Featured Image
Doug Mainwaring Doug Mainwaring Follow Doug

News, , ,

Ex-transgenders tell US Supreme Court: It’s ‘abuse’ to affirm gender confusion

Doug Mainwaring Doug Mainwaring Follow Doug

WASHINGTON, D.C., September 27, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) – In advance of the United States Supreme Court hearing oral arguments in a high-profile case about alleged transgender discrimination, a group of former transgendered persons have filed a brief hoping to disuade the court from requiring employers to affirm gender confusion.  

The matter before the court is a lower court’s very liberal interpretation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964’s prohibition against “sex” discrimination, contorting it to include “sexual orientation” and “gender identity.”

In their amicus brief, the group of nine men and women offer their personal histories as cautionary tales in order to inform the justices of the often tragic unintended consequences which occur when males attempt to live as if they were females, and females as males.  

The nine – each of whom at some point in their lives “transitioned” to the opposite sex, then after experiencing regret “reverted” – are Walt Heyer, Jamie Shupe, Linda Seiler, Hacsi Horvath, Clifton Francis Burleigh Jr., Laura Perry, Jeffrey Johnston, Jeffrey McCall, and Kathy Grace Duncan.

While their plea to the court will not be given the same media attention as a brief filed by over 200 corporations such as Amazon, Apple, Disney, Starbucks, and Coca-Cola urging the court to accept the expanded meaning of “sex” descrimination in Title VII, the brief filed by the nine speaks louder and more authoritatively because it is based on lived personal experience rather than novel politically correct notions.   

Affirming transgenderism is a destructive lie

“There is an explosion of people with gender identity issues,” say the nine amici. “This emerging group of people with gender identity issues are suffering from emotional, psychological, or social identity discomfort far deeper than new pronouns can rectify. Courts should not ignore that fact.” 

“Doctors admit they do not know who will remain gender-dysphoric long term, yet they condone gender identity change, socially and medically, for youths and adults,” say the nine. “This is abuse. It is abuse to tell a person he or she can select a gender and truly become the opposite sex. It is a false hope. Such a suggestion is factually a lie, a lie with life-long destructive ramifications.”

They argue that affirming gender confusion and encouraging medical and surgical transitioning is akin to addressing an anorexic person’s needs by providing a low-calorie diet, diet pills, and stomach stapling.

Their brief continues: 

The proponents of gender identity theory tell parents, schools, medical professionals, and all other members of society that they must support and affirm one’s transgender journey to prevent the person from attempting suicide. However, it is an open question scientifically whether supporting a one’s desire to appear as the opposite sex adds stress rather than reducing it. Amici argue this approach undeniably made things worse in their cases. Pretending that a person actually is a person of the opposite sex is not likely to benefit anyone and is more likely to cause harm. The risk that gender-affirmation treatments might ultimately harm, rather than help, troubled students cannot be dismissed without evidence.

People are encouraged, affirmed and assisted in “coming out” as transgendered, often without one word about the dangers of that path. Today, the politically correct response expected from adults, especially parents, is to affirm children and adults in their desired gender. But affirmation gives people false hope that they can really become a different sex. It is a lie—a lie told with compassionate motives, but a lie nonetheless. Lying is not compassion.

Lying to people hurts them. For a vulnerable person, pursuing a dream that is physically impossible to achieve can lead to depression, and depression is the leading cause of attempted suicide. This may help explain some of the startling suicide rates among those identifying as transgender.

It is important to tell people the truth and stop pretending. We need to stop pretending that doctors have scientific backing for their recommendations for individuals with gender dysphoria.

The effect of such “affirmation” is the destruction of core identity. It plants the notion inside the minds of people that the essence of who they are is wrong. They are not someone to be loved or embraced, but eradicated.

In October, the nine justices will hear oral arguments concerning three consolidated cases in which lower federal courts arrived at disparate decisions concerning the termination of employees because of their “sexual orientation” or “gender identity” or issues related to those proclivities.  

“Federal appeals courts are divided over the scope of protection for gay, lesbian and transgender workers under civil rights laws,” notes a Law.com report.  

The brief filed by the nine specifically addressing one of the three cases, known as R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes v. EEOC and Aimee Stephens, in which the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled that a male funeral director who was fired after announcing his intention to dress as a woman while performing his duties at a Christian funeral home was the victim of “gender identity” discrimination.

The other two cases are:

  • Altitude Express v. Zarda, in which a skydiving instructor was fired after he revealed to a customer that he is gay. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled that this was a form of discrimination based on “sex,” prohibited under Title VII;
  • Bostock v. Clayton County, in which a man was fired from his job as a county child welfare services coordinator after his employer learned he is homosexual. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit chose not to view his employer’s action as violating Title VII’s ban on sex discrimination.

The U.S. Justice Department under the Trump Administration is expected to argue that the term “sex” as cited in Title VII does not include civil rights protections for “sexual orientation” or “gender identity.”

The important role of faith

Perhaps the most striking – and surprising – feature of the stories of these formerly transgendered indiviuals is that they declare to the Supreme Court justices the important role their Christian faith played in escaping the harmful lies of transgenderism:

  • Laura Perry “discovered God” after her mom asked her to create a website for her Bible Study. She now dedicates her life to preaching freedom in Christ. 
  • Jeffrey McCall found faith in God, “experienced the transformative power of the Holy Spirit,” and dumped his dresses, hair, and makeup to follow Jesus. Jeffrey was inspired to found the Freedom March, a growing movement of ex-gay and ex-transgender individuals.
  • Kathy Grace Duncan, after developing faith in Christ, “experienced healing and found the courage to live as God created her.”
  • Linda Seiler, though “she continued to experience the urge to transition after finding salvation in Christ, pastors and fellow Christians led her through the process of healing, and she became a campus pastor at a church.”
  • Jeffrey Johnston believes God healed him and brought him to the realization that he was never supposed to have transitioned to identifying as a female.

Their brief concludes: 

Based on the experiences of the Amici and the experiences relayed to them by many others, for people who identify as transgender, true reality is found in what is called “de-transitioning,” which involves coming to terms with and accepting one’s sex. 

Indulging the transgender concept will harm those whom it is intended to benefit.

FREE pro-life and pro-family news.

Stay up-to-date on the issues you care about the most. Sign up today!

Select Your Edition:

You can make a difference!

Can you donate today?


Share this article