Pentagon Marches Forward With Trans Change
It’s been a year and a half since President Trump made the decision to rescue the military from the transgender distractions of the Obama years. And in 30 days, he might actually get to see that order take effect.
As commander-in-chief, making quick decisions is a necessity. Thanks to liberal activists, Donald Trump has never had that luxury. Instead of fighting the president’s policies in Congress or at the ballot box — they’d rather take the administration to court. That means national security issues — like rolling back Obama’s social experimentation in the military — get put on hold. In the case of partially banning transgenderism, for almost two years.
Fortunately for the president — and our men and women in uniform — the Supreme Court gave the White House the green light to move forward with the policy while the fight plays out in the courts. Now, the Defense Department seems well on its way to doing what our troops and the plurality of Americans have demanded since 2016: restoring some common sense to the military’s mission.
This week, the Pentagon approved a new policy that will prevent recruits from using the military as their free ticket to costly gender surgery or drugs. “After April 12, no one with gender dysphoria who is taking hormones or has transitioned to another gender will be allowed to enlist. And any currently serving troops diagnosed with gender dysphoria after April 12 will have to serve in their birth gender and will be barred from taking hormones or getting transition surgery.” If service secretaries choose, they can waive the policy on a case-by-case basis.
Already, as of February 1, taxpayers have forked over $7,943,906.75 to military gender reassignment surgeries, hormones, and psychotherapy. That’s millions of dollars it could have spent equipment, salaries, and training. Not a penny of that went to the Pentagon’s real purpose: fighting and winning wars. Fortunately, President Trump has led the charge to bring the Defense Department’s priorities back in line. “I want a very, very strong military,” Trump has said. And he’s proved it — putting the security of our nation first, no matter what or who stands in his way.
Originally published here.
The Pronouns That Can Slow Down Foster Homes
If you’re wondering what America would look like under House Democrats, try California. The west coast state is an extremists’ dream on abortion, sexuality, gender, and secularism. It’s a place where kids might not only be carrying around student IDs with Planned Parenthood’s number on the back, but Christians could be blacklisted from fostering kids.
That’s the Left’s newest idea for punishing common sense in California. As if letting sixth graders get hormone treatments without their parents’ okay isn’t bad enough, now state legislators want the foster system to encourage more gender-free nonsense. Under a bill just introduced in the state house, foster parents would have to encourage this confusion by only using the names and pronouns these children want.
Assemblyman Mike Gibson (D) thinks the plan will attract more foster parents — an idea conservatives called ridiculous. If anything, it boxes Christians and conservatives out of the foster system — at a time when the state desperately needs them. “Forcing Christian foster parents to refer to their foster children as the wrong gender is forcing them to affirm what they believe is a lie. And not only a lie,” the California Family Council’s Greg Burt told reporters, “but harmful to the child.”
It puts parents in an impossible position, CFC President Jonathan Keller argued. “Either they will violate this law by remaining faithful to their biblical beliefs about the biological/binary nature of gender, or they’ll violate their faith by affirming the confused gender feelings of their foster care children. Why would the state want to push Christian foster parents out of the system when [they’re] already in short supply?”
It’s simple, really. They don’t want Christians — or parents — involved. The Left is desperate to keep children locked in this fantasy world, where morality, truth, and science don’t exist. That’s why California wanted to make it a crime to counsel people struggling with their sexuality. The far-Left wants to “make sure the gender-dysphoric people they claim to be ‘helping’ have no way out, even if that’s what they desperately want,” Walt Heyer explains. Admitting that change is possible would undermine the whole linchpin of the LGBT argument: that being gay or transgender isn’t a choice.
Reinforcing this ideology with kids — and ordering adults to play along — is about the LGBT movement’s survival. They don’t care if the American College of Pediatricians calls it “child abuse.” Or that men and women who’ve been trapped in these lifestyles are hurting and suicidal. It doesn’t bother them that the underlying issues are going untreated. They care about their agenda. And just like the women they nudge into abortions without a thought to the pain or consequences, they’ll do anything to protect it. It’s not about tolerance — it’s about manipulation.
Parents are the last and final hope for so many of America’s children. The health care community, education system, and business world are all bullying moms and dads into accepting a lie that devastates kids. They’re losing their rights, custody battles, medical authority, and any say over what their sons and daughters are learning at school. Parents, you need to be equipped and ready to fight back. Part of that means being involved on the local level — in school board meetings, curriculum reviews, and state politics. The other piece is understanding what Congress is doing that affects your values on gender.
On Tuesday morning, FRC’s Government Affairs team spent a couple of hours briefing Hill leaders about the threat of the transgender agenda to our freedom, our health, our schools, and our privacy. Make sure you take the time to understand the truth of what you’re up against. Check out some of the materials we gave to legislators, including “A Parent’s Guide to the Transgender Movement in Education,” “50 Years of Sex Changes, Mental Disorders, and Too Many Suicides, and ”Regret Isn’t Rare.“
Originally published here.
Dems Start from Scratch with Kitten Act
What do cats have that newborn babies don’t? Democrats’ support. In one of the sickest ironies no one is talking about, Senate liberals picked this moment — 17 days after they voted to kill America’s perfectly healthy infants — to fight for the humane treatment of kittens. Maybe the DNC’s strategists are out to lunch, or maybe the Left really is this shameless, but I can’t wait to see some of these politicians standing on debate platforms next year telling the American people that when it comes to protecting living things: We chose cats over kids.
For sponsors like Senator Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), the optics are nauseating. Here he is, arguing that America "must stop killing kittens,” when, three weeks ago, he stood in the U.S. Capitol and agreed with 43 Democrats that human beings should be put down. “The USDA’s decision to slaughter kittens after they are used in research is an archaic practice and horrific treatment, and we need to end it,” Merkley said with a passion that he and his colleagues couldn’t muster for a generation of perfectly healthy newborns. His Kittens in Traumatic Testing Ends Now — or KITTEN — Act wouldn’t stop the research, but it would keep the animals from being destroyed.
“The KITTEN Act will protect these innocent animals from being needlessly euthanized in government testing,” Merkley told reporters, “and make sure that they can be adopted by loving families instead.” Does he even hear himself? They should be treated and adopted? That’s exactly what Americans have requested for living, breathing babies. Democrats said no. Killing a child is a “personal decision,” they said, and Congress shouldn’t get in the way. What a comfort for abortion survivors like Melissa Ohden to know that, given the choice, Democrats would save a stray cat over her.
“The fact that we need a piece of legislation to tell the federal government to stop killing kittens is ridiculous on its face,” Congressman Brian Mast (R-Fla.) argued. But “ridiculous” doesn’t begin to describe a party that tells America to back away from the tables of crying newborns while it rushes to the rescue of kittens instead. I suppose we should also tell firefighters when they run into burning houses to look for the pets first? After all, on the Democrats’ sliding scale of “wantedness,” shouldn’t we find out how loved someone is before we decide if they’re worth saving?
Meanwhile, as if legal infanticide isn’t revolting enough, House Democrats have decided Americans should pay for it. In what’s turning out to be a test for the most unpopular majority in history, Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) chamber is pushing a bill that would force a country who overwhelmingly opposes late-term abortion to bankroll it — along with abortions in any trimester. Rep. Diane DeGette (D-Colo.), another liberal who can’t seem to take taxpayers’ “No!” for an answer, is trying to overturn the Hyde amendment. “It’s just important as we move forward that we pass legislation that honors women’s reproductive health and their decisions,” she said.
But what about honoring taxpayers — two-thirds of whom fiercely oppose the idea of financing the Left’s killing machine? And that includes “pro-choicers.” Although the bill doesn’t stand a chance in the Senate, it could still make history. If Pelosi keeps up with the Left’s tone-deafness and brings DeGette’s bill up for the vote, it would be the first time the House has voted to overturn Hyde in history.
While House and Senate Democrats seem obsessed with taking lives, at least one court is helping states protect them. In what may turn out to be the ruling that turned the Supreme Court tide, the Sixth Circuit Court sided with Ohio in defunding Planned Parenthood. For three years, the Buckeyes have been fighting to redirect the $1.5 million for abortion providers to real health clinics. Buckeye leaders, including former Governor John Kasich, were sick of “using abortion providers as the face of state health care programs.” A lower court said too bad. But 11 judges on the Sixth Circuit disagreed, insisting that Ohio’s law doesn’t violate the Constitution “because the affiliates do not have a due process right to perform abortions.”
And while President Trump didn’t have anything to do with the ruling, he had plenty to do with the people who made it. Four of the 11 judges who defended Ohio’s law were appointed by this White House. If you’re wondering how much this administration’s commitment to nominations matters, this is proof. There are men and women on benches across America today who are literally saving lives because this president made the courts a priority. Thanks to Donald Trump, pro-lifers know better than anyone: you don’t need Congress to win on life.
Originally published here.
This is a publication of the Family Research Council. Mr. Perkins is president of FRC.