The Body Reveals the Person: Moving Beyond Sexual Identity Obsession

American culture has become obsessed with sexual identity confusion. This obsession has affected almost every aspect of public life, from sports (in a multitude of ways) to retail companies to beer. It has become such an obsession that a massive swath of corporate America will soon transform their branding into the symbol of this obsession for an entire month.

Most importantly, this obsession has diminished our souls and the very essence of what it means to be human. We are currently about a decade into this culture-wide phenomenon. Lest we settle into seeing this situation as the new normal, it’s important to keep front and center how tragic this sexual identity obsession truly is — it presents a grave misunderstanding of the body and a diminishment of life’s highest goods. We desperately need a way forward out of obsession and into true freedom.

A single verse in the first chapter of the first book of the Bible reveals the essence of human life: “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them” (Genesis 1:27).

From this verse comes a limitless well of truth from which to draw. A groundbreaking understanding of this truth began to develop in 1979, when Pope John Paul II began delivering a series of 129 individual addresses that would later collectively become known as the “Theology of the Body.” The central idea of this theology can be summed up here: “The body, in fact, and it alone, is capable of making visible what is invisible: the spiritual and the divine.” In other words, the body reveals not only the physical person but also the image of the invisible God, as stated in Genesis.

John Paul further declared that “[the body] was created to transfer in the visible reality of the world the invisible mystery hidden since time immemorial in God, and thus be a sign of it.” In other words, the maleness and femaleness of the human person are indissoluble aspects of God that He chose to reveal through the created body.

Indeed, our maleness and femaleness go to the very core of who we are — every cell of our bodies possess either a male or female pair of chromosomes. But the goodness of our bodies goes far beyond merely the physical aspect, as beautiful as that is. We have been created out of an outpouring of generous love of the Trinity and have been adopted through Christ (Romans 8:14-17) as sons and daughters. Our bodies ultimately reveal that we are male sons and female daughters of a loving Father.

All that God has created is infused — filled to the brim — with meaning. This is why we can marvel at the intricacy of a flower, or the truth held in a beautiful painting, or the incomparable goodness of a delicious meal. So too are our bodies filled with immeasurable meaning.

Therefore, when we “identify” as a sex other than what we are, or as “non-binary,” or as some other sexual identity, we are selling ourselves far short of our maleness or femaleness. Our chosen “identity” becomes vacant and stripped of meaning, and we render ourselves androgynous. Rather, it is in and through our male and female bodies that we experience the world around us, and most importantly, our relationship with God our Father.

It is in this way that our bodies and all of visible creation point to the invisible reality of God. When we fully realize the boundless potential of our embodied male and female souls, we will be set free of confusion about our sexual identity, knowing that we have been loved into existence just as we are — in the image of God.


Dan Hart

Dan Hart is senior editor at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. ©2023 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

VIDEO: Ivermectin for Cancer?

Mentioned below is information sent to me from an associate with a medical intelligence background. This specialist actually worked in the field of intelligence where nations employ medical techniques and science as part of their weaponry. Said weaponry can be used either for good, or evil. Below is the use of Ivermectin for good, but deliberately kept somewhat hidden from the general public. Hidden, that is, until Covid where Ivermectin began to surface as a strong and effective intervention repealing the ravages of Covid, which, itself, was a bio-weapon released by China.

I pray you find the information of value.


Dr. Pierre Kory: Why Big Pharma Was Threatened By Ivermectin

Dr. Pierre Kory Explores the Real Reason Behind the War on Ivermectin


Ivermectin, a potential anticancer drug derived from an antiparasitic drug

The Cancers For Which Ivermectin Has Been Demonstrated to be Effective

Ivermectin has New Application in Inhibiting Colorectal Cancer Cell …

Outcome of Ivermectin in Cancer Treatment: An Experience in … – PubMed

©2023. Lyle J. Rapacki, Ph.D. All rights reserved.

EXCLUSIVE: Biden Admin Tells Adults How to Discuss Sex with Teens Behind Parents’ Backs

As part of its month-long focus on adolescent health, the Biden administration is promoting a document that tells Planned Parenthood and other taxpayer-funded family planning offices how to talk to minors about sex without their parents overhearing, and how to secretly deliver birth control to adolescents without parental knowledge or consent.

Federally-funded guidelines instruct adults to pause before discussing sex with minors and to ask, “Are you alone in the room?” These instructions specify tactics to follow “if you’re really having a hard time getting a parent” to leave the room during the sex talk. They suggest children as young as 13 discuss sex with groups like Planned Parenthood in a parked car or communicate in writing, so their parents cannot hear the adults’ side of the conversation. And they encourage offices to have vans roam neighborhoods giving minors federally funded contraceptives; to mail birth control to adolescents in “plain, unmarked packaging;” and/or to have teenagers receive contraceptives at public meet-up places.

A federal grant recipient admitted the cloak-and-dagger sex discussion is necessary, because “parents might not agree with some of the things that we’re talking about.”

The emphasis on shutting out adults comes as the Biden administration and 24 states are fighting against a lawsuit to recognize parents’ right to know if the government is enabling underage sexual activity by giving teens birth control.

Biden Admin: ‘It Takes a Village’ to Teach Teens about Sex

The Biden administration revealed that it aimed to “expand sexual and reproductive health information and services” for teens during National Adolescent Health Month (NAHM), which runs during the month of May. The announcement made it clear government-funded strangers would take a leading role in forming teens’ views of sexuality.

“The adage ‘It takes a village’ has been proven time and again,” said Jessica Marcella, deputy assistant secretary for Population Affairs and director of the Office of Adolescent Health in the official press release. “[T]his year,” the Biden administration is “amplifying the important role of youth-serving professionals and other caring adults in their interactions with young people.”

The Biden administration’s official Resources for National Adolescent Health Month™ 2023 links to a document titled “Providing Family Planning Services to Adolescents During Uncertain Times,” produced by the Reproductive Health National Training Center (RHNTC), a group that trains Title X providers at taxpayers’ expense. Its instructions detail how Title X recipients, who distribute federally funded contraception to children in the name of “family planning,” can and should bypass parents during sex-related telehealth meetings.

‘Why Are You Talking to My Young Person in the Bathroom with the Door Locked?’

The plan to speak about sex one-on-one with impressionable youth begins during scheduling. “Confirm with youth clients that you have their phone number/contact information rather than their parents’ contact information,” the document tells federal grant recipients. “At the beginning of the visit, do a privacy screen. Ask ‘Are you alone in the room?’ or ‘Can other people hear what you are saying?’”

The document links to a webinar which fleshes out these ideas in greater detail. A slide on “Ensuring Adolescent Privacy” tells Title X grantees to ask:

1. Are they alone in the room? Always ask first! If a parent is present, ask to provide alone time during the appointment.

2. Can people hear them outside the room? Can they relocate? Use headphones? Use yes/no questions or chat feature?” (Emphases in original.)

The written document tells teens who want to “protect their privacy” from their parents “during a virtual visit” to:

  • “Take the call in the bathroom, outside, or in a parked car.”
  • “Use headphones.”
  • “Schedule the call at a time when there are fewer people at home.”

“[P]arents might not agree with some of the things that we’re talking about and some of the services that our patients are looking for,” Safiya Yearwood, a nurse at Baltimore’s Star Track Clinic, told the webinar. Title X grantees must “mak[e] sure that patients are, number one, safe to even have these conversations, and determine[e] where they can do it.”

The easiest method is to assure teens know how to call without their parent or guardian’s input. “[A]re we letting all of our adolescent patients know what their protections are?” asked webinar host Kaleigh Cornelison, MSW, who was then lead program specialist at the University of Michigan’s Adolescent Health Initiative, and who now works at ETR, which specialized in “health equity” advancement. “[A]re we informing everyone of what their rights are?”

“Are we ensuring that everyone knows what their rights are and what they have access to without a parent or caregiver’s consent?”

If parents are present, Title X grantees should make every effort to get them to leave the room. “Standardize time alone for all adolescent clients with the provider,” Cornelison instructed Title X offices. Have a “system in place so it’s standard practice; it’s not out of the ordinary. It comes to be expected every time.”

“We had to create scripts” for telehealth visits, explained Chinwe Efuribe, MD, MPH, who founded the Centered Youth Clinic and Consulting clinic and medical director of Every Body Texas, on the webinar. Employees told parents their absence “is our practice” and, “we usually have one-on-one time with our young people, and we would like to continue that.”

It is important to normalize the practice to evade parents’ suspicion, she said. “If the parent was there in the visit, also let them know that this is something that we’ve always been doing that we want to continue doing, so they don’t think that, you know, ‘Why are you talking to my young person in the bathroom with the door locked?’” said Efuribe.

If parents refuse to leave, Cornelison told Title X recipient offices, they should tell teens they “can maybe get a little creative about moving rooms, putting on headphones, maybe some questions are asked in a chat instead of verbally just to sort of deal with that privacy issue if you’re really having a hard time getting a parent or caregiver outside of the space.”

To maintain silence after the visit, Cornelison told providers to assure all emails are sent to the teens’ private email account, so no “parent is going to get a red flag.”

Two sexually active minors testified the Biden administration-promoted guidelines helped them hide their sexual activity from others, including parents.

“It had been an ongoing battle for me” to keep her parents uninformed of her sexual activity, said Kacie, an underage teenager. “I did not think I needed to hear or experience the repercussions from my family.” Her efforts included talking to her Title X office “on the phone behind the shed” and lying to her parents to get the use of the family car. “I’d be like, ‘Hey, I’m going here, and I’m doing this.’ It’s not like, ‘I’m going to my doctor to get help with Title X services,’” she said. Bianca, a teen who uses they/them pronouns, added that she particularly appreciated online events, where “you can tell someone, ‘Hey, I’m going to this event!’ and you don’t have to say, ‘I’m going to the clinic.’”

Contraceptive Vans and Unmarked Boxes of Condoms

After the consultation, adult Title X grantees must deliver contraceptives to minors without the parents’ knowledge. “With more virtual visits happening, clinics have come up with creative ways to deliver the prescriptions and supplies that they previously gave youth on-site at the clinic,” says the document, which encourages offices to begin:

  • “Mail delivery of supplies in plain, unmarked packaging”
  • “Curbside pickup of supplies at the clinic or other community locations frequented by youth”
  • “Use of a mobile van to bring supplies to people in their neighborhoods”

Yearwood told the webinar she mailed teens “That Box,” a box full of condoms, “little toys,” and other sex items. “There’s no sort of markings on there that would say, ‘There’s HIV [testing kit] and condoms in here,’” she said.

“When I go to the clinic, Safiya and them [sic] always give me like a ‘goodie bag.’ And it’s so cute. It’s like a bag but it has condoms and all these things that I need,” said Bianca — with her parents none the wiser.

Eroding Parents’ Rights Did Not Begin with Gender

“These guidelines encourage health care providers to keep the parents of teens in the dark about their potentially life-altering decisions surrounding sexual activity,” Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse, the founder and president of the Ruth Institute and author of “The Sexual State: How Elite Ideologies are Destroying Lives and How the Church was Right All Along,” told The Washington Stand.

“It has long been federal policy that minors past the age of puberty have a right to contraception without their parents’ knowledge or consent,” Morse told TWS. “This latest effort by the federal government to actively encourage health care providers to help teens deceive their parents is part of a longstanding pattern of the Sexual State to spread the ideology of the Sexual Revolution — whether people know it or not, whether people want it or not.”

Title X became law when President Richard Nixon signed the Family Planning Services and Public Research Act of 1970 (now Public Law 91-572). In 1978, Congress amended the law specifically to include adolescents. A series of courts ruled that the law forbids parental consent or notification laws. In 2021, the Biden administration codified these rulings in regulation to federal law 42 C.F.R. § 59.10(b), which states that “Title X projects may not require consent of parents or guardians for the provision of services to minors, nor can any Title X project staff notify a parent or guardian before or after a minor has requested and/or received Title X family planning services.”

Family advocates have tried to remove the government-imposed barrier between parents and unemancipated minors for more than a quarter of a century. In 1997, then-Rep. Ernest Istook attempted to require parental consent before federally funded facilities could give birth control to minors. But the House Appropriations Committee defeated the Istook amendment, substituting a watered-down alternative that asked Title X participants to encourage family involvement “to the extent practical.”

More recently, parents earned a victory in a federal courtroom — a breakthrough the Biden administration is trying to reverse.

Biden Takes Parents to Court

A concerned parent sued HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra, Deanda v. Becerra, last December, arguing that Title X confidentiality guidelines violate parents’ rights — and won.

The secretive “administration of the Title X program violates the constitutional right of parents to direct the upbringing of their children,” ruled U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, a Trump appointee, who also recently found the FDA had wrongly approved the abortion pill (mifepristone). “[P]arental rights … do not completely disappear with respect to a minor child’s sexual activity.”

The Biden administration appealed the decision in February. The attorneys general of 24 states and the District of Columbia signed an amicus brief siding with Biden and against parents/guardians.

They are supported by Planned Parenthood and other federally funded contraceptive providers who oppose parental “involvement” — starkly framing the legal battle as a struggle between their business and parents’ rights.

“Forced parental notification and involvement undercuts the integrity of the Title X program and creates barriers to care and decision-making,” said Clare Coleman, president and CEO of the National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association (NFPRHA). Establishing parental oversight of their minor children’s sex life would “eviscerate longstanding Title X program protections that ensure young people can access the care they need from providers they trust.”

The Deanda lawsuit is “shameful,” said Planned Parenthood CEO Alexis McGill Johnson. “Young people deserve access to the health care they need to make their own decisions about their bodies, lives, and futures.”

Planned Parenthood said it is “grateful” to the president and “fortunate that the U.S. Justice Department and the Biden administration [is] dedicated to fighting back,” said Johnson, adding that Planned Parenthood will “look forward to our ongoing work with them.”

Sexually Active Teens Have Worse Mental Health: Biden Administration

The Biden administration’s anti-parental rights legal efforts seem at odds with its own advice on how to improve poor teen mental health. The CDC website states multiple times, “Parent engagement also makes it more likely that children and adolescents will avoid unhealthy behaviors, such as sexual risk behaviors and tobacco, alcohol, and other drug use.” Sexually active teens are more likely to suffer from depression, addiction, and suicidal ideation than their abstinent heterosexual peers, according to a report the CDC released in February. Teens who have sex with members of the opposite sex are twice as likely to self-report attempting suicide, more than twice as likely to use marijuana, and 45% more likely to report overall poor mental health.

The rates are higher for teens who have sex with members of the same sex.

Independent studies have found parental involvement is particularly important for vulnerable populations the Biden administration uplifts as the center of its policies. Black female teens living in low-income urban areas and “at increased risk for sexually transmitted diseases” found high levels of “perceived parental supervision” resulted in lower rates of gonorrhea and chlamydia, concluded one such study. “[P]arental supervision can result in lower sexually transmitted disease rates in urban high-prevalence populations.”

“Given the mental health crisis among American teens, deliberately putting a communication barrier between children and their parents is a really bad idea,” Morse told TWS.

Any sexual activity increases the possibility of physical health impacts, as well. While abstinence prevents all pregnancies and disease, the oral contraceptives distributed by Title X fail to prevent pregnancy at least 7% of the time, and condoms have a “typical use failure rate [of] 13%,” according to the CDC. The NAHM’s resources page admits that “condom use with every sexual act can greatly reduce — though not eliminate — the risk of” sexually transmitted infections/diseases (STIs/STDs). People between the ages of 15 and 24 accounted for half of the 26 million new STDs/STIs in the U.S., according to the CDC.

Many of the hormonal contraceptives and long-acting reversible contraceptives Title X offers teens also constitute potential abortifacients. And many are now distributed by Planned Parenthood, which may now refer visitors for abortions.

‘It Takes a Family,’ Not a Village

Perhaps knowing how incendiary its materials are, the RHNTC guide carries a disclaimer that, although “[t]his publication was supported by the Office of Population Affairs (Grant FPTPA006030),” the “views expressed do not necessarily reflect the official policies of the Department of Health and Human Services.” It does, however, reflect a training document intended to teach Title X providers how to use the taxpayer dollars furnished by the HHS.

Pro-family advocates say these prescriptions align with the Biden administration’s attempt to have minors guided on sexual issues by unrelated adults at the government’s direction, instead of loving parents.

Marcella’s reference that “it takes a village to raise a child” is “simply an attempt to replace parents. It takes a family to raise a child — not a village. It takes a loving mother and father who work together to teach their child to strive for the good, true, and beautiful,” Mary Szoch, director of the Center for Human Dignity at Family Research Council, told The Washington Stand.

“Since day one, the Biden administration has worked to replace mothers and fathers with a village — and not just any village, but one that is only made up of people intent on leading teenagers down the path of self-destruction and death.”

Resources: You can read the document here. You can view the webinar here.


Ben Johnson

Ben Johnson is senior reporter and editor at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2023 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Adidas Uses Men to Model Female Swimsuits

A world without women. This male dominated, misogynist far-left movement is erasing women. And the feminists lay down for it like dogs.

For all these many years I have been writing, exposing the feminist movement as a big lie. It is a misogynist movement rooted in Lenin-Marxist dogma. And now the feminist silence and sanction of the trans males in women’s sports is irrefutable proof.

Adidas ripped for male modeling women’s swimsuit as sportswear goes woke

First Nike teamed up with transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney to promote its sports bras, and now Adidas is using an intact male model to hawk its women’s swimwear.

The German-based sportswear giant was accused of seeking to mock, belittle and “erase” women by using an obviously male model to display its women’s one-piece Pride Swimsuit, part of its newly unveiled Pride 2023 collection.

Former NCAA All-American swimmer Riley Gaines said that companies like Adidas “want you to know that they think men make the best women.”

“It’s disgusting,” she told Outkick podcast host Dan Dakich. “You would think they would see the public response to the Nike sponsorship, where Dylan Mulvaney was sporting this sports bra, which is of course intended for only women.”

She pointed out that the shots of Dylan Mulvaney modeling Nike sports bras and women’s workout gear last month spurred boycott calls, and “Adidas saw this, yet still thought it was a good idea to implement this themselves.”

“To even remotely put this out there is belittling, it’s offensive, it’s demeaning to what it is to be a woman,” said Ms. Gaines, “because I promise you, if you have XX chromosomes, you do not look like that in a swimsuit.”

Indeed, many commentators noted that the model has chest hair and other physical attributes more commonly associated with men.

“Hey @adidas, does the $70 price of this women’s swimsuit include the cost of the sock to stuff down my crotch because, unlike your model, I don’t seem to have a penis to fill out that bulge,” tweeted British radio host Julie Hartley-Brewer. “And do I have to order the chest hair separately? Please let me know. Thanks.”

The Independent Women’s Network asked: “Why is @adidas advertising male bulges in their WOMEN’S swimwear line!?”

Read more.


RELATED VIDEO: OFF TARGET: Backlash Builds Over Retail Giant’s Trans Kid Clothing Designed by Satanist


EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Study Reveals MOST People’s Lungs Now Riddled With Microplastics Found in Disposable Face Masks

Woman wearing protective face mask in the office for safety and protection during COVID-19

A shocking new study has revealed that most people have microplastics, commonly found in disposable masks, in all areas of their lungs. For those of us who refused the “vaccine” and the mask, it’s vindication but we continue to be punished by these toxic lemmings.

Also: Possible toxicity of chronic carbon dioxide exposure associated with face mask use, particularly in pregnant women, children andadolescents – A scoping review

There were 12 types of microplastic found in samples.

The 4 microplastics present in the most considerable quantities included:

  • polypropylene (PP): found in carpets, clothing, automotive plastics, and surgical masks
  • polyethylene terephthalate (PET): present in clothing, beverage, and food containers
  • resin: a constituent of protective coating and paints
  • polyethylene (PE): a component of food wrappers, milk containers, toys, and detergent bottles

In 2020, the amount of disposable face masks littered into the environment increased by a staggering 9000 percent. Billions of people strapped polypropylene masks to their faces every day for two years and sucked their air through plastic fibers for 8 hours or more. To not have discovered plastic in lungs would have been surprising.

The confirmation of microplastics in the lungs also backs up a study conducted in 2020 which predicted a microplastic inhalation risk posed by wearing masks.

Also: Covid-19 face masks: A potential source of microplastic fibers in the environment

A new study has revealed that most people have microplastics, commonly found in disposable face masks, in all areas of their lungs.

Not only are masks uncomfortable, make it hard to breathe, and are completely useless at preventing viruses passing through, but surgical masks worn during the pandemic could have a far unhealthier effect than previously thought.

Those British Health Trusts still mandating face masks in hospitals, and all the dentists and GPs surgeries that seem to have a psychotic obsession with preventing patients from breathing normally, might care to look at the long-term damage they are inflicting on them.

According to a new study published in the Science of the Total Environment, microplastics commonly used in surgical masks have been discovered in the lungs of most people.

According to thoracic surgeon Dr. Osita Onugha, the presence of microplastics in the lungs is a public health ticking time bomb with the potential to cause an explosion of cancer cases in the coming years.

Researchers in Britain looked at lung tissue obtained from study participants and found microplastics in all regions of the lungs including the deeper section. According to the study, this is the first time microplastics have been found in human lung tissue samples using μFTIR spectroscopy. Though the researchers did not confirm the source of the microplastic contamination, the plastic fibers found in the lungs are most commonly found in face masks.

Researchers identified 39 microplastics in 11 of the 13 lung tissue samples, with an average of 3 microplastics per sample.

In 2020, the amount of disposable face masks littered into the environment increased by a staggering 9,000%.

Billions of people strapped polypropylene masks to their faces every day for two years and sucked their air through plastic fibers for 8 hours or more. To not have discovered plastic in lungs would have been surprising.

The confirmation of microplastics in the lungs also backs up a study conducted in 2020 which predicted a microplastic inhalation risk posed by wearing masks. According to researchers in that study, the inhalation risk posed by spherical and fiber-like microplastics was high while wearing a mask. Unfortunately, researchers in that study continued to recommend the use of plastic masks despite the risk of inhalation.

CLICK HERE: What ARE Those Risks?


RELATED ARTICLE: DEMOCRAT SHAKEDOWN: Walgreens to Pay San Francisco $230 Million for FDA Created Opioid Crisis


EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

VIDEO: The Unspoken Horrors of Gender Transition Surgery

Gender Transition Surgery: Dreams Turned to Nightmares.


  • Children are increasingly lured into “gender-affirming” hormone therapy and sex reassignment surgeries, are never given appropriate informed consent, and they have no idea what they’re getting themselves into. Many adults even underestimate how difficult and painful it will be
  • All it takes for a young girl to start the gender transition process to become a boy is a letter of support from a therapist. Typically, the therapist will write a letter of support after just one or two visits. Next, she’ll be sent to an endocrinologist who, after a single visit, will prescribe her testosterone
  • Some gender transition centers don’t even require any kind of mental health assessment, and several Planned Parenthood clinics are apparently handing out hormone replacement therapy (HRT) prescriptions on the first visit
  • While some pro-trans advocates insist HRT is harmless and reversible once you quit taking the hormones, this simply isn’t true. The effects of testosterone on a girl can be both profound and permanent, and can be seen within a matter of months
  • The transgender movement is a stepping stone in the transhumanist agenda. Ultimately, the goal is to get rid of flesh and blood bodies altogether and have our existence either within a synthetic body or as disembodied avatar in cyberspace, or both. Turning humanity into misgendered people incapable of natural reproduction is merely a first step in that direction

In the video above, WhatsHerFace Entertainment dives into the “unspoken reality of transgender sexual reassignment surgery and all of the pain, regret and horrors it entails.”

Most clear-headed adults would realize that surgically and chemically altering your anatomy from male to female, or female to male, is a complex and painful process. The problem is that it’s typically not level-headed adults making the decision to undergo gender reassignment. It’s primarily children who are being pushed into it, and they have no idea what they’re getting themselves into. Many adults don’t even realize how difficult and painful it will be.

As reported by WhatsHerFace, all it takes for a young girl to start the gender transition process to become a boy is a letter of support from a therapist. Typically, the therapist will write a letter of support after just one or two visits. Next, she’ll be sent to an endocrinologist who, after a single visit, will prescribe her testosterone.

While that’s alarmingly lax enough, some gender transition centers have cut through even that tiny bit of red tape. Some don’t require any kind of mental health assessment, and a number of Planned Parenthood clinics are apparently handing out hormone replacement therapy (HRT) prescriptions on the first visit.

Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT) Is Not Harmless

While some pro-trans advocates insist that HRT is harmless and completely reversible once you quit taking the hormones, this simply isn’t true.1 As reported by WhatsHerFace, the effects of testosterone on a girl can be both profound and permanent and can be seen within a matter of months. Effects of high-dose testosterone treatment include:

Voice deepening

Facial hair growth
Hair loss, receding hairline, balding Increased libido
Sexual dysfunction Increased aggression and unpredictable moods
Sterility Enlargement of clitoris
Vaginal atrophy

As noted by Cleveland Clinic,2 many of these changes persist even if you completely stop taking testosterone. Can a child or teenager fully comprehend what sterility might mean to them later in life? I don’t think so. I also don’t think they can comprehend how other physical and emotional changes might affect them, such as going bald.

Other types of hormone therapy include puberty blockers, which are given to children who have not yet entered puberty. These drugs delay the onset of sex characteristics associated with the gender you were assigned at birth.

What’s particularly shocking is that the adults steering them toward gender reassignment don’t make it a point to thoroughly inform them about the difficulties they might face. Overall, I don’t think children and teens are capable of making the decision to transition, and encouraging or facilitating it really ought to be illegal.

Double-Mastectomies Performed at 15

While you’re considered too immature to get a full, unrestricted driver’s license until you’re 18, and can’t drink alcohol until you’re 21, “gender-affirming” sex hormone therapy can begin as early as 14,3 girls who think they’re boys can get a double-mastectomy at the age of 15, and full sex reassignment surgery is available at age 17 or 18, depending on the procedure, although the World Professional Association for Transgender Health is advocating for surgeries as early as 15.4

The Boston Children’s Hospital requires you to be 17 to undergo vaginoplasty, where a boy’s penis, testicles and scrotum are removed and a vagina is created, and 18 to undergo phalloplasty, the surgical construction of a penis, or metoidioplasty, where testosterone is used to enlarge the clitoris, from which a small penis is then constructed. Prosthetic testicles are also added in both of those cases.

Understanding Female-to-Male Reassignment Surgery

When a biological woman decides to surgically become a man, she’ll undergo phalloplasty, which involves taking large sections of skin from her forearms and/or thigh to fashion a penis. As you can see from the images included in WhatsHerFace’s video, this will leave a very large unsightly scar on one or both forearms, and while the donation site heals, there’s always a risk of infection.

Since the donation site needs to be hairless, electrolysis must first be performed. If electrolysis fails and hair grows back in the donated skin, the trans male may struggle with painful hair growth inside his urethra for the rest of his life.

Trans men who are on testosterone also face gynecological challenges, especially vaginal dryness, and vaginal atrophy, which can be very painful. Pelvic pain and bacterial vaginosis are other commonly reported issues.5,6

Understanding Male-to-Female Reassignment Surgery

During vaginoplasty, which is where a biological male surgically transitions to female, the surgeon will use skin from the patient’s scrotum to create a vaginal canal. If additional skin grafts are needed, they’ll use skin from the sides of their abdomen.

Before the skin grafts are taken, he must undergo electrolysis on the chosen donor sites. However, electrolysis does not always permanently eliminate hair growth, especially not male hair growth, which tends to be more profuse, and if the hair grows back, the trans male can end up with hair growing in his vaginal canal.

Vaginoplasties aren’t always successful, and if they must be redone, a part of the patient’s colon will typically be used instead. A downside of this procedure, called colovaginoplasty, is an offensive discharge odor.

After vaginoplasty, the patient must then dilate the vagina on a daily basis. This basically entails stretching (dilating) the vagina using a lubricated dildo to prevent it from sealing shut. Your body basically views this new opening as a wound and will do what it can to heal it. Trans women must do this several times a day for the rest of their lives.

Dreams That Nightmares Are Made Of

Dilation is one of the challenges of male-to-female sex reassignment surgery (SRS) that most people underestimate. Here’s one testimony included in WhatsHerFace’s video.

“Three months ago, I started this ‘dream’ (nightmarish hell) that is SRS … Dilating is Hell, everything is sensitive or sore, my … leg movements are, while better than before, still pretty limited. I feel constant stinging and burning sensations pretty much around the clock in my crotch area.

This is probably the most suicidal I’ve ever been since before I actually transitioned. This ‘vaginal canal’ (which is actually a f***ing open wound) has given me nothing but grievances and Jesus f*** am I tired of it.

I’ve actually been considering asking my surgeon whether or not it’s possible to just close this pseudo-vaginal canal or just get rid of it all together. I wish somebody had told me even just a third of what a hellride this was going to be. But nobody did. And now I’m stuck with this nightmare.

I’m pretty much considering just stopping dilation. ‘The canal will shrink,’ so what? Maintaining it is pretty much keeping my whole … life prisoner of this thing. While I didn’t like what I had before, at all, it still allowed me freedom … For comparison, this shit is like going from parole straight into solitary confinement.”

Sure, you might think, but that’s just recovery. Eventually, all will be well. Maybe, maybe not. Here are the words of a trans female who is still struggling three years after her vaginoplasty.

“Suicidal thoughts. Three years post-op SRS and still having discharge and pain … I had SRS in 2016, August … and I’m experiencing discharge and pain again from my neovagina after it had gone away for two years. Orgasming is very difficult these days and when I do I feel less than half of what I used to feel down there.

I am normally a very strong person who doesn’t easily give up but over the last couple of weeks I find myself crying myself asleep almost every night. Wondering why I had to get this surgery.

Since the surgery I haven’t dated anyone and everyone I have been on a date with turned me down diplomatically when I came out and discussed that I have a neovagina. I’m not saying no one should get this surgery and I’m sure there are people who have amazing results but far too often I hear that people experience complications from SRS.

I find life very draining these days. I have to clean my vagina with isobetadine to keep smell away and to keep the discharge at bay. I have to dilate once a day still. I should have thought things more carefully through. I thought SRS was a wonderful end point to a difficult journey. It opened up a whole other can of worms.

I could have just had anal sex and left my genitals alone and maybe have the testicles removed. Doing something so taxing as having the tissues inverted turned out to be such a bad idea. I wish I could just have the vagina closed up at this point. I don’t see myself ever having sex again either way. I know I should be grateful for having had a surgery of 22,000 CAD paid for by the government. But I feel lied to. I feel so stupid.”

Parents Are Removed From the Equation

Consider those words, and then consider that pro-trans ideology is now being openly taught in kindergarten through high school across the U.S. Children are being brainwashed into thinking they can choose their own gender and that it’s as easy to switch genders as it is to switch clothes. It’s not.

Yet, the horrors of SRS are being so well hidden that neither parents nor their trans children understand what’s in store, both in the short and long term. While there are cases where everything goes right and the boy or girl finally feels “complete” after SRS,7 there seem to be far more cases where they end up even more miserable.

What’s worse, some states, like Washington, are considering laws that severely infringe on parent’s rights to be involved in their child’s decision to transition. For example, as reported by ZeroHedge:8

“April 12 [2023], House lawmakers debated Senate Bill 5599,9 which creates an exemption for the state that grants it the right to not be required to notify parents of minors who have left their homes because their parents wouldn’t let them pursue gender transition medical procedures …

Republican state Rep. Chris Corry said the bill ‘erodes parental rights in the state of Washington.’ ‘Essentially what the bill would do would be if a child left a parents’ home for certain medical care and went to a shelter or host family, that shelter or host family would not be required to notify the parents of their child’s whereabouts,’ Corry said.

This is obviously a fundamental violation of parental rights and something that’s deeply concerning for parents across Washington state.’ State Rep. Peter Abbarno, a Republican, said the crux of the debate over the bill was whether the state be permitted to ‘essentially hide where the child is.’

Most parents, Corry said, would ‘go to the ends of the earth to find their child’ if they disappeared after an argument. ‘And the fact that we have a bill that may become law that would say, ‘we’re not going to tell you,’ was really just a bridge too far for us,’ Corry said.

Corry told The Epoch Times that, under the bill, a disagreement between a child and parents over the child’s desire for a medical transition constitutes ‘abuse and neglect,’ only because the parent hasn’t ‘properly affirmed what the child wants.’

Corry said there are already laws that protect children from abuse and neglect in the state that require ‘solid and compelling reasons’ why children would need to be removed from their homes. ‘What’s frustrating is even in those cases, the parents still have a right to know where their kids are after they’ve been removed,’ Corry said. ‘In this case, parents would have no idea.’”

Rapid-Onset Gender Dysphoria: A Social Contagion

According to the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, data from Western countries suggest gender dysphoria is now at 8% among children,10 compared to just a fraction of a percent among older adults.11

Kids who question their gender but aren’t good candidates for permanent transitioning may be as high as 1 in 5!12 In the U.S., research suggests 5% of 18- to 29-year-olds identify as trans, compared to 1.6% of 30- to 49-year-olds and only 0.3% of those 50 and older.13

How is this even possible? How is it that so many young people are suddenly gender confused? Social pressure appears to have a lot to do with it, and that includes pressure from adults, such as school teachers. But widespread trauma may also play a role.

According to a 2018 transgender identity study14 described in Psychology Today,15 “rapid-onset gender dysphoria” (ROGD) “appears to be a novel condition that emerges from cohort and contagion effects and novel social pressures.”

As such, its etiology and epidemiology is distinct from conventional gender dysphoria described in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). Remarkably, 80% of the teens identifying as transgender were girls identifying as boys.

Not surprisingly for those of us who understand how the internet is being used to manipulate impressionable minds, 63.5% of parents reported that shortly before their child announced they were trans, they’d noticed a marked increase in social media consumption. In particular, parents had noticed their child was following popular YouTubers who discussed their transition.

Signs of Indoctrination

Among the many surprises discovered in that study, the investigator, Dr. Lisa Littman, a behavioral scientist at Brown University, found that one of the many beliefs espoused by these trans teens was that anyone who isn’t specifically transgendered is “evil,” including gays and lesbians. As reported by Psychology Today:16

“Parents further reported being derogatorily called ‘breeders’ by their children, or being routinely harassed by children who played ‘pronoun-police.’ The observation that they no longer recognized their child’s voice came up time and again in parental reports.

In turn, the eerie similarity between the youth’s discourse and trans-positive online content was repeatedly emphasized. Youth were described as ‘sounding scripted,’ ‘reading from a script,’ ‘wooden,’ ‘like a form letter,’ ‘verbatim,’ ‘word for word,’ or ‘practically copy and paste.’”

To me, the fact that trans teens sound like carbon-copies of each other is a sign of indoctrination. A script has been unleashed, and trans activists are repeating that script with the aim of indoctrinating its audience. We saw the same thing happen during COVID. Mainstream media repeated the script of the official COVID narrative, word for word, day in and day out. Repetition — that’s how you indoctrinate people.

Now, we also have the added pressures of corporations that view the trans agenda as a cash cow (although most who have gone that route are finding out the hard way that trans is still a tiny minority of their customer base, and the rest are not willing to encourage the fomentation of a mental health problem).

Even if corporate CEOs aren’t gung-ho about the trans agenda, many are lured in that direction because they want to optimize their corporate equality index (CEI).

Is Transgenderism a Maladapted Collective Stress Response?

That said, Littman hypothesized that ROGD may be a maladaptive coping mechanism for other underlying mental health issues or trauma. In essence, it may be a form of maladapted collective stress response. Psychology Today wrote:17

“It is clear from Littman’s study that the rise of rapid-onset gender dysphoria, which seems to predominantly involve natal females, points to a complex web of social pressures, changing cultural norms, and new modes of distress and coping that warrant further investigation. For parents, educators, and clinicians alike, caution is warranted in dealing with this growing phenomenon.”

Cui Bono?

So, who benefits from this maladaptive groupthink? Primarily, that would be hospitals, doctors and surgeons conducting gender reassignment surgeries, and, of course, Big Pharma. The cost for a complete sex change costs, on average, $132,000, but can run as high as $200,000 to $300,000 by the time everything is said and done.

Dr. Robert Malone18 recently calculated it would cost $102 billion to transition the current cohort of young adults (a total of 2.58 million kids, teens, and young adults between the ages of 10 and 24) who believe they’re trans. Right now, that’s an untapped market, and it’s quite clear the health care industry is chomping at the bit to get it going.

At present, insurance companies do not have to cover the cost of sex reassignment surgery, but that could soon change, as the Affordable Care Act website is actively encouraging trans people to sue for unlawful sex discrimination.19

What’s Behind the Trans Agenda?

In closing, it’s worth noting that many of the same people who attacked circumcision and fought against body shaming are now promoting transgenderism, which seems to be dehumanizing to the point of self-mutilation.

In the video above, self-proclaimed feminist and investigative journalist Jennifer Bilek discusses the forces behind the trans movement and “gender-affirming medical care” for children.

In short, it’s a stepping stone in the transhumanist agenda. Ultimately, the goal is to get rid of flesh and blood bodies altogether and have our existence either within a synthetic body or as disembodied avatar in cyberspace, or both.

Turning humanity into misgendered people incapable of natural reproduction is merely a first step in that direction. Next comes the melding of man with machine and artificial intelligence. Over time, the flesh and blood part of humans will be reduced while the synthetic parts will increase.

They want the younger generations to get comfortable with the transhumanist idea that gender is fluid and based on how you feel, rather than what you are, as well as the idea that you shouldn’t want to reproduce, because human reproduction will be outsourced to the tech industry.

As explained by Bilek, the trans ideology promotes the idea that you can choose your gender, even though that is a biological impossibility, because that’s a steppingstone to the grander ideology that you can exist without a body altogether, in cyberspace, where you can be whomever you want.

They want the younger generations to get comfortable with the idea that gender is fluid and based on how you feel, rather than what you are, as well as the idea that you shouldn’t want to reproduce, because human reproduction will be outsourced to the tech industry.

Over the past decade, Bilek notes, the trans argument has gone from “some people are born in the wrong body,” to simply advocating for the right to augment yourself in whatever way you see fit, to add or strip yourself of whatever appendages you don’t want. According to Bilek, it’s a fetish-based cult, and seemingly rational people are buying into it, not understanding what it’s all about.

I believe the transgender movement poses a severe threat to mental, emotional and physical health, and must be counteracted by level-headed discourse. How can anyone say they’re concerned about children’s health and welfare while simultaneously promoting irreversible surgeries that will pose lifelong risks to their health and render many of them sterile?

It’s one thing to change a child’s pronouns. It’s another to cut off their breasts and penises just because they say they feel at odds with their — for now — elected gender. The very idea that a child should be allowed to decide with such lifelong implications as mutilating their sex organs is incomprehensibly negligent.

And when you consider the hidden motive behind this movement, it reinforces the anti-human, anti-humane nature of it, because children, who are our future, are being physically and psychologically sacrificed to further an ideology that seeks to destroy the human species and turn it into something it’s not.

Sources and References:

EDITORS NOTE: This MERCOLA column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

SPECIAL REPORT: Diseases Coming Across the Southern Border

America is not only being bombarded with illegals, even terrorists, pouring across the formerly more secure Southern Border, but as you will learn in this SPECIAL REPORT on ARIZONA TODAY, a myriad of diseases are also coming into America with illegals from over 160-countries. I held with nationally known medical consultant Jean Rice, RN, BS/BA who has well over 40 years experience in the medical profession, this conversation is sobering, NOT theatrical or conspiracy theory but real and alarming!

WATCH: Arizona Today – SPECIAL REPORT with Jean Rice, RN

Acute diseases now arriving with illegals and refugees: third-world types of bacteria and parasites, new forms of lice and worms. Americans have not been exposed to these types of aggressive agents. Doctors not trained to identify or treat these new diseases.

  • Tuberculosis cases are rising across America, including treatment resistant TB.
  • Costs for counties and states to treat these new illnesses are extremely high – and rising.
  • More than 17 states in horror as to what they are challenged with now; real concern with what’s to come in months ahead.
  • Unscreened refugees brought into U.S. are now being integrated into our communities: NO background checks, NO medical history recorded; NO education on sanitation and basic hygiene; NO formal medical screening conducted.
  • Public or elected officials are not informed so proper decisions and preparedness can be accomplished.
  • 1 suspected and 1 confirmed case of Leprosy reported in Riverside, CA grade school
  • 150 high school students in Manhattan, Kansas ill with unknown parasite
  • 100 cases of Chlorine resistant bacteria were discovered in city swimming pool.
  • 150 people in 2 counties in AZ contract aggressive form of measles.
  • 2 dozen cases of TB reported in Kansas City high school after students came into contact with infected student.

I need your help to keep sending forward uncensored information that is founded on facts, not theory or mere sensationalism.

Please help me distribute the attached reports and the conversation. Go to your mailing lists and distribute…now! Americans need to become awake to this on- coming and serious assault to our health. Please also consider going to my website site: and contributing by pushing the PayPal button. I have self-funded this show the past two years relying on the Lord to raise up contributors.

Thank you! Thank you most sincerely for distributing the content helping me to awake Americans.

©2023. Lyle J. Rapacki, Ph.D. All rights reserved.


Refugees and antimicrobial resistance: A systematic review

Infectious diseases

List of Chronic Human Diseases Linked to Infectious Pathogens

‘Sickening’: NIH Funds Transgender ‘Experiment’ on Mostly Minors, Leaving 2 Dead

On Tuesday, news broke that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) funded a study on mostly minors who purported to identify as transgender, in which they were given cross-sex hormones over the course of two years. Two of the study’s participants ended up committing suicide, and 11 more experienced suicidal ideation. Lawmakers and doctors are expressing outrage that taxpayer dollars were used to fund a study that caused death and irreversible harm to children.

The study, entitled “Psychosocial Functioning in Transgender Youth after 2 Years of Hormones,” was published in The New England Journal of Medicine in January and was conducted by the Boston Children’s Hospital, the University of California at San Francisco, and the Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago under a $477,444 five-year grant from NIH. It studied 315 participants aged 12-20 who identified as transgender or nonbinary, 240 of which were minors.

Each participant was given cross-sex hormones over the course of the two-year study, meaning that they were given hormones of the opposite biological sex in order to appear more like the opposite sex. Despite claiming that “appearance congruence, positive affect, and life satisfaction increased, and depression and anxiety symptoms decreased” among the participants, the study went on to acknowledge that two people died by suicide and 11 people experienced “suicidal ideation” (“a broad term used to describe a range of contemplations, wishes, and preoccupations with death and suicide”).

“It is sickening that the federal government is preying on young people and using our taxpayer dollars to advance its radical gender ideology,” Rep. Josh Brecheen (R-Okla.) told The Daily Signal. “We are rightfully demanding answers from NIH, and we are committed to holding those responsible accountable for this tragic loss of life.” Brecheen is one of 15 Republican lawmakers that signed a letter to NIH Acting Director Lawrence Tabak expressing “grave concerns” over the study.

“Despite overwhelming evidence that chemically transitioning children is not safe, the NIH plans to give more than $10.6 million to experiment on children and adolescents through 2026,” the letter states. “We are deeply concerned about your agency’s use of taxpayer dollars to advance experiments on children who will be irreversibly harmed by radical gender ideology.”

Doctors are also expressing serious concerns over the study. During Wednesday’s edition of “Washington Watch with Tony Perkins,” Dr. Quentin Van Meter, a pediatric endocrinologist and former president of the American College of Pediatricians, pointed out that the study was conducted using questionable methodology.

“It’s a very unusual study in that it’s not like other studies where you have unified criteria across the centers, a set of consent forms that’s uniform for the whole project,” he explained. “[Most studies] are governed by an institutional review board that’s independent … and they require a very strict consent form for adolescents. They have a safety committee, which is a separate entity which has no financial interest in any way with those doing the study. So it’s a very clean and solid way to stop a study and examine it when things go wrong.”

“That does not apply to this study,” Van Meter continued. “For some reason, it’s not a standard study. Nothing was standardized by it. Each center was doing just what they wanted to do and what they continue to do. And they call it an ‘observational study’ to get out from under the regular kinds of regulations which [would] have stopped this study in its tracks. The sad thing is … the two deaths are unconscionable.”

Van Meter, who also serves as an associate clinical professor of pediatrics at Morehouse School of Medicine, went on to note that a total of $5 million was originally granted for a five-year study.

“It’s perverse that they’re [publishing] this study [with] the first two years [of] data … as a study hailing success of their programs. It is an absolute sham with faulty reasoning [and] faulty representation. … I was at the Pediatric Endocrine Society meetings in San Diego just over this past weekend, and it was lauded by the interest groups as being one of the most concrete studies to show the benefits of their labor and their ideology. And clearly it doesn’t show that.”

Van Meter further detailed the health outcomes that result from giving minors cross-sex hormones.

“They will be sterilized, first of all, that’s the baseline of the horrific nature of the outcomes,” he underscored. “On top of that, there is the side effects of the medications that create disease. … We have known about [that] in medicine for as long as we’ve known about hormones and their effects going back into the early 1920s. … [T]here’s plenty of data from top to bottom to show that every one of the drugs they’re using has adverse consequences. The overall lifespan of the transgender population is half that of the U.S. population. … [T]hey’re creating medical problems that would not have otherwise existed. And these poor individuals not only are sterile, but they are sexually incompetent. They have no ability to have any real sexual function moving forward when their organs are fried by cross-sex hormones. Their brain [development is] adversely affected, and the adolescent age bone density is taken apart and they end up having frequent fractures in adulthood because of that.”

Van Meter continued, “It’s just a panoply of disease that otherwise would not have existed if the child had been counseled and walked through the process, which is the real international standard of care — to not medicalize this, but realize it’s based on mental health issues, and resolving those mental health issues essentially resolves the transgender affirmation or the transgender identification in [over] 90% of all these kids.”

The endocrinologist additionally emphasized how many European countries are “10 years ahead” of the U.S. in determining that there is “no proven benefit to mental health and likely a deterioration of mental health” due to gender transition procedures through the use of broad systemic reviews of the literature. In October, Van Meter highlighted the fact that the United Kingdom, Sweden, Finland, and France have all taken steps to restrict minors from being able to undergo irreversible gender transition procedures.

Perkins further observed that efforts like the NIH-funded study will likely be remembered with “shock and horror” decades from now, just as the Tuskegee syphilis study is today.

“You’re absolutely right,” Van Meter responded. “And hopefully it will be sooner [rather] than later that the real reality breaks forth and the world knows how evil this concept is of taking healthy children with mental health problems and throwing hormones and surgery at them to create a solution which does not work and never has worked. You know … there’s going to be maybe a million plus children around the world who have been permanently damaged. And that is the sad thing. You know, my heart says we need to do this yesterday and shut this down.”


Dan Hart

Dan Hart is senior editor at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2023 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Trump Townhall Underscores Life as a 2024 Issue

The Trump administration was, decidedly, the most pro-life in our history. During his debate with Hillary Clinton in 2016, former President Trump graphically described the brutality of the abortion procedure. A signal achievement was his appointment of three Supreme Court justices who support the Constitution as it was written, underscoring the sanctity of unborn life.

So, when President Trump’s spokesman recently said that “President Donald J. Trump believes … [abortion] is an issue that should be decided at the state level,” I was deeply concerned. That’s why, earlier this week, I joined Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, for a meeting in Florida to discuss the important topic directly with the former president.

Our sense of alarm has been growing. After last summer’s Supreme Court decision returned the power to defend life to the people, a number of Republicans heaved a sigh of relief. Many of them were glad to see the end of the fictional constitutional right to abortion, but some seemed more glad to kick the life issue back to the states than take any further action. More concerned with political consequences than protecting the unborn, their eagerness to abandon the pro-life cause was striking.

That’s not what they were saying before the Dobbs decision, which returned to them the power to defend life. Since the mid-1980s, the GOP has called for the right of the unborn to live to be recognized as the most fundamental of human rights. Overwhelmingly, Republican lawmakers have supported a human life amendment to the U.S. Constitution and called upon legislators and judges in the states to respect human personhood in the womb, where life begins. Science tells us that personhood begins in the womb. For years, Republicans at the federal level have taken a stance in defense of life, and presidential administrations have defended it. So what has changed now?

None of these proposals would prevent states from enacting pro-life legislation, whether protecting the unborn after they can feel pain, after a certain point in gestation, protecting American taxpayers from funding abortion, or anything else. I was a state legislator in Louisiana for many years and authored a number of pro-life measures. And no one is more committed to a constitutional understanding of the limits of the federal government and the broad authority of the states than me. Yet personhood in the womb is not just a state issue — it is the most profound of all human rights issues. It merits federal consideration — and protection.

During our meeting in Miami, Mr. Trump reaffirmed his commitment to protecting children who can feel pain and are actually sucking their thumb in their mother’s womb. His horror at late-term abortion and the incredible idea that some so-called “unwanted” children could be left to die after birth remains unchanged. That’s why we met with him: To encourage the former president to stay strong on the issue of the sanctity of human life. And I can report that Mr. Trump has not changed his position. He remains committed to his strong presidential track record of defending the unborn to the fullest extent of the executive branch’s authority.

During his Wednesday town hall in New Hampshire, he said of his pro-life record, “I am honored to have done what I did.” President Trump noted several times during the event that pro-abortion activists are radical. And radicals are unreasonable and never satisfied. This is why, in last November’s elections, Democrats spent at least $320 million in advertising to attack the Dobbs decision overturning Roe v. Wade. The Biden administration has authorized nearly half a billion dollars of taxpayer funds that can be used to subsidize abortions and abortion businesses. Republicans spend only a fraction of this amount celebrating unborn life.

I deeply appreciate the pro-life, pro-family policies that President Trump’s administration advanced. As we move into the 2024 presidential election cycle, my role will not be to endorse in the primary election but to work with the candidates, like President Trump, to ensure the issues impacting faith, family, and freedom are understood and advanced. My focus will be ensuring that the sanctity of human life, upholding the true, God-given purpose of human sexuality, and the myriad policies that affect the family — ranging from religious freedom to tax policy — remain front and center.

It is encouraging to see that Mr. Trump remains committed to defending the little ones in the womb. But how much more heartening it is to know the God Who gives us the privilege of protecting them and their mother from the abortion industry. That’s a high calling, and we’ll never retreat from it.


Tony Perkins

Tony Perkins is president of Family Research Council and executive editor of The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2023 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Pro-Life Leaders Meet with Trump to Reinforce Federal Strategy

Family Research Council President Tony Perkins has shared the details about his meeting with former President Donald Trump amid media reports the Republican front-runner had backed away from the pro-life issue ahead of the 2024 presidential election.

Last month, a Trump campaign spokesman told The Washington Post that Trump believes abortion “should be decided at the state level,” touching off media speculation that the candidate would take no federal action to protect life during a second term. Perkins met the 45th president alongside Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and SBA Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser on Monday afternoon.

“The purpose of the meeting was simply to encourage the president to stay strong on the issue of the sanctity of human life. And I can report that the former president, Donald Trump, has not changed his position,” Perkins told listeners of “Washington Watch” on Tuesday.

“There was some mischaracterizations of some things that he had said,” Perkins added.

The four leaders found common ground talking about the Republican Party platform, which Perkins has helped craft for the last four election cycles.

“We support state and federal efforts against the cruelest forms of abortion,” says the most recent Republican Party platform (emphasis added). The GOP’s guiding document also calls on Congress to pass a plethora of pro-life legislation ending abortions based on a child’s sex or disability diagnosis, as well as dismemberment abortions, and to adopt a Human Life Amendment to the U.S. Constitution “to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to children before birth.”

The Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision does not preclude abortion-related legislation at the federal level. “It’s a states issue, but it’s also a federal issue,” Perkins explained. “The court said this is in the hands of elected officials, not judges.”

“I talked about that with him. And I said, ‘Look, that’s the standard. It was there before Roe was overturned. Why should it change?’” said Perkins. “When a baby feels pain and is sucking his thumb in his mother’s womb, that ought to be a place we can draw the line. We’ve got 67% of Americans who agree that abortion across the board should be outlawed after that.”

“I’m pleased to say that the president understood that,” Perkins told his audience.

Trump remains the front-runner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, holding a commanding a 29-point lead over his nearest challenger, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis (R), according to the RealClear Politics average of national polls.

Perkins also noted that Trump was not the only — or even the first — presidential hopeful he had briefed on pro-life, pro-family issues.

“I’ve sat down with a couple of them already. This will be my third” candidate consultation meeting, Perkins revealed. “I will meet with any presidential candidate to have a discussion about the issues, and where they should be on these issues to connect with what we call SAGE Cons,” a term coined by pollster George Barna meaning Spiritually Active Governance Engaged Conservatives.

Perkins, a former elected official, made clear meeting with Trump did not constitute an endorsement in the 2024 presidential race. “I will not be endorsing a presidential candidate in the primary. I will be sitting down, talking with any and all” candidates who “want to talk about the issues that matter,” he said, specifying the sanctity of human life, human sexuality, tax policy that impacts the family, and religious freedom — “anything that touches the family.”

Democrats eked out a better-than-expected midterm election in 2022 in part by flooding the zone with abortion-related messaging portraying Republicans as extreme — largely without GOP pushback. That makes it pivotal for would-be office holders to grasp the issue thoroughly, said FRC Action Vice President Brent Keilen. “We have to remember that the science hasn’t change. And so the policies that the Republican Party has stood for over the last decades that were based and are based off of the science, should not change, either.”

While some in the GOP have advocated a states-only response to abortion, Democratic leaders have already tried to impose their permissive views on the entire nation. “Republicans are pushing for this to go back to the states,” said Keilen. “That is not at all what the Democrats are pushing for.”

The House of Representatives, then controlled by Democrats, passed the “Women’s Health Protection Act” by a near party-line vote last July. The bill would strike down most of the 1,381 pro-life protections enacted by state legislatures between 1973 and the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision, including:

  • prohibiting sex-selective abortions;
  • barring many abortions after viability;
  • preventing abortions on babies 20 weeks or older, who are capable of feeling pain;
  • disallowing abortions undertaken without parental consent or notification;
  • prohibiting telemedicine abortion drug prescriptions, which involve no in-person medical examination;
  • banning unlicensed individuals from carrying out abortions;
  • allowing pregnant mothers to receive scientifically accurate information about their babies’ development, or to see an ultrasound or hear the child’s fetal heartbeat; and
  • allowing pro-life medical professionals the right to refuse to participate in an abortion.

The Democratic Party platform calls for taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand without restriction until the moment of birth as a matter of “health, rights, and justice.” Adopting that position has forced the U.S. to join a handful of rogue human rights abusers that place no federal limit on abortion, including North Korea and China. President Trump, who famously campaigned to “Make America Great Again,” “believes such a position is unworthy of a great nation and believes the American people will rebel against such a radical position,” Dannenfelser said.

“That is the standard position of the Democrat Party that is only supported by about one in five Americans, so you have 80% of the country, according to recent polling, that opposes” Democratic orthodoxy, said Keilen. Only 19% of Americans believe abortion should be permitted “in all cases, with no exceptions,” according to a 2022 Pew Research Center poll. “That doesn’t even get into the Born-alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, which we have not been able to get passed, which would afford those protections to a baby who survives a failed abortion,” Keilen added.

“If you message on this well, the vast majority of Americans are with you on this issue,” said Keilen.

Eyeing a massive wedge issue, GOP leaders have encouraged Republican candidates to attack Democratic extremism. “We are the pro-life, pro-woman, pro-family party, and we can win on abortion. But that means putting Democrats on the defense,” said Republican National Committee Chair Ronna McDaniel after the initial Trump brouhaha.

Days later, Trump attacked “the extreme late-term abortionists in the Democrat Party, who believe in abortion-on-demand in the ninth month of pregnancy, and even executing babies after birth.” That rhetoric echoes Trump’s successful strategy in the 2016 presidential campaign. During the third and final debate on October 19, Trump said under Hillary Clinton’s policy, “you can take the baby out of the womb in the ninth month on the final day, and that’s not acceptable.”

That off-the-cuff remark became a revelation to pro-life leaders. “At that moment, I said, ‘He’s going to win this. He is going to secure the votes of pro-life voters.’ And he did,” said Perkins. “What’s more than that is: He actually followed through. … His policies were unprecedented when it came to advancing human life.” Trump named three of the six justices who voted to overturn Roe v. Wade last June, supported the Hyde Amendment, and signed numerous measures partially defunding abortion businesses such as Planned Parenthood.

After the latest media flare-up, Trump signaled his openness to signing the “Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act,” introduced by Graham, which protects babies from abortion after 15 weeks. “We’ll get something done” in a second term, Trump promised.

“Going forward, I think he’s going to be very clear on this. That’s my hope. That’s what I believe to be the case,” Perkins said.

“And we will not back up from this issue one bit,” Perkins assured his listeners. Effective promotion of pro-life protections, at any level of government, “will be the benchmark of how we evaluate conservative Bible-based candidates for office.”


Ben Johnson

Ben Johnson is senior reporter and editor at The Washington Stand.


Donald Trump: Supreme Court Overturning Roe v. Wade Was a “Great Victory”

Gov. Ron DeSantis Signs Bill Protecting Doctors, Nurses From Being Forced to Do Abortions

Documents Show Biden Admin Considers Pro-Life Moms Potential Domestic Terrorists

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. ©2023 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Public Health Tyrants Need to Be Quarantined

I’m going to keep pounding away at the fact our public health authorities were wrong about everything regarding COVID.  I’m doing so because they assumed an awful lot of power over our lives and ultimately proved to be destructive.  This should never be allowed to happen again.

They were wrong about masks.  A review of 78 studies shows there is no evidence masks are effective in a pandemic.  There is also no evidence removal of mask mandates caused COVID deaths to go up.  In fact, in Kansas, counties with a mask mandate experienced significantly higher case fatality rates than counties that did not.  So, masks not only did not help, they hurt.  But what did the public health industrial complex do?  Suppress the truth, that’s what.

Public health authorities were wrong about the lab leak theory.  It remains a perfectly good theory, now found credible by the Energy Department and the FBI.  But what did Fauci do?   Government records show he dismissed the lab leak hypothesis as a “conspiracy theory”, gave government grants to proponents of the theory to shut them up, and commissioned a report to publicly discredit the theory.  Fauci rules?  I don’t think so.  CNN and Facebook helped Fauci cover up the truth.

Public health officials were wrong about ivermectin.  The aggregate of studies continues to weigh in favor of ivermectin’s efficacy in COVID cases on mortality and lesser questions.  But public officials deliberately trashed ivermectin – calling it just a ‘horse de-wormer’ – and conspired to keep it from being prescribed.  A group of doctors is now suing to hold officials at the FDA and HHS accountable for their actions.  I hope all the hospitals that threw doctors out for prescribing or advocating for the use of ivermectin get sued, too.

The public health industrial complex was also wrong about the impact of COVID on kids, falsely claiming it was a leading cause of death among young people.  Accidents, drug overdoses, and drownings were far more prevalent.  The truth is only one out of a 100,000 kids and teens died from COVID.  The numbers were never high enough to justify school lockdowns and the self-inflicted ravages of learning loss from closing school doors are now common knowledge.

Public health authorities were also wrong about natural immunity, falsely claiming COVID vaccine immunity was better, as late as in March in congressional testimony.  Fauci is in this story, too, meeting in secret with other U.S. health officials, to get their story straight about how natural immunity was no good despite the scientific evidence showing it was.  Their effort was ultimately futile, though, because evidence keeps piling up that natural immunity is better.

Evidence is also piling up the vaccines were not very effective.  A recent study shows the immune system gets tired and doesn’t produce much of a response after a third dose.  Another study shows the effect of bivalent boosters wears off after two months.  These studies are in addition to the pile of other studies I mentioned in previous commentaries casting doubt on COVID vaccine efficacy.

So many lies, so many cover-ups.  We deserve better from our government officials and politicians.  They’re supposed to be working for us, not lording over us.  I, for one, will never trust them again.  But the Moral of the Story is we need to put up more of a fight when public health authorities and politicians try to steal our liberty for no good reason.  One of the very first things I read about pandemic legal theory is that public health authorities have to make their case in court before taking emergency measures.  That never happened.  They were never put to their proof under oath and cross-examination.  Let’s make sure a full examination of their argument happens the next time these political animals go off the rails.

©2023 Christopher Wright. All rights reserved.

Visit The Daily Skirmish and Watch Eagle Headline News – 7:30am ET Weekdays

RELATED VIDEO: Katherine Watt: In Her Own Words

‘Death with Dignity’ — Ha!

The Left loves its phony narratives and I’ve taken aim at several of them.  Today I take aim at ‘death with dignity’, the phony narrative the Left uses to sell assisted suicide and euthanasia.

I start with the spectacular story out of the Netherlands in 2019 where a court upheld the actions of a doctor who euthanized a woman with dementia against her wishes.  The doctor put sedatives in the woman’s coffee and had the family hold her down for the lethal injection.  The woman put up a fight.  Doesn’t sound like a very dignified death to me.

And it wasn’t very dignified what happened to the brother of a friend of mine.  The brother had his third stroke and was sedated.  His wife violated his written instructions by stopping all treatment and withdrawing all food and water.  The wife was heard to say she was tired of dealing with the situation and it’s also true the sooner he died, the more she stood to inherit.   A financial motive – how dignified is that?

To these two ugly stories, we can now add a third.  A palliative care nurse recently published the story you are about to hear so “eyes will be opened to the horrifying reality of euthanasia”:

  • They say euthanasia is a compassionate, dignified way to die. They say everyone should have the option, and that a life with suffering is not a life worth living. But that’s not what I’ve seen. I know Medical Aid in Dying (MAID) to be messier and more distressing than anyone cares to talk about.
  • Laura had picked out music to play in the background while she died, and had chosen which loved ones she wanted by her side. It was planned for 6 pm. She was alert and oriented, and had signed a waiver saying that if for whatever reason she was no longer judged to be of sound mind at the time of the MAID provision, she could be euthanized anyways. She thought she had complete control. Just a few hours before 6 pm Laura had a completely unexpected grand mal seizure. She wouldn’t stop seizing and required large doses of a sedating anticonvulsant. The time of the provision came, and she was confused and groggy from the sedating medication, and unable to properly confirm she wanted the euthanasia, or say goodbye to her family members. She tried to speak but no one could understand what she was saying. Laura was euthanized at 6 pm, according to the waiver she had signed. This was what she had requested, but the family came out of her room shaking, with eyes wide. They cried, and kept saying it should have never happened that way. They had no closure. There was no dignified, peaceful ending. Just their loved one, killed in the middle of trying to say something…. (H)er death was sudden, and traumatic, and the family went home right after without anyone to support them through the process…. (A) coworker sped out of the room shaking and crying,
  • I know multiple other nurses who have been through the same experience. Although they had no religious or moral objections to MAID, after witnessing it first hand they swore to never be in the room again while it happened. They were deeply unsettled, and their conscience told them what they couldn’t admit to themselves: the intentional ending of a life is wrong, no matter the circumstances.
  • Patients may think that choosing MAID relieves their family of the burden of waiting for their death, or seeing suffering. But in reality it steals time and closure, and replaces a natural process with an unsettling ending. From what I have seen, loved ones of euthanized patients appear to struggle more in their grief than loved ones of patients who die naturally.

Welcome to the wacky world of the Left, where ‘death with dignity’ means people being killed against their wishes, for unsavory motives like money.  Where the vendors selling assisted suicide are not killers.  Where the real cause of death – assisted suicide – is kept off death certificates.  Where death is considered ‘medical treatment‘ and medicine means a ‘substance to cause death’.   Where doctors push assisted suicide on vulnerable patients, elder abuse is common, agonizing deaths routinely occur from lethal drugs that don’t work as advertised, destructive social contagion takes over, and people are taught all of this is good when it could not be more evil.

If this is ‘death with dignity’, you can keep it.

©2023 Christopher Wright. All rights reserved.

Visit The Daily Skirmish and Watch Eagle Headline News – 7:30am ET Weekdays

Trans Procedure Bills Signal Growing Consensus around Protecting Children

On April 28, Montana Governor Greg Gianforte (R) signed into law SB 99, a bill that prohibits puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and genital-mutilating surgeries for minors. A similar bill was sent to the governor’s desk in Oklahoma on April 27. Both pieces of legislation passed their respective state legislatures by a wide margin, signaling the broad public support that these types of laws are receiving despite intense pressure from left-wing activists to torpedo the bills.

In Montana, in spite of the use of highly dramatic language by a transgender identifying representative that earned him a censure, and despite the necessity for police to arrest several protestors and clear the state capitol in riot gear, the state House and Senate easily sent the measure to the governor’s desk by votes of 65-33 and 31-17, respectively. In Oklahoma, where a group of around 150 pro-trans protestors descended on the state capitol in early February to denounce an early version of the bill, the state senate easily passed SB 613 last Thursday by a vote of 38-8. The bill now goes to Governor Kevin Stitt’s (R) desk, who is expected to sign it.

The large margin by which both measures passed appears to be a reflection of widespread societal consensus that minors are not capable of adequately considering the ramifications of life-altering hormonal and surgical procedures that are often irreversible. Recent polling on this issue shows that nearly 80% of Americans agree that children should not be allowed to undergo transgender procedures.

Montana and Oklahoma will join 13 other states that have passed similar legislation that gives minors some level of protection from gender transition procedures in the last two years. They include Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Mississippi, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, and West Virginia.

The growing cultural agreement on the issue is reaching unexpected quarters. On Sunday, Paul Stanley, a member of the rock group KISS, tweeted in part: “There is a BIG difference between teaching acceptance and normalizing and even encouraging participation in a lifestyle that confuses young children into questioning their sexual identification as though [it’s] some sort of game and then parents in some case allow it. … With many children who have no real sense of sexuality or sexual experiences caught up in the ‘fun’ of using pronouns and saying what they identify as, some adults mistakenly confuse teaching acceptance with normalizing and encouraging a situation that has been a struggle for those truly affected and have turned it into a sad and dangerous fad.”

In addition, Bill Maher, a liberal comedian and host of HBO’s “Real Time,” has also recently expressed misgivings about the growing trend among minors to identify as the opposite sex, pointing to “social contagion” as a phenomenon that proves that transgender identities do not develop as organically as activists say they do: “[I]t is also somewhat trendy — I know people hate to hear that, but it’s obviously true — there is an element of social contagion, or else it wouldn’t be so prevalent in here [California] and not in Indiana, it wouldn’t be regional.”

Dr. Jennifer Bauwens, director of the Center for Family Studies at Family Research Council, was encouraged by the wide margins with which the Montana and Oklahoma bills passed, along with other cultural indicators of a growing accord on the issue.

“Common sense is prevailing in the midst of a media narrative that is saying the opposite of what most people can readily see,” she told The Washington Stand. “They don’t need scientific studies that have been distorted for the purposes of the medical and research elite. It’s very encouraging to see. When people are actually exposed to what’s happening, they come out in force and reject such atrocities happening to children.”

Bauwens, a clinical psychologist who has provided trauma-focused treatment to children, went on to point out the lack of evidence-based proof in the transgender activists’ arguments in favor of transgender procedures for minors.

“I think it’s interesting that the arguments from the other side are basically coming down to attacking those who are bringing out the common sense but also bringing out the research and showing how bad it is,” she noted. “And those who are practitioners of some sort, whether they’re doctors or mental health professionals, are coming out and saying, ‘This isn’t okay.’ So, the proponents are basically bringing personal attacks because they have no other argument. Because if you have great science, then why not argue from that standpoint? But instead, all they can do is say the same thing over and over again, which is, ‘If they’re not given this surgery, they’re going to commit suicide’ or ‘This is lifesaving care’ or ‘You have blood on your hands’ — all of these poor arguments and personal attacks.”

Bauwens concluded by providing an analogy between gender transition procedures and plastic surgery.

“There [are] permissions for someone to get plastic surgery before 18,” she explained. “There are safeguards about how someone is treated after surgery, and preparing them for that, and possible depression and disappointment that might come because that plastic surgery didn’t achieve the results they hoped it would. But we don’t have that over these transgender procedures. Where is the advocacy for people who have body dysmorphia — those who have a fixation about a finger that bothers them and they want to get surgery and remove that finger? Where are the advocates that say we should pay for all fingers to be removed? It just tells you how much this is not about science. They’ve made it a civil rights issue. They’re not even looking at the effects that [gender transition procedures] have. To them, it’s an identity, and they classify it on par with race.”


Dan Hart

Dan Hart is senior editor at The Washington Stand.


Fathers and Sexual Identity

KISS Superstar Paul Stanley Calls Child Mutilation ‘A Sad and Dangerous Fad’

‘Banning Books’ or Protecting Kids from Sexually Explicit Material?

Openly Gay Professor Indicted for Alleged Heinous Acts Against Children

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2023 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

2023 Dirty Dozen List REVEALED! Please Take Action!

What is the Dirty Dozen List?

The Dirty Dozen List is an annual campaign calling out twelve mainstream entities for facilitating, enabling, and even profiting from sexual abuse and exploitation. Since its inception in 2013, the Dirty Dozen List has galvanized thousands of individuals like YOU to call on corporations, government agencies, and organizations to change problematic policies and practices. This campaign has yielded major victories at Google, Netflix, TikTok, Hilton Worldwide, Verizon, Walmart, US Department of Defense, and many more.


Apple App Store

Deceptive to the core: Apple App Store age ratings and descriptions mislead parents about the content, risks, and dangers to children on available apps. When caregivers aren’t informed, kids pay the price. Appeal to Apple to #fixappratings



Discord is a Haven for Sexual Exploiters: This messaging platform is popular with predators who want to groom children and find and trade child sexual abuse materials, as well as adult image-based sexual abuse. Demand Discord step up and stop the exploitation



“Whatever it is, you can get it on eBay.” Unfortunately, that includes childlike sex abuse dolls and spycams advertised specifically for filming women without their consent. Encourage eBay to act ethically!



Instagram’s slogan is “Capture and Share the World’s Moments” – for countless children and adults that includes their worst moments. Grooming, child sexual abuse materials, sex trafficking, and many other harms continue to fester on Instagram.



Kik’s Crawling with Criminals. The anonymous messaging app is a “predator’s paradise” for grooming kids and sharing images of their abuse, in addition to hardcore porn and prostitution ads. Kik needs to be called to account for harm against kids!


Microsoft’s Github

GitHub is the go-to place to create sexually exploitative technology. Deepfakes, “nudify” apps, and AI-generated pornography originate on this collaboration platform for software development. Microsoft’s GitHub must get rid of image-based sexual abuse.



OnlyFans: Empowerment or Exploitation? OnlyFans promotes itself as giving porn performers power, but in reality it empowers sex traffickers, child exploiters, and “revenge porn” posters. Learn more and take action.



It takes less than 5 seconds to find sexual exploitation on Reddit. This “front page of the Internet” is a hub of child sexual abuse materials, sex trafficking, and image-based sexual abuse. Reddit must rid its platform of sexual violence.



Roblox isn’t all fun and games. Among the blocks and buildings, kids may be exposed to predators and inappropriate content. Request Roblox to keep its “imagination platform” free of sexploitation.



Snapchat Is Dangerous By Design – Year after year, Snapchat is named a top spot for sextortion, sexual interactions between minors and adults, and pornography exposure. No more excuses! Tell Snap to end its apathy and fix safety measures now.



Porn is too easy to spot on Spotify – and the parental controls are tone deaf. Insist this popular streaming platform fix its filters to remove sexually explicit images and prevent predators from accessing kids.



“Twitter was asked to take [child sexual abuse material] down and Twitter said ‘we’ve looked at it and we’re not taking it down.’” – Judge at the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.


RELATED ARTICLE: Discord Responds to Being Put on the Dirty Dozen List

EDITORS NOTE: This NCOSE 2023 report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

ABC Censors RFK, Jr.

ABC heavily edited its interview with Democrat presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Thursday because it didn’t like what he said about vaccines. In doing this, ABC demonstrated that it thinks the people who are unfortunate enough to watch the network are too stupid to think for themselves or evaluate truth claims on their own. It also showed that it thinks Leftist “news” outlets properly have the authority to determine what the American people see and hear and what they do not. The Left is growing increasingly censorious and authoritarian; RFK Jr. is a lone voice on the Left standing against this trend, and so it’s no surprise that he would fall victim to it along with an increasing number of patriots.

ABC’s Linsey Davis poisoned the well from the start, introducing Kennedy as “one of the biggest voices pushing anti-vaccine rhetoric, regularly distributing misinformation and disinformation about vaccines, which scientific and medical experts overwhelmingly say are safe and effective based on rigorous scientific studies.” Then ABC cut Kennedy’s own words about the vaccines, not allowing him to make his case. The network did, however, did show a part of the interview where Kennedy was discussing opposition among his own family to his views on vaccines.

Davis was upfront about the network’s censorship of the video, explaining:

We should note that during our conversation, Kennedy made false claims about the COVID-19 vaccines. Data shows that the Covid-19 vaccine has prevented millions of hospitalizations and deaths from the disease. He also made misleading claims about the relationship between vaccination and autism. Research shows that vaccines and the ingredients used in the vaccines do not cause autism, including multiple studies involving more than a million children and major medical associations like the American Academy of Pediatrics and the advocacy group Autism Speaks.

Davis also said: “We’ve used our editorial judgment in not including extended portions of that exchange in our interview.” Yet Davis’ own claims were unproven. Kennedy’s own website, The Defender, features an April 14 article with the headline: “45 Times as Many Deaths After COVID Shots in Just 2 Years Compared With All Flu Vaccine-Related Deaths Since 1990, Data Show.” The subtitle: “The authors of a peer-reviewed meta-analysis of national and international COVID-19 vaccine adverse events during the first two years of the rollout said their findings highlight the importance of reevaluating public health policies that promote universal mass injection and multiple boosters for all demographic groups.” Did Davis offer any specific refutation of these claims? Of course not. ABC just did its best to ensure that the public didn’t hear about them at all.

In the portion of the interview that aired, according to a report in the Daily Caller Friday, Davis challenged Kennedy “over his claims that there is a correlation between vaccinations and autism.” Davis asserted that what Kennedy was saying had been “debunked.” Kennedy asked: “Wait a minute, who debunked it?” Davis replied: “We have not seen any kind of scientific connections from the CDC, the World Health Organization…” Kennedy said: “They’re captured agencies.” Indeed. They reflect the establishment line rather than letting the truth lead them where it may. For her part, Davis doesn’t seem to have bothered to refute that, either. Censorship is so much easier.

Kennedy charged that what ABC did was actually illegal:

47 USC 315 makes it illegal for TV networks to censor Presidential candidates but Thursday, ABC showed its contempt for the law, democracy, and its audience by cutting most of the content of my interview with host Linsey Davis leaving only cherry-picked snippets and a defamatory disclaimer. Offering no evidence, @ABC justified this act of censorship by falsely asserting that I made “false claims.” In truth, Davis engaged me in a lively, informative, and mutually respectful debate on the government’s Covid countermeasures. I’m happy to supply citations to support every statement I made during that exchange. I’m certain that ABC’s decision to censor came as a shock to Linsey as well. Instead of journalism, the public saw a hatchet job. Instead of information, they got defamation and unsheathed Pharma propaganda. Americans deserve to hear the full interview so they can make up their own minds. How can democracy function without a free and unbiased press? As President, I will free FCC from its corporate captors and force the agency to follow the law by revoking the licenses of networks that put the mercantile ambitions of advertisers ahead of the public interest. #Kennedy24

RFK’s confidence that Linsey Davis was herself shocked by the censorship was a trifle naïve. Censorship is the hallmark of the contemporary Left. But he is standing against it: “I don’t believe that we should be the party of war. I don’t believe that we should be the party of Wall Street. I don’t believe that we should let neocons dictate our foreign policy and I don’t believe in censorship, for starters.”

Sounds great. But will the Leftist media establishment let the American people hear him saying it?


RELATED ARTICLE: RFK Jr.: “Mega-Billionaires” are Using Climate Change to Usher in Totalitarian Controls of Population


EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.