Transgender 1st-Grader: Says Who?

The homosexually controlled mass media acts as if it's a done deal that a boy who possibly only wants to pretend he's a girl is, therefore, a girl. The issue is being pushed by the pro-homosexuality movement because the boy is being denied the right to use the girls' restrooms at school.

Transgender 1st-grader must wait for ruling on use of school restroom - The Denver Post

Six-year-old Coy Mathis, center

Here's the deal. The pro-homosexuality adults surrounding this issue have taken it upon themselves to deem that just because a child who wasn't getting his or her way suddenly becomes more animated once given his or her way that it means that the decision to give that child his or her way was necessarily the right thing, as if gratification makes right.

I should think that before simply deferring to an impressionable child who has been exposed to information on TV and elsewhere about transsexual surgeries and such (and this one was very early on), that the child be first checked hormonally and chromosomally, etc. If there is some obvious difference between the child's genitalia and the child's other sexual markers or characteristics, then that would be one thing. If there are no such differences though, then one should begin with environmental factors such as cultural or other exposure where the child became confused.

Why do I suggest this? A child could simply outgrow the "transgender" phase/thinking; but in the meantime, what bad pattern of thinking will have been more ingrained at the adults having simply deferred? I don't say I can enumerate all of the possibilities but do say that it seems that culturally, way too many people are all too willing to go along with what undermines bright lines.

It is not cut and dried in that there truly are hermaphrodites born through no fault of their own; but just because that is true doesn't mean that it necessarily follows that giving in to every stubbornly insistent child that he is a girl or she is a boy is a good idea.

Where are the stories about the boys who pretended to be girls who grew out of it? We need to know. You know they are out there. You also know that encouraging them at the time to become girls may well have caused more problems than living through the stubbornness without caving in.

I have seen an 18-year-old undergo sex-change surgery only to regret it a year later. Waiting would have been advisable, obviously.

Transgender 1st-grader must wait for ruling on use of school restroom - The Denver Post.


The following should appear at the end of every post:

According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":

Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.

Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.

Political Campaign Intervention

Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.

Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.

Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:

  • Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
  • Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
  • Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
  • Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
  • Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office

Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:

  • The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
  • Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
  • We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
  • When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
  • It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
  • We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
  • We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
  • When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
  • We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
  • It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.

And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)

  • Subscribe

  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.