Friday, January 13, 2017

Transgender movement's folly exposed by one who lived it

In a time when there is an increasing backlash among the LGBT community against gender-specific terms like "boy" and "girl", "mom" and "dad", is it any wonder that it would blatantly use young people as tools to further any part of their agenda? 

Below is an article by Walt Heyer that appears on The Witherspoon Institute website. Mr. Heyer is a former transgender who does a magnificent job of exposing the dangerous truths about the transgender movement. As many studies show, the majority of young people who experience gender identity issues outgrow them by the time they reach adulthood, but as some, like the National Geographic, are doing, the push for transgenderism seems to matter more than allowing kids to evolve naturally as they're meant to do. 

Studies also show that transgenderism is a serious psychological disorder and so encouraging those suffering from gender identity disorders to undergo extreme surgical and hormonal alterations as a solution is like encouraging an anorexic to get liposuction. I would even call it a form of  child abuse. At some point common sense and honesty must prevail and Mr. Heyer does a great job of outlining the issue. Please take a look:

I was just like the ‘trans’ 9-year-old in National Geographic. Now I know it’s pure fantasy

by Walter Heyer
Psychiatrist Richard Corradi calls transgenderism a “contagion of mass delusion.” As a former transgender, I can tell you that Dr. Corradi is correct. Yet National Geographic magazine selected a trans-activist boy named Avery Jackson for the cover of its special January “Gender Revolution” issue—an image and publication that will only help promote this “contagion of mass delusion” around the globe.

Like it or not, there are two sexes: male and female. Man and woman join to form the foundation of family. National Geographic apparently felt the need to give the LGBTQ movement a helping hand in redefining gender and family.
If you’re an LGBTQ loyalist, you will love the “in your face” cover photo of the boy Avery. But for me, one who was restored after living for eight years as a female transgender, the cover photo is a sad and painful reminder of a lost childhood, a family ripped apart, and a marriage that did not survive. To me, the cover is a glossy reminder of the brokenness of transgender ideology.
The cover photo of Avery, like all photos, shows one moment in time. What it does not give us is a long-range perspective of the consequences of Avery’s choices and those of his parents. It cannot show us his future.
I lived “the life,” just like Avery. I was a cross-dressing boy at age nine, but—after years of pain and self-delusion—my cross-dressing stopped decades later, when I realized that the idea of changing sexes is pure fantasy. Cross-dressing initially felt zany, fun, exhilarating, and wonderfully affirming of my belief that I should have been born a girl. But after many decades of trying to comprehend the gender confusion that persisted even after my sex transition, I came to understand that my grandmother’s cross-dressing of me was emotional child abuse. The psychological harm grew as years went by.


The transgender promotional cover photo of Avery fails to address the 41 percent of the transgender population who will at some point attempt suicide. Even when affirmed, accepted, and loved, transgender individuals attempt suicide, which indicates that the issues they struggle with run deeper than a change in gender identity can rectify. Sex reassignment has not proven to be effective in resolving gender dysphoria for nearly half of this diverse population of gender-troubled individuals.
review of 100 research findings concludes that sex changes are not effective, and many transgender people after surgery remain traumatized to the point of suicide.
This National Geographic cover is slick work, as it attempts to legitimize cross-dressing. Calling it “transgenderism” sounds more current than “cross-dressing,” but the reality remains the same.
Avery is simply a cross-dressing boy. Cross-dressing affects outward appearance only; what you do not see are the deeper long-term psychological consequences. No sex is changed; no biological transformation takes place.
Interestingly, in the glossary of the “Gender Revolution” issue, no mention is made of cross-dressing.
Yet, to promote their misguided ideological mission to deconstruct gender norms, the author-activists include the recently invented term for all of us non-transgender people, who number about 99.7 percent of the population: “cisgender.” In this way, the sexual activists are engaging in nihilism—dismissing human nature and observable reality itself.

Fantasy and Delusion: What “Feels Right” Isn’t Always Right

Transgenderism is interesting in theory, but slicing up bodies and injecting hormones is pure Frankenstein 2.0. To treat gender dysphoria, a surgeon operates on a man and makes a “woman.” To keep up the façade, cross-gender hormones are prescribed for life.
Is the surgeon’s transgender female equivalent to a biological female? This argument requires some intellectual parallels.
Let’s compare a real diamond with a manmade cubic zirconia. Which one is a real gem? Or take a 20-dollar bill printed by Treasury Department of the United States and compare it with a counterfeit $20 made in the back room of Lefty’s bar. Which one is genuine?
Surgically created sex changes and cross-dressing boys are as fake as a counterfeit twenty-dollar bill or a cubic zirconia. Yet, if we are to be politically correct, we should call a cubic zirconia a diamond and accept a counterfeit twenty-dollar bill as legal tender. We don’t want the zirconia or the counterfeit currency to feel sad because we call them fake.
With the extreme emphasis on political correctness and safeguarding people’s feelings, we are abandoning all ability to call what is fake “fake” and what is real “real.”
Yes, I enjoyed cross-dressing. Yes, the cross-dressing feelings were strong, delighting me when I slipped on that soft, full-flowing purple chiffon evening dress Grandma made especially for me. Yes, strong feelings of wanting to be a girl grew from seeing myself in the mirror. I believed I should have been born a girl and desired to be one. As a young person, I did not doubt I should have been a girl.
My delusional pursuit progressed over forty years from cross-dressing to cross-gender hormone therapy to surgery. I sought out a gender therapist who specialized in diagnosing gender dysphoria and approving people for gender reassignment surgery. But seeking him out was a mistake, because a gender therapist’s vision of treatment is narrowly focused on one destructive path: sex change.
In hindsight, I can see more clearly today than ever before.
I can see from my experience that transgenderism is fantasy motivated by strong feelings. When it comes to gender, people can change clothing and other aspects of the public persona, but biological sex will always remain fixed.
There are no lab tests or medical findings that can even prove the existence of transgenderism. The only way to diagnose it is when someone self-identifies as transgender. No amount of hormones or cosmetic surgery can effect a biological change of sex. Feelings, no matter how strong, cannot change sex. To pretend anything else is only a masquerade. At best, transgenderism is Mardi Gras, not reality.

Child Exploitation

Even if young Avery is willing to be used in this way, National Geographic’s cover photo is exploitation. The health and well-being of this child are being sacrificed to advance a political and cultural crusade.
Avery may not realize that his feelings and photos are a revenue source for National Geographic and a strategic tool for the LGBTQ lobby. Yes, the bright lights are squarely on Avery. He is today’s poster child—a hero, at least for now. But Avery’s male sex is unchangeable, while feelings do change. What will surface eight, ten, or even thirty years from now? Anyone who thinks that affirming his transgenderism can undo Avery’s innate male sex has caught the contagion of mass delusion.
Avery’s mom surely thinks she is helping her son, just as my grandmother thought she was “helping” me. Today, my body bears the scars from all the unnecessary surgeries I endured because as a young boy I was enabled, encouraged, and provided opportunity to act out such a fantasy.
It is naïve to believe there are no negative outcomes from using this young boy as a symbol and presenting him as an activist. National Geographic’s irresponsible imagery of a cross-dressing boy on the cover will no doubt ratchet up the spread of the contagion that is transgenderism.
Notably, the magazine does not include any interviews with individuals who have had their lives destroyed by the long-term consequences of cross-dressing and gender confusion. Cross-dressing eroded my true gender which in turn ruined my teen years, ripped apart my marriage, and ended my career.

There Is a Way Back

Avery and I have something in common: the strong belief starting in childhood of being a girl.
What makes me different from Avery is seventy years of life experience dealing with the transgender fantasy. Experience is a great teacher. I learned that sex-change surgery and living the life of transgender female didn’t deliver the serenity I was promised. Instead it complicated matters. Every day I had to confront the reality that I was not a real woman.
Many do not have the desire or courage to admit that transgenderism is delusional and was never required medically to resolve their gender conflict. I, on the other hand, wanted my sanity restored. Admitting my regret made me rare in trans-land.
I turned to Christ and away from transgenderism. I wanted to be obedient to the Lord. Obedience is giving up what I want, in order to live the life Christ wants. I had to stop living in defiance of God and stop demanding that the church, God, and everyone else make accommodations for my delusions. Demanding that people use my preferred female pronoun was childish.
I must have been right about obedience, because once I gave up what I wanted, He drew me to a new level of sanity. Through prayer and counseling, I was unshackled from my transgender female life and restored to life as male.
One passage that guided my steps and gave me hope comes from the book of Matthew, where Jesus says, “Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it. For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it.”
The LGBTQ movement and their co-conspirator, National Geographic, throw open the wide gate that leads to transgenderism and seeks the destruction of gender persona. But gender acquired through hormones and surgery is a delusional pursuit, and the delusion is contagious. Promoting Avery’s situation as a success story will hurt others who are struggling, because it advances the false idea that embracing transgenderism will solve the issues they face and heal the pain they feel.
I determined to be one of the few who find the narrow way that leads to a redeemed life. My faith was rewarded with a redeemed life in my male gender, far better than transgenderism. Yes, that makes me very different—and very richly blessed.
Reprinted with permission from The Witherspoon Institute.

Friday, January 6, 2017

Could 2017 signal a return to common sense values?

Happy New Year, everyone! I hope you all had a wonderful Christmas and overall holiday season. I am a little slow easing back into the swing of things at the start of this new year, but am thinking it's time to put into practice one of my New Year's resolutions: to stop procrastinating. Am not off to the greatest start on that, but will try my best!

At the beginning of this new year, there is already so much to talk about that it's hard to focus on just one topic right now. One thing that keeps popping into my head, though, is something that happened toward the end of last year that, to me, seemed like one of the most under-reported international stories of the year: Poland officially recognized Jesus Christ as the King of Poland and called upon Him to rule over their nation, its people and their political leaders. Imagine if this were to ever happen in America.

This declaration took place on Nov. 19 when the Catholic Bishops of Poland in the presence of President Andrzei Duda and many Catholic pilgrims.

"Immortal King of Ages Lord Jesus Christ, our God and Savior," they declared at the ceremony, "bowing our heads before You, King of the Universe, we acknowledge Thy dominion over Poland, those living in our homeland and throughout the world. Wishing to worship the majesty of Thy power and glory, with great faith and love, we cry out: Rule us, Christ!"

As reported by Fr. Paul McDonald in Rorate Caeli and at Radio Maryja, the enthronement or recognition of Christ as King of Poland "was done in the official presence of the president of Poland [Andrzei Duda]" and was repeated at many Polish cathedrals and parishes on Sunday, Nov. 20.
In our increasingly secular world, I wonder if the story got such little attention because of the decreasing belief and faith in God, and therefore the story simply was of little interest, or because the godless in our culture simply didn't want to acknowledge such a significant God-centered occurrence in our modern times. 
Either way, Poland doesn't seem to be the only country in Europe that is starting to at least revisit its Christian roots. France, for instance, is seriously considering electing Francois Fillon as its next president, an openly devout Catholic who is winning votes with his conservative faith and values and promises to preserve traditional values while  upholding France’s Catholic roots. Although he has no plans to overturn the 1975 law that legalized abortion in France, he has promised to “put the family at the heart of all public politics.”
The family is “certainly not a place for dangerous social experimentation”, he said for instance, referring to recently passed adoption rights for same-sex couples.
What's going on in Poland and France seems to follow similar cultural shifts such as those in the UK with the Brexit vote and here in America with the election of decidedly non-establishment Donald Trump. Maybe people are tired of the politically correct mindset that has pushed God out of the public square, replacing the void with more Big Government, terrorism, drug addiction, mass shootings, and various other forms of malfeasance. 

Maybe the direct, albeit, yes, brash approach of Donald Trump will signal to others that it is safe to come back out into the public square and speak freely. We need to speak with love, of course, and I will always advocate for decency and decorum, but ultimately it will be up to us to take back our country and stop fearing the wrath of the politically correct, intolerant left.
While obviously there is so much work left to be done, who knows, maybe 2017 will be the year of fresh starts and the return to common sense, decency and the overall Judeo-Christian values that can turn things around for the better for all of us. At the very least, I have hope.

Monday, December 19, 2016

"Fake news" hysteria prompts Facebook censorship of real news

Just like the left co-opted the word "hate" to apply to anyone who disagrees with their godless worldview, the left now is marginalizing any reporting of differing views as simply "fake."  Facebook officially jumped on this bandwagon when it announced plans to use a number of reputed fact-checker sites and otherwise liberal media entities to combat so-called “fake news.”
After taking stiff criticism for being a conduit in the recent spike in misinformation and hoaxes published to drive Internet traffic (e.g. headlines depicting famous people as recently dead, when they are, in fact, very much alive) Facebook will begin fact checking, labeling, and burying in its News Feed what it determines to be either a hoax or fake news.
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg said last week that the website had the responsibility to make sure it “has the greatest positive impact on the world.” He added that “with any changes we make, we must fight to give all people a voice and resist the path of becoming arbiters of truth ourselves.”
It may sound good on the surface, but the concern lies in who exactly Facebook is partnering with to "monitor" the facts. Facebook has already been accused in the past of burying conservative-leaning information. It is now aligning with Snopes,, ABC News and PolitiFact - all left of center entities - to manage its fact-checking activities. But how do we know these "fact checker" organizations won't take a story like the exposure of Planned Parenthood selling baby parts and determine it must be "fake news" simply because the details of a particular story don't gel with the worldview of the left?
All these third-party "fact-checkers" need to do is take it upon themselves to determine something to be fake, and the story then gets labeled as such and downgraded in the News Feed - in other words, buried so very few, if any, people will see it.
As reported by LifeSite News, while the third-party fact checkers are part of an international fact-checking network led by the nonprofit Poynter Institute for Media Studies in St. Petersburg, Florida, there is some history among them of producing politically correct value judgments and reporting regarding things like abortion and other areas.  
In one recent instance, Politifact rated Texas Senator Ted Cruz’s October 2016 statement that Hillary Clinton supports abortion on-demand throughout pregnancy, along with partial birth abortion with taxpayer funding, as “false” even though Clinton has repeatedly stated her support for taxpayer-funded abortion and clearly confirmed her support for partial-birth abortion in the final presidential debate on October 18.
LifeSiteNews contacted Politifact in February requesting a correction of its classification of Florida Senator Marco Rubio’s statement during a presidential debate that Clinton supports legal abortion up through an unborn child’s due date as “false,” providing verification though Clinton’s previous statements and voting record. Politifact did not respond.
Politifact has exhibited bias as well when reporting on contraception and abortion, and in another recent instance concerning Planned Parenthood and mammograms. It also has reported that no link exists between abortion and breast cancer. Meanwhile, Snopes faced criticism more than once earlier this year for showing pro-Hillary Clinton bias in its reports during the presidential campaign.
“Fake news” has remained at the forefront of media coverage since before Donald Trump’s historic election win over Clinton last month, with Clinton supporters claiming such dubious information helped propel Trump to victory.
With Facebook and other media outlets moving to save face for their respective part in the recent tide of misinformation disseminated, the definition of the term “fake news” continues to become muddy in post-election fallout.
Facebook’s approach opens the door to abuse and censorship of conservative, pro-life and other traditional viewpoints by not limiting its initiative to simple detection of sites that may not be legitimate while at the same time handing off the task of defining “fake news” to essentially liberal entities for the purpose of affecting traffic on the site.
Maybe this is the time to create a new social media website to counter to Facebook, reducing it to the liberal mouthpiece that it seems to be on the road to becoming.
With all the hysteria on the left about the Electoral College, conspiracy theories about Russian hacking, and now, condemnation of "fake news", Facebook's proposed solution to put liberal media in charge of filtering out real news hardly seems to be the most reliable course to take. 

Wednesday, December 7, 2016

Stein should reimburse MI for recount folly

I hope when/if the Presidential election recount in Michigan is complete, that Jill Stein will reimburse Michigan counties the approximate $12 million this bogus, outrageous recount will cost them. Money that could and should be used for police, fire, roads and other necessities will instead be used to feed the bizarre leftist attempt to block the inevitable that the left just cannot face: that Donald Trump will become President of the United States on January 20, 2017.

Of course, Stein has no intention of reimbursing our state of the astonishing expense she is forcing on us. Of course Stein has no chance of winning the state of Michigan even with a recount - that is unless it turns out 99% of the votes were counted incorrectly and actually were meant for her.

What I find most appalling is that, during her anemic campaign, Stein couldn't even raise enough money to air a commercial ad. But in the few days after the election she managed to raise over $6 million to help launch a recount? Gee, I wonder who might be behind her tactics and helping her raise these amazingly huge funds.

By the way, since when does a federal judge have the jurisdiction to interfere with a state's election policy and procedure? Since there is no way Stein could have possibly won the state of MI even with some allegedly faulty vote counts, she has no business perpetrating this disgraceful injustice on our state. It was bad enough a federal judge was even brought into this, but it is beyond comprehension that he would have allowed the recount to go forward given the fact that Stein is in no way an aggrieved party in the issue.

I love how the left went nuts when Trump insinuated he would have to wait to see how the election turned out to see if he would accept the outcome. Hillary Clinton, in response, went on a self-righteous rampage about the importance of respecting our election process and standing by its validity. Where is she now in denouncing Stein, who had absolutely no chance of winning anything, yet is literally taking millions of dollars from Michigan county governments, money that could have been used for things so much more useful than her giant egotistical need to disrupt our nation?

Michigan lawmakers are now considering legislation to discourage futile recount efforts by candidates who lose their election bids by an incontestable amount, forcing the candidate to foot the bill for the recount. What sweet justice it would be to see Stein have to pay us back for this folly. Am not holding my breath at this point, though.

Tuesday, November 22, 2016

Once again, the "party of love" shows its venomous hate

In the name of "Love Trumps Hate", childish "adults" are blocking traffic, smashing windows, and publicly threatening and mocking elected officials and their wives. This is the "get a sticker just for breathing" generation come home to roost. 

When you don't keep score at children's sporting events, when you get a trophy just for being on a team, when you're allowed to throw tantrums at grocery stores because your parents are not allowed to spank you, you then grow up thinking that the way to deal with disappointment is to act like a spoiled child. Of course, however, these adult children believe it is all in the name of love. What I want to know is, if this is love, what on earth would hate look like in their eyes?

Following Donald Trump's presidential victory, high school students put on a skit, with teacher approval, depicting the assassination of Trump. Protesters across America took to the streets blocking workers from getting to their jobs while they beat the life out of innocent citizens, smashed windows, and burned Trump in effigy. Teachers in California proposed a curriculum depicting Trump as a racist, sexist bigot, while others disappointed with the presidential election have outright called for Trump's death.

Meanwhile, Brandon Victor Dixon, an actor in the Broadway smash hit 'Hamilton' publicly called out Vice President-elect Mike Pence, who was in attendance at a recent performance of the show. In an attempt to educate Pence about values and law and rights, Dixon's comments lead to raucous boos by others present aimed at Pence, who was merely politely sitting in his seat. 

“We, sir," Dixon called out from the stage, "we — are the diverse America who are alarmed and anxious that your new administration will not protect us, our planet, our children, our parents, or defend us and uphold our inalienable rights. We truly hope that this show has inspired you to uphold our American values and to work on behalf of all of us.”

It's too bad Dixon doesn't seem to know that it is the Republicans who want to uphold those rights he claims to value so deeply. It's too bad that Dixon doesn't seem to know it is the Democrats who want to trounce on our freedoms of things like speech and self-defense. It's unfortunate that Dixon seems not to know that it is the Democrats who endanger our parents and our children in their sick support of euthanasia, abortion, and health-rationing ObamaCare. It's too bad the actor seems to have no idea that it is the Democrats who want open borders at the expense of security and safety for every citizen. And it's too bad that Dixon seems to be uninformed of the fact that it is the Democrats who hold the shameful history of slavery, the Ku Klux Klan, Jim Crow laws, and voter suppression, and that it is the Republicans who fought against these atrocities every step of the way.

Dixon's knowledge level seems to be as top-notch as the vapid model who hosted the "American Music Awards" Sunday night and felt the need to do an astonishingly disrespectful imitation of soon-to-be First Lady Melania Trump. What credentials this immature girl has to speak in such a public forum in the first place is beyond me. But more than that, what right does she have to mock anyone, let alone a legal immigrant who became a US citizen - an accomplishment the model should respect considering the fact that both her parents are immigrants?

It is unfathomable to witness the ignorant hatred of the left who then still have the audacity to claim, with a straight face, that they are the people of love.

So the left's cherished candidate didn't win. It's time to grow up and accept the outcome of the freedoms the left claims to hold so dear. If there were any actual leadership from the left, that leader would step up and tell these children-adults that vandalism, public mockery, depictions of and threats of assassination, and overall disrespect are not the ways to deal with disappointment. If nobody does step up to take the lead on proper behavior, the left will only continue to lose elections and power. Then again, maybe that's not such a bad thing.

Thursday, November 17, 2016

Electoral College not to blame for Clinton loss

I received a group email from a LinkedIn contact today asking me to sign a petition to have the electors of the Electoral College make Hillary Clinton president when they meet on Dec. 19 because, after all, she won the popular vote.

Yes, it's true Hillary received more votes overall than President-elect Donald Trump. But most of that is because Hillary won the states of New York and California, both of which have enormous populations (and, it's no secret, are very blue states). Trump won key states like Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Fewer votes by population, perhaps, but a larger total of electoral votes. And that is a good thing, because it underscores that we are a Federal Republic, not a democracy. 

If we were a pure democracy that elected presidents based on popular vote only, those who live in smaller, less populated states would essentially have no say in a national election since the more populous states like New York and California could easily sway the election simply by their large numbers of voters. Candidates would focus all their attention only on those large states that could garner them the most votes, while ignoring the rest of the country. I don't know about you, but I'd prefer not to have our national elections decided largely by California and New York only.

For those blaming the Electoral College for Hillary's loss, think again. When you look at the country map after the election, it's a sea of red, punctuated by blue, heavily populated urban areas. What the Electoral College does is balance the influence of big and small states. The Founding Fathers did not want mob rule or "popular vote" elections for president. That would ensure the big states would elect the president. It is the same argument for having two houses of Congress: one voting by population, the House, and one voting by state with all states equal, the Senate. 

Think about it this way. If the Cleveland Indians won three games in the World Series by a 20-0 score in each game, and the Chicago Cubs won four games 1-0, by "popular vote" standards, the Indians should have been World Series champs. But it's not about how many runs you score, it's how many games you win that counts. With the Electoral College, the rural Kentucky voter has just as much chance of helping his preferred candidate win the state of Kentucky as the wealthy liberal Manhattan voter has of helping his preferred candidate win New York. And isn't it liberals who claim they are for all people, especially the "little guy"? Then they should celebrate the Electoral College for giving everyone equal power in the national election system.

Rest assured, Republicans have also questioned the Electoral College when it hasn't suited them. Nobody likes to lose, but if we were to base our elections just on where most people live, then we all lose because we are no longer a nation grounded in equality in one of the truest senses of the word: that everyone's vote counts. Why would we ever want to change that - unless we're all willing to move to places like California or New York. I'm happy where I am, thanks. 

Wednesday, November 9, 2016

Trumping evil - hope wins!

Despite the media and the entire left's bloodthirsty quest to sabotage the Donald Trump campaign, Trump's supporters prevailed to take our country back last night. Thanks be to God! Among many other things, Trump's victory snatched from the jaws of evil the likelihood of continued corruption and abuse of power, division & class warfare, recklessly open borders, the loss of America's sovereignty, a stacked, leftist Supreme Court, and the ungodly, unbarricaded pursuit of abortion on demand at all stages of pregnancy.

There is not much to say right now except that evil was largely "Trumped" last night.  Of course, not all evil. Colorado, for instance, passed its assisted suicide ballot measure, and we do have to hold President-elect Donald Trump and all Republicans to their word to make America great again by reducing evils like ISIS, taxpayer-funded abortion, and the like. 

But the bottom line is that, with the election of Donald Trump, we still have work to do, but we have been given a chance, a safer context within which to do the work we must continue to do to ensure that conservative principles, values and common sense can once again lead America in the right direction. In other words, last night we were given the thing that President Obama promised, but failed to deliver: we were given hope.

Thank you to everyone who helped make this happen!