Supreme Court Rejects Parental Rights Dispute In Colorado

ChristisKing

Merry Christmas!! 😁
Joined
Jun 16, 2021
Messages
46,464
Reaction score
41,566
Points
3,488
Location
USA
Apparently they can't even give a legit response in why. This is child abuse.

The statist lefties view humans, regardless of age as property of the state. Of course the statist left view themselves as exempt from their own laws/rules etc. It's often called the "god complex."
 
I personally don't see how either set of facts even remotely touches on their children's care and upbringing. One voluntarily went to a meeting and the other didn't go but was invited. People have become such Karens.
 
The statist lefties view humans, regardless of age as property of the state. Of course the statist left view themselves as exempt from their own laws/rules etc. It's often called the "god complex."
"some people are more equal than others"
 
Reads to me it was turned down on a technicality. We see this all the time. I hate when the courts do this as it just ends up back in court when they could have made a ruling they know they will have to at some point anyway.

Seems maybe it was attempted to be amended and the court rejected that also. It's why rulings take so long and are so expensive.
 
Apparently they can't even give a legit response in why. This is child abuse.

The right believes children are the property of their parents.

This complaint reads as though the school mistreated their property. Not child abuse.
 
The MAGAt larvae need to get the same education as everyone else. If they didn't that would be the child abuse.
Of course you dumb twats want public schools to indoctrinate young kids with lies like “transgenderism”, and to keep it a secret from parents.

Thanks for proving the point of the families. Lunatics like you don’t have the “right” to brainwash children at public schools.
 
Apparently they can't even give a legit response in why. This is child abuse.

Parental abuse as well. The legal fact is that a child is a legal ward of the parents until 18, in a sense property of said parents, and that submission of their child to the government-run public school is wholly voluntary.

As such, the court should rule as is common sense that:
  1. NO SCHOOL should interject themselves nor interfere in a student's natural sexual development by petitioning that student influencing them one way or the other.
  2. IF the student initiates contact with the school over gender identity or change, those concerns should be relayed to the parents.
  3. It is up to the family then, the parents and child, not the school, to discuss and decide any issues on gender or sexual identity; the school's job remains teaching competency in reading, writing, and arithmetic, et al, for readiness in the workforce--- sexual/gender identity is not an educational nor workforce issue.
 
Back
Top Bottom