Posted on 03/12/2021 7:46:12 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Axios is reporting that the number of bills Republicans have advanced in the first two months of 2021 at the state level to protect women and girls in the wake of the Biden administration’s radical transgender policies exceeded the total of such efforts in 2020. Of course, Axios frames these bills as anti-trans rather than pro-woman and pro-child. While President Biden, or those pulling his strings, felt like taking on this issue by executive proclamation, America is not wholly on board by any stretch of the imagination.
A recent poll from Rasmussen found 54% of Americans oppose letting trans athletes compete with biological women and girls in sports. Only 32% support it, and 14% are undecided. Opposition among women has increased since Rasmussen started surveying the issue in 2019. Polls generally show Americans want trans individuals to be supported, but they also show that support drops when respondents face trade-offs or questions of fairness. Responses also change when language is simplified to remove the politically correct language people are not familiar with.
Some of the current bills seek to confirm religious exemptions for health care providers, restrict single-sex facilities, and confine sports participation to biological sex. Of even greater importance, 20 of these bills prohibit doctors from beginning the transition in children and forbidding these procedures without parental consent.
Recently, Representative Dan Crenshaw interviewed trans activist Scott Newgent. Newgent is vehemently opposed to transitioning children based on his own horrific experience with surgical interventions and complications. Also, he suffers from chronic diseases he attributes to his transition from female to male, and he did not transition until well into adulthood.
(Excerpt) Read more at pjmedia.com ...
Transgender is just another word for HOMO
Talk is cheap.
Dear moderator, I inadvertently mis-spelled the word “state” in the title of this thread, I would appreciate it if you could correct the typo. Thanks
RE: Talk is cheap.
What does it mean, that such protection bills should not be proposed at all?
RE: Transgender is just another word for HOMO
Do you believe Bruce ( now Caitlyn ) Jenner when he says he is still attracted to females?
Well, that's just hateful.
What are they doing to protect the rest of us from fraudulent elections by which this insanity is shoved down our throats?
>>Transgender is just another word for HOMO<<
It is just an affectation for show. The fact they refuse to go to a shrink but instead hack their johnsons off tells us they invest their life into that affectation. Because without it they are meaningless. They are little people living little lives when they stumble on this way to be “special.”
Even their messiah bruce jenner said he had a problem b/c he was not attracted to men but with no johnson he could not be with women. Then he shut up about it but the bottom line is we have to assume trannies (male parading as female) are celibate.
Let’s see if they actually follow it through.
Giving them the benefit of the doubt that they actually want to - and will - get substantive legislation enacted, ultimately this will all come down to federal courts and the principle of preemption.
To that end, Gorsuch’s decision to join the libs on the last big trans case to come before the Court is not encouraging. I’m afraid the slippery slope of Obergefell is only going to get slipperier...and steeper.
Regardless of the bills that state government leaders are introducing concerning women, the problem with state leaders is this imo. They don’t seem to respect the constitutionally limited power of the feds to deal with sex-related discrimination any more than the crook lawmakers that voters also unthinkingly elect to the federal government do.
More specifically, if constitutionally illiterate state lawmakers would start reading Free Republic, they would know that they could throw unconstitutional, politically correct federal policy on sex discrimination out the window by simply pointing out the following.
The only power that the states have expressly constitutionally given the feds to deal with sex-related discrimination is limited to biological sex at birth-associated voting rights issues, evidenced by the 19th Amendment.
"19th Amendment:
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation [emphasis added]."
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
The bottom line is that probably a bunch of state lawmakers need to lose their jobs under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment for unthinkingly facilitating blatant federal government overreach of its constitutionally limited powers, just like probably most federal lawmakers need to lose their jobs for the same reason.
"14th Amendment, Section 3: No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same [emphasis added], or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability."
Note that Trump as a private citizen is now doing the work to primary RINOs out of the governments since ordinary voters evidently weren’t up to the task. (The ill-conceived 17th Amendment was a YUGE mistake!)
Insights welcome.
60 bills? Some states might be proposing more than one law on this. I know Connecticut is trying to pass a law because the state record was broken in the last two year - one by a xx girl, then twice by two freaks...
Its a start. Asserting “States Rights” may be the only way to save our country. To save the patient, you cut out the cancer.
We MUST do this! (1/2 a country, 3/4 of a country, or 7/8 of a country) is better than THEIR country.
The United States of MAGA begins NOW!
This from THE LIFE OF BRYAN never gets old. It is 40 years ago this movie came out.
http://montypython.50webs.com/scripts/Life_of_Brian/8.htm
JUDITH: I do feel, Reg, that any Anti-Imperialist group like ours must reflect such a divergence of interests within its power-base.
REG: Agreed. Francis?
FRANCIS: Yeah. I think Judith’s point of view is very valid, Reg, provided the Movement never forgets that it is the inalienable right of every man—
STAN: Or woman.
FRANCIS: Or woman... to rid himself—
STAN: Or herself.
FRANCIS: Or herself.
REG: Agreed.
FRANCIS: Thank you, brother.
STAN: Or sister.
FRANCIS: Or sister. Where was I?
REG: I think you’d finished.
FRANCIS: Oh. Right.
REG: Furthermore, it is the birthright of every man—
STAN: Or woman.
REG: Why don’t you shut up about women, Stan. You’re putting us off.
STAN: Women have a perfect right to play a part in our movement, Reg.
FRANCIS: Why are you always on about women, Stan?
STAN: I want to be one.
REG: What?
STAN: I want to be a woman. From now on, I want you all to call me ‘Loretta’.
REG: What?!
LORETTA: It’s my right as a man.
JUDITH: Well, why do you want to be Loretta, Stan?
LORETTA: I want to have babies.
REG: You want to have babies?!
LORETTA: It’s every man’s right to have babies if he wants them.
REG: But... you can’t have babies.
LORETTA: Don’t you oppress me.
REG: I’m not oppressing you, Stan. You haven’t got a womb! Where’s the foetus going to gestate?! You going to keep it in a box?!
LORETTA: crying
JUDITH: Here! I— I’ve got an idea. Suppose you agree that he can’t actually have babies, not having a womb, which is nobody’s fault, not even the Romans’, but that he can have the right to have babies.
FRANCIS: Good idea, Judith. We shall fight the oppressors for your right to have babies, brother. Sister. Sorry.
REG: What’s the point?
FRANCIS: What?
REG: What’s the point of fighting for his right to have babies when he can’t have babies?!
FRANCIS: It is symbolic of our struggle against oppression.
REG: Symbolic of his struggle against reality.
****
And another one from Fellini Satyricon(1969)
https://subslikescript.com/movie/Fellini_Satyricon-64940
He who bears the mark
of every known vice,
who by his own admission
should be banished - Ascyltus!
He won his freedom through whoring
and keeps it the same way.
He gambled away his youth.
He sold himself as a woman,
even when approached as a man.
And that shameless Giton?
On the Day of the Virile Toga
he wore a woman’s stole.
His mother had already convinced him
not to act like a man.
In jail he was a whore,
capable of forsaking
the oldest of friendships.
Shame on him!
He’s a disgrace!
Lesson from History: Transgender Mania is Sign of Cultural Collapse - Camille Paglia
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8BRdwgPChQ
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.