Join CRA TODAY!
There is no “US” Without You!
Thank you for visiting us here at the online headquarters for THE CALIFORNIA REPUBLICAN ASSEMBLY.
If you find value in the work we are doing to help fight for conservative values here in the Golden State, PLEASE BECOME A MEMBER TODAY!
(CRA NEWS DESK) – A group of advocates gathered near the California state Capitol in downtown Sacramento to protest against three proposed laws that push a “transgender ideology” and limit the rights of parents. Assembly bills 665, 957, and 223 would adversely affect the rights of parents and guardians who believe “children’s natural bodies are perfect.”
The proposed bills would ensure mental health services for youths and include a child’s gender identity as part of the health, safety, and welfare of the child in custody cases. Meaning that these proposed bills will make non-affirming a child’s gender identity “child abuse” in California.
Opponents of the proposed legislation have spread the word on social media sites, that if the legislation is passed, parents will be forced to authorize medical treatments, such as cross-sex hormones and puberty blockers, and gender reassignment surgery, which will be detrimental to their children’s health and wellbeing.
Parents have highlighted concerns about the impact of the proposed laws on their relationship with their children and their parental rights. According to the legislatuion, parents who refuse to medicalize their child can be deemed abusive, while the laws seem to limit access to paperwork to change gender or sex identifiers for anyone under the age of 18.
Recently, Erin Friday, a lawyer and the mother of a child who used to think she was transgender, expressed her views on these proposed bills and exhibited her apprehensions. “You, as a parent, can be deemed abusive if you refuse to medicalize your child,” Friday said during a news conference. “If you refuse to poison your child with cross-sex hormones. If you refuse to stop the natural body growth called puberty. If you refuse to remove your child’s healthy breasts or genitals.”
In contrast, the supporters of the bills claim that the proposed laws would ensure that youths have access to the mental health services they require. Assemblywoman Lori Wilson, the sponsor of AB 957, argued that California has a duty to “draw a line in the sand” against anti-trans efforts that have gained traction in other states. AB 957 would include a parent’s affirmation of the child’s gender identity as part of the health, safety, and welfare of the child in custody cases, whereas AB 223 would seal petitions and related paperwork to change gender or sex identifiers for anyone younger than 18.
Opponents of the current proposition argue that the proposed laws would not protect parents who refuse to acknowledge their child’s gender identity, thus complicating the decision-making process. Opponents further warn that this ideological framework, if put into practice, would undermine parental rights and relationships, which form the very fabric of family life.
The proposed laws are indeed controversial, prompting a vigorous debate between proponents and opponents. While some argue that these laws would ensure that all children receive access to the therapy and support they require to lead happy and fulfilled lives, others argue that they infringe upon parental rights and represent a dangerous intrusion of ideology into family life.
