+- Rogue-Nation Discussion Board (https://rogue-nation.com/mybb)
+-- Forum: Controversy and Debate (https://rogue-nation.com/mybb/forumdisplay.php?fid=52)
+--- Forum: Social Unrest and Justice (https://rogue-nation.com/mybb/forumdisplay.php?fid=57)
+--- Thread: California Bill Would Charge Parents Who Don't Affirm Transgenderism With Child Abuse (/showthread.php?tid=773)
Pages:
1
2
California Bill Would Charge Parents Who Don't Affirm Transgenderism With Child Abuse - Infolurker - 06-10-2023
Nothing to see here, nothing at all. This is just normal now. Either get with the program of what we are doing to your children or we will take them away. Submit or face the consequences?
BREAKING: California Bill Would Charge Any Parent Who Doesn’t Affirm Transgenderism With ‘Child Abuse’
https://www.dailysignal.com/2023/06/09/california-bill-would-charge-any-parent-doesnt-affirm-transgenderism-child-abuse/
Quote:A recently amended California bill would add “affirming” the sexual transition of a child to the state’s standard for parental responsibility and child welfare—making any parent who doesn’t affirm transgenderism for their child guilty of abuse under California state law.
AB 957 passed California’s State Assembly on May 3, but a co-sponsor amended it after hours in California’s State Senate on June 6.
Assembly Member Lori Wilson, D-Suisun City, wrote the bill and introduced it on Feb. 14. State Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, co-sponsored it. Wilson’s child identifies as transgender.
Originally, AB 957 required courts to consider whether a child’s parents were “gender-affirming” in custody cases. Wiener’s amendment completely rewrites California’s standard of child care.
AB 957 post-amendment “would include a parent’s affirmation of the child’s gender identity as part of the health, safety, and welfare of the child,” altering the definition and application of the entire California Family Code.
California courts would be given complete authority under Section 3011 of California’s Family Code to remove a child from his or her parents’ home if parents disapprove of LGBTQ+ ideology.
By changing the definition of what constitutes the “health, safety, and welfare of [a] child,” schools, churches, hospitals, and other organizations interacting with children would be required to affirm “gender transitions” in minors by default—or risk charges of child abuse.
RE: California Bill Would Charge Parents Who Don't Affirm Transgenderism With Child Abuse - Ninurta - 06-10-2023
Depends on the circumstances, I reckon. If a kid has always identified as the opposite gender of their birth, then it's probably legitimate, and any decent parent would acknowledge that. If, on the other hand, your sixth grader comes home one day suddenly re-identifying, then there is a deeper problem, and likely one caused by indoctrination at school. In that case, any decent parent would fight tooth and nail.
In NO circumstances should the State be allowed to dictate a parent's parenting. Some are decent parents, some less so, but they are ALL parents, with parental rights transcendent of the authority of the State.
Another good reason to flee California. Newsome is really trying to empty the state, isn't he? Maybe he has plans to sell the rest of it to China, and doesn't want to have to evict the citizens, so he's "convincing" them to leave voluntarily...
I mean, it sure LOOKS like there is some kind of plan afoot on the Left Coast, and that's as good a working theory as any!
Also a good reason to never let him get within hair-sniffing distance of the White House - where the hell is there to go when he starts "convincing" citizens of the entire US to vacate so he can sell the rest to China?
.
RE: California Bill Would Charge Parents Who Don't Affirm Transgenderism With Child Abuse - Infolurker - 06-11-2023
LOL
Speak of the devil
RE: California Bill Would Charge Parents Who Don't Affirm Transgenderism With Child Abuse - Freija - 06-11-2023
(06-10-2023, 11:47 PM)Ninurta Wrote: In NO circumstances should the State be allowed to dictate a parent's parenting. Some are decent parents, some less so, but they are ALL parents, with parental rights transcendent of the authority of the State.
1000 TIMES THIS ^
Considering some f*cking backwards red states already do treat loving and supportive parents that affirm their transgender children as child abusers, all I can say is congratulations California for listening to the advice of nearly every major medical organization in the country and for having some compassion.
@"Infolurker"#107 You can post whatever you want but I wish you would please stop trying to stir shit up about transgender issues by posting outrage from biased right-wing propaganda sites as this is not ATS and you're not going to get the same back slapping engagement here as you would there. At least I hope not. It makes you come across as a hapless puppet drone in a manufactured culture war with the only purpose being to sow division and promote unfounded fear mongering.
I will add that as a transgender child, without the love and support of my parents I would not be here today or lived the amazing life that I have and as someone that did once fear I could have been taken away from my family, know that this was absolutely terrifying as I am sure many kids today also fear that live in states bent on eradicating their existence and intruding on the rights and decisions made between their parents and doctors.
RE: California Bill Would Charge Parents Who Don't Affirm Transgenderism With Child Abuse - xuenchen - 06-11-2023
Does this new Bill provide extra for mental evaluations of EVERYBODY involved??
Whatabout mental treatments and solutions??
RE: California Bill Would Charge Parents Who Don't Affirm Transgenderism With Child Abuse - Infolurker - 06-11-2023
See, there is no "MSM / Left Sources" as CNN, MSDNC, and the others will not report on such things as we all know.
Luckily the "general population" is starting to catch on.
Shining a light on events that impact people (and especially children) is not hate although I understand "anything" that goes against the party platform is hate currently. Check this one out and explain how "this" is normal parenting? The kid tells on what his activist mom is trying to do to him on livestream.
Boy Cries Out for Help on Livestream, then THIS Happens!
RE: California Bill Would Charge Parents Who Don't Affirm Transgenderism With Child Abuse - quintessentone - 06-11-2023
The more I listen to and try to understand what the young people and their parents face, the more I believe they need to navigate their lives as they see fit - with health support of course.
Listen to this anti-woke father speak about his child's suffering.
RE: California Bill Would Charge Parents Who Don't Affirm Transgenderism With Child Abuse - Infolurker - 06-11-2023
(06-11-2023, 06:55 PM)quintessentone Wrote: The more I listen to and try to understand what the young people and their parents face, the more I believe they need to navigate their lives as they see fit - with health support of course.
Listen to this anti-woke father speak about his child's suffering.
As many of us "continuously" say..... Adults can do as they please. That person transitioning is not 4.
RE: California Bill Would Charge Parents Who Don't Affirm Transgenderism With Child Abuse - quintessentone - 06-11-2023
(06-11-2023, 07:00 PM)Infolurker Wrote:(06-11-2023, 06:55 PM)quintessentone Wrote: The more I listen to and try to understand what the young people and their parents face, the more I believe they need to navigate their lives as they see fit - with health support of course.
Listen to this anti-woke father speak about his child's suffering.
As many of us "continuously" say..... Adults can do as they please. That person transitioning is not 4.
Who knows the child's needs better, outsiders or the parents and healthcare providers? And no child at a very young age as that is getting any type of hormones from what I've read it is considered at puberty only.
RE: California Bill Would Charge Parents Who Don't Affirm Transgenderism With Child Abuse - Ninurta - 06-12-2023
(06-11-2023, 01:22 AM)Freija Wrote:(06-10-2023, 11:47 PM)Ninurta Wrote: In NO circumstances should the State be allowed to dictate a parent's parenting. Some are decent parents, some less so, but they are ALL parents, with parental rights transcendent of the authority of the State.
1000 TIMES THIS ^
Considering some f*cking backwards red states already do treat loving and supportive parents that affirm their transgender children as child abusers, all I can say is congratulations California for listening to the advice of nearly every major medical organization in the country and for having some compassion.
@"Infolurker"#107 You can post whatever you want but I wish you would please stop trying to stir shit up about transgender issues by posting outrage from biased right-wing propaganda sites as this is not ATS and you're not going to get the same back slapping engagement here as you would there. At least I hope not. It makes you come across as a hapless puppet drone in a manufactured culture war with the only purpose being to sow division and promote unfounded fear mongering.
I will add that as a transgender child, without the love and support of my parents I would not be here today or lived the amazing life that I have and as someone that did once fear I could have been taken away from my family, know that this was absolutely terrifying as I am sure many kids today also fear that live in states bent on eradicating their existence and intruding on the rights and decisions made between their parents and doctors.
And it goes in both directions. "Hands off" is "hands off". NO State should be allowed to jail parents or take their children for any decisions they make in the parenting realm, either for transgenderism or against it. That's between the parent, the child, and their chosen medical professionals. It's none of the State's business either way - the State is not their doctor, it is not the parent, and it is not the child. it is not the State's place to step in, in any case such as the ones being discussed.
.
RE: California Bill Would Charge Parents Who Don't Affirm Transgenderism With Child Abuse - Ninurta - 06-12-2023
(06-11-2023, 07:00 PM)Infolurker Wrote:(06-11-2023, 06:55 PM)quintessentone Wrote: The more I listen to and try to understand what the young people and their parents face, the more I believe they need to navigate their lives as they see fit - with health support of course.
Listen to this anti-woke father speak about his child's suffering.
As many of us "continuously" say..... Adults can do as they please. That person transitioning is not 4.
Here's the problem. Just like the State, neither you nor I are that child, that child's parents, or their doctors. We, by rights, have NO right to interfere in decisions made by any of those folks on their own behalf. It's not our call to make, none of our damned business. No more than it is the State's decision, in either direction.
Anything else is just busybody interference in someone else's affairs. It doesn't matter if that interference comes from the Left, or the Right, it's STILL interference all the same. One is no different from the other as far as interference in personal affairs goes. I don't tell other folks how to run their own houses, and they damned well won't tell me how to run mine, and that is the long and the short of the entire contrived argument.
It's much like the argument several years ago regarding gay marriage. Once you ask the State to step in - as licensing of marriages, asking State permission to get married - you open the door for the State to make a mess of things. In the matter of gay marriage, the State, in order to be a proper state, must extend all State sponsored privileges equally to ALL citizens. There are no "under-citizens" or "second class citizens" in a proper State. So if the State is allowed to give permission for a thing, or withhold permission for a thing, then those permissions have to be equally distributed to all of the citizens, regardless of their personal situation.
So, if you don't want the state poking around and interfering in YOUR personal life, then don't ask them to do that to anyone else... because that WILL, eventually, splash back on you, too.
Just as no one else has a right to force us to feed their fantasies by forcing us to play their silly little pronoun games, WE do not have the right to prevent them from having their fantasies, however silly we may think they are. 90% of the world's social ills, maybe more, could be cured in one fell swoop by simply ending the busybody game that everyone is playing to try to force OTHER folks around to their own way of thinking. No one has a right to end someone else's rights - their right to swing their fist ends where the other's nose begins, that sort of thing.
.
RE: California Bill Would Charge Parents Who Don't Affirm Transgenderism With Child Abuse - Snarl - 06-12-2023
(06-10-2023, 10:26 PM)Infolurker Wrote: Either get with the program of what we are doing to your children or we will take them away.
People (with kids) should probably consider following businesses ... and just move out of the state as quickly as possible.
If I lived in Cali, I would definitely try to be gone before they stop the sale of gasoline. Might not be able to 'escape' after that.
RE: California Bill Would Charge Parents Who Don't Affirm Transgenderism With Child Abuse - quintessentone - 06-12-2023
How I interpret that Cali law is the parents will be charged with child abuse depending on the severity of the child's psychological state and whether or not it is severe enough to lead to suicide.
RE: California Bill Would Charge Parents Who Don't Affirm Transgenderism With Child Abuse - Snarl - 06-12-2023
(06-12-2023, 04:57 AM)Ninurta Wrote: Anything else is just busybody interference in someone else's affairs. It doesn't matter if that interference comes from the Left, or the Right, it's STILL interference all the same. One is no different from the other as far as interference in personal affairs goes. I don't tell other folks how to run their own houses, and they damned well won't tell me how to run mine, and that is the long and the short of the entire contrived argument.
I feel 'relief' when I hear the government is pushing into barriers that no one would agree to if they were polled. I feel 'relief' because I lived my life in the time before. My kids are both standing on their own two feet. Neither of them elected to make babies.
If paying taxes became voluntary ... and that's where it needs to go back to ... there'd simply be no money to pay for this horseshit.
RE: California Bill Would Charge Parents Who Don't Affirm Transgenderism With Child Abuse - Ninurta - 06-12-2023
(06-12-2023, 11:43 AM)quintessentone Wrote: How I interpret that Cali law is the parents will be charged with child abuse depending on the severity of the child's psychological state and whether or not it is severe enough to lead to suicide.
How I interpret it is that it's State political interference in personal matters, same as the states that outlaw any care at all. Both are the same to me - State interference in personal matters, where the State has no right to a say. In both of those cases, specifically, it is State interference and negation of parental rights. It is, effectively, the State "removing" children from parental care while still requiring the parents to foot the bills for that care and provide it.
That would constitute a "constructive taking", which is Constitutionally unsound, in both cases.
.
RE: California Bill Would Charge Parents Who Don't Affirm Transgenderism With Child Abuse - quintessentone - 06-13-2023
(06-12-2023, 10:29 PM)Ninurta Wrote:(06-12-2023, 11:43 AM)quintessentone Wrote: How I interpret that Cali law is the parents will be charged with child abuse depending on the severity of the child's psychological state and whether or not it is severe enough to lead to suicide.
How I interpret it is that it's State political interference in personal matters, same as the states that outlaw any care at all. Both are the same to me - State interference in personal matters, where the State has no right to a say. In both of those cases, specifically, it is State interference and negation of parental rights. It is, effectively, the State "removing" children from parental care while still requiring the parents to foot the bills for that care and provide it.
That would constitute a "constructive taking", which is Constitutionally unsound, in both cases.
.
There are toxic parents out there that indoctrinate their children using their very narrow lens to navigate society and if their child shows any veering off of that view then the child's veering-off needs become secondary, so depending on the severity of the child's needs in relation to their mental or physical wellbeing, that would fall into one of the many reasons for interference.
RE: California Bill Would Charge Parents Who Don't Affirm Transgenderism With Child Abuse - Infolurker - 06-17-2023
(06-13-2023, 12:05 PM)quintessentone Wrote:(06-12-2023, 10:29 PM)Ninurta Wrote:(06-12-2023, 11:43 AM)quintessentone Wrote: How I interpret that Cali law is the parents will be charged with child abuse depending on the severity of the child's psychological state and whether or not it is severe enough to lead to suicide.
How I interpret it is that it's State political interference in personal matters, same as the states that outlaw any care at all. Both are the same to me - State interference in personal matters, where the State has no right to a say. In both of those cases, specifically, it is State interference and negation of parental rights. It is, effectively, the State "removing" children from parental care while still requiring the parents to foot the bills for that care and provide it.
That would constitute a "constructive taking", which is Constitutionally unsound, in both cases.
.
There are toxic parents out there that indoctrinate their children using their very narrow lens to navigate society and if their child shows any veering off of that view then the child's veering-off needs become secondary, so depending on the severity of the child's needs in relation to their mental or physical wellbeing, that would fall into one of the many reasons for interference.
Yeah, nothing to see here:
Mom Who Lost Trans Daughter Begs CA Senate To STOP Pushing Gender Ideology
Mother testifies her daughter was taken by the state of California. Despite her objections her child was put on testosterone, exploited to raise money for a LGBTQ organization and then committed suicide.
RE: California Bill Would Charge Parents Who Don't Affirm Transgenderism With Child Abuse - Michigan Swamp Buck - 06-17-2023
Laws created and passed by an elected legislature in a representative republic should be those laws demanded by the constituents being represented. If that isn't what is happening, then the system is broken and is actually something other than a representative republic.
RE: California Bill Would Charge Parents Who Don't Affirm Transgenderism With Child Abuse - Ninurta - 06-17-2023
(06-13-2023, 12:05 PM)quintessentone Wrote:(06-12-2023, 10:29 PM)Ninurta Wrote:(06-12-2023, 11:43 AM)quintessentone Wrote: How I interpret that Cali law is the parents will be charged with child abuse depending on the severity of the child's psychological state and whether or not it is severe enough to lead to suicide.
How I interpret it is that it's State political interference in personal matters, same as the states that outlaw any care at all. Both are the same to me - State interference in personal matters, where the State has no right to a say. In both of those cases, specifically, it is State interference and negation of parental rights. It is, effectively, the State "removing" children from parental care while still requiring the parents to foot the bills for that care and provide it.
That would constitute a "constructive taking", which is Constitutionally unsound, in both cases.
.
There are toxic parents out there that indoctrinate their children using their very narrow lens to navigate society and if their child shows any veering off of that view then the child's veering-off needs become secondary, so depending on the severity of the child's needs in relation to their mental or physical wellbeing, that would fall into one of the many reasons for interference.
And that is where our opinions differ. I don't recognize the power of the State to interfere in that situation any more than I recognize it's power to interfere in the opposite circumstance of interference in medical procedures to effect a transformation. If the State has no right to interfere in the one case, then they cannot logically have the right to interfere in the other. That child, either way, is the child of that parent to indoctrinate or teach as they see fit, and is not the State's child to interfere with. As a matter of fact, I think armed resistance is justified in either case when the State oversteps it's boundaries into personal affairs.
I feel the same way regarding same sex marriages. If the State issues licenses to heterosexuals, then it must logically also issue licenses to homosexuals. Fair is fair, and there are no second class citizens - you are either a full citizen with all the rights and privileges that entails, or you are not a citizen at all. I myself have never quite grasped the importance of asking a State for permission to marry whomever one will, but it seems to be an important thing to some people, and so must be permitted evenly and equally to avoid stratifying a state into a caste system of inequality. At the same time, the State has no right to compel any clergy to perform any such marriage against their conscience, because that too is a personal matter, and there are plenty of other officiants who can get the job done without the worry of violating a conscience. I've been married 4 times, and there are plenty of clergy around who would refuse to perform marriages 2 through 4 on grounds of conscience, and rather than requiring one of those to violate his own beliefs, it was a simple matter to find another who had no qualms.
Like charity, teaching or "indoctrination" begins at home. It is not the State's job to either indoctrinate or enforce such indoctrination in social matters. That's where Islam started going off course - mixing social matters with political ones, and confusing the two. It's what led to the collapse of the Western Roman Empire as well - they adopted Christianity, started confusing religious issues with political ones, and that eventually brought about it's collapse. That sort of thing is what confuses societies and leads to the collapse of empires, states, and entire societies. We are currently just watching that happen in real-time. It's just our turn, hence all the confusions being bandied about. It's to be expected at some point - no society or civilization lasts forever. Welcome to the New Dark Ages.
.
RE: California Bill Would Charge Parents Who Don't Affirm Transgenderism With Child Abuse - Infolurker - 06-18-2023
We will have to see how the lawsuits pan out.
The doctors use this BS to scare the parents (Would you rather have a dead daughter or a live son, let us cut off her breasts and put her on testosterone.) The Europeans already know this is BS and are stopping this butchery on their teens.
'Mutilating children for profit.' California teen sues doctors over breast-removal surgery at age 13 in Kaiser Permanente's SECOND blockbuster trans lawsuit
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11873443/California-teen-sues-doctors-breast-removal-surgery-13-Kaiser-Permanentes-2nd-lawsuit.html
Quote:A California teenager has started to sue the doctors who at age 13 cut off her breasts in a medical gender change she now bitterly regrets, in America's latest blockbuster trans lawsuit.
The 18-year-old, who is referred to as Layla Jane, says she should never have been put through the 'torment' of testosterone hormones at age 12 and puberty blockers and surgery the next year.
She is one of a growing number of detransitioners, as they are known, who come to regret their procedures and sue the doctors they accuse of pushing them into irreversible treatments instead of counselling.'I don't think I should have been allowed to change my sex before I could legally consent to have sex,' Layla said on Fox News.'I don't think I'm better off for the experience, and I think transition just completely added fuel to the fire that was my pre-existing conditions.'
According to legal papers, Layla experienced moodiness, anxiety, gender confusion and anger issues as a child. At age 11 learned about radical transgender ideology and went online to learn more about the new trend.
She self-diagnosed that she was a boy and believed transitioning would solve her mental health problems.
According to the suit, doctors at the Permanente Medical Group and Kaiser Foundation Hospitals rushed her on to cross-sex hormones and a double mastectomy without properly assessing her mental health problems.Her evaluations lasted only 30 minutes and 75 minutes, records show.
They are accused of 'intentional, malicious, and oppressive concealment of important information and false representations' that saw Layla pushed into the procedures.
It's claimed they presented Layla Jane and her parents with a terrifying choice: 'Would you rather have a live son, or a dead daughter?' — language that echoes complaints from other detransitioners across the US.'These are decisions I will have to live with for the rest of my life,' Layla said in a statement.'I'm ready to join the growing group of detransitioners so that no other child has to go through the torment I went through at the hands of doctors I should have been able to trust.'