By Deacon
Mike Manno
(The Wanderer) – By now most have heard about
California’s lawsuit against a local school district that refuses to keep
parents in the dark about the sexual proclivities of their children. Under
state law school officials are prohibited from telling parents that their child
might be living a “double life,” a boy at home and a girl in school.
It’s called
transgenderism and it’s becoming very popular in some circles. It is where a
child — yes, child is the correct word — has occasion to believe that he or she
was born in the wrong body and is confused about which sex he or she is. And
for some kids they claim they are neither, the term is gender nonconforming.
Now that
used to cause a red flag to pop up saying, “This kid needs help.” Of course,
that’s not the case now. This, according to experts in the field (oxymoron?),
is a perfectly normal condition for which society should make allowances. It is
not a disease or mental health, they say.
Of course,
they are wrong. This is what happens when personal and political ideology rules
rather than common sense, as we see far too often in these blue states.
This is a
social contagion whose fires are being fanned by a collection of leftist
activists, woke academics, anti-family Marxists, and an assortment of other
wing-nuts from across the political spectrum whose voices are louder than their
collective intelligence.
In the case
at hand, California’s chief legal wing-nut, Rob Bonta — and a host of others in
his employ having the same level of intelligence — has filed a lawsuit against
the Chino Valley School District that had the courage to stand up against the
state and declared that when it comes to their children, parents should know
about such things.
You see, to
the nimrods running the California schools, Chino Valley’s unwise defense of
parents’ right to know is outweighed by the collective intelligence of those
who celebrate gender as a spectrum.
“[The Chino
policy] unlawfully discriminates against transgender and nonconforming
students, subjecting them to disparate treatment, harassment, abuse, mental,
emotional, and physical. This is by design: The Board’s plain motivations in
adopting [the policy] were to create and harbor animosity, discrimination, and
prejudice towards those transgender and gender nonconforming students, without
any compelling reason to do so,” says the all-knowing and all-powerful banana
republic of California.
According to
W-N Bonta, “For far too many transgender children and gender nonconforming
youth, school serves as their only safe haven — a place away from home where
they can find validation, safety, privacy. We have to protect that.” Of course,
that is woke speech for “parents can’t be trusted to do that job that is why
the atheists running the state must step in.”
The suit
alleges in one section that “transgender and gender nonconforming students in
unsupportive environments experience high degrees of discrimination and
harassment.” I would think that that would be true. But where are these
“unsupportive environments” that the state must assume dot the landscape?
According to the suit, the unwelcome places are homes in which these children
reside with their parents.
“Gender
identity is not a choice, and it is not a mental illness. It is an essential
part of one’s identity and being, and cannot be voluntarily changed.
Transgender students in unsupportive or unsafe environments suffer significant
levels of discrimination, abuse, and harassment, both physical and mental, well
above their non-transgender peers,” it says.
Of course,
schools are the ideal place for such students. They are safe from prying
parents. Perhaps the teachers’ union loves the kids more than the parents do.
Think that answers it?
Then the
state reports on a study from the state’s public schools which found that 40
percent of the transgender students reported bulling against only 7.3 percent
of the non-transgender students that reported bulling.
Okay, but
this is a sad fact: Kids will be kids and they can be mean to those they see as
“different.” So, the answer is to treat them in such a manner that they find
solace only with other transgender and transgender allied students? Who’s treating
whom differently?
But it can’t
be just other kids that are bullying these students. It’s not. According to the
suit the bullies are (drum roll) the parents. And here is the evidence as
presented to the court:
“In the 2015
U.S. Transgender Survey, 10 percent of respondents said that an immediate
family member had been violent toward them because they were transgender, and
15 percent ran away from home or were kicked out from their homes because they
were transgender. Of those who transitioned in the year preceding the survey,
eight percent reported violence from an immediate family member because they
were transgender, seven percent ran away from home, and eight percent had been
kicked out of their home.”
Okay, look
at the percentages. Harassment at home: 10 percent; 8 percent. That means that
90 percent and 92 percent of the homes were not abusive just because their kids
found some difficulty with their sexual identities. But the state sees a
problem that can only be rectified by a complete ban on parental notification.
Typical authoritative governmental overreach and assertion of power by one who
knows best.
And think
about this a little harder. Some children are reluctant to talk with parents
about many sensitive (to them) matters; afraid of disapproval, punishment, loss
of parental love. These are all things that children of all ages wonder about;
now combine that with some teachers’ union representative who tells them you
can’t trust your parents with this information.
One of the
saner voices in this argument came from Republican State Rep. Bill Essayli:
“There’s a lot of systems in place to deal with physical abuse of any minor,
and I think it’s wrong for the state to presume that parents are a danger and
therefore take a blanket policy where they’re going to withhold information
from all parents under the auspice that some parents might be harmful to their
kids.”
His bill to
do just that was never given a hearing.
There is a
disconnect here and it is one that the wing-nuts running the state are encouraging.
If these self-aggrandizing nitwits really wanted to support children they would
be doing all they could to strengthen the bonds and developing trust between
parents and their children. Parental involvement in the lives of their children
makes for better kids and better schools.
But that
apparently doesn’t count in California. Remember this is the state that
legalized abduction of children from other states who were unable to transition
there to find appropriate state-approved guardians with nary a word to the
parents who would be left wondering whatever happened to the pretty little girl
who helped them with their farm chores.
Sorry, she
ran off to California where she could become a boy.
Of course, we’re not winning this war. In just the past two weeks courts in
Maryland and New Jersey, apparently populated with the same dimwitted nimrods
as in California, sided against parents on this issue.
And keep
this in mind: from its inception, Communists’ dogma has always promoted the
disruption of the nuclear family. Just sayin’.
(You can reach Mike at: DeaconMike@q.com and listen to him every weekend on Faith On Trial or podcast at https://iowacatholicradio.com/faith-on-trial/)
No comments:
Post a Comment