Kaitlyn (nee Bruce) Jenner, Elliot (nee Ellen) Paige in attendance.
Manhattan’s largest school board district approves
resolution that could ban transgender athletes
from women’s sports
Manhattan’s largest neighborhood school board district approved a resolution that could lead to a ban on transgender athletes in girls’ sports – despite sharp community backlash Wednesday night.
Community Education Council District 2, which serves Manhattan from the Lower East Side to the Upper East Side, passed the controversial measure in an 8-3 vote that demands the city’s Department of Education allow a public review of its policy allowing transgender girls to play female sports.
The vote took place at the end of a contentious meeting in midtown Manhattan attended by City Council members, district parents and “Umbrella Academy” actor Elliot Page, who transitioned in 2020 and has been a strong supporter of trans youth.
She was so adorable as Ellen. Please pray that she will wake up to reality and truth.
Speakers at the meeting mostly slammed the resolution.
Jared Danker, a gay man who works for the DOE and a District 2 parent, said the resolution would “marginalize and discriminate against a group of students who need our affirmation and support.”
NYC Council member Erik Bottcher, who spoke on behalf of himself and three state lawmakers, also condemned the resolution.
“We are outraged that you’re considering a resolution targeting transgender girls and sports. It is utterly shocking that such a regressive and harmful resolution is being proposed in the school district in the middle of Manhattan,” he said.
The resolution is mostly symbolic, as it only serves as a request to DOE brass to hold a review of the existing policy that the department already backs.
Some members of the CEC D2 said they want community input on guidelines put in place in 2019 by NYC’s Public School Athletic League that allow trans participation, according to the proposal.
The goal of resolution 248 is to have a review of the DOE’s guidelines and to add parental involvement into decisions. CEC D2 members also want transparency, arguing that they don’t know how the initial decision was made.
CEC member Maud Maron, one of the resolution’s sponsors, dismissed arguments the proposal is transphobic, but claimed it would spark a conversation about who is allowed to play girls’ sports.
“If we have a proper and real conversation, one of the outcomes could be that nothing changes and that we all discover that these guidelines are just perfect as they are,” Maron explained.
“But another one of the possibilities is that we realize that the excluded voices had something really important to offer and they should have been heard from in the beginning.”
While the measure doesn’t explicitly call for a trans ban in girls’ sports, Maron has advocated for such restrictions when she ran for Congress as a Democrat last year.
J.K. Rowling Shreds Puberty Blockers After U.K. Ban:
‘Well-Funded Lobbying Groups Drunk on Their Own Power'
by Paul Bois, Breitbart, March 18, 2024:
J.K. Rowling ripped into the activists who pushed puberty blockers after the U.K. National Health Service (NHS) banned their use on minors dealing with transgenderism.
NHS England based its decision to ban puberty blockers for children this week on there not being enough evidence on the procedure’s safety or clinical effectiveness. The U.K. government also endorsed the “landmark decision,” hailing at as being in the “best interests of children.”
NHS England proposed a ban on the procedure last June and issued the definitive decision following a review from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE).
Author J.K. Rowling, who has been an outspoken critic of transgender radicalism since 2020, celebrated the decision on social media and called out the activists who pushed this on children.“How was this allowed in the first place… no words,” one user on X said in reply to her post highlighting the policy change.
“Well-funded lobbying groups drunk on their own power, politicians closing their eyes rather than suffer social media pushback, idiot celeb cheerleaders who’re about to go very quiet, pharmaceutical companies chasing profit, medics who abandoned ethics and should be in the dock,” she replied….
One self-identified ‘de-transitioner’ said, ‘It breaks my heart it was allowed to go on for so long. The damage done is untold, and the number of detransitioners who have broke down in pain to me will live with me forever.’”
=============================
BY
J.K. Rowling, who has herself been victim of abuse for speaking out against the most aggressive elements of the trans lobby, discussed the vulnerability of children and how they are being used by the system. Despite this ban, UK children will be used as lab rats:
The hormones will be only available for children with gender dysphoria through clinical trials intended to fill gaps in medical knowledge, though provision is expected to be made in exceptional circumstances on a case-by-case basis.
In America, puberty blockers continue to be allowed by the Food and Drug Administration, and thousands of kids are taking these risky drugs, with many more lined up for them, even against the wishes of parents in many cases. They are referred to by some in the woke system as “estranged parents.”
At least 121,882 children ages 6 to 17 were diagnosed with gender dysphoria from 2017 through 2021.
In America, puberty blockers along with gender transitioning for kids is supported “at the highest levels” of the Biden administration, with psychological and physical risks dismissed.
In Canada, the same level of madness is occurring with the full support of Trudeau's far-left government. The number of detransitioners lining up to sue the government has not reached critical mass yet. When it does, it will reflect astonishing pain in thousands of children. Teen girls who transition to boys have an attempted suicide rate above 50% and it's entirely because of regret for what they have done to themselves.
Tens of thousands of professional people and politicians are going to be utterly terrified when they stand before Jesus Christ in Judgment. Of course, probably very few of them believe in God, as if that will help them.
=======================================================================
Supreme Court allows removal of trans-identified
child from Catholic parents' home to stand
The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to take up a case involving Catholic parents trapped in a custody battle after refusing to recognize their trans-identified son's self-declared female identity.
In a list of orders published Monday, the Supreme Court refused to take up the case of M.C., et vir v. Indiana Department of Child Services. The court didn't provide a reason for rejecting the petition for a writ of certiorari filed by Indiana Catholic parents Mary and Jeremy Cox.
The Coxes appealed to the nation's high court in December after years of litigation that began shortly after their teenage son informed the devoutly Catholic couple that he identified as a girl and wished to be called by female pronouns.
Because of the couple's religious beliefs about gender and sexuality, they could not in good conscience comply with their son's request. The Indiana Department of Child Services initiated an investigation into the Cox household over the parents’ refusal to use their son's self-declared female name and pronouns.
"No other loving parents should have to endure what we did," Cox said in a statement after the Supreme Court's announcement. "The pain of having our son taken from our home and kept from our care because of our beliefs will stay with us forever. We can't change the past, but we will continue to fight for a future where parents of faith can raise their children without fear of state officials knocking on their doors and taking their children."
The courts here are ignoring the fact that the vast majority of transgender children suffer from mental illness or they could never justify removing such children from their parents. It's madness!
Joshua Hershberger, the general counsel for the Indiana Family Institute, which helped support the couple along with the religious freedom advocacy group Becket, said in a statement that the appeal "accomplish[ed] the goal of placing this fact pattern in front of SCOTUS as a real and growing threat to parental rights, freedom of religion, and free speech."
"These constitutional principles represent a cause — not just a case — and we will continue to advocate for that cause in law and culture," Hershberger said.
The petition asked the high court to address the question, asking, "When can the state muzzle parental speech and remove a child from the home of admittedly fit parents?" It stated that if left unresolved, "evidence regarding siblings' removal from the home is admissible in a petition to terminate parental rights as to a different child."
In 2021, two years after their son started identifying as a girl, the Indiana Department of Child Services launched an investigation into the parents that culminated with his removal from their custody and placement into a home that affirmed his self-declared identity.
In June of that year, a trial court ruled that the boy should be removed from the Coxes' custody because of their supposed "inability, refusal or neglect to provide shelter, care, and/or supervision at the present time."
After the state dismissed the allegations of "neglect to provide shelter, care, and/or supervision," lower courts upheld the state's decision to remove the Coxes' child from their custody while enabling the couple to visit their son periodically as long as they agreed to refrain from discussing his gender identity. When the Indiana Supreme Court declined to take their case, the couple sought relief from the U.S. Supreme Court.
The petition suggested that the actions of Indiana and the state courts run afoul of "this Court's precedents on parental rights, free speech, and religious exercise" by increasing "governments' power to remove children from fit parents, [limiting] Free Exercise defenses to removal of children, and [putting] speech that occurs in the home beyond the reach of the First Amendment."
In a previous interview with The Christian Post, Becket attorney Laura Slavis warned that a failure to intervene by the U.S. Supreme Court would set a "dangerous precedent" that could lead to other states removing children from their parents based on their religious beliefs.
"There are two major issues in this case: One is about the fact that the child is taken away just because of the parents' religious beliefs on sexuality. And the other is what a parent can speak to their child about in the confines of their own home," she said.
"We think that it's important that this case be addressed and a very clear message be sent that this is unconstitutional so that other states can't rely on the precedent," Slavis added.
She stressed that a Supreme Court ruling in their favor would mean that "the parents would no longer have any legal consequences flowing from this custody proceeding that happened against them."
No comments:
Post a Comment