From the South Lawn of the White House to the pulsing heartbeats of North America’s bustling metropolises, Democrats are stepping into the 2024 electoral fray armed with a transgender-dominated platform that makes the riots of 2020 look like a block party.
This time, the spotlight is focused on the very future of the country: our children.
In a repudiation of the family as the foundation of society, the Democrat platform contends, “Your children are not your children.” And it doesn’t stop there. The Democrats are loud and proud that they’re “coming for your children.”
This was echoed by President Biden himself in April when he proclaimed at a White House event, “There’s no such thing as someone else’s child. Our nation’s children are all our children.”
His sentiment was further reinforced by the LGBTQ activists during their Pride Month celebrations. The rallying cry of “We’re here. We’re queer. We’re coming for your children!” may have escaped the notice of those consuming mainstream media, but as Tucker Carlson has demonstrated, the traditional news platforms no longer control the narrative.
America is turning to Twitter for an unfiltered snapshot of reality, and reality is not pretty. The videos of the LGBTQ agenda are being shared, as citizen journalists take over telling a truth that legacy media won’t touch.
One could write off a single declaration of seizing the children as a mere slip of the tongue, but the unwavering commitment of the progressives suggests deliberate intent to make it a bedrock principle woven into the very fabric of the Democratic Party.
The party finds itself flanked by a president whose mental acuity is questionable at best and demonstrators whose behaviors set a new standard for raunch. By raunch, I refer to the naked men dangling their parts at children along the Pride parade route, and naked women in heavy makeout sessions in a public fountain, while children played nearby.
These individuals are the ones taking over our schools, libraries, parks, and city councils.
Even a top cabinet official – Rachel Levine, the Secretary of Health and Human Services – has officially declared that it’s not just Pride Month but Pride Summer.
Levine, a transgender individual, is determined to see the Democratic Party transgender platform permeate the cultural fabric of America. Levine’s aim is to dismantle the traditional family unit and supplant it with the state, utilizing the powers of the DHHS to cement this agenda ahead of the 2024 elections.
Democrats like Levine appear to be drawing from the Marxist ideology of Frederick Engels and Karl Marx, who famously critiqued the family and foresaw its inevitable demise.
Engels said “On what foundation is the present family, the bourgeois family, based? On capital, on private gain. In its completely developed form, this family exists only among the bourgeoisie. But this state of things finds its complement in the practical absence of the family among the proletarians, and in public prostitution.”
Thus, he predicted, the family “will vanish as a matter of course.”
His colleague Marx explained how that would be achieved: “The education of all children, from the moment that they can get along without a mother’s care, shall be in state institutions at state expense.”
The American middle class, with its inherent kindness and compassion, has proven to be fertile ground for this Democrat redefinition of “love,” which amounts to actual hatred of the nuclear family.
Leveraging the tolerance of centrists, the Left has weaponized the Christian principle of “What Would Jesus Do” to quell debate and sway major Christian denominations to their cause. It has worked with many mainstream Christians, who haven’t found a good response to that rhetorical question.
The platform for 2024 looks set to feature a triumvirate of transgender dominance, the sexualization of children, and a critique of the traditional family. Why this direction? Because the Democratic Party, now under the influence of its most radical elements, finds itself incapable of reining in its fringe. The genie cannot be returned to the bottle.
Parents, brace yourselves: They are coming for your children. Alphabet agencies and unions like the National Education Association, and even the State of California, have made it clear and are leading the charge.
California Republican State Sen. Scott Wilk issued a warning: A new bill that would criminalize parents who don’t affirm their child’s “gender transition” is a bridge too far. It’s time for parents to run for the border.
“If you love your children, you need to flee California,” he said.
Democrats, seemingly emboldened by favorable polling in the 18- to 34-year-old demographic, are confident they have the winning issues for 2024.
For much of America, however, Democrats have simply packed the powder keg, stretched out the fuse, and are holding a match aloft.
We now live in an era in which mutilating surgeries are done routinely as part of the preferred treatment for gender dysphoria, the belief that the gender “assigned” to you at birth does not reflect your true self.
Modern science has developed solid evidence that gender is determined at conception, not birth, and is not assigned by anybody but is fixed for life. So, until recently, sufferers from gender dysphoria were thought to be confused and maybe need educational counseling while simply waiting for adulthood, when over 80% seamlessly settled into their “birth gender.”
But earlier in this century, a new “best available science” stealthily but comprehensively came to dominate the world of transsexual medicine. Suddenly, gender-confused patients, even adolescents and children, were deemed to be unerringly insightful regarding their true gender identity. They needed not mental health treatment but physical alteration. And they needed it now.
Few seemed to note that gender dysphoria, unlike most other conditions, had no specific manifestations, no test or objective evidence that could confirm or deny its existence. Thus, based simply on the “feeling” of a minor unable to drive, vote, or get a tattoo because of their manifest immaturity, irreversible therapies were initiated.
These included puberty blockers, followed by sex hormones of the desired sex and then both “top” and “bottom” surgeries. Planned Parenthood advertised puberty blockers (obviously to pre-pubescent patients) “as early as your first visit.” Parents who proved balky were excluded from decision-making about transition procedures and sometimes even lost custody of their children.
Another suspicious aspect of adolescent transgenderism is that it behaves very differently from other hardwired inborn conditions. Until recently, transgenderism had been confined mostly to young boys. Now, girls outnumber boys three to one. Researchers additionally note that girls especially often seemed vulnerable to “social contagion,” contracting this affliction in groups where gender switching is seen as the path to social approval. It’s what the cool kids do.
There are also regional variations which don’t fit a biological model. California has a rate of transgender identification well above the national average. For example, six percent of the students in Davis, California identify as transgender, compared with 1.7% nationally.
Yet the tsunami of children transitioning continues to sweep over the western world. In America, it is endorsed by mainstream professional societies of physicians, pediatricians, psychiatrists, and transgender health professionals. None of these organizations are inclined to counter the concerns of their critics, just to silence and shame them.
Because the U.S. doesn’t have a centralized database, accurate numbers of participation are hard to come by. We do know that, in a decade, we have gone from one to 60 “comprehensive gender clinics.”
In the UK, with an experience similar to ours, there were 72 referrals in 2010 to the NHS gender clinic. Ten years later there were 2,729.
But as we accumulate more experience, the tide may be turning. A growing wave of former patients who received the gender affirmation protocol now bitterly regret their experience. They typically recount being unhappy teenagers who believed from social media sources that transitioning could bring the social approval that they craved.
After a cursory evaluation, they were begun on hormones that permanently changed their body form and functions and finally surgery removing their now unwanted body parts. Eventually, they realized that by listening to trusted authorities, they had made an awful mistake.
As one lamented, “I am angry. I’m sad. I can’t have kids…I’ll never lose my virginity. I’m left with the scraps of the life I could’ve had.”
Because of cases like these and research questioning the basic premises of transition therapy, Britain recently closed down the famous Tavistock gender clinic. Sweden and Finland have switched to an approach that emphasizes counseling, with drugs rarely if ever used. New Zealand and others are also reconsidering the affirmation model.
But American medical authorities are soldiering on, oblivious to the yellow lights flashing furiously. When will they admit that their recommendations violate the principles of medicine (first do no harm) and common sense (don’t cause injury treating a condition that is likely to resolve spontaneously)? Misleading impressionnable adolescents into unnecessary, permanent life altering decisions to serve an ideology is despicable.
Dr. Thomas Patterson, former Chairman of the Goldwater Institute, is a retired emergency physician. He served as an Arizona State senator for 10 years in the 1990s, and as Majority Leader from 93-96. He is the author of Arizona’s original charter schools bill.
Arizona Republicans continue to take proactive steps to protect women’s sports.
Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne recently filed a legal response in the case of Jane Doe, et al. v Thomas C. Horne, et al., asking the federal court to grant his side “an additional 90 days to compile evidence as Plaintiffs did at leisure, and then deny the Motion for Preliminary Injunction.” Horne is seeking to defend an Arizona law that prohibits biological males from competing in women’s and girls’ athletic events at state public schools, colleges, and universities. That law was SB 1165, which was signed by former Arizona Governor Doug Ducey on March 30, 2022.
Superintendent Horne is defending state law against politically driven out of state law firms. Biological males should not be playing competitive sports with biological females. Thank you @icons_women athletes for joining us and fighting for Title IX. https://t.co/adSYXBa2cG
— Arizona Department of Education (@azedschools) May 24, 2023
Horne’s action comes weeks after Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen and House Speaker Ben Toma filed a Motion to Intervene in the proceedings. According to the Senate Republican’s press release, “On April 17, 2023, plaintiffs represented by a radical organization filed a motion for a preliminary injunction to stop the law from being enforced in Arizona,” and “Attorney General Kris Mayes is not defending the constitutionality of the law.”
The transfer of power from Republican Mark Brnovich to Democrat Kris Mayes in the Attorney General’s Office has forced the Republican-led Arizona Legislature into the lead role when it comes to litigation of federal and state lawsuits. Both Petersen and Toma figure to take many more legal actions over the next year and a half with Democrats occupying the Governor’s and Attorney General’s Office in the Grand Canyon State.
In his most-recent filing to the court, Horne states, “The disruption and the unfairness caused to others by Plaintiffs insisting on unfairly competing against biological girls is undeniable. If the preliminary injunction were to be granted, a number of schools would permit biological males/transgender females to compete against girls. This would be devastating to girls who hope to excel but cannot because they are competing against biological boys and being deprived of scholarships. “
The Republican Superintendent, in his second stint as the state’s top educator, issued the following statement when announcing his filing: “I have sympathy for anybody who feels trapped in the wrong body, but I don’t believe that biological boys should be playing against girls. If there really are no differences between males and females then all sports would already be co-ed.”
Last Wednesday, Horne had joined Marshi Smith, a former University of Arizona swimming star, at a press conference to announce the court filing and to highlight a letter sent to the NCAA from Marsh and dozens of other female athletes in March 2022.
Tune in to Superintendent Horne and women athletes from @icons_women speak about the lawsuit defending Arizona's ban on biological boys playing girls' sports. https://t.co/PyACMfQ3mg
— Arizona Department of Education (@azedschools) May 24, 2023
That letter, also co-signed by Riley Gaines, expresses the ladies’ “anguish” as they watched the 2022 NCAA Swim & Dive Championships earlier in the month. They write that they “feel we are witnessing irrevocable damage to a sport that has transformed our own identities for the better,” charging that “the NCAA has successfully failed everyone by allowing Lia Thomas to compete directly with women.” The female athletes state that they “are eager and willing to discuss directly with the NCAA potential steps it can implement to create new solutions for the expanding athletic family.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
Many are surprised to learn that Mesa Public Schools (Unified District #4) has had a co-ed option for restrooms, locker rooms, and overnight facilities since 2015. The district leadership at the time quietly developed a Transgender Support Plan for children. This includes choosing which facilities the child wants to use along with a new name and new pronouns. This plan involves no parental consent or parental notification.
Due to public comment and internal questions, Board President Hutchinson, under the guidance of Superintendent Fourlis, asked for a legal opinion from the Board’s counsel, Udall Shumway. A brief memo was placed on the agenda for the meeting May 9, 2023, and Udall Shumway determined that the Transgender Guidelines stand.
In the meeting I asked about the criteria for a child to be placed on this plan. Kacey King, the district’s counsel said, “for younger children a teacher or counselor might suggest that they put it into writing.” I was shocked at this statement. This is absolutely not the role of teachers or counselors. I have been told that school counselors are simply there to determine what barriers exist that may prohibit classroom learning.
To have a counselor or teacher help put a child on a Transgender Support Plan is simply wrong, particularly without any communication with the parents. The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly recognized that parents possess the fundamental right to direct the upbringing, education, and health care of their children. This right does not belong to any school or staff. Public school offers a service to the community—a service to teach children the academic standards to prepare them for a future to be able to be confident and self-reliant adults. Schools need to stay in their lane if they are going to retain public trust.
Opportunities exist for children to develop personal relationships with counselors and without parental consent. In one such example, the district had an elementary school student who was struggling in math. She would ask to see the counselor during the math lesson. Her mother was never notified because they weren’t official counseling sessions. The mother eventually found out when she confronted the school about her daughter’s below average math performance. No one previously told her that her daughter was behind in math or that she was visiting with a counselor.
Counselors may also have informal visits with children who don’t want to go to lunch or recess with their classmates and decide to visit with a counselor instead. Perhaps a child opens up about personal struggles, then the option exists for that trusted authority figure to guide the child to complete a private Transgender Support Plan. How would the parents know?
There is no other program or plan in the district that is comparable in secrecy or purpose to the Transgender Support Plan. Specialized learning plans, after school clubs, field trips, photographs, all require parental consent. Yet, a student can be given a new identity, and no one will notify the parents?
The main legal justification for these guidelines right now stems from the 9th Circuit case Parents for Privacy v Barr. The court ruled against parental rights, ruled against freedom of religion, and ruled against privacy. I have spoken to attorneys who believe this ruling will be overturned. In the meantime, one of the best courses of action is to make sure our parents are informed. There is no legal argument against notifying parents about a child discussing “gender identity” or any other such topics at school. In fact, the law is on the side of the parents. I will continue this fight for parental rights and transparency.
Rachel Walden is a member of the Mesa Public Schools Governing Board. You can follow her on Twitter here.
A Tucson school board says it won’t review its secretive policy allowing males who claim to be transgender into girls’ locker rooms and restrooms.
The Catalina Foothills School District (CFSD) told parents that it wouldn’t reconsider their unwritten policy on boys who claim to be transgender — a policy which also doesn’t require parents to be notified when males use their daughters’ locker rooms and restrooms, and directs girls to use another facility if they’re upset that males use female-designated private spaces. The policy has reportedly been in place for at least a decade.
This AZ school district has a policy that not only allows boys in girls bathrooms, it instructs girls to find another bathroom if they're uncomfortable with that.
The @CFSD16 board is now refusing to review the policy even after several residents voiced their disapproval. pic.twitter.com/p8zIqLJ7ig
— Arizona Women of Action (@azwomenofaction) March 20, 2023
Eileen Jackson, president of the CFDS governing board, informed one parent, Bart Pemberton, in a February email obtained by Daily Caller News Foundation that students uncomfortable with their policy may request an accommodation.
“Similarly, any student who is uncomfortable sharing multiple-occupancy facilities with others has the ability to request an accommodation,” Jackson said. “[O]ur administrators do not require any student to be singled out or isolated based on any of the protected statuses identified in our policy.”
Jackson told Pemberton in a follow-up email that the governing board wouldn’t review the matter and had no interest in doing so. Jackson added that she fully supported the policy.
“By not requesting this item be added to a future agenda, I am expressing my full support of the policy and our administrators’ implementation of this policy in our schools,” said Jackson.
In response to online criticism, CFSD pointed back to its 2015 governing board decision to expand its nondiscrimination policy to include gender identity, as justification of its unwritten policy on males in girls’ restrooms and locker rooms.
“This policy guides administrators in their daily decisions that arise in the operation of our schools. Principals operate well within the directive of the Board’s established policy,” stated CFSD. “There is no plan to revise the board policy to exclude the language referencing gender identity or expression. Board members have indicated their full support of the current policy and our administrators’ implementation of this policy in our schools.”
CFSD’s governing board policy came from the Arizona School Boards Association (ASBA), which also hosts the policy on its platform. The latest version of this policy was adopted in June 2021.
ASBA recently fought against the advancement of legislation intended to remove sexualized books from K-12 classrooms.
Chris Kotterman, representing ASBA, claimed that the legislation was an “unprecedented state control of curriculum.” Kotterman also issued a veiled warning that the Arizona Department of Education (ADE) wouldn’t always be run by a Republican individual, as it is currently, indicating that the legislation’s framework for creating prohibited books list would be weaponized against those advocating to remove sexualized content.
CFSD also offers resources to students concerning gender identity and expression, referring students to the It Gets Better Project, the Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network (GLSEN), Southern Arizona Gender Alliance (SAGA), and Gender Affirming Healthcare.
These organizations listed by CFSD offer minors everything from counseling to information on medical treatments for gender identity and expression.
“Gender affirming healthcare can include therapy to address feelings of gender dysphoria, as well as medical treatments that help individuals achieve physical characteristics that better align with their gender identity,” stated CFSD.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
