America’s children are being targeted by sex predators. Their recruiters are already in our schools and libraries. These “transgender” people need your children as converts. Consider:

• Children returning from school carrying “gender unicorn lessons,” which teach strange ideas of sex and gender.
• Public libraries are conditioning your children through “drag queen readings” to get children familiar with these recruiters.
• Schools are hiding from parents that they’re giving puberty blocking drugs to their children.

The transgender people insist that they be allowed to access and recruit children, and that you accept them as being of their assumed sex – even in private places like separate-sex bathrooms. They claim, “trans rights are civil rights.”

If you oppose them, you’re charged with genocide- of mass murdering hordes of children. But, if you don’t oppose them, you’ll end up losing your rights as parents and all of the children will be prey to sexual and financial abuse. Read on to become aware of how the transgender agenda destroys parents’ oversight, age of consent, and causes bodily harm to their young victims.

Sexually flailing against God’s creation

People practicing homosexuality want to be accepted as normal by society. That is what the “love is love” campaign is all about. Likewise, people practicing transgender behaviors want us to affirm their choices. Why, then, do Christians actively oppose homosexuality and transgenderism? It’s not out of hate for these people, but because God hates these behaviors. Even if we wanted to affirm them, we couldn’t do that and also have a God-honoring society.

In Genesis, we read how God created everything, including Adam (a man) and Eve (a woman). God told Adam “from any tree of the garden you may eat freely; but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die” (Gen. 2:16-17, NASB). But Adam decided he didn’t trust God’s version of good and evil, and sought his own understanding. This was the sin of Adam– that he pursued his own version of right and wrong.

Homosexuality is a manifestation of Adam’s sin. God hates it because, at its root, it is rebellion against Him and rejecting His creation. They’ll have man-to-man, or woman-to-woman, sex and curse us if we tell them that this is wrong. An article from Got Questions calls it “shaking our fists at God.”

Homosexuality is not the cause of a society’s decline, but it is a symptom of it; it is the result of people making themselves the final authorities. Romans 1 gives the natural digression of a society that has chosen idolatry and sinful pleasure instead of obedience to God. The downward spiral begins with denying that God has absolute authority over His creation (Romans 1:21-23).

The result of a society’s rejection of God’s rule in their lives is that God gives “them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator” (Romans 1:24-25). Verses 26 and 27 say, “Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.” The phrase “God gave them over” means that, when we insist on shaking our fists at God, He finally lets us have the perversion we demand. And that is a judgment in itself. Homosexual behavior is the result of ignoring God and trying to create our own truth. When we defy God’s clear instruction, we reap the “due penalty” of our disobedience (2 Thessalonians 1:8-9; Revelation 21:8).

Transgenderism is a variant of homosexuality. The important difference between them is that a man or woman claims to be of the other sex – an assertion in defiance of the facts. It’s another claim of godhood, that someone can declare their own sex and it becomes true because they say so. We’re all supposed to chime in and affirm this claim, much like throwing a pinch of incense to Caesar. Frequently, but not always, transgender behavior also includes surgical removal of a person’s sex organs.

A key thing about transgenderism is how you can’t just ignore it. People are in your face about you acknowledging the sex assertion, and about you using “preferred pronouns.” Woe to you if you disagree with them. Walter Hudson, a state legislator from Minnesota, commented about this:

We used to take our differences a lot more seriously. But we eventually settled on a social contract rooted in classical liberalism, the notion that neighbors should be able to peacefully co-exist without demanding renunciation of sacred belief. The transgender community has not received that memo. Despite individual exceptions, the general rule among the dominant trans culture is an illiberal insistence upon affirmation. It’s not enough for them to believe that “transgender women are women.” You must believe it too. You must confess it with your mouth upon every social interaction. You must call a guy cosmetically altered to appear as a woman “she,” or you will be found guilty of heresy and summarily convicted in the court of public opinion. At the very least, your sentence will be social censure and condemnation. More likely, you will lose your job or face other grave consequences that hobble your capacity to live…

The dominant trans culture has successfully employed a repressive cultural strategy of social censure and unearned indignation to enforce a code of conduct that “affirms” their beliefs. Of course, it amounts to gaslighting. No one believes that the man cosmetically altered to appear as a woman has become a woman. But you’re expected to “affirm” that lie with every use of a “preferred pronoun” as an act of fealty and submission. It’s enforced with severe social censure for violations of trans decorum, which typically involves being treated as beneath contempt.

Christians aspire to proclaim the gospel, and to build a Christian society (Matt. 13:33, 28:18-20). America still has a strong Christian influence, and our standards of right and wrong are measured by what the Bible says. God hates homosexuality, in either form, and judges a society that approves of it (Gen. 19:15-26; Rom. 1:26-27). This means that building a Christian society includes opposing homosexuality and transgenderism.

Transgenderism brings unwelcome surprises

Are Christians being meanies, not letting an “oppressed minority” experience full acceptance into American society? No, we’re trying to protect our society from predators, who would use this acceptance to exploit and hurt children. After everything is said and done, this conflict is over recruiting children into transgenderism.

Consider the rage over a  Texas bill, which would ban sexual transition surgery on minors. And look at the concern about a Florida bill that, only modestly, regulates when transgender concepts could be taught in public schools. It certainly is about the children.

If America gives these advocates what they demand, if they convince us that it’s fair and just to yield to their claims, then look at the life-changing surprises awaiting us.

Surprise #1: Transgender education is already in American schools

Of the things a people can expect of society, perhaps protecting the vulnerable is its most important task. And children are its most vulnerable group, because they’re innocent of how the world might mistreat them. American society provides them special protection through concepts like “age of consent,” and by the understanding that their parents are their legal guardians. This has been consistently confirmed, most famously in the Wisconsin v. Yoder Supreme Court case:

The history and culture of Western civilization reflect a strong tradition of parental concern for the nurture and upbringing of their children. This primary role of the parents in the upbringing of their children is now established beyond debate as an enduring American tradition.

However, teaching children about transgender behaviors has already been forced into public schools, without seeking parents’ consent and usually without notice. It’s done because  teachers believe that the students belong to them. In practice, teachers, administrators, and school boards act like they can they can do as they please with their students.

They approve, not merely permit, teaching transgenderism, and seek to indocrinate students even in kindergarten. They teach propaganda like “assigned sex at birth”and “gender unicorns.” They even seek to reach three-year-old children with these lessons! To evade parental oversight, they counsel children in secret, and deny what they’re doing.

Don’t be fooled in thinking that your “excellent school district” doesn’t do that stuff. They probably do already, for so much of their agenda is set by state bureaucracies. Remember what Ronald Reagan said: “Trust, but verify.”

Surprise #2: Transgender agenda overrules “age of consent”

The point of the “age of consent” is that the parents protect a child from making uninformed or immature decisions. The child increasingly learns how the world works, and his or her parents give increased personal control.

Young children know nothing about how “gender-affirming” therapy changes the body’s development. Even drug therapy has permanent consequences. If you stop taking the drugs the body doesn’t play “catch-up” for the years of missed development. No youth of nine or ten has the wisdom, or skepticism, to understand the implications of tampering with puberty.

Non-parental counselors are conflicted, having self-interests to not tell the youth of any potential problems. We used to call people like this “predators” and “child exploiters.” Yet transgender advocates demand that youth be allowed to make these decisions without parental approval. For example, the Minnesota Lt. Governor said, “when our children tell us who they are, it is our job as grown-ups to listen and to believe them,” she added. “That’s what it means to be a good parent.” Not true, because a good parent looks for the best interests of a child, and much of love means saying “no.”

Surprise #3: All ages of consent could be nullified

If a child can consent, without having parental approval, to body-altering procedures, even surgery, then the “age of consent” is nullified. Perhaps some advocate will then petition a judge that the sexual age of consent should also be nullified. A similar argument exists for removing the minimum age for entering into financial contracts. This results in many exploiters, and many hurt children.

Surprise #4: Parental oversight would effectively be abolished

In a transgender-affirming world, a child can ask for, and expect to get, body-altering treatments without parental permission. And the schools can effectively ignore the parents, teaching things and transitioning youth without their parents’ knowledge. After all of that, what is left of parental oversight?

In Minnesota, the enmity towards parents is so strong that the legislature passed a law, making the state a sanctuary for children who want to run away and get transgender treatment there. And the state will fight the parents when they ask for the return of their child. By the way, isn’t it a crime for an adult to help a child make that journey across state lines?

Let’s take this farther. If parental oversight isn’t respected, then what purpose is served by a family? Why should society, or the law, honor it? In 1920 the socialists in Soviet Russia asked this question, and decided that abolishing the family was a good idea. That turned out horribly, and families were again honored – but only after many lives were ruined.

Affirming transgender behavior opens a big box of trouble

As you see, we can’t simply say “let them have their way” and we all live happily together. A decision to normalize, to affirm, transgender behavior, in the scope they want it for, will soon lead to widespread child exploitation and neutering of the protective family environment. This would be a major change in American society. Decisions like this shouldn’t be made by manipulating some judges, or through bureaucracy. It is a major deal, and demands public debate.

Opposing transgender agenda is not genocide

We’ve seen how submitting to transgender demands would cause much harm to American children. A Christian culture ought to prevent this harm by rejecting their assertions, and not changing society to suit these demands. At minimum this means:

• A man might claim to be a woman, or a woman a man. But that doesn’t grant any rights or privileges other than those of the person’s biological sex.
• A person doesn’t have any legal right to require others to recognize him or her as their claimed, non-biological, sex.
• Civil rights laws don’t favor someone’s pretending to his or her non-biological sex.

However, transgender activists claim that opposing them amounts to genocide. Here’s the advocacy site, OutFront Magazine, claiming that denying transitioning drugs or surgery amounts to a crime against humanity:

While, of course, this convention, passed by the Third United Nations General Assembly in 1948, does not specifically mention sexual orientation, gender identity, romantic orientation, etcetera, the objects of the oppression of the queer community, including the trans community, such communities should obviously be included under such a definition.

The sentiment of the opening clause is that, in short, genocide is the purposeful destruction of an oppressed societal out-group on the basis that they are that group, and such unequivocally includes the entirety of the queer community.

Regarding the transgender community specifically, many enacted policies, or policies attempting to be enacted, in the modern-day meet such a definition. The aforementioned policies of banning transgender healthcare for trans youths are potentially the most egregious instances of violation of this definition of genocide.

Puberty blockers and hormone replacement therapy, the topics of these policies, have been shown to drastically reduce the horrifically high suicide rate of transgender youths, saving lives. To block trans youth from such a treatment manufactures a higher suicide rate and thus manufacture more suicides, more deaths within the transgender community, specifically amongst youth.

That is, it’s genocide because they wish it were so. But they are preying on our youth, and blaming us when their targets despair. It seems far more likely that the children are hanging out with the wrong adults, “groomers” if you will. And according to the articles I provided earlier, our public school teachers and employees seem to be at the forefront of transgender recruitment.

On the Dr. Phil show, a transgender man (biological female) named Reece explains her decision process. Note that she thinks that using transitioning drugs at age eight is a really fine and normal thing. And if you should deny these drugs, she thinks that this would be genocide.

One of Dr. Phil’s guests not only defended trans medical procedures for minors but claimed that it is absolutely vital for their mental health.

“Being able to start my transition at 11 was just so overwhelming and scary, but exciting, and I feel grateful. Say that a trans person came out at 8, and they had to wait till they were 18 to start hormone replacement therapy and not even able to get puberty blockers so their body has to fully now go through puberty,” Reece, a trans man, said. “That now makes transitioning 10 times more hard and traumatizing.”

Reece went on to say that legal regulations to prevent these procedures being done to minors is akin to mass-murder.

“It’s extremely important for trans youth to be able to transition at puberty, I think, without that, all of these kids who know who they are deep down inside would never get the opportunity to live their childhood as their truth. And I think that’s just horrendous. And I think it’s just transgender genocide. If I was not able to transition at the age I was, I would not have made it to 18. I do not think the government should be denying trans health care. It’s life-saving healthcare,” Reece said.

The guest went on to contradict themselves when describing hesitation to actually go through with a double mastectomy at a young age and deciding to “wait till I’m older.”

Reece then said, “I didn’t want to wait. I was eligible at 15. I went to get it at 15 and I just was too young to go through with it at that age for myself personally, but someone who has a bigger chest who is also that age would definitely need it if they felt like they did and I think they should be able to get it.”

These two articles underline that the transgender community wants your children. After all, it’s hard to assume the appearance of the other sex after you already have adult genitals. So they evangelize the children early, before puberty, especially before they’ve got the wisdom to resist.

In a more general sense, stopping this agenda will indeed shut down the transgender community. Without getting easy converts, it won’t be much fun for them to do their role playing. But it’s not genocide. By that logic, you may as well claim that enforcing traffic laws is “genocide against speeders.” So saying “genocide” is just using a scary word. Why not also call us “fascists” and “racists,” to get full value out of using scary sounding, but no longer meaningful, words.

Don’t be afraid to eliminate child abuse, and child maiming, by opposing the transgender agenda. But this agenda would be implemented not through legislation, but by top politicians changing bureaucratic rules, such as the words in the Civil Rights Act. We must be loud and persistent in getting our politicians to behave, because we really do care.

The controversy over transgenderism arose a few years ago seemingly out of nowhere. But when it did arise, it erupted like a cultural Mount St. Helens.

The transgender cause has not been part of the homosexual communities’ agenda until recently.

When Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen wrote their book, published in 1990, “After the Ball: How America will conquer its fear and hatred of Gays in the 90’s,” I do not recall they made any mention of the transgender issue. At that time, there were transvestites—men that dressed as women who were a recognized part of the community. They were still gay, saw themselves as men, and were still interested in men. And there were “butch” lesbians. Many dressed like men, but still saw themselves as women and were attracted to women. Such variety among homosexuals is not unusual.

While homosexuality was removed from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual as a mental illness in 1973, transgenderism was first categorized as a psychosexual disorder in 1980. In 1994, the classification was changed to gender identity disorder, and in 2013 it was changed to gender dysphoria. Today, gender dysphoria remains categorized as a mental illness.

The modern history of recognizing transgenderism as something different from homosexuality dates to the German doctor Magnus Hirschfeld, who founded the Institute for Sexual Research in Berlin in 1919. In 1930 he performed the first known sexual reassignment surgery. Before Hirschfeld, not much clearly is known about the issue. The history is murky, to say the least. There isn’t even much known about the Institute for Sexual Research either since the Institute was destroyed by the Nazis in 1933 and all the Institute’s books and records were burned. Hirschfeld was forced into exile and he died in France two years later.

The first American to become widely known after having undergone sexual reassignment surgery was Christine Jorgensen, born George William Jorgensen, Jr. Jorgensen served in the U.S. Army in Europe during WWII and while there learned of fledgling practice of sex reassignment surgeries. Throughout his life he had been troubled by his “lack of male development,” but we don’t know what he meant by that. In any case, after returning from the war he began taking estrogen and in 1952 he received permission from doctors in Copenhagen to undergo a series of surgeries there.

A letter he later wrote to his parents announcing that he now was Christine somehow was leaked to the press. The story was widely circulated, and Christine Jorgensen became a household name. Jorgensen remained somewhat of a celebrity for the rest of his life—as an oddity, not as a norm. He died in San Clemente, CA in 1989 at the age of 62.

Until after 2010, there has been very little public awareness about the transgender issue. However, since 2006, a recent survey showed, there has been a 4,000% increase in youths seeking transgender treatment. Additionally, prior the to 2000’s a large majority  of those seeking transgender treatment were males seeking to transition to female. Today that has reversed. Now 70% of those seeking transgender care are female wanting to become male. During the early years the general public was completely unaware of the changes. Now most are aware of many issues involving transgenders’—biological males using female restrooms and locker rooms, biological males on female sports teams, hormone and surgical treatments, etc.—but few have greater than a superficial understanding.

Perhaps the first inkling that the general public got of the sexuality changes going on behind the scenes was in February, 2014, when the Amazon Original show, “Transparent,” (about a parent, Morton, coming out transwoman, Maura) was released to critical acclaim. The show centered on the characters exploring their sexuality and their reactions to others. In no way could the show be considered a real-life attempt to understand what a real-life mental illness is, gender dysphoria. It was an emotionally manipulative series aimed at normalizing transgenderism.

The awakening of the general public began to accelerate when the Obama Administration issued instructions to U.S. Schools that Title IX applied to trans girls, requiring schools to allow biological boys to play on girls’ teams and to use girls’ facilities. While the Trump Administration later rescinded those rules, the schools already were full speed ahead implementing the Obama Administration’s plan. The Biden Administration is accelerating the agenda even faster.

The pandemic and parents becoming more aware of what their children are being taught, the press coverage of the 4000% increase in the number of trans youths, Abigail Shrier’s 2020 bestselling book, “Irreversible Damage,” all have coalesced to make the issue seem like a freight train, thundering down a mountain, after losing its brakes.

To many of us the last five years has seemed out of control, that the world has lost it’s collective mind on this issue. Who could possibly think that when a child as young as four or five, or maybe even younger, says they were born in the wrong body we should accept that as true? That is insane. But we are told its settled science. Moreover, courts and schools and government at all levels have steamrolled any opposition.

Most people must believe this insane idea, right? It turns out, no.

Last month, Summit Ministries of Manitou Springs, CO, released the results of a poll it commissioned. McLaughlin and Associates conducted the poll of 1,000 likely voters from all over the country. It was a stratified random sample that covered all ages, parties, races, voting behavior, sex, ideology, education, population density, and region of the country. One of the questions that was asked was: “What is your reaction to efforts to expose children to the transgender movement using things like drag shows, school curriculum, and social media.” To my surprise, of the 92% that answered the question, 71% of the participants were concerned, while 29% were not upset or concerned. Of the 71%, 41% described themselves as very concerned or angry.

The other question that was asked was “Do you believe that pharmaceutical companies and doctors who promote puberty blockers and cross sex hormones for underage children seeking gender transition should be legally liable for any harmful side effects that arise?” There were 826 of the 1000 participants that answered that question, 83%. Of those, again 71% answered yes, while 29% replied, no.

It is encouraging that at least 71% of us have some common sense. So why are we electing legislators and hiring people for government jobs who don’t? That is a genuine mystery.

When it comes to truth, though, who believes what makes no difference. Just because the whole world believes a lie, that does not make it true. The challenge for us today is to find the closest proximity to truth that we can on this issue. Some experts believe that chemically and surgically mutilating healthy sex organs is the best course of action. Other experts are repelled by the thought, instead favoring talk therapy.

My research points to more experts being repelled than being in favor of the mutilating chemical and surgical interventions. In these circumstances, doesn’t the solution seem clear? Shouldn’t treatment be that which causes the least harm, while allowing the experts to continue researching and debating the issue?

It seems to me that would be the best practice for decision making, as well as the least divisive. Let’s end the eruption and toxic hostility . . . on this issue, at least.

Pastor Derek Buikema asks professor, theologian, and author Dr. Carl Trueman to explain a bit about “expressive individualism,” the subject of Dr. Trueman’s important book The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self: Cultural Amnesia, Expressive Individualism, and the Road to Sexual Revolution.

The ideas that “The real me is my feelings, and my ability to express those feelings outwardly makes me an authentic person,” are central features of expressive individualism, the most extreme form of which is “transgenderism.”

Dr. Trueman urges Christians to acknowledge what expressive individualism gets right as well as to acknowledge the serious dangers posed by not grounding our feelings in external realities and truths.

State “education” authorities in Michigan are under fire nationwide after getting caught red-handed encouraging teachers to, among other absurdities and crimes, “transition” children to new “genders” without the consent or even knowledge of their parents. The trainings are almost too outrageous to believe, and yet officials are publicly defending it all.

The growing scandal, which was first exposed by prominent anti-woke activist Christopher Rufo with the Manhattan Institute, has government “school” officials scrambling to perform damage control. But parental outrage over the abuse is growing nationwide as even liberal-media polls show the public has overwhelmingly turned against this sort of brainwashing in school.

The Michigan Department of Education program in question urges government-school “educators” to “facilitate the sexual transition of minors without parental consent,” as Rufo put it in his exposé posted on social media. The trainers also claim the notion that gender is “binary” is a “system of oppression” created by the West that must be dismantled.

There is proof, too, as documents and footage emerge. One leaked training video for teachers features a self-styled “Black, masculine-identified, cisgendered lesbian baby boomer” instructor named “Amorie Robinson.” During the training session, she urges teachers to familiarize themselves with the “terminology” such as “gender fluid,” “gender queer,” or “gender non-conforming.”

According to Robinson, children may “identify” as “asexual, lesbian, straight, gay, bisexual, queer, questioning, demisexual, demiromantic, aromantic, and skoliosexual.” Teachers should “Google on those” because “we ain’t got time today” to examine all the sexual and gender “identities” children might adopt, she said.

Another trainer urges teachers to hide children’s sexual and gender “identities” from parents, even if discussing the child’s desire to commit suicide. “I would one-thousand percent recommend working with the student to let them guide that process,” says the trainer, Phillips-Knope, after recommending teachers refer to children as “earthlings” instead of boys and girls.

When it became a toxic political hot-potato when blasted by GOP gubernatorial candidate Tudor Dixon, even far-left Democratic Governor Gretchen Whitmer was forced to condemn it. Her office sent a mild rebuke to the Department of Education and urged it to “review your trainings to ensure they comply with all applicable regulations, maintain department guidelines, and are reflective of best practices.”

In an op-ed published by establishment propaganda organs, Michigan Superintendent of Public Schools Michael Rice defended the abusive “trainings.” In fact, he referred to them as “professional development” to “build the capacity of educators to provide safe, supportive, and inclusive school climates where all students can thrive — especially students who identify as LGBTQ+.”

“Our local educators and support staff care deeply about their students and seek to better understand how to reach students and help them feel accepted, safe, and supported,” Rice continued, adding that anyone who calls out the madness is attempting to “bully” school staff. “Children deserve safe and inclusive environments to minimize their fears and anxieties.”

After falsely denying that teachers were taught to keep parents in the dark, Rice went on to admit that it’s true—but it’s “for the children,” supposedly. “In a situation in which the student is concerned about abuse, neglect, or homelessness if parents are told, educators may be cautious about sharing issues of sexual orientation and gender identity with parents,” he said.

Teachers “have a responsibility not to put children in harm’s way, even inadvertently,” Rice continued, as if government was now in charge of protecting children from their own parents and families—the very people who love them more than anyone else on the planet. “Such decisions are not made lightly and are ultimately about safeguarding the health, safety, and wellbeing of students.”

This is a similar attitude to the one adopted by the Biden administration. As The Newman Report documented earlier this year, the U.S. departments of Justice, Education, and Health and Human Services released a video encouraging children to file federal complaints against their own families and communities if they were not “affirmed” in their chosen sexual proclivities or gender fantasies.

This is collective madness — and it is beyond evil. Adults must stop encouraging and normalizing the madness, for the same reason it would be irresponsible to talk to a schizophrenic’s imaginary friends or encourage an anorexic girl to have liposuction. This dangerous abuse of children should be prosecuted. But as has always been the case, the only true protector of a child will be his or her parents.

This article was originally published on FreedomProject.com and is reprinted here with permission.

A prominent organization that accredits hundreds of elite private schools across America has joined forces with a fringe leftwing organization that promotes transgenderism and even castration of children. The news is fueling concern among critics even as millions of families flee government schools over similar indoctrination of children in tax-funded “education.”

According to documents and media reports about the scandal, the National Association of Independent Schools (NAIS), which accredits almost 2,000 private schools in the United States and beyond, hosted a “professional development” conference in partnership with the pro-transgender group Gender Spectrum. These schools teach many of America’s future elites.

Among other goals, the conference was aimed at teaching school staff and leaders how to address “the increasing gender diversity across the K-12 experience,” the NAIS said. Of course, no mention was made of the fact that the increase in “gender diversity” among children is due almost exclusively to the indoctrination of school children by groomers.

The costly professional development conference was aimed at teachers, school leaders, administrators, curriculum developers, and other “education” professionals from the NAIS network. The NAIS tried to justify the scheme as producing more “well-being” on campus.

“Schools that implement gender-inclusive practices support their commitment to diversity and enhance a climate of campus well-being,” NAIS said in announcing the scheme, without offering any evidence that brainwashing children with gender confusion would enhance anything other than confusion among children.

The NAIS’ Inclusive Schools Network Initiative was described by the outfit as “a yearlong professional development program that will help build a network of support and ongoing capacity-building among independent schools as they address the instructional, institutional, and social-emotional challenges and opportunities of gender-inclusive practice.”

According to the announcement, topics covered include “dimensions of gender, key terminology, and the spectrum framework for gender,” “making a case for gender education in schools,” a “train-the-trainer curriculum to support institutional development and change,” a “legal webinar and advisory designed for independent schools,” a “workshop” exploring “gender at the intersection of race, power, and identity,” and much more.

The Gender Spectrum group is more than a little controversial. One of its “partners” listed on its website is Align Surgical Associates, a group of quacks who specialize in the surgical mutilation of genitals under the guise of performing “sex changes.”

The Gender Spectrum group has also hosted seminars promoting double mastectomies for confused girls, “vaginoplasty” surgery, and “facial” surgery as part of its “Gender Affirming Surgery Series.” There are growing calls nationwide to formally criminalize the mutilation of children.

The premise underlying much of this is the claim, echoed by NAIS in its announcements, that “gender nonconforming” students were being “teased” or “bullied” by other children. In reality, it is students who reject the gender-bending propaganda who are mercilessly terrorized and abused.

The NAIS has been exposed even recently promoting similar transgender lunacy in the schools it works with. In fact, earlier this year, the organization was exposed peddling the “gender unicorn” as part of the NAIS “queer-inclusive” curriculum targeting children at age four.

The scandal surrounding NAIS, which primarily deals with non-religious private schools, comes as more and more Christian schools move toward “woke” policies as well. In fact, Christian education leaders have been sounding the alarm about major accreditation organizations for Christian schools, too.

Simply removing children from government indoctrination centers posing as “schools” is no guarantee that they will get a decent education — or be protected from dangerous brainwashing. In fact, as the NAIS showed, due diligence is absolutely essential.

This article was originally published by Freedom Project Media.

As state governments respond to public pressure and work to rein in LGBT extremism in schools, the White House issued an executive order seeking to impose more gender confusion and homosexual activism on school children across the nation and beyond. The effort puts parental rights squarely in the crosshairs.

This executive order represents all-out war being declared by Biden on the traditional family, biological reality and biblical sexual norms, according to critics and analysts. It comes as inflation surges, supply chains collapse, millions of illegal immigrants pour across the open Southern border, and social tensions reach alarming levels.

Perhaps the most dangerous element of the scheme is to declare any effort to stop a child from mutilating his or her body as harmful to the child. The idea is embedded throughout the document, and could result in devastating interventions in families by education officials and even child welfare services. Parents nationwide are already facing such tactics.

Among other school-related policies, the executive order calls on the U.S. Department of Education to establish a “Working Group on LGBTQI+ Students and Families.” The new outfit will be in charge of imposing a broad range of pro-LGBT policies on states, school districts, and educational institutions — including “more access to gender-affirming care.”

According to the White House, the policies promoted by this new homosexual and transgender working group are intended to “promote safe and inclusive learning environments in which all students thrive.” That is, of course, thinly veiled code language for promoting homosexuality and gender confusion at school while demonizing traditional values.

In reality, the students who are truly excluded and unsafe — in many cases even facing bullying from staff — are those who resist or even question the LGBT dogma. Countless children nationwide have reported vicious persecution from school officials and fellow students for refusing to bow before the golden LGBT statue.

Another key element of the executive order targets so-called “conversion therapy,” which is designed to help people — especially young people — struggling with unwanted sexual attraction or gender dysphoria. While Biden has no power to ban it with an edict, his order will encourage states to broadly infringe on free speech, religious liberty, parental rights, and the right of people to seek counseling they want.

Ultimately, one of the goals is to push back against the “more than 300 anti-LGBTQI+ laws” introduced across America that protect school children from indoctrination and protect girls from having to compete in sports against males. The scheme also seeks to curtail state efforts to limit children’s ability to obtain life-altering opposite-sex hormones and surgical mutilation under the guise of “health care.”

“The message of the president’s new order is unambiguous: absolutely zero restrictions on bombarding children with morally degenerate sexual and gender propaganda and then permanently mutilating their genitals will be tolerated in Joe Biden’s America,” wrote Darren Beattie at Revolver.News, calling for Republicans to criminalize the mutilation of children.

The consequences of allowing this war on children to continue butchering countless victims are beyond intolerable. And so, this lawless decree by Biden’s handlers must be exposed and resisted by every American and every political leader at every level of government.

Watch Alex Newman being interviewed by Dr. Duke Pesta here:

This article was originally published by FreedomProject.com.

The infamous William “Will” Thomas, who now pretends to be a woman and goes by the name “Lia,” has had a long-time goal of swimming in the Olympics—a goal thwarted by the fact that he is not fast enough. A little thing like insufficient speed, however, is no obstacle for a man who thinks he can become a woman by wishing really hard. Superstitions die hard, especially in a science-denying culture that worships the self and believes fentanyl use is “empowerment.” So, Thomas soldiers on wearing womanface and a woman’s speedo covering his man parts, hoping to make Olympic trials in 2024.

In an interview with Good Morning America, Thomas said,

I knew there would be scrutiny against me if I competed as a woman. … but I also knew I don’t need anyone’s permission to be myself.

Thomas’s self is male, so taking estrogen and cross-dressing constitute a denial of himself.

Thomas is not seeking permission to be himself. He’s demanding to swim on a women’s team when he’s a man. Objecting to a man swimming on the women’s team is not a denial of permission to be himself. It is a denial of his demand that everyone play along with his desire to masquerade as a woman.

When asked about his change in rankings after he began swimming on the women’s team, Thomas responded that swimming success didn’t factor into his decision. All that he sought was to be his “authentic self”:

The biggest change for me is I’m happy. … Trans people don’t transition for athletics. We transition to be happy and authentic and our true selves. 

All that matters to Thomas are his feelings—not the feelings of female teammates or competitors who too have trained their whole lives only to see hopes and dreams destroyed because Thomas wishes he were a woman.

It is widely reported that Thomas—a man with all his man parts—undressed in women’s locker rooms. Many women strongly feel that as women, they should not and do not want to undress in the presence of male peers. For some of these women, those feelings derive from their faith. Thomas, therefore, denied them permission to be their authentic selves. He made them unhappy.

Well, finally the World Swimming Coaches Association (WSCA) has found some sanity and courage in a dusty corner of a chlorine-choked locker room and tossed another obstacle in the lane of Will Thomas.

On May 13, 2022, the WSCA issued its position statement on “transgender” swimmers, that is, on swimmers who pretend to be the sex they are not and never can be. The statement, unfortunately infused with “trans”-cultic language, reads in part,

[T]he inclusion of transgender people into female sport cannot be balanced with fairness due to the retained differences in strength, stamina and physique that are present when comparing the average female with the average transgender female/non-binary person who was assigned male at birth (whether with or without the involvement of testosterone suppression). This is the primary factor to be considered in an endeavour to balance fairness with inclusion.

A “transgender female” is a male. Non-binary persons don’t exist.  And no one is “assigned” either a sex, or a gender, or a gender identity at birth. But at least the WSCA acknowledges that men and women are different, and those differences matter when it comes to sports.

The WSCA offers a solution:

One … solution is to create a Trans Division. The Trans Females [i.e., men or female impersonators] will race each other. The Trans Males [i.e., females or male impersonators] will race each other. There is an argument that the Trans Males have been completely lost in this debate because they are uncompetitive in our current structure. This would also allow those of indeterminate gender to be factored into such a solution.

This solution would enable Thomas to be his “authentic” self: a “trans” person.

Evidently, the WSCA is not up to date on current Newspeak. “Gender” refers to the aggregate of behaviors, conventions, roles, and expectations associated with sex of male or female. As such, there is no such thing as a person possessing an “indeterminate gender.”

Perhaps the WSCA was using “gender” in the old-fashioned way, as a synonym for biological sex. If so, neither Will Thomas nor any other “trans”-identifying swimmer has an “indeterminate gender.” Smith has a definite “gender,” and it’s male.

Like other supporters of the sexual integration of sports who grasp at any defense they can concoct, Thomas trots out the tired and patently silly claim that since there is physical diversity among women athletes, women’s sports should include men:

I’m not a medical expert, but there is a lot of variation among cis female athletes or cis women who are very tall and very muscular and have more testosterone than other cis women. Should that then disqualify them?

Well then, why should women’s sports be limited to women? Why should only men who pretend to be women be allowed to participate in women’s sports?

If the fact that some women have more testosterone than others justifies allowing men who pretend to be women to participate in women’s sports, why not let men who don’t pretend to be women participate in women’s sports? Thomas can’t say, “Well, they’re not women,” because he’s not a woman either. And he can’t say, “Well, they’re not transgender” because that would constitute discrimination based on “gender identity.”

Leftists claim that anti-discrimination policies and commitments to equality demand that men who pretend to be women be treated exactly like women. Such a claim is nonsense. If commitments to anti-discrimination were intended to prohibit all distinctions based on both sex and “gender identity,” then there should be no sex-segregated activities for anyone anywhere.

If sports cannot take into account either sex or “gender identity,” then there should be no single sex sports at all. If swim teams allow Will Thomas to swim on the women’s team, then they should allow Michal Phelps to as well. Allowing Thomas to swim on the women’s team while prohibiting Phelps would constitute discrimination based on “gender identity,” and as Thomas believes, we can’t have that.

With regard to equality: commitments to equality entail treating like things alike. Equality does not entail or require treating unlike things alike. Will Thomas is a thing unlike those things called women. The fundamental distinction in sports is not height, muscle mass, and hormone levels. The fundamental distinction is biological sex, which shapes average biological differences. Sure, the fastest female swimmer may be faster than the slowest male swimmer. But the fastest males will always be faster than the fastest women.

We ignore “trans”-cultic beliefs and practices at our own peril. Left unopposed, they threaten our First Amendment speech rights and religions liberty. They threaten the right of parents to raise their children in accordance with truth. They threaten the privacy of all Americans in spaces in which men and women engage in personal acts, like going to the bathroom, undressing, and tending to menstrual needs–which only women do. They threaten women’s sports. And they threaten the safety of girls and women.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Finally-a-Sports-Association-Commits-to-Fairness.mp3

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) under Biden’s incompetent rule has decided that in order for schools to access federal money to provide lunch to needy children, schools will have to sexually integrate bathrooms and locker rooms. The USDA defended its decision with this bizarre comment:

[A]ccording to the U.S. Census Bureau’s Household Pulse Survey, more than 13% of LGBTQ respondents lived in a household that experienced food insecurity, compared to 7.2% of non-LGBTQ adult respondents. This survey also found food insufficiency – not always having enough food to eat – to be three times as common among transgender individuals (nearly 24% of respondents) as compared to cisgender individuals (8.3% of respondents).

The USDA didn’t say how the sexual integration of bathrooms and locker rooms is related to the problem of “food insecurity” in “LGBT” households or “food insufficiency” among “transgender” individuals. Nor did Biden’s USDA explain why any children who suffer from food insecurity and food insufficiency should be denied school lunches just because schools honor sexual differences in private spaces. This sounds remarkably like extortion. The federal government will make impoverished children suffer more in order to promote the unscientific beliefs of the “trans”-cult.

And it’s not just America’s federal bureaucrats who are abusing their power to socially construct a new mixed up, muddled up, shook up world unfit for anyone other than Lola. (Actually, this socially constructed new world is unfit for Lola too.)

Canada will be using public funds to build a shrine to the false gods of homoeroticism and “trans”-cultism (a phenomenon closer to Haitian Vodou than to science). The shrine features a cylindrical structure with a glitzy, gaping opening representing the imprint of a cloud festooned with disco ball walls. The shrine titled Thunderhead is intended to convey the message that homosexuals and cross-sex impersonators have “risen up” to say, “‘We demand change.’”

Emphasizing the pagan religious nature of the worship of narcissistic desire is a “healing circle ringed with stones hand-picked by Two-Spirit Elders.” Imagine the uproar that would ensue today if a public monument were being built on federal land using federal money that included symbols of Christianity.

The term “two-spirit” was invented—that is to say, socially constructed—in 1990 at the “Third Annual Inter-tribal Native American, First Nations, Gay and Lesbian American Conference.” Although there is debate about the precise meaning of “two-spirit,” it generally “refers to a person who identifies as having both a masculine and a feminine spirit and is used by some Indigenous people to describe their sexual, gender and/or spiritual identity.” As such, it is a pagan or quasi-religious term.

The belief that there can be a female spirit trapped in a male body is a faith-based metaphysical claim that has seized the malleable imaginations of post-Christian cultures in search of meaning. “Trans”-cultism is either a form of mysticism or a mental illness. It has no basis in hard science. There is no scientific proof that a human spirit can be born in the wrong body. There is no scientific proof that a person’s subjective, “internal” feelings about one’s maleness, femaleness, both, or neither have any objective material reality.

Religion is defined as, among other things, “Belief in a spiritual or metaphysical reality, accompanied by practices or rituals pertaining to the belief.”  “Trans”-cultic beliefs about “gendered” spirits inhabiting opposite-sexed bodies are accompanied by cultic practices masquerading as science, like using chemicals to artificially stop normal, healthy puberty or to artificially produce unnatural opposite-sex puberty.

Other practices are even more barbaric and can include slicing off the healthy breasts of young, mesmerized women or castrating young men and turning their penises inside out to create “neo-vaginas” that their bodies will always recognize as wounds and try to close them up.

Like all the beliefs of the “LGBTQ+” communities, the term “two-spirit” embodies debatable, socially constructed ontological and moral beliefs—not objective, inarguable science-based facts. These arguable, faith-based, socially constructed beliefs are being imposed by government, big business, and academia throughout the Western world.

Leftists, those normalizers of all things sexually perverse and opponents of all sexual taboos, have binary hissy fits when conservatives accuse them of “grooming” children. The same leftists who defend drag queen story hours for preschoolers, openly admit to using their publicly funded teaching positions to promote their sexual peccadillos, and who pass laws requiring that all boys’ bathrooms in public schools be retrofitted with tampon machines, are rising up in unrighteous indignation at the suggestion they’re grooming children.

Merriam-Webster defines the verb “groom” as “to get into readiness for a specific objective.” The online Free Dictionary defines it as “to prepare, as for a specific … purpose.” As such, leftists who teach children either implicitly or explicitly that homosexuality and cross-sex impersonation are good, healthy, or moral are grooming children. Leftists who seek to use government schools as sexual re-education camps are grooming children. Leftist re-educators who teach children that opposition to single sex “marriage” and carving up girls’ bodies are “homophobic” and “transphobic” are grooming children.

Another leftist gripe is that all social conventions related to sex that they hate are “socially constructed” and imposed by society. By that they mean social conventions related to biological sex are arbitrary conventions that are forced on society. “Trans”-activists and their “progressive” collaborators believe that society “conditions” children into believing that biological sex exists and matters. “Trans”-activists maintain the peculiar belief that stereotypes precede and shape male and female differences rather than the other way around.

Oddly, they don’t see their assumptions about homosexuality and cross-sex impersonation as socially constructed. They don’t see their efforts to use the government, public schools, and big business to promote their views as “imposing.”

So, Fisher-Price’s recently introduced drag queen dolls for preschoolers have nothing to do with leftist socially constructed beliefs about cross-sex impersonation and nothing to do with imposing those beliefs on children.

Producing Barbie dolls in sparkly pink evening gowns has everything to do with socially constructed and imposed beliefs and conventions but producing drag queen dolls has nothing to do with the socially constructed and imposed beliefs and conventions of the “trans”-cult. Got it.

These collectible Little People dolls for preschoolers are Fisher-Price’s entree into the world of ideological grooming. Fisher-Price can’t let Mattel’s “gender-neutral” dolls corner the market on corporate grooming for profit.

Target may have been the first corporate behemoth to pave the broad path to sexual anarchy at the expense of children. Today Target has de-sexed toy aisles, de-sexed bathrooms, draped the store in rainbows to celebrate deviant sexuality, and now carries breast binders and panty packers to help girls pretend to be boys. Breast binders are used to compress girls’ breasts and “packers” are underwear that allow girls to “wear a packer, which gives the appearance of having a penis or bulge.”

Those who worship boundary-free sex-related desires view all morally tethered beliefs as “homophobic” and “transphobic.” They hurl these epithets to silence expressions of moral beliefs they hate. But the socially constructed and imposed Christo-phobic beliefs of the “LGBTQ+” community have no right to a monopoly on the public square.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Leftists-Socially-Constructing-a-Pagan-World.mp3

A new national poll from McLaughlin & Associates of likely November voters finds that 78 percent of Americans do not believe transgenderism is a “healthy human condition.” That same large percentage of Americans agreed that minor children suffering from gender confusion should be “required to wait until they are adults” before undergoing life-altering drugs and surgeries. Moreover, 90 percent believe that medical professionals performing gender-altering procedures should be required by law to disclose the long-term medical and psychological impact of such procedures.

An overwhelming 93 percent of those surveyed say it is “possible to distinguish between men and women.” Most of those surveyed (72 percent) also do not want schools teaching elementary-age children about sexual orientation and gender identity with 38 percent saying it was “inappropriate” and another 30 percent saying is “dangerous because it can lead to children being groomed for sexual encounters at an early age.”

However, the pollsters also found that a large portion of those surveyed are afraid to speak about this issue due to fear of retribution.  One-third say they keep their views on this to themselves. Only 30 percent say they are willing to express their views on this in public.

Read more:  

Nearly Two-Thirds of Americans Believe Transgenderism Isn’t Healthy, But One-Third Keep Views to Themselves

This article was originally published by the AFA of Indiana.

You know that notorious slippery slope that sexual anarchists mockingly dismiss as a figment of conservatives’ hysterical imaginations? Surely, you remember when conservatives argued that public approval of homoeroticism would lead ineluctably to public approval of other forms of sexual deviance. Well, here we are slip-slidin’ down that phantasmagorical slope all greased up with deviant sexuality.

“Trans”-cultism is ubiquitous, poisoning our professional medical and mental health communities; our public libraries; our schools, and children’s bodies.

Public school teachers in metaphorical trench coats eye five-year-old children with bad intent and throw hissy fits if they can’t teach children that sodomy is making America great.

Polyamory—known euphemistically as “consensual non-monogamy”—is spreading like gangrene on the necrotic tissues of a dying marriage ethos.

Sensing the softened ground, seeded and watered by boundary-free sexual libertines, creeps who feast on the flesh of minors and call it “intergenerational love” or “Minor Attraction,” are poking their ugly heads up in dark alleys, TED Talks, and cartoons. Diverse incarnations of “Minor Attraction,” including pedophilia (sexual attraction to pre-pubescent children), hebephilia (sexual attraction to pubescent children ages 11-14), and ephebophilia (sexual attraction to mid to late adolescents, ages 15-19), will be showing up more and more, just as hebephilia did in the original version of The Vagina Monologues.

Incest is not far behind. What’s my evidence, you ask? My evidence is that the left has given it a name: “Genetic Sexual Attraction.” For now, this phenomenon is defined as a strong sexual attraction between relatives who meet for the first time as adults, but how long will it be before relatives raised together will start ruminating on whether they would like to have sex with their siblings or parents? Remember, “love is love,” and ideas have consequences.

And the next nightmare we see on our careering hurtle down the slope is bestiality, renamed “zoophilia” and “zoosexuality.” Kathy Rudy, Duke University Professor of Gender, Sexuality and Feminist Studies authored a scholarly essay titled “LGBTQ … Z,” for which she provides this abstract:

In this essay, I draw the discourses around bestiality/zoophilia into the realm of queer theory in order to point to a new form of animal advocacy, something that might be called, in shorthand, loving animals. My argument is quite simple: if all interdicts against bestiality depend on a firm notion of exactly what sex is (and they do), and if queer theory disrupts that firm foundation by arguing that sexuality is impossible to define beforehand and pervades many different kinds of relations (and it does), then viewing bestiality in the frame of queer theory can give us another way to conceptualize the limitations of human exceptionalism.

In a trenchant critique of the dangerous ideas of Rudy, Dr. Devin Jane Buckley, points out that Rudy “seems uncertain as to whether she is sexually attracted to her own dogs.”

Rudy writes,

Queer theory has schooled me in ways that make the question of what counts as sex seem rather unintelligible. How do we cordon off sexual desire from all the other desires that move our lives? What does sex mean? Do I think I’m having sex with my dogs when they kiss my face? How do we know beforehand what sex is?

Leftists no longer know how to define “woman” or “sex.” And these are the people who want to teach the nation’s children about sexuality.

Rudy explains how queer theory has advanced social acceptance of bestiality:

Put differently, both animal rights and psychosocial perspectives [which view desire for animals as mental illness] do not believe that borders can be crossed. Queer theory, on the other hand, tells us that few of us have stable identities anymore, that borders are always crossed. We’re all changing, shifting, splitting ourselves up this way and that. It labels these processes ‘hailing,’ ‘suturing,’ and ‘interpolation’; where once we saw ourselves affiliated in one way, a new interpretive community emerges to capture our passions and move us differently. I am asking the reader to entertain the possibility that the same kinds of shifts and disruptions happen with categories like ‘human,’ ‘rabbit,’ ‘ape,’ or ‘dog.’

There you have it: bestiality, the new transgressive identity slowly emerging from the slimy goo pooling at the bottom of the fictitious slope.

Alexis Tsoulis-Reay, writer for New York Magazine’s The Cut, has twice written about a married man who has a “zoosexual” relationship with his horse. Her first article was “What’s it Like to Date a Horse?” In her follow-up article, “About That Interview I Did with a Zoophile,” just published a month ago, Tsoulis-Reay described her anger when a friend characterized the man into bestiality as having a “horse fetish”:

When one of my friends, an attorney who is married and straight, asked me how my “horse fetish” reporting was going, my first thought was, STFU, you normative bitch! I was genuinely annoyed that she’d described his entire sexual identity as a kink. “It’s a sexuality, not a fetish!” I earnestly texted back to her in all caps.

Leftists invented the idea of “authentic identity,” conflating all phenomena that are associated with or affirmed by an individual as integral parts of authentic identity and beyond moral judgment. Fetishes will become “authentic identities.” Moral disapproval of fetishistic “identities” will become hate speech. Fetishistic “identities” will develop political lobbies that will insist that their fetishes are “sexual orientations,” and voilà, fetishes will become protected under existing anti-discrimination laws.

Here are two of the leftist claims that applied consistently helped create the non-fallacious slippery slope:

1.) Marriage has no inherent connection to either sexual differentiation or reproductive potential, thereby nullifying the requirement that marriage be limited to two people or to people not closely related by blood.

2.) “Love is love,” thereby nullifying any restrictions, taboos, or prohibitions related to erotic relationships. If love is love, then who’s to say the love between adult siblings or men and horses is wrong. Some leftists argue that it’s wrong to have sex with animals because animals can’t consent. But that hardly seems a rational justification for prohibiting sex with, for example, cows since cows can’t consent to be caged, owned, branded, or eaten, which seem far more onerous than being sexually penetrated, and humans perform all of those acts.

While conservatives have been gullibly playing Candyland, sexual anarchists have been playing chess. Sexual anarchists have strategy; conservatives have strategery. The strategery of Christians in America is notable for its lack of discernment, lack of spine, and a bloated desire to be both in and of the world. Pallid, neutered “niceness,” severed from an understanding of sin has supplanted the love of Christ.

The slippery slope exists all right, but it’s not surprising that the “love is love” crowd can’t see it.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Its-All-Downhill-When-Fetish-Becomes-Identity.mp3

“Woe to those who call evil good and good evil,
who put darkness for light and light for darkness,
who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.”
~Isaiah 5:20

Informed people know that Christians are persecuted around the world, but too few acknowledge the growing persecution of Christians in Canada and the United States. This is not to suggest that the persecution faced by Christians in North America is equivalent to the severe persecution Christians face in countries like China, Afghanistan, and North Korea. Christians in North America, especially American Christians, are blessed to be living in country where we are yet able to exercise our religion relatively freely. However, there are red flags in America and other formerly Christian-friendly countries. While the United States was founded by those with a biblical worldview, recent events have shown that those in power wish to change that.

Some on the left and right dismiss the idea that Christians are persecuted in America as laughable, asserting that Christians are a privileged and protected class. While this may have been true throughout much of our history, it is not the case anymore.

Recently, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki commented on lawmakers in Alabama who have been valiantly working to protect kids from barbaric transgender surgeries and hormone therapies. In a press briefing, Psaki said, “Alabama’s lawmakers and other legislators who are contemplating these … discriminatory bills have been put on notice by the Department of Justice.”

This threat from a purportedly unbiased DOJ should be alarming.  Not only is Biden’s DOJ supporting the mutilation of young children’s bodies, but it is also actively attempting to make it a crime to protect children from these irreversible acts.  If anything, it should be a crime to chemically castrate children or mutilate their bodies.

The Canadian government has been enacting legislation that supports sexual deviance and oppresses Christians. Bill C-4 bans any form of conversion therapy throughout all of Canada. This law may sound good to some people because, when people hear the phrase “conversion therapy,” they think of aversion therapy, or non-existent lock-down camps where kids are allegedly sent to be converted. That’s not the purpose of Bill C-4, though.

Bill C-4 bans all counseling efforts that would help someone understand the cause/s of their same-sex attraction or help them align their sexual identity with their religious faith. Both Bill C-4 and Jen Psaki aim to quash any opposition to the LGBTQ agenda–an agenda antithetical to Christianity.

In addition, our government schools are Exhibit A in how the government opposes Christian values. Many public schools teach children that the “LGBTQ”  movement is noble, while Christians see it as sinful. For that, Christians are deemed hateful bigots. The government is clearly taking a stance on this sensitive topic, and that stance is firmly anti-Christian.

The United States is not as oppressive as Canada, but there are disturbing trends on the American horizon. Christians should become politically involved to preserve the blessings of the First Amendment and be good stewards of our right to govern ourselves.

Here’s some news you might have missed.

On April 7, 2022, Florida preschool teacher, 28-year-old Lois Schwartz, boasted about teaching her students that she is neither a boy nor a girl and that she’s a polyamorous, pagan witch.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1512208604421496832

“Eli” Dinh, formerly Molly, a kindergarten teacher at the private Hillbrook School in California, uses a pronoun game to inculcate five-year-olds with her arguable, self-serving gender theories. On Instagram she goes by @okayenby, with “enby,” standing for nonbinary. She expects others to refer to her by the third-person plural pronouns “they” and “them.” Dinh is a woman who gave birth and breastfed two children before she decided that her authentic identity was male. Then she started doping testosterone, hired a quack surgeon to lop off her breasts, and changed her name from Molly to Eli. Dinh’s favorite curricular components are, not surprisingly, social and emotional learning and anti-bias education—for kindergartners. Private schools may teach whatever destructive nonsense they want, but Dinh is the cold, sharp tip of a colossal iceberg that is plowing through government schools as well.

Brooke Charter School first-grade teacher “Ray Skyer,” a bearded woman who pretends to be a man, told K-2 students this hogwash during a zoom class:

Something that’s really cool and unique about me is that I’m transgender. We touched on that earlier this week in the book that Ms. Hammond read, but I’m going to give you my explanation about what it means to be transgender.

So, when babies are born, the doctor looks and makes a guess on whether the baby is a boy or girl based on what that baby looks like. Most of the time, that guess is 100 percent correct. … But sometimes the doctor is wrong. The doctor makes an incorrect guess. When the doctor makes a correct guess, that’s when a person is called cisgender. When a doctor’s guess is wrong, that’s when they are transgender.

So, I’m a man, but when I was baby, the doctors told my parents that I was a girl. … Until I was 18 years old, everyone thought I was a girl. This was super, super uncomfortable for me because I knew that wasn’t right. … So, when I was 18, I told my family and friends that I’m really a boy, and it was like this huge weight had been lifted off of my shoulders, and I had the freedom to be who I truly am.

.@BrookeSchool 1st grade teacher records an “identity share” zoom call with K-2 grades where he spoke about being trans.

“When babies are born the dr looks & makes a guess on whether the baby is a boy or girl. Sometimes the dr is wrong. If they are right, the baby is cisgender” pic.twitter.com/qYGFm9B7rF

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) April 10, 2022

This short video teaches parents everything they need to know about morally and intellectually unmoored activists who self-identify as teachers working in schools. First, they propagandize in many ways, including through literature, direct instruction, and demagoguery.

Second, they propagate highly controversial beliefs without telling young students that the “explanations” are controversial, disputed, faith-based, and devoid of scientific support. Doctors don’t “guess” whether babies are boys or girls. They identify the sex of babies. Skyer was correctly identified as the girl she is and ever more will be. Her mother’s obstetrician did not guess, and he or she was not wrong. At 18, Skyer decided to start masquerading as a man.

Skyer did not merely explain. She manipulated the emotions of young innocent children who would not want anyone—especially a teacher they know and like—to feel “super, super uncomfortable.” So, in addition to feeding them fantastical fiction in the guise of objective truth, Skyer is trying to make children feel predisposed to sex-masquerades.

Indefensible ideological grooming of children by leftists is not limited to the United States. Australian Member of Parliament Bernie Finn shared an assignment given to 10-year-old boys and girls in a school in the district he represents. Children were instructed to discuss their father’s erections and ejaculations with their fathers. It should go without saying that at no age should a child be asked to discuss with their fathers their erections and ejaculations. But we are forced to say such things now because purportedly “civilized” societies no longer experience righteous anger at evil being promoted as good to children in school. How long before “civilized” societies no longer find father-daughter personal orgasm discussions objectionable?

Conservative Americans seem—to borrow a British term—gobsmacked by the trans-volution sweeping our formerly rational society. I am gobsmacked by their astonishment. The trans-volution has been slowly emerging like a parasitic guinea worm from the homo-volution which was birthed by the Boomer’s sexual revolution. I first warned about the emerging trans-volution in late 2008 when I wrote about “bisexual” Anglican priest Laurel Dykstra who has twins via a sperm donor. Dyskstra wrote an article in 2005 on how to make preschools “trans-friendly.” Here were her explanations and recommendations:

• She said that the “gender binary system. … is harmful to everyone.”

• She moralized that “It is not enough for classrooms, teachers, and schools to be ‘open’ or ‘non-judgmental’; they need to be actively trans-positive.”

• Dykstra recommended that when talking to preschoolers, teachers should say things like “‘Well, most men have penises, but some don’t,’” and “‘Some girls grow up to be men.’”

• She urged teachers to “Encourage kids to question their assumptions. ‘How do you know that that person is a woman? Could a man wear a dress?’”

• She instructed teachers to “Call children by the name and the pronouns they choose.”

• She recommended accessorizing classrooms with a “Tranny Teddy. Have a non-gendered toy/doll/puppet…. Do not use pronouns and give this creature a variety of gendered clothing, such as a skirt and tie. If asked, say ‘Oh, Binker isn’t a boy or a girl.’”

• She suggested having a “Butch/Femme Day. Why not teach kids language like butch/femme, as an alternative to boy/girl or male/female? You could have dress-up days to play deliberately with gender, like ‘Fabulous and Fearless Day’ or ‘Capable and Campy.’”

• She encouraged teachers to “Invite a drag performer or transsexual person who would be willing to share their story and a photo album.”

• When reading picture books to preschoolers, Dykstra recommended “switching pronouns, avoiding them altogether, or using alternative pronouns.”

• Dykstra rationalized using deceit in the face of parental opposition: “For ‘stealth practitioners’ (i.e., teachers in a transphobic setting), these classroom suggestions can be implemented without fanfare to create a more just and welcoming classroom.”

Dykstra offered these suggestions 17 years ago, and I issued warnings 14 years ago. Increasing numbers of warnings have been issued across the nation by men and women who have been paying attention. The ignorance and sloth of conservatives—including church leaders—in addressing the evil in the midst of our schools is inexcusable.

If Americans had been paying attention to warnings about the perverse shape of things to come, maybe the disaster we see unfolding in schools could have been stopped, thereby preventing the incalculable damage being done to children. But confronting socially acceptable evil requires not just awareness but courage, perseverance, and a willingness to suffer for the neighbors we love.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Ideologically-Grooming-Kids-in-Schools.mp3

If you ever doubted that we wrestle against spiritual forces of evil who call good evil and evil good, then please watch these two videos of brief statements made on the floor of the Illinois House on Wednesday.

First, watch this video of one of Illinois’ finest lawmakers, the always gracious Tom Morrison (R-Palatine), who civilly expressed his views on the injustice of eradicating public recognition of sex differences, including in women’s private spaces and sports.

Then watch this video of Illinois’ worst lawmaker, the sanctimonious, arrogant, and venomous lesbian Kelly Cassidy (D-Chicago), who, in response to Morrison, hurled indefensible lies at him, refusing even to use his name.

I urge you to watch these videos because how each Illinois House member spoke is almost as important as what they said. But for your convenience, the transcripts of both statements are set forth below, beginning with Morrison’s. Please read it carefully, so you are able to discern whether Cassidy’s response was justifiable:

For these past several weeks, we’ve been hearing facts about women’s history month, and I’m sure that we’ll hear more facts today and this week. When we hear those words, we think about our own mothers, wives, daughters, other notable women throughout history. We objectively know what a woman is, but it’s become increasingly common now to pretend that we don’t know. This is becoming George Orwell’s 1984. It’s Newspeak. It’s gaslighting. It’s activists pounding the table to declare that two plus two equals five. And that does not make it so. Demands that society accept lies as facts in the name of tolerance, inclusion, and justice is anything but. It’s not right, compassionate, or just.

This past weekend, the NCAA allowed a man to become a national champion in women’s swimming. This action was months and years in the making, and it denied that rightful place of honor to actual female athletes, several of whom were denied being named All Americans because their place was taken by University of Pennsylvania swimmer Lia Thomas. Anyone who thinks that fairness in sports competition is the only issue here is missing the point.

Months ago, teammates of Lia Thomas complained to school officials that Thomas had exposed male nudity repeatedly in their locker room. This should have been a clearcut case of indecency and harassment, but university officials ignored the women’s concerns and discomfort. “Listen to women.” In this case, hardly.

Parents in Los Alamitos, California last month sent their fifth-grade girls on a three-day overnight school science field trip. After the weekend concluded, the girls told their parents that three male counselors who identify as non-binary shared those cabin quarters with the girls for each of the nights. Schools in Illinois already have similar policies. And most parents don’t even know, nor will they be told by school officials, less they be accused of discrimination.

In several states, including California, Washington State, and even here in Illinois, hundreds of male inmates, many of whom are serving time for sexual crimes or other crimes of violence are self-declaring as female or non-binary. And they’re getting a transfer to a women’s-only facility. There’s no requirement for surgery, no requirement for hormone therapy. Even if that did make the policy less bad, any sane person realizes how outrageous this is, but the practice continues and is expanding as more individuals realize what they can get away with.

According to a press report, President Joe Biden is now reportedly planning or considering I should say an executive order modeled after the California law, which would allow federal inmates to self-identify their gender and choose between a male or female prison.

Ideas have consequences. It is a minority of vocal activists who continue to push this ideology on all levels of society, including to young school children. It’s an ideology that is at war with reality, and we must stop blindly going along.

We can and should be kind to individuals who suffer from gender dysphoria, but we can do so without completely and irrationally upending society, which is already happening at lightning speed. If we really believe in the protection of women and women’s rights, we must acknowledge the harms being done and bring a stop to this, including the silence and passive acceptance about what’s really going on.

I imagine that here in this body, and perhaps beyond this chamber, there will be some who will try to condemn me and my words, but I’d like to close with these words by columnist Selwyn Duke: “The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it.”

Thank you.

Now read Cassidy’s statement:

Last week, my constituent Elise Malary was pulled out of Lake Michigan. Elise was a shining example of what we want people to do and be in our community. She was part of our community on the North Side. She was dedicated to uplifting the people that she lived and worked with every day. She is one of too many black trans women whose lives mean nothing to the man on the other side of this room. She is one of many transgendered youth who are at increased risk of suicide because of the actions of people like the man that just spoke.

We are watching around the country as right-wing politicians take aim at trans youth and their families picking on the least of these. I’ve watched for years as my colleague has tormented trans youth in his community. And the brave young woman who stood up to that behavior is now my constituent as well. And to every trans youth out there listening,  to every parent who loves and affirms their children as God gave them to them, that’s not happening here in Illinois.

We will not follow in the footsteps of states that are tormenting these families and driving them away. We will embrace our youth. We will protect our youth and we will work together to solve the epidemic of murders and suicides among trans women in our community because we actually love and care for people as God made them. I don’t want to hear any more hate speech on this floor, not from anyone. And if we can only do one thing to honor Elise Malary’s memory, it’s to do that. Hate speech does not belong on this floor, not now, not ever.

For those who don’t know, “Elise” Malary, was a 31-year-old man who identified as a woman. He was not—as Cassidy implied—a “youth.” His age doesn’t make his death less tragic. Rather, his age reveals how misleading and manipulative Cassidy is.

To summarize, Morrison believes it is unjust for women to lose sports awards and records to biological men. He believes it is unjust for adult men to room with young girls. And he believes it is unjust for female prisoners to be housed with male criminals.

So too do feminists from the other side of the political aisle, including the Women’s Liberation Front, Naomi Wolf, Kara Dansky, the Women’s Declaration International, and J.K. Rowling. In Cassidy’s view, are all these left-leaning feminists—including many lesbians—guilty of hate speech for expressing their belief that sex-based rights exist and that denial of them is unjust? Does defending the sex-based rights of girls and women constitute the tormenting of gender-dysphoric boys in Cassidy’s distorted view?

I have seen and heard a lot of repugnant things spewed by the unscrupulous demagogue Cassidy, but nothing as repugnant as her exploitation of a tragic death to smear of one of Illinois’ finest public servants. In her vitriolic diatribe, she trembled with unrighteous rage as she falsely accuses Morrison of not caring about the death of a “black trans youth.” What is her evidence for this allegation?

What evidence did Cassidy provide for her malignant claim that Morrison doesn’t care about the deaths of “trans”-identifying youth or that his words about the reality and meaning of objective, immutable biological sex causes the suicide of “trans”-identifying youth?

What is Cassidy’s evidence that Morrison hates and “torments” trans people? What is her evidence that Morrison (or the millions of men and women who share his beliefs on gender dysphoria) hates those who identify as “trans”? Does Cassidy hate everyone who believes differently than she does on gender, sex, and “sexual orientation”? If so, then she must hate a huge swath of people, including many Catholics, Protestants, Eastern Orthodox, Orthodox Jews, and Muslims.

What is her evidence that God “made” gender dysphoria? Did God make Minor Attraction? Zoophilia? Genetic Sexual Attraction? Did God make body dysmorphia? Did God make schizophrenia? Did God make cleft palate or spinal bifida? Or does God make humans in a world corrupted by the fall that results in disordered bodies, minds, and hearts?

In Cassidy’s view, does “loving and caring for others just the way God made them” include loving and caring for Christians just the way God made them? Does such love demand she affirm all their desires, beliefs, and actions? Does caring for and loving pedophiles or hebephiles require affirming their feelings and identities?

Is Cassidy aware that many in the medical and mental health communities believe that gender dysphoria and “trans”-identification may be symptoms—like depression and anxiety—of underlying causes, including autism, trauma, abuse, and psychosocial experiences?

Is she aware that hospitals in Sweden and the UK have stopped providing hormonal “treatment” to minors? Are they hateful? Should they be prohibited from speaking? While children and teens with gender dysphoria need compassion and treatment, the disputed question is what kind of treatment is best. Disagreeing with Cassidy on the best path forward does not constitute hatred of gender-dysphoric youth.

Cassidy concludes with an astonishing display of arrogance. Cassidy arrogates to herself the right to define “hate speech” and then arrogates to herself the right to ban it from the House floor? Unbelievable hubris.

Word to Cassidy, Christians think her assumptions about gender, sex, and “sexual orientation” are false and destructive. Many Christians feel uncomfortable and even marginalized by what they view as her hate speech and her attempts to silence dissent. They find her words as intolerant and bigoted as she finds the words of Rep. Morrison.

Why did no Republicans respond to Cassidy’s intemperate, uncivil, indefensible statement? Are there no Republicans with the integrity and courage to speak publicly as Morrison did on this issue of profound importance? Are there no Republicans willing to call for Cassidy to be censured?

Republicans who said nothing following Cassidy’s calumny should be ashamed.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Kelly-Cassidy-Hits-New-Ethical-Low.mp3

One of my colleagues has been combating LGBTQ extremism for several decades, working tirelessly for almost no money, and with constant vilification as his main reward. I asked him one day on the air, “Why don’t you just stop?” He answered, “I’ll stop when they stop.”

That is exactly how I feel.

When I no longer have to read headlines like this, I’ll stop: “‘We’re uncomfortable in our own locker room.’ Lia Thomas’ UPenn [female] teammate tells how the trans swimmer doesn’t always cover up her male genitals when changing and their concerns go ignored by their coach.”

Seriously? His male genitals? What kind of madness is this?

And the fact that a biological male with male plumbing (who, by the way, is attracted to females), shares a locker room with women – where they disrobe and shower – is absolute insanity, not to mention terribly unfair. In fact, it is outright abusive.

As one of the female swimmers said (anonymously), “‘It’s definitely awkward because Lia still has male body parts and is still attracted to women.’

“The swimmer said that multiple teammates have raised their concerns with their coach, trying to get Thomas ousted from the female locker room,” but all to no avail.

How can anyone possibly defend this? And does anyone want their daughter exposed (literally) to something like this? This is madness.

As for Will “Lia” Thomas competing against other girls, even Bruce “Caitlyn” Jenner has weighed in, calling out the unfairness of it and saying, “We must protect women’s sports.”

So, as long as the madness continues, I’ll continue to shout out as well. How can I (or we) do anything less?

And what about headlines like this? How can we stay silent when this is happening on our watch?

“EXCLUSIVE: ‘They created a double life for my daughter’: Parents of girl, 12, who tried to hang herself twice at school after ‘months of secret meetings about her gender identity’ slam district staff who ‘went behind their backs’ and ‘likens it to sex offenders who take advantage of a child and try to keep things in secret’.”

What an outrage.

Yet similar things happen in schools across America every day, as the teachers and administrators and counselors encourage kids in their gender identity and same-sex attractions, to the complete exclusion of the parents.

In the words of the girl’s father, Wendell Perez, “We’re talking about the staff from school this information and developing a plan of several sessions with my daughter, for months, talking about issues that are related and that the parents need to be involved. They basically created a double life for my daughter.”

He added, “If we allow this to happen, we are admitting that the sex offenders – the models operating of the sex offenders – is correct, because that is actually what they do. They take advantage of a child, they try to keep things in secret and make them do things that they are not supposed to do.”

He was hardly exaggerating.

A mother and father in another country with a “progressive” school system were shocked when they met with their daughter’s teachers at school. She was a young teen.

In previous months, for the first time in her life and quite out of the blue, she had begun to identify as a male, wanting to go by a new name. But when the parents probed more deeply, they learned that the school had been encouraging her in this direction.

When they met with her teachers, they were shocked and outraged to learn that the school had planned to announce their daughter’s new male identity and name the very next day – without the parents having the slightest hint this was going on.

How can this be tolerated? And who on earth gave these teachers and administrators and counselors these kinds of rights?

As for those who struggle with gender identity confusion, I do not refer to their struggle as transanity, as I have stated many times. I have compassion for them in their struggles and cannot imagine the pain and agony they have lived with.

That’s also why I advocate strongly that we do our best to help them from the inside out, finding better solutions than puberty blockers for children and sex-change surgery and then more hormones for life for adults.

But as long as the casualties mount. As long as children’s lives are being destroyed. As long as girls are being exposed to male genitalia in their locker rooms (and sexually assaulted in their bathrooms). As long as female athletes are forced to compete with males.

Written by Patience Griswold

Amid growing international pushback on the transgender movement’s so-called “gender affirmative” approach to gender dysphoria and the rush to give minors experimental treatments including puberty-blockers, cross-sex hormones, and irreversible surgeries, the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) has released new draft guidelines recommending a less radical approach than they have held to in the past.

Rather than immediately rushing adolescents into a lifetime of hormone “treatments” and surgeries, the draft guidelines recommend mental health evaluation and several years of monitoring for adolescents with gender dysphoria, although they continue to encourage harmful and irreversible procedures after that.

WPATH, an international organization headquartered in Minnesota, plays an extremely influential role in the use of so-called “treatments” such as cross-sex hormones and “gender transition” surgery. Throughout the rest of the draft guidelines, WPATH continues to recommend so-called “gender affirmative treatments” that have caused permanent harm to young people and adults, yet the proposed draft offers slightly more protection to adolescents struggling with gender dysphoria than recommendations from major medical associations in the U.S. WPATH’s shift, slight though it is, also shows that on an international level, the transgender movement is recognizing that they may be held accountable for the damage they have caused.

WPATH’s draft guidelines added a chapter on adolescents requiring a full mental health evaluation and several years of monitoring before receiving cross-sex hormones or surgery. The guidelines continue to recommend irreversible surgeries for minors, including mastectomies for girls as young as 15 and “bottom surgery” for 17-year-old girls, although they do not recommend similar surgery for boys under 18. The guidelines also removed requirements that adults receive mental health evaluation, despite the fact that many adults who have detransitioned have spoken up about how the mental health struggles that were driving their gender dysphoria were not adequately addressed when they sought help.

At the same time, if WPATH adopts these guidelines, multiple major medical associations in the U.S., including the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Psychological Association, and the Endocrine Society will be out of step with international standards, advocating an even more radical approach than WPATH. These associations encourage a so-called “gender affirmative” approach known as the “Dutch protocol,” originated by a doctor in the Netherlands who has since cautioned against his own approach. This protocol encourages medically “transitioning” children, disregarding the fact that puberty-blockers and cross-sex hormones can lead to dangerous complications including stunted bone growth, pulmonary embolisms, increased risk of heart attacks, and permanent loss of fertility.

Attempting to live in denial of biological reality is always harmful. No amount of surgery or cross-sex hormones can ever change the fact that a man is a man, and a woman is a woman, down to every single cell. People struggling with gender dysphoria deserve compassion, and true compassion never reinforces lies.

The New York Times’ coverage of WPATH’s new guidelines claims that “transition” improves mental health outcomes. However, the best studies show that this is not the case, and the studies that have been used to prop up this narrative are riddled with methodological flaws. One study claiming to show that “transition” improved mental health actually showed the opposite, a fact that the authors of the study eventually acknowledged.

Sadly, the LGBT lobby is actively working to penalize counselors and mental health professionals who would offer compassionate support to minors struggling with gender dysphoria. 20 states have implemented so-called “conversion therapy” bans and, and the five largest cities here in Minnesota have adopted them. These counseling bans interfere with the client-patient relationship and deny help to kids who are struggling with gender dysphoria, insisting that the only option that should be available to them is to be rushed to “transition,” even as a growing number of young people and adults who have detransitioned speaking out about how they have been harmed by transgender ideology.

Children and teens with gender dysphoria deserve better than to be treated as guinea pigs for the sake of advancing radical gender ideology. WPATH’s guidelines, while they offer slightly more protection than they have in the past, are dangerous and recommendations from the AAP, APA, and ES are even more so.

This article was originally published by the Minnesota Family Council.