Has The Groundwork Been Laid?

Was last night's speech the groundwork for claims in November—acting as a pretext to justify using federal force, the military, or law enforcement to interfere with the upcoming 2026 midterm elections?

I am not the only one to question that. Senator Chris Coons of Delaware said:

“Tonight’s address from President Trump was a tantrum of sinister innuendo, conspiracy theories, and misdirection. Americans who tuned in tonight heard no new concrete or proven claims about foreign interference in our elections. There is unanimous agreement within the intelligence community that foreign adversaries did not succeed in interfering with the vote in the 2020 election. President Trump and his allies have filed dozens of lawsuits, launched countless investigations, and even sparked an insurrection to try to find voter fraud in the 2020 election. They have failed to do so every single time because none exists.

“Unfortunately, these lies are no longer about one election President Trump lost six years ago. Since retaking the White House, President Trump has moved National Guard troops into our cities, repeatedly floated the possibility of deploying ICE agents at polling locations, and said the Postal Service won’t deliver mail-in ballots in states that don’t turn over sensitive information to his administration. Tonight’s speech is his latest effort to exert partisan control over the 2026 elections because he knows Republicans can’t win on their own record. 

“Should President Trump try to interfere in November’s election through illegal, un-American means, I believe he will fail. I will support every effort to defend our democracy, and I will not stop working to ensure every eligible vote will be counted.”

Congressman García said about the speech;

“Tonight’s unhinged speech is the beginning of Trump’s attempt to overthrow the 2026 midterm election and to smear and criminalize noncitizens. This is what our insecure, delusional President does: if he doesn’t like the outcome of an election, he does everything in his power to subvert it. While these debunked claims by Trump and his cronies may seem laughable, they are a dire threat to democracy in America. The January 6th insurrection showed the country and the world that Republicans in Congress lack the spine to stand up to Trump’s authoritarianism. Now is the time for communities nationwide to mobilize against a federal takeover of elections, ICE at polling sites, and Trump’s pathetic lies. Whether through filing lawsuits, educating voters, volunteering at polling sites, holding the media accountable, or other tactics, we all have a role to play in preserving our right to vote in the face of Trump’s ongoing assault on democracy.”

The BBC News wrote;

Democrats, meanwhile, accused Trump of attempting to sow doubts about the security of the upcoming November midterms which will decide control of Congress for the remainder of his presidency.

"Let's be clear - in America, voters choose their leaders, not the other way around," top Senate Democrat Chuck Schumer posted on social media after the speech.

"Democrats will fight like hell to make sure every American voter can cast their ballot freely, without obstruction or interference from Donald Trump," he added.

Looking at Trump’s track record, I think they may be right... He is laying the groundwork for calling out the troops, even though doing so is strictly against the law.

• Federal Criminal Statutes (Title 18), 18 U.S.C. § 592 (Troops at Polls): This statute makes it a federal crime—punishable by up to five years in prison—for any civil, military, or naval officer of the United States to order, bring, or keep troops or "armed men" at any polling place during an election.
• 18 U.S.C. § 593 (Interference by Armed Forces): This statute makes it a federal crime for any member of the U.S. military to use force, threats, intimidation, or advice to prevent any qualified voter from casting their ballot, or to interfere with an election officer performing their duties.
• 18 U.S.C. § 595 (Interference by Administrative Employees): This law prohibits any person employed in an administrative position by the federal government (which includes federal law enforcement agencies like ICE, the FBI, or DHS) from using their official authority to interfere with or affect a federal election.

But as we have seen in the past, Trump is willing to act and ignore the law. We also have the Posse Comitatus Act, which expressly limits the federal government's ability to use military personnel for domestic law enforcement.

In an Ipsos/Reuters poll, 69% of respondents said they were "very or somewhat concerned" about attempts to overturn official election results. Notice that it doesn’t say people are worried about standard election interference, but rather about overturning the election itself!

Fraud isn’t the only concern that Americans have about elections, though. In fact, all three polls found that more people are worried about disenfranchisement than fraud. In the Ipsos/Reuters poll, 57% said they were very or somewhat concerned about eligible voters being prevented from voting, and 44% of respondents to the YouGov/CBS News poll identified that as a major problem. And according to Marist, 58% of adults think it’s likely that many people will show up to vote in 2026 and be told they’re not eligible.

If nothing else, the consensus among political analysts, election experts, and lawmakers is that Trump’s speech last night has only served to increase anxiety and deepen divisions regarding the security and integrity of the upcoming elections.

[/Editorial]

Is Big Brother Now A Private Company

I'm heading up to the Cape today... so it is prewritten blogs today!

---

So, have the feds handed over their "Big Brother" surveillance to private companies?

Silent Watchers: The rise of Connecticut’s police camera network

Insider Investigator

Katherine Revello

July 12, 2026

Connecticut has the highest per capita rate of automated license plate reader (ALPR) cameras in New England and across other northeastern states, including New York, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey.

According to DeFlock, Connecticut ranks twenty-fifth overall for the number of per capita cameras in the state, averaging roughly 1.78 cameras per 10,000 residents. 

Those cameras are maintained by a variety of police departments and private businesses and use artificial intelligence to take pictures of and ‘read’ the license plate and make and model characteristics of every vehicle that goes past. The cameras can be either mounted to roadside infrastructure, like a pole or traffic light, or in the dashboard of a police car.

Every plate read is dumped into a massive database law enforcement can search and check against various crime hotlists. The majority of the data collected and stored is not connected to a crime and is never searched for or viewed by police before it’s purged from the system, often after a 30-day retention period.

That database involves the entire Flock network. As the quote notes, "Every plate read is dumped into a massive database law enforcement can search and check against various crime hotlists." But the problem is that there are errors in this database. Basically, these are warrantless searches!

The Electronic Freedom Foundation writes;

Imagine driving to get your nails done with your family and all of a sudden, you are pulled over by police officers for allegedly driving a stolen car. You are dragged out of the car and detained at gun point. So are your daughter, sister, and nieces. The police handcuff your family, even the children, and force everyone to lie face-down on the pavement, before eventually realizing that they made a mistake. This happened to Brittney Gilliam and her family on a warm Sunday in Aurora, Colorado, in August 2020.

And the error? The police officers who pulled them over were relying on information generated by automated license plate readers (ALPRs). These are high-speed, computer-controlled camera systems that automatically capture all license plate numbers that come into view, upload them to a central server, and compare them to a “hot list” of vehicles sought by police. The ALPR system told the police that Gilliam’s car had the same license plate number as a stolen vehicle. But the stolen vehicle was a motorcycle with Montana plates, while Gilliam’s vehicle was an SUV with Colorado plates.

Couple that with gun-happy ICE agents, and it spells disaster!

Police over-reliance on ALPR systems is also a problem. Detroit police knew that the vehicle used in a shooting was a Dodge Charger. Officers then used ALPR cameras to find the license plate numbers of all Dodge Chargers in the area around the time. One such car, observed fully two miles away from the shooting, was owned by Isoke Robinson.  Police arrived at her house and handcuffed her, placed her 2-year old son in the back of their patrol car, and impounded her car for three weeks. None of the officers even bothered to check her car’s fog lights, though the vehicle used for the  shooting had a missing fog light.

Officers have also abused ALPR databases to obtain information for their own personal gain, for example, to stalk an ex-wife. Sadly, officer abuse of police databases is a recurring problem.

In my town there are twelve reported cameras.

The Institute for Justice also found problems with the data.

But those machine errors account for about one-third of the mistakes in the cases IJ identified. The rest involved human error, with officers entering wrong information into the system or misinterpreting what the ALPR data says.

Last year in San Diego, for instance, officers were searching for a red Alfa Romeo connected to an attempted carjacking. The officers didn’t have a plate and were instead relying on Flock’s “vehicle signature” technology, which captures detailed characteristics of individual cars like make, model, and color. 

The Flock system gave them a positive hit on a superficially matching car—but it was a totally different red Alfa Romeo, located five miles away from the crime at the time it occurred. Officers nevertheless arrested all three of the car’s occupants. One passenger spent nearly a month behind bars during the holidays before officers realized their error and set him free. 

People lives are at stake... there can be no false reporting!

People's lives are at stake—there can be no false reporting!

Also, there have been a number of cases where the police used the data to track ex-girlfriends. The Institute for Justice in another article reported;

An ongoing review of media reports and public records by the Institute for Justice has identified at least 24 cases nationwide of officers allegedly abusing ALPR data this way, with the bulk of those incidents happening since 2024. Nearly all of these officers were criminally charged and lost their jobs, either by resigning or getting fired. 

Flock Safety and other ALPR providers emphasize that they have internal safeguards to prevent this kind of misuse. But only a few of the 24 analyzed cases were initially discovered through internal investigations, according to media reports. Most incidents came to light only after victims reported the officers’ behavior to the police, typically in the context of a broader stalking allegation. 

“The fundamental problem with these systems is that they place private information about people’s movements over time in the hands of every officer,” said Michael Soyfer, an Institute for Justice attorney who is representing residents of San Jose and Norfolk in lawsuits challenging their cities’ ALPR surveillance networks. “Without the constitutional safeguard of a warrant requirement, that predictably allows officers to abuse their access to these systems for things like stalking romantic partners.” 

In an article in the Courthouse News they write;

In a lawsuit, two California drivers have accused tech company Flock Safety of violating state law by allowing out-of-state and federal agencies to access information captured by its automated license-plate recognition (ALPR) cameras.

“Flock has created an Orwellian mass-surveillance infrastructure that is practically impossible to avoid, particularly for anyone operating a vehicle in the towns and cities across this country where Flock has installed its cameras,” the drivers say in their complaint, filed Thursday in state court in San Francisco.

“Flock attempts to evade responsibility and shift liability for its violations by pointing fingers at its own customers,” they claim. “But Flock cannot rely on weaponized incompetence when its obligations under California law are crystal clear.”

They go on to write that various police agencies go around the law by search the databases at the request of ICE and CPB.

The Mountain View Police Department, the plaintiffs say, discovered only recently that federal agencies accessed its cameras’ data through a nationwide search tool. They say this feature was enabled without the police department’s permission or knowledge.

In recent months, the cities of Santa Cruz, Richmond, Mountain View and Los Altos Hills all shut down Flock cameras or terminated their contracts, according to the drivers.

Last October, California Attorney General Rob Bonta sued the city of El Cajon over its refusal to comply with state law prohibiting the sharing of license plate data with federal and out-of-state law enforcement agencies.

Here in Connecticut they tried to pass a law but it never made it to the floor of the legislature last session. In the bill HB 5449: AN ACT CONCERNING AUTOMATED LICENSE PLATE READER SYSTEMS, and it states...

108 (5) Unless authorized pursuant to section 29-6d of the general

109 statutes, collect automated license plate reader data on the premises or

110 within a distance established by the Police Officer Standards and

111 Training Council pursuant to section 2 of this act, of a reproductive or

112 sexual health facility, as defined in section 42-515 of the general statutes,

113 that primarily provides gender-affirming health care services or a

114 nonprofit or community organization that primarily serves immigrant

115 communities, excluding any property under federal jurisdiction,

116 provided such facility or organization notified the Police Officer

117 Standards and Training Council of such facility's or organization's

118 location;

You have to wonder if this is ultimately just a clever way to bypass the Fourth Amendment. After all, it is no longer the government directly collecting your personal data—it is a private company doing the legwork, which then sells access right back to government agencies. When private corporations build massive, unregulated tracking databases that police departments simply "subscribe" to, it creates a dangerous constitutional gray area.

These are, indeed, the new shades of Big Brother.

I Promise You A Rose Garden

[Essay]

The ads are starting!

The primary is August 11.

"Are you tired of do-nothing Democrats? Well, I promise..."

That is how a political ad starts. The candidate promises to bring change to Washington or Hartford.

I'm not going to vote for him. Why? Because of the attack ads. What I want to hear is not what they are against. I think we are all against high food prices, high electric rates, and crime. I want to know how they are going to curb those problems.

But they never explain how. As they say, "The devil is in the details." How are they going to cut electric rates? Every candidate in the U.S. promises to lower electric rates. Don't you think other politicians have been trying to do that? But here is a secret: it can't simply be done. Rate increases are driven by the price of fuel and by the cost of state-mandated repairs after major disasters.

Last week, we had a local disaster when a line of thunderstorms moved through. The utility crews did a fantastic job. But during emergencies, they are often paid double time or more, and many work close to 80 hours in a week. So you have a choice: weeks without power, or an all-out effort to restore power with cost taking a back seat. Then we complain when the utilities want to recover those costs.

We got where we are today because modern political ads have become little more than attack ads. Not one politician seems willing to tell you what they actually want to do, or even whether they have a real plan.

Democracy is not a spectator sport. It takes work. To write this blog, I read dozens of news sources and look for information from both sides.

The economy and the cost of living are the number one issues. Candidates on both sides say they are going to fight inflation. But very few explain how. We have seen how Trump says he plans to do it: by cutting business taxes, rolling back environmental regulations, and allowing mergers, all of which he claims will help bring down inflation.

Politicians have also promised to bring down healthcare costs. Trump said he would make the healthcare system more affordable and said he had concepts for reforms. But he never explained how. Yet healthcare costs remain the highest in the world.

Elections on both sides of the aisle have become exercises in promising voters the sky and delivering... crap.

For many voters, it is all about party loyalty. Others want substance, and when they don't get it, they end up voting the party line anyway.

We are spiraling downward, and many people don't seem to care. They don't demand honesty, and they end up with the government they get.

They say the number one issue is the economy, yet they keep voting for the same party they believe is holding them back.

[/Essay]

Yes It Was...

...Also bigotry, and all the other "isms"!

‘Cruelty was the point’: Transgender troops look back on their ban as it’s set to end

Military Times

By Riley Ceder

July 15, 2026

Transgender service members are on the precipice of being allowed back into the military after a federal court ruled that the Trump administration’s ban against them was unlawful.

As troops look toward a future when their service might be welcome once again, individuals affected by the policy told Military Times that the year and a half time period upended their lives.

Transgender service members are on the precipice of being allowed back into the military after a federal court ruled that the Trump administration’s ban against them was unlawful.

As troops look toward a future when their service might be welcome once again, individuals affected by the policy told Military Times that the year and a half time period upended their lives.

The Pentagon's figure of about 4,240 service members were trans.

But that is out of around 2.04–2.11 million personnel! Or around... are you ready for this? 0.2%

With their lives on hold, these service members felt depression, anxiety and disillusionment over why an institution to which they had pledged their lives suddenly cast them out, swiftly and seemingly without regard for their psychiatric and professional well-being.

Service members also felt betrayed that the Defense Department used their “gender dysphoria” diagnosis to justify their separation. The term was assigned to service members during previous administrations as a medical diagnosis that allowed them to serve openly as transgender and receive gender-affirming care.

They say family values are passed down through the generations... I think that is true. Trump's father was arrested a KKK rally in New York City! We see what family values that are being passed down through the family. So far it seems his family are following in his foot steps.

Army Infantry Major Kara Corcoran has served for over 18 years and is currently involved in the involuntary separation process.

In May 2025, she graduated from the School of Advanced Military Studies after completing an esteemed one-year master’s degree program that trained her to become an operational planner.

But she was informed by her chain of command that senior leadership had prohibited her from crossing the stage with her peers during graduation unless she adhered to male regulations and standards, in keeping with the new DoD policy.

“Cruelty was the point,” Corcoran said of the rule.

Yes, it was.

By the way, these countries permit transgender military service:

• Australia
• Belgium
• Canada
• Denmark
• France
• Germany
• Japen
• Netherlands
• New Zealand
• Norway
• Spain
• Sweden
• United Kingdom

Cuckoo Award

We have a WINNER! A real winner for the coveted cuckoo award, I mean this is a real winner!

Hegseth announces new policy to test troops for low testosterone

AP News

By  KONSTANTIN TOROPIN and MATTHEW PERRONE

July 15, 2026

 Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced Wednesday that he is rolling out a new screening program for “testosterone deficiency” among troops, calling it necessary to allow them to operate at their “absolute best.”

The screenings will be conducted annually as part of service members’ required medical screenings for those 30 and older, he said. Troops under 30 can volunteer to be tested. In a video on social media, Hegseth said receiving testosterone replacement therapy would be voluntary.

Cuckoo! Cuckoo!

The move comes as other Trump administration officials have begun to advocate for men to have easier access to testosterone replacement therapies, but the messaging from Hegseth and others blends known science on the hormone with broader, and less substantiated, claims.

You know the more T you have the more you chance of heart problems!

 

So today's Cuckoo Award goes to Sectary of Defense Hegseth

 

 

---

But on a serious side...

Testosterone use in the military has previously come under scrutiny

When asked what conditions Hegseth was looking to address with the new policy, the Pentagon referred to Hegseth’s remarks in the video that mentioned keeping troops “strong, resilient and capable” and that the rigors of the modern battlefield demand “maximum psychological and mental readiness.”

Over the past several years, special operations troops — and specifically Navy SEALs — have come under scrutiny for their use of testosterone and similar substances to enhance performance.

The death of a SEAL recruit during training in 2022 led to a discovery of substances in his possession, including testosterone, and revealed far more rampant drug use among the elite program than was previously acknowledged.

A year after the recruit’s death, the Navy said it would begin a drug-testing program to screen for “any hormonal substance, chemically or pharmacologically related to testosterone, that promotes muscle growth.”

They are playing with fire!

Wow! Did You Know?

You all know that I follow local politics pretty closely but this got by me and I think a lot of other people also.

Did you know that Connecticut passed a law banning the sale of sensitive personnel information on the internet including us in...

Public Act No. 25-113. AN ACT CONCERNING BROADBAND INTERNET, GAMING, SOCIAL MEDIA, ONLINE SERVICES AND CONSUMER CONTRACTS.

It sound innocuous enough but it has a little gem inside.

[(38)] (39) "Sensitive data" means personal data that includes (A) data revealing (i) racial or ethnic origin, (ii) religious beliefs, (iii) a mental or physical health condition, [or] diagnosis, disability or treatment, (iv) sex life, sexual orientation or status as nonbinary or transgender, or (v)citizenship or immigration status, (B) consumer health data, (C) [the processing of] genetic or biometric data [for the purpose of uniquely identifying an individual] or information derived therefrom, (D) personal data collected from [a known] an individual the controller has actual knowledge, or wilfully disregards, is a child, (E) data concerning an individual's status as a victim of crime, as defined in section 1-1k, [or] (F) precise geolocation data, (G) neural data, (H) a consumer's financial account number, financial account log-in information or credit card or debit card number that, in combination with any required access or security code, password or credential, would allow access to a consumer's financial account, or (I) government-issued identification number, including, but not limited to, Social Security number, passport number, state identification card number or driver's license number, of that applicable law does not require to be publicly displayed.

Okay, this is the first I saw this so... The National Law Review writes...

Who Is Now Covered?

As of July 1, 2026, the CTDPA applies to any entity that conducts business in Connecticut, or targets products or services to Connecticut residents, and that during the preceding calendar year satisfied any one of the following:

• Controlled or processed the personal data of at least 35,000 consumers (reduced from 100,000), excluding data processed solely to complete a payment transaction;
• Controlled or processed consumers’ sensitive data, regardless of volume; or
• Offered consumers’ personal data for sale in trade or commerce, regardless of volume.

[...]

What Counts as “Sensitive Data” under the CTDPA?

Your company is swept in if, during the past year, it collected or processed any of the following, no matter how few Connecticut residents were involved:

cticut residents were involved:

– Data revealing racial or ethnic origin

– Data revealing religious beliefs

– Data revealing a mental or physical health condition, diagnosis, disability, or treatment

– Data revealing sex life, sexual orientation, or status as nonbinary or transgender

– Data revealing citizenship or immigration status

– Consumer health data

– Genetic or biometric data, or information derived therefrom

– Precise geolocation data

You got That?

The Bottom Line

Connecticut has shifted from a threshold-based law that mostly affected large companies to an expansive framework that can capture smaller organizations – particularly those that touch sensitive data, rely on ad-tech and targeted advertising, share data in ways that may count as a “sale,” or offer online features used by minors. With the Connecticut Attorney General’s cure period gone and enforcement already active, the cost of waiting has risen. Companies with any nexus to Connecticut should consider the following steps:

• Reassess whether you are in scope. Given that the sensitive data and sale triggers under the amended CTDPA have no volume threshold, assume you may be in scope until confirmed otherwise.
• Map your data. Inventory what personal and sensitive data you collect, how it is used, and with whom it is shared – including via tracking pixels and list exchanges.
• Refresh privacy notices and consent flows. Disclose profiling, targeted advertising, and any use of personal data to train LLMs, and ensure notices are conspicuous, multilingual, and accessible.
• Review profiling and automated decision-making. Build compliant processes to honor opt-out requests, provide explanations for how decisions were reached, and complete the new impact assessment for activities on or after August 1, 2026.
• Strengthen protections for minors. Stop targeted advertising to, and sales of personal data of, individuals aged 13-17, and remove engagement-maximizing design features.

DST or EST That Is The Question

It looks like fixing the clock is a done deal, the question boils down to either fixing the clock Daylight Saving Time or Standard Time. So I asked Gemini: Congress is look at fixing the time to either standard time or daylight savings. what are the pros and cons of the clock of either one?

The main tradeoff comes down to a choice between economic/recreation benefits in the evening versus human health and safety in the morning. [1, 2]

While the U.S. House of Representatives recently voted to pass the ⁠Sunshine Protection Act to make Daylight Saving Time (DST) permanent, a competing bill called the ⁠Sunshine for Our Kids Act pushes for permanent Standard Time. Both options successfully eliminate the widely disliked twice-yearly clock change, but they shift daylight hours in very different ways. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

---

Permanent Daylight Saving Time (Clocks Forward Year-Round)

This option extends the time system currently used from March to November into the winter months. [1]

The Pros:

• More Evening Light: Sunsets occur one hour later in the winter, leaving more daylight for outdoor activities, exercise, and family time after work or school. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
• Economic Boost: Industries like retail, golf, tourism, and restaurants benefit heavily because people are more likely to go out and spend money when it is still light outside. [1, 2, 3]
• Crime Reduction: Extra evening daylight has historically been linked to lower outdoor crime rates during peak commuting hours. [1, 2]

The Cons:

• Dark Winter Mornings: Sunrises are delayed by an hour. In northern and western parts of time zones, the sun might not rise until 8:30 AM or 9:00 AM during the winter. [1, 2, 4, 5]
• Child Safety Hazards: School safety advocates and parents worry about millions of children waiting for school buses or walking to school in pitch-black darkness. [1, 2]
• Historical Failure: The U.S. actually tried permanent DST in 1974. It was quickly repealed after only a few months because the public grew to hate the freezing, dark winter mornings. [1, 2, 3]

---

Permanent Standard Time (Clocks Back Year-Round)

This option keeps the country on the time system currently observed between November and March. It is the system currently used year-round by Hawaii and Arizona. [1]

The Pros:

• Better Physical Health: Major medical groups like the ⁠American Medical Association strongly support permanent Standard Time. Morning light is vital for resetting human circadian rhythms. Stanford researchers found that permanent Standard Time reduces "circadian burden" and could prevent up to 300,000 strokes and reduce millions of obesity cases nationwide compared to the current system. [1]
• Improved Sleep Quality: Brighter mornings make it easier to wake up naturally, while darker evenings signal the brain to produce melatonin, helping people fall asleep earlier and get more rest. [1, 2]
• Safer Morning Commutes: Drivers and workers have better visibility during the rush hour commute, lowering the risk of early-morning traffic accidents. [1, 2, 3, 4]

The Cons:

• Extremely Early Summer Sunrises: In June and July, the sun would rise as early as 4:00 AM or 4:30 AM in certain states. This daylight is largely wasted while most people are still sleeping.
• Darker Summer Evenings: Sunsets would occur an hour earlier in the summer. This reduces time for evening recreation, backyard barbecues, and outdoor youth sports.
• Economic Pushback: Businesses strongly oppose this option because early darkness cuts into post-work consumer spending and hurts the recreation industry. [1, 3, 4, 5, 6]

Feature	Permanent Daylight Saving Time (DST)	Permanent Standard Time (ST)
Primary Beneficiary	Retail, tourism, and evening recreation	Public health, sleep quality, and morning safety
Winter Mornings	Dark; sunrises as late as 8:30–9:00 AM	Bright; matches the natural biological clock
Summer Evenings	Bright; sun stays out late for activities	Darker; sun sets an hour earlier than we are used to
Scientific Stance	Opposed by sleep and medical experts	Strongly endorsed by health and sleep experts

So what do you think?

online polls

A Question.

Well, okay, a few questions. But the primary one is: What about the child’s rights? What about our rights?

Religious parents sue school district over staff using child’s chosen pronouns

A pair of religious parents have filed a lawsuit against a Maryland school district after teachers respected their child’s request to use a masculine name and pronouns at school without first informing them.

Pink News

Jul 14

By Siân Thompson

The lawsuit, filed Wednesday (8 July) in federal court against Anne Arundel County Public School District, seeks to force educators to stop using the student’s chosen name and pronouns, instead requiring staff to refer to the child by their birth name and the pronouns associated with their sex assigned at birth.

The parents, identified in court only as John and Jane Doe, are being represented by the conservative legal organisation America First Legal, which was founded in 2021 by Trump adviser Stephen Miller and has repeatedly challenged LGBTQ+ protections in courts across the US.

When are the courts going to say it is child abuse to force a child into a gender that is not their true gender?

Where do you draw the line... when they’re 10? What about 12? Where do you draw your arbitrary line? Because that is exactly what it is—just some age that has no bearing on whether they are trans or not.

Suppose your son wants to dress as Anna from Frozen? Would it be okay to beat him to "beat the gay" out of him?

Conversion therapy? Maybe a little "brain zapping" might make your child think straight?

Then, conversely, what happens if you say, "Yes, you can call yourself whatever you want... loving you is the most important thing"?

Suppose ten years or so down the line they decide it was not truly them, so they detransition... So what?

Do you belittle them—"What a horrible life you created for yourself!"—or do you reach out to them, hug them, and say, "We love you, and that is the most important thing"?

What are your family values? It's your choice.