The Regime Media Want to Trans Your Kids

The Regime Media Want to Trans Your Kids

Rea­son­able indi­vid­u­als may pre­sume that the pro-abor­tion Regime Media may also be in sup­port of hor­mon­al and sur­gi­cal muti­la­tions of chil­dren, euphemisti­cal­ly known as “gen­der affirm­ing care”. Net­work evening news cov­er­age of yesterday’s Supreme Court hear­ing on this issue removes all doubt for any­one har­bor­ing these rea­son­able pre­sump­tions.

Of the net­work news­casts, ABC’s is the most naked­ly pro-trans­ing of the kids. Here it is, in its entire­ty:

ABC WORLD NEWS TONIGHT

12/4/24

6:45 PM

DAVID MUIR: From the Supreme Court tonight, oral argu­ments in a land­mark case that could deter­mine access to health care for trans­gen­der youth across this coun­try. In ques­tion, a Ten­nessee law ban­ning gen­der affirm­ing care such as hor­mone ther­a­py and puber­ty block­ers for minors. Sev­er­al Ten­nessee fam­i­lies with trans­gen­der chil­dren say the law is uncon­sti­tu­tion­al. The con­ser­v­a­tive major­i­ty on the court seemed to side with Ten­nessee’s move. 26 states have passed laws restrict­ing gen­der affirm­ing care. The Supreme Court’s deci­sion expect­ed this spring.

David Muir’s brief doesn’t both­er with such quaint con­cepts as bal­ance. There is no men­tion of the argu­ments against these treat­ments except that Ten­nessee makes them and the Court appears to agree with them. 

The euphemistic lan­guage of the trans lob­by is pre­sent­ed here as nor­mal and main­stream. In fram­ing the issue as one of “access to care”, one hears echoes of the pro-abor­tion argu­ments also cham­pi­oned by the Regime Media. The fun­da­men­tal dif­fer­ence being, per­haps, that the abor­tions now being advo­cat­ed for (whether sur­gi­cal or “med­i­c­i­nal”) are no longer (imme­di­ate­ly) lethal, and are admin­is­tered some­time after the 40th trimester. Oth­er than that, the cov­er­age sounds iden­ti­cal.

The most bal­anced cov­er­age comes via CBS, which did a full sto­ry on the SCOTUS hear­ing. To be clear, the sto­ry is still very strong­ly biased in favor of the trans­ing of chil­dren. How­ev­er, cor­re­spon­dent Jan Craw­ford did air a view­point usu­al­ly silenced on Regime Media: that of the detrans move­ment right before clos­ing out her report:

ERIN FRIDAY: And any­body can go back into their youth and think about deci­sions that they made at 13, 14, or things that they thought “I’ll nev­er have kids, I’ll nev­er get mar­ried,” (VIDEO SWIPE) but it changes. It changes over life, and once you med­ical­ize a child, they don’t get to change their mind.

CRAWFORD: Now you know, as you can see, both these fam­i­lies want the same thing. They want their kids to be hap­py, they want to pro­tect them, and they both believe that the oth­er side’s approach would cause ter­ri­ble harm. And as sig­nif­i­cant as this case is, the ques­tion of tran­si­tion treat­ments, the deci­sion could go well beyond this issue. For exam­ple, ques­tions today: if the Court strikes down these state laws as uncon­sti­tu­tion­al, how could that bol­ster trans­gen­der argu­ments for par­tic­i­pa­tion in girls and women’s sports? Norah.

O’DONNELL: Jan Craw­ford. Thank you very much.

The detrans argu­ment is brack­et­ed by Crawford’s both­sidesing of the issue, AND by the hope that a strik­ing down of the Ten­nessee law might legit­imize boys who want to play in girls’ sports.

NBC didn’t both­er with nuance, either. Inter­est­ing­ly, Hal­lie Jack­son frames the Biden administration’s chal­lenge of the Ten­nessee law as patri­ot­ic- a push­back against Euro­pean bans on “gen­der affirm­ing care”:

HALLIE JACKSON: At issue, a Ten­nessee law that bans puber­ty block­ers and hor­mone ther­a­py for trans youth. But it allows those treat­ments for oth­er rea­sons. That’s why oppo­nents argue the law dis­crim­i­nates on the basis of sex. Lib­er­al Jus­tice Ele­na Kagan:

ELENA KAGAN: One of the artic­u­lat­ed pur­pos­es of this law is essen­tial­ly to engend- encour­age gen­der con­for­mi­ty, and to dis­cour­age any­thing oth­er than gen­der con­for­mi­ty. (VIDEO SWIPE) Sounds to me like we want boys to be boys and we want girls to be girls.

JACKSON: But oth­ers, point­ing to places in Europe putting restric­tions on gen­der affirm­ing care. 

BRETT KAVANAUGH: The coun­tries that have been at the fore­front of this are, you know, pump­ing the brakes on this kind of treat­ment because of con­cerns about the risks.

JACKSON: The Biden admin­is­tra­tion push­ing back, point­ing to how the treat­ments have saved lives.

Com­pare that to pol­i­cy com­par­isons cov­ered to favor Euro­pean pol­i­cy, such as on speech or guns. Where­as they are usu­al­ly cheered for their cen­sor­ship and gun con­trol stances, here the Euros are now the bad­dies for not allow­ing gen­i­talia to be chopped off of chil­dren.

Cov­er­age of the Supreme Court hear­ing on the Ten­nessee ban on child sex­u­al muti­la­tion was equal parts dis­turb­ing and enlight­en­ing and serves as a pre­view for what cov­er­age might look like of the Court upholds the Ten­nessee law. Expect Dobbs lite.

The Regime Media want to trans your kids.

Click “expand” to view full tran­scripts of the afore­men­tioned CBS and NBC reports as aired on Wednes­day, Decem­ber 4th, 2024:

CBS EVENING NEWS

12/4/24

6:44 PM

NORAH O’DONNELL: In one of the most antic­i­pat­ed cas­es at the Supreme Court this ses­sion, the jus­tices heard argu­ments today over Ten­nessee’s ban on gen­der affirm­ing care for minors. Sim­i­lar bans have been enact­ed in near­ly half the coun­try. CBS’s Jan Craw­ford has more on a case that could have sweep­ing con­se­quences.

JAN CRAWFORD: Com­pet­ing ral­lies made clear the con­flict. But in argu­ments, a major­i­ty of jus­tices appear to agree, laws passed by Ten­nessee and 23 oth­er states ban­ning hor­mone treat­ments and puber­ty block­ers for chil­dren who iden­ti­fy as trans­gen­der do not vio­late the Equal Pro­tec­tion Clause.

BRETT KAVANAUGH: If the Con­sti­tu­tion does­n’t take sides, if there’s strong, force­ful, sci­en­tif­ic pol­i­cy argu­ments on both sides in a sit­u­a­tion like this, why isn’t it best to leave it to the demo­c­ra­t­ic process?

CRAWFORD: Con­ser­v­a­tive jus­tices point­ed to grow­ing inter­na­tion­al con­cerns that tran­si­tion med­ica­tions are unsafe for chil­dren.

JOHN ROBERTS: I think that would be very trou­bling, to say that in such a evolv­ing sit­u­a­tion, we are going to decide what the right approach­es are.

CRAWFORD: Lib­er­al jus­tices pushed back. One com­pared the bans to racist Jim Crow-era laws.

KETANJI BROWN JACKSON: I’m wor­ried that we’re under­min­ing the foun­da­tions of some of our bedrock equal pro­tec­tion cas­es.

CRAWFORD: And said the med­ica­tion could be life-sav­ing.

SONIA SOTOMAYOR: The evi­dence is very clear that there are some chil­dren who actu­al­ly need this treat­ment.

CRAWFORD: L.W. is one of the chil­dren at the cen­ter of the case. She start­ed med­ica­tion to stop male puber­ty at 13, and female estro­gen a year lat­er.

SAMANTHA WILLIAMS: I can’t imag­ine her with­out her med­i­cines. She’s a dif­fer­ent kid. She’s a health­i­er, hap­pi­er kid… (VIDEO SWIPE) …all we’re try­ing to do is make the best deci­sions for our kid.

CRAWFORD: But a Cal­i­for­nia mom who refused to allow the med­ica­tion when her teenage daugh­ter iden­ti­fied as trans, and has since detran­si­tioned, said the risks are too high.

ERIN FRIDAY: And any­body can go back into their youth and think about deci­sions that they made at 13, 14, or things that they thought “I’ll nev­er have kids, I’ll nev­er get mar­ried,” (VIDEO SWIPE) but it changes. It changes over life, and once you med­ical­ize a child, they don’t get to change their mind.

CRAWFORD: Now you know, as you can see, both these fam­i­lies want the same thing. They want their kids to be hap­py, they want to pro­tect them, and they both believe that the oth­er side’s approach would cause ter­ri­ble harm. And as sig­nif­i­cant as this case is, the ques­tion of tran­si­tion treat­ments, the deci­sion could go well beyond this issue. For exam­ple, ques­tions today: if the Court strikes down these state laws as uncon­sti­tu­tion­al, how could that bol­ster trans­gen­der argu­ments for par­tic­i­pa­tion in girls and women’s sports? Norah.

O’DONNELL: Jan Craw­ford. Thank you very much.

NBC NIGHTLY NEWS

12/4/24

6:43 PM 

LESTER HOLT: Now to the poten­tial land­mark case before the Supreme Court con­cern­ing trans­gen­der rights, and one state’s law ban­ning tran­si­tion-relat­ed care for minors. Hal­lie Jack­son now on today’s argu­ments and how the jus­tices sig­nalled they may rule.

HALLIE JACKSON: The so-called cul­ture wars col­lid­ing with the Supreme Court tonight…

PROTESTER: I’m not against trans rights. I’m against it on minors.

JACKSON: …as the jus­tices con­sid­er whether states can restrict gen­der affirm­ing care for kids and teens. And the sig­nal so far, sup­port for let­ting those bans con­tin­ue. Some con­ser­v­a­tive jus­tices con­cerned the Court would be sec­ond-guess­ing states if it stepped in.

JOHN ROBERTS: The Con­sti­tu­tion leaves that ques­tion to the peo­ple’s rep­re­sen­ta­tives, rather than to nine peo­ple, none of whom is a doc­tor.

JACKSON: At issue, a Ten­nessee law that bans puber­ty block­ers and hor­mone ther­a­py for trans youth. But it allows those treat­ments for oth­er rea­sons. That’s why oppo­nents argue the law dis­crim­i­nates on the basis of sex. Lib­er­al Jus­tice Ele­na Kagan:

ELENA KAGAN: One of the artic­u­lat­ed pur­pos­es of this law is essen­tial­ly to engend- encour­age gen­der con­for­mi­ty, and to dis­cour­age any­thing oth­er than gen­der con­for­mi­ty. (VIDEO SWIPE) Sounds to me like we want boys to be boys and we want girls to be girls.

JACKSON: But oth­ers, point­ing to places in Europe putting restric­tions on gen­der affirm­ing care. 

BRETT KAVANAUGH: The coun­tries that have been at the fore­front of this are, you know, pump­ing the brakes on this kind of treat­ment because of con­cerns about the risks.

JACKSON: The Biden admin­is­tra­tion push­ing back, point­ing to how the treat­ments have saved lives. Atlas McGuin­ness and his mom Court­ney trav­el­ing from Delaware just to be at court today.

COURTNEY MCGUINNESS: As a par­ent, you just auto­mat­i­cal­ly go through “how am I going to make sure that my child gets the care that they need?”

JACKSON: What would you want the jus­tices to know about you, if you could give them a mes­sage?

ATLAS MCGUINNESS: I’m human. I’m just the same as any oth­er kid oth­er than the fact that I iden­ti­fy dif­fer­ent­ly.

JACKSON: Any impact would stretch far beyond Ten­nessee. More than 20 oth­er states have sim­i­lar laws in place. Part of an intense debate nation­al­ly over trans rights. Any deci­sion prob­a­bly won’t come until clos­er to the end of the Court’s term in June. Lester?

HOLT: Hal­lie Jack­son, thanks.