In 2012, North Carolina voted for a ban on gay marriage, extending a streak of thirty consecutive “no” votes in a period of a few years:
The AP made that projection based on an actual tally of votes. With 35 percent of the vote counted, 58 percent of those casting ballots voted in favor of the amendment, making North Carolina the 30th state to adopt such a measure.
In 2008, California, the most liberal state in the union, voted the same way:
Proposition 8, which “provides that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California,” passed 52% to 48%, by a margin of about 600,000 votes.
A Pew Research poll from the time said love, companionship, and commitment were the most popular reasons for getting married, among all couples same-sex or not. Fairness, being treated the same as heterosexual counterparts, was a commonly stated reason for supporting same-sex marriage. Religious folks were supposedly imposing their values on others, presumably the less religious LGBTQ community.
Massachusetts had managed to legalize same-sex marriage in 2003, but only via a court ruling, not by popular vote; they stood alone for a dozen years.
Three years after North Carolina became the 30th state to reject gay marriage, the U.S. Supreme Court in Obergefell vs. Hodges legalized same sex marriage. Thirty states voted no, but five justices voted yes, and so in 2015, the law was changed universally.
Many folks agreed with the argument same sex couples should be given the same benefits and rights as heterosexual couples. I disagree, but I understand the appeal of this argument. Perhaps the state should have remained agnostic on marriage; marriage is, after all, a religious institution. I said in 2012 (and still do today): find a religious institution to marry you–if you can, but don’t compel to me to affirm your choices.
I don’t say this to belittle or mock individuals, and I am certainly not calling for hated of gays and transgenders or to take away their freedom to live as they choose. However unproven and misguided ideas should be mocked. These ideas are not simply misguided; they are, in the end, dangerous ideas. These ideas corrupt our entire culture; they are telling others to be whatever they want by ignoring reality.
The problem (the disaster, actually) is the direction we headed in eight years since the Obergefell ruling. After affirming and encouraging marriage, child-bearing, and traditional family units for 200+ years, the USA is charging hard in the opposite direction.
We have gone from equal footing for all types of marriages to pick the bathroom of your choice (and why are you complaining?) to transgenderism is normal to drag queens are heroes of the state to trans the kids and don’t tell the parents. There is no bottom to the slippery slope. How long is it before the state abandons all pretense of neutrality and compels churches to perform gay marriages?
If I don’t recognize your personal pronouns, claim I am “transphobic”. Pretend reality does not exist and anyone can be whatever they want in order to make other problems disappear. Pretend sexually lurid LGBTQ books in schools are normal and shout your opponents are “banning books” when they notice. Tell parents it broadens kids’ horizons when they are exposed to drag queens or teachers with bizarre sexual proclivities (left panel). Tell us our religious values need to be kept private while you publicly impose your quasi-religious values on us. Rewrite history and tell us history is just repeating itself. Tell us there are no differences between men and women. Tell us trans men can bear children and dare us to disagree. Tell us it is all natural, normal, and good.
Politicians encourage LGBTQ expressions, tell this “community” they are persecuted by the rest of us, encourage folks, kids especially, to join this community, and most importantly, solidify a voting block for years to come. How nice. It is all based on lies, but who cares about truth if it means more votes?
Here We Go
I, JOSEPH R. BIDEN JR., President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim March 31, 2023, as Transgender Day of Visibility. I call upon all Americans to join us in lifting up the lives and voices of transgender people throughout our Nation.
I will lift up your lives, but not your values. Live your life as you choose, but allow for objections.
Who is under threat? Drag queens or our children?
The state of Washington now allows runaways to be placed with a host parent while legally denying biological parents a say in medical interventions. Apparently, host parents and the state understand children’s current medical needs better than the parents who raised them. The great need to “trans the kids” has led us to this awful situation.
“An act relating to supporting youth,” or Senate Bill 5599, allows host homes for runaway youth “to house youth without parental permission.” Furthermore, the host homes do not need to notify parents about where their kids are or if they are getting medical interventions “if there is a compelling reason not to, which includes a youth seeking protected health services.”
The “protected health care services” included “gender-affirming care,” which for minors arbitrarily included anything prescribed by a doctor to treat dysphoria, the bill obtained by FOX 13 Seattle said.
“Gender affirming treatment can be prescribed to two-spirit, transgender, nonbinary, and other gender diverse individuals,” the bill stated.
For minors, “affirming care” typically included puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and surgeries. It was unclear which services would be approved under the bill.
The state and “host” parents know better than the biological parent. Can we read this any other way? I said recently, there are two institutions which can still push back against the all-powerful state: religion and family. The state is attacking both. This is more proof.
Apparently, California legislators think the state knows best as well:
California filed a bill in March that allows adolescents to be admitted to a group home without parental agreement with clearance from school counselors. The bill is currently being considered in the State Senate.
“In the dystopian nightmare we are in, if a parent doesn’t use the child’s chosen pronoun or name, they are labeled dangerous,” Pamela Garfield-Jaeger said in her testimony, according to Daily Signal.
It is just puberty blockers after all. We have been dispensing them for ten years now, what could possibly go wrong?
Doctors typically guide kids toward therapy or voice coaching long before medical intervention. Puberty blockers, anti-androgens that block the effects of testosterone, and hormone treatments are far more common than surgery. They have been available in the U.S. for more than a decade and are standard treatments backed by major doctors’ organizations, including the American Medical Association.
Do we believe minors should make such life altering decisions–before they understand anything about sex and life in general? This is a gross experiment our government is pushing upon citizens it is supposed to protect.
Rand Paul vs. Rachel Levine: Do You Support Government Overriding Parental Consent On Puberty Blockers? | Video | RealClearPolitics
Senator Paul provided to Dr. Levine, government health official, an example from a woman who made a transgender choice as a child, but regrets it years later. I’ve written previously about parents who are pressured to conform or risk the state taking away their child transgender-delusion. States codify the paradigm and exclude dissenting parents, the ones generally most looking out for the kid’s best interest. The state whose interest is to advance a political narrative, regardless of the individual involved, makes the decision instead.
Do you still doubt our society is not actually targeting (sexualizing) and harming kids? Watch this man preach. You can believe this is good only if you look away and pretend not to see.
Zoey Zephyr, Montana legislator, shows how the game is played. However, there is actual resistance to the LGBTQ agenda in Montana, a conservative (and more sensible) state and Zephyr does not fare well.
First, let’s establish Zoey is clearly a man pretending to be a woman.
Zoey Zephyr is allowed this pretense. He is not excluded from serving in the state legislature. Nobody prevents him from “living his truth” which he has done quite openly and proudly. We comment on his boorish actions, but we don’t hate Mr. Zephyr for who he is. However, he thinks being transgender allows him special rights. The Montana legislature admonished him, not for being transgender, but for trampling basic rules of decorum.
The events started when Zephyr told colleagues on the House floor on April 18 that they would have blood on their hands if they supported a bill that would ban gender-affirming care for minors.
House Republicans asked her to apologize for the comment on behalf of decorum, but she refused, and they voted not to allow her to speak for three days. Protesters descended on the Capitol on the third day, April 24, and chanted “Let her speak!” from the House gallery. Zephyr defiantly raised her microphone in the air. Two days later, House Republicans voted to censure her for the remainder of the legislative session, which ended last week.
First, why is such surgery absolutely necessary for children? Second, don’t tell us we have blood on our hands for raising reasonable objections. Montana, at least, will not look aside at such outrageous claims. They were not intimidated like many others are today. Mr. Zephyr is the one proposing actual surgery during which blood is actually shed, after all.
I don’t condone transgender surgery for adults either, but it is allowed; this debate is about children. Kids under 21 are not allowed alcohol. Kids under 18 cannot engage in sexual activity with an adult; they cannot vote; they cannot purchase a gun, etc. These are reasonable restrictions, universally accepted and less impactful than permanently altering your anatomy.
Zephyr’s comments although outrageous, are all too common. He stood by these comments and so was banned from speaking the remainder of the debate. Your actions have consequences sir. But Zephyr was so sure he is right, he persisted. He seeks martyrdom.
The state House erupted Monday when Zephyr was again shut down when she attempted to address unrelated legislation. A crowd of pro-Zephyr protesters interrupted House proceedings, chanting, “Let her speak!”
Video of the House floor shows that as the chanting continued, the state House speaker is heard asking the sergeant of arms to clear out the guests in the gallery.
The audio of the livestream of the session later cuts off and is replaced with music, with Zephyr seen in the video with an arm raised, holding up a microphone, looking in the direction of the protesters that were in the gallery. During that time, some protesters are seen being escorted out by law enforcement.
Aren’t such protests deemed evil and a threat democracy since January 6, 2021 or are protests led by transgender legislators deemed acceptable?
The bill to ban gender-affirming care for minors ultimately passed, and Gov. Greg Gianforte, a Republican, signed it into law, making Montana one of 18 states with laws that restrict such care.
The legislature took further action against Zephyr for his role in disrupting the legislature–as well they should have:
The Montana Freedom Caucus . . . called for “immediate disciplinary action” against Zephyr. The group faulted Zephyr for “standing in the middle of the floor encouraging an insurrection after all members were told to move to the sides and clear the House gallery to remain in a safe location.”
No public officials actually participated in the January 6 riots as Mr. Zephyr did last month. Consequently, Zephyr was banned from participating for the remainder of the legislative session, far less punishment than some who simply stepped into the US Capitol for a few moments on January 6.
Many decline to fight back against the LGBTQ agenda; they fear being labeled transphobes or homophobes; they avoid confrontation, especially with the press who sides with folks like Zephyr, but not Zephyr’s colleagues:
I spoke with conviction, precision, and with clarity, to the real harm that these bills do. As happens sometimes during discussions, the majority leader rose up to object to things that I had stated and then we moved on, because that’s what happens on the House floor.
Did you have any sense that Republicans in the Montana House would go so far as to formally silence you over what you said?
I was obviously elected to represent my constituents and to speak to the issues that they sent me there to speak about. So when I spoke on Senate Bill 99 in opposition, when it came to the next pieces of legislation that we heard that day, I was focused on those. When I went home that evening, I was focused on the hearings in my committee that were coming up the next day, the bills that were going to be on the House floor, and discussing how my caucus and I were going to talk about those bills. My focus was on the work ahead, and I learned that evening that the Freedom Caucus, while misgendering me, had called to censure me. I believe I put out a statement in response to that, that same day. Then I went back to work and spent some time with other legislators later that evening
Nothing is said about the “blood on your hands” comment, nothing about the disruption to legislative activities and his own active participation in those (shall we call them subversive?) activities. Zephyr says he is hated; he is just doing his job. No, sir. It is not hatred; it is about your lies and inconsistencies being highlighted.
Good for these legislators! This is the manner the battle should be fought and won.
It is about Love and Marriage?
Love and marriage, love and marriage,
Go together like a horse and carriage.
This I tell ya, brother, you can’t have one without the other.
Frank Sinatra, 1965
Mr. Zephyr was not distraught after being censured. He celebrated with a marriage proposal days later.
I see two gay men, appearing foolish in dresses, but instead the scene is portrayed as trans-women in love. I can’t imagine what will go on in this household. Still, in America such a relationship is allowed. It is applauded with “day of visibility” and an entire “pride month”, in fact. Sure. Live your life as you choose.
The narrative has evolved: women and men should be paid the same for the same work to they are equivalent in skills and talents to men and women are interchangeable. What is a woman after all? Supreme Court justices and many others would rather not say Judge-Kentaji-Brown-Jackson-What-is-a-woman?
We used to say anyone could grow up to be president. We knew despite circumstances or limitations, hard work and commitment to goals, generally led to success. Society didn’t limit us as much as our own limitations and doubts. We hoped in what was possible (to be president), if not probable; determination and persistence in pursuit of the goal were generally worth the effort. If you fell short, you still might land in a good place.
Today, proclaim you are a different sex and it must be conferred upon you. Any other response is deemed hateful. Your proclamation need not be given much consideration or justified in any way, and often it is not. Your notion, no matter how bizarre or divergent from reality, must be acknowledged by everyone else; indeed it has meaning only if acknowledged by others.
This is a cop-out: your failure can be blamed on someone else, never on your own error in judgment or your own lack of commitment. What have you accomplished by demanding others affirm your version of reality? Succeed through the dint of effort; don’t demand from others as a substitute for achievement. I don’t accept another’s false sense of reality. That view is not hateful.
Martina Navratilova was one of the most accomplished tennis players of all time with 59 grand slam singles and doubles championships. How dominant would she have been and how would she have been remembered if she had competed against the tennis equivalent of Lia Thomas? Ms. Navratilova told us what she thought recently:
“It’s not about excluding transgender women from winning ever,” said Navratilova, 65. “But it is about not allowing them to win when they were not anywhere near winning as men.”
“But right now, the rules are what they are. Maybe put an asterisk there, if she starts breaking records left and right,” said Navratilova, referring to Thomas.
Navratilova, openly gay and sympathetic to the transgender community herself, is labeled transphobic by Lia Thomas. Simply disagreeing is enough to earn this label. In fact, that’s all most with the label have ever done.
“You can’t really have that sort of half support where you’re like, ‘oh, I respect her as a woman here but not here,’” Thomas said, “They’re using the guise of feminism to sort of push transphobic beliefs.”
In the 2018–2019 season she was, when competing in the men’s team, ranked 554th in the 200 freestyle, 65th in the 500 freestyle, and 32nd in the 1650 freestyle. In the 2021–2022 season, those ranks are now, when competing in the women’s team, fifth in the 200 freestyle, first in the 500 freestyle, and eighth in the 1650 freestyle. According to an archived page of the swimming data website Swimcloud, Thomas was ranked 89th among male college swimmers for that season.
Thomas, after transition, climbed from 554th to 5th (200 freestyle), from 65th to 1st (500 freestyle), and from 32nd to 8th (1650 freestyle). We are hateful to consider this cheating? We are hateful to demand men and women compete separately? We are hateful for expressing an opinion deemed uncontroversial ten years ago?
Examine the results in any local 5k race. These races are popular throughout the country, and typically, men and women compete together (although there are separate results for each). There is generally an even mix of male and female competitors, but I have never seen more females than males among top finishers. Often only one or two of the top twenty are female. Why is it consistently so? By the time he was a teenager, my son was almost never beaten by a woman, including many far more experienced female runners. He would have won the state high school (1A) championship if competing as a female, but was further down the list competing as a male. He would have received a full athletic college scholarship (and accolades for his bravery and success) if we had played Lia Thomas’s stupid game.
Women can have babies and men cannot. Men are stronger, taller, and heavier than women. Women are drawn to certain jobs or professions and men to others, and we are better off for it. Sure, you can find counter examples, but in any broad sample the numbers always bear out. Mothers and fathers fulfill different roles in the family unit, both are essential and complementary. I can fulfill my wife’s role if necessary, but I am not as good at it as she, and vice versa. A family is better off with both a male and a female fulfilling their distinct roles. Again, you can find counter examples, but this is not the rule. You can convince a few people that single parenthood or same-sex parents are better, but you have no evidence to support your belief. The counter is supported by all of human history and countless civilizations. Majorities are not always right, but the overwhelming consensus over millennia certainly is. Rewrite history if you can’t accept these facts. Call me hateful for stating facts or for denying your own reality. I have no unique claim to the truth and I have often been wrong, but I have no doubts regarding this point.
In July 2022, the University of Pennsylvania nominated Thomas for the 2022 NCAA Woman of the Year Award, one out of 577 athletes nominated for this award.
Why is Thomas, who is not even a woman, declared woman of the year? Caitlyn Jenner and Rachel Levine, two other non-women, won similar awards the last two years. The pool of transgender women is minute, so why are a disproportionate number winning such awards? Transgender women are better women than biological women?
Why shouldn’t the success of Lia Thomas upset accomplished athletes like Martina Navratilova? We are not hateful for raising concerns.
Also, please tell me why 78-year Martha Stewart is on the cover on the SI Swimsuit Issue? I am supposed to applaud this or be told there is something wrong with me for mocking it? The indoctrination doesn’t work on many of us.
One thought on “From Obergefell to “Let’s Trans the Kids”. What’s Going on?”
Many thanks for all that. The pastor spoke very well and powerfully. The whole veil has been too pronged, a chemical attack via vaccines and big pharma drugs etc. in the environment as a whole and the Satanic propaganda and lies from the evil ones.
Satan himself is LGBTQi+ etc which is why this is happening and those who follow him become like him. I wrote this to ridicule the transgender nonsense should you be interested.
Kind regards and again thank you for all you do.