Family Research Council Will Fix Constitutional Flaw That Allows Trans Americans Too Much Freedom

Could it be that the Religious Right -- or at least some parts of it -- has finally recognized that trying to reverse decades of civil rights progress by gay people is a lost cause? This might explain why it feels like they're starting to freak out a lot more often about the threat to the Homeland posed by trans* people using whatever restroom they want. Or, also an optimistic view, they're freaking out more because the culture as a whole is becoming incrementally friendlier to trans* folks?

In any case, freaked out they are, as we see in an idea being floated by the Family Research Council: How about a constitutional amendment forbidding any government entity from recognizing any gender reassignment? According to FRC spokesstraightmen Peter "Really This is My Real Name" Sprigg and Craig "Two First Names" James, it's very important that the Constitution not allow too much liberty for the wrong people:

“I think the ideal policy for government with respect to [trans rights] is that your sex is your biological sex,” Sprigg said. “My view is, that if your biological sex is unambiguous at birth -- if your internal sex organs, your external genitalia, and your chromosomal makeup all are unequivocal in declaring you to be of one sex – then that is your sex for life, and that is your only sexual identity that the government will recognize.”

You see, the problem is that the Founding Fathers, who were manly men, never mind those sissypants wigs and lacy ruffles, never anticipated the need to regulate genitalia to the degree that the FRC now recognizes they must be regulated, according to Sprigg:

Unfortunately, we never codified [these distinctions]. And I think a lot of states just kind of through erosion, through response to pressure from the transgender movement, have gotten to the point where they, first of all, recognize sex changes in terms of people’s identity documents…But now, they’re going further and actually punishing people who also don’t affirm this myth, this fiction, that people can change their sex.

As a quick fix for this terrible oversight on the part of the Founders -- who simply couldn't have anticipated how far Americans would take their dumb "liberty" idea -- Mr. James suggested that all we need to do is to write trans* people out of the Constitution, and then America will be America again:

“Might Congress — might there be a need for us to have a constitutional movement, an amendment, to identify a person’s sex: it is what you are at birth?”

As one more bit of evidence that a national freakout over trans rights is just what the nation needs right now, there's also this Fox News story about some very upset parents in Lafayette, California, who are worried that sex ed classes at Acalanes High School -- taught by Planned Parenthood, so you know it's filthy -- are teaching children that sex is something that people have, and that while they're deciding whether or not to have sex, kids might also want to just casually change their gender, because that's exactly how it works.

The scary instructional materials include a “Genderbread Person,” which Fox helpfully explains is "a play on the name of the holiday cookie," since no one would get it otherwise. This horrifying specter -- reproduced on the Fox website at a resolution too low to actually read -- has all sorts of terrifying words on it, and tells children that they can be any gender they want to be, at whim of course:

And of course, some parents are angry because even though they were given the choice of opting their special snowflakes out of the class, they never dreamed that the poor innocents would be subjected to hardcore pornography like the chart above and encouraged to go have a sex change operation after class.

Parents also complained because their precious snowflakes "felt the sessions were pressuring them to have sex" -- which is almost certainly what the teachers and instructional materials were saying. For instance, the class includes materials on consent, which means that obviously they WANT kids to ask each other to consent to sex. As proof, they include some very blurry, small images of the handouts, reproduced here in the actual "enlarged" size from the Fox News website:

 
 Even the largest version of the image, which you have to view separately, is too blurry to read

Maybe, just maybe, since the headings on one are "Vague Statements" and "Clear Statements," the point isn't to teach kids how to say, "Is it OK if I take my pants off?" but rather, to teach them what consent is and isn't? Not that anyone should ever give consent until they say "I do" at the altar, of course.

Now, for all the Fox News attempts to make the class seem like a vision of Genderqueer Hell, we're at least encouraged by what the upset parents are actually asking for. Rather than petitioning for the class to be scrapped in favor of teaching that boys are boys, girls are girls, and they should just not know too much before the wedding night, the parents want the high school to:

provide a sex ed preview course offered live to parents by the same person who teaches the kids, prior to their taking the course, to give parents the full disclosure and knowledge necessary to make an informed decision regarding their child's participation.

That, we're actually cool with -- more information is good, and would actually give the parents a better basis for, what's that word, consent.

[ RWW / Fox News ]