Election 2018: Rust Belt vs Transgender Crap. This Should Get Interesting...

[Silhouette]

Won't this be a non-issue in less than a year?

Yes, idiot. If the court finds that parents have to urge children to drug themselves for planned butchery all to enable mental delusions, or THEY LOSE CUSTODY... that LEGAL PRECEDENT will be a "non issue in less than a year"...

You understand how case law and legal precedent works, right?

 

[Silhouette]

Wonder how the Rust Belt is digesting this news for election 2018? Religious parents lose custody of transgender teen for refusing hormone treatment

A Hamilton County, Ohio, judge took a transgender teen away from her parents on Friday because they refused to allow the 17-year-old to undergo hormone treatments as part of a female-to-male transition.

Remember, the hormones these "doctors" are attempting to prescribe to this poor little brainwashed sex-cult guinea pig are not FDA approved for that use. On top of that, they are known to permanently sterilize, stunt normal growth and cause cancer. So to be clear, a court just set legal precedent to remove children from homes where the parents refuse to consent to the institutionalized cult-abuse of their child.

Transgender hormone blockers are ‘institutionalized child abuse’: pediatrician

— A nationally recognized pediatrician offered a jolting reality check about the dangers of encouraging children to think they are transgender and prescribing hormone blockers to prevent them from developing.....The pediatrician characterized the transgenderization of youth as “large-scale child abuse.

Oh, it's ON now...

 

[Silhouette]

To date, 100% of responders say they would not vote for democrats because of this case. And the cement life-preserver slips around the neck of the DNC again in 2018, courtesy of their parasite, the cult of LGBT.

 

[Silhouette]

Oh, lookie here. The judge wants more LGBT cult "rights" to take away kids if the parents don't enable their serious mental delusions and desires to permanently mutilate their bodies (at such a young age where bad judgment is endemic in their demographic and hence the need for guardians, in irony)

Ohio parents lose custody for not allowing daughter’s transgender hormone therapy

An Ohio couple lost legal custody of their daughter Friday after refusing to allow her to undergo hormone replacement therapy in order to transition to a male.

Hamilton County Judge Sylvia Sieve Hendon awarded legal custody to the 17-year-old teen’s maternal grandparents, who support the hormone treatment. The judge also called on legislators to enact laws giving transgender minors more legal rights in these situations.

I call on the judge to have the bailiff arrest herself for participation in conspiracy to commit child endangerment and kidnapping. I think I know what witness to call:

Transgender hormone blockers are ‘institutionalized child abuse’: pediatrician

WASHINGTON, D.C., October 17, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) — A nationally recognized pediatrician offered a jolting reality check about the dangers of encouraging children to think they are transgender and prescribing hormone blockers to prevent them from developing.

On October 11, the Heritage Foundation sponsored a forum on transgenderism at which Dr. Michelle Cretella said it is child abuse to facilitate gender confusion in children by helping them “transition” to the opposite sex.

So when are we going to have the required separate counsel briefing the courts on behalf of children in general (that the precedent then applies to) in cases such as these? Never? Will we never allow these vital parties to these cases to have counsel briefing? Going to shut out the voices of their expert witnesses are we? Just listen to layman activist judges that pander to the LGBT cult in lieu of due process?

 

[jknowgood]

Liberalism will be dead in ten years. All these kids that are indoctrinated. When they get in the real world will find out they were lied to for years. They will find out conservatives aren't racist homophobes, and that liberalism destroys what ever it touches.

 

[Silhouette]

Liberalism will be dead in ten years. All these kids that are indoctrinated. When they get in the real world will find out they were lied to for years. They will find out conservatives aren't racist homophobes, and that liberalism destroys what ever it touches.

What do you think, specifically, about children's counsel being systematically blockaded from participating in briefing the courts on these landmark cases that so deeply and profoundly affect all children via precedent?

 

[jknowgood]

Liberalism will be dead in ten years. All these kids that are indoctrinated. When they get in the real world will find out they were lied to for years. They will find out conservatives aren't racist homophobes, and that liberalism destroys what ever it touches.

What do you think, specifically, about children's counsel being systematically blockaded from participating in briefing the courts on these landmark cases that so deeply and profoundly affect all children via precedent?

I think the courts should stay out of things like this. I'd be more for the child to be taken away if the parents gave the child the drugs. In my view a child shouldn't be able to make an life changing decision. When they turn 18 they can make that decision.

 

[Silhouette]

Liberalism will be dead in ten years. All these kids that are indoctrinated. When they get in the real world will find out they were lied to for years. They will find out conservatives aren't racist homophobes, and that liberalism destroys what ever it touches.

What do you think, specifically, about children's counsel being systematically blockaded from participating in briefing the courts on these landmark cases that so deeply and profoundly affect all children via precedent?

I think the courts should stay out of things like this. I'd be more for the child to be taken away if the parents gave the child the drugs. In my view a child shouldn't be able to make an life changing decision. When they turn 18 they can make that decision.

Hmmm. That wasn't the question. Here, let me rephrase it. What do you think, specifically, (given the fact that the courts ARE involved and ARE setting landmark precedent), about children's counsel being systematically blockaded from participating in briefing the courts on these landmark cases that so deeply and profoundly affect all children via precedent? My question is focusing on children's counsel being blockaded from participation/briefing in cases where children are clearly involved.

 

[jknowgood]

Liberalism will be dead in ten years. All these kids that are indoctrinated. When they get in the real world will find out they were lied to for years. They will find out conservatives aren't racist homophobes, and that liberalism destroys what ever it touches.

What do you think, specifically, about children's counsel being systematically blockaded from participating in briefing the courts on these landmark cases that so deeply and profoundly affect all children via precedent?

I think the courts should stay out of things like this. I'd be more for the child to be taken away if the parents gave the child the drugs. In my view a child shouldn't be able to make an life changing decision. When they turn 18 they can make that decision.

Hmmm. That wasn't the question. Here, let me rephrase it. What do you think, specifically, (given the fact that the courts ARE involved and ARE setting landmark precedent), about children's counsel being systematically blockaded from participating in briefing the courts on these landmark cases that so deeply and profoundly affect all children via precedent? My question is focusing on children's counsel being blockaded from participation/briefing in cases where children are clearly involved.

I think the courts should stay out.

 

[Silhouette]

I think the courts should stay out.

In reality they're not and never will. So given that context, would you please answer my question?