OPINION:
A version of this story appeared in the Higher Ground newsletter from The Washington Times. Click here to receive Higher Ground delivered directly to your inbox each Sunday.
“Evil.”
That’s how Sen. Tim Scott, South Carolina Republican, astutely labeled a California bill that would punish parents who decline to “affirm” their children’s transgender identities.
Mr. Scott, currently traversing America as he seeks the Republican presidential nomination amid a crowded field, delivered the bold descriptor when asked about Assembly Bill 957, a bill recently passed by the California legislature.
AB 957, also known as the “Transgender, Gender-Diverse, and Intersex Youth Empowerment Act,” would force judges in custody hearings to consider, among other factors, whether parents are accepting of their kids’ gender identities.
“In making a determination of the best interests of the child in a proceeding described in Section 3021, the court shall, among any other factors it finds relevant and consistent with Section 3020, consider all of the following: The health, safety and welfare of the child,” the amended bill text reads in part. “As used in this paragraph, the health, safety and welfare of the child includes a parent’s affirmation of the child’s gender identity.”
The fear, of course, is that the measure — if signed as expected by liberal Gov. Gavin Newsom — would place Christian and religious parents in peril, considering the continued degradation and cultural dismissal of traditional and biblical views on gender and sexuality.
And that fear feels almost certain to become reality, with California increasingly plunging itself further into an abysmal mix of toxic insanity and downright dangerous policy-making.
It’s the sort of recipe that yields a toxic cocktail for ignorantly endangering kids and families while also targeting religious sensibilities and liberties. Thus, Mr. Scott’s decision to label it “evil,” an “absurdity” and “un-American” seems pretty succinct.
Of course, fact-checkers are tripping over themselves to emphasize the bill neither tells judges how to rule nor directly takes children away from parents who aren’t affirming.
But anyone paying attention to all we’ve seen unfold recently can logically and easily see where this is all headed: Parental rights are on the chopping block, as California presumably seeks to solidify its standing as a transgender “sanctuary” state.
As The Washington Times’ Valerie Richardson noted in her coverage this summer, “Even though the bill only applies to custody disputes, critics predicted it would be leveraged to redefine child abuse to include parents who oppose their children’s efforts at gender transition.”
All of this has politicians and advocates understandably concerned.
“The radical Left is on a mission to make parents less important. They think your kids belong to them,” Mr. Scott told Fox News. “I will fight back, put parents back in charge, and protect the next generation of children from this absurdity.”
On the surface, the GOP hopeful’s comments might seem wild, bombastic, or a desperate attempt at gaining votes, though the facts on the ground give credence to his claims.
Fact-checkers and proponents of the legislation are free to dance around the issue all day long. Still, California keeps sliding down a slippery slope, eroding parental rights during the swift descent.
Consider what’s happening in the Chino Valley Unified School District. After the school board recently adopted a policy mandating parents be told if their children seek to change their gender identities in school, the state labeled it a “forced outing policy.”
In fact, California Attorney General Rob Bonta is suing Chino Valley Unified School District, claiming that notifying parents about their kids’ gender happenings would wrongfully endanger the “physical, mental and emotional well-being of non-conforming students who lack an accepting environment in the classroom and at home.”
It’s certainly important to protect children, but this sort of framing makes it seem as though parents are the force from which kids need safeguarding, placing schools, teachers and, by proxy, the government itself in the position of shield and “protector.”
The idea that mothers and fathers don’t deserve the right to know everything about their children’s mental, physical and social well-being isn’t only downright insane, but it’s also dangerous and, as Mr. Scott said, absolutely evil.
It’s the sort of wedge that can destroy and harm families, the very bedrock of our society.
AB 957 and its implications were so shocking to Republican state Sen. Scott Wilk that the veteran politician issued an eyebrow-raising warning to parents while discussing the measure this summer.
“In the past when we’ve had these discussions and I’ve seen parental rights atrophy, I’ve encouraged people to keep fighting,” Mr. Wilk said. “I’ve changed my mind on that. If you love your children, you need to flee California. You need to flee.”
That’s a bold statement for a leader who, himself, plans to eventually leave the very state he has long served.
AB 957 is indeed limited in its scope, and we don’t know how the implementation will go, but if history and recent events are any guide, parents might want to heed Mr. Wilk’s advice or, at the least, find ways to keep fighting for their children.
They’re your kids, not the government’s — and finding peaceful, persuasive ways to ensure politicians respect that reality is of the utmost importance.
• Billy Hallowell is a digital TV host and interviewer for Faithwire and CBN News and the co-host of CBN’s “Quick Start Podcast.” He is the author of four books.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.