(LifeSiteNews) — Supporters of letting gender-confused children obtain surgical and chemical mutilation have found allies in campaign workers for failed Republican presidential campaigns.
“Conservative officials, advisors, and activists” submitted an amicus brief in the U.S. v. Skrmetti case.
The pending Supreme Court case will decide if Tennessee and Kentucky and, by extension, other states can protect gender-confused children from harmful puberty blockers and damaging surgeries to remove healthy organs.
The early 2000s campaign workers, many of whom are now lobbyists or consultants, have also found allies in a handful of legislators who think parents have a “right” to take their 12-year-old daughter and have her breasts removed and made permanently infertile, ensuring they will never have grandkids.
This includes Missouri Republican state Representative Chris Sander, who based on his posts on X (formerly Twitter), is primarily concerned with pushing LGBT issues.
These procedures are sometimes called “sex changes,” although the new euphemism is “gender-affirming care.”
Much like how liberal Republicans have played the “limited government” card to support the abortion of innocent preborn children, this amicus brief says being conservative actually means lying to children and letting them present as the opposite sex. It is not possible for someone to change his sex – this is a well-established biological fact and moral truth.
Republicans, the amicus brief argues, should actually support the legality of drugs and surgeries to permanently alter confused children.
One signer is Fred Karger, who apparently ran for the Republican nomination in 2012. He’s so obscure that he actually wrote a book called “Fred Who?” However, he was active in aggressively targeting businesses that supported traditional marriage.
“Fred Karger is not your average Republican candidate for president in 2012. For one thing, he’s moderate,” a book blurb states. “For another, he’s Jewish. And for another, he’s gay. While he never hid his politics or religion from the world, he did keep his homosexuality a secret for years.”
Just to underscore Karger’s disordered view of the world, he also lobbied for homosexual “marriage.” Part of this effort included going after businesses and individual donors who supported traditional marriage in California. So much for respecting other people’s views.
He “raised” nearly $600,000 when he ran for president – but it almost all came from him own pockets.
Other “conservative” activists who we’re supposed to look to for their insights include Michael Napolitano, who served in the White House Office of Public Affairs from 2001 to 2003. What has he been doing these past two decades? He helps push for so-called “LGBT freedom” and contraception.
Brian Jones is another advocate on the brief. After serving as the communications director for John McCain’s failed 2008 presidential campaign, he was a “senior advisor” to Mitt Romney’s failed 2012 presidential campaign.
According to Ballotpedia, he also served as an advisor to Chris Christie’s failed 2016 presidential campaign. The amicus brief cites Christie’s comments in support of letting parents bring in their teenage children to have infertility-causing drugs and surgeries.
He currently works for a consulting firm called the Black Rock Group, which supports homosexual “marriage.”
The failed 2012 Romney campaign contributed a few more signers, including Director of Data Science Alex Lundry and Kirsten Kukowski, the press secretary for the Republican National Committee in 2012.
While the truthfulness of a statement does not depend on the speaker, or their success winning elections, it is problematic when individuals, under the banner of conservatism, push for harmful and dangerous ideas. The basic argument made by the brief is that parents have the “right” to take their children for these transgender surgeries, and conservatives should support this.
However, a simple test undermines their claim.
Do these Republicans support limits on abortions for minors? If so, they should also oppose similarly harmful procedures against minors. They should see how it is not hypocritical to prevent parents from taking their children for abortions, because the procedure itself is evil, even if activists call it “health care.”
If they do support parents being able to take their children to have abortions, then we know their worldview is distorted and we should view anything they say on morality with a heavy dose of skepticism.
And to be clear, there is “no right to do wrong,” as Gov. Ron DeSantis has stated.
So, there can be no true moral right to take a child for a mutilating gender surgery, just as parents can never truly have the “right” to take their kids for an abortion.
What the signers get wrong is that they do not understand that parents have a right to raise their children and take actions directed toward the good. We currently have laws against buying cigarettes and alcohol for minors because those actions are not oriented toward the good.
Let’s hope this amicus brief is as successful as the presidential campaigns the signers ran.
