Posted on 02/04/2024 8:50:08 PM PST by SeekAndFind
A New York father has tragically lost a custody battle for his son after he opposed “transgender” medical treatment for the young boy, who has decided he does want to live as his biological sex! How can any honest, objective individual argue that this is a decision made in the child’s interests?
The Twitter account Two Genders One Truth summed up the heartbreaking story of the Hannons, based off UK Daily Mail article. Young Matthew Hannon’s mother began taking the little boy to a transgender “therapist” when he was only five years’ old (note: the Daily Mail said it had changed names for privacy reasons). It is astounding that 17-year-olds are not considered mature enough to drink alcohol, but five-year-olds are supposed to be capable of deciding to damage their bodies and cross dress in pursuit of the fiction that people can change “genders.”
The worst part is, according to Two Genders One Truth, Matthew’s father Dennis didn’t even know his son was being taken to the “therapist”! Matthew’s mother and father were split up, the Daily Mail explained, and though Matthew’s mother put him in girl’s clothes from the age of three, Dennis knew nothing about it, as the boy did not pretend to be a girl with his father. Dennis accuses Matthew’s mother of pushing their son to identify as transgender.
NY courts ruled Dennis Hannon has no medical authority over his son Matthew because he refuses to “trans” his son.
At the age of 5, Matthew’s mother sent him to a “transgender therapist” behind his father’s back. She asked Matthew’s school to change his name to Ruby and use female pronouns ...
pic.twitter.com/uWzGj77rBO— Two Genders One Truth (@2genders1truth) February 2, 2024
(Excerpt) Read more at pjmedia.com ...
These mothers are just narcissists who treat their children like accessories to make them look good. Claiming the child is ‘trans’ is just leftist virtue signaling.
It is very difficult to read such stories and not see a Babylon Bee link. It’s madness.
Bump.
If this man were to kill the judge involved in this evil, and I were on a jury, I could consider it “justifiable homicide”.
Yes. Malpractice would be a good one. Thy are tampering with the human reproductive system and there is no science telling what damage that is doing. It is like those workers spraying Roundup. Well, those puberty-blocking drugs are being pushed without knowing their long term damage. And the surgeries are like animal experiments. This gold rush to sex changes has a lot of people being hurt by quacks.
And they will hate their parent or parents who allowed them to make such a terrible decision before they were legally allowed to get a tattoo. Instead of guiding them toward a normal life and protecting their children from rash, uninformed, immature dangerous decisions, their “protector” gladly accepted the praises and accolades of evil people who DO NOT have the best interest of the children at heart.
You live in a Blue state, you live by a Blue state’s rules, whether they are illegal or unconstitutional. Wise up, Freepers.
5 yrs old? Mutilated for life and sterilized. Sick. Evil.
I agree, no way in hell. His “Mommy” conditioned him to be like that. A sick women.
No lie. If that’s my kid, somebody’s dying. I promise you.
2 Corinthians 6:14
Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?
Repeal the 19th is the only solution.
If your only solution is take rights away from ALL women because of the actions of a few, then how are you any different than the leftist who wants all whites to pay reparations for the actions of a few whites in the 19th century? We don't fight leftist collectivism by replacing it with right-wing collectivism.
Taxation without representation is tyranny. Women pay income taxes just as men do. That's not going to change any time soon unless men are willing to work a LOT harder and longer than they currently are so women can all be homemakers as in the time of the Founding Fathers. You have the right to not vote if you believe that's not a woman's role. You do not have the right to make that choice for me.
I say that as a 63 yr old female that has 2 adult (fully functional and productive) children.
Don't care. If you're for dividing people by group membership or unrepresentative government, you're part of the problem.
I will take one for the team. Fact is leftard women voters far outnumber conservative women voters.
What on earth did we do before women could vote? Seems things were much better. There are very few Margaret Thatchers, if any out there.
What on earth did we do before women could vote? Seems things were much better.
We suffered domestic abuse in silence because the few laws against it weren't enforced. American men failed to hold their abusive brothers accountable then and I don't trust this current generation of "bros before hoes" conservative men to do any better (with some exceptions obviously). Oh, and many women still worked outside the home and paid taxes; they just couldn't access their own money if their husband left them for another woman or spent it all on drink. Pass from me.
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.
