‘Bla­tant Pro­pa­gan­da’: CNN Blast­ed For Pan­el Fea­tur­ing Moms With Trans-Iden­ti­fy­ing Kids

CNN inter­viewed three trans­gen­der-iden­ti­fy­ing chil­dren and their moms on Wednes­day as Ten­nessee defend­ed its ban on irre­versible trans­gen­der pro­ce­dures on minors before the Supreme Court. 

The pan­el, host­ed by CNN’s Lucy Kafanov, fea­tured the par­ents of the gen­der-con­fused chil­dren repeat­ing trans­gen­der activist talk­ing points and express­ing fear about the incom­ing Trump admin­is­tra­tion. Kafanov prompt­ed the pan­elists with ques­tions about the $200 mil­lion Repub­li­cans spent on “anti-trans” ads dur­ing the last elec­tion, and asked them how they were “cop­ing” with Trump’s elec­tion.  

“I don’t know what kind of care my kids are going to need in the future, but I also believe in body auton­o­my and parental rights and so my kids deserve access to the same life-sav­ing care that oth­er cis­gen­der kids are receiv­ing with­out politi­cians inter­fer­ing,” Hazel Heinz­er claimed. 

The claims about “live-sav­ing” care were echoed by anoth­er mom who point­ed to the “sui­cide rate of trans youth.”

Activists often tell par­ents that they can either have a liv­ing child with the pro­ce­dures or a dead child with­out. But research actu­al­ly shows that the pro­ce­dures can actu­al­ly increase the like­li­hood that minors will attempt sui­cide.

Paul Dupont, the com­mu­ni­ca­tions direc­tor of the Amer­i­can Prin­ci­ples Project, told The Dai­ly Wire that the entire seg­ment was a dis­hon­est push for trans­gen­der ide­ol­o­gy.

“If there’s any­one still won­der­ing why peo­ple are increas­ing­ly aban­don­ing out­lets like CNN, this seg­ment should be Exhib­it A,” he said. “It’s a per­fect exam­ple of the bla­tant pro­pa­gan­da still being pushed by lega­cy news on an issue where pub­lic opin­ion has moved strong­ly against them.”

Michelle Calla­han-Dumont, anoth­er one of the moms, said her child asked her three “fright­en­ing” ques­tions after Trump won. She said that the child asked, “Are we going to have to move?”, “Are they going to take me away from you?” and “Am I not going to be able to get my med­i­cine?”

Calla­han-Dumont lat­er told The Dai­ly Sig­nal that her child, a 10-year-old boy who iden­ti­fies as a girl, “knew since birth” that he iden­ti­fied as trans­gen­der. 

Callahan-Dumont’s child told CNN that he was scared of being shot in the street because of his iden­ti­ty. He said that he was afraid “that I’m going to be mur­dered, like one day I’m going be walk­ing down the street and somebody’s going to come up and shoot me or some­thing.”

The child said it made him “lit­er­al­ly dead inside” when Repub­li­cans cam­paigned against per­form­ing trans­gen­der pro­ce­dures on kids. 

CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE

Kafanov lat­er asked the pan­el how it impact­ed their child­hood by hav­ing “to fight for your right to exist.”

One of the kids respond­ed, “my child­hood is hon­est­ly kind of ruined” by hav­ing to deal with “so many like racist, anti-trans” peo­ple.

Lizette Tru­jil­lo said that her 17-year-old child has been lob­by­ing since the age of 9, say­ing that she had spent the “major­i­ty” of her life “defend­ing” her “exis­tence.” 

“I think that they would focus on real things, like cli­mate change, instead of using our iden­ti­ties as a pawn just to get votes or just to stay in an office,” the child said about what she wished politi­cians would work on. 

Dupont told The Dai­ly Wire that Kafanov’s fram­ing of the issue was a cyn­i­cal effort to use dis­tressed chil­dren.

“The sad­dest part about this seg­ment is that it is ‘jour­nal­ists’ like Kafanov who have been cen­tral in con­vinc­ing trans­gen­der-iden­ti­fy­ing chil­dren like these that their lives are in dan­ger,” he said.

“By fram­ing con­ser­v­a­tive efforts to pro­tect kids as threat­en­ing their ‘right to exist,’ Kafanov and her ilk have done more to ter­ror­ize these chil­dren than any­one else. And CNN’s deci­sion to put these clear­ly dis­tressed kids on nation­al tele­vi­sion only serves to val­i­date con­cerns that they are being used to advance the cause of gen­der ide­ol­o­gy with zero regard for their own well-being.”