that loving your neighbor looks like “getting vaccinated and masking up” and voting for Democrats, and that “Abortion is a religious freedom.”
“People of all genders and sexualities have and need abortions. Abortion is healthcare,” Newendorp wrote with misinformation about maternal deaths. “I am an ordained minister who supports a person’s right to choose what is right for their life and their body. I am pastor [sic] who is pro-choice.”
In January, Newendorp started a GoFundMe “on behalf of Jennifer London” to help her fiance “Jensen” undergo a double mastectomy, known in the transgender-activist world by the euphemism “top surgery.”
Since moving to Wisconsin for her role at the children’s hospital, Newendorp appears to have become friendly with the other chaplains, posting pictures of herself going wedding dress shopping with fellow Children’s chaplain Ian Butts. This indicates Newendorp is not the only anti-Christian person installed in a religious role at the hospital to help families deal with life-and-death medical situations.
If Butts’ name sounds familiar, that’s because he was the chaplain who interrogated Children’s staff members who submitted religious exemption requests over the disastrous Covid shot mandate that left many hospitals dangerously understaffed. As part of the invasive vetting process, Butts grilled employees about their religious beliefs to determine whether their theology met his standards for being allowed their First Amendment rights and freedom to make their own medical decisions.
As I reported in these pages at the time, “The questions included the specifics of the employees’ personal religious convictions and their vaccination record, with Butts pressing on what he considered to be contradictions. Two particularly leading questions regarded the specifics of how the employees would keep their patients safe without being vaccinated, implying a moral implication of refusing a vaccine, as well as how they could square working for a hospital that mandated something so contrary to their personal convictions as a condition of employment.”
“We have already seen that Children’s holds little value for respecting deeply held religious beliefs, given their recent COVID Religious Waiver Committee. But this feels like a step too far. This feels like they have actively recruited activists into this field to further their progressive agenda,” one former Children’s Wisconsin employee told The Federalist of the trans activist chaplains. “I think this situation really calls into question who do we want guiding the spiritual development of our children — especially children who are stuck in a hospital, isolated, sometimes alone, and extremely vulnerable and easily impressionable.”
Children’s also recently posted a flier for a “Spiritual Care Intern” named Meg Trimm, who demanded to be referred to by the third-person plural pronouns “They” and “Them.” This chaplain intern was “an LGBTQ+ community educator and LGBTQ+ teen safe space facilitator” who believes “a professional chaplain’s job is not to convert anyone or preach religion, but to empower each person to find and use the hope and resilience systems they already have.”
“I am deeply concerned with this new infiltration of trans activists into our chaplain and faith-based services,” the former Children’s employee told The Federalist. “We have already witnessed the erosion and lost of public trust in fields of psychology, psychiatry, social work and general mental health counselors due to the rise of activists in these areas. Now parents have to worry about this as well?”
Like other pediatric hospitals that have recently come under fire for mutilative transgender interventions, the “Gender Health Clinic” at Children’s Wisconsin advertises medical interventions and surgeries for children up to age 16, with no specified age the hospital deems too young. It advertises that its services include “top surgery” (meaning a mastectomy that mutilates a child’s healthy and developing breasts), wrong-sex hormones, and allegedly “reversible” puberty-blocking hormones, although that isn’t what the experts and “science” say.
While the National Health Service used to claim such gender-bending interventions were “reversible,” it has since backpedaled, admitting:
Little is known about the long-term side effects of hormone or puberty blockers in children with gender dysphoria. … It’s also not known whether hormone blockers affect the development of the teenage brain or children’s bones. Side effects may also include hot flushes, fatigue and mood alterations. … [Gender-affirming] hormones cause some irreversible changes, such as: breast development (caused by taking oestrogen), breaking or deepening of the voice (caused by taking testosterone). Long-term cross-sex hormone treatment may cause temporary or even permanent infertility.
If health-care workers in the “Gender Health Clinic” at Children’s Wisconsin decide it’s “appropriate,” they prescribe puberty blockers to children at their first visit, even if they’ve never been evaluated by a mental health professional. And while the hospital says it doesn’t pump kids full of wrong-sex hormones on the first visit, it “can work to quickly start hormones at a follow-up clinic visit, usually within a few weeks.”
Furthermore, the pediatric hospital states on its “gender health history” form: “We offer gender-affirming Spiritual Support to all our patients.” Andy Brodzeller, an external communication director for Children’s, failed to explain what “gender affirming Spiritual Support” means despite being asked repeatedly.
“Our chaplains are trained to support and engage families of various faith and personal backgrounds in a health care setting,” Brodzeller said in response to a Federalist inquiry. “They only interact with patients if specifically requested by a family. Families are also always free to seek the services of their own personal faith leader. Regarding your question about parental involvement related to care for gender diverse kids, parents and guardians are essential to all care decisions. Clear, informed consent of all parents/guardians is required before proceeding with all treatments.”
But with trans activist “chaplains” like Newendorp and Trimm stacking the pediatric hospital’s spiritual support bench, and a promise from Children’s to “offer gender-affirming Spiritual Support to all our patients” (emphasis mine), people in the Children’s community are rightly concerned.
“We have many parents and families at Children’s who are deeply religious and hold traditional Judeo-Christian values. Will these new chaplains be able to serve the need of these families objectively?” the former Children’s employee added. “How will they properly support a grieving parent who is dealing with a child’s traumatic injury? How will they properly counsel a child who may be alone in the hospital due to a single parent working to make ends meet and maintain insurance?”
Kylee Griswold is the editorial director of The Federalist. She previously worked as the copy editor for the Washington Examiner magazine and as an editor and producer at National Geographic. She holds a B.S. in Communication Arts/Speech and an A.S. in Criminal Justice and writes on topics including feminism and gender issues, religion, and the media. Follow her on Twitter @kyleezempel.
Imagine the Environmental Protection Agency decides that, instead of setting air pollution standards, it will outsource oversight to an industry group called the “Emission Standards Coalition,” which, despite its innocuous name, is funded and staffed entirely by coal companies. Or, closer to home, imagine that city councilmembers in your quiet suburb decide that henceforth all speed limits will be set by the local auto racing club. We all would promptly object, haranguing the government for abdicating its most basic responsibility to citizens. “Foxes shouldn’t guard henhouses,” we’d say. Rules meant for public health and safety shouldn’t become tools to advance special interests and profit seekers. Lifting pollution and speed limits may benefit factory and Ferrari owners, but the public at large will have to cope with the resulting damage.
Farfetched as these examples might seem, something like this is happening in health care. Along the new frontier of “transgender health,” novel and even destructive “standards of care” are being set by ideologues and billionaire-backed foundations — all with the government’s blessing.
Earlier this year, President Joe Biden’s Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) published a proposed rule under Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act. Behind its 190-plus pages and innocent-sounding name (“Nondiscrimination in Health Programs and Activities”) hides a radical agenda that would reshape the nation’s health care in alarming ways. HHS is proposing new national standards for what it calls “gender affirming care,” mandating that doctors provide these services and insurance plans cover them. What is “gender affirming care” exactly? HHS never really says. Its proposed rule neither defines the term nor identifies objective standards — such as age limits — that might apply. Instead, HHS incorporates guidance from medical societies and a group calling itself the “World Professional Association for Transgender Health,” or WPATH.
WPATH is not a government agency. It is a trans-activist group. Its president is Dr. Marci Bowers, a man identifying as a woman and self-described “pioneer in the field of Gender Affirmation Surgery” with her own transgender reality show, “Sex Change Hospital.” WPATH’s staff appears to be largely borrowed from Veritas, a for-profit company that does marketing and public relations for medical societies. WPATH’s funders include the Arcus Foundation (“one of the largest LGBT funders in the world”), the Soros-backed Open Society Foundations, and the Tawani Foundation, headed by transgender billionaire Jennifer Pritzker.
‘Standards’ Reflect Radical Backers
In 2018, the Tawani Foundation gave WPATH $200,000 to develop its so-called “Standards of Care,” a gift that earned Pritzker the WPATH “Philanthropy Award.” And Pritzker is heavily invested in trans causes. While the foundation has been funneling money to groups like WPATH and the National Center for Transgender Equality, its for-profit arm, Tawani Enterprises, is making financial bets on medical devices, implants, and surgical cutting tools. With the transgender surgery market expected to grow by billions of dollars over the next decade, one careful observer notes that “it is hard to avoid the impression of complementarity” here.
No surprise, then, that the WPATH standards that HHS hopes to enshrine into law reflect the radical views of its backers. On the list of WPATH “treatments” are mutilating surgeries (mastectomies, vaginectomies, penectomies), “chest binding,” “genital tucking,” “aesthetic procedures” like “body contouring” and “voice surgery,” and puberty-blocking drugs for children. There’s no minimum age requirement for these procedures. WPATH even calls for “psychotherapy” for prepubescent “gender diverse children” to “explore their gender,” with parents involved “as necessary” and excluded if their involvement is “contra-indicated.” WPATH says it’s “committed to advocacy” for “social and political climates that ensure social tolerance, equality, and the full rights of citizenship.”
This isn’t medicine. It is the destruction of healthy bodies, the indoctrination of children, and the dissolution of parental rights. It is radical sexual ideology under the guise of science.
Rest of the World Backs Away
Even to call WPATH’s guidance “standards of care” is misleading. As the Society for Evidence Based Gender Medicine explains, a true standard of care “is a treatment approach that all reasonable providers would use in a particular clinical situation,” but no such consensus exists for so-called “gender affirming care,” especially for kids. And the mounting damage this form of “care” is doing to both kids and adults is well-documented. It’s why countries around the world are backing away from it, even as HHS bureaucrats are strangely doubling down.
WPATH published its latest guidance in its “partner” journal, the recently renamed “International Journal of Transgender Health.” Among its authors is Susie Green, who heads the United Kingdom-based group Mermaids focused on “gender-diverse kids.” Green is not a medical professional. She spent several years as an IT consultant before famously helping her 16-year-old son undergo transgender surgery in Thailand. Another contributor to the WPATH guidance is Laura A. Jacobs, a self-described genderqueer “activist” and “heretic” whose “psychotherapy specialties” include “LGBTQIA+” adolescents, “BDSM,” “kink,” and “sexwork.”
It isn’t shocking that a bunch of well-funded activists could come together, give their glossy PDFs a veneer of academic credibility, and market their views as a new sexual orthodoxy. What is shocking is that they’ve managed to capture the federal bureaucracy. For HHS to uncritically platform WPATH, mandating shoddy science and destructive medicine as law, is an alarming development that deserves greater scrutiny.
Ultimately, this is a lawless effort. HHS has no power to override the states and the medical profession by imposing “standards of care” for the entire country. Nor can HHS force these standards on health care professionals in violation of their ethical and religious convictions. And purporting to delegate these tasks to billionaire-backed ideologues with no democratic accountability is worse yet. Just as racing enthusiasts don’t set speed limits and coal companies don’t set pollution rules, transgender activists shouldn’t be setting national medical standards.
Douglas G. Wilson Jr. is the chief executive officer of the Catholic Benefits Association and founding board member of the Catholic Health Care Leadership Alliance.
In a direct rebuke to Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham’s radical abortion agenda, the City Council of Hobbs, New Mexico, unanimously voted last week to become a sanctuary city for the unborn. Overwhelming support for and passage of the ordinance mean abortion is now classified as murder and outlawed within Hobbs city limits. It also means that any blue politicians or abortion facilities that try to go against the city’s wishes could face an uphill legal battle.
The vote was vehemently opposed by Lujan Grisham, who called the architects of the ordinance “out-of-state extremists.” The governor’s reaction is no surprise considering her own history of abortion extremism.
Shortly after the Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson decision, Lujan Grisham signed an executive order designating $10 million in taxpayer funds toward the development of an abortion facility in Doña Ana County, an area that shares a border with El Paso, Texas. That was just a couple of months after Lujan Grisham signedan executive order “protecting medical providers from attempts at legal retribution” for granting abortions and refusing to comply with other states’ abortion extradition laws.
“As more states move to restrict and prohibit access to reproductive care, New Mexico will continue to not only protect access to abortion, but to expand and strengthen reproductive health care throughout the state,” Lujan Grisham said in a statement. “Today, I reaffirm my resolve to make sure that women and families in New Mexico — and beyond — are supported at every step of the way.”
Since then, abortion dominated the state’s political scene and even became a focal point in Lujan Grisham’s re-election race against Republican challenger Mark Ronchetti.
Amy Hagstrom Miller, the CEO of Whole Woman’s Health, one of the nation’s largest dealers of abortion, previously told Reuters that Lujan Grisham’s friendliness toward abortion led her to consider relocating some of their Texas facilities closer to the border with New Mexico.
Residents of Hobbs, a nearly 40,000-person town, however, weren’t taking any chances on getting swept up in Lujan Grisham’s pro-abortion executive spree. The pro-life community in Hobbs as well as the nearby city of Clovis revolted with the introduction of ordinances designed to protect unborn babies.
The threat of legal challenges thanks to widespread support for those sanctuary city ordinances, Hagstrom Miller confessed, “has given her pause about operating in eastern New Mexico.”
“In this post-Dobbs era, where anti-abortion folks are emboldened, I want to be sure we’re in a place where our patients can be safe, where our doctors and our staff can be safe,” she said.
The Clovis City Commission postponed its vote on the ordinance allegedly so it can “perfect the language to better protect against litigation.” “We hope this sends the message to our state legislature that there are pro-life cities out there and we want to self-determine on this issue,” Clovis Mayor Mike Morris said shortly after a vote to advance the ban.
If Clovis passes the ordinance, it will join Hobbs and a myriad of other towns that all recently decided to push back against Democrats’ abortion extremism.
“Between Governor Abbott’s resounding defeat of Robert Francis O’Rourke to four more municipalities joining over fifty towns with existing sanctuary city for the unborn ordinances, this is an exciting time for Texans as we work to end abortion,” Texas Right to Life President Dr. John Seago told The Federalist. “Additionally, as the abortion industry looks to target Texas women from just outside our borders, it is equally exciting that Hobbs, New Mexico has joined the fight and passed the ordinance to keep the desperate abortion industry out of their city limits.”
The pro-life movements in Texas and New Mexico have been so effective recently that they’ve even earned the wrath of the Biden White House.
“We have been very clear about what MAGA extreme Republicans are trying to do when it comes to a woman’s rights to choose,” White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said during a recent trip to New Mexico with President Joe Biden. “They’re trying to take that away, clearly, and in the most extreme ways. What it’s doing is it’s putting women — women and girls’ lives at risk.”
This article was updated on 11/16 to reflect that members of the Clovis City Commission are no longer unanimously “expected to vote in favor of the ban.”
“The Ordinance, as it stands now, is ready. The commission, however, is unready and unwilling,” Mark Lee Dickson, founder of the Sanctuary Cities for the Unborn Initiative, told The Federalist.
Dickson also said that Clovis Mayor Mike Morris is facing backlash after he was “pressured by several Republicans to push things past the election and even past the legislative session.”
Jordan Boyd is a staff writer at The Federalist and co-producer of The Federalist Radio Hour. Her work has also been featured in The Daily Wire and Fox News. Jordan graduated from Baylor University where she majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow her on Twitter @jordanboydtx.
A court has ruled against the Biden administration’s requirement that healthcare providers perform sex-change procedures, concluding that federal Title IX’s definition of sex discrimination does not include sexual orientation or gender identity. The case centered on two Texas physicians who filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Service’s Notification of Interpretation and Enforcement of Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which interpreted Title IX’s definition of sex to include sexual orientation and gender identity. The physicians sued, arguing that the Notification forced them to provide services such as body-mutilating surgeries on people suffering from gender dysphoria, such as castration and double mastectomies, and that it violated federal administrative procedures.
In a decision released Friday, U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk of the Northern District of Texas, Amarillo Division, ruled that “Title IX operates in binary terms — male and female — when it references ‘on the basis of sex.’”
“If ‘on the basis of sex’ included ‘sexual orientation’ and ‘gender identity,’ as Defendants envision, Title IX and its regulations would be nonsensical,” Kacsmaryk ruled. “Title IX expressly allows sex distinctions and sometimes even requires them to promote equal opportunity.”
“Defendants’ reinterpretation of Title IX through the Notification imperils the very opportunities for women Title IX was designed to promote and protect — categorically forcing biological women to compete against biological men.”
Kacsmaryk also rejected the claim by the defendants that their reinterpretation of Title IX was justified in light of the 2020 U.S. Supreme Court v. Clayton County, in which the high court concluded that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which protects against employment discrimination, applies to sexual orientation and gender identity.
“Title IX is not Title VII,” Kacsmaryk continued. “The Court will not reflexively apply new Title VII precedent in the Title IX context.”
In May 2021, the HHS announced that it was going to interpret Title IX’s explicit prohibition on sex discrimination to include sexual orientation and gender identity. Under the new interpretation, the HHS Office for Civil Rights would enforce Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act to protect “the civil rights of individuals who access or seek to access covered health programs or activities” and stop discrimination “against consumers on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.”
The proposed reinterpretation of Title IX was met with multiple lawsuits, with a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit unanimously deciding to block the implementation of the rule back in August.
Like Blaze News? Get the news that matters most delivered directly to your inbox. SIGN UP
In Tuesday’s midterm elections, grassroots parental rights organizations successfully secured key victories in school board races across the country, reported the Daily Caller News Foundation. Moms for Liberty, a group fighting to preserve parental rights in the public education system, and the 1776 Project PAC, a political organization fighting against critical race theory in classrooms, supported school board candidates in several races. While not all midterm election results have officially been called, the organizations reported that many of their endorsed nominees already won and successfully flipped school boards to conservative majorities in Florida, Maryland, Indiana, and Michigan.
“Last night was a disappointing night for Republicans in many parts of the country, but we’re happy to say we were very successful in key races in Florida, Oklahoma, Ohio, Maryland, which were by far the biggest places we targeted,” Aiden Buzzetti, head of coalitions and candidate recruitment for the 1776 Project PAC, told the DCNF. “We also officially flipped our 100th school board since our first election in November 2021.”
The 1776 Project PAC reported that four of its endorsed candidates in Brandywine, Michigan, were victorious in Tuesday’s midterm elections, which successfully turned the school board majority. Similarly, the Carroll County school board majority flipped after all three endorsed candidates won their races.
Of the 67 candidates Moms for Liberty supported in Florida school board elections, 41 won. The organization stated that it backed more than 270 school board contenders across 15 states in the midterm elections.
“We’re thrilled,” Tiffany Justice, Moms for Liberty co-founder, told the DCNF. “We were able to endorse over 500 parental rights candidates so far this year with 270 on the ballot yesterday. For us, starting an organization a little less than two years ago, and then having chapters across the country that have vetted and endorsed candidates in 270 races was a really big deal. That was an accomplishment in and of itself.”
Leading up to the midterm elections, Justice urged citizens to “vote like a mother” and elect officials who would give parents the most say in their children’s education.
“There’s no truer love than that of a mother for their child,” Justice told the DCNF. “When we say, ‘vote like a mother,’ it means vote, unabashedly, for parental rights and for your children’s future. Don’t allow the hate or the noise to take you away from what you know to be true and right and good.”
Americans ages 11 to 18 play online for an average of 10 hours per day, according to a study out today by a research team that includes psychologist Jean Twenge, author of “iGen” and “Generation Me.”
The researchers surveyed 1,600 Americans ages 11 to 18 in May 2022. On average, the study participants reported using digital media an average of 10 hours and four minutes per day, on such entertainment activities as social media, video chat, texting, shopping, and gaming.
That’s a total of 70 hours per week spent online, approximately double the average time spent in school. If teens were suddenly banned from screen time, they could use the time freed from solely that to instead hold down both a full-time and a part-time job. Some of this average may include multitasking, such as texting while scrolling Instagram, the study said, but this total of 70 hours per week spent on screens also did not include time spent watching TV.
Low-Class Behavior Rampant in Middle Class
The researchers say their Institute for Family Studies and Wheatley Institute study is the first to examine the effects of family structure on young people’s screen time. They found that teens living with their own biological and married parents still spent an astonishing amount of time on screens, at an average of nine hours per day. Still, that was nearly two hours fewer per day, on average, than children living without a biological parent, who spent an average of 11 hours per day online.
“The adolescents most likely to be depressed, lonely, and dissatisfied with life are heavy digital media users in stepparent, single-parent, or other non-intact families,” write study authors Twenge, Wendy Wang, Jenet Erickson, and Brad Wilcox. “The link between excessive technology use and poor mental health is larger for youth in non-intact families compared to those in intact families.”
So, according to this study’s findings, children in intact families spend an average of 63 hours per week amusing themselves online, while children in broken families spend an average of 77 hours per week amusing themselves online. The study discovered “especially large differences by family structure in youth time spent on gaming and texting. For example, youth in stepfamilies report spending about 50 minutes a day more texting than youth in intact families.”
Other studies on children’s screen use reinforce this finding — that America’s young people are wasting almost all of their waking free time on entertainment instead of personal growth or service to others. As this IFS/Wheatley study points out, this shift has happened extremely quickly, and it’s not all because of the 2020-2022 Covid lockdowns that also arrested American children’s development. Between 2009 and 2017, “the time high school students spent online doubled.”
The study points out that high screen time for adolescents is correlated with depression, loneliness, lack of sleep, and negative body image. It does not mention the opportunity cost of diverting young people’s free time to entertainment consumption instead of personal development that benefits others, such as learning to repair bicycles, playing outside, testing out jobs through work and internships, or working to save for college or marriage.
The study recommends that parents keep electronic devices out of kids’ bedrooms at night, limit screen time to a few hours per day, delay smartphone access to age 16 or 18, keep kids off social media as long as possible, and arrange for their kids to make friends with kids in families with similar boundaries about tech use to help their children socialize with people instead of robots.
Unchallenged mass tech addiction is one more way our morally bankrupt ruling class incentivizes destructive lower-class behaviors instead of encouraging lower classes to raise their standards. This works to erase the middle class by indulging laziness, like the shameful “quiet quitting” PR campaign. This is another form of societal suicide. Laziness cannot maintain, let alone keep advancing, the United States’ world-class level of scientific and cultural advancement.
Nothing worth having comes without strenuous and sustained effort. Internet addictions erase not only willpower but also self-discipline, excellence, and the communication skills needed to work with others and sustain key relationships such as marriages, as Twenge and others’ academic work shows.
This Is a National Crisis
If a child played with Legos for 10 hours a day, every day, his parents or teacher would have him screened for autism and developmental delays. If a child played pretend for 10 hours a day, at any age, he’d be sent to the school psychologist.
If your child did anything for 10 hours a day, you’d be worried about him and work strenuously to bring some balance to his life, for his own good. Parents need to man up and do the hard work of tightly restricting the addictive side of the internet from their kids, for not only their own good but for the sake of our country. Even 30 hours of screen time a week is obviously excessive for kids. Seventy hours of screen time a week is completely out of control, the willful destruction of our future.
“If an unfriendly foreign power had attempted to impose on America the mediocre educational performance that exists today, we might well have viewed it as an act of war,” wrote the National Commission on Excellence in Education in the famous 1983 report, “A Nation At Risk.” “As it stands, we have allowed this to happen to ourselves.”
The same sentiment applies to today’s American youth, but in a far more advanced condition. If a foreign nation had imposed on Americans the destruction of our mental and moral capacity that results from such rampant internet addiction as this study explores, we’d consider it an act of war. In fact, it’s pretty clear that our top foreign adversary created an addictive social media app for the same reason it helps Mexican drug cartels ship fentanyl across our border: because China knows that if they destroy America’s future, they rule the world.
The only thing standing between them and your kids is you, parents. Maybe a few elected officials could stand with us and take down these internet monopolies that make bank strip-mining our future, or at least require real proof of parental consent for children to use addictive tech products, such as a tiny credit card payment. But don’t wait for others to do your job for you. Put down your phone, grab your kids, and make your family motto the title of one of my childhood books: “Do Something Besides Watching TV.”
If your children enter adulthood having done nothing with 25,000 hours of their lives they can never get back, and with their brains destroyed by internet slot machines, that’s on you. You’re the one paying for their phone and letting them self-destruct. Tell them to get a job or read some books or do anything but sabotage themselves and our society. If you don’t, you deserve to be judged the same way as moms who put Mountain Dew in their babies’ bottles.
A new report suggests that chest reconstruction surgeries performed on adolescents with gender dysphoria increased nearly 400% from 2016 to 2019 as concerns about the ethics and consequences of medical interventions for trans-identified youth persist.
The Journal of the American Medical Association released the report Monday examining the frequency of gender transition surgeries involving the human chest among adolescents in the United States. The report, authored by Rishub Karan Das, Dr. Galen Perdikis and Dr. Salam Al Kassis of Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, analyzed data from the Nationwide Ambulatory Surgery Sample on youth with gender dysphoria who underwent “top” surgeries between 2016 and 2019.
The research analyzed the incidence of both masculinizing and feminizing chest reconstruction surgery. Masculinizing chest surgeries involve the removal of the breasts, while feminizing chest surgeries involve the augmentation of breast tissue designed to make the organs more visible in biological males who identify as females.
The report found that the number of chest reconstruction surgeries performed on minors increased from about 100 in 2016 to 489 in 2019, a 389% increase in three years. The number of chest reconstruction surgeries has steadily increased over the years, surpassing 200 in 2017 and eclipsing 300 in 2018. The study analyzed a weighted estimate of 1,130 operations performed. According to the research, masculinizing chest surgeries accounted for the overwhelming majority of chest reconstruction surgeries in the three-year period. Feminizing chest surgeries comprised just 1.4% of the total.
While the majority of children who had the surgeries were 17 years old, about 5.5% were under 14. The median age for recipients of the surgeries was 16 years old.
The research did not provide statistics about “bottom” surgeries among minors, which involve the removal of the sex organs that correspond with the patient’s biological sex and/or creating artificial sex organs that match their stated gender identity.
Many children’s hospitals, including the one at Vanderbilt University, have come under fire for performing life-altering procedures on children. Vanderbilt announced that it will halt those surgeries following backlash to reporting indicating that the hospital offered them.
While the authors contend that “gender-affirming surgery may improve the functioning and mental health” of teens with gender dysphoria, other medical organizations remain skeptical about the benefits of gender transition procedures.
The American College of Pediatricians, which describes itself as a “national organization of pediatricians and other healthcare professionals dedicated to the health and well-being of children,” warns about the long-term and short-term impacts of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones, which are commonly prescribed to youth with gender dysphoria. The organization identified the side effects of puberty blockers as “osteoporosis, mood disorders, seizures, cognitive impairment and when combined with cross-sex hormones, sterility.” Additionally, the medical organization states that cross-sex hormones come with “an increased risk of heart attacks, stroke, diabetes, blood clots and cancers across their lifespan.”
Concerns about the negative consequences of surgical interventions for trans-identified children have prompted several states to outlaw the performance of such procedures on minors. Alabama, Arizona and Arkansas have passed laws to that effect while the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton have classified gender transition surgeries on minors as a form of child abuse.
Critics contend that the gender-transition procedures offer a permanent solution to what might be a temporary problem for many adolescents suffering from gender dysphoria. Detransitioners, those who formerly struggled with gender dysphoria and have since come to regret the gender transitions they underwent, have become increasingly outspoken about sharing their stories.
Last week, Chloe Cole, an 18-year-old who underwent a double mastectomy at 15, discussed the regret of having her breasts removed when calling into a Conejos Valley Unified School District board meeting in Ventura County, California.
“Very quickly, I was given what I wanted, but it was far from what I needed. Two years later, I was still suffering from major complications,” she explained.
Cole suggested that as a minor, she lacked the maturity to understand the ramifications of her life-altering decisions.
“I will not be able to breastfeed any children I have in the future, and my sexuality has permanently been affected because I was allowed to make adult decisions starting at 13 and then again at 15,” she said.
Cole characterized her experience as an example of “what happens when we treat children like adults and expect them to have the mental faculties for proper long-term decision-making.”
A group of detransitioners spoke at a recent school board meeting in California amid concerns about public schools exposing students to gender ideology, warning that such content increases the likelihood that minors will rush to embrace “irreversible” decisions to their long-term detriment.
Three young adults who formerly identified as trans spoke at a school board meeting for the Conejo Valley Unified School District in Ventura County, California, last week. Chloe Cole, an 18-year-old woman who has launched a support group for individuals who have come to regret undergoing gender transitions called Detrans United, was among three detransitioners who told their stories to the school board at a recent meeting.
Detrans United shared their testimonies on its Twitter account Thursday, noting that the purpose of their remarks was to “voice our concerns about their policies that allow confused children to come to harm.” Cole indicated on her Twitter account that the distribution of a book introducing 8-year-olds to the word “transgender” was the primary reason she decided to call into the school board meeting.
Cole shared screenshots of the book, titledCall Me Max, which declared that although “transgender is a long word,” it “means something simple.” The book laid out how “trans means going across” while “gender means being a boy or girl or a little of both.” Another page of the book adds, “When a baby is born, a grown-up says, ‘IT’S A BOY!’ or ‘IT’S A GIRL!’”
Call Me Max embraced the idea that trans-identified children know that they were born in the wrong body from birth: “If a brand-new baby could talk, sometimes that baby might say, ‘NO I’M NOT!’ When a baby grows up to be transgender, it means that the grown-up who said they were a boy or a girl made a mistake.”
The school board meeting that Cole and the two other detransitioners called into was held on Oct. 11, which coincided with National Coming Out Day, an occasion that encourages LGBT youth to come forward about their sexual identities. One speaker addressed National Coming Out Day in her remarks.
“Growing up, I hated dresses and skirts. I hit puberty at 9 years old and I hated my developing breasts,” Cole recalled. “I hated growing into a woman. I didn’t identify at all with the women around me.”
Cole explained that her discomfort with her biological sex led her to decide that she “wanted to become a boy.” She began socially transitioning by adopting a boy’s name for herself, cutting her hair and wearing boys’ clothes.
“My parents were supportive but they weren’t sure what to do with me, so they sought the help of mental professionals who manipulated them into allowing me to do whatever I wanted to do with myself,” Cole said. She began to take puberty blockers at age 13, and had her breasts amputated at age 16.
Cole lamented the lack of time between her initial referral to receive the double mastectomy and the surgery itself, which amounted to six months. “Very quickly, I was given what I wanted but it was far from what I needed. Two years later, I was still suffering from major complications,” she added. While Cole did not specify when exactly she began to regret taking significant steps to change her gender, she elaborated on the long-term consequences of her hasty decisions.
“I will not be able to breastfeed any children I have in the future and my sexuality has permanently been affected because I was allowed to make adult decisions starting at 13, and then again at 15.This is what happens when children are sexualized and exposed to developmentally inappropriate and confusing content and ideas from a young age. This is what happens when we treat children like adults and expect them to have the mental faculties for proper long-term decision making.”
Cole concluded her testimony with a message to the school board: “You are placing children in direct harm. Children deserve better.”
A round of applause followed Cole’s remarks. After Cole finished speaking, another detransitioner, Cat Cattinson, began to outline her concerns about gender ideology in public schools in remarks delivered via telephone: “I was introduced to gender ideology when I was 13 years old. I began identifying as the opposite sex, a man, and believing this negatively affected me for the next 15 years.”
“For the record, coming out as gay is entirely different than coming out as another gender,” she suggested. Cattinson condemned surgeons who are performing mastectomies on underage girls, saying it’s an “irreversible procedure that will prevent this person from ever breastfeeding.” In addition to her status as a detransitioner, Cattinson used her experience as a molecular biologist to dismiss the central idea of gender ideology.
Cattinson added: “Humans cannot change sex. It’s impossible and trying to appear as the opposite sex comes with significant health risks such as infertility, osteoporosis and many more as well. Puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and surgeries are irreversible.”
As her remarks came to a close, Cattinson contended that “there is a serious lack of quality research that any of these interventions improve mental health or prevent suicide in the long term.” Like Cole, Cattinson’s remarks drew a round of applause.
Abel Garcia, a male detransitioner, also addressed the board to speak out against “the push that they are doing right now to our children with the transgender ideology.” Garcia stressed that “we cannot expect children as young as they are right now to believe that they can change their sex with cross-sex hormones and irreversible surgeries.”
Garcia detailed how he had breast implants at age 21. Implying that he did not have the maturity to make such a decision, the detransitioner told the board: “I cannot expect a child, a high school male or elementary child, to understand the full extent of damages that will be done to their bodies if an adult like myself wasn’t able to.”
For her part, Conejo Valley Unified School District Trustee candidate Lisa Powell insisted in a Twitter post shortly after the board meeting concluded that “CA state law requires schools to support and affirm transgender students.” “As a trustee, I will support and affirm our transgender students — not only because it’s the law, but because it’s the right thing to do,” she vowed.
CA state law requires schools to support and affirm our transgender students. As a trustee, I will support and affirm our transgender students – not only because it’s the law, but because it is the right thing to do.— Lisa Powell (@Powell4CVUSD) October 12, 2022
At the previous school board meeting on Sept. 20, a parent slammed the Conejo Valley Unified School District for its response to a seventh-grade boy masturbating in class. She attributed his inappropriate behavior to the school district’s sex education curriculum.
“It does not take an expert to figure out what happens to a 13-year-old boy when he’s staring at mostly naked girls wearing underwear to school and being exposed to concepts like oral and anal sex in seventh grade,” she said. “They let children write the dress code. The Teen Talk comprehensive sex ed is not age-appropriate and neither are supported by parents and teachers have spoken out adamantly against this.”
In a statement published Monday, the Conejo Valley Unified School District has decried what it has described as “on-going social media warfare and print disinformation campaigns” as part of an effort to “create false narratives from email snippets, social media posts, half statements made at Board meetings, and printed disinformation.”
According to district leadership, “What was once lively discourse at our Board of Education meetings during public comments and agendized topics has escalated to a concerted and organized effort to create chaos and further narratives that are unfounded and simply have nothing to do with current action items nor Board duties and business.”
Besides noting that district officials experienced death threats, the statement did not provide specific examples of actions it found troubling. It did, however, proclaim that the “sensationalizing of rumors and months-old reported incidents must stop,” in what appeared to be a veiled reference to the remarks at the Sept. 20 board meeting regarding the in-class masturbation that took place in May. District officials suggested that “these fictitious narratives are being wrongly used to politicize incidents involving our students.”
The Conejo Valley Unified School District crafted a fact sheet, which was last updated on Oct. 14, to respond to parental concerns about the sex education curriculum. It states that parents can opt out of the curriculum if they so choose.
Like Blaze News? Get the news that matters most delivered directly to your inbox. SIGN UP
Old Nick’s Pub in Eugene, Oregon, is advertising an upcoming event where an 11-year-old drag queen will be among those performing.
“Are you excited for Drag queen story time brunch this Sunday morning!? Well, lets meet our performers! Vanellope is here to show you what a 11-year-old drag queen can do. With all the charm and sweetness of a bowl of sugary cereal, Vanellope is here to brighten up your morning with all her drag talent,” a Facebook post reads.
The event is being billed as open to people of all ages. According to a Facebook post, the event will be free for kids under the age of 11.
“Join us for an all-new journey into Fantasy and Story with local favorite drag queen, Maliena! She will enchant us with fairytales new and old! With special guest queens and performances woven within, this is a new All Ages Drag event you won’t want to miss!” a post on the establishment’s website reads.
According to the Daily Mail, the child has performed at the establishment before — the outlet refers to the child as a girl. In September, the pub posted what appears to be a photo of the child reading a book. “Move over Maliena because Vanellope may be our new favorite!” the post declares. The pub is standing behind its move to allow the child to perform and is arguing that drag is not necessarily sexual in nature.
“Dear friends, our youngest drag queen is being targeted by a hate campaign on Twitter right now. We LOVE AND SUPPORT VANELLOPE. Drag is an art form. It is not an inherently sexual act to dress in drag, and those sexualizing her are falling into a very typical societal trap of misogyny that views any female performance as sexual,” the pub declared in a Facebook post. “We think she’s gonna be a star on the big screen someday, so if you can come pack the house on Sunday and show her how loved and supported she is, we will force the darkness out once again with our light.”
Old Nick’s posted a video last month advertising a drag queen story time event. In the video, a drag queen said there would be “queens of all ages” at that event.
Children in America are in need of protection now more than ever. The leftist tide is coming at them in full force, pushing a radically sexualized agenda on minors both mentally and physically, robbing them of their innocence and their childhood. That’s why legislators like Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., are introducing legislation to protect children from dangerous experimental procedures such as puberty blockers, wrong-sex hormones, and ill-named “gender-affirming” surgeries.
Instead of being allowed to enjoy the innocence of childhood, develop imagination, cultivate friendships, develop curiosity, and enjoy the satisfaction of learning facts, figures, and formulas, children are assaulted with sexualized content fueled by a radical agenda. If you think it’s not having an effect, just look at a sampling from Maryland schools. According to school surveys in Montgomery county, over the last two years, the number of students identifying as gender nonconforming has increased by 582 percent. This survey includes children in elementary school.
At the very least, parents should be fully aware of any and all exposure their children have to sexualized content, and they have the primary right to know of any confusion or distress their children may be experiencing in school. Yet somehow it is becoming more to push policies to keep parents in the dark. Most schools cannot even prescribe aspirin to a child without parental consent, yet they see no issue with socially transitioning a minor without parental involvement. The disparity gives every cause for concern.
And when the parents do know about their child’s gender confusion, the agenda becomes even more radical, pushing parents to “affirm” their child’s choices to extreme degrees. Whether you embrace the ideology, no amount of parental concern can justify even the slightest delay in transitioning a child.
Compliance, Not Concern
One lesbian couple had already transitioned their eldest son when their second boy started asking to be called a girl. Unlike their first child, who had preferred playing with girls and had a gentler side, the younger acted like a typical boy, so his mother suspected that he was simply mirroring his older sibling’s behavior. But what happened when she voiced her concerns to a gender therapist?
“She [their gender therapist] expressed that it was transphobic to believe there was anything wrong with our younger son wanting to be like his older transgender sibling. When I pushed back, and asserted that I was not yet convinced our younger son was transgender, she told me that if I did not change his pronouns and honor his identity, he could develop an attachment disorder,” the mom recalls.
Instead of addressing the mother’s fears, the therapist merely preyed on them further.
It’s horrible to emotionally blackmail loving parents while blatantly ignoring their genuine concerns, but this is mild compared to the psychological manipulation that’s been waged on other parents, who have been told “comply or they die,” with doctors insisting that any questioning of their child’s feelings will result in further depression and suicide.
Meanwhile, these “experts” are not basing their methods in science at all.
So Much for Science
According to the recent Heritage report, “Puberty Blockers, Cross-Sex Hormones, & Youth Suicide” by Dr. Jay Greene, stats show that the exact opposite may be the case. He writes, “Starting in 2010, when puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones became widely available, elevated suicide rates in states where minors can more easily access those medical interventions became observable.”
That’s right, here it seems that access to these “life-saving drugs” has actually increased suicide rates. The fact is, there is no golden standard study proving the “lifesaving” claims of transition, yet left-wing politicians insist that it is the only path forward.
There isproof that these drugs are dangerous on their own, and there is no certifiable data proving the long-term harmlessness of puberty-blocking drugs and wrong-sex hormones, despite leftist claims to the contrary.
This isn’t health care. This isn’t science. We need to stop using children to wage ideological warfare, and we must stop the progressive tide before every child pays the price.
A Reason for Hope
Rep. Taylor Green is trying to do just that. She recently released the Protect Children’s Innocence Act (H.R.8731), which, if passed, will charge anyone who knowingly performs “gender-affirming care” — including the administering of puberty blockers and wrong-sex hormones — with a class C felony.
The bill will prohibit the federal taxpayer funding of so-called gender-affirming care, forbid institutions of higher education from providing instructions on such care, and will prevent aliens who have performed such procedures from receiving a visa. If they already have a visa, they will be eligible for deportation. It is designed to protect children from abusive experimental procedures from every angle.
Victims of surgery who realize their mistake and choose to detransition have recourse to the courts through a private right of action levied against anyone who took an active part in their transition, including administering puberty blockers and performing surgeries. There is no statute of limitations, ensuring that anyone involved in destroying a child’s life will be held accountable in perpetuity.
This bill also looks out for those victims who have already suffered at the hands of misleading therapists, doctors, and propaganda. While it does ban transition attempts on minors, it explicitly states that it in no way prohibits doctors from helping patients handle complications due to those interventions, regardless of whether they were received illegally. In every aspect, this bill holds the health of these patients as its primary object, not monetary benefits and soul-sucking propaganda.
Fighting on defense in the culture isn’t enough. We’re losing — more and more children are being subjected to these horrific “treatments” every single day. We need to fight back legislatively. We need to protect the innocence of children and demand justice for those who have already been deprived of that privilege. If the battleground is in our backyard, this bill gives us the chance to push back enemy lines, to establish a first line of defense that will allow our children the space they need to grow and thrive.
The character of our country will be determined by whether we are willing to defend our innocents. Children being mutilated and castrated openly is the moral issue of our time. Will we stand up and fight? Or will we let these evil monsters continue to wreak havoc on the helpless?
Sandra Kirby is the Government Affairs Manager at American Principles Project. Follow her on Twitter @SandraK1776.
U.K. Prime Minister Liz Truss signaled support for a police investigation into the trans charity Mermaids, saying it should be “properly looked at” during prime minister’s questions in the Commons Chamber.
The Department for Education in England has stopped referring schools to the controversial charity, which promotes transgenderism to youth, amid increased scrutiny of the organization’s health recommendations for children and a scandal involving one of its trustees giving a speech for an organization that promotes resources for pedophiles.
As The Times reported Wednesday, the Charity Commission is assessing complaints against Mermaids following a report by The Daily Telegraph last week that the group sends “chest binders” to girls as young as 13 without their parents’ knowledge. Binders are often used by girls seeking to flatten their breasts to resemble a boy, and they can potentially cause breathing difficulties, damage healthy breast tissue and lead to cracked ribs.
On Wednesday, Miriam Cates, the MP for Penistone and Stocksbridge, asked the prime minister: “Does my right honorable friend agree that it has taken far too long for these concerns to be taken seriously and does she also agree that it is high time for a police investigation into the activities of Mermaids?”
Truss replied: “What I would say on the subject of the investigation she raises, of course those matters should be … properly looked at.”
Earlier this month, The Times also reported that Jacob Breslow, a trustee for Mermaids, resigned after it was discovered he spoke at a U.S.-based B4U-ACT event in 2011. The organization promotes resources for individuals who are sexually attracted to children. In his presentation, Breslow reportedly claimed that pedophiles are misunderstood.
Andrea Williams, the chief executive of the Christian Legal Centre, credited parents Nigel and Sally Rowe for the Education Department’s decision to stop promoting Mermaidsas a mental health resource in schools. The British charity affirms children’s gender confusion and is led by Susie Green, whose son identifies as female and was put on puberty blockers at age 12.
Williams noted that the focus must now be directed toward the Church of England, which still utilizes Mermaids’ strategies in its “Valuing All God’s Children” (VAGC) guidance. In 2017, VAGC cited Mermaids as a model of care. While this citation was removed in 2019, the content reportedly still influenced the current trans-affirming approach, according to CLC. Over 4,000 of the Church of England’s primary schools utilize the VAGC guidelines, according to a November 2017 Daily Mail report.
“The Church of England has over one million children under its care — will senior leaders finally listen and scrap this untenable advice?” Williams asked.
Christian Concern, the organization associated with CLC, launched a petition Tuesday that will be delivered to the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, calling for the Church of England to scrap its trans-affirming policies. The petition currently has over 12,150 signatures.
In addition to instructing schools not to require students to wear uniforms that may “create difficulty for trans pupils,” VAGC discourages using faith or the Bible to justify refusals to accept a child identifying as the opposite gender.
Last week, the Rowes penned a letter to the archbishop, urging the Church of England to discard its VAGC policies, expressing concern that the guidance allows children as young as 5 to identify as the opposite sex.
“In U.K. law you cannot change legal gender until you are 18 years old. Scientifically, you cannot change your biological sex,” the parents wrote.
“Furthermore, basic Christian teaching is that we are all created male or female and that the differences between the sexes are beautiful, designed and complementary, and should be respected in society. We are all created male and female (Genesis 1:27).”
Despite opting to homeschool their children, the parents wrote that they remain concerned about the effect that the school’s policies may have on other children. According to the Rowes, much of the “confusion” and “distress” their sons experienced in school from having to refer to their friends as the opposite sex has lifted since their parents pulled them out.
The letter follows a $24,956 (£22,000) settlement the Department of Education paid the Rowes in September for “legal costs and a commitment from the government to reform transgender policies,” according to the Christian Legal Centre.
The CLC supported the parents’ taking legal action against the department in 2021 after the Church of England’s Portsmouth Diocesan Board of Education dismissed their complaint in 2017, citing the VAGC guidelines. One of the Church of England’s primary schools had labeled their son “transphobic” for refusing to abide by the school’s trans-affirming policies.
The parents also raised concerns about the school allowing two 6-year-old boys in their sons’ classes to identify as girls without a psychological assessment. In opposition to the school’s policies, the Rowes decided to homeschool their children instead.
The letter cites an August speech at the Policy Exchange by Suella Braverman, who was then the attorney general, and said there is no “absolute legal obligation” to affirm children who might be questioning their gender identity. She noted that schools sometimes allow children to use pronouns or compete on sports teams designated for the opposite sex without their parents’ knowledge.
“Anyone who questions such an approach is accused of transphobia. In my view, this approach is not supported by the law,” Braverman said.
The Rowes contended in their letter that this statement from the then-attorney general proves that the Church of England’s VAGC policies in schools have no legal basis.
“We, therefore, ask you to commit to scrapping the Valuing All God’s Children guidance as a matter of urgency so that staff and children in Church of England schools are properly safeguarded and protected from harmful transgender ideology and practice,” the parents wrote.
“We also request a meeting with you to discuss these points and what the Church of England will do about them at your earliest convenience.”
In July, the Church of England responded to a question from the General Synod, the denomination’s legislative body, about its definition of a woman. The Rev. Robert Innes, the denomination’s bishop in Europe, responded that “There is no official definition, which reflects the fact that until fairly recently definitions of this kind were thought to be self-evident, as reflected in the marriage liturgy.”
Innes cited the church’s “Living in Love and Faith” project, which the church website describes as a “discerning way forward” for the church regarding “identity, sexuality, relationships, and marriage.”
Pointing to “the marriage complexities associated with gender identity,” Innes claimed that the project “points to the need for additional care and thought to be given in understanding our commonalities and differences as people made in the image of God.”
Parents are rallying behind a mother who blasted a Southern California school district for its plans to host a “family-friendly” Halloween drag show, which she said amounts to “pimping out our kids” in an already “hyper-sexualized” culture.
In a video that went viral on social media, Brittany Mayer from the Christian-based parental rights group Rooted Wings spoke at the Encinitas Union School District Board meeting in San Diego County, California, accusing them of acting as “groomers and activist pimps” for the “Boo Bash” drag queen show planned for the Saturday before Halloween, Fox News reported.
“What is it about a grown man costumed in a sparkly bra with augmented boobs busting out and wearing a miniskirt barely covering his twerking a** with duct tape on his front while spreading his fish-netted legs as he writhes on the ground, grinding his groin next to a minor, family-friendly?” she asks the board in the video.
On Twitter, Mayer revealed that the drag queen show was sponsored by a local San Francisco gender reassignment surgery center in collaboration with a popular gay nightclub. “While we have a culture that has a huge problem with child porn and with sex trafficking, Encinitas Union School District in CA, made the decision to feature an event to sexualize young children,” she wrote.
She told the board, “You all played the activist pimp for Align Surgical center and for a 21-plus gay bar. It makes you groomers and activist pimps and we won’t have those sitting on a school board that oversees the education of our children.”
Elected San Diego Supervisor Terra Lawson-Remer criticized the parents, saying on Twitter that they “should be ashamed of themselves for pushing hate and intolerance on all of us.” She also said she would be taking her 3-year-old to the event.
Carrie Boller, a mother of two and a community activist, pulled her kids out of the district, ABC 10 reported. The Encinitas Union School District said it’s not hosting or sponsoring the Oct. 29 event but shared it on a community information hub called Peachjar to notify parents about opportunities for families in the district.
However, Boller said, “Our message is very clear. We don’t want strip shows, we don’t want drag shows, and definitely not sent out inviting the parents and kids in our district.”
Justin Ried, a parent of two children who is also running for school board, was quoted as saying, “We certainly want to be an inclusive community and support groups of all kinds, but the question is where do we draw the line?”
The district said the flyer had been taken down as it did not meet district approval criteria, and it has reviewed and adjusted procedures for approving fliers in the future. But parents are demanding to know who approved it for promotion and want the district to apologize.
Mayer told Fox that she and dozens of other parents showed up at the school board meeting last Tuesday to confront the leadership, which had been requested several times to stop promoting the event and issue an apology.
“We asked the board again and again to reconsider and to issue an apology and an explanation, which they didn’t, which is why we decided to show up,” she was quoted as saying.
She added that the planned show was not an isolated incident.
“This is coming to every school across the nation,” she said, adding that “… We’re not going to play by the rules, that we’re supposed to be afraid, that we’re going to be punished if we don’t speak up now.”
In less than one month, if Proposal 3 passes, children will have a right under the Michigan constitution to walk into one of Planned Parenthood’s 12 so-called “gender affirming” facilities in the state and, without parental knowledge or consent, obtain puberty blockers. And with Planned Parenthood of Michigan promising “gender affirming” care “via telehealth in the coming months,” Michiganders’ kids won’t even need to leave their house to obtain these sterilizing drugs.
Passage of Prop 3 will also give boys a constitutional right to be castrated and girls the right under Michigan’s constitution to be sterilized by way of a hysterectomy or the removal of their ovaries — all without their parents’ consent.
Deceptive marketing by Planned Parenthood and far-left politicians, such as Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, hides this reality from Michigan voters, leading Prop 3 to be uniformly referred to as “the abortion amendment” even though the expansive language of the proposed constitutional amendment reaches far beyond abortion. And on abortion alone, notwithstanding proponents’ claims that “passing this amendment simply restores the same protections that Michiganders had for five decades under Roe v. Wade,” Prop 3 goes far beyond the controlling Roe-Casey precedent: If passed, the constitutional amendment would create an extreme regime in Michigan of abortion on demand, at any time, for any reason, without informed or parental consent, and paid for by taxpayers.
The expansive and legalistically worded language of Prop 3, crafted by Planned Parenthood and left-wing backers, however, extends beyond abortion to create a constitutional right to several aspects of what transgender activists call “gender-affirming care,” despite it being neither affirming nor caring. And Prop 3 extends that right to all individuals, including children.
This is not merely a political point, and it is not a worst-case-scenario argument based on how some liberal activist judge or justice might interpret Prop 3. This reality flows from the plain language of Prop 3 and rests on general legal principles of constitutional construction.
It’s Right in the Text
Here is the pertinent language Prop 3 would etch into the Michigan constitution as Article 1, Section 28, with the key language underscored:
“(1) Every individual has a fundamental right to reproductive freedom, which entails the right to make and effectuate decisions about all matters relating to pregnancy, including but not limited to prenatal care, childbirth, postpartum care, contraception, sterilization, abortion care, miscarriage management, and infertility care. An individual’s right to reproductive freedom shall not be denied, burdened, nor infringed upon unless justified by a compelling state interest achieved by the least restrictive means. …
(2) The state shall not discriminate in the protection or enforcement of this fundamental right.
* * *
(4) For the purposes of this section:
A state interest is “compelling” only if it is for the limited purpose of protecting the health of an individual seeking care, consistent with accepted clinical standards of practice and evidence-based medicine, and does not infringe on that individual’s autonomous decision-making.
* * *
(5) This section shall be self-executing….
Prop 3 Applies to Men and Women AND Boys and Girls
By its express terms, Prop 3 applies to “every individual” and guarantees an “individual’s right.” The proposed constitutional amendment further provides that “the state shall not discriminate in the protection or enforcement of this fundamental right.”
As a matter of constitutional interpretation, then, the rights guaranteed by Prop 3 would be rights that both adults and children possess as “individuals,” and the rights apply equally to males and females.
This proposal represents a huge demarcation from controlling Michigan law, under which minors must have parental consent to obtain medical treatment or receive prescription medications, with the only current exception being the judicial bypass provisions governing minors seeking abortions. Specifically, Michigan law currently provides that to obtain an abortion, females under the age of 18 must have the written consent of one parent or legal guardian, but the law allows a girl to seek permission for an abortion from a judge, called a “judicial bypass.” A court must grant a judicial bypass if the judge finds either that “the minor is sufficiently mature and well-enough informed to make the decision regarding abortion independently of her parents or legal guardian,” or “the waiver would be in the best interests of the minor.”
In the context of abortion, Prop 3 guts Michigan’s requirements for either parental consent or a judicial bypass, first by declaring that the amendment applies to all “individuals” and second by expressly providing that “the state shall not discriminate in the protection or enforcement of this fundamental right.” Treating females under 18 differently than those 18 or over is a textbook example of discrimination.
Section 4 of the amendment further cements the reality that minors must be treated equivalent to adults for purposes of the rights Prop 3 would establish. That section of the proposed amendment expressly limits the justifications allowed for regulating abortion or the other rights Prop 3 would inscribe in the constitution.
Under Section 4, the state may only regulate abortion and the other rights covered by the proposed constitutional amendment if it is necessary to “protect the health of an individual seeking care,” and “does not infringe on that individual’s autonomous decision-making.”
The rights of parents do not matter; Mom and Dad have no rights. And even the health of the girl does not matter because, under the plain language of the amendment, the state’s interest cannot “infringe” on the “individual’s autonomous decision-making.”
This legal analysis flows straight from the plain language of Prop 3, but case law from other states where a state constitutional right to abortion exists confirms this analysis. For example, in Alaska and Florida, courts have declared parental consent and parental notification statutes unconstitutional. And courts in California, Massachusetts, and New Jersey have struck parental consent statutes.
Prop 3’s grant of such “autonomous decision-making” is not limited to abortion, however. Rather, the plain language of the proposed constitutional amendment provides that the right to “reproductive freedom,” “entails the right to make and effectuate decisions about all matters relating to pregnancy, including but not limited to … sterilization … or infertility care.”
Under Michigan law currently, minors cannot be chemically or surgically sterilized (or rendered infertile) without their parents’ consent, and even then most physicians would refuse to sterilize a minor — except in the case of transgender-identifying patients.
The modern medical community has embraced the transgender ideology that teaches that human beings can be born “in the wrong body,” and that the appropriate treatment for such individuals consists of making their bodies appear to conform to their “internal sense” of gender.
The first step in such wrongly named “gender-affirming” medical response consists of prescribing puberty blockers to children. Puberty blockers, at a minimum, render children temporarily infertile by preventing them from maturing sexually, and a longer-term use renders them sterile. The surgical procedures used under the guise of “gender confirmation” — castration, hysterectomy, and the removal of ovaries — likewise sterilize the patients.
In fact, it is this very destruction of children’s future fertility and the medical rendering of them sterile that has led to several states banning the use of puberty blockers and surgical “gender confirming” procedures on minors. For instance, in Iowa, the Legislature made these legislative findings to explain its proposed ban on puberty blockers and surgical procedures that sterilize children:
Puberty blockers prevent gonadal maturation and thus render children taking these drugs infertile. Introducing cross-sex hormones to children with immature gonads as a direct result of pubertal blockade is expected to cause irreversible sterility. Sterilization is also permanent for those who undergo surgery to remove reproductive organs[.] … For these reasons, the decision to pursue a course of hormonal and surgical interventions to address a discordance between an individual’s sex and sense of gender identity should not be presented to or determined for children who are incapable of comprehending the negative implications and life-course difficulties resulting from these interventions.
But in Michigan, if passed, Prop 3 guarantees children the right to “make and effectuate decisions about all matters relating to … sterilization,” and without “discrimination,” giving boys and girls the right to obtain puberty blockers and surgical sterilization without parental notice or consent.
If passed, Section 4 of the proposed constitutional amendment will further guarantee that the Michigan Legislature cannot interfere in transgender minors’ decisions to obtain puberty blockers or surgical “gender reassignment” through castration, removal of ovaries, or a hysterectomy. That section, as excerpted above, provides that the state may only regulate such procedures for the limited purpose of “protecting the health of an individual seeking care, consistent with accepted clinical standards of practice and evidence-based medicine,” and then, only so long as it “does not infringe on that individual’s autonomous decision-making.”
But the “accepted clinical standards of practice” by the supposed “mainstream” medical organizations is, at a minimum, to provide puberty blockers to children, with a steady movement toward the cash cow that is surgical interventions for minors.
Planned Parenthood Targets Kids One Way or Another
Again, these conclusions flow directly from the plain language of the proposed constitutional amendment. But here the public would be wise to note two significant facts: Planned Parenthood Advocates of Michigan helpedlead the ballot initiative to amend the Michigan constitution through the passage of Prop 3, deceptively described as the “Reproductive Freedom for All” amendment, and Planned Parenthood nowrepresents “the second largest provider of ‘gender-affirming hormone therapy.’” In fact, less than two weeks ago, Planned Parenthood launched an ad marketing puberty blockers to minors.
What Planned Parenthood and its extremist political partners don’t want publicized, however, is that a “Yes” vote for Prop 3 will not merely make abortion-on-demand, for any reason, at any time, and without informed or parental consent the law of Michigan: It will guarantee that children have an unfettered “right” to “transition” by obtaining puberty blockers and surgical sterilization, parents be damned.
With less than one month to go before Michiganders cast their final ballots, little time remains to give proof to the left’s lie that Prop 3 is about codifying Roe. It is not. It is about sacrificing the children of the state — both born and unborn.
Margot Cleveland is The Federalist’s senior legal correspondent. She is also a contributor to National Review Online, the Washington Examiner, Aleteia, and Townhall.com, and has been published in the Wall Street Journal and USA Today. Cleveland is a lawyer and a graduate of the Notre Dame Law School, where she earned the Hoynes Prize—the law school’s highest honor. She later served for nearly 25 years as a permanent law clerk for a federal appellate judge on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Cleveland is a former full-time university faculty member and now teaches as an adjunct from time to time. As a stay-at-home homeschooling mom of a young son with cystic fibrosis, Cleveland frequently writes on cultural issues related to parenting and special-needs children. Cleveland is on Twitter at @ProfMJCleveland. The views expressed here are those of Cleveland in her private capacity.
Parents in San Diego, California, are outraged over a flyer that was sent to public school children advertising the “queerest” Halloween party with a “family-friendly” drag show and sponsored by a gay bar and a gender reassignment surgery center. The flyer for the show was sent to parents of students in the Encinitas Union School District using its email platform. The event is being organized by Trans Family Support Services; a group based in San Diego that helps provide transgender support services for people across the country. The flyer advertised a “family-friendly drag show” as well as other Halloween events like a costume contest and trick-or-treating.
The school district explained that the email went out through PeachJar, a service that offers optional information about other events in the district. It added that the emails contained the notice, “Distribution of this flyer does not imply endorsement by the Encinitas union school district, its schools or staff and is distributed in compliance with federal and state law.”
Some parents are planning to attend the school district’s board meeting to protest the event and to denounce a comment made by a district employee calling them homophobes. Attorney Paul Jonna told KGTV-TV that a concerned parent called him and that he was requesting information from the school district.
“A lot of people are just generally not comfortable with the idea of pushing drag queen shows on little kids, but separate and apart from that, I think the biggest concern with this event are the sponsors,” Jonna said.
“We submitted a public records request to find out more about their involvement, their communication with these sponsors and sort of this event,” he added.
He added that the event was sponsored by Align Surgical Associates, which advertises as offering “gender confirmation surgery for transwomen, transmen, non-binary, and gender diverse individuals.” He said another sponsor, Rich’s San Diego, advertises itself as “San Diego’s largest and most popular gay nightclub.”
Kathie Moehlig, the founder and executive director of Trans Family Support Services, said they will not cancel the show.
“We’re not going to back down from doing what we know is right and appropriate to support these youth and their families, just because some people think they can use it as their mega piece to get talking points and get attention,” said Moehlig.
Here’s more about the planned drag show:
Parents to protest Encinitas Union School District for hosting ‘Queerfest’ drag show Halloween event www.youtube.com
In August 2011, I participated in a brainstorming session held at Liberty University together with a number of conservative leaders, all of whom had been on the front lines of confronting LGBTQ activism.
As we discussed the impact of this activism on the nation, we asked ourselves what words we could find to help awaken the national conscience. What slogan or saying would capture our concerns and would appeal to the masses? One phrase we agreed on was: “Stop sexualizing our children!”
Now, more than 10 years later, that cry must rise from coast to coast, from all concerned parents from all stripes and backgrounds, and it must speak to heterosexuals activists and LBGTQ activists alike: “Stop sexualizing our children! They do not belong to you, and you will not continue to influence them and degrade them and pollute them and pervert them. Enough is enough! This must stop, and it must stop now.”
From the heterosexual side, the attack has come through sex-ed curricula in schools, presenting inappropriate subjects in inappropriate ways, beginning with the youngest school children. It has been going on for a long time.
In her 1989 book Sex Education: The Final Plague, Catholic author Randy Engel cited Dr. Melvin Anchell’s 1981 statements, noting that:
“When sex educators devalue parental influence … they in effect devalue the student’s conscience. At the same time, they are instrumental in ‘removing societal inhibitions,’ they intensify their efforts for ‘sexual openness’ and they teach the students ‘to rely entirely on their own inexperienced and immature judgments and those of their peers.’
“One of the results of this indoctrination process, charges Dr. Anchell is the formation of a ‘horde culture,’ which is characterized by ‘sexual indulgences … devoid of love.’ ‘The indoctrinated show no guilt, nor do they display concern for morality.’ They are in effect the new barbarians!”
Anchell made these remarks more than 40 years ago, yet some parents are still unaware of just how pervasive this curriculum is in some of their schools. Isn’t it beyond time to wake up?
The heterosexual sexualizing of our children also continues apace through movies and music and social media, where it seems that nothing is sacred anymore.
As I wrote in 2011 after attending that conference at Liberty, “The recent cover of the French edition of Vogue magazine caused considerable controversy, and it was not because of the all too typical, female model featured in a sensual pose. Instead, it was the fact that the model this time was a 10-year-old girl.
“The headline of an article appearing on JewishJournal.com announced that, ‘Vogue Blurs the Line between Fashion & Pedophilia with 10-Year-Old Model,’ and the article’s author, Ilana Angel, rightly noted that, ‘A 10 year old is not able to distinguish between playing dress up in mommy’s make-up and high heels and proving a sexual aid to pedophiles.’ How true!
“But this is only one, extreme example of the way our kids are being sexualized. How many children watch MTV and VH1, mimicking the moves and memorizing the lyrics of the latest song by Britney Spears or Lady Gaga, having no clue that the moves they are making and the words they are mouthing are sexually charged. These kids are too young to have any understanding of sexuality, and yet it is no secret to the TV execs that these same children are a major part of the viewing audience.”
Fast forward to 2019, when I wrote (and here’s a reader alert for graphic content coming), “It was not enough for Teen Vogue to celebrate anal sex, promote prostitution and teach kids how to have an abortion without parental permission. Now this popular young people’s magazine is offering guidelines on ‘sex spells,’ guaranteed to ‘make your orgasms magical’ (What wholesome reading for teens!)”
Tragically, this is barely the tip of a massive, destructive iceberg.
As for the LGTBQ+ sexualizing of our children, much of it comes in the form of indoctrination. Gay is good. Queer is cool. Being trans is something to celebrate. And your kids need to know this starting in pre-school, if not earlier. In fact, let’s normalize drag queens for toddlers!
As I wrote in 2011, it is outrageous “to introduce the categories of adult homosexuality and bisexuality to elementary school children, and now is the time to draw the line. Otherwise, your 8-year-old daughter might come home from school to tell you that she just learned that Joan of Arc was transgender. (After all, wasn’t she a cross-dresser?) Or perhaps your little boy will tell you how exciting it was to learn about the drag queens who started a riot at the Stonewall Inn in 1969.
“The fact is that our educational system is having a hard enough time teaching our kids the three R’s. Must they now learn LGBTQ’s? Now is the time to stop sexualizing our children. They should not be casualties of the culture wars. Do you agree?”
Do these words seem eerily prophetic today?
No wonder, then, that a March 2022 article was titled, “Joan of Arc: Cross-dressing warrior-saint and LGBTQ role model.” Your kids might well have heard about this too. And I already mentioned the perverse new fad of drag queens reading to toddlers. Should I add that they do so with the enthusiastic affirmation of the American Library Association?
This past July, I wrote an article titled “The Only Surprise is That Parents are Just Now Learning About LGBTQ+ Curricula in Their Children’s Schools.”
What, then, prompted me to address this topic yet again?
It was reading about “Gays Against Groomers, an organization comprised entirely of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and even transgender people, launched in 2022 [which] has had meteoric success at attracting followers to their cause exposing the harms done to children by some radicals hiding behind the LGBTQ banner.” Yes, these are gays (and others) who are against the grooming of children. They, too, recognize what is happening.
It was also this story that got my attention: “In Chicago, the city’s largest children’s hospital offers ‘kink’ and ‘trans-friendly’ sex toys for minors.”
Enough with this unbridled assault on our children. However, one may attempt to justify this madness, it must stop, and it must stop now. Parents, grandparents, educators, influencers, politicians, pastors, and other spiritual leaders, whoever you are, whatever stage of life you are in, it’s time that we stand together and raise our voices as one, shouting: “Stop sexualizing our children!”
What started out as an innocent remark on Instagram has left Brittany Aldean, the wife of country music singer Jason Aldean, as the target of an unhinged wave of attacks from America’s demented “Trans the Kids” crowd.
In a late-August video reel showing herself transforming “from a relatively makeup-free face into fully ready glam,” Aldean captioned the post by saying she’d “really like to thank [her] parents for not changing [her] gender when [she] went through [her] tomboy phase” and that she “love[s] this girly life.”
While only an anodyne caption, the comment evoked the ire of self-proclaimed country artist Cassadee Pope, who took to Twitter to lash out at Aldean for comparing her “‘tomboy phase’ to someone wanting to transition.”
“You’d think celebs with beauty brands would see the positives in including LGBTQ+ people in their messaging,” Pope said.
Fellow country singer Maren Morris also decided to throw her irrelevant opinion into the mix, saying, “It’s so easy to, like, not be a scumbag human” and calling Aldean “Insurrection Barbie,” in an apparent reference to the Aldeans’ previously expressed support for former President Donald Trump.
Rather than back down and cower in the face of the latest left-wing, angry mob, Aldean is doubling down and openly criticizing the demonic practice of forcibly mutilating children seemingly being championed by Pope and Morris.
“Advocating for the genital mutilation of children under the disguise of love and calling it ‘gender affirming care,’ is one of the worst evils. I will always support my children and do what I can do [to] protect their innocence,” Aldean said on Instagram. “Some parents want to be accepted by society so badly that they’re willing to make life-altering decisions for their children who aren’t old enough to fully comprehend the consequences of those actions. Love is protecting your child until they are mature enough as an adult to make their own life decisions.”
“Karen Morris, thanks for calling me Barbie,” Aldean added in response to Morris’s tweet.
Since the social media spat, Aldean has continued in professing her advocacy for children being exploited by deranged, pro-trans leftists, with the beauty-line entrepreneur recently reaffirming her views during an interview on “Tucker Carlson Tonight.”
“I think that children should not be allowed to make these life-changing decisions at such a young age,” she said. “They are not mature enough; they should have parents who love them and advocate for them regardless. We have ages on everything. We have it for cigarettes, driving, military, voting. … Yet for some reason people think that we can let a child choose their gender so young? It’s very baffling to me.”
She continued, saying that “[t]here are so many consequences of doing that a[t] such a young age” and that “[s]ociety should be able to sit back, speak our minds about it and fight for these children.”
Aldean has since released a Barbie-inspired T-shirt with the phrase “Don’t tread on our kids,” with profits from the apparel line benefiting Operation Light Shine, a charity dedicated to helping “fight child exploitation and human trafficking.”
Aldean Is Right
Despite the hyperbolic virtue signaling from elitists like Pope and Morris, Aldean’s remarks about the realities of “transitioning” minors are 100 percent correct. Medically mutilating children’s genitals and pumping them full of wrong-sex hormones in the name of “care” is not compassionate; it’s satanic.
Just as is the case with any other weighty subject matter, most children have no clue what sex is, let alone transgenderism. The idea that minors are well-rounded and knowledgeable enough to understand the long-term implications associated with removing one’s penis or breasts is a hair-brained narrative that only the most hardcore leftists in society could convince themselves is true.
As noted by Federalist Contributor Samantha Stephenson, even among youth with gender dysphoria, “studies indicate that in all likelihood, symptoms will resolve in 93 percent of these children by the time they reach adulthood or even earlier — an outcome that is taken off the table for children subjected to experimental hormones with largely unknown effects, whose bodies are mutilated and fertility stolen.”
Ultimately, parents signing off on mutilating their child’s genitals are not doing what’s best for their son or daughter, but for themselves. From its inception, medically “transitioning” minors has always been about adults inflicting their will upon innocent, unsuspecting children, who are forced to live with the consequences of their parents’ ill-advised decision-making.
But rather than stand up and join Aldean in defending these kids, woke-ified celebrities like Pope and Morris will continue to attack anyone who dares to defy their twisted, pagan religion, which somehow convinces them that castrating and sterilizing children is both virtuous and humane. To them, who cares if these kids grow up to regret the procedure or become suicidal as a result? All that matters is getting a pat on the back from America’s residential, left-wing mob.
At the end of the day, Brittany Aldean has nothing to apologize for. The dangers of medically mutilating children are simply too horrific for society to sit in silence. Following Aldean’s lead, any and every sane American who understands the evils associated with this barbaric practice must speak up and get active, lest our children continue to pay the price.
Shawn Fleetwood is a Staff Writer for The Federalist and a graduate of the University of Mary Washington. He also serves as a state content writer for Convention of States Action and his work has been featured in numerous outlets, including RealClearPolitics, RealClearHealth, and Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @ShawnFleetwood
School districts around the world are racing to implement Social and Emotional Learning (SEL) programs in the name of improving their students’ social and emotional skills. In fact, according to the global purveyor of SEL standards, 27 states so far have adopted K-12 SEL competencies, and all 50 states have adopted SEL competencies for pre-K students. But where is this massive push for SEL coming from, and what are the motives behind it?
The answer to this question is becoming clear: The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) is a primary force behind the SEL movement worldwide. A major way UNESCO advocates for SEL is through UNESCO’S Mahatma Gandhi Institute of Education for Peace and Sustainable Development. The Gandhi Institute produces an online publication called The Blue Dot, which features articles from SEL experts and others around the globe that highlight “the relationship between education, peace, sustainable development and global citizenship.” Invoking Gandhi’s name in the title of this United Nations entity is meant to pull at the heartstrings of anyone who hears it. But should our heartstrings be pulled?
SEL Is Key to Achieving the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals
The title of a feature article in The Blue Dot co-written by a specialist from the Gandhi Institute reveals why UNESCO is hellbent on getting SEL into every school in America and across the world: “SEL for SDGs: Why Social and Emotional Learning (SEL) is Necessary to Achieve the Sustainable Development Goals.” The “sustainable development goals” (SDGs) are noble-sounding goals that would essentially require government management of energy sources worldwide and the large-scale redistribution of wealth in the name of saving the planet. In UNESCO’s view, the endgame of SEL is not to meet the social and emotional needs of each child, but to shape all children to meet the needs of a global society by adhering to the sustainable development goals.
The article explains that the UN’s sustainable development goals will create “dissonance” in people due to the conflicting nature of some of the goals. The goals will also create dissonance in people because of the monumental sacrifices that may be necessary to achieve them — giving up fossil fuels, family values, and control of one’s own property, to name a few.
Therefore, proponents say it is necessary to reduce children’s emotional resistance to the goals through systemic SEL in the classroom: “Since dissonance is an unpleasant emotive state, subjects of dissonance require emotion-regulatory capabilities (emotional resilience) to navigate the behaviors and prerequisite antecedents to attain [the] SDGs.” The article says, “Dissonance can be caused by beliefs, attitudes, values, and feelings,” and that “interventions to reduce dissonance are required to address … the intensity of emotional response.”
In short, they believe interventions by way of SEL programs are necessary to influence young people’s “beliefs, attitudes, values, and feelings” so they will more readily think like global citizens and cooperate with the goals UNESCO has set for the world.
Another article in The Blue Dot titled, “What is Systemic Social and Emotional Learning and Why Does it Matter?” and written by two officers from the Collaborative for Academic, Social and Emotional Learning (CASEL), says CASEL’s mission is to help make “SEL an essential part of the preschool to high school education.” CASEL has positioned itself as the world leader on SEL standards and has a cooperative relationship with UNESCO. These two entities are united in their zeal to weave SEL into all school subjects and to deliver it to all children everywhere.
Raising the Next Generation of ‘Global Citizens’
But why? What is it UNESCO wants to instill in children? UNESCO’s materials make it clear that SEL is intended to foster not only kindness between students, but cooperation with a global agenda rooted in the doctrine of collectivism. Nandini Chatterjee Singh, a program specialist for the Gandhi Institute, says“SEL skills are powerful competencies” that have been shown to “instill pluralistic thinking.” The institute’s website further says it is seeking to teach children to “exhibit prosocial behavior for … a peaceful and sustainable planet.”
In short, proponents of the sustainable development goals and SEL want to instill “pluralistic thinking” in your child in the name of global peace. They want children to be taught to value the “collective good” over individual liberties, rights, and property despite the fact that the freest, most prosperous nations in the world are founded on individual liberties, rights, and property.
Richard Davidson, a writer in The Blue Dot, says UNESCO’s Gandhi Institute is poised to disseminate SEL programs “that will have the potential to influence the development of the next generation of global citizens,” and he declares, “I believe that today we have a moral obligation to incorporate SEL into our educational systems at all levels.” Similarly, CASEL says, “SEL at the classroom level needs to be embedded in coordinated, systemic, whole-child, school-wide approaches.” (For more on whole-child, whole-school approaches to education, see here.)
In another SEL article in The Blue Dot, Mahima Bhalla, learning coordinator for the Gandhi Institute, says that “in order to contribute to the goal of peaceful and sustainable societies,” his organization “recognizes the need to move beyond only academic purposes of education” and instead focus on influencing the social and emotional state of students. This indicates a clear sea change in the purpose of education.
Systemic SEL Digital Curriculum
According to Davidson, the Gandhi Institute’s digital platforms “show great promise for massive scaling” and the director of the Gandhi Institute says it has already disseminated a suite of interactive digital SEL modules that address “contemporary issues such as migration, nationalism and violence.” The scope of these digital modules appears to go well beyond teaching Johnny and Billy to get along on the playground, which is how SEL is often sold to local educators.
The intended reach of the Gandhi Institute’s advocacy is made clear in its “Recommendations to Implementing SEL” section where it says the recommendations the institute gives are “prescribed as general guidelines for education decision makers at the national level right down to school boards and schools.” It’s also telling that it notes, “There needs to be an intentional focus (such as a campaign) organized by a coalition of partners led by UNESCO to communicate a common and unified message on the importance of SEL to parents and the public at large.”
By their own admission, UNESCO and its partners are eagerly trying to sell the idea of systemic SEL to the stakeholders known as parents. So are the parents of the world lining up to demand that schools add integrated SEL programs to their children’s school curricula? No. SEL is being peddled by UNESCO from the top down under the guise of local control.
Developing the attributes of compassion, kindness, and empathy in children is a noble goal, and some of that development can appropriately happen at school. But infusing digitally connected, UNESCO-endorsed, systemic SEL curriculum into the classrooms of the world to instill pluralistic thinking in children is not the answer. Local programs, local communities, and individual families are the best ways to instill social and emotional skills in children and to maintain free societies based on individual rights and responsibilities.
Hardly a day goes by now that we don’t see another appalling example of transgender ideology’s aggressive intolerance in the public square. Recently, the target of that intolerance was an 80-year-old woman in the small town of Port Townsend, Washington, who was permanently banned from her local YMCA pool after she objected to a “trans woman” — a man — in the women’s locker room.
And for daring to speak out about that in public, she and her supporters were attacked this week in broad daylight by a mob of trans activists and Antifa thugs.
“I saw a man in a woman’s bathing suit watching maybe four or five little girls pulling down their suits in order to use the toilet,” Jaman told the Post. “I asked if he had a penis and he said it was none of my business. I told that man to ‘get out right now.’”
For exercising what would have been universally praised not long ago as guts and common sense — confronting a man trespassing in a women’s locker room to watch little girls undress — Jaman was accused of “being discriminatory” by the YMCA manager, threatened with the police, and ordered to leave. A member of the YMCA for 35 years, she was subsequently banned from the pool permanently.
Jaman’s ordeal wasn’t over, though. On Monday, Jaman and others gathered to speak out about the local YMCA’s dangerous policy of allowing men into the women’s locker room. As Jaman was speaking, a mob of Antifa militants, including burly, tattooed men, converged on the rally, screaming, “Trans women are women,” in an attempt to intimidate and drown her out. They ripped down the suffragette flags on display behind Jaman, who was visibly shaken and asked, “Are we going to get beat up here?” and asked supporters in the crowd to call the police.
Eventually, the Antifa mob surrounded Jaman, whose supporters, most of them middle-aged and elderly women, had to form a protective circle around her. Some women were thrown to the ground. Others had their shoes ripped off. Just as black-shirted Antifa men were beginning to tussle with Jaman’s supporters, the police showed up.
It wasn’t enough, though, simply to terrorize and physically assault women exercising their First Amendment rights. The mayor of Port Townsend, a self-described “pervert and deviant” named David J. Faber, praised the mob that went after Jaman and her supporters, calling it an “incredible night” that was “beautiful” and falsely claiming that “Trans and cis-allies alike spoke love & support.”
As copious video evidence posted on Twitter shows, they did no such thing. They engaged in the thuggish intolerance, simmering violence, and blind rage characteristic of the far left — and then they reveled in it, with the likes of Faber praising the mob for their brutality toward an 80-year-old woman who dared to speak up.
Mobs like the one in Port Townsend on Monday, however, are merely the blunt instrument, the Brown Shirts of a much larger effort on the part of the left to sever the relationship between parent and child and reshape society in a way that allows adults, especially adult men, to fulfill their every desire — often at the expense of children.
But that effort isn’t being led by black-shirted Antifa thugs, it’s being led by medical professionals at some of the most prestigious hospitals in the country. In recent weeks, Libs of TikTok, Matt Walsh, Chris Elston (Billboard Chris), and others have been posting publicly available promotional videos and other information from Boston Children’s Hospital touting so-called “gender-affirming care,” which includes chemical castration, mastectomies, hysterectomies, and genital mutilation performed on minors.
Boston Children’s Hospital responded by removing all its videos and information about “gender-affirming care” from its YouTube channel and quietly updating its website to claim (falsely) that gender-related surgeries are only for those over 18.
Meanwhile, Big Tech and the corporate press predictably came to the defense of the hospital. Facebook banned Libs of Tik Tok this week, and NBC News’s Brandy Zadrozny spread misinformation by claiming BCH doesn’t perform genital surgeries on minors. Almost all media coverage of the BCH affair has been framed as far-right activists threatening the hospital and engaging in “stochastic terrorism” when in fact all that Libs of Tik Tok and others have done is post the hospital’s own materials.
The videos are genuinely horrifying. A buttoned-up surgeon calmly explaining phalloplasty to the camera over whimsical music can’t hide the horrifying fact that what’s being described is the cutting off of forearm flesh from a healthy girl to fashion a non-functioning penis. It is barbaric in the extreme, and the attempt to make it sound mundane and palatable in these videos somehow only highlights the barbarity and cruelty of it.
In other words, the people and institutions behind this movement are not fringe, they are not the pink-haired youths and black-clad Antifa thugs screaming at old ladies in the streets. They occupy the elite heights of American society. They have real power and influence.
And if you object or protest in any way, they are angling to get you labeled a bigot, a threat to child safety, a terrorist. And you know what that means.
John Daniel Davidson is a senior editor at The Federalist. His writing has appeared in the Wall Street Journal, the Claremont Review of Books, The New York Post, and elsewhere. Follow him on Twitter, @johnddavidson.
‘Gender-Affirming Care’ Is the Opposite of Gender-Affirming and Caring
People don’t like hospitals that hurt children instead of healing them. Boston Children’s Hospital has been deluged with criticism after conservative activists highlighted its own materials promoting medical transition for minors. The hospital has tried to cover up its deeds, but it cannot escape the truth that so-called gender-affirming care isn’t. The euphemistic phrase conceals the brutal realities of medical transition, but these procedures — including puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and various surgeries — do not affirm patients’ gender, let alone care for them. Gender-affirming care is a lie and we must stop it.
The tide may be turning against the transgender craze. Across the pond, the United Kingdom’s infamous Tavistock pediatric gender clinic has been shut down, and a massive medical malpractice action has begun against those responsible for rushing children into transition. Here in the U.S., Republican politicians are increasingly willing to stand up against the radical transgender agenda, as even the spineless are realizing that this is a winning issue. And it seems only a matter of time until trial lawyers target America’s aggressive and unregulated gender clinic industry.
Thus, there is hope that regulations and lawsuits will curb the craze for rushing people, especially children, into medical transition. It is even possible to imagine a quiet climb-down in which the political left, and the institutions it controls, realize that radical gender ideology is a loser and sidle away from it. There have been a few signs that this is happening, such as New York Times articles questioning transgender orthodoxy.
Will Proponents Back Down?
But there are no guarantees of victory, in large part because many people may be in too deep to back down. Democrats in general, and the Biden administration in particular, have embraced transgender ideology. They have done everything from putting men in women’s shelters to using school lunch programs for poor children as leverage to force schools to adopt the rainbow agenda, including letting males into girls’ locker rooms. And, of course, pretty much every major left-wing group has followed the LGBT lobby into pushing a radical transgender agenda.
Nor is it only politicians and activists who have staked their credibility on the trans agenda. From education to entertainment to Big Business, a lot of people have embraced transgender ideology, including medically transitioning children. The medical industry in particular has a lot to lose, both in credibility and cash, if the transition train slows down. This may explain why pro-trans research is routinely published even though the studies are mostly lowquality, with some being demonstrably terrible. The goal isn’t to publish good research, but to provide cover for an ideology that is chemically and surgically sterilizing children.
And, of course, there is pride — no, not the rainbow celebrations sponsored by big business, but actual personal pride. Will parents who bought into gender transition admit the harm they have done to their children? Will liberals admit not only that they were wrong, but that Christian conservatives were right? These and similar truths may be too hard for many to accept.
Consequently, we opponents of the transgender agenda must keep the pressure on. We must make sure that those in thrall to transgender ideology — from politicians to academia to the media to Big Tech and Big Business — either abandon it or are defeated. In doing so, it will help to show how the horrifying harms inflicted by gender transition are the result of denying the truth of sex and gender.
Gender-Affirming Care Is a Lie
Gender-affirming care is a lie because gender is not a free-floating metaphysical substance. Gender becomes nonsensical when disconnected from sex, because gender is the social expression of the biological realities of human sex. As Matt Walsh’s recent documentary “What is a Woman?” demonstrates, gender makes no sense without reference to biological sex — it either goes around in circles (e.g. a woman is anyone who identifies as a woman) or descends into crude stereotypes (e.g. a boy who likes pink must be a girl).
We are a sexually dimorphic species; the difference between male and female is essential to the continuation of humanity. Thus, though there is variation in gender expression between individuals, and gender expectations between cultures, gender always has to refer back to our embodied realities as male or female. Thus, there cannot be a gender identity that is deeper, more essential, or more immutable than our sex. And so it is impossible to have “gender-affirming” medical care that attempts to efface the reality of bodily sex.
There are people who are unhappy with their bodies and wish that they were the other sex. But they are not, nor can they become, the other sex — at most they can be chemically and surgically altered to resemble the other sex and attempt to socially live that role. These people need compassion and help in accepting their healthy natural bodies, not chemicals and surgery to contort their bodies into facsimiles of the other sex. Transition is never medically necessary, which is why activists encourage suicide threats from those who identify as transgender — they have to take themselves hostage because they are in no medical danger.
The ugly truth hidden behind the lying promises of “gender-affirming care” is that medical transition always inflicts physical harm for no physical benefit; it damages a patient’s body, rather than healing it.
Gender-affirming care isn’t, and it must be stopped.
Nathanael Blake is a senior contributor to The Federalist and a postdoctoral fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.
As a former homeschooled student and now a homeschool dad, I know first-hand the importance of sound education and the delicate balance of approaching difficult topics with my children.
First things first, families need to be grounded in what the Declaration of Independence calls the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God, meaning God’s law is true, supreme, and immutable. In today’s society, children are taught that it is acceptable, and often encouraged, to redefine nature’s law. To “create your own truth” and go against the foundational truths that this country was built upon. Being rooted in the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God is the starting point, the catapult, for addressing difficult topics that our kids are facing on a daily basis.
The Rise of Gender Fluidity
Gone are the days when our God-given body parts were the determining factor of our sexual identity. Leftist agendas are now pushing that your sex is determined at birth, but your gender is not determined until you are old enough to start showing either feminine or masculine tendencies. Parents are being told to keep their children’s biological sex secret until their child is old enough to decide their own identity. This blatantly goes against the laws of nature.
When teaching our kids about their sexuality, we can ask, what does nature’s law tell us about sexuality? It is as simple as returning to God’s original design and purpose for humanity. We can explain this to our children by highlighting the responsibilities of males and females and their benefits to society. We can also educate our children about their bodies and the benefits of their sex. Yes, there are biological differences that match the Laws of Nature and Nature’s God. Our job as parents is to continually affirm to children who they are and how they were made and to teach them to know the truth about themselves, and that it isn’t something you can just change. When our minds don’t match the physical world, it is our minds that need to be healed, not our bodies. Just as physical laws are immutable, so too are natural laws.
Discussing Current Events with Your Children
It is no secret that we are consumed daily with news. Whether you watch the news with your kids or not, they are constantly being exposed. The rising generation has access to more information than ever before, which is why it is crucial that you are laying foundational truths at an early age with your children. Don’t be afraid to have difficult conversations with your kids.
The recent overturning of Roe v. Wade is a perfect example of ensuring your children are rooted in the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God. Our children need to know that the fetus is a stage in human development, much like we have identified being a toddler or a teenager as a stage in human development. The Law of Nature’s God states that every person may lawfully enjoy those rights which God has given. Key words being every person.
Life begins at conception, and the unborn are still lawfully entitled to the right to life. We need to be clear and speak truth to our children when this topic gets brought up in our households. To address the “your body, your choice” argument, let them know that choices have consequences and that having physical relationships outside of a committed marriage could lead to having a baby. Yes, you have a choice, but it is earlier in the decision-making process than when others claim it should occur. Your choice can’t end the life of another human. As parents, it is our responsibility to educate our children to see all life as valuable and to communicate Nature’s Law.
Parents, Your Children Need You!
Overall, this idea of the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God can and should be the starting point for these types of conversations with your children. These truths ultimately overcome the false ideals the left is attempting to spread. The ultimate takeaway for your children is that just as physical laws are unchanging, so too are natural laws. Not preparing our children adequately can lead to significant problems for the next and rising generations. Parents need to educate themselves so they can teach their children to recognize truth over propaganda. Introducing children to the truth and having these difficult conversations with your kids early on and in an age-appropriate manner will better prepare and equip them for the future.
Robert Bortins is chief executive officer of Classical Conversations, the world’s largest classical homeschooling organization.
In 2016, psychologist Dr. Peter Langman compiled biographical data on 56 American school shooters. He found that 82% had grown up in dysfunctional family situations, usually without two biological parents at home. The trend has sadly continued. The shooter in Uvalde, Texas, hadn’t lived with his father in years. The Sandy Hook shooter hadn’t seen his father in the two years leading up to that massacre.
Last month, new research from the Institute for Family Studies demonstrated, once again, how important fathers are, especially for boys. For example, boys growing up without their dads are only half as likely to graduate from college as their peers who live with their dad at home. Strikingly, those numbers remain steady even after controlling for other factors such as race, income, and general IQ. Boys without a dad at home are also almost twice as likely to be “idle” in their late twenties, defined as neither working nor in school, and are significantly more likely to have been arrested or incarcerated by the time they turn 35.
These are only a few of the data points which demonstrate that fatherlessness is one of the most pressing crises our culture is facing. Why doesn’t our culture talk more about this?
One reason is that this crisis intersects other “third rails.” Our culture got to this point via the sexual revolution, which encouraged promiscuity by redefining freedom and prioritizing autonomy over responsibility. When sex outside of marriage becomes normal, it is mostly women who are left on their own to raise the resulting children.
There are other contributing factors as well, many of which were made possible by legislation. Divorce has been largely destigmatized, not in small part by making it legally easier. The legal demand for same-sex “marriage” brought with it the demand for same-sex parenting, which by definition asserts that kids do not need both a mother and a father. Certain forms of assisted reproduction likewise assert that children are less the fruit of a committed marriage than they are a commercial process.
And now here we are, with 32% of American boys growing up in homes without their biological dads. If there’s anything that we should learn from the grim outcomes of this social experiment, it is that dads aren’t replaceable. This was true from creation, but even more so in a fallen world with each of us born with a fallen human nature. We only learn to grow from socially, emotionally, and spiritually immature children into adults so that we can live together in a healthy way by seeing healthy behavior modeled and by having unhealthy behavior corrected.
Scripture passages affirm that mentoring in righteousness requires demonstration, as much or more than just explanation. Christ repeatedly told his followers to “do as He did.” When He washed His disciples’ feet, He offered it as an object lesson: “I give you an example, that you also should do as I did to you.” Paul told believers in Corinth and Ephesus to be “imitators” of him, just as he was an “imitator of Christ.”
In other places, Scripture even points to modeling and mimicry in sex-specific ways. In his letter to Titus, Paul instructed men to be “dignified” and “self-controlled” and to “urge the younger men to be self-controlled.” He also told the older women to “teach what is good” and to “train the younger women” to be “self-controlled,” “pure” and “kind.”
That, of course, is another cultural third rail. We are so desperate to pretend sexual difference isn’t built into our biological reality, we simply cannot abide the suggestion that our genders are critically important in parenting. But the numbers don’t lie. As Dr. Ryan Anderson, president of the Ethics and Public Policy Center, puts it, “[T]here is no such thing as ‘parenting.’ There is mothering, and there is fathering—children do best with both.”
Christians can challenge the growing public safety crisis that is fatherlessness, and we must start in the Church. We must affirm, in word and in action, that there are men and there are women and that both matter in parenting. We have to de-normalize absent dads, challenge men to take responsibility for their sexual choices and for their children and fill in the gaps whenever and however necessary.
No matter if our technologies and cultural dogmas pretend otherwise, every child has a father. These new statistics show, again, that every child needs their father. We have no right to deprive them of
John Stonestreet serves as president of the Colson Center for Christian Worldview. He’s a sought-after author and speaker on areas of faith and culture, theology, worldview, education and apologetics.
Police are often placed in situations where they have to make life-or-death decisions in an instant.
Thanks to the attitudes of the establishment media, the results of those consequential choices usually only get publicized if police can be blamed for making the wrong call.
However, now dramatic body cam footage was released where police successfully handled a dangerous situation in which a 4-year-old boy used his father’s gun to open fire on the officers. They were able to disarm the child before anyone got hurt.
Multiple versions of the body cam recordings were shared in a YouTube video. Watch:
ABC4 in Utah linked highlights from the videos and summarized the events that took place on February 21. The police were summoned when “employees reported that a man brandished a gun in the drive-thru after his order was incorrect.”
Sadaat Johnson, 27, was in the McDonald’s drive-thru with two children in the car, a 4-year-old and a 3-year-old.
Johnson did not comply with police instructions, and the situation escalated until officers were forced to pull Johnson from the vehicle.
The video does not show what happened next in the car. While the police were making the arrest of Johnson, the 4-year-old boy picked up the gun. An officer saw the weapon and shouted “Gun!”
Should kids be taught to be respectful to the police?Yes No
ABC4 reported, “The officer used his hand to sweep the gun away and the gun went off, hitting the upper part of the McDonald’s building. The officer then yelled at the person inside of the car to drop the gun, and after looking inside the car, realized that it was a small child.”
The children can be heard crying as they exit the car. The officers ask “Are you all right, kid?” and try to reassure them: “It’s okay, it’s okay.”
The discharge may have been accidental. However as reported in the New York Post, “The investigation showed that Johnson then ‘told the child to shoot at the police,’ authorities said. It was not clear exactly when he gave the order and it was not caught in the bodycam clip.”
“The boy — who was taken into protective custody — said he shot at the cops because ‘he wanted his daddy back,’ according to court records obtained by ABC4.”
Johnson also explained to the authorities “this wasn’t the first time his 4-year-old child had gotten his hands on a gun.”
Johnson ended up pleading guilty to two third-degree felonies, child abuse or neglect and aggravated assault. Johnson was sentenced to 120 days in jail, three years of probation and courses on anger management and parenting. He can no longer own guns.
A huge contributing factor to this near-disaster was Johnson’s disrespect and disregard for the police. This attitude leads to more danger in police interactions, despite the absurd progressive activist campaign to defund the police based on claims that it’s police presence that starts the problems.
This is not to say law enforcement does not need some reform. But it needs to be reform that puts police back into serving and protecting communities, rather than abusing citizens on behalf of the political class.
Police should also question even their own self-serving agendas. The Utah body cam footage was in stark contrast to footage from the mass shooting in Uvalde, Texas. There, the cams caught almost 400 law enforcement personnel unable to handle a lone shooter for almost an hour, while kids died.
In the Utah case though, it is a testament to God’s mercy and the police that no one was killed or injured through the careless abuse of firearms. There could have been causalities of officers, kids or both.
The trouble was caused due to a series of bad decisions and actions by Sadaat Johnson, as much as some want to blame the gun or the cops instead.
Richard Bledsoe is an author and internationally exhibiting artist. His writings on culture and politics have been featured in The Masculinist, Instapundit and American Thinker. You can view more of his work at Remodernamerica.com.
The alleged mother of the 10-year-old girl at the center of a national story told a reporter on Thursday that the man accused of raping her daughter is the victim of slanderous lies.
Telemundo reporter María Vargas-Pion went to the house where law enforcement apprehended 27-year-old Gerson Fuentes, the man charged with raping the child. The woman who opened the door identified herself as the mother of the young child, confirming the victim also lives there and that she is “fine.” Shockingly, the woman, who refused to provide her name, claimed that everything being said about Fuentes is a “lie.” According to Vargas-Pion, the mother also confirmed that she refused to press charges against Fuentes.
She reportedly refused to press charges despite Fuentes, according to Telemundo, telling police that he had sexual contact with the young girl on at least two occasions. The assaults reportedly happened when the girl was 9 years old, Telemundo reported, and resulted in a pregnancy, which was terminated in an abortion procedure last month.
Fuentes is being held in jail on $2 million bond. He is from Guatemala and was living in the United States illegally.
Another interesting aspect to the story is whether physicians who knew about the sexual assault reported the case to law enforcement, as required by Ohio and Indiana law. The Indianapolis Star confirmed that Dr. Caitlin Bernard, the Indianapolis OB/GYN who performed the abortion, disclosed the abortion by filing the correct forms with the Indiana Department of Health and the Department of Child Services. Bernard filed the appropriate form on July 2, two days after the abortion, according to the newspaper. Indiana law mandates the form be filed within three days for patients under the age of 16.
“As we stated, we are gathering evidence from multiple sources and agencies related to these allegations,” Rokita told the Star. “Our legal review of it remains open.”
Meanwhile, attorney Kathleen Delaney said Bernard is considering legal action against Rokita and others for having “smeared” her.
“She followed all relevant policies, procedures, and regulations in this case, just as she does every day to provide the best possible care for her patients,” Delaney said in a statement provided to the Star.
“She has not violated any law, including patient privacy laws, and she has not been disciplined by her employer,” the statement continued. “We are considering legal action against those who have smeared my client, including Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita, and know that the facts will all come out in due time.”
The full 77-minute video has been released from the day 19 children and two teachers were killed at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas. The full video, which includes a hallway surveillance camera and a bodycam from one officer, was obtained by the Austin American-Statesman. The outlet posted the four-minute edited collection of excerpts on its website. It posted the full video on its YouTube page.
The edited video begins with the gunman crashing the pickup truck he was driving, and then moving to the school after shooting at witnesses across the street and firing shots in the school parking lot.
WARNING: The following video contains images and audio that viewers will find disturbing.
“The video tells in real time the brutal story of how heavily armed officers failed to immediately launch a cohesive and aggressive response to stop the shooter and save more children if possible. And it reinforces the trauma of those parents, friends and bystanders who were outside the school and pleaded with police to do something, and for those survivors who quietly called 911 from inside the classroom to beg for help,” Statesman reporter Tony Plohetski wrote.
“The kids are running,” a woman calls out during the video in a 911 call, adding “Oh my God.”
Panic-stricken screams are heard as a woman orders children into their rooms.
The excerpt then continues with the shooter entering the school, peering around a corner to rooms 111 and 112, before sauntering down the hallway holding his rifle. The video captures one boy emerging from a bathroom. The boy peers around the corner and looks at the shooter, who is farther down the hall, before running away upon hearing the first shots.
Officials have said in the next two and a half minutes, about 100 rounds were fired, according to the Daily Mail.
A few moments later, the first officers arrive.
Three officers approach the classroom warily with drawn weapons. A burst of gunfire erupts, sending the officers running. One officer holds his head as if he was struck.
The clip video then cuts to 19 minutes later, then 31 minutes later, as more officers with guns and a ballistic shield arrive. Officers continue to wait. Four shots are heard.
“They’re making entry,” an officer says, but nothing happens.
At 12:30 p.m. local time, an officer squirts hand sanitizer from a wall-mounted dispenser and rubs his hands together. Officers appear to be discussing alternate ways to enter the classroom.
At 12:50, officers breach the classroom, killing the gunman.
Republican state Rep. Dustin Burrows said Tuesday that most sections of the hallway video will be shown to Uvalde community members on Sunday.
However, with the leak of the entirety of the footage, more backlash is sure to ensue.
After corporations across the nation announced they would cover employees’ travel expenses to get abortions in other states following the U.S. Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade, a veteran-owned business in Texas has responded by offering to pay for employees’ parental leave and adoption costs.
The U.S. Supreme Court’s 6-3 ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, a case involving Mississippi’s 15-week abortion ban, stated that the Constitution does not confer a right to abortion, leaving individual states to determine its legality.
In response, over 60 major companies stated their intentions to reimburse employees traveling for an abortion if they live in states that ban the practice, according to a list compiled by Reuters.
Instead of covering employees’ abortion-related travel expenses, Buffer Insurance announced in a June 27 post on its Facebook page that the company would provide benefits for employees who are giving birth to or adopting a baby. The company plans to cover the medical costs of childbirth or adoption and offer paid maternity or paternity leave.
“After the overturn of Roe v. Wade, we took the opposite stance that these big corporations are making, and they’re making it easier for people to abort their babies. We want to make it easy for employees to grow their families,” Buffer Insurance President Sean Turner told The Christian Post in an interview.
“And then if employees want to grow their families through adoption, we want to pay towards those expenses as well,” he added.
Turner added that Buffer Insurance is working with “any and all” employers to help them implement the same benefits and offer them to their employees.
“We realize that a lot of large corporations have some of these policies in place. But specifically, we’re a small and young company, so we really want to activate the majority of people who work for other small, midsize organizations,” he said. “So those are the ones that we think are going to have the most impact by implementing these types of policies of generosity in their own business.”
One of the ready-to-use policies Buffer Insurance promotes to other employers includes a lactation policy. Turner explained that this policy offers lactating mothers time to pump breast milk for their babies while they’re at work.
In addition, Turner said that Buffer Insurance is working with employers to help them maximize the benefits and minimize the taxes associated with providing employees with bonuses. He explained that the idea is to offer employees resources and “avoid a lot of waste.”
“Let’s say, for example, an employer is saying, I want to give $5,000 to an employee’s birth. If they were just adding that to their employees’ check as a bonus, there are taxes that employers pay as well as the employee,” Turner said.
“So maybe by the time they receive that, it’s only $4,200 or $3,200. So there are ways that we talk about in these resources to avoid those taxes, and it still is a 100% tax-deductible item for the employer.”
“We really encourage business owners and business leaders in different communities to implement something like this that includes a lot of generosity towards their employees,” he concluded.
Earlier this month, The Walt Disney Co. promised in an internal memo obtained by CNBC that it would pay for employees to travel out of state for abortions. In addition to “family planning (including pregnancy-related decisions),” the coverage extends to non-pregnancy situations, including cancer treatments, transplants and rare disease treatment.
“Our company remains committed to removing barriers and providing comprehensive access to quality and affordable care for all of our employees, cast members and their families, including family planning and reproductive care, no matter where they live,” the memo reads.
Dozens of other companies, including DICK’S Sporting Goods, Goldman Sachs, Apple and Nike have also announced plans to reimburse employees traveling out of state for abortions.
A school board director in Washington state who also owns a sex shop in Bellingham is planning a series of workshops for children as young as 9 to discuss “sexual anatomy for pleasure” and “safer sex practices for all kinds of sexual activities.” The classes, branded under the name “Uncringe Academy” at the WinkWink Boutique, will host 9- to 12-year-olds in the first string of courses Aug. 10-11 and 13- to 17-year-olds a few days later in the second.
“The class for 9- to 12-year-olds is an introduction to topics related to relationships, puberty, bodies and sexuality,” store owner and Bellingham School Board Director Jenn Mason told Seattle radio host Jason Rantz. “We focus on how puberty works, consent and personal boundaires, defining ‘sex,’ and discussing why people may or may not choose to engage in sexual activities.”
“There’s a lot to learn when it comes to bodies, puberty, sex, gender, and relationships!” the course description reads. “That’s why WinkWink created ‘Uncringe Academy’: honest, supportive, and inclusive sex education classes to help young people of all genders and sexual identities understand this important part of their life.”
Topics discussed under an “affirming framework” will include
“the ethics and realities of sexualized media and pornography” and
“What IS sex? Kinds of solo and partnered sexual activities.”
Students who enroll under the sliding-scale fee schedule from $5 to $50 will also be taught about “the science of puberty,” “healthy relationships and relationship models,” and “gender and sexual identities.”
Mason did not respond to The Federalist’s inquiries into how the age range was selected and whether it was appropriate to present explicit material to minors.
WinkWink is advertised as a “woman-owned, all-inclusive sex shop” where “we celebrate sexual expression and exploration, banish shame, and help our customers to better love themselves and others.”
“Pleasure is our revolution,” the website reads. “We believe that normalizing, accepting, and affirming all bodies, identities, and gender experiences is an inherently political act.”
Tristan Justice is the western correspondent for The Federalist. He has also written for The Washington Examiner and The Daily Signal. His work has also been featured in Real Clear Politics and Fox News. Tristan graduated from George Washington University where he majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow him on Twitter at @JusticeTristan or contact him at Tristan@thefederalist.com.
State Farm has withdrawn its support for a program that distributes LGBT-themed books to schools and libraries after a whistleblower leaked an email showing the company encouraged staff to donate books about gender identity to children as young as 5. The insurance company’s Chief Diversity Officer and Vice President of Public Affairs, Victor Terry, announced the end of the collaboration with the organization behind the program, GenderCool Project, in a Monday email to staff obtained by the Twitter account Libs of TikTok. The GenderCool Project describes itself as a “youth-led movement” designed to highlight “transgender and non-binary youth who are thriving.”
“State Farm’s support of a philanthropic program, GenderCool Project, has been the subject of news and customer inquiries. This program that included books about gender identity was intended to promote inclusivity,” the email reads. “We will no longer support that program.”
Terry also wrote that State Farm does not support mandating school curriculum on gender identity, stating that “[c]onversations about gender and identity should happen at home with parents.” The chief diversity officer said that the company supports organizations that provide “resources for parents to have these conversations.”
State Farm confirmed in a Wednesday statement to The Christian Post that it’s no longer affiliated with the organization, insisting again that the program was created to promote “inclusivity.”
“We will continue to explore how we can support our associates, as well as organizations that align with our commitment to diversity and inclusion, including the LGBTQ+ community,” the company told CP. “We recognize and value the diversity of all people and support a culture of respect and inclusion in the communities in which we live and work, as well as our workplace.”
State Farm’s announcement about the discontinuation of its partnership with The GenderCool Project followed the release of a Jan. 18 email leaked to the nonprofit organization Consumers’ Research by concerned employees at the insurance company. Consumers’ Research, an organization that educates people about policy issues and corporate activities, has launched the “Like a Creepy Neighbor” public awareness campaign in response to State Farm’s partnership with the GenderCool Project.
The title of the campaign is a play on the company’s catchphrase, “Like a good neighbor, State Farm is there.” The leaked email was sent by Jose Soto, a corporate responsibility analyst for State Farm in Florida. It reveals that State Farm was “partnering with The GenderCool Project to help diversify classroom, community center and library bookshelves with a collection of books to help bring clarity and understanding to the national conversation about being transgender, inclusive and non-binary.”
The collection of books created by The GenderCool Project that State Farm sought to distribute includes works titled, A Kids Book About Being Transgender, A Kids Book About Being Inclusive and A Kids Book About Being Non-Binary.The books are designed to help children 5 years old and older have “challenging, important, and empowering conversations about the toughest and most pressing topics we face today.”
“The project’s goal is to increase representation of LGBTQ+ books and support our communities in having challenging, important and empowering conversations with children age 5+,” Soto’s email reads. “This is a fantastic way to give back and an easy project that will help support the LGBTQ+ community and to make the world around us better.”
The company reportedly intended to recruit six insurance agents to “[receive] these books in March, then [donate] them to their community by the end of April.” While the email only referenced recruiting agents in Florida, it indicated that the program is not just a regional initiative.
“Nationwide, approximately 550 State Farm agents and employees will have the opportunity to donate this three book bundle to their local teacher, community center, or library of their choice,” Soto wrote.
Hild told The Washington Examiner and other news organizations in a Zoom call that the program likely would not be allowed in Florida schools come July 1, when the Parental Rights in Education Bill takes effect.
Critics of the bill, signed by Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis in March, have derided it as a “Don’t Say Gay” bill that could stigmatize LGBT students. The legislation prohibits public schools and third parties from discussing sexual orientation and gender identity with students in kindergarten through third grade.
“We would hope State Farm would … cooperate with the governor’s office or law enforcement in [Florida] and retrieve any of these books that may have been donated to public schools that by law now do not belong there,” Hild said, adding that such discussions with children are inappropriate according to “any reasonable understanding.”
The issue of gender identity in schools has appeared in several learning institutions throughout the country in recent months. Earlier this month, Fairfax County Public School Board, which oversees the largest school district in Virginia, reviewed a student handbook that includes suspension as a potential punishment for students who “maliciously” misgender their trans-identifying peers.
The proposed revisions to the district’s Students’ Rights and Responsibilities (SR&R) handbook indicates that students can face a five-day suspension for “malicious deadnaming,” which is defined as “[w]hen someone, intentionally or not, refers to a person who is transgender or gender-expansive by a name other than their own chosen name.”
In April, two sets of parents of the Ludlow Public School District in Massachusetts filed a lawsuit against school officials at Baird Middle School in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts Springfield Division. The complaint maintains that the school officials reportedly encouraged their children to secretly adopt new gender identities without informing their parents. The lawsuit accused the school of having a “protocol and practice of concealing from parents information related to their children’s gender identity.”
A new report says that the Texas school shooter told fourth graders what was coming after he shot his way into their classroom Tuesday at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde. The report from KENS-TV was based on the account of a fourth-grade pupil it did not name. The gunman killed 19 children and two adults before he was killed in a shootout with law enforcement. The fourth grader explained that the ordeal began with a gunshot.
“He shot the next person’s door, and then, we have a door in the middle, and he opened it. And then he came in. He crouched a little bit, and he said, ‘It’s time to die,’” the boy said.
The boy was doing all he could to survive.
“When I heard the shooting through the door, I told my friend to hide under something, so he won’t find us. I was hiding hard. And I was telling my friend to not talk because he is going to hear us.”
Four boys hid with the child who spoke to KENS, partially shielded by a tablecloth. The boy recounted a harrowing moment near the end of the ordeal.
“When the cops came, the cop said, ‘Yell if you need help!’ And then one of the persons in my class said ‘help.’ The guy overheard, and he came in and shot her,” the boy said.
“The cop barged into that classroom, and the guy shot the cops. And the cops just started shooting,” he said.
Then came silence.
“I just opened the curtain. And I just put my hand out,” he said. “I got out with my friend. I knew it was the police when I saw the armor and the shield.”
The boy recalled the actions of his slain teachers, Irma Garcia and Eva Mireles.
Jack Davis is a freelance writer who joined The Western Journal in July 2015 and chronicled the campaign that saw President Donald Trump elected. Since then, he has written extensively for The Western Journal on the Trump administration as well as foreign policy and military issues.
As neighbors and classmates continue to share more information about Salvador Ramos in the aftermath of the horrific school shooting in Uvalde, Texas, on Tuesday, an all-too-familiar portrait of the killer has begun to emerge.
Ramos, 18, allegedly shot and critically wounded his grandmother in a rage moments before going on a shooting rampage at nearby Robb Elementary School. At the school, he senselessly murdered at least 19 students and two adults and injured several others before he was fatally shot by police. Ramos was reportedly wearing a tactical vest during the shooting spree and was armed with a rifle.
The mass killing immediately gripped the nation and caused widespread mourning. Many of the victims were just 10 years old.
Those who knew Ramos described him as a loner who endured a rough home life with a drug-abusing mother. He was reportedly the frequent target of bullying as a teenager due to his lisp and stutter and social awkwardness. But, they said, Ramos responded to his circumstances by violently lashing out at “peers and strangers” and engaging in lawless behavior, often leading to run-ins with local law enforcement.
Speaking with the Washington Post, a childhood friend of Ramos who used to play video games and sports with him said he would often exhibit strange behavior, even cutting up his own face for “fun” on one occasion. That same friend said Ramos would often drive around town with another friend at night, shooting random people with a BB gun and egging people’s cars.
Another former friend told the Post that Ramos was bullied incessantly in middle school and junior high before he eventually stopped going to school. One time, he posted a picture on social media wearing black eyeliner. The post garnered a slew of negative comments. Ramos was not on pace to graduate with his peers this year.
One high school classmate said that in recent months, Ramos posted videos on Instagram “where the cops were there and he’d call his mom a b***h and say she wanted to kick him out.” The classmate added that in the videos, “He’d be screaming and talking to his mom really aggressively.”
He worked at a local Wendy’s restaurant, where co-workers remembered him as a mostly quiet kid with “an aggressive streak,” according to the Daily Beast.
“He would be very rude towards the girls sometimes, and one of the cooks, threatening them by asking, ‘Do you know who I am?’ And he would also send inappropriate texts to the ladies,” said one former co-worker, adding, “At the park, there’d be videos of him trying to fight people with boxing gloves. He’d take them around with him.”
Here’s what we know about the 18-year-old shooter who officials say killed 19 students, 2 adults…www.youtube.com
In the weeks before the massacre, and right after he turned 18, Ramos appears to have purchased two semi-automatic rifles. He reportedly posted photos of the guns online along with cryptic messages. An unidentified former classmate said that days before the attack, Ramos texted him a photo of a firearm and a bag of ammo, CNN reported.
“He would message me here and there, and four days ago he sent me a picture of the AR he was using … and a backpack full of 5.56 rounds, probably like seven mags,” the classmate said, “I was like, ‘Bro, why do you have this?’ and he was like, ‘Don’t worry about it.'”
A since-deleted TikTok account that authorities believe belonged to Ramos featured only a short clip of a mobile game and the line, “Kids be scared IRL.”
Then, on Tuesday, the day of the attack, he posted another photo of the rifles on Instagram and tagged a random girl who lives in California, the New York Post reported. He then messaged the girl, urging her to repost the image. She responded confusedly.
Early Tuesday morning, Ramos messaged her again, saying, “I’m about to.” The girl asked “about to what” to which he answered, “I’ll tell you before 11.”
“I got a lil secret I wanna tell u,” he wrote in another message, accompanied by a smiley-face emoji covering its mouth. He never shared the secret, but sent one last message at 9:16 a.m., saying, “Ima air out.”
Shortly after, alerts of an active shooter in Uvalde hit the news.
Both the Instagram and the TikTok accounts in question were taken offline on Tuesday.
National news reporter John Mone, of Newsy, paraphrased an alleged eyewitness account of the moments prior to the attack. He said the eyewitness, Eduardo Trinidad, claimed that Ramos “got into an argument with the grandmother and she was screaming, ‘He shot me! He shot me!’ and then he got in the car, zoomed down the street, there was some kind of crash.”
“The suspect got out, he had two weapons, and then started engaging gunfire. From that point on, apparently, according to Mr. Trinidad, the suspect walks into the school and unfortunately the rest is history,”Mone said.
Editor’s Note: This article previously stated that Ramos was wearing body armor and carrying multiple firearms when he entered the school. That reporting has since been disputed.
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and President Donald Trump.
This spring I got an email from 4-H, a club I participated in as a child, effectively communicating that my Christian family need not apply to summer camps and other activities sponsored by the quasi-public organization. (County governments often sponsor 4-H activities.) This email was signed by a 4-H staffer who put pronouns in his signature and told me, “Youth are assigned cabins based on gender indicated on the 4-H camp application and registration,”suggesting children were roomed by gender identity rather than sex.
Naturally, I was concerned that my tween daughter and son might be roomed overnight with an emotionally disturbed camper or counselor if I enrolled them in this camp. Based on numerous reported stories, I know that if this did happen, the camp likely would not even tell me, so I’d only hear about it after the fact from my kids. When I emailed again to confirm I was understanding this correctly, the staffer refused to answer definitively whether campers could be placed in private facilities such as bedrooms and bathrooms with transgender individuals. That’s an unacceptable risk to children’s well-being, as well as a lawsuit waiting to happen.
Given how socially contagious LGBT identification is, it’s not just about transgender issue but also exposing children to sexual information and pressures far earlier than they are ready. Hand in hand with grouping children by gender identity is forcing conversations about what that means, which pushes children earlier and earlier to declare and investigate sexual behaviors. This is destabilizing to their identity, not “affirming” it.
Given 4-H national’s commitment to the toxic “diversity, equity, inclusion” ideology, the fact that my Christian kids now cannot equally access lots of their programming due to 4-H’s choice to sexualize their activities was no surprise. But I still wanted to see in writing that my red county in my red state was indeed giving tax breaks and other government privileges to an organization that might room children overnight with troubled people of the opposite sex against their parents’ will. The answer is yes. (Thanks, Republicans!)
Everywhere We Go, Someone Wants to Talk Dirty to My Kids on the Public Dime
It’s not just places kids get naked. It’s everywhere. I cannot take my children to the public library anymore, either, because the shelves are so full of pornographic and hostile books that it’s not a safe place for them. There, too, self-righteous LGBT activism has resulted in effectively banning my children from yet another public place and weaponizing my own tax dollars against my children’s safety. The shelves and displays in our library are full of books telling my children lies such as that “men can become women” and “some boys have girl brains” and “gender is a social construct.” I’m happy to have these conversations with my children when they are ready, but I know my six-year-old, and he is not ready. My eight-year-old is not ready, and neither are my 10- and 11-year-old, frankly. It’s grotesque and evil to put books at their eye level that deliberately aim to confuse them about something so deep and important. To do this is to usurp not only my parental wisdom and authority over my own children but to usurp my children’s right to an innocent, emotionally secure childhood.
It Won’t Happen, And When It Does, You Bigots Will Deserve It
These all prove that rapidly rewriting American laws to ignore sexual differences has effectively banned Christian families from equal participation in public facilities and activities. It’s not just Christian families, it’s any family that thinks it imprudent to lodge their sometimes-undressed daughters with an emotionally traumatized male at summer camp or to obtain swimming lessons at a public pool. This all descends from the massive bait and switch inherent to the LGBT policy agenda. We were told it was only about extending government sanction to what consenting adults do behind closed doors. We were told it was about allowing people to visit loved ones in hospice and inherit without legal difficulties. It wasn’t going to affect our families, remember?
Anyone who raised concerns about how calling sexual activities that cannot create a family “marriage” would affect children, faith, and families was smeared as a know-nothing bigot. Anyone who wanted to logically think through how legally equating men to women in the social keystone of marriage would have a domino effect on many other laws and social arrangements was also smeared as a hateful bigot, all the way up to highly intelligent and reasoned Supreme Court dissents. It’s the same toxic play we’ve seen work ever since: Anyone with a contrary opinion or even unanswered questions is not engaged, but simply smeared.
Men and Women Are Different, And That Matters
The fact is that equating homosexual relationships to marriage very often requires explaining adult sexual behaviors to tiny children. Erasing the differences between the sexes in marriage also leads irrevocably to erasing the differences between the sexes everywhere else, from bathrooms to pools to summer camps. Breaking down all sexual differences also results in discrimination against religious expressions that acknowledge men and women are different, and these differences are divinely ordered.
Thus upending the natural sexual order has resulted, not in the falsely promised “equality,” but in simply flipping which social system will rule. For what we were prevented from discussing or even seeing was the fact that these two regimes — treating the sexes as different and complementary versus seeing them as neutered and interchangeable — are mutually exclusive.
You cannot have both transgender swimmers and single-sex sports competition. You cannot have both the sexual profligacy pushed by the dominant LGBT activist class and protect children from sexualized childhoods and predatory social situations. You must have one or the other.
In the absence of clarity about this reality combined with effective use of power on reality’s behalf, abrasive, antisocial activists have fully taken over every public space. Any further sorties are merely tinkering around the edges of their all-encompassing kingdom.
Children Are No Longer a Protected Class, They’re Targets for Groomers
So instead of achieving equality, what we have really achieved is the subversion of children’s developmental needs to adult desires. Instead of equality, we have replaced legal preferences for the only sexual arrangement that produces the most stable future citizens — lifelong married biological parents — with legal preferences for sexual arrangements that harm children and send religious folk to the back of the public bus.
Therefore, all who believe in protecting children from marinating in sexual imagery and ideas everywhere they go are the new underclass in our political regime, and in many cases no Republican officials will even recognize our legitimate concerns, let alone fight for our daughters. That’s certainly the case here in Indiana, where Republican Gov. Eric Holcomb won’t sign bare-minimum legislation protecting girls’ sports and nobody is even talking about making our libraries, camps, and pools safe for families (even though that’s one of the few value-added policies a state like Indiana can offer its citizens).
Many of our major public and private institutions are making the public square completely hostile to a happy childhood and faith. Their “solution” to alleged bigotry was institutionalizing actual bigotry. “Our kind” aren’t wanted in “their” territory, you see. Maybe we would be allowed to have separate pools and summer camps funded by our own money, as long as the ACLU doesn’t sue them out of existence like they do Christian hospitals and foster care agencies.
What we weren’t told was that letting homosexuals out of the closet would require stuffing all the children and Christians inside.
Although most Americans oppose allowing surgeons to perform sex-change operations on children and teenagers suffering from gender dysphoria and teaching young children about sexual orientation and gender identity in schools, many are afraid to speak about such hot-button issues due to fear of retribution.
Summit Ministries, in conjunction with McLaughlin & Associates, conducted a poll of 1,000 general election voters between April 22-26 and asked respondents for their views on LGBT issues, specifically the debate about body mutilation surgeries for minors and teaching matters related to sexual orientation and gender identity to young children. One question asked participants to share their “personal opinions about transgenderism,” specifically whether they
“believe it is a healthy human condition that should be celebrated” or
“do not believe it is a healthy human condition.”
Those who selected the latter option had the opportunity to clarify whether they “stay silent on the issue to not offend others” or are “willing to say so.”
A majority of respondents (56%) indicated that they do not believe transgenderism is a “healthy human condition.” Twenty-seven percent hold that view and are willing to share it in public, while 29% elect to remain silent about their true beliefs on the issue. Thirty-two percent of Americans characterized transgenderism as a “healthy condition.”
The differing responses to that question reflect the partisan divide among demographic subgroups, with majorities of liberals (61%), those who approve of President Joe Biden’s job performance (52%), Democrats (51%) and those who plan on voting for Democrats in the upcoming congressional elections (51%) viewing transgenderism as healthy, and pluralities or majorities of all other subgroups seeing it as “not healthy.”
An overwhelming majority of those surveyed (78%) told pollsters that minors suffering from gender confusion should “be required to wait until they are legal adults” before undergoing life-altering surgeries, such as removing breast tissue and genital mutilation, including removing one’s testicles (an orchidectomy) or severing the penis to create a cavity (a vaginoplasty).
By contrast, 9% said gender-confused children “should be encouraged to undergo permanent gender alteration.” Majorities of all subgroups agreed that children should have to wait until adulthood before they undergo elective, life-changing elective operations.
Requiring “medical professionals performing gender-altering procedures” to “disclose the common, long-term medical and psychological impact of such procedures” received an even higher level of support among all demographic groups. Eighty-one percent of respondents supported requiring the disclosure of side effects associated with body mutilation surgeries, while 9% opposed the idea.
The questions about body mutilation surgeries for minors come as some states, including Arizona and Arkansas, have banned the procedures for children due to concerns about their longterm effects.
As Florida continues to face pushback from LGBT activists for enacting a law prohibiting school officials from engaging in discussions about sexual orientation and gender identity with students in kindergarten through third grade, the poll demonstrated opposition to such discussions among the American public.
When asked to weigh in on “schools teaching about sexual identity and sexual behavior with elementary-age children,” 38% of respondents described such instruction as “inappropriate in a school setting,” while an additional 28% said it was “dangerous because it could lead to children being groomed for sexual encounters at a young age.” Slightly more than one-fourth (26%) of participants thought such material was “appropriate in a school setting.”
Liberals are the most likely demographic subgroup to view the discussion of sexual orientation and gender identity at school as “appropriate” (54%), followed by those who approve of President Joe Biden’s job performance (47%), those planning on voting Democrat in the upcoming congressional elections (46%), Democrats (44%), those who supported Biden in the 2020 presidential election (43%), those residing in urban areas (32%) and African Americans (30%).
Besides rural Americans, pluralities of all other subgroups believe that such instruction is “inappropriate.” A plurality of those living in rural areas (40%) think teaching children about sexual orientation and gender identity is “dangerous.”
Another question asked whether it was “possible to distinguish between men and women.”
An overwhelming majority of those surveyed (89%) answered in the affirmative, while 7% said “no.” A narrower majority of respondents (53%) disagreed with the idea that “a person’s biological sex and their gender are two separate things.” Thirty-six percent of the sample agreed with the proposition that an individual’s biological sex is different from their gender.
Majorities of liberals (62%) planning on voting for Democrats in the upcoming election, those who voted for Biden in the 2020 presidential election (53%), Democrats (52%), and those who approve of Biden’s performance as president (52%), view biological sex and gender identity as distinct, while majorities of all other subgroups do not.
A separate poll conducted by the American Principles Project of voters in battleground states from May 2-6 yielded similar findings. The poll surveyed 1,200 likely voters in Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, all states that have competitive U.S. Senate races this year. The survey found that 56% of respondents residing in battleground states supported laws banning minors from obtaining puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and medicalized gender transition surgeries, while 31% opposed them.
The American Principles Project poll also revealed that 60% of Americans living in battleground states supported laws banning school officials from discussing sexual orientation and gender identity with students in kindergarten through third grade, while 34% opposed such laws.
Authorities are investigating after groups of pro-abortion advocacy organizations identifying themselves as “Jane’s Revenge” claimed credit for vandalizing the headquarters of a pro-life advocacy group in Wisconsin, vowing to carry out future attacks if their pro-life counterparts do not “disband.”
Robert Evans, a reporter with the Netherlands-based news operation Bellingcat, took to Twitter Tuesday to share the contents of a message he received from Jane’s Revenge, which purportedly claimed responsibility for the vandalism at Wisconsin Family Action’s headquarters in Madison, Wisconsin, on Sunday.
The exterior of the pro-life organization’s headquarters was vandalized with graffiti, a molotov cocktail was thrown through a window and an office at the facility was set on fire.
Earlier this week the office of a Wisconsin anti abortion organization was firebombed.
I have received a statement from the group claiming responsibility. They call themselves “Jane’s Revenge” (a reference to the Jane Collective).
The incident at Wisconsin Family Action is one of several examples of violence directed at pro-life groups and churches following Politico’s publication of a draft U.S. Supreme Court opinion that suggests the court could reverse the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion nationwide.
Jane’s Revenge, which described itself as “not one group, but many,” attributed the act of vandalism to outrage over the leaked Supreme Court opinion. The Christian Post has not independently verified the validity of the statement shared by Evans. Evans said the statement was sent to him through an anonymous intermediary that he trusts. The statement is titled “first communique.”
The Madison Police Department told NBC15 that it is aware that a group claimed responsibility for the attack on the Wisconsin Family Action office and is working with federal law enforcement to determine the claim’s validity. A spokesperson for the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives told The Guardian that the agency is aware of the claims of responsibility but couldn’t offer further comment.
The message began with an insistence that “[t]his is not a declaration of war” as “war has been upon us for decades,” which “they did not want and did not provoke.” The group stated that “we been attacked for asking for basic medical care.”
“[T]oo long have we been shot, bombed, and forced into childbirth without consent,” the message stated.
The reported Jane’s Revenge communication said the vandalism at Wisconsin Family Action “was only a warning.”
“We demand the disbanding of anti-choice establishments, fake clinics, and violent anti-choice groups within the next thirty days,” the group added. “This is not a mere ‘difference of opinion’ as some have framed it. We are literally fighting for our lives. We will not sit still while we are killed and forced into servitude.”
The message proclaimed: “We have run thin on patience and mercy for those who seek to strip us of what little autonomy we have left” before accusing the pro-life movement of instigating violence in the forms of “bomb[ing] clinics and assassinat[ing] doctors with impunity.”
The most notable example of violence against abortion doctors is the assassination of Kansas abortion doctor George Tiller in 2009. Still, for the most part, violence against abortion clinics and doctors has been rare.
“Medical imperialism will not face a passive enemy,” the statement reads. “Wisconsin is the first flashpoint, but we are all over the US, and we will issue no further warnings. And we will not stop, we will not back down, nor will we hesitate to strike until the inalienable right to manage our own health is returned to us.”
Evans said the group told him that “we are in your city” and “we are in every city,” promising that “next time the infrastructure of the enslavers will not survive.”
Wisconsin Family Action had initially attributed the vandalism at its headquarters in Madison to “Anarchy 1312,” noting that a logo featuring the phrase was painted on one of its exterior walls.
Last year, before the Supreme Court announced its intention to hear the challenge surrounding Mississippi’s 15-week abortion ban, the U.S. Director of National Intelligence included “ideological agendas in support of pro-life or pro-choice beliefs” on a list of domestic violent extremists that “pose an elevated threat to the homeland in 2021.”
The document referred to them as “abortion-related domestic violent extremists.” Examples of pro-abortion violence include the 2009 murder of pro-life activist Jim Pouillon and the 2016 arson at a pro-life pregnancy center in New Mexico.
More than a year after the DNI included “abortion-related domestic violent extremists” on a list of national security threats, abortion has emerged as a flashpoint in American politics following the publication of the draft opinion in the New Mexico case, which is not final.
The attack on the Wisconsin Family Action office is not the only incident of vandalism targeting pro-lifers since the Dobbs draft was leaked last week. Other examples of such violence include the targeting of Catholic churches in Colorado and Texas with graffiti containing pro-abortion messages, the theft of the tabernacle at another and an arson attack at Oregon Right to Life’s headquarters.
A series of dueling protests are scheduled to take place this weekend, with Planned Parenthood Action Fund, Planned Parenthood Federation of America and the Women’s March collaborating to hold“Bans off our Bodies” events in Washington, D.C. and several other cities Saturday. At the same time, Students for Life of America plans to hold counterprotests in Washington and eight other cities.
Republican U.S. Rep. Kat Cammack said that “pallets” of baby formula are being delivered to an illegal immigrant detention center in Texas while Americans’ chances of finding formula on supermarket shelves grow more slim by the day. Cammack, a Florida lawmaker who was elected in 2020, indicated in a pair of Facebookvideos Wednesday that a Border Patrol agent at the Ursula facility in McAllen sent her photos showing pallets of baby formula and other food for infants that had been delivered to the detention center.
“They are sending pallets — pallets — of baby formula to the border,” Cammack said. “Meanwhile, in our own district at home, we cannot find baby formula.”
“The first photo is from this morning at the Ursula Processing Center at the U.S. border. Shelves and pallets packed with baby formula,” she wrote in a related Twitter post. “The second is from a shelf right here at home. Formula is scarce. This is what America last looks like.”
Cammack added in her first video that “we literally are struggling to find baby formula around the country; moms are struggling, going from store to store to store and then the stores are actually capping the amount of baby formula they will sell them.”
The congresswoman called it “unconscionable” and said the administration of President Joe Biden is responsible for the “open border policy” that is “crushing the middle class.”
“They hate everything about [former President] Donald Trump so much … they’re willing to hurt their own citizens,” Cammack added, saying it’s “absolutely outrageous.”
Cammack posted a second video later Wednesday and was no less outraged, saying the Border Patrol agent told her, “Kat, you would not believe the shipment I just brought in.”
She went on to say that “he has been a Border Patrol agent for 30 years, and he has never seen anything quite like this. He is a grandfather, and he is saying that his own children can’t get … baby formula.”
While she wasn’t happy that the baby formula was going to “illegals that are crossing into the United States,” Cammack said “it is not the children’s fault at all.”
Rather what is “infuriating” is “that this is another example of the America last agenda that the Biden administration continues to perpetuate,” she added.
“I don’t know about you, but if I am a mother in anywhere, any-town America, and I go to my local Walmart or Target or Publix or Safeway or Kroger or wherever it may be that you shop, and you are seeing their shelves, and you are seeing signs that you are not able to get baby formula, and then you see the American government sending by the pallet thousands and thousands of containers of baby formula to the border, that would make my blood boil,” Cammack also said.
Cammack told her viewers that Republicans in Congress are doing what they can about the issue, but “we have zero leverage.”
The federal Office of the Administration for Children & Families — which oversees the Office of Refugee Resettlement — on Thursday didn’t immediately respond to TheBlaze’s request for comment on Cammack’s claims.
Conservative candidates won a bunch of closely watched school board elections in Texas on Saturday. One of the higher-profile losses was suffered by Jim Rice, a member of the Fort Bend Independent School District (ISD) since 2010. He is also the immediate past president of the Texas Association of School Boards (TASB) where he has served on the board since 2012. TASB is a state affiliate of the National School Boards Association (NSBA)—the same group that crafted the infamous letter to the Biden administration that accused parents who showed up to school board meetings of domestic terrorism. At least 22 states have severed ties with the NSBA, but not Texas yet.
Rice was beaten by Rick Garcia, a small-business owner who was a seventh-grade Texas history teacher in the district. Garcia will be joined on the board by David Hamilton, who ran for an open seat. Both winners were backed by the Republican Party. Fort Bend ISD serves around 80,000 students with more than 10,000 staff, just southwest of Houston.
There are 1,204 public school districts in Texas, with about 5.4 million students and 424,699 instructional staff—the most school districts and staff in the nation and second only to California in student enrollment. The May 7 election covered at least 47 major school districts with a combined enrollment of 1.4 million students (about 26 percent of Texas public school students), plus hundreds of other smaller districts in rural Texas.
“This past Saturday, there were a number of outstanding victories for parents across Texas. This election was a referendum on the radical policies and indoctrination that have taken place in classrooms across the state. Parents are taking back control and getting schools back to basics,” said Christopher Zook, Jr., who runs FFOT (Freedom Foundation of Texas) PAC. The PAC focuses on electing freedom-minded candidates to school boards of all sizes across Texas.
More Wins for the Right
In Tarrant County, school board candidates backed by three conservative PACs were doing very well, with one group spending $500,000 to support candidates in four school districts in Fort Worth suburbs. With campaigns focused on critical race theory and pornographic books in libraries, 10 of 11 conservative candidates in the four districts won election, with the eleventh making the runoff scheduled for June 18. Only two of the 11 were incumbents.
In Hays County, a suburb of Austin that tipped to Joe Biden in 2020, two conservatives, Olivia Barnard and Tricia Quintero, won election to the Dripping Springs ISD, ousting a liberal incumbent and winning an open seat. Quintero said, “This election cycle, conservative school board candidates swept into office statewide, proving that voters want parental rights and family values defended. The results leave no doubt that Texans do not want CRT in the classroom, cannot afford soaring tax bills, and will not stand for the politicization of the classroom.” She added, “It’s time for us, as a state, to move toward a better, brighter future.”
The election results caught the attention of Republican Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, who tweeted: “Conservatives won school board elections across Texas. Parents are more involved and active in school elections and school policies than ever before. No one cares more about children than their parents. The power of parents will continue to expand in Texas.”
Campaigning for reelection, Abbott called for a “Parents Bill of Rights” in January along with expanding families’ access to course material, preventing the collection of personal information unless required, and cracking down on educators who provide minors with access to explicit material. These issues largely powered Republican Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s upset victory last November.
Abbott will face former Democratic U.S. Rep. Beto O’Rourke in November. O’Rourke lost a close election to Sen. Ted Cruz in 2018 and subsequently performed poorly in the Democratic presidential nomination contest in 2020. At a recent campaign stop, O’Rourke called for more spending on education, including $8,000 a year more for teachers. He also called for canceling the state’s STAAR standardized tests.
O’Rourke’s allies in the teachers’ unions more bluntly criticized Abbott. Andrea Chevalier, a lobbyist for the Association of Texas Professional Educators—effectively, a teachers union—said that Abbott’s remarks pit “educators against parents and creating this narrative that’s really harmful for public schools (making) it seem that parents need to take these bold actions.”
This heightened effort by conservatives and concerned parents will have to be sustained for future success. As a right-to-work state with no collective bargaining for government employees, Texas technically doesn’t have teachers’ unions. But many teachers have a fear of being sued for classroom actions and the teachers’ associations offer legal protection against that for some $500 a year in fees—a portion of which goes into politics.
Further, national unions will have a significant interest in beating back a conservative surge in the second-most-populous state. School boards serve as important benches to develop talent for higher political office—one that’s been largely unpopulated by conservatives in recent decades.
“These election results were not happenstance,” Zook said. “They were the culmination of years of sunlight that has been shone on the radical ideologies being taught in classrooms across Texas. Parents spoke up with one loud voice and said they do not want radical indoctrination in our schools.”
Chuck DeVore is vice president of national initiatives at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, a former California legislator, special assistant for foreign affairs in the Reagan-era Pentagon, and a lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army (retired) Reserve. He’s the author of two books, “The Texas Model: Prosperity in the Lone Star State and Lessons for America,” and “China Attacks,” a novel.
Just as slavery and its lingering effects scarred America for centuries, the national sin of Roe v. Wade has weighed our nation down with the shame and devastation of legalized mass murder. Just as slavery deeply challenged the patriotism of those scarred by that evil regime in America, so has the unconstitutional and morally abhorrent abortion regime in America.
Also, just as slavery plainly contradicted the philosophy and law of the American founders — who wrote “all men are created equal, and… endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, [and] among these are Life” — so does Roe v. Wade, which even leftist “scholars” agree is a garbage decision. Just as slavery created a constitutional crisis that existentially threatened America, so did Roe v. Wade.
The attention on the protesters using violence and intimidation to retain a clearly unconstitutional and clearly immoral court diktat has obscured that if the Supreme Court does not overturn Roe, its legitimacy is finished. At that point, after decades of fruitlessly investing in keeping as many courts as possible closer to constitutionalism, the right will fully agree with the left that the Supreme Court is an illegitimate, utterly politicized institution, as I explained on EWTN last week. That will finish off what was left of the American republic and mark its complete conversion into something entirely different.
For it is highly politicized decisions like Roe, its companion Planned Parenthood v. Casey, and others such as those sanctioning the New Deal starting with West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish, that have undermined the court’s legitimacy. The court maintains legitimacy precisely in doing its job of applying the law faithfully, instead of taking politics into consideration. Just as overturning Plessy v. Ferguson restored the Supreme Court’s legitimacy, so would the overturn of Roe v. Wade.
Besides keeping the Founders’ America alive for “one more season of restraint,” fixing warped Roe v. Wade jurisprudence would also enliven the country, not just literally but also figuratively. It would breathe new life into an America that all of us should be able to admit has been on life support for some time.
Those of us who have been willing to admit what abortion is — the taking of a human life — have for decades been weighed down with the knowledge our own country has been allowing this on a mass scale, and even demanding we participate in and celebrate it. Such a regime not only delegitimizes itself but drains its own lifeblood.
The potential overturn of Roe v. Wade is a massive opportunity to overturn a horrifying evil, and therefore to do great good. The opportunity to do great good is a strong and previously unavailable motivator. It would be a huge energizer for those who have resisted the usurping regime’s massive efforts to get us to stop seeing and talking about what we have seen that regime do to our nation. It would be the fall of a great spiritual Berlin Wall inside our nation.
It would allow us to finally stop talking about “norms” and start talking about whether those norms nourish or destroy life. We could stop talking about marginal tax rates and about whose duty it is, exactly, to provide for those who cannot provide for themselves. In short, we can start making the necessary bold moves to re-seed and water a culture of life. Without Roe, we can start from the beginning and move holistically, from the bottom up instead of merely tinkering around the corners of an entirely corrupt edifice.
That’s the most needed action in this moment, as the political and immoral left has become very clear about its frightening degradation into a death cult. Overturning Roe would show that major, enduring cultural victories are still possible, and that all of the nation’s institutions don’t belong to the left. Perhaps that’s why this poll showed a move to the right after people heard about the leaked majority opinion to overturn Roe.
An outpouring of creative social entrepreneurship and policy could be in the offing as states finally have the opportunity to make good on their voters’ belief that the unborn are people deserving of the best care a civilization can offer. By returning this existential policy to the people again, it could allow them to get involved in more immediate, tangible, and fruitful ways than demonstrating in the streets or on Twitter. People who want to save lives could be more able to adopt a baby now that abortion isn’t killing nearly all of the potential adoptees or help sponsor local children living with their own needy families like many churches do for children in faraway nations. It would be even less tenable to ban Christians from helping with foster care and adoption when the need for connecting children with parents increases through refusing to kill inconvenient children.
We’re so used to losing, who knows what the biggest win in generations could do to energize the American majority that remains committed to families and the rule of the real Constitution, not the murderous “living” one. But I do know that nothing is so energizing and refreshing as a baby. There’s nothing more unifying, more animating, and more lively. A baby is a life, and a baby makes a life. This is true both for us as individuals and for us as a collective.
Children are a reason to get up in the morning, to make a morning at all. Discharging our responsibilities to children is the way to make it “Morning in America” again, both in our homes and in our civic life. Caring for them is the best way forward. It is the only way. Without children, a civilization dies, both spiritually and literally. We are on the cusp of continuing to lose our babies, but there’s a chance we can get them back. And we need to, for our nation’s life is inextricable from theirs.
As every good parent learns, having a child is the way to become human again. Being human means becoming the kind of person who will sacrifice himself to benefit another. A society without enough of such persons is soon not a society at all. The Supreme Court’s decision, therefore, can either mean life or death not only for the unborn, but also for their nation. We must all hope, pray, and prepare.
The Walt Disney Company will soon be airing an ad on all of its channels featuring the mother of a trans-identified child lambasting supporters of bills banning genital mutilation surgeries for children and the teaching of LGBT ideology in schools. The mother accuses these Americans of trying to “tear our families apart.”
The LGBT advocacy organization GLAAD released the public service announcement called “Protect Our Families” last week. The 60-second ad profiles the Briggle family, which includes Amber Briggle along with her husband and her two children. The ad focuses on her trans-identified daughter, who now identifies as a boy and goes by the name Max.
The LGBT advocacy group says the video shows that “families with transgender kids are just like any other family: they love their kids unconditionally and simply want the best for them.”
In the video, Briggle discusses Max’s interests as she narrates a background video of her daughter in an effort to persuade those watching the ad that society should support parents who want their children to be given puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones, saying a transgender child “is no different than yours.”
“There are some politicians who are trying to tear my family apart, simply because my [daughter] is transgender,” she asserts. “Trans kids don’t have a political agenda. They are just kids. They just want to be left alone.”
CNBC reports that the ad, which does not explicitly mention any legislation, in particular, will air on channels owned by The Walt Disney Company as well as channels owned by Comcast, WarnerMedia and Paramount. The Walt Disney Company has received intense criticism over its outspoken opposition to a Florida parental rights bill recently signed into law by the state’s Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis.
The legislation states that “classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation and gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards.” While states including Alabama, Arizona and Arkansas have passed laws banning the prescription of cross-sex hormones and puberty blockers to minors, the Florida law does not include such a provision.
After initially declining to take a position on the Florida bill, Disney, which operates the popular theme park Walt Disney World in Orlando, Florida, came out hard against the bill after critics derided it as the “Don’t Say Gay” bill. Disney’s opposition to the law that prevents teachers from exposing young children to LGBT ideology, motivated worship artist Sean Feucht to hold a protest in front of Disney’s headquarters in Burbank, California.
Last month, Christopher Rufo of the Manhattan Institute and City Journal released video footage of Disney officials discussing their efforts to incorporate “queerness” and other LGBT ideology into programming directed at children as part of what he described as “Disney’s all-hands meeting about the Florida parental rights bill.”
Briggle, a progressive activist who is running for city council in Denton, Texas, operates a blog titled “Love to the Max.” In an August 2019 blog post, Briggle listed “3 things your child can do to help make middle school better for my trans son.” Accompanying the blog post is a photograph of Max, which identifies the child as a member of the fifth grade graduating class of 2019. This seems to indicate that Briggle’s child is now in eighth grade and is either 13 or 14 years old.
In the blog, she noted that “my sweet [daughter], Max, socially transitioned in 1st grade — changing [her] name and pronouns, but otherwise living life exactly the same (only much, much happier).” In a speech at this year’s GLAAD Media Awards, Briggle said, “We live in Texas, where Gov. [Greg] Abbott issued a directive to investigate parents like my husband, Adam and I for child abuse because we provide Max with the gender-affirming care he needs.”
Briggle added that Child Protective Services recently visited their home and questioned them. She expressed relief that “a court has barred Texas from investigating parents of trans kids.”
Supporters of legislation banning what LGBT advocates refer to as “gender-affirming care,” including the American College of Pediatricians, warn that puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones can have negative side effects. Side effects of puberty blockers identified by the American College of Pediatricians include “emotional instability” as well as “osteoporosis, mood disorders, seizures, cognitive impairment and, when combined with cross-sex hormones, sterility.”
The medical organization lists “an increased risk of heart attacks, stroke, diabetes, blood clots and cancers across their lifespan” as possible complications of cross-sex hormones.
While supporters of providing puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones to youth with gender dysphoria maintain that such procedures help improve the children’s mental health, children who underwent some form of gender transition only to regret doing so later insisted that such procedures worsened their mental health.
The newsmagazine program “60 Minutes” profiled a group of “detransitioners” last year, including a male who once identified as female explaining to CBS’ Lesley Stahl that he “had never really been suicidal before until I had my breast augmentation.” He told Stahl that “about a week afterward, I wanted to actually kill myself,” adding: “I had a plan, and I was going to do it but I just kept thinking about my family to stop myself.”
Another detransitioner, who once sought to transition from female to male, developed a “really disturbing sense that, like, a part of my body was missing, almost a ghost limb feeling about being like, there’s something that should be there.”
Iowa is now the 11th state to pass a law mandating that any student who wants to participate in girls’ sports must be a biological female. Gov. Kim Reynolds signed House File 2416 into law on Thursday, which requires students to confirm their biological sex before competing in girls’ sports.
An LGBT activist group called the Movement Advancement Project is keeping a tally of the states that have passed legislation protecting girls’ sports, deriding the laws as “bans on transgender youth participation in sports.”Ten other states that passed such laws ahead of Iowa include: Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Idaho, Mississippi, Montana, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas and West Virginia.
Reynolds explained that the new law was “a victory for girls’ sports in Iowa.”
“No amount of talent, training or effort can make up for the natural physical advantages males have over females. It’s simply a reality of human biology,” the governor said in a statement issued on the day that she signed the legislation. “Forcing females to compete against males is the opposite of inclusivity and it’s absolutely unfair.”
The Family Leader, an Iowa-based conservative group that advocated for the legislation, released a statement on Thursday celebrating the signing of HF 2416, declaring that “protecting girls’ sports isn’t political; it’s biological reality.”
“Allowing genetically male athletes to compete in women’s sports puts our girls at an undeniable physical disadvantage and threatens their athletic opportunities,” the group added. “Our high school girls and college women deserve to compete on a level playing field, and today, that playing field is protected.”
Mark Stringer, the executive director of the Iowa chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, released a statement last week labeling the new legislation a “cruel law” that “violates the civil rights of transgender girls [boys who identify as girls] and women in our state.”
“Our legislators and the governor heard from vulnerable Iowa kids and their families, and about how important participation in school sports is to them in living fully as themselves in all aspects of their lives,” Stringer said. “Elected officials have ignored their pleas and have instead passed a law that actively marginalizes and isolates these kids. They are scoring political points at the expense of transgender girls who just want to play team sports along with other girls.”
Introduced in February, HF 2416 was passed by the House in a vote of 55-39 and the Senate in a vote of 31-17 before it was sent to the governor. The new law defines “sex” as “a person’s biological sex as either female or male and provides that the sex listed on the student’s official birth certificate or certificate issued upon adoption may be relied upon if the certificate was issued at or near the time of the student’s birth.”
Last week, Utah Gov. Spencer Cox announced that he planned to veto a similar bill that the state Legislature had passed, believing that it did not consider the rights of trans-identified student athletes.
So we looked! Then we saw the List scatter like glitter! We looked! And we saw it! Like a book list from Twitter!
And it told us, “Why do you read old books like Seuss?”
“I know they appeal To every daughter and sonny. But the joy found inside them Is no longer funny!”
“I know some new books you can read,” Said the List. “I know some new tricks,” Said the List with a Fist. “A lot of good tricks. I will show them to you. Your parents Won’t mind at all if I do.”
Then Americans Did not know what to say. Moms ‘n dads aren’t librarians Who take Seuss books away.
But our conscience said, “Woah! Woah! Make this list far less woke. Tell the List with a Fist We don’t want it to stoke Any fire but love Between family and friend. The List is too woke. It’s designed to offend.”
“Now! Now! Have no fear. Have no fear!” said the list. “My tricks are not bad,” Said the List with a Fist.
“Why, we can have Lots of good books, if you wish, With a game that I call Shut-up-the-conscience!”
“Put me down,” said our conscience, “As one happy to see You remove from your List Ibram X. Kendi.”
“Have no fear!” said the list. “I will offer much more. I will offer X. Kendi, And authors galore! There’s a book about a Hawaiian girl, Who sorely wished, To be androgynous!” Said the List…
“Look at this! Look at this now!” said the list. “Here’s a prince in a dress! Prince Sebastian with a twist! He’s Lady Crystallia, Dressed in drag by night! He hires a seamstress, Who sees the light!
And look! This book is Common Core aligned! But all that is fine. Oh, yes. All that is fine….”
“Look at this! Look at this! Look at this NOW! It is fun to read fun But you have to know how. I can hold up these books! I can hold up another! Here’s a Muslim sister and brother, And the sister’s teen, lesbian lover. They lie to the parents, But then make them quite sad. It’s erotic in places, And old customs are bad. It’s a confusing, grim tale, For young teens it’s designed. But that’s all fine. Oh, yes. That’s all fine.”
That is what the list said… Then it slipped into kids’ heads! The kids took it, they took it all. And the American conscience, It saw the kids fall!
And our conscience fell, too. It fell into a think! It said, “Do I like this? Some of it stinks. But some of it’s good,” Said our conscience quite split. “But I don’t like it, Not one little bit!”
“Now look what you did!” Said our conscience to the list. “You mixed good with bad, You List with a Fist. You took things we love, Like love among races, Then mostly removed Any trace of white faces. You added to friendships, Trans-sexy things, When kids need some time To grow free of such stings.”
“But I like to trans sex. Oh I like it a lot!” Said the List with a Fist As the conscience it fought. “I will not unmix my list. I do not wish to change. And so,” said the List with a Fist, “So so so… I will show you Another good book that I know!”
And then it went on, As clever as a fox, And handed the conscience An Amazon box. A cardboard package. It was clearly a book. “Now look at this trick,” Said the list. “Take a look!”
Then the list shook the box, With a wink of the eye: “I call this game Two-in-One-Fun!” Said the list. “In this box is a child, I will show you now: He’s two things and one child!” Said the list, with a bow.
“I will open the box. You will see something new. One child. And I call “him” Thing One and Thing Two. These Things will not bite you. They want to have fun.” Then out of the box, Came Things Two, but Child One! “See the child was a boy, Who then dressed like a mermaid. With lipstick and jewelry He played and he played.
In his mind the poor boy Grew out long flowing hair. Then he dolled himself up Till his nana just stared.” But our conscience said, “Woah! Those things should not be In this list. Make them go! They should not be here When the logic is wrong. One boy. Two Things?” Our conscience stayed strong.
“Have no fear, little conscience,” Said the List with a Fist. “These Things are good Things,” With a wink said the list. “They are good. Oh, so good! They have come here to free Every child from the sorrow Of having to be.”
“Now here is the freedom they like,” Said the list. “They like to make lists!” Said the List with a Fist.
“No, not another list!” Said the conscience dismayed. “They should not make a list With the gender “mermaid”! Nor Trans Man, nor Two-Spirit, Pangender, nor Fluid, Not Transmasculine, Intersex, Nor Cisgendered Druid!”
The American conscience Saw new lists unfurl. With one child called two Things: Both girl and demigirl. “Fists! Lists!” cried the List with a Fist, “Two is one; fun is fun!”
Things Two and Child One!? It’s unhappy and sad! It’ll string out one kid. It’s a dangerous fad. Encouraging boys To wear mother’s gown Will end with far worse Than a lip-sticky frown.
Things Two in Child One Will tear him to bits, Pull his heart this way And that till it splits! And America said, “I do NOT like the way the list plays! Mother Nature can see that One child has one way!”
Then our conscience said, “Look! Look!” And our conscience shook its own fist. “Mother Nature is coming! And she has no such list. Through the flowers she’s humming, And she’s something to say. Oh, she will not like it To find kids this way!”
“So, DO something! Fast!” said the conscience. “Do you hear! I saw her. Your mother! Mother Nature is near! So, as fast as you can, Think of something to do! You will have to get rid of ‘Child One is Things Two’!”
So, as fast as we can, We’ll get on to the net. And we’ll say, “On the net We can help kids, we bet. We bet, with the net, We can set things right yet!
“Or better, get kids to set down the net! Set it down with a PLOP! And avoid hurtful lists So the Two Things will stop.” Said the conscience aloud. And then with clenched fists, The Americans said, “Be gone, mixed up list!”
“Oh dear!” said the list. “You did not like our game… Oh dear. What a shame! What a shame! What a shame!”
Then the list took Two Things From its list full of books. And the list went away With a sad kind of look.
“That is good,” said the conscience. “The list’s gone away. Yes. But Mother Nature will come. She will find a big mess! And this mess is so big And so deep and so tall, But we must pick it up, Or the country will fall!”
And THEN! Who was back in the house? Why, Mother Nature, of course! “Have no fear of this mess,” Said the Nature of Things. “I always heal the list’s nasty stings.
And so… I will show you a different Good trick that I know!”
Then we saw her pick up All the kids that were down. She called to the merboy: “Dear, put down that gown, And the silk, and the necklace, And the lipstick, and heels. Use your head and a mirror, Not your murkier feels.” And she stood them up fresh, And free and true. And she said to each one, “You know God loves you!”
Then Mother Nature gave way And a voice from above Gave a choice to our conscience, The choice of Love.
And the American conscience, Now knows what’s at stake: “Love what you are, Or you’ll love what is fake.”
Should we tell kids about this? Now, what SHOULD we do? Well… What would YOU do If the list with a fist came for you?
Christian groups are urging parents to remove their children from a group of private schools after video footage revealed an effort to teach pre-k students about LGBT ideology.
Breitbart News obtained video footage from a National Association of Independent Schools (NAIS) workshop in 2020. NAIS describes itself as a “nonprofit membership association that provides services to more than 1,900 schools and associations of schools in the United States and abroad, including more than 1,600 independent private K-12 schools in the U.S.”
At the training session, which took place in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, speakers addressed how to “prepare your PK-8 Students for Their World” through “the lens of gender, identity, and sexuality education.”
NAIS lauded the workshop for enabling Belmont Day School, a private school in Belmont, Massachusetts, to share its “comprehensive, dynamic, responsive Health and Wellness curriculum with a developmentally appropriate PK-8 Gender, Identity, and Sexuality strand.”
One speaker who presented at the workshop discussed how “with the younger children starting in pre-k, we talk about their bodies, about the parts that they were born with, about penises and vaginas and whether that makes somebody a boy or a girl.” The speaker explained that students as young as pre-k are asked, “What do they feel like inside? Do they feel like a boy or a girl? What does their head say? Does (sic) their head and their heart and their body match up?”
As the woman spoke, a picture of the “Every” Body Tool appeared on the screen. The image on the left side of the screen featured a human body with icons representing the brain, heart and DNA. A key on the side of the screen had the phrase “gender identity” next to the brain icon, the phrase “sexual orientation” beside the heart icon and the word “sex” alongside the DNA icon. A star appears in the middle of the diagram to represent “gender expression,” which is implied to be a sum of an individual’s gender identity, sexual orientation and sex.
In a statement to The Christian Post, Meg Kilgannon, senior fellow for education studies at the Family Research Council, explained that because “parents with children in private schools do not enjoy basic civil rights protections that are afforded in public institutions,” “their recourse is to remove their child from the school since groups like NAIS are training private school teachers and administration to promote LGBT materials even to very young students.”
“Parents of children in private schools often have a false sense of security about the intellectual safety of their children from sexualized materials we see promoted in public schools,” she added. “Whether they are teaching in public or private schools, teachers and administrators are produced by the same university system that’s obsessed with queer theory and critical race theory. The post-Obergefell world is fraught for parents seeking to protect children from sexualized content or instill a worldview based on traditional sexual ethics.”
The 2015 Supreme Court decision Obergefell v. Hodges legalized same-sex marriage nationwide. Critics of the decision expressed concern that it would have negative implications for religious liberty and lead to schools promoting same-sex relationships as equally beneficial to children as the nuclear family.
“LGBT interest groups and advocates have significant influence in public education settings”, Kilgannon told CP. “Private institutions are the next step, to the degree some were not early adopters of sexualized identity trends in education. The HRC rating and scores for businesses can easily be applied to private schools.”
Kilgannon warned that “LGBT activists and advocates are ready to name and shame any organization that doesn’t go along with their demands for affirmation and applause, including private schools and the organizations that are part of the private educational infrastructure, like NAIS.”
The video footage of the NAIS conference reveals that the effort to expose young children to LGBT ideology continues throughout the elementary school years. Suggested reading material for first-grade students includes the book, What Makes a Baby, characterized by Amazon as a “twenty-first century children’s picture book about conception, gestation, and birth.”
Amazon’s summary of the book notes that the work “reflects the reality of our modern time by being inclusive of all kinds of kids, adults, and families, regardless of how many people were involved, their orientation, gender and other identity, or family composition.”
The summary also states that “the story doesn’t gender people or body parts, so most parents and families will find that it leaves room for them to educate their child without having to erase their own experience.”
Who Are You? The Kid’s Guide to Gender Identity is listed as recommended reading for second-graders. Second-grade students are taught about gender identity “in terms of your head and your heart and your body parts matching up” and asked, “Does that work for you?” and “What happens if it doesn’t?”
“The kids draw wonderful self-portraits … dealing with all aspects of their identity, including specifically, their gender identity,” the speaker explained. Under this curriculum, fifth-grade students are reintroduced to the “Every” Body tool and told that “hormones and chromosomes” are “something that you can only change with a whole lot of effort.”
The speaker suggested that fifth graders are told that “gender expression” is “something that you can change from day to day.”
Describing fifth grade as “our big year,” the speaker discussed the “Gender Unicorn,” where students are asked to check off their “gender identity” as either “female/woman/girl,” “male/man/boy” or “other genders.” Additionally, students have the option to check off their gender expression as “female,” “masculine” or “other,” their sex assigned at birth as “female,” “male” or “other/intersex” and indicate whether they were physically or emotionally attracted to “women,” “men” or “other gender(s).”
A Google drive account featuring “Workshop Resources”lists“Anything by Planned Parenthood, but especially their Sexuality Education Conference Series” as one of several “recommended resources” for NAIS schools looking to implement similar curriculum. Other recommended resources included the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Educators Network, an LGBT advocacy group.
Five pages of recommended reading for students and parents included books promoting transgenderism, such as Jacob’s New Dress and My Princess Boy, and books that promote same-sex relationships with titles like A Tale of Two Daddies and A Tale of Two Mommies. The list also featured a book titled Who Are You?: The Kid’s Guide to Gender Identity.
Another document outlines scenarios for teachers to respond to, including one where “a male kindergarten student wants to wear a princess costume in the Halloween parade” but “his parents have communicated with the homeroom teachers that they do not under any circumstances want their son wearing a princess costume.”
In another scenario, a student comes to the teacher saying that his parents refuse to let him participate in a gay pride parade the school is spearheading and uses “homophobic and transphobic language as well as perpetuating LGBTQ+ stereotypes.”
In each scenario, teachers are encouraged to consider guiding questions asking, “Who does this impact?” “Who do we need to respond to?” “How does the approach change for different constituents?” “What would I like to do vs. what would I probably do?” “Can you use this framework with other scenarios in your school” and “How do you move or encourage others to move from an accomplice to ally?”
Breitbart’s reporting about the NAIS workshop comes as many American families increasingly turn to private schools and other alternative methods of education due to dissatisfaction with the sexually charged curriculum their children are exposed to in public schools. The inclusion of the books Gender Queer and Lawn Boy, which critics liken to child pornography and a promotion of pedophilia, in school libraries has caused particular concern.
Illinois’ recently enacted sex education guidelines teaching children in grades as low as kindergarten about gender identity have also resulted in parental protest. Outrage over public schools’ embrace of critical race theory, “woke” ideology and sexually explicit curriculum has led to the rise of advocacy organizations such as Parents Defending Education and the 1776 Project PAC, which is working to elect school board candidates opposed to such ideology.
Breitbart credited the video footage and screenshots included in its reporting to tips from “Undercover Mother,” a group that describes itself as a “Mom Collective with children in independent schools” seeking to protect their children from “the abuse being inflicted by the schools and the cartels of the regional and National Association of Independent Schools.”
A researcher who went undercover in the metaverse as a 13-year-old girl witnessed grooming, graphic sexual material, and threats of rape. The researcher, the BBC reported, used an app with a minimum age rating of 13 and visited virtual reality rooms where other users’ avatars were simulating explicit acts. The researcher, whose online presence depicted that of a 13-year-old girl, was shown sex toys and condoms and approached by several adult men. One man told the researcher that in the metaverse, users’ avatars can “get naked and do unspeakable things.” Other users approached the researcher while in the metaverse and discussed “erotic role-play.”
The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, a British charity dedicated to the welfare of Great Britain’s children, warned that some of the apps in the metaverse are “dangerous by design” as there is very little content moderation in the metaverse.
For instance, the app used by the researcher to access the metaverse, VRChat, allows its users to access any number of immersive chatrooms. Some of these rooms are as innocuous as digital McDonald’s, while others allow users to watch and participate in pole dancing or even attend digitally immersive strip clubs.
Mr. Burrows of the NSPCC said, “It’s children being exposed to entirely inappropriate, really incredibly harmful experiences. This is a product that is dangerous by design, because of oversight and neglect. We are seeing products rolled out without any suggestion that safety has been considered.”
Jess Sherwood, the researcher who went under cover, said, “I was surprised how totally immersed in the spaces you are. I started to feel like a child again. So, when grown men were asking why I wasn’t in school and encouraging me to engage in VR sex acts, it felt all the more disturbing.”
She said, “VRChat definitely felt more like an adult’s playground than a child’s. A lot of the rooms were overtly sexualized in pink neon, similar to what you might see in the red-light district in Amsterdam or in the seedier parts of London’s Soho at night. Inside, sex toys were on display.”
Catherine Allen, founder of a UK-based augmented and digital reality consulting firm, said that while VR can be “fun and surreal,” it also tends to be “quite traumatic and disturbing.” She described an incident in a Meta-owned app where she and a 7-year-old girl were surrounded by a group of men who joked about raping them.
VRChat said that it was “working hard to make itself a safe and welcoming place for everyone” and that “predatory and toxic behavior has no place on the platform.”
As parents across the nation wake up to the threat that the American educational system poses to children, many have taken note of the sexually explicit, politically motivated literature that has made its way into public and school libraries.
In Wyoming, community members notified the police department about explicit books in the local library’s youth section. “Sex is a Funny Word,” written by Cory Silverberg and illustrated by Fiona Smyth, is one such book. It was placed on the American Library Association Reading List for 2016. Intended for those as young as 7-year-old second graders, the book has been featured in middle school libraries and discusses the “subjects of transgender identity, intersex conditions, and masturbation.” It also erroneously claims that “having a penis isn’t what makes you a boy. Having a vulva isn’t what makes you a girl. The truth is much more interesting than that!”
This type of propagandizing has become standard for the left-wing extremists embedded in our education system. But what makes it all the more astonishing is both the thoroughly unnerving — and previously unreported — history of this book’s author and the institutional support that’s propelled him to notoriety.
From Sex Shops To School Libraries
Cory Silverberg’s website links to the four books he’s written. Each one focuses on the same thing: sex. With the exception of “The Ultimate Guide to Sex and Disability,” which he coauthored with Miriam Kaufman and Fran Odette, the author’s work is aimed at children. His latest book, “You Know, Sex,” another collaboration with Smyth, is available for pre-order and discusses “pornography,” “stigma,” and “gender.” He calls the book “essential for kids.” His website bio states, “Cory’s life is full of kids. All of them know where babies come from. Some know more.”
Who is this man so intent on informing your children not only about sex, but about pornography, transsexuality, and masturbation? On his website, which advertises children’s books, the author cites himself as a “founding member of Come As You Are Co-operative,” an anti-capitalist sex shop in Toronto, which he also links to.
As the Toronto Star noted years ago, this isn’t just any sex shop. This is a “beginner’s sex store.” The outlet noted that the store hoped “to hold an off-site sex-education workshop for parents of children aged 7 to 12, one that will focus on more than reproduction.” The Star went on to quote Silverberg as saying, “Our overall focus is pleasure-based rather than fear-based.”
The shop’s website includes a section that catalogs the owners’ media appearances. One edition of Fab magazine, published on February 7, 2007, includes an article titled “Come As You Are Celebrates 10 Years.” It spares no details, highlighting a “Japanese rope bondage” workshop, while also graphically describing a real life, in-person “workshop” that featured sexual demonstrations from two naked men.
The disturbing focus on children that is so clear on Silverberg’s personal website is just as apparent on the sex shop’s website. Right next to ads for the exact type of products you’d expect a sex shop to sell, is a “Kids, Parents, and Teens Books” section. The section boasts “sex positive guides for younger folk.”
The kid’s section carries books like “Gender Creative Child,” a guide to masturbation, and “Woke Parenting,” which seeks to help readers “raise your kids to be feminist, anti-racist,” and “gender-inclusive.” Silverberg’s own books are also featured on the site.
Involvement In Curriculum Development
The author’s involvement in Ante Up reveals a conscious desire to embed his distorted worldview into schools. The organization advertises “socio-emotional learning” curriculum that “focuses on supporting educators of color and working-class educators in unlearning the white supremacist ableist heteropatriarchal ways of writing and educating others.”
The sex shop co-founder is joined by such esteemeed co-collaborators as Clarissa Francis, who cut squarely into the Babyon Bee’s marketshare when her bio explained that she “developed the Let Freedom C.U.M. Sexuality Workshop Series to equip Black sexuality professionals, and the aspiring sexually liberated, to recognize and utilize multi-disciplinary approaches to discussing Pleasure Activism as a tool for Black Sexual Liberation.”
The organization seems to have courted favor with various political bodies in New York. Ante Up’s founder Bianca Laureano “wrote the sexual and reproductive justice discussion guide for the NYC Department of Health and Mental Hygiene,” according to her bio. Silverberg spoke on “Sex Is a Funny Word” for the NYC Department of Education’s Office of Curriculum, Instruction, and Professional Learning.
Institutional Support of Extremism
It isn’t a fluke that a leftwing sex shop founder has been propped up as an authority on sexuality, with direct access to children. Media and education institutions, alongside several leftwing activists, have helped mainstream such fringe beliefs. The author is praised because of, not in spite of, the extremism of his sexual worldview.
That “Sex is a Funny Word” was lauded by Kristin Russo on behalf of BuzzFeed as “revolutionary” tells you everything you need to know, but the outlet was one of many institutions to lend its support.
The book won the American Library Association’s Stonewall Award and was celebrated by the School Library Journal, which called the book “exceptional” specifically because of “its introduction of the subjects of transgender identity, intersex conditions, and masturbation.” The organization publishes roughly 6,000 book reviews every year and bills itself as “the premiere publication for librarians and information specialists who work with children and teens.”
Lambda Literary, which “nurtures and advocates for LGBTQ writers,”heaped praise on the book, noting that it took “his radical approach to sex education” featured in his first book even further. It goes on to discuss the role that the book can have in cementing cultural shifts. During an interview with the organization, the author pointed out that some of his critics believe that he is “warping people’s ideas of gender.” He flatly responded, “Maybe I am.”
Various activists, each of whom is committed to overthrowing healthy conceptions of sex, lauded the book alongside these institutions in reviews posted on Amazon.
Andee Hochman is an accomplished leftwing activist who wrote a book all about upending traditional notions of family. It was named “one of the 100 most important feminist books of the 20th century by Sojourner magazine.” Hochman celebrated“Sex Is a Funny Word’s”“radical and urgent message – sexuality with a side of social justice,” also expressing glee that one of the children in the book was portrayed as non-binary. Her lone critique? The text was too small.
Transgender activist and author of “My New Gender Workbook” Kate Bornstein was similarly impressed, writing a review that proposed the book as a viable alternative to college, graduate school, and even “years of therapy.” This is high praise, especially from an activist who wrote the “Step by-Step Guide to Achieving World Peace Through Gender Anarchy and Sex Positivity.”
Aidan Key, who leads trainings in schools, remarked that the book enables readers to “step out of today’s binary gender paradigm,” while Slate’s Rachelle Hampton lauded the book because it “humorously tackles topics from gender to masturbation” and was “leaps and bounds ahead” of other books “in terms of how progressive it is.”
But Huffington Post outdid both Slate and BuzzFeed years ago when they offered the author a platform and even hosted a symposium on reshaping America’s sexual norms with him and more established leftwing activists. The author’s extreme views were given the patina of normalcy through the presence of more mainstream activists like notable author Esther Perel and the widely published Ian Kerner, who talk less of childhood masturbation and more of feminism and relationships. They were also joined by academic Leonore Tiefer, who was involved in the leadership of an organization intent on keeping perversity like “Sex is a Funny Word” in school libraries. Tiefer won an award named after Alfred Kinsey, a hero of the pro-pedophile group NAMBLA.
What’s so telling isn’t the book itself, but that the beliefs behind it, undoubtedly considered reprehensible by massive swaths of the world, have been intentionally mainstreamed by both an activist base and an institutionally backed political movement that’s hostile to traditional notions of decency. No wonder parents are getting active.
Cory Silverberg did not respond to a request for comment.
Spencer Lindquist is an intern at The Federalist and a senior at Pepperdine University where he studies Political Science and Rhetoric and Leadership and serves as Pepperdine’s College Republicans President. You can follow him on Twitter @SpencerLndqst and reach him at LSpencerLindquist@gmail.com.
Goldie Hawn warned that the national trauma inflicted on children by the COVID-19 pandemic is approaching and “could very well surpass” the dread brought on by the 9/11 terror attacks and the Cold War. In an op-ed for USA Today, Hawn described how she saw her “entire world get ripped apart” by the threat of all-out nuclear war between the United States and the Soviet Union in 1956 when she was in the fifth grade. After being shown a graphic and grim educational film about the dangers of nuclear war, the then-11-year-old Goldie Hawn ran home during lunch to call her mother at work and told her, “Mommy, come home quick! We’re all going to die!” Hawn said the threat of nuclear holocaust inflicted trauma on her for years.
“Even in high school, I’d hear a siren in the morning and be too terrified to go to school that day,” Hawn wrote. “This was a specific trauma that affected me, but it was a collective trauma, too – an entire generation of American children was, in some form or another, taught to think of nuclear holocaust as a real threat.”
Hawn compared the collective trauma endured by her generation to the upheaval other generations experienced – such as children who watched the Challenger space shuttle disaster happen live on Jan. 28, 1986, the kids who witnessed the Twin Towers collapse from the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and the youngsters who have had their lives turned upside down by the COVID-19 pandemic.
“We all know how magical a child’s imagination can be – the wonderful worlds they create in their minds. But there’s a flip side to the joyful creativity that can turn a big cardboard box into a spaceship,” the “Overboard” actress articulated. “A child’s mind exposed to real-world fear, without the ability to properly process it, can go down dark passages leading to nothing less than existential dread.”
Hawn explained that the COVID-19 pandemic has robbed adults and children of critical “support structures that all humans depend on for perspective, encouragement, and love.”
“The COVID era has changed our children’s lives in far more real, tangible ways — social distancing, school closures, daily mask use,” she added. “Kids are afraid of people, spaces, even the air around them – a level of constant fear not seen in decades.”
Hawn cited a report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that found emergency room visits for suspected suicide attempts by adolescent girls spiked nearly 51% in 2021 and almost 4% for boys. The movie star noted that U.S. Surgeon General Dr. Vivek Murthy cautioned in December that the COVID-19 pandemic has had “unprecedented impacts on the mental health of America’s youth and families.” She also linked to a declaration of national emergency in child and adolescent mental health by the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, and the Children’s Hospital Association.
“As health professionals dedicated to the care of children and adolescents, we have witnessed soaring rates of mental health challenges among children, adolescents, and their families over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, exacerbating the situation that existed prior to the pandemic,” the declaration stated in October. “Children and families across our country have experienced enormous adversity and disruption.”
Hawn commented on the alarming concerns about the mental health of America’s youth, “This tells us that as a nation, we have failed our children.””We are not properly funding preventive care and early interventions that normalize the mental struggles every individual has at some level,” the Academy Award-winning actress wrote. “There are everyday tools for mental fitness, just as there are for exercise and healthy eating; we just don’t teach them in any systematic way to our nation’s children.”
Hawn called for “helping children understand the chemical reactions that occur in their mind” when they hear the “latest horrifying statistic or headline on the evening news.” She said that understanding how the brain works will provide children with “the patience and confidence to put things in perspective, rather than fall victim to the emotions of the moment and end up in a helplessness that leads to depression and sometimes self-harm, the kind we are seeing in record numbers among children.”
She warned that the answer is not to allow kids to “be over-diagnosed or shuffled through a system that screens and treats extreme cases after they are too late.”
“We will survive the COVID-19 pandemic, but I’m not sure we can survive an entire generation whose collective trauma sends them hobbling into adulthood. We need more research, more preventative care and more early intervention. And there’s still time,” Hawn concluded. “If we get it right, today’s kids could emerge as the strongest generation America has ever produced.”
Hawn also made headlines this week when she appeared on “The Megyn Kelly Show” and proclaimed that Hollywood celebrities need to entertain the public no matter what political affiliations they have. “I stay in my lane,” Hawn declared when it comes to spouting political opinions.
Legal Insurrection went live on October 12, 2008, originally at Google Blogger. We hit our one-millionth visit about 11.5 months later, our second million a few months after that, and since then readership and linkage from major websites have grown drama
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
Legal Insurrection went live on October 12, 2008, originally at Google Blogger. We hit our one-millionth visit about 11.5 months later, our second million a few months after that, and since then readership and linkage from major websites have grown drama
Legal Insurrection went live on October 12, 2008, originally at Google Blogger. We hit our one-millionth visit about 11.5 months later, our second million a few months after that, and since then readership and linkage from major websites have grown drama
Legal Insurrection went live on October 12, 2008, originally at Google Blogger. We hit our one-millionth visit about 11.5 months later, our second million a few months after that, and since then readership and linkage from major websites have grown drama
News, Opinion, Interviews, Research and discussion
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
Legal Insurrection went live on October 12, 2008, originally at Google Blogger. We hit our one-millionth visit about 11.5 months later, our second million a few months after that, and since then readership and linkage from major websites have grown drama
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
Bible Translations, Devotional Tools and Plans, BLOG, free mobile application; notes and more
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
Conseritive Political Articles and Discussions
Legal Insurrection went live on October 12, 2008, originally at Google Blogger. We hit our one-millionth visit about 11.5 months later, our second million a few months after that, and since then readership and linkage from major websites have grown drama
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
The Bible Gateway is a tool for reading and researching scripture online — all in the language or translation of your choice! It provides advanced searching capabilities, which allow readers to find and compare particular passages in scripture based on