Telling A 5 Year Old They Are ‘Transgender’ Is Child Abuse


Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.



Hat/Tip to Warner Todd Huston at Publius’ Forum.

Right on the money on this one, Mr. Huston!

Here is his Op-Ed in its entirety:


A school in Maine got in hot water last week for feeding 5,6,and 7 year olds a “lesson” on being transgendered. But can a 5-year-old even be a “transgendered” kid? No. And to impress on them to think so is child abuse.

Officials at a grade school in Kittery, Maine instituted a lesson plan for its Kindergartners and its first through third graders meant to train them on the subject of transgendered kids and to push the idea that being transgendered is perfectly normal. Naturally, many parents were furious at the scheme.

The school had begun reading to these tiny tykes from a book titled, “I am Jazz” by Jessica Herthel and Jazz Jennings. The book is about a transgendered boy who struggles with “a boy’s body and a girl’s brain.”

Many parents didn’t learn of the outrageous LGBT indoctrination plan visited upon their children until Fox News’ Sean Hannity highlighted the story.

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

After the story broke parents started complaining to the school that no notice of the lesson plan was revealed to parents ahead of time.

The school has since apologized and said it broke its own rules about keeping parents informed about what was going on in the classroom. The school promised to be more attentive to that pledge in the future.

Still, one of the school’s teachers is defended the indoctrination effort saying that “experts” insist that a child is never too young to be trained about LGBT issues.

Wrote school guidance counselor Dana Richerich: “Some people may think primary school students are too young to worry about addressing issues surrounding gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and questioning (LGBTQ) students. Not so, experts say. It’s never too early to begin teaching children about respecting differences.”

But this is nonsense. No kid should be thinking about deviant or non-traditional sexual roles until they are old enough to understand the traditional roles. It is child abuse to begin sexualizing kids in Kindergarten and leaves them open to confusion at least, possible mental aguish as they struggle to grasp it all, and at worse sexual abuse as they seek to put into action the LGBT deviations that are taught them.

K through 3 is way, way too young for this garbage and any teacher or administrator who tries to indoctrinate kids with the LGBT agenda should be charged with child abuse.





Those Against Indiana’s Religious Freedom Law Are Either Ignorant Or Liars


Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

 photo freedom_of_religion_zpsxaldsbfq.jpg

Hat/Tip to Warner Todd Huston at Publius’ Forum.

Another outstanding Op-Ed from Warner Todd Huston, printed in its entirety.

I have to be straight forward right at the outset on this faux controversy over the new Indiana Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Those losing their tiny minds about it are either wholly ignorant of what is in the law, or know full well what is in it and are lying about the law in order to push their anti-Christian, gay-supporting agenda. There can be no other choice, here.

Firstly, before we even get to the case in Indiana, to act as if this whole idea is “new” is specious. Religious Freedom Restoration Acts (RFRA) have been around since President Bill Clinton signed one in the 1990s.

The first such law was signed in 1993 by Bill Clinton and was passed unanimously by the House of Representatives where it was sponsored by no less than New York’s Chuck Schumer, now one of the farthest left Senators in Washington D.C.

Furthermore, 30 other states have RFRA laws just like Indiana’s or other laws that offer RFRA-like protections–including liberal states like Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Washington state, and Illinois.

In fact, 19 other states have laws almost exactly like the new Indiana law and no one is suddenly boycotting them. So, to act as if Indiana is alone, here, is a lie-based talking point.

Additionally, all the hysterical attacks from halfwitted liberals out there are not addressing a single thing in the bill but instead are making wild-eyed, spittle-specked assumptions that the bill somehow outlaws gays. So, here is the text of the Indiana bill in case you need to see it.

But the fact is, the new Indiana statute does not give anyone the license to discriminate against gays or anyone else for that matter. We already have federal laws that prevent such things and this law doesn’t make any attempts to overturn those protections.

Additionally, this law has nothing at all to do with how citizens interact with other citizens. This law addresses what government does to people with religious convictions. This law covers how government interacts with the people, not how the people interact with each other.

There are plenty of other laws that prevent discrimination and this RFRA law doesn’t do a single thing to upset them.

Yes, when all is said and done, if you are one of those running around vomiting all over yourself because of this law you are either an ignoramus who knows nothing at all about what he is talking about, or you are a liar using lies to push your gay agenda.




Sweden Declares War…on Playtime


Did the Burgermeister Meisterburger, seen here in this undated file photo,take over Sweden?  It would appear so, considering the whacky Cultural Marxism taking place there.  For a bit more, take a look at this from the American Enterprise Institute…

But subterfuge and propaganda appear to be the order of the day in Sweden. In their efforts to free children from the constraints of gender, the Swedish reformers are imposing their own set of inviolate rules, standards, and taboos. Here is how Slate author Nathalie Rothchild describes a gender-neutral classroom:

One Swedish school got rid of its toy cars because boys “gender-coded” them and ascribed the cars higher status than other toys. Another preschool removed “free playtime” from its schedule because, as a pedagogue at the school put it, when children play freely ‘stereotypical gender patterns are born and cemented. In free play there is hierarchy, exclusion, and the seed to bullying.’ And so every detail of children’s interactions gets micromanaged by concerned adults, who end up problematizing minute aspects of children’s lives, from how they form friendships to what games they play and what songs they sing.

The Swedes are treating gender-conforming children the way we once treated gender-variant children. Formerly called “tomboy girls” and “sissy boys” in the medical literature, these kids are persistently attracted to the toys of the opposite sex. They will often remain fixated on the “wrong” toys despite relentless, often cruel pressure from parents, doctors, and peers. Their total immersion in sex-stereotyped culture—a non-stop Toys”R”Us indoctrination—seems to have little effect on their passion for the toys of the opposite sex. There was a time when a boy who displayed a persistent aversion to trucks and rough play and a fixation on frilly dolls or princess paraphernalia would have been considered a candidate for behavior modification therapy. Today, most experts encourage tolerance, understanding, and acceptance: just leave him alone and let him play as he wants. The Swedes should extend the same tolerant understanding to the gender identity and preferences of the vast majority of children.

The linked article has a wealth of information on the gender politics of the left, and how they seek to severely mess up children.  Rather than simply allow kids to play, the liberals there want to monitor and manage it.  In fact, they want to control it completely.  Combine that with the fact that the liberals want to separate children from parents at the earliest possible age, the over all pattern of control takes on a new and more sinister meaning.

When we say that the liberals want to control all aspects of human life, we aren’t kidding.


Do “Lumps of Cells” Have a Gender? Planned Parenthood Thinks so


Planned Parenthood

Planned Parenthood has quite the history.  From being founded by an avowed eugenicist that openly called for the extermination of the black race, to taking donations to abort black babies, to putting most of their facilities in minority neighborhoods, to and to getting caught trying to cover up for statutory rape and child prostitution, PP has been stung repeatedly.  Here is the latest Live Action Sting of Planned Parenthood, via Da Tech Guy…

Da Tech Guy himself lends some mighty pertinent analysis…

Why does Planned Parenthood condemn sex selection motivated by gender bias? That implies that they don’t mind sex selection motivated by other reasons.

Can someone explain to me under what circumstance sex selection would NOT be gender bias?

Secondly since according to the defenders of abortion we are dealing with a clump of cells that don’t amount to a human life, the reason why someone has an abortion is no more relevant than why a person might get plastic surgery. How can you have “gender bias” against a “thing” not a person.

The very act of this argument by Planned parenthood concedes the humanity of the child they are aborting.

And he nailed it.  How can something that is not living, and clearly NOT a person, have a gender  to discriminate against?  And, if it’s bad to discriminate against it, are you not then giving it rights?  And, if you are giving it rights, are you then saying “but it’s really OK to kill it for another reason?”

So then, let’s take a look at the likely reactions, shall we?

1.  Planned Parenthood got caught.  Their first response might likely be to say, “isolated incident.”  Then, Live Action will release video after video.  There is a chance, that after being caught so badly last time doing this, that they’ll avoid it.

2.  Planned Parenthood will fire the workers involved, and say that they will retrain everyone (so as how to not get caught in the future).

3.  Planned Parenthood, and their media allies, will claim that the videos were “selectively edited” to show something that really didn’t happen.  Then, when Live Action releases the full and unedited videos, the MSM will ignore them.

It ought to be fun to watch this unfold, though we can be assured that if the MSM covers it, it will be to cover it up.


Gender Bender Blender


As one would guess, the “ObamaCare” legislation contains all sorts of predictable liberal gobbly-gook. For example, this, from CNS:

HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius is required by the proposed law — The Affordable Health Choices Act,which was voted out of committee on July 15-to create a database within one year of the law’s enactment that will include detailed information about those who sign up for government-run or supported health care programs, including their race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, language and disabilities.

The proposed law states that the database can use the Office of Management and Budget “standards for race and ethnicity measures.”

But for the collection of “gender” data, instead of using the categories “male” and “female,” the legislation calls for “developing standards for the measurement of gender.”

Now, this is going to be a complicated process, isn’t it? The Conservative Hideout does believe in helping out and doing it’s “fair share”, so here is the official Conservative Hideout list of possible genders for teh gubbermint:

  1. Male

  2. Female

  3. Bi-Sexual

  4. Tri-Sexual

  5. Pan-Sexual

  6. Asexual

  7. Transsexual

  8. Confused-Sexual

  9. Too-ugly-to-be-sexual (Unless there’s beer involved, and lots of it.)

  10. Tree hugging hippie (why stop at hugs?)

  11. Porn Star

  12. Even worse, aspiring, yet out of work, porn star.

  13. The child molester posing as the hawt chick you’re chatting with on Myspace

  14. Drunken sorority babe at frat party (If you Google this…well…you know).

  15. Paris Hilton

  16. Internet Porn Addict

  17. Trailer Trash (He was only mah second couzin!)

  18. Eunuch

  19. “I don’t know, like, I was sooooo drunk…..and they were sooooo hawt, and I can’t remember the rest…but this other dude, like, had a camera…”

  20. MILF

  21. Jerry Springer (or other similar “freak show”) Guests

  22. Easy

  23. Effortless

  24. Slut

  25. Prostitute

  26. Anna Nicole Smith (Like the last two, but with a boatload of money- and dead)

  27. Furry (If you Google this, you will be offended! BE WARNED!!)

  28. Plushie (Infinitely worse than the last one. This one will ruin childhood memories!)

  29. Spring Break (Enough said?)

  30. The idiot that fills in the “Sex” space on a form with the word “YEAAAAAAAAH!!”

  31. You, if you actually bothered to read the entire list.

No thanks are needed gubbermint, though you can send $10,000,000 to my account. Just send some of that Porkulus money that isn’t being used on jobs. Oh wait, that’s all of it!

Feel free to suggest more answers for the list!