The parents of a 6-year-old boy have filed a complaint with the Colorado Civil Rights Division because Eagleside Elementary School in Fountain banned the first-grader from using the girls' restroom. While this may seem to be one of those "dog bites man" stories---my apologies to my beloved Alaskan Malamute---it is actually one of the latest examples of politically correct sexuality.
The child, Coy Mathis, was born male but identifies as female. He has attended the school since December 2011 before being pulled out by his parents. He wears girls' clothing, and students and staff used female pronouns when referring to him. Fountain-Fort Carson administrators decided over the recent winter break that he should use the boys' restroom, the staff's restroom or the one in the school nurse's office.
The parents, Kathryn and Jeremy Mathis, held a
press conference publicity stunt on the Denver, CO. capitol steps last week to explain their reasons for filing the complaint:
She said that as soon as Coy began to talk, she insisted she was a girl, not a boy.
As parents, they were sad and upset when they heard that Coy could no longer use the girls' restroom at school, Kathryn Mathis said.
"This automatically singles her out and stigmatizes her," she said. "It sets her up for future harassing and bullying, and creates an unsafe environment. The school has a wonderful opportunity to teach students that differences are OK, and we should embrace their differences, instead of teaching them to discriminate against someone who is a little different."
Yeah, this boy is being stigmatized, but it's not because of where he can or cannot take a pee. And as far as the parents claim that he knew he was a girl since since he was able to talk (18 months old)? It's not possible.
According to Dr. Clarence G. Leach, LPC, the ability to reason---which is the ability to use cognitive mental powers to think, reflect, make decisions, and apply choice---aren't developed until adolescence (around nine or ten years old). A toddler is ill-equipped to make a decision like this. Mr. and Mrs. Mathis are not only wrong about their son's ability to make this decision at that age, but they are essentially guilty of child abuse by raising him as a girl.
But get this, liberal politicians---and by default, the media---agree with, and are supporting, these parents. The Bill of Rights in the Constitution is obsolete if you want to carry a gun, but if a little boy wants to urinate sitting down, that's a civil right?
Sadly, politically correct sexuality is making inroads in many ways.
Politically correct marriage: It has been a union between one man and one woman for millennia. Today, politicians have determined that two sexually deviant* men---or two sexually deviant* women---should have the "civil right" to marry each other. As America awaits the outcome of two challenges to traditional marriage being considered by the Supreme Court, RINO Republicans, and the Chameleon President, have submitted briefs in support of homosexual marriage despite previous support for the one man-one woman model. Part of the President's brief in support of homosexual marriage concluded that children don't need nor have the right to a father/mother parent structure.
*Deviant: someone who deviates. To deviate means: to stray especially from a standard, principle, or topic; to depart from an established course or norm. When it comes to sexuality and marriage, anything outside the "standard" or "norm" can be called deviant.
Politically correct civil unions: This "marriage-lite" approach to granting special rights to homosexual relationships is becoming a stepping-stone to same-sex marriage. Proof of these special rights can be found in the recent "outing" of homosexuals in the military. In a recent decision by the former Secretary of Defense, special benefits will be granted to homosexuals in a "committed relationship" while denying those same rights to unmarried heterosexual couples.
In Colorado, the recent hijacking of the political process concerning civil unions is the epitome of politically correct sexuality. In 2006, Colorado voters defeated Referendum I---which would have granted rights similar to marriage---and passed a ban on homosexual marriage with Amendment 43. Choosing to ignore the will of the voters, Colorado Democrats---under the guidance of openly homosexual party leaders---forced a civil unions bill through the legislature. The most recent version provided no exceptions for religious objection, which will force religious charities to end some of their work in Colorado, including Catholic adoption services. I guess politically correct sexuality doesn't require tolerance of religion, only tolerance by religion.
Politically correct sex education: Public schools have been a source of educating children about human sexuality for over half a century. With the permission of their parents, children have learned about reproduction, abstinence, sexually-transmitted diseases, and contraception. However, under the politically correct sexuality model, special consideration must be given to "tolerance" and "sensitivity" to the needs of homosexuals, i-bisexuals, and the transgendered. In addition, politicians---like the liberal extremists in Colorado and Chicago---have determined that children as young as five-years-old need to participate.
Considering the fact that children are unable to reason at that age---along with the religious convictions of Christians, Jews, and Muslims across America who object to their children being taught that being sexually active is normal, and sexual deviance must be tolerated---what could possibly be motivating them other than self-centered political correctness.
After decades of moral relativism, the war on American values is growing intense. Will she survive? Or will she fall in a narcisstic heap of politically correct sexuality?
This post was originally at The Strident Conservative