« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Colorado Transgender Child – What’s Wrong with this Picture?

Any family with a crippled child (disabled if you prefer) faces an ardous path caring for that child.  The amount of care required is often proportional to the extent of the child’s damage.   These families need and deserve the assistance provided by extended family, neighbors, their religious advisor and the community at large.  Caring for a crippled child takes patience and a considerable amount of money.  The costs to care for severely disabled children are astronomical and often exceeds the limits available through the family’s income and insurance resources.  How a family negotiates the needs of caring for the crippled child exposes their needs, patience, financial resources, parenting skills, and… their moral code.  The family’s allegiance to tradition and how they value logic, and the impact of logic upon the society around them, are also under consideration.

This diary takes a devil’s advocate analysis (sans emotions) of the dynamics present in this family’s complaint.

The Colorado family that recently filed a sexual complaint with the school district claiming one of their children was “Transgender”; also contains a crippled child.  A few pictures are available of the family.  The photo shows the mother holding what appears to be child with severe disabilities.  This child also appears their youngest child.  This cursory analysis is based solely upon common factors – height, facial maturity, so are the disbalities assessed.  I can find no information on the family’s shape or needs.

The news reports of this case focus upon the alleged transgender child and the schools refusal to cater to his wishes.  The family asserts their child displayed transgender behaviors – what ever those are.  Obviously, the parents aquiesced to the child’s behaviors and the parent interpreted the behaviors as transgender.  The child is too young to make a decision of this magnitude.

Question immediately arise.  What behaviors prompted the parents to radically alter their child’s appearance?  Did the parents wait for these behaviors to abate?  Did the parents encourage the child one way or another?   Or did the parents perform a calculus to improve their financial ability to care for their crippled child by advocating the transgender child’s (alleged) wishes? Did this family seek the assistance of an impartial professional?  Did the parents seek out the gay community before or after lodging their complaint? Who approached whom – and WHEN? What other legal complaints have this family lodged?  Did they family seek a path to a legal payday, then act to achieve it – to pay for their crippled child’s needs – by sacrificing another child? More importantly, WHY should society change to accomodate the demands of a child who is not at an age to make a reasoned and informed decision – regardless of the parent’s and the gay community’s allegations.

Should a transgender child later choose to adopt the behaviors traditionally allocated to their natural sex, will the child be permitted?  Parents ultimately impact that choice.  But the gay community historically asserts sexual preference is unalterable.  They fight against psychitarists and religious people who work to assist a person aclimate to their natural sexuality and behave that way.   The gay community’s stance suggests they view a choice to display gay sexual behaviors as fixed – immutable.  This poses problems.  If the parents allow the child to “experiment” with sexual behaviors and the child prefers to be a boy again – will the child be permitted?  Or, must the child live the remainder of its life based upon a childish choice?  If the parents do not object – then WALLAH!  Junior is a boy again – Oh Well!  Who knew? Boys will be boys… if it suits our needs. (We got paid and our interest is satisfied.)

Meanwhile, should the parents pursue a legal complaint against the school for damages – at least two parties benefit.  The Gay community gets attention for their generic purposes – expanding gay rights.  This stands to also codify a parents’ ability to determine their child’s sexuality – regardless of nature’s mistake. No longer will traditional standards for human sexuality be defined by birth.  A subjective assessement would replace nature – and the society will be legally obligated to contort and comply with the chosen behavior.

Make no mistake about this point – human behaviors are CHOSEN.  Ask yourself… each time you face a choice – regardless of the importance or significance – do you not consider the act or behavior, discuss that act with your inner self, and then act?  Is not every act a complicit event? Example: Just because a hetero-sexual person is afforded an opportunity to act in ways that reconfirm their stated sexuality (having sex), does NOT guarantee that person indulges the behavior.  A choice is taken for the options available – Every Time.

What is at stake here is much more profound than it appears.  The very structure of logic is at stake.

If a legitimate, logical basis is to obtain (as the transgender advocates claim) “the rejection of natural traits/laws, confirms the ascedency of the personal interpretation/evaluation, AND, the behaviors adopted from the evaluation are valid.  However… if this method of evaluation is the standard - Then, ANY contrary assessment, evaluation, and argument of the circumstances must hold equal value!  Ergo, any person, for any reason, can view this transgender event subjectively, indifferently, from an entirely opposite vantage - and that argument must be given equal credence.  Appearance and tradition be damned.

An argumentative person can use existing physical traits – or entirely ignore them – based not upon the evidence available and traditional methods used to proof facts – but by the outcome desired.  Science, the scientific method and accepted FACTS are endangered due to this thinking.

Circumstances surrounding the family and the political climate afford more than one interpretation of the family’s motivations.  The family’s actions hold the potential for selfish, financial gain (to care for their child) Fame – a law named after the family/child, AND… the family is assisted/bolstered by the gay community who stand to gain by parasiting themselves upon, OR, helping design the circumstances and the complaint for gay political gain.  The family and the gay community are in league for an ostensibly analogous goal: expanded gay rights.  But, in fact – their motivations are starkly dissimilar and dishonest.  The family sees an opportunity for financial gain and fame by associating themselves with the gay community.  The gay community provides the family clout  – the attention required to elevate this matter to a point where large amounts of money are available to the family.

In a more rational and reasonable day and age, the people advising, and working to advance this child’s behaviors, would be held as child abusers.  Both the parents and the gay community are abusing the child by potentially directing the child’s behaviors to satisfy their wants; AND, for the family - the financial needs for a sick child.  This matter exposes the insideous aims and methods of the LEFT – by any means necessary…

 

 

Get Alerts