Category Archives: Gay Fascism

Pelosi reveals liberal leftist agenda in Equality Act remarks

At the March 13 Democrat press conference that introduced H.R. 5 – Equality Act, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi revealed a litany of  liberal, leftist goals she hoped Democrats would achieve. Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI), gave the initial remarks. Pelosi  gave the hallmark Democrat speech.

The following text is the official transcript of Pelosi’s remarks. The bold face highlighted text marks are mine.

# # #

Pelosi Remarks at Press Event Introducing H.R. 5, The Equality Act

March 13, 2019

Washington, D.C. – Speaker Nancy Pelosi joined Democratic leaders of the House and Senate for a press event introducing H.R. 5, the Equality Act, which amends the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to explicitly prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in education, employment, housing, credit, federal jury service, public accommodations and the use of federal funds. Below are the Speaker’s remarks

Speaker Pelosi. Senator Merkley! Thank you, Senator Merkley, I accept your kind words on behalf of our House Democrats who, overwhelmingly, support this legislation and I thank David Cicilline and the Members of the Task Force for their work to bring us to this day.

I remember full-well the day you described in the LBJ Room when we stood there, you taking the lead in the Senate, David in the House, and right between the two of you, John Lewis, John Lewis giving his imprimatur to the path that we were going down.

[Applause]

So, I thank you. It is a pleasure to welcome back Senator Schumer when he gets here, a former Member, and Senator Baldwin, a former Member of whom we are very proud, and thank you for your leadership, as well as Senator Booker, not of this House but certainly of this Congress who we are very proud of as well. I am proud to join all of you.

As I was listening to the comments that were being made, Congressman Cicilline – I think I decided to call you Chairman, you call everyone Chairman in the Majority – and Senator Merkley, I was thinking back on the path to this day.

When we first got the Majority, we said we had four goals we wanted to achieve. One was to pass the hate crimes legislation. Senator Baldwin was very much a part of that in the House, and Senator Schumer of course in the Senate, and then Senator Baldwin in both houses.

The next was supposed to be ENDA, end discrimination in the workplace, but we all came to the conclusion, led by the outside groups, that we should do the repeal of ‘Don’t Act Don’t Tell’ next. So, that rose to number two on the agenda, not in terms of importance but in terms of chronology and in getting the votes. So then, with the help of so many of you, we repealed ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’

[Applause]

Next was marriage equality, which the courts happily recognized – marriage equality. So, we had one left, ENDA. But everybody just said, why should we be ending discrimination in the workplace? What about in every place – in housing, in every place?’

So, that’s when Mr. Cicilline stepped forward and said, ‘We’ll open the Civil Rights Act.’ Not a small thing to do, and that’s why Mr. Lewis and the Congressional Black Caucus and all of our Members were so important in getting behind that fully so here we are today.

Here we are today. We are proud to stand with Members from both sides of the Capitol to take a momentous step towards full equality for LGBTQ Americans and for our country. We take great pride in serving with a record-breaking ten LGBTQ Members in the Congress. We are happy about that.

[Applause]

Let us once again salute David Cicilline, a champion for equality. Thank you, Senator Merkley, for your tireless leadership in the Senate.

Our inside maneuvering, though, is only possible because of the success of the outside mobilization, so I want to join David Cicilline and Senator Merkley in acknowledging the work of our outside friends who made this possible.

[Applause]

Advocates and allies have always made the difference: in passing fully-inclusive hate crime legislation, repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Act, defeating the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act – remember that horrible thing? And more. Forget about it.

Again, your mobilizing and organizing will make the difference, once again, so I thank all of you for that. Let me just say on that score, that many of you have reported to us that many in corporate America and in the business community are behind the Equality Act, and I think that is going to be very important.

[Applause]

Our Founders, in their wisdom, wrote in our beautiful preamble to the Constitution ‘the blessings of liberty.’ They talked about the blessings of liberty which were to be the birthright of all Americans. That’s why I am especially upset that, last night, we were all sickened and saddened to see the President revive his hateful transgender service ban. No one with the strength and bravery to serve in the military should be turned away – turned away – so sad.

I had some trans in uniform folks here for the State of the Union Address, and they were so saddened because they have a high percentage of participation in our military, and to have that not get its full respect and, in fact, lessened by the President’s actions – so, we have important work to do in fighting to defeat this disgusting ban and we will succeed.

[Applause]

While the President betrays our values with his ban, the Congress is bringing our nation closer to equal liberty and justice for all with the Equality Act. Sexual orientation and gender identity deserve full civil rights protections – in the workplace and in every place, education, housing, credit, jury service – you want jury service? In public accommodations. That is why we are proud to stand with Members of the Congressional Black Caucus, many of whom are here with us, Bobby Scott, Sheila Jackson Lee. You will be hearing from Bobby Scott.

We are proud, as David said, that this bill has nearly 240 bipartisan co-sponsors in the House. We look forward to a swift, strong and successful vote on this bill. And now, it would have been my pleasure – did he come? Okay, Chuck is on the way.

[Laughter]

Is that okay? He will be here shortly. I am pleased to welcome back to the House side, a place where we took great pride, where she was first lesbian to be elected to the Congress of the United States. How proud we are of Tammy Baldwin.

~ Grif

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Coming to America: Canadian man fined $55,000 for misgendering a ‘transgender’

Yesterday, our Grif published an important post, “Democrats file legislation to force all Americans to accept the LGBTQ agenda,” on a bill in the House, H.R. 5: Equality Act, introduced by Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI), which would add “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” as protected classes under federal civil rights law.

If the so-called Equality Act becomes law, it would impact essentially every part of American life. Everyday Americans, especially Christians, would be penalized for not conforming to the Left’s LGBT dicta and agenda, including:

  • Employers and workers must conform to new sexual norms or else lose their businesses and jobs.
  • Hospitals and insurers must provide and pay for “transgender”  therapies and surgeries against their moral or medical objections.
  • Parents would be forced to provide sexual reassignment treatments for their children who are confused about their sexual identity.
  • Religious (read: Christian) institutions would be forced to provide adoptions to permit same sex couples to adopt children.

Canada is already doing that — penalizing anyone who doesn’t conform to the LGBT dicta.

The British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal is a quasi-judicial human rights body in British Columbia (BC), Canada. It was established under the British Columbia Human Rights Code and is responsible for “accepting, screening, mediating and adjudicating human rights complaints.”

The Tribunal is comprised of three members: Diana Juricevic, Norman Trerise and Devyn Cousineau.

On March 27, 2019, the BC Human Rights Tribunal fined Christian activist William Whatcott $55,000 CAD (US $41,298) for violating Section 7 of the BC Human Rights Code by misgendering Morgane Oger (birth name Ronan Oger), a male-to-female “transgender” and a 2017 New Democratic Party candidate, calling Oger a biological male (which is what he is) in street flyers and on the Internet.

In the Tribunal’s 105-page ruling, authored by Devyn Cousineau, Oger — a biological male — is referred to as “Ms.,” “she” and “her”.

The Tribunal says:

Mr. Whatcott created a flyer entitled “Transgenderism vs. Truth in Vancouver‐False Creek” [Flyer]. In it, he called Ms. Oger a “biological male who has renamed himself… after he embraced a transvestite lifestyle”. He expressed a concern “about the promotion and growth of homosexuality and transvestitism in British Columbia and how it is obscuring the immutable truth about our God given gender”. He described being transgender as an “impossibility”, which exposes people to harm and constitutes a sin….

When Ms. Oger and her team learned of the Flyer, they had to formulate a response during their election campaign. Ms. Oger went to the police, who advised her of safety protocols. She warned her children to be wary of strangers. She describes the effect of the Flyer as destabilizing, terrifying, and searing. Ultimately, Ms. Oger was not elected in her [False Creek] riding [or electoral district].

After the election was over, Ms. Oger filed a complaint with the Human Rights Tribunal [Tribunal], alleging that the Flyer violated ss. 7(1)(a) and (b) of the Human Rights Code [Code]. Those sections prohibit publication of any statement that “indicates discrimination or an intention to discriminate” (s. 7(1)(a)), or “is likely to expose a person or group or class of persons to hatred or contempt” (s. 7(1)(b)). In response, Mr. Whatcott denies that the Flyer violates s. 7 and says that in any event his rights to freedom of speech and religion guarantee his right to distribute it. He says those freedoms are especially important during an election campaign….

In his constitutional argument, Mr. Whatcott argues that the “effect of the BC Human Rights Commission’s decision to proceed to the hearing stage in this case amounts to oppressive government action that violates the respondent’s s. 2, 15 and s.27 of the charter rights….

I can find no merit in Mr. Whatcott’s argument. The Tribunal is a creature of statute. It is bound to enforce and implement the Code, and the means by which it does this is to accept and adjudicate human rights complaints. In this decision, I have found that Ms. Oger has established a violation of s. 7 of the Code. A significant part of my analysis has entailed balancing Mr. Whatcott’s religious rights under the Charter and thus accounting for his religious freedoms. In Saguenay, the Court recognized that the application of human rights legislation may impose reasonable and justifiable limits on freedom of religion: paras. 89‐90….

Mr. Whatcott’s argument, if accepted, would require the Tribunal to reject any complaint for filing if it could impact on a person’s religious beliefs. Not only would this amount to an improper abdication of jurisdiction, but it would itself be an act of preferring one religious belief over another. “True neutrality” requires the Tribunal to abstain from such positions and rather adjudicate each complaint on its merits, weighing religious rights where appropriate: Sageunay at para. 134. That is precisely what it has done in this case.

This argument is dismissed.

I have found that Mr. Whatcott violated s. 7 of the Code. I declare that his conduct in publishing the Flyers was discrimination contrary to the Code and order him to cease the contravention and refrain from committing the same or a similar contravention: Code, s. 37(2)(a) and (b).

Ms. Oger seeks an award to compensate her for injury to her dignity, feelings, and self‐respect: Code, s. 37(2)(d)(iii). She argues that, given the nature of the discrimination in this case, the fact that it is ongoing, and that it had a serious impact on a vulnerable person, an award of $35,000 is appropriate. Mr. Whatcott opposes the award and argues it is unduly punitive….

I accept that the impact on Ms. Oger was serious….

More importantly, though, the Flyer and its potential ramifications terrified Ms. Oger….

Given the high levels of violence and hatred that are still perpetrated against transwomen in our society, it was not unreasonable for Ms. Oger to fear a violent outcome from this Flyer, even though – as Mr. Whatcott, JCCF, and CAFE repeatedly argued – there was no express call to violence within the Flyer itself. As Ms. Oger explained, it was not necessarily Mr. Whatcott she had to worry about, but the person who might be emboldened by the Flyer to act on their own hatred for transwomen….

By using her birth name, Ronan, Mr. Whatcott further caused Ms. Oger to feel hurt and angry….

I accept that the injury to Ms. Oger’s feelings, dignity and self‐respect was severe, and that the effects are ongoing. The circumstances warrant a higher award than in previous cases arising out of s. 7….

I find that an award of $35,000 for injury to dignity, feelings and self‐respect [plus $20,000 in costs incurred by Oger] is appropriate….

In my view, the severity of Mr. Whatcott’s conduct, the fact that it was intentional and flagrant and persisted for the entire duration of the complaint, and the possible deterrent effect it could have on other transgender complainants seeking recourse at this Tribunal, mean that a high award is warranted in this case….

H/t FOTM reader-commenter William and Mass Resistance

See also:

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Democrats file legislation to force all Americans to accept the LGBTQ agenda

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi March 13 introduced the so-called Equality Act, a bill that would add “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” as protected classes under federal civil rights law.

The legislation, known as the Equality Act would specifically include all LGBTQ definitions and would penalize everyday Americans for their beliefs about marriage and biological sex. Similar sexual orientation and gender identity laws at the state and local level have already been used in this way.

While liberal Democrats and some liberal Republicans in the House of Representatives are lauding the proposed legislation, some conservatives are calling it a “frontal assault on religious liberty.”

If the Equality Act becomes law, it would impact essentially every part of American life. It would force employers and workers to conform to new sexual norms or else lose their businesses and jobs. It would force hospitals and insurers to provide and pay for these therapies against any moral or medical objections. It would force parents to provide sexual reassignment treatments for their children who are confused about their sexual identity. It would force religious institutions that provide adoptions to permit same sex couples to adopt children, and the list goes on.

Monica Burke, a research assistant in the DeVos Center for Religion and Civil Society at The Heritage Foundation, in a critique of the proposed legislation noted that most Americans “don’t want a nationwide bathroom requirement, health care mandate, or “preferred pronoun” law based on gender identity, but congressional Democrats seem to think it’s time to impose them.”

Burke’s critique in The Daily Signal:

Nancy Pelosi delivered . . . on her promise to introduce the so-called Equality Act, which would elevate sexual orientation and gender identity to protected classes in federal anti-discrimination law.

Although that may sound nice in theory, in practice sexual orientation and gender identity policies at the state and local level have caused profound harms to Americans from all walks of life.

How might a sexual orientation and gender identity law on the federal level, as introduced in the House and Senate, affect you and your community? Here are seven ways:

1.   It would penalize Americans who don’t affirm new sexual norms or gender ideology.

Jack Phillips’ case went all the way to the Supreme Court after the Colorado Civil Rights Commission accused the bakery owner of discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation when the self-described cake artist declined to create a custom cake to celebrate a same-sex wedding.

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, but left the law in question, the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act, intact. Until last week, Phillips was in court again defending himself against the same agency under the same law.

The day after the Supreme Court ruled in Phillips’ case, Autumn Scardina, a lawyer who identifies as transgender, requested that he create a “gender transition cake.” After Phillips declined, the state Civil Rights Commission found probable cause under the law that the baker had discriminated on the basis of gender identity.

Thankfully, the commission dropped the case, and Phillips agreed to drop his own lawsuit accusing the state agency of harassing him for his Christian beliefs.

Phillips is just one of many Americans who have lost income because of their belief that marriage is between one man and one woman. Others cases involve florists, bakers, photographers, wedding venue owners, videographers, web designers, calligraphers, and public servants.

These cases are just the beginning. The same policies used to silence disagreement over marriage can be used to silence disagreement over the biological reality of sex.

2.  It would compel speech.

Virginia high school teacher Peter Vlaming lost his job for something he did not say.

A county school board voted unanimously to fire the veteran teacher over the objections of his students after he refused to comply with administrators’ orders to use masculine pronouns in referring to a female student who identifies as transgender.

Vlaming did his best to accommodate the student without violating his religious belief that God created human beings male and female, using the student’s new name and simply refraining from using pronouns altogether.

Unfortunately, the school still considered this a violation of its anti-discrimination policy.

Incidents like these would increase under federal policy proposed in the Equality Act. Both federal and private employers could face costly lawsuits if they fail to implement strict preferred pronoun policies. Employees could be disciplined if they fail to comply, regardless of their scientific or moral objections.

3 . It could shut down charities.

Foster care and adoption agencies, drug rehabilitation centers, and homeless centers already face challenges under state and local policies on sexual orientation and gender identity.

In Philadelphia, just days after the city put out an urgent call for 300 additional families to foster children, the city halted child placements by Catholic Social Services because of the organization’s belief that every child deserves both a mother and a father.

Although same-sex couples have the opportunity to foster children through the state or every other agency in Philadelphia, the city canceled its contract with Catholic Social Services. The agency’s approved foster homes remain available while children languish on the waiting list.

A federal sexual orientation and gender identity law would make this situation a national phenomenon, which would spell disaster for the 437,500 children in foster care nationwide.

Other charities would be affected, too.

In Anchorage, Alaska, a biological male born Timothy Paul Coyle goes by the name of Samantha Amanda Coyle. On two occasions, Coyle tried to gain access to the city’s Downtown Soup Kitchen Hope Center, a shelter for homeless, abused, and trafficked women.

In one attempt, authorities said, Coyle was inebriated and had gotten into a fight with a staffer at another shelter, so Hope Center staff paid Coyle’s fare to the emergency room to receive medical attention. Coyle sued the center for “gender identity discrimination.”

A federal sexual orientation and gender identity law could force any social service organization to open up private facilities—including single-sex bathrooms, showers, and sleeping areas—to members of the opposite sex.

4.  It would allow more biological males to defeat girls in sports.

Two biological males who identify and compete as women easily defeated all of their female competitors in an event at the Connecticut State Track Championships. Transgender athlete Terry Miller broke the state record in the girls’100-meter dash. Andraya Yearwood, also transgender, took second place.

Selina Soule, a female runner, not only lost to the biological males in the championships but also lost out on valuable opportunities to be seen by college coaches and chosen for scholarships.

Soule said about the 100-meter event: “We all know the outcome of the race before it even starts; it’s demoralizing.”

A federal sexual orientation and gender identity law would defeat the purpose of Title IX of the Civil Rights Act, which is supposed to guarantee women equal educational and athletic opportunities.

Under radical gender identity policies, female athletes have sustained gruesome injuries at the hands of male competitors. In high school wrestling, female athletes have forfeited rather than compete against transgender athletes on testosterone.

A federal law could set girls’ and women’s sports back permanently at every level.

5.  It could be used to coerce medical professionals.

Under state sexual orientation and gender identity laws, individuals who identify as transgender have sued Catholic hospitals in California and New Jersey for declining to perform hysterectomies on otherwise healthy women who wanted to pursue gender transition.

If these lawsuits succeed, medical professionals would be pressured to treat patients according to ideology rather than their best medical judgment.

The Obama administration tried to coerce medical professionals into offering transition-affirming therapies through a regulation in the Affordable Care Act, popularly known as Obamacare.

That move was stopped in the 11th hour by a federal judge. However, that could all be set back in motion if a national law imposes a nationwide health care mandate regarding gender identity.

6.  It could lead to more parents losing custody of their children.

The politicization of medicine according to gender ideology will create more conflicts among parents, doctors, and the government. A federal sexual orientation and gender identity law would jeopardize parental rights nationwide.

In fact, the current issue of the American Journal of Bioethics includes an article arguing that the state should overrule the parents of transgender children who do not consent to give them puberty-blocking drugs.

This has already happened. In Ohio, a judge removed a biological girl from her parents’ custody after they declined to help her “transition” to male with testosterone supplements.

After the Cincinnati Children’s Hospital’s Transgender Health Clinic recommended these treatments for the girl’s gender dysphoria, the parents wanted to pursue counseling instead. Then the county’s family services agency charged the parents with abuse and neglect, and the judge terminated their custody.

Similar cases are proceeding through the courts with children as young as 6 years old.

Meanwhile, studies show that 80 to 95 percent of children no longer experience gender dysphoria after puberty. Politicizing medicine could have serious consequences for children who are exposed to the unnecessary medical risks of drastic therapies.

A federal sexual orientation and gender identity law would make these cases more common.

7.  It would enable sexual assault.

A complaint under investigation by federal education officials alleges that a boy who identifies as “gender fluid” at Oakhurst Elementary School in Decatur, Georgia, sexually assaulted Pascha Thomas’ 5-year-old daughter in a girls’ restroom. The boy had access to the girls’ restroom because of Decatur City Schools’ transgender restroom policy.

School authorities refused to change the policy even after Thomas reported the assault. Eventually, she decided to remove her daughter from school for the girl’s emotional well-being and physical safety.

A federal sexual orientation and gender identity law would give male sexual predators who self-identify as females access to private facilities, increasing the likelihood of these tragic incidents.

It could also make victims less likely to report sexual misconduct and police less likely to get involved, for fear of being accused of discrimination.

The proposed Equality Act could impose a nationwide bathroom policy that would leave women and children in particular vulnerable to predators. It actually would promote inequality by elevating the ideologies of special-interest groups to the level of protected groups in civil rights law.

This extreme and dangerous legislation would create unprecedented harms to businesses, charities, medical professionals, women and children, and entire families.

Texas fights back

Meanwhile, as congressional Democrats are advocating for the hamstringing of religious belief, Texas is pushing forward with new legislation that, if passed, will ultimately protect religious freedom—in Texas, at least. From Christian Ellis, CBN News, March 25:

The Republican-controlled state senate in Texas is considering SB 17. The bill would allow state license holders like lawyers, health care professionals, and counselors to serve clients based on their religious beliefs without any adverse actions from licensing boards.

Texas Lt. Gov Dan Patrick (R) announced the bill as one of his top priorities for the 2019 Legislative Session. The bill was designated a priority as “a result of requests and recommendations from senators and the people of Texas.”

“They strengthen our support for life, liberty and Texas values, increase protections for taxpayers,” wrote Patrick.

SB 17’s section on religious freedom reads:

“State agency that issues a license or otherwise regulates a business, occupation, or profession may not adopt any rule, regulation, or policy or impose a penalty that:

(1) limits an applicant’s ability to obtain, maintain, or renew a license based on a sincerely held religious belief of the applicant; or

(2) burdens an applicant’s or a license holder’s:

(A) free exercise of religion, regardless of whether the burden is the result of a rule generally applicable to all applicants or license holders;

(B) freedom of speech regarding a sincerely held religious belief; or

(C) membership in any religious organization.”

Conservatives across the state expect the bill to pass as the Republican party has control over the state’s House, Senate, and governorship. However, opponents like the National Association of Social Workers Texas have stated they will argue against the bill in the hearing, calling it “discriminatory”.

The organization states the bill runs “counter to the NASW Code of Ethics for all professionals, and will deny services to already marginalized persons in the LGBTQ community or women seeking access to reproductive care and services.”

SB 17 comes at a crucial time when religious freedom faces ongoing threats across the country, and as a new threat emerges in the Democrat-controlled US House of Representatives. This month, Democrats introduced an updated version of their Equality Act that elevates protections for sexual orientation over protections for religious liberty. The bill could threaten ministries with legal consequences if they denied an LGBTQ individual from working for their institution.

“Every American should be treated with dignity and respect, but our laws need to protect the constitutionally guaranteed rights that we have,” Greg Baylor from the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) told CBN News.

“Now under the Equality Act we will have a nationwide law,” continued Baylor. “We will see a proliferation of instances where Christians and others are being coerced to violate their beliefs in order to comply with such a law.”

While Democrats are indicating the Equality Act is a big part of their agenda, they do not currently control the US Senate, so the measure is not expected to pass unless they gain control of both houses of Congress in the 2020 election.

While Democrat liberals are planning an assault on religion, Texas is pushing forward with new legislation that, if passed, will ultimately protect religious freedom.

The Republican-controlled state senate in Texas is considering SB 17. The bill would allow state license holders like lawyers, health care professionals, and counselors to serve clients based on their religious beliefs without any adverse actions from licensing boards.

Texas Lt. Gov Dan Patrick (R) announced the bill as one of his top priorities for the 2019 Legislative Session. The bill was designated a priority as “a result of requests and recommendations from senators and the people of Texas.”

~ Grif

Note from Eowyn: H.R. 5 – Equality Act was introduced by Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI) on March 13, 2019. See also “Coming to America: Canadian man fined $55,000 for ‘misgendering’ a ‘transgender’“.

Please follow and like us:
0
 

German intellectuals call for end to gender-pronoun tyranny

So many choices…

The Guardian archly reports, March 8, 2019, that in an “reactionary” open letter published by the Dortmund-based German Language Association, a group of German authors, academics and comedians are calling for a fightback against “ridiculous linguistic constructions” designed to make the German language more gender-neutral.

German Language Association, with over 36,000 members, is one of several institutions in Germany which that try to set standards on grammar and spelling.

The letter’s signatories include philosopher Rüdiger Safranski, novelist Peter Schneider, comedian Dieter Hallervorden, and the former head of Germany’s domestic intelligence Hans-Georg Maassen.

In the German language, nouns have either a male, female or neuter gender; words for mixed groups of people are traditionally based on the masculine form. If you are talking about a group of teachers, for example, you would say die Lehrer, not die Lehrerinnen.

Feminist linguists have made various proposals to make the language more inclusive, either by typographic trickery, such as LehrerInnen, Lehrer(innen) or Lehrer*innen, or by replacing them with nouns that make the gender more invisible. Those proposals have been accepted by a number of academic institutions and municipal authorities. As an example, since January this year, officials in the city of Hanover no longer use the generic noun Lehrer in their correspondence, but the more neutral Lehrende (“teaching ones”).

The protest letter, headed “An end to gender nonsense!” and published shortly before International Women’s Day, argues that the distribution of gender to generic nouns in German is too arbitrary for there to be a systemic sexist bias. As examples, in German, lions are male while giraffes are female and horses neuter. The signatories also dispute that masculine generic pronouns discourage women from entering certain professions, pointing out the fact that Germany’s constitution has 13 mentions of the “chancellor” in its masculine form “did not prevent the repeated rise of Angela Merkel to the post of chancellor”.

See also:

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

‘Child Abuse’? Massachusetts Therapy Ban Means Parents Could Lose Their Kids if They Try to Help Them

Massachusetts lawmakers are considering a therapy ban that would not only make it illegal to counsel children about unwanted same-sex attraction or gender confusion, but also punish parents who allow it by taking custody of their children.

Andrew Beckwith, president of the Massachusetts Family Institute, told CBN News that the bill “categorizes the treatment itself as child abuse.”

It appears that Massachusetts is the first state to consider defining such therapy as abusive and allow for the option of taking away parental custody.

“This is a bill that would allow the state to take, for example, your daughter, and make her someone else’s son,” Beckwith said.

According to the Human Rights Campaign, a powerful LGBTQ advocacy organization, 15 states and Washington, DC have already passed therapy bans for youth. Beckwith says Massachusetts could be the first to add the abuse definition. Lawmakers in Maine and Colorado are also considering therapy bans for youth right now. LGBTQ advocates have argued for years that therapy that allows youth to discuss their concerns about unwanted same-sex desires or gender identity issues is harmful.

Massachusetts lawmakers first introduced a youth therapy ban bill in 2013. Beckwith says proponents appear to have an “aggressive timeline” right now, because last year lawmakers couldn’t agree on the abuse provision and delayed a vote until the end of the session in June.

This year, according to Beckwith, they’re already taking action. Lawmakers held a hearing on March 5 to consider testimony from those the measure would impact.

Parental custody is already an issue in transgender cases involving children across the country. Recently, Ohio officials stripped parental rights from a couple that opposed medical treatment for their teenage daughter who wanted to become a boy. In Texas, a divorced father and mother are fighting over medical treatment for their 6-year-old son. The mother says he identifies as a girl and wants to pursue medical treatments to help him change. The father says the boy identifies as a boy and opposes the treatments.

The Massachusetts Senate’s bill S.70, titled “Relative to abusive practices to change sexual orientation and gender identity,” was reported favorably by committee Monday, March 11, and referred to the committee on Senate Rules.

Hearings on Massachusetts House Bill H.110, “An Act banning conversion therapy,” was extended for additional testimony. A new date for the extended hearings has not been set. The House version of the bill would “prohibit practices by health care providers that attempt to change sexual orientation or gender identity. Children, Families and Persons with Disabilities.”

~ Grif

Please follow and like us:
0
 

New French law compels schools to replace ‘mother/father’ with ‘parent 1/parent 2’

Callum Paton reports for Newsweek that on Feb. 12, 2019, France’s National Assembly voted in favor of an amendment removing the words “mother” and “father” from forms in French schools, replacing them with “parent 1” and “parent 2.” In so doing, the amendment became law, alongside a new school bill.

France’s majority party, La République en Marche! (LREM; in English “Forward!“), which was founded in 2016 by now-President Emmanuel Macron, says that the new law is a necessary step to bring France’s schools into line with the European nation’s 2013 same-sex marriage law — the Marriage for All Law that was passed in 2013. A Forward! legislator, Valérie Petit, told French outlet 20 Minutes: “The amendment aims to anchor into law the family diversity of children in the administrative forms submitted in school.”

Rodrigo Arenas, co-chair of Fédération des Conseils de Parents d’Élèves (FCPEP), the country’s largest federation of parents, called the amendment a “very good thing” because it “takes into account changing family situations” and “resonates with the law passed on the fight against harassment, because often in situations of child harassment, children have been targeted for not conforming.”

In a tweet on Feb. 14, Arenas decries usage of “mother” and “father” as religious tyranny (translated from French):

It will be necessary for the supporters of the “a Papa, a mother” to understand that a religious conception of the family cannot be imposed on a secular public school. This is why private schools exist.

Arenas also retweeted a tweet by LICRA (International League against Racism and Anti-Semitism), calling for making “homophobia” (whatever that means) a crime:

Racism, anti-Semitism, negationnisme, homophobia must cease to be regarded in our country as “opinion crimes” enshrined in the Law of 1881 which protects the freedom of the press. They must be considered as common law offences.

Conservative parties call the amendment a danger to society:

  • Xavier Breton, a conservative deputy for the country’s Les Républicains (LR), denounced the law as frightening, calling it a result of “politically correct thinking that did not correspond to reality” in that 95% of legal unions in France are comprised of male-female couples.
  • Eric Ciotti, another lawmaker whom Newsweek calls “rightwing” (how come the media never call leftwing parties “leftwing”?), calls the law a “fantasy” and that the “negotiation of gender” would “deconstruct the balance of society.”
  • France’s main “far-right” party, the Rassemblement National (RN), which progressed to the second round of the country’s 2017 presidential elections, also objected to the amendment. RN leader said “the mask had fallen” from the face of Forward!, and that Forward! is showing their contempt for the family.

Meanwhile, the Yellow Vest rebellion continues in the streets of Paris. In the video below, a protester had his hand blown off.

See also “Shocker, not: Macron AWOL as violence, protests continue in Paris“.

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

UK woman arrested for calling “trans woman” a “man” on Twitter

The UK is toast.

FYI: Some NSFW language toward the end of this video.

If you don’t want to watch the video, read the Breitbart story here.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Homosexual actress Ellen Page slams Chris Pratt for attending “infamously anti-LGBTQ” church

Now do followers of Islam, Ellen. I triple-dog-dare you!

From Fox News: Ellen Page slammed Chris Pratt for attending a church she claimed is “infamously anti-LGBTQ” and doubled down on her comments on Saturday.

Page’s criticism came after Pratt appeared on “The Late Show With Stephen Colbert” and talked about being religious and completing a 21-day fast inspired by the Biblical Prophet Daniel.

“The Lego Movie 2: The Second Part” actor frequently attends Zoe Church, which is modeled after Hillsong Church, a megachurch founded in Australia but which has locations in New York City and Los Angeles, the New York Times previously reported. Variety stated Pratt was also a Hillsong church attendee.

Following Pratt’s appearance on the late-night show, Page took to Twitter to criticize Pratt for attending the church, which she did not name. “Oh. K. Um. But his church is infamously anti lgbtq so maybe address that too?” She tweeted along with a Hollywood Reporter article about Pratt’s interview.

On Saturday Page, who came out as gay during a 2014 speech in Las Vegas at a conference for the Human Rights Campaign, doubled down on her comment against Pratt and said the actor should “try and listen” to the LGBTQ community.

“If you are a famous actor and you belong to an organization that hates a certain group of people, don’t be surprised if someone simply wonders why it’s not addressed,” the 31-year-old actress tweeted Saturday. “Being anti LGBTQ is wrong, there aren’t two sides. The damage it causes is severe. Full stop. Sending love to all.

She said in another tweet, “If lgbtq+ people are expressing their pain, their trauma, their experiences … maybe just try and listen? Open your heart, stop being defensive and have compassion. It’s a beautiful and life changing feeling, empathy. Much love truly to all.

Pastor Chad Veach previously told the New York Times he modeled Zoe church after Hillsong, which is popular among celebrities, including Justin Bieber.

Senior pastor Brian Houston at Hillsong previously said in a 2015 statement that the church does “not affirm a gay lifestyle.”

“We do not affirm a gay lifestyle and because of this we do not knowingly have actively gay people in positions of leadership, either paid or unpaid,” he said in a post on the church’s website. “I recognize this one statement alone is upsetting to people on both sides of this discussion, which points to the complexity of the issue for churches all over the world.”

He said that he loves and accepts “people on a personal level.”

“Everyone is welcome at Hillsong church except for known predators, those who are disruptive, or those who have adversarial agendas,” he said, adding that gay people are welcomed at the church but cannot pursue a leadership role.

Page has been outspoken about LGBTQ issues and recently spoke out against the attack on “Empire” star Jussie Smollett. (Maybe you should wait for that investigation to pan out, Ellen. It has yet to be proven that an attack actually did occur.)

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Radical feminist kicked off Baltimore LGBTQ Commission for referring to male rapist as male

Trans ideology has allowed a male rapist into a female prison. It has allowed males to compete in female sports. It has forced women to accept men into showers and locker rooms. It has allowed a man to be named Glamour Magazine’s Woman of the Year. Women who object are vilified and harassed on social media; they lose friends, social standing, and even jobs.

The transgender fiction is too much even for some Leftists.

Last November, a self-described Progressive playwright said she was blacklisted for dissenting from the transgender groupthink.

The latest inmate to break free from the Left’s thought-gulag is self-described radical feminist Julia Beck.

Austin Ruse reports for Crisis Magazine, Feb. 1, 2019, that Julia Beck, a lesbian and a self-confessed “radical feminist”, told her story on a recent Heritage Foundation panel, convened to encourage opposition to a Congressional bill called the Equality Act.

HR 2282, The Equality Act, introduced by Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI) — who was the first openly “gay” mayor of a U.S. state capital — would enshrine the transgender ideology into American law under the legal concept of public accommodation, wherein the federal government will take away any and all women-only spaces in the country.

Julia Beck said she was booted from the Baltimore LGBTQ Commission because she referred to a male rapist, who claims to be female, as male. The authorities put the male rapist in a woman’s prison, where he proceeded to rape more women.

The logical question to ask the prison authorities and Baltimore’s LGBTQ Commission is this:

How can a man rape women unless he is male?

For correctly referring to the rapist as male, Beck was accused of “violence” and voted off the LGBTQ Commission. Leading the attack on Beck was the Commission chairman — a man who also claims to be female, and a lesbian.

During the hearing to kick Beck off the LGBTQ Commission:

  • A gay man announced that “biological sex is a thing of the past.” To which Beck sensibly responded, “How can we be homosexual if sex is fake?”
  • Testifying against Beck was a woman who identifies as a man, insisting she is not and had never been a woman despite having a vulva because “It does not make me any less of a man that I have a vulva. It’s there and it’s masculine.” Alas, as described by Beck, the woman-who-calls-herself-a-man had “just survived a hysterectomy and was shaking and complaining of hot flashes.”

Beck told the largely conservative audience at Heritage Foundation:

“There are only three sexualities: homosexual, heterosexual, and bi-sexual. All the hip new identities in the alphabet soup like non-binary, gender fluid, pansexual, are not real sexualities. Sexualities are based on sex while gender identities are based on stereotypes.”

To underscore her point, Beck points out that so-called “trans-women”, i.e., biological males, usually present themselves in the most exaggerated and even grotesque caricatures of women.

Beck was one of four radical feminists on the Heritage panel, all of whom have virtually nothing in common with conservatives other than opposition to the trans ideology.

Beck’s co-panelists also had horror stories to tell:

(1) Jennifer Chavez, of the Women’s Liberation Front, told several stories of desperate mothers whose kids were hijacked into the trans-cult. A 14-year-old girl “spontaneously” decided she was male and, according to her mother, went from a “sweet loving girl to a foul-mouthed hateful pansexual male.” The girl ran away from home and moved to Oregon, where she was given a double mastectomy and a radical hysterectomy, even though she had been diagnosed previously with ADHD, depression, and anxiety. She is now living on the streets and planning a surgery that would take part of her arm in order to create a crude penis with a mechanism to fake an erection.

Chavez said much of this contagion is spread via YouTube and other social media sites by Jazz Jennings and someone named Riley J. Dennis, who is famous for saying it is bigotry for males to avoid sex with “trans-women” such as himself. Dennis, one of the sickest and most dangerous people on social media, has a huge YouTube following where he discusses all manner of vile things such as how to have sex with someone in various stages of “transitioning.” A short clip of Jazz Jennings was shown at Heritage in which he was celebrating his impending castration. It showed a “penis” cake that Jennings gleefully sliced to cheers from his family and friends.

(2) Kara Dansky, also of the Women’s Liberation Front, said that the issue is really about the intellectual bankruptcy of gender identity ideology and the importance of language. No one really knows what these words mean; all definitions of gender identity either reinforce sexist stereotypes or are completely tautological and rely on regressive sex-based stereotypes. Referring to men who identify as female because they see themselves as nurturing and compassionate and like to wear dresses, Dansky said this is insulting to women who worked hard to get into the workplace, dress the way we like, and that women are not defined by what we wear.

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

The ‘Freak Pride’ Caption Contest

This is the 191st world-famous FOTM Caption Contest!

Here’s the pic:

Note: The above pic was taken at the 2011 Toronto Gay Pride Parade.

You know the drill:

  • Enter the contest by submitting your caption as a comment on this thread (scroll down until you see the “LEAVE A REPLY” box).
  • The winner of the Caption Contest will get a gorgeous Award Certificate of Excellence and a year’s free subscription to FOTM:D
  • FOTM writers will vote for the winner.
  • Any captions proffered by FOTM writers, no matter how brilliant (ha ha), will not be considered. :(

This contest will be closed in a week, at the end of next Tuesday, January 8, 2019.

To get the contest going, here’s my caption:

Woman on left: “Cardinal McCarrick! I didn’t recogize you without your red cassock and biretta!”

For the winner of our last Caption Contest, go here.

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0