Transgender Issues

California Law: Calling Transgenders the Wrong Gender Pronoun Can Send You to Jail

A newly signed law signed by California Gov. Jerry Brown last week states that health care workers who choose not to address transgender patients by their preferred pronouns could face fines or jail time. The bill, which was signed into law Wednesday, is designed to protect transgender and LGBT individuals in hospitals, assisted living facilities, long-term care facilities, and retirement homes from discrimination and ensure their needs are met, such as letting them use the bathroom of their preferred gender. “It shall be unlawful for a long-term care facility or facility staff to take any of the following actions wholly or partially on the basis of a person’s actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) status,” the bill reads. The law states that health care workers who “willfully and repeatedly” fail to address transgender people by their “preferred name or pronouns” if they were “clearly informed of the preferred name or pronouns” would be in violation of the law. According to the newly-signed law, violators could be punished with a fine “not to exceed one thousand dollars,” sent to prison “in the county jail for a period not to exceed one year,” or both. State Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), who introduced the bill to the California Senate in August, argued that people would not be criminally prosecuted despite the law’s wording. “It’s just more scare tactics by people who oppose all LGBT civil rights and protections,” he said in a statement last month. Wiener’s office claimed that the law “does not create any new criminal provisions,” but instead creates “new rights within an existing structure.” Those who opposed the law, including Greg Burt of the California Family Council, criticized the measure when it was in its early stages for being a violation of free speech. “How can you believe in free speech, but think the government can compel people to use certain pronouns when talking to others?” Burt told the California Assembly Judiciary Committee in August, according to CBN News.

Well said, Greg..   Wow..  You really can’t make this stuff up, folks.  And, thank God I don’t live in California!  Hopefully this ridiculous, and fascist, bill put together by liberal Dems in Sacramento, and signed law by that idiot hippie Gov. Jerry Brown (D-CA), will be challenged in the courts.  Unreal…

Sex change regret: Gender reversal surgery is on the rise, so why aren’t we talking about it?

Around five years ago, Professor Miroslav Djordjevic, the world-leading genital reconstructive surgeon, received a visit at his Belgrade clinic: a transgender person who had undergone surgery at different clinic to remove male genitalia – and since changed their mind. That was the first time Prof Djordjevic had ever been contacted to perform a so-called gender reassignment “reversal” surgery. Over the next six months, another six people also approached him, similarly wanting to reverse their procedures. They came from countries all over the western world, Britain included, united by an acute sense of regret. At present, Prof Djordjevic has a further six prospective people in discussions with his clinic about reversals and two currently undergoing the process itself; reattaching the male genitalia is a complex procedure and takes several operations over the course of a year to fully complete…

A sign of things to come??

French: Transgenderism Doesn’t Excuse Treason

If Bradley Manning had stayed Bradley Manning, would he still be in prison? If Bradley Manning had stayed Bradley Manning, would he be basking in celebrity, enjoying fawning photo shoots? Given the magnitude of his crimes, I dare say that he’d be in prison today if he still identified as a man. Then he’d be nothing but what he actually is, a garden-variety traitor — a faithless soldier who should count himself fortunate not to face capital punishment. It’s worth remembering what he did. He disclosed, in a gigantic document dump, more than a million pages of classified information, including information about American military operations, American diplomacy, and American allies. The Obama administration was forced to rush to safety foreign friends whom Manning had outed as helping Americans. He broke faith with every relevant provision of the Army’s warrior ethos — he abandoned his mission, he actively aided the enemy, and he acted with stunning disregard for the lives of his comrades. He did so because, acting on his own authority, he decided he wanted to stimulate “worldwide discussion, debate, and reforms.” To be clear, this wasn’t whistleblowing. He didn’t identify a specific wrong and expose it responsibly while taking care to minimize the harm of disclosure. He just disclosed documents without regard for their contents. He didn’t know if anyone would die because of his actions. He didn’t know to what extent vital missions or programs would be compromised. He just did what he wanted to do. There was no honor in his action. None. And now look at him. He’s the subject of a fawning Vogue profile and photo shoot. In fact, he’s an LGBT celebrity now, swarmed at public events and even featured at New York’s Pride March, where he waved “from a drop-top Nissan alongside Gavin Grimm.” When Trump issued a series of tweets declaring a ban on transgender soldiers in the military, media outlets flocked to cover Manning’s response. But one wonders, do the transgender soldiers actually serving look at Chelsea Manning as a poster child for trans service? But no matter. For many leftists, Manning offers the irresistible combination — radical criminal acts combined with revolutionary identity. It’s “Radical Chic” all over again, this time through the lens of latest civil-rights fashion, transgender rights. The radical quarters of the Left have a long history of excusing and celebrating even the most vile of criminals so long as they have the right revolutionary politics. Disturbingly, that celebration leaks even into organizations that are billed as “meanstream.” Recall, it was just last month the Women’s March tweeted its appreciation for convicted cop-killer and FBI most-wanted terrorist Assata Shakur: Earlier this summer, New York’s Puerto Rican Day Parade sought to honor convicted terrorist Oscar Lopez Rivera as a “National Freedom Hero.” Under pressure, he decided to “forgo” that honor, but he was featured in a float anyway — and parts of the crowd gave him a “hero’s welcome.” These kinds of celebrations are not just morally abhorrent; they’re deeply polarizing. They represent the idea that the rule of law — even when the subject is murder or treason — is contingent upon the politics and racial or gender identity of the lawbreaker. Americans on opposing sides of the ideological divide are given a signal — that when it comes to advancing the radical cause, not even human life or national security can stand in the way. There are no lines that can’t be crossed. This is what radical identity politics does. It twists and distorts normal moral analysis. It declares that the ends justify the means, and then goes even farther to say, “By any means necessary.” This is an unacceptable ethic not just for a constitutional republic but for any form of civil society. Allegedly “mainstream” media outlets, politicians, or organizations that honor or respect the likes of Manning, Rivera, or Shakur cover themselves in shame.

Agreed!  And, well said, David.  Attorney, and Army Reserve officer (Major), David French is responsible for that excellent op/ed.  David was awarded the Bronze Star for his service in Iraq.  David understands better than most, what real honor is all about.

Majorities of Americans Want Bathrooms Linked to Biological Sex, Not Gender Identity

Majorities of Americans support the traditional concept of biological men using men’s restrooms and biological women using women’s restrooms, says a newly released poll from Crux/Marist. Additionally, the poll finds most Americans support the right of physicians and employers to choose not to perform or cover surgeries or treatments for the purpose of changing an individual’s sex. According to Crux: By a margin of almost 40 points, a majority of Americans – 66 percent to 27 percent – do not think “someone who is transitioning to become the opposite sex” should be allowed to use whichever showers or locker rooms they want. By a margin of nearly 20 points, a majority of Americans have the same opinion about bathroom use (56 percent to 38 percent). Eight in 10 Americans say doctors and other healthcare professionals should not be forced to be involved with operations intended to change someone’s sex, if they disagree with such procedures for religious reasons. Fewer than two in 10 disagree (18 percent). And by a margin of 30 points (62 percent to 32 percent), Americans believe employers should be legally allowed to opt out of covering medical procedures intended to change a person’s sex on the basis of freedom of religion. The survey was conducted December 12-13, 2016, with 545 U.S. adults participating using live telephone interviews. Results are statistically significant within 4.2 percentage points. A recent Rasmussen survey found only 28 percent of Americans support the Obama-era policy that claims the federal government should decide bathroom policies for elementary and secondary schools in the United States. The poll also found that only 38 percent favor “allowing transgender students to use the bathrooms of the opposite biological sex.” As 36 percent surveyed supports local government setting the bathroom school policies and 28 percent states that state government should design the rules for transgender students, a total of 64 percent of Americans prefer not having the federal government create bathroom policy based on gender ideology. A recent poll by a pro-transgender group at UCLA showed that only 23 percent of Americans think people should be allowed to switch their legal sex without any tests or approval by government agencies. In an April Civitas poll in which younger children were the focus of questions, results showed that only seven percent of 600 North Carolinians strongly supported a judge’s demand “ordering girls and boys in public middle schools to share locker rooms, bathroom, and shower facilities.” Seventy-two percent of respondents strongly opposed the demand. President Donald Trump announced last week he is rejecting former President Barack Obama’s May 2016 national K-12 school policy that allows a child’s choice of gender to supersede his or her actual biological sex. Trump has decided to return the issue to state and local governments, even though his administration has not announced whether it opposes the demand of transgender activists that “gender identity” should determine a person’s legal sex.

Federal judge halts Obama administration controversial transgender health rules

A federal judge in Texas on Saturday ordered a halt to another Obama administration effort to strengthen transgender rights, this time over health rules that social conservatives say could force doctors to violate their religious beliefs. U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor granted a temporary injunction stopping federal health officials from enforcing rules that are intended to ban discrimination by doctors and hospitals against transgender persons. O’Connor wrote in a 46-page ruling that the rules “likely violate” the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and “places substantial pressure on Plaintiffs to perform and cover transition and abortion procedures.” Transgender rights advocates have called that a far-fetched hypothetical, saying a person would not approach a doctor who lacked suitable experience and expertise. O’Connor is the same judge who sided with Republican-controlled states earlier this year over transgender protections in public schools sought by the Obama administration. That lawsuit centered on a federal directive requiring schools to let transgender students use bathrooms consistent with their gender identity. The lawsuit in which O’Connor issued the injunction Saturday contends that the rules, which were finalized in May, could force doctors to help with gender transition contrary to their religious beliefs or medical judgment. Joining Texas in the lawsuit were Wisconsin, Kentucky, Nebraska and Kansas, along with the Christian Medical and Dental Association and Franciscan Alliance, an Indiana-based network of religious hospitals. The Obama administration finalized the regulations around the time it issued its directive to public schools regarding transgender students. Thirteen states signed on to fight that directive, including three involved in the latest lawsuit, and won a temporary injunction in August from U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor.

Transgender woman arrested in voyeurism incident at Idaho Target

An Idaho man who told police he identifies as a woman was arrested Tuesday after allegedly taking photos of a woman in a Target fitting room, officials said. Sean Patrick Smith, 43, was allegedly dressed in women’s clothing when he entered the fitting room in the women’s section of the store in Ammon on Monday, East Idaho News reported. Smith, also known as Shauna Patricia Smith, then began taking pictures of a woman in the changing stall next to him, police said. “The woman was begging for help as she chased the man out the door,” a witness told East Idaho News. “She kept saying she wanted those pictures deleted.” Detectives found Smith on Tuesday and charged him with one felony count of voyeurism. He was booked into the Bonneville County Jail and was set to make a court appearance Wednesday.

And it begins…