On Friday, May 13, 2016, President Barack Hussein Obama, a former frequenter of Chicago’s gay bath houses, decreed that America’s K-12 public schools must accommodate the miniscule number of students who self-identify as “transgender” by allowing them to use the bathrooms and locker rooms of their sexual identification rather than that of their biological sex. This, as pointed out by Breitbart News, disenfranchises almost 55 million American children in 100,000 K-12 public schools with regard to their privacy and safety.
Bear in mind that we are not discussing those individuals once referenced as “transsexuals,” those who are undergoing or have undergone gender reassignment surgical procedures due to genuine physical, mental, and emotional issues or anomalies. In the case of recent controversies relating to public rest room laws and the “transgender students” referenced by the Obama administration, we are discussing people who have made a choice to identify as the opposite gender, or to simply represent (appear) as such.
In the case of adult “transgenderites,” there has been a great deal of public concern apropos allowing these individuals access to public accommodations designated for the opposite sex, as this opens the door to abuses by a wide array of sexual deviants and criminal sex offenders.
These concerns hold no significance to those on the left of course, for whom societal dysfunction, chaos, crime, and confusion are a stock in trade. Their counterfeit concern for “transgendered children” is not only illogical due to the miniscule number of these youth; it is simply a device by which dysfunction, chaos, crime, and confusion may be fomented, and by which accusations of bigotry amongst those who oppose advancement of the agenda may be opportunistically levied.
For the record: The individuals for whom the left and the Obama administration are currently advocating are not “transgendered children.” They are children who are mentally and/or emotionally disturbed, quite probably as a direct consequence of the pernicious social changes brought on by liberal-socialists over the last several decades.
Even more offensive than Bath House Barry’s edict was the comparison made by his communist affirmative action attorney general Loretta Lynch this week, when she drew a legal and moral parallel between a North Carolina law (currently under attack by the administration and the full force of the left) which prohibits cross-dressers from using the public bathrooms of their fancy, and the past injustices of segregation in America.
“This is not the first time that we have seen discriminatory responses to historic moments of progress for our nation. We saw it in the Jim Crow laws that followed the Emancipation Proclamation; we saw it in the fierce and widespread resistance to Brown v. Board of Education…”
- Attorney General Loretta Lynch, May 9, 2016
I find it monumentally sickmaking that our war criminal sexual deviant saboteur usurper president can blithely utter such decrees, and that his attorney general can draw such erroneous and disgusting comparisons with impunity, yet Americans are unable to articulate what such vermin truly deserve without eliciting a visit from the Secret Service (at the very least).
As I have written before on numerous occasions, such audacious and unconstitutional actions, and inaction on the part of the administration’s supposed opponents (the Republican leadership) are precisely why so many voters have gravitated to Donald Trump, a presidential candidate who some perceive to be everything from feckless to potentially tyrannical. While Trump himself is a social liberal in many aspects, he has articulated opinions which would translate into policies inclined toward preserving individual liberties (Case in point: Trump has said that the question of transgendered individuals’ access to public facilities should be left to the states).
The recent push by the political left to legitimize the choices of a handful of deviants (adult “transgenderites”) and “transgendered children,” in addition to holding little significance in the face of issues facing our nation that actually carry weight and depth, is nothing more than part of the international socialist agenda to disenfranchise those who hold traditional values (primarily Christians), and to create a society that is focused upon its basest aspects (i.e., sex, sensualism, personal aggrandizement, etc.) rather than positive, creative social development.
Populations so focused are of course much easier to control than morally-grounded ones, and that is truly the name of this game.