Category Archives: Children

Relentless Punishment for Expressing Common Sense

Dear Marriage Supporter —

LGBT activists like to portray their small community as victims of bigotry, hatred and harassment. They use that portrayal, with the help of their allies in the media, in a relentless push to force all of society to accept their skewed, false narrative about the intrinsic nature of men and women, and human sexuality. Consider these two cases currently in the news:

  • Isabella Chow is a student at UC Berkeley in California, and is an elected member of the campus Student Senate. She is also a Christian. LGBT activists presented a student resolution to express support for transgenderism. This is not something that Chow could do and maintain her beliefs that God made us male and female. So she decided to abstain on the resolution after issuing a statement that all people, including those who identify as transgendered, are entitled to God's love and should be free from discrimination. For this, she's been brutally attacked in the public square, yelled at on the way to class, confronted by angry mobs, had over 1,000 students demand that she change her views and been kicked out of her student political party.
  • A male PE teacher at a Florida middle school has been punished for refusing to personally oversee a female student who claims a male "gender identity" when changing in the boys locker room. The teacher does not want to observe a biological female who is naked. In response, the school district has threatened putting him on administrative leave and transferring him to another school district. They say his failure to implement their transgender policy, "won't be tolerated." This policy was written by an LGBT activist and imposed on students with no discussion or notice to them or their parents.


It's now become common that merely expressing the obvious observation that sex is a biological reality assigned at birth, not an emotional feeling or a political condition that can be chosen amounts to outright hostility, bigotry and hatred. And activists  relentlessly push this narrative in every forum, especially where young people are prevalent such as in the schools.

But here's the truth: biology is not bigotry. It is not a demonstration of love for your neighbor to accept a lie about them – that they can reject the sex that God assigned them in the womb.

The promulgation of this lie is having an impact on young people. Statistically, the LGBT community makes up about 2-3% of society according to large-scale studies. The so-called transgender account for about 10% of this tiny audience, which translates into 0.2% - 0.3% of the entire population. However, because of the widespread cultural push to normalize transgenderism and LGBT behavior, a whopping 57% of young people in the US and the UK say they are not completely heterosexual and consider their sexuality to be fluid. Another study reported a nearly 400% increase in the percent of people claiming a non-conforming "gender identity".

These are serious issues. A child who is struggling with emotional issues, trying to figure out where he or she fits in with peers and the larger society, is now at risk of being labeled "transgender" and could find himself on a path that leads to social, psychological and medical intervention with often permanent consequences, such as being prescribed powerful hormone blockers that cause sterilization.

As serious as these issues are, however, powerful cultural forces are intent on making sure that even discussing them is seen as hateful and bigoted.

This type of attitude needs to be confronted and protected against. But with the Democrats set to take control of the US House of Representatives, I fear that the situation may get worse before it gets better.

NOM has been at the forefront of speaking truth to power when it comes to confronting the rising cultural push for transgenderism. We've sponsored a bus tour to bring attention to the issues, and aggressively promoted independent studies that document the consequences of this push.

We've also fought for legal protections for citizens so that government cannot punish people who maintain a common-sense understanding of the biological reality of male and female.

Please help us continue to stand for the truth of male and female by making a contribution today.

>>> I'm in for $1,000

>>> I'm in for $500

>>> I'm in for $250

>>> I'm in for $100

>>> I'm in for $50

>>> I'm in for $25

>>> I'm in for a different amount

We're in an insane moment in history where seemingly everything in life is being politicized and the LGBT agenda has been weaponized against anyone who fails to fully embrace it.  In times like these, society needs people of clarity and courage to stand up and speak truth to power. NOM will continue to do just that, even in the face of an increasing cultural and political wind to the contrary. I pray that you will stand with us.

Please, take a moment to make an urgent contribution so that we can fight for children, families, people of faith, and for truth.


Brian S Brown

Donate Today!

The vote is tomorrow...

Dear Friend—Just a few minutes ago the US Senate voted to end debate on the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the US Supreme Court. Tomorrow there will be an up or down vote on his confirmation.

Please contact your US Senators to urge them to support the confirmation of Judge Kavanaugh. He is a supremely qualified judge, someone whose legal rulings have been uniformly respected as being fair, well-reasoned and well-articulated. Most importantly, he is a constitutionalist, meaning that he believes that the constitution means what it says and that judges should never invent constitutional "rights" in order to advance their own views of what the law should be. You can learn more about why we strongly support Judge Kavanaugh by watching our endorsement video here.

The number to call to reach your Senators is 202-224-3121.

If you are active on social media, please also post your support for the Kavanaugh nomination and ask your friends and contacts to do the same.

When we began this process many months ago, I said it would be unlike anything we had ever seen beforeBoy were those words prophetic. The way that Judge Kavanaugh has been treated by Senate Democrats is a national disgrace. After this battle is completed and Judge Kavanaugh is on the Supreme Court, it will be time to explore whether there should be changes to the Senate confirmation process to prevent a repeat of the circus that occurred here.

So far, the confirmation vote looks good as the vote today to advance the nomination was 51-49. But Senators can change their minds and we need to keep the pressure up. So please take a moment to call your US Senators to voice your support for Judge Kavanaugh.


Brian S Brown
Brian S. Brown

Tell Congressman Scott Taylor To Support Faith Based Adoption Agencies

Dear Friend—Freshman Republican Scott Taylor of Virginia is a fraud. He campaigned as a conservative but time and again has sided with liberal extremist Nancy Pelosi. Just recently, Taylor joined Pelosi in trying to kill legislation that would have protected religious charitable adoption groups who believe that marriage is the union of one man and one woman from being punished by the government over their religious belief that children put up for adoption are entitled to the love of a mother and a father.

Please sign our petition letting Rep. Scott Taylor know you oppose him for trying to force Christian adoption agencies to abandon their religious beliefs if they want to provide adoption services to children in need.

Scott Taylor has revealed himself to be a puppet of the left and radical LGBT extremists who regularly trot out gratuitous charges of "discrimination." Groups like Catholic Charities and Bethany Lutheran Services have had to stop providing adoption services because they are simply unwilling to sacrifice their religious beliefs to the demands of government agencies doing the bidding of these LGBT extremists. Children suffer as a result of these governmental demands. Across the country, people of faith are being targeted, punished and pushed to the margins simply because they believe what the bible says, that marriage is one man and one woman. This is wrong, and our laws need to be fixed so that good and decent people who love children and want to help them are not punished because of their Christian beliefs in marriage.

Sign the Petition Today!

Fortunately, Rep. Taylor's unjustified and unprincipled attack on faith-based adoption providers has failed, and legal protections for these providers were added to a key funding bill, making passage of the provision by the House of Representatives likely. Still, it's important for Rep. Scott Taylor to know that we don't appreciate his betrayal of conservative principles and his decision to side with extremist voices like Nancy Pelosi against good and decent people of faith who want nothing more than to help children according to the tenets of their religious beliefs.

Please sign our petition letting Rep. Scott Taylor know that you stand with faith-based adoption agencies and want to make sure they are free to help children and families while remaining true to their religious beliefs.

Thank you for your help.


Brian S Brown
Brian S. Brown

Donate Today!

Boys in the Girls' Room in Frederick County, MD?


The Board of Education of Frederick County, Maryland is considering a policy that endangers the privacy and safety of the county’s students by allowing "access to facilities, including rest rooms, locker rooms, or changing facilities, that correspond to their gender identity […] without question" [emphasis added].

Below are some important action items for you to consider, but first I'm including more information about this dangerous policy. You can read the policy in full here (PDF).

If you're already familiar with it, feel free to skip below to see how you can help today, or simply go online and sign our petition about this policy now:

Please take immediate action to defend students' privacy and safety in Frederick County today!

This ominous policy is far-reaching in its implications. If adopted, it would mandate that:

  • “All students [would] have access to facilities, including rest rooms, locker rooms, or changing facilities, that correspond to their gender identity. Access [would be] provided without question or additional complicating procedure. Students, including non-binary students, [would] determine which facilities are consistent with their gender identity."
  • “Under no circumstance [would] any student [be] required or directed to use a private use facility.”
    “Students [would be permitted to participate in sports and phys. ed. Classes] in a manner consistent with their gender identity” and “[t]he gender identity of student-athletes [would not be required] to be disclosed to coaches, teammates, opponent’s coaches, or anyone else….”
  • On “overnight field trips,” any student would have “the opportunity to room with others according to their gender identity,” and while efforts would be made to “accommodate any student who desires greater privacy… no student should be isolated.”
  • Students and all staff who work with students would be required to refer to students by their chosen name and pronouns, and be provided “a current and complete list of preferred names and pronouns for all students” to be used “in every interaction.” There would also be no dress code for events based on gender.
  • Finally, and most dangerously of all, the policy states: “Depending on privacy needs or a transgender student’s own personal transition, school staff are authorized to work with students (and their families, if students explicitly wish) to provide options that may support a student’s needs” [emphasis added] - which implies that schools might work independently of parents in implementing policies having to do directly with children’s health, safety, privacy, and general welfare!

This policy is not only absurd, it is dangerous. With this policy, the Board of Education adopts the view of LGBT activists that “gender nonconforming” or “non-binary” students are the only ones with “rights,” and ignores the basic rights of privacy and safety of all other students. It puts the agenda of gender redefinition, a political tool being used by radical activists throughout society, ahead of the privacy and safety of students in intimate spaces like locker rooms and bathrooms. To satisfy the whims of activists and powerful lobbyists from Hollywood and Washington, DC, the Frederick County Board of Education would - without regard to parents’ wishes - force students to use the restroom, to shower, and even to cohabitate overnight with members of the opposite sex! All this in the name of “creating [a] welcoming and affirming]” environment for students who suffer from gender confusion!

So now it is time for us to take action!

Here is how you can help:

We have launched an online petition to the Board of Education urging them to reject this dangerous policy. Please visit and sign this petition right away!

Sign Our Petition Today!

Secondly, if you are able, consider attending the next Board meeting, where this policy is scheduled to be discussed. The meeting will be on Wednesday, June 14th at 6:00 PM in the FCPS Board Room, 191 South East Street in Frederick.

Finally, please share this email with your friends and family in Maryland, especially in Frederick County, and alert as many people to this urgent matter as you can!


Brian S Brown

Fake News Drawn from a Flimsy Study

A recent study in the journal JAMA Pediatrics has caused a lot of buzz in the press. The study claims to trace the “Association Between State Same-Sex Marriage Policies and Adolescent Suicide Attempts” among LGBT youth and is being presented by the media as "proof" that gay marriage saves lives.

But like much of the fake news coverage this study has generated, the study itself leads people to a  fake conclusion: that somehow the enactment of same-sex marriage results in reduced teen suicide attempts, especially for  LGBT teens. In fact, the study proves nothing of the sort. Indeed, some data in the report suggest the opposite may be true in states that have had experience with same-sex marriage the longest.

The study begins with the presentation of its conclusions as if they were facts proven by the study. The report opens with a tidy summary and easy to swallow conclusion: Same-sex marriage enactment is associated with reduced teen-suicide attempts. The authors' biases don't become evident until the reader dives into the actual report, including the astonishing statement that, "Policies preventing same-sex marriage constitute a form of structural stigma because they label sexual minorities as different and deny them legal, financial, health and other benefits that are associated with marriage." This is a political statement, not a statement of established scientific fact. As we will discuss further down, it is also subject to question because the study authors don't look at things like civil union and domestic partnership laws that were in place in some states and for all intents and purposes treated same-sex unions exactly the same as opposite-sex ones. This is especially true in states like California.

Further, the authors' conclusions neatly presented on Page 1 and upon which all the fake media coverage is based give no hint of the inherent unreliability of the study that the authors themselves acknowledge, but notably only deep in the body of the report: "The analyses on the association between implementation of same-sex marriage policies and adolescent suicide attempts among those identifying as sexual minorities should be interpreted with caution."

This is like burying the lede: the fact is that the entire study should be viewed cautiously.

In a brief and insufficient acknowledgement, also rather buried within the text, the authors admit that while they have traced a correlation between redefining marriage and reduced teen suicides (in some states), they cannot affix a causal relationship between the two: "[O]ur analysis does not allow us to understand the mechanisms through which implementation of same-sex marriage policies reduced adolescent suicide attempts."

The reality is that the conclusions of the study are subject to numerous and significant warnings throughout the text itself that the results may not be reliable. For example, "it is unclear what drives greater rates of suicide attempts among adolescents who are sexual minorities"…"[we] emphasize that these estimates are subject to bias"…"complex survey design"…"The analyses on the association…should be interpreted with caution."

Furthermore, there is data in the study that actually undercuts and shows the opposite of the conclusions reported. For example, in Figure 2, data from some of the states that implemented same-sex "marriage" before 2013, suicide attempts appear to have risen after this implementation. The mean also appears to have risen in recent years, and may be the same or only exceedingly tiny percentage below where it started. In other words, there may be little to no difference, and in some states like New York there seem to be rising rates of teen suicide attempts, since same-sex 'marriage' was enacted.

It is also questionable, as we mentioned earlier ,whether the authors haven't mis-categorized certain states, like California, by putting them in the category of "Wave 2" (i.e., states that implemented same-sex 'marriage' in 2013/14). The authors say, "We defined the exposure as a state-level policy granting same-sex marriage rights as opposite sex couples." If, as the authors state, teen suicide attempts are attributable to "stigma" caused in part by denying them "legal, financial, health and other benefits that are associated with marriage," it would be instructive to look at state data for states like California which for many years have had expansive domestic partner or civil union legislation eradicating any legal distinction between couples. The study's authors say that California courts provided for same-sex 'marriage' in 2013, but fail to mention that California has been a domestic partner state since 2004, with policies benefiting gay couples that are "associated with marriage" that meant there was no legal difference as to how the state treated opposite-sex married couples compared with same-sex couples in a domestic partnership. The same is the case for states that had expansive civil union laws.

It would be interesting to look at the state-by-state data of actual teen attempted suicide numbers by year, so that we could compare states like California that for a long time have provided expansive benefits to gay couples vs those that do not. Unfortunately, the study does not provide that data to examine, leaving us to rely only on the authors' representations.

Most fundamentally, though, the key point is this: that even given all the cautionary notes, biases, etc., there is nothing in the report to show that same-same 'marriage' causes a reduction in suicide attempts among teens. The authors acknowledge this deep in the body of the report, but fail to note it in presenting their now highly-publicized conclusions. There is simply an alleged correlation between two things -- teen suicide attempts and same-sex marriage -- and not any proof that one is impacted by the other.

In the classic logical fallacy -- since "A" happened, followed by "B" happening, "B" was caused by A" -- readers are led to a conclusion that is not established by the evidence. Such is the case with the JAMA report.  What other correlations could be used to advance a similar conclusion, one wonders? Obamacare was passed in 2010. Are changes in attempted teen suicide rates associated with Obamacare? What about the enactment of DACA, which was created in 2012? What about Dodd Frank, which was enacted in 2010? Or the stimulus plan enacted in 2009?

We do not pretend to understand the authors' motivations for presenting their study in the way they did, and we don't intend to impugn them personally or professionally. But the simple truth is that the authors have presented a study that leads people to a fake conclusion that is not established by the facts. There is no evidence whatsoever in this report that passage of same-sex 'marriage' reduces teen suicide attempts. The authors admit this in the report. The fact that the mainstream media has run with this study as "proof" just shows their own bias.

Childhood Depravity on Fox

Marriage Supporter — Just when you think Hollywood can’t sink any lower, along comes a TV show on Fox called "The Mick" — which really should be called "The Ick." The first episode of this TV show aired on January 1st and showed a six-year-old boy, who is apparently transgender, wearing a bondage gag. Apparently the producers consider childhood bondage a "joke."

But that’s not all. The episode showed the boy wearing a dress, where he commented how the dress "kind of breezes" on his private parts, which he refers to using the word for female genitalia.

It is utterly depraved that Fox thinks childhood bondage and transgenderism are things to laugh at so they can sell expensive commercials to advertisers.

We are demanding that Fox cancel "The Mick" immediately. Please sign our petition to Fox demanding that they cancel this depraved show.

Exploiting a six-year-old for profit is a disgusting, subhuman act. Allowing such a child to model something that is used for sexual abuse and depraved, sadistic acts is not funny: it’s child abuse.

Furthermore, having a boy claim that he has a female genitalia does great disservice to young children who might be exposed to this propaganda. Boys do not have female genitalia. A boy who pretends to have a vagina is not practicing comedy, he’s exhibiting signs of gender dysphoria, a serious abnormal psychological condition requiring skilled medical care and therapy.

Please sign our petition demanding that Fox cancel "The Mick."

"The Mick" is nothing more than propaganda and depravity from the sexual radicals who rule Hollywood, a further descent into the cultural swamp that has only accelerated since the US Supreme Court redefined marriage. Once the radicals succeeded in redefining marriage, they have made a headlong push to redefine gender — and now they are using six-year-old children as weapons in their cultural propaganda war on gender.

Please sign our petition today demanding that Fox cancel "The Mick," a show that belongs in a septic tank, not on television.


Brian S Brown

Act Today!

Read NOM's Brief to the US Supreme Court

Marriage Supporter — I'm pleased to let you know that last Friday the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) filed a critically important legal brief with the US Supreme Court challenging President Obama's authority to impose his dangerous gender ideology policies on children in America's public schools. Obama has illegally issued directives to the public schools to allow biological males into intimate facilities reserved for females, such as showers and bathrooms, risking the privacy and safety of our children and grandchildren.

Read NOM's legal brief here.

The filing of this brief gives us an excellent opportunity to reverse President Obama's policies, preventing him from redefining gender in the same way that he redefined marriage in our nation's policies. If we are successful — and we think there is an excellent chance we will be successful — we can deal a fatal blow to the efforts of liberal politicians and LGBT extremists who wish to impose their insane ideas about gender. A victory before the US Supreme Court would mean that gay and lesbian extremists could redefine gender only through the democratic process, something they simply cannot do because it is such an extreme — and objectively false — position.

But as excited as I am to have the opportunity for NOM to participate in this case, I am also concerned because of the $12,000 it cost to prepare, print and file the brief. We've only raised half of that amount, so we've got a big hole in our budget that urgently must be filled.

Please make an immediate emergency financial contribution of $25, $35, $50, $100, $250 or even $500 or more to help us cover the cost of this critically important undertaking.

Make an Immediate Impact Today!

We're asking the Supreme Court to take the case of G.G. v. Gloucester County School Board. Much of our argument is a purely legal one about the need for the Court to clarify, or reverse, a prior holding that liberal judges are wrongly using to give great deference to anything President Obama's administration wants to do in his quest to remake America. But a critical element of the brief exposes more than two dozen examples of cases where men, many claiming to be transgender, have violated the privacy of women in bathrooms, showers and other intimate areas. These include:

  1. A Seattle man, citing transgender bathroom laws, gained access to a women's locker room at a public recreational center where little girls were changing for swim practice. The man began to undress in front of the girls. He told women who complained that he had a right to be there.

  2. A Toronto man claiming to be transgender was arrested for sexually assaulting several women in a homeless shelter after he gained access to the shelter and its shower area by claiming a female gender identity as "Jessica."

  3. A Virginia man was caught and arrested for peeping on and filming two women and a five-year old child in a women's restroom after receiving entry by dressing as a woman.

  4. A Los Angeles man, dressed as a woman, entered a Macy's department store bathroom and videotaped women under bathroom stalls. Investigators found a video camera in his purse containing hours of video of women using the restroom in the store.

  5. A sex offender wearing fake breasts and a wig was arrested for loitering in a Campbell, CA women's restroom in a shopping center. The man had previously been arrested on charges of child molestation and indecent exposure.

  6. On two occasions, Berkeley, CA police arrested a man who had disguised himself as a woman to get inside a UC Berkeley locker room. Once in the locker room, the man used his cell phone to photograph women.

  7. Last year in Virginia a man in women's clothing entered the women's restroom at a mall and again at a Wal-Mart and used a mirror and camera to take pictures of a mother and her 5-year-old daughter and a 53-year-old woman while they were in neighboring restroom stalls.

President Obama and LGBT extremists want people to think that redefining gender based on "gender identity" is simply about showing respect to "transgender" people. But our brief shows how it is far more than that — it risks the privacy and safety of girls and women, who will have no recourse to resist the presence of biological males in the most intimate of areas.

Help Us Fight Back Against Obama

Now that the brief is before the justices of the US Supreme Court, it's imperative that we cover the thousands of dollars we're in the hole as a result of this fight. I am counting on you to help us meet this expense so that we don't have to cut back any other activity.

Please make an immediate contribution of whatever you can afford — $25, $35, $50, $100, or even $250. Some people will make a sacrifice to give $10, and we appreciate their sacrifice greatly. Other supporters have been blessed with resources and perhaps can consider a larger gift of $500, $1,500 or even $2,500.

Whatever amount is right for you, please act today so that we can cover the budget shortfall created by the opportunity to use this case to stop President Obama's insane, dangerous gender agenda.


Brian S Brown

Donate Today!

Judge Halts Obama Administration's Transgender Agenda

Breaking news today via Reuters:

A U.S. judge blocked Obama administration guidance that transgender public school students must be allowed to use bathrooms of their choice, granting a nationwide injunction sought by a group of 13 states led by Texas.

Reed O'Connor, a judge for the Northern District of Texas, said in a decision late on Sunday that the Obama administration did not follow proper procedures for notice and comment in issuing the guidelines. He said the guidelines contradict with existing legislative and regulatory texts.


At a hearing on the injunction in Fort Worth on Aug. 12, lawyers for Texas said the guidelines usurp the authority of school districts nationwide. They said they were at risk of losing billions of dollars in federal funding for education if they did not comply.

U.S. Department of Justice lawyers sought to dismiss the injunction, saying the federal guidelines issued in May were non-binding with no legal consequences.

The guidance issued by the Justice Department and Education Department said public schools must allow transgender students to use bathrooms, locker rooms and other intimate facilities that correspond with their gender identity, as opposed to their birth gender, or face the loss of federal funds.

Under the injunction, the Obama administration is prohibited from enforcing the guidelines on "against plaintiffs and their respective schools, school boards, and other public, educationally based institutions," O'Connor wrote.

Read the whole article here.

Stunning Statistics on the Impact of Radical Gender Ideology on Children

From the BBC comes a disturbing report of a meteoric rise, over the past six years, on referrals to clinicians of children under the age of 18 for treatment to help them make "gender transitions."

GIDS StatsThe startling figure for the whole age group of one- to eighteen-year-old referrals is the rise from 94 in 2009-2010 to 969 in 2015-2016: an increase of 930%! This includes a stunning rise in referrals for children between the tender ages of five and nine years old: within that age group, the rise in referrals over the period studied has been nearly 600%!

In explaining the phenomenon, the BBC quotes the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS), an official specialized service provided under England's National Health Service (NHS):

GIDS, based in north London, is the NHS's dedicated gender identity development service for children and takes referrals from GPs, paediatricians, mental health services and schools across the country.

Its director, Polly Carmichael, said in recent years more younger children were making gender transitions and there was no "right or wrong approach", with many families reporting their child was happier living in another gender.


In terms of the general increase in referrals, GIDS said there could be a number of reasons, but increased awareness and acceptance of gender issues - particularly via the media and social networks - was a likely factor.

The article also notes that Carmichael acknowledged that, "research published in the Netherlands suggest[s] that 'for some young people who make an early social transition it may be difficult to de-transition if their gender identity develops in another direction'."

We hope that the lesson of that research is taken to heart and that those to whom these poor children are referred do not push them into making a life-changing decision which they are mentally and emotionally too immature to grasp. Indeed, we have already seen in many ways how "gender transition" decisions can be regretting in a very high percentage of cases.

In any case, this article points to a troubling trend of how the permeation throughout our culture of radical LGBT ideology is beginning to have a problematic impact on the youngest and most vulnerable in our society.

Pope decries gender ideology taught to children

From USA Today:

Pope Francis has lamented that children are being taught at school that gender can be a choice, adding that his predecessor, Benedict XVI has labeled current times "the epoch of sin against God the Creator."

Francis weighed in with his view on gender and what he said was that of the emeritus pontiff while meeting privately last week with bishops from Poland during his pilgrimage there. The Vatican released a transcript Tuesday of those closed-door remarks.

The pope said he wanted to conclude his remarks by reflecting on this: "We are living a moment of annihilation of man as image of God."

Francis said: "Today, in schools they are teaching this to children — to children! — that everyone can choose their gender."

Without specifying, he blamed this on textbooks supplied by "persons and institutions who donate money." The pope blamed what he called "ideological colonizing" backed by "very influential countries" which he didn’t identify.

One such "colonization" he said — "I’ll say it clearly with its first and last name — is gender."

Read more here.

Boy Wins Honors In Girls All State Track and Field

From RedState comes a story that couldn't be more absurd nor sadder:

Alaska’s Haines High School senior, Nattaphon Wangyot, is a young man who identifies as female, and competes against the girls of his high school under the allowance of the Alaska School Activities Association.


Emma Daniels, one of the runners who was denied advancement to the state meet, spoke out about Wangyot. “I’m glad that this person is comfortable with who they are and they’re able to be happy in who they are, but I don’t think it’s competitively completely 100-percent fair” [...]

“I don’t know what’s politically correct to say, but in my opinion your gender is what you’re born with,” said Peyton Young, a fellow athlete. “It’s the DNA. Genetically a guy has more muscle mass than a girl, and if he’s racing against a girl, he may have an advantage.”

Read more here.


Science Proves Family Structure Matters

Throughout history it's been obvious to any observer that children in intact families with a married mother and father do much better than children from broken homes or those living in alternative family structures. In recent years, there's been an attempt to deny that reality and convince people that children raised by gay or lesbian parents are somehow exempted from the realities of family life, claiming there are "no differences" in outcomes for these kids or even sometimes suggesting they do better than children raised by a married mother and father in the home. Increasingly, social scientists have been examining this "no differences" claim and, as you might suspect, find it without merit. A distinguished social scientist from the University of Virginia, W. Bradford Wilcox, writes a detailed piece this week for National Review reviewing three recent developments that make it harder for the "family structure denialists" to continue to make the "no differences" claim. He says:

"It’s been a rough two weeks for the family-structure denialists, those progressive academics (Philip Cohen, “How to Live in a World Where Marriage Is in Decline”), journalists (Katie Roiphe, “New York Times, Stop Moralizing About Single Mothers”), and pundits (Matthew Yglesias, “The ‘Decline’ of Marriage Isn’t a Problem”) who seek to minimize or deny the importance of marriage and family structure. That’s because three new pieces of scholarship — a journal, a report, and a study — were released this month that solidify the growing scientific consensus that marriage and family structure matter for children, families, and the nation as a whole."

The studies and reports mention by Wilcox confirm many of the outcome problems that children who lack a married mother and father in the home experience, especially boys lacking the presence of their father at home. Wilcox says these children "are floundering in school and society" and details findings including problems in the areas of truancy and educational attainment, increased behavioral problems, higher cognitive disability, perform worse on standardized school tests and are less likely to graduate from high school. And the article details important new findings that states with higher levels of married parenthood enjoy higher levels of growth, economic mobility for children growing up poor, higher median family income and markedly lower levels of child poverty. Says Wilcox,

"[W]ith study after study showing that children, families, and now even states benefit from strong and stable married families, the job of those who would seek to deny that marriage and family structure also play an important role — the family-structure denialists — is getting harder and harder. That’s because the facts just aren’t with those who seek to deny the scientific evidence that family change is having a major impact on our social environment and — in particular — our boys.

The complete article is available at National Review.

Pope Francis Reasserts that Traditional Marriage is Under Attack

On the eve of Pope Francis’ visit to the United States, he has issued a strong and unequivocal statement in support of marriage as the union of one man and one woman, and notes that traditional marriage is under attack “by powerful contrary projects supported by ideological colonization.” The Pope said that married couples are “in the best position” to introduce Jesus Christ to others. He said the unique joy that the Lord enables families and couples to experience in the intimacy of domestic life, both in moments of joy and suffering, "must be witnessed to, announced and communicated externally, so that others, in turn, take the same path."

Catholic Online expounds on this:

ThinkstockPhotos-101054028Pope Francis told couples to defend God's design for the family as the union of a man and woman for the procreation of children, and urged them to be merciful to those whose marriages have failed.

Today "the family - as God wants it, composed of a man and a woman for the good of the spouses and also the generation and education of children - is deformed by powerful contrary projects supported by ideological colonization," the Pope said Sept. 10.

A family which is filled with the presence of God, he said, "speaks for itself of God's love for all men."

. . .

The unique joy that the Lord enables families and couples to experience in the intimacy of domestic life, both in moments of joy and suffering, "must be witnessed to, announced and communicated externally, so that others, in turn, take the same path," he said.

The Pope encouraged couples to live the movement's spirituality and commitments in a deep way, saying these allow couples to live their married life confidently, following the path of the Gospel.

. . .

ThinkstockPhotos-75677464He also encouraged the couples to draw close to the increasing number of wounded families who suffer due to either a lack of work, concern for a child, the distance, or an absence of a family member or a violent environment.

"We must have the courage to enter into contact with these families," he said, adding that it must be done "in a discreet but generous way, materially, humanly or spiritually, in those circumstances where they are vulnerable."

Pope Francis closed by encouraging couples to instruments of Christ's mercy toward those whose marriages have failed, and stressed that married fidelity is a gift from God.

Mercy has been shown to "every one of us," Francis said. He added that couples who are united and happy could better understand the pain and the suffering caused by betrayal, abandonment and a lack of love.

"It is necessary, therefore, that you bring your witness and your experience to help Christian communities to discern the real situations in which these people find themselves, to welcome them with their wounds, and to help them to journey in faith and in truth," he said.

"Nor must you forget the unspeakable suffering of the children who experience these painful family situations: you can give a lot to them."

Pope Francis asked those present to pray for the upcoming Synod on the Family, and for all their reflections on the "vital cell of our societies" within the difficult current cultural context.

Declining Marriage Rates Hurt the Poor Hardest

As the marriage success gap widens in America, social analysts from both the right and the left debate what could be the cause. Why is it that the wealthy and educated have successful marriages while the poor and working classess by and large do not? The Right argues that the rise of abortificant ability and laws protecting a mother's choice over childbearing have marked the decline, while those on the Left generally argue that the lowered standard of living among the poor has hurt marriage.

Rachel Sheffield, writing for Public Discourse, examines the theories of leftist Andrew Cherlin, and points out why the loss of American manufacturing jobs is not the ultimate cause of marriage's decline:

ThinkstockPhotos-146006568[R]esearchers have directly examined the thesis that reduced manufacturing employment reduces marriage rates. Sociologists at New York University recently studied how increased importing from China in the 2000s affected marriage in communities that produced competing products. The new competition had negative economic effects—but this did not impact marriage rates. This research is preliminary but casts serious doubt on the primacy of economic factors in the decline in marriage rates. If centuries of subsistence-level poverty did not destroy the two-parent family, it is hard to see why a late twentieth century slowdown in the rate of compensation growth would.

On the other hand, Cherlin is correct that working class men are indeed less likely to be employed today than in the past. Part of the reason appears to be directly connected to the decline in marriage rates—but as an effect, not a cause. In other words, because marriage rates are down, men are less likely to engage in the labor force.

In a 2014 report published by the American Enterprise Institute, researchers Brad Wilcox of the University of Virginia and Robert Lerman of American University report that over half (51 percent) of the decrease in male employment between 1980 and 2008 (and 37 percent of the decline between 1980 and 2013) is connected to the decline in marriage. The authors note:

When young men and women replace formal commitment with informal relationships or none at all, work becomes less urgent, especially for men, who have historically taken all kinds of jobs to support their families. With no wife or children to support, men become less focused on the job market.

Wilcox and Lerman’s research shows that the greatest decline in male employment since 1979 has been among unmarried men. This trend holds true across all levels of education. The authors also point out that median family income would be 44 percent higher today if the United States had the same rate of married-parent families as in 1979.

The true cause of marriage's decline lies in the spread of "casual sex." Sheffield explains:

The spread of birth control and the legalization of abortion attempted to disconnect sex from childbearing. It ended up disconnecting childbearing from marriage, weakening men’s responsibility as fathers. As Brookings Institution scholars George Akerlof and Janet L. Yellen put it, “By making the birth of the child the physical choice of the mother, the sexual revolution has made marriage and child support a social choice of the father.”

Marriage binds a man and a woman together for life so that they can make children to love and raise. Without the openness to children, marriage loses its meaning and, as we have seen, falls by the wayside.

Catholic Archbishop Says It's Not About Equality or Rights — It's About Destroying the Family

In a letter published in the Pacific Daily News, the Catholic Archbishop of Agana (Guam), Anthony Sablan Apuron, exhorts all “sisters and brothers” to stand firm in defense of marriage as the union between one man and one woman.

Mid adult couple looking at their babyIn the face of recent events undertaken by the U.S. District Court of Guam, the U.S. Supreme Court and the 33rd Guam Legislature in redefining marriage, the Church stands firm on her teaching that marriage is between one man, and one woman.

Disagreement is not discrimination. These recent laws force the people of Guam, and of the United States, to either agree with a particular political position or face ridicule and sanction for discrimination. These types of laws not only undermine the precepts of the United States Constitution to freedom of speech, but also undermine and attempt to eradicate the constitutional right to Freedom of Religion.

These times compel the Church to expose the intentions of those who have deceivingly disguised same-sex unions as an issue of equality and anti-discrimination. It is important to understand that the political pressure to push the agenda for same-sex “marriage” has never been about gay rights; the true intention behind this agenda has always been about the destruction of the family and the imposition of the totalitarian system. The approval of same-sex “marriage” has now thrown open the doors of Guam to implement in our community a very clever and systematic theory, which has as its aim the destruction of marriage and family through the annihilation of any sexual differences among persons. This theory is known as the “Theory of Gender.”

At the political level, in order to avoid “discrimination” among the genders, a principle of “radical equality” has been imposed upon society, demanding and forcing society to have a neutral response to gender. Any objection is considered not only discriminatory and intolerant, but bigotry.

The next step will be to implement this theory in the educational system of Guam. This means that our children, your children, will be forced to assimilate to this pattern of non-gender; that there is no such thing as “male” or “female” — they will be encouraged to explore their sexuality earlier, and parents will have no voice in the education of their children. These ideas are already part of an international agenda promoted especially by the United Nations. The laws just passed on our beautiful island, which were disguised to fight against discrimination, will now work to subvert our human sexuality from the most tender age with the goal to abolish the natural family and create new “models” of a family.

. . .

In my view, these recent laws are not a sign of human progress, but are dangerous steps toward annihilation of our fundamental religious beliefs. As shepherd of the local Church of Guam, I urge every person to be mindful that each of us is answerable to the supreme judge for what we do and do not do.

Copyright 2015