To understand what leftists really mean, you always have to think in terms of opposites. They often say the exact opposite of what they mean or intend. This is to disarm you into potentially supporting them. This is the case in the naming of Senate Bill 26-018 in Colorado, dubbed the “Legal Protections for Dignity of Minors” bill.
The four Democrat sponsors of the bill are state senators Katie Wallace and Chris Kolker, and state representatives Meg Froelich and Lorena Garcia.
Their bill, if passed into state law, would allow a child to change his or her name, suppress records documenting a name change, and allow the court to strip away parents’ rights if they do not “affirm” their child’s name change.
This is not exaggeration or hyperbole. This is what the bill actually says:
The bill requires the court to suppress a record associated with a petition seeking to change the name of a petitioner who is less than 18 years of age unless the petitioner was previously convicted of a felony. The bill authorizes the court to use the suppressed court record for administrative purposes, but the court is prohibited from publishing the petitioner’s name or the petitioner’s new name online.
On the matter of parental rights, they have none. The court will decide such things as “allocation of parental responsibilities, including parenting time and decision-making responsibilities, in accordance with the best interests of the child, giving paramount consideration to the child’s safety and the physical, mental, and emotional conditions and needs of the child.”
Apparently, the bill treats a loving home and caring parents as though this is an abusive environment. It assumes that a judge and a state bureaucracy, which has no history with the child, can somehow understand what is in the child’s best interests, which includes safety. Again, think opposites.
What the leftist sponsors of this bill really want is for the state to take control of these confused children. It’s not a question of who should determine what’s in the child’s best interest or who should decide. It’s a given that the state will decide if given the opportunity, but in reality, not for what’s in the child’s best interest. Rather, it’s all about what’s in the Democrat party’s best interest.
The Democrats benefit by creating a confused generation of children, who, in their confusion, will only become more dependent on the state and reliant on the party. This gives the Democrats power.
Any time a Democrat can find a way to tear families apart and substitute a real loving parent with a manipulative set of court officers, it will do so.
With this in mind, the sponsors of the bill made sure to include this language on the amount of time the court will grant to parents if they are obedient:
The court…may make provisions for parenting time that the court finds are in best interests of the child, with the child’s safety always paramount, unless the court finds after a hearing, that parenting time by the party would endanger the child’s physical health or significantly impair the child’s emotional development. In addition to finding that parenting time would endanger the child’s physical health or significantly impair the child’s emotional development, in any order imposing or continuing a parenting time restrictions, the court shall enumerate the specific factual findings supporting the restriction.
This is where the bill is very sketchy on purpose. There is nothing in there that specifically says that if you, as a parent, resist your child’s transing process, you lose your rights. To do that, the bill sponsors had to first establish that all forms of abuse are reason enough to restrict parenting time and supplant parents as decision-makers. This is something everyone can agree on. It’s a linguistic Trojan horse.
Once you understand this, then the bill appears to seek to classify non-recognition of a confused child’s “new identity” as a form of parental abuse. This would then give the court a reason to keep the parents away from the child. The bill would do this under another statute called the “Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act (CADA), Places of Public Accommodation.”
The bill sponsors are pointing to this law, which has nothing to do with parenting, to establish that if your child says he’s trans, he’s now going to be in a protected class, and you have to treat him that way. That means if he says he’s a girl, and you, as the parent, tell him he’s not, or you try to convince him he’s not, you could be violating his rights under CADA and this new law if enacted.
In other words, you could be found guilty of unlawful discrimination against your own child if you deny him or her privileges, advantages, or accommodations because of “protected characteristics” such as sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression.
All of these same conditions would apply when it comes to parents making decisions for their minor children. If you step out of bounds, a court can step in and make decisions for your child that the law would normally require you to do.
The bill sponsors have thought of everything when it comes to breaking apart families. Imagine if the left spent this much time trying to improve society for parents and children.
It’s time to get the year off to a good start by taking advantage of the full catalogue of common sense thinking that comes with a PJ Media VIP membership. The good news is, PJ Media VIP memberships are on sale! Get 60% off of an annual VIP, VIP Gold, or VIP Platinum membership! Use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off a VIP membership!
