After publishing this Substack, I came across this video of a young woman’s “detransition” story. I also learned that Texas Christian University canceled an event featuring Chloe Cole, another “detransitioner” who travels the nation sharing her testimony. The fight to protect the next generation from the evils of “transgenderism” is far from over.
This quote is from the young woman who lived as a “male” for eight years but now regrets having a double mastectomy, full hysterectomy, and genital reconstruction surgery:
“I’m so angry…and so sad. It’s like a virus, or something, that infected me. And it happened so quickly…I can’t have kids. I’ll never lose my virginity. It’s like I’m left to just accept the scraps of the life that I could have had…I don’t know how to be okay with that. I hate when people [say], ‘Everything happens for a reason.’ No, this didn’t happen for a reason. It’s just a tragedy. Call it what it is.”
In the video, you can see what appears to be mutilation scars on her left forearm. Skin grafts are typically taken from this area to construct “a penis, urethra, scrotum, and the obliteration of the vaginal cavity with closure,” an operation known as phalloplasty (or “bottom surgery”). While it is possible to correct genital deformities, the damage to her body is irreversible, and the trajectory of her future is permanently altered. She can recover some femininity, but her womanhood is gone forever.
This is the expected end of social “transitioning,” cross-dressing, and using alternative names and pronouns—all of which can be concealed by false interpretations of student privacy laws. Also, when K-12 district representatives and employees implement DEI policies, host rainbow celebrations, and defend “gender identity,” they are advocating for all of the above. No one is born in the wrong body, and anyone who supports sterilizing and castrating minors should not be trusted around children.
I always bring the “transgender” agenda back to government education because it’s an area where many parents are still asleep at the wheel. Public schools (and increasingly some private schools) are the battlefield as board members, administrators, teachers, and counselors position themselves as the enemy of parental rights. Thankfully, parents are winning in the courts, and thousands of children will never undergo “transgender” medical malpractice. Still, parents must remain vigilant in the ongoing war to assert moral authority over their children.
It’s also important to bring attention to another group that’s not doing enough to tackle the “transgender” problem. Sadly, many Christians are aiding and abetting the spread of LGBTQ ideologies and practices. Keep in mind that “Christian” is a relative term associated with thousands of denominations and cults, and can be interpreted to mean a “good person.”
On February 25, 2025, Pew Research published survey results showing that “57% [up from 54% in 2014] of U.S. Christians say homosexuality should be accepted by society; 55% [up from 44% in 2014] say same-sex marriage should be legal.” The report also reveals 29% of Christians believe greater acceptance of “transgender” individuals is “a change for the better.” The latter is a baseline number, as researchers did not ask this question in previous case studies.
Oddly enough, Barna’s 2025 study shows Millennials and Gen Z have increased their church attendance. The report says, “The typical Gen Z churchgoer now attends 1.9 weekends per month, while Millennial churchgoers average 1.8 times—a steady upward shift since the lows seen during the pandemic. These are easily the highest rates of church attendance among young Christians since they first hit Barna’s tracking.”
Before we celebrate, let’s consider that in 2004, 51% of American pastors held a biblical worldview. By 2022, just 37% of pastors had sustained a biblical worldview, while 62% held syncretistic beliefs (that is, blending Christianity with other religions). In 2023, only 36% of pastors were “very effective” in helping Christians grow their faith over time. A mere 10% were “very effective” in “growing new converts into mature Christians,” while 12% encouraged believers to share their faith, and a measly 6% reached out to non-Christians.
These are sobering statistics, and, according to Barna, the increase among Gen Z still equates to attending church “less than half the time” of older generations. So, while young people are seeking truth, many will join ministries led by compromised leaders. Gen Z’s faith might grow over time, but they won’t share it outside the church, and what they learn may not have a lasting effect. In short, the American Church produces converts without conviction and consumers without consecration, who master religious transactions without transformation.
My fellow believers, none of this is a sign of “revival.”
I have lost count of how many times we canceled Netflix, rebooked Disney vacations, and chose Walmart over Target. Jumping on a trend is not good enough. We can’t be so preoccupied with our regularly scheduled programming that we fail to address the spirit of the age that’s consuming present generations.
Are we too holy to associate with LGBTQ people because their sin looks different than ours? Are we so loving that we can’t confront sin at all? Have we settled for inviting the lost to hear watered-down preaching because we’re too biblically illiterate to usher them into the Kingdom directly? If we’re honest, most Christians wouldn’t know how to minister to that broken woman in the video. We would say, “Jesus loves you,” and hand her a flyer for the next church event.
I agreed when the woman said destroying her body didn’t happen for a reason, and she called it a tragedy. The expression, “Everything happens for a reason,” is typically what believers (and nonbelievers) say when they lack the capacity to produce genuine empathy. It’s on par with “God works in mysterious ways,” a favorite among those who cannot discern the difference between coincidence and divine appointment. Neither of these phrases is found in Scripture.
The truth is, everything does not happen for a reason. Some things—and I would argue, living in a fallen world, that most things—happen as a consequence. Our beliefs influence our actions, and actions dictate outcomes. We can only help the next generation by imitating the Berean Christians (Acts 17:11), speaking the truth in love (Eph. 4:15), and investing time in young people beyond religious activities. Some sinners will never darken the doorway of your church, but they shouldn’t have to wait until Sunday to hear the gospel.
I challenge Christians to befriend an LGBTQ person, learn their story, and, when their heart is ready, preach the full gospel to them. Don’t stop at “Jesus loves you” and a church invitation. Tell them why He was crucified. Explain that He is not only our Friend—He is also our Judge. He extends mercy to those who repent and wrath to those who reject Him. Jesus came as a lamb, but He will return as a lion. Faith in His work on the cross is the only way to life, both now and for eternity.
Never separate love from truth.
Tiffany Benson is the Founder of Restore Parental Rights in Education. Her commentaries on education, politics, and Christian faith can be viewed at Parentspayattention.com and Bigviewsmallwindow.com. Follow her on socials @realtiffanyb.
Chandler, Arizona, has a special election coming up on November 4, 2025. If you’re a resident, keep an eye on your mailbox. Ballots were mailed to voters on Wednesday, October 8, 2025.
One matter on this year’s special election ballot seems rather innocuous—Proposition 410—Charter Amendment Clarification of Term Limits for Councilmembers and Mayor.
At first glance, this appears to be a simple clarification of murky language in an outdated city charter. The current city charter states: “No person shall be eligible to be elected to the office of councilmember for more than two consecutive terms, or to the office of mayor for more than two consecutive terms or to more than a consecutive combination of the same.”
Simply put, candidates can hold office for two consecutive terms and then must sit out four years before running again. This language, however, poses a major problem. The past three Chandler mayors all served 8 years (two terms) on city council and then served 8 years (two terms) as mayor. This is in violation of the charter as it is currently written.
This all came to light in May of this year. Matt Orlando, a current 2-term Chandler city councilmember who filed a statement of interest to run for mayor in 2026, was quoted as saying, “It’s all how we interpret the charter – Bottom line is this: there is some clarity that is needed to fix the charter language.”
There was some debate at the subsequent city council meetings about whether this should be fast tracked to the November 4th special election ballot or tabled for community discussion and then voted on in 2026. The council ultimately voted 6-1 in favor of clarifying the charter language to, in essence, EXTEND the term limits from 8 years in office at city level to 16 years in office at city level. As currently written, an individual could not run for mayor after two terms on city council without a legitimate legal challenge.
This all sounds pretty boring, right? I certainly thought so. The last three Chandler mayors all served 16 years—8 on council and 8 as mayor. And Chandler is one of the best run, most financially solvent cities in Arizona. So, who cares?
Then I started seeing the signs—VOTE YES ON PROP 410 – KEEP CHANDLER TERM LIMITS (emphasis added).
Wait…am I confused? Isn’t a yes vote intended to get rid of the current term limits and extend them to 16 consecutive years at city level—8 on council and 8 as mayor?
After seeing the signs, I went home and did some research. And I was right. A yes vote most certainly does NOT keep term limits as written. It extends them. So, then I made some phone calls, specifically asking if it is legal to lie on campaign signs. And guess what? IT IS LEGAL TO LIE ON CAMPAIGN SIGNS. Whoa. I just went from a whole level of not caring to being very perturbed.
Why the lies? What is going on? And who is behind the YES ON PROP 410 campaign? If we are being outright lied to on campaign signs up all over the city, these are questions we should be asking. And I am asking them.
I’m not sure who is behind it, but I do know that Councilmember Matt Orlando, who plans to run for mayor in 2026, has made it clear that he fully endorses the Yes on 410 messaging. And interestingly enough, he would be the one who would benefit the most from its passage.
Do we really want a city leader who knowingly misleads his constituents for personal gain?
I know I don’t.
Charlotte Golla is Chandler resident of 20 years, wife and mother of four children, fundraising consultant, and concerned citizen.
How long must taxpayers be forced to throw money at a failed plan before something is done about it? For the Maricopa Association of Governments’ (MAG) regional transportation plan—which for two decades spent billions on light-rail and other wasteful “active transportation” projects and has primed the pump for another twenty years of boondoggle spending—The Club hopes the answer is not much longer.
Since 2004, local governments through MAG have siphoned more and more funding from a transportation tax to build white elephant transit projects throughout Maricopa County. Yet MAG won’t budge from its broken plan despite collapsed ridership, worsened congestion, and ballooningcosts – for projects that don’t match how people actually travel.
The good news is that with the next statutory transportation audit coming due July 2026, lawmakers on the Joint Legislative Audit Committee (JLAC) will have an opportunity to weigh in on the MAG plan and provide recommendations for change.
State law requires that these five-year audits evaluate several elements of the MAG plan, including transit service, costs, ridership, congestion, and mobility. While previous audits flagged some deficiencies, they lacked any concrete performance metrics, and on a few occasions were prepared by a firm tied to MAG (a conflict of interest). So, to further bolster the JLAC process, the Arizona Free Enterprise Club brought in a nationally recognized transportation expert to conduct an audit of the plan. The result: MAG’s plan is failing and needs a major overhaul.
In the first five months of 2025, solar and wind dominated new U.S. electricity generation. Of the 15 gigawatts (GW) added, solar was 11.5, wind was 2.3, and gas was just 1.3, according to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Industry voices like Stephanie Bosh of the Solar Energy Industries Association hail this as proof that solar delivers power “faster and cheaper than any other source.” Is this true?
As we accelerate toward a grid increasingly reliant on wind and solar, a closer look reveals a troubling reality: these intermittent sources are driving up electricity costs, not slashing them, through a web of hidden expenses that threaten reliability and affordability.
Solar and wind’s part-time nature is the root issue. Solar generates nothing at night, little in the first and last hours of daylight, and falters under clouds, rain, or snow. Wind generation varies unpredictably. This intermittency doesn’t just displace fossil fuels like natural gas and coal—it forces them into inefficient backup roles.
Calling fossil fuels backups is a misuse of the English language that only serves the wind and solar industrial complex. It’s equivalent to calling the starting pitcher a backup in favor of a pitcher who can only play when the wind blows or the sun shines.
Hydrocarbon, coal and natural gas plants, with fixed costs (capital, maintenance, and employees) comprising 60-75% of operational costs, must raise prices on reduced sales volumes to break even. As renewables flood the market during peak production, they suppress wholesale prices temporarily, where subsidized low-bid renewables set the prices for all. In other grids, they get windfall profits, getting the highest price paid for electricity.
Yet, in the “pay-as-clear” system, evening ramps or scarcity periods spike prices, as expensive peaker plants — needed more frequently for renewable gaps caused by the addition of wind and solar — set the highest price, which is paid to all.
Consider the evidence from high wind and solar regions. California’s residential rates are 30-35 cents/kWh—nearly double the U.S. average of 17 cents — despite 50% wind and solar. Germany’s prices top 36-41 cents/kWh with 55% from wind and solar; Denmark and the UK follow suit at 37 and 29-32 cents, respectively.
These ambitious transitions expose the myth: wholesale dips from renewables are overshadowed by retail hikes from taxes, subsidies, grid upgrades, peakers, and using full-time coal and natural gas part-time.
In California, demand from EVs and data centers exacerbates this, and intermittency demands more peakers. These peaker plants run inefficiently, emit more when ramping up, and charge more because they are only used some of the time, causing costly price spikes. They set the price all generators are paid with the take-and-pay system.
In a grid of only hydro, nuclear, gas, and coal — dispatchable sources—peaker needs plummet. These can load-follow predictably, handling demand peaks without the supply volatility renewables cause. Hydro ramps quickly; nuclear provides steady baseload, natural gas and coal are dispatched to match demand. The system worked and was cost effective.
Pre-renewable grids used peakers sparingly, at 4-10%, versus 20% or more in solar-heavy systems like California, where the solar “duck curve” (charting solar generation creates a graph that looks like a duck, no production at night, the belly of the duck, ramp up during the day, the neck of the duck, with a sharp drop as the sun sets, the downward beak of the duck) requires rapid evening ramps of 10-20 GW.
Adding renewables means building more costly, underutilized peaker plants, inflating bills. Cancelling out much of the CO2 emission reductions that are the stated reason for adding costly disruptive wind and solar.
Transmission costs compound the problem. Wind thrives in remote plains or offshore; solar thrives in distant deserts. Connecting these to cities demands expensive high-voltage lines that cost $1-3 million per mile. Thousands of more miles than are needed for nearby hydrocarbon or nuclear plants.
U.S. estimates peg a price tag of $450 billion by 2035 for renewable integration, adding at least 2 cents/kWh to rates. In Germany, €70 billion in upgrades add 3 cents/kWh. Claims of renewables being “cheaper” rely on levelized cost of electricity (LCOE), ignoring transmission and peaker costs. Solar’s $30-50/MWh jumps 30% or more when transmission and backups are factored in.
FERC projects 84% of 133 GW additions by 2028 will come from wind and solar, making our grids less reliable and more expensive.
Policies like the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which stripped tax subsidies and credits may slow growth, but the trend persists. We need honest accounting. We cannot ignore the wind and solar reality: more blackouts and ever higher prices.
The idea to extend light rail to the State Capitol has occupied the dusty shelves of bureaucratic transit plans for ages. Phoenix first floated it in their 2000 “Transit 2000” plan, their 2015 Transportation 2050 initiative, and the concept has taken up space in every MAG and regional planning cycle since 2004. The idea’s longevity is not a testament to how good ideas endure; rather how bureaucrats remain unaffected regardless of light rail’s failure; unwilling to change course despite low ridership, high costs, high crime, or changing travel patterns. The world changes but a transit plan apparently never dies.
In fact, it turns out it can’t be stopped from destroying the Capitol corridor even when lawmakers pass a law to stop it.
In 2023, Republican legislators negotiated Proposition 479, Maricopa County’s half cent sales tax for transportation, which included a clause prohibiting the use of any public resources for light rail coming within 150 feet of the State Capitol. The goal of the provision was to insulate lawmakers from the disruption and destruction caused by light rail. This neat trick of making the “Capitol Line” someone else’s problem would likely backfire.
Well, it turns out we were right, and what Phoenix has in store for the Capitol corridor is worse than anyone could have imagined.
Sandra D. Kennedy, with help and funding from Soros and company, has made it clear that she will bring the Green New Deal to SRP whether customers care or not.
You remember Sandra Kennedy, right? Kennedy tried to pass a Green New Deal regulatory mandate while serving at the Corporation Commission, but it was thankfully defeated by the other Republican Commissioners in 2022. Now, we conservatives need to pay attention again because with the SRP Board elections coming in April, there is a push to flip the board by Sandra Kennedy and her supporters.
Currently, the SRP Board is nearly split between conservatives and Green New Dealers, but the left is pushing hard to flip board members at the SRP election in April. We can’t let that happen.
It is important to understand that SRP does NOT fall under Arizona Corporation Commission jurisdiction, the entity that regulates the other Arizona electric utilities. The Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District (the District) was officially organized in 1937, formalizing its dual role in managing water resources and providing electricity. This formation was driven by a need to expand the utility’s role in power generation to support the growing population and industries of central Arizona at that time. SRP was formed according to ARS Sec: 48-2301-48-2475, which permits self-governance by a board elected from its members and elections that are completely independent from the regular elections held by city, county, and state.
The next election of Board members (a complex process) will be held April 7, 2026, and all eligible SRP voters must be registered with SRP no later than March 9, 2026. This registration and voting is completely independent of Maricopa County and the Arizona Secretary of State. Maricopa County residents can register to vote here (though you may find that many of you will not be eligible to vote).
Another important point to explore is why all Maricopa County residents who receive electricity from SRP cannot have a vote in who decides on costs of decarbonization, new power plants, and rates to fund these. I have lived in Mesa and Gilbert for the past 45 years and owned 4 houses in that time, but I could only vote in SRP elections at one of the 4 houses, why?
The answer is because the SRP District voting boundaries have never changed since it was incorporated in 1937 even though SRP has expanded service well outside the district’s original boundaries (see here).
The result is that more than 250,000 Maricopa and Pinal County residents have no say in how SRP spends its earnings or sets rates for us customers. This wide swath of Maricopa citizens cannot vote in SRP District elections, and that is just patently unfair!
It is well past time for SRP and the Arizona Legislature to update SRP Governance to include all ratepayers—or give the Corporation Commission the authority to regulate SRP. In the meantime, please do something NOW. Register to vote if you are eligible, and TALK to everyone you know about voting!
David Winstanley is a retired Director of Engineering at Honeywell Aerospace, former Chair of LD15 Republicans, and a conservative activist for local issues in the East Valley.
