Children Should Be Playing With Toys Not Deciding on Sexual Orientation
Recently the Maine Judicial Supreme Court overturned a lower court’s decision, which had supported a local school board in not allowing a transgendered child be able to use a girl’s restroom. Before I offer my opinion on this, let me provide a little background information, and pay attention because it can get confusing.
Maine resident’s Wayne and Kelly Maines had a son who they named Wyatt. As the child grew, he told his parents, that he felt he should have been born a girl. The parents began to allow the youngster to dress as a girl, play as a girl, and in short they allowed the child to live as a girl. The parents also went so far as to change the name of Wyatt to Nicole at the child’s request. In 2007 it was discovered that 10 year old Wyatt, who is now Nicole, was using the girls’ restrooms at the school he was attending as a 5th grader. Some of the other students at the elementary school complained that Nicole, who still was a male at this time, was using the female restrooms. To address the situation and prevent any more confusion, school officials stated that Nicole could use a staff restroom, which was for both males and females. Problem solved, right…well not according to the parents of the youngster.
Maines’ parents went to the school board and complained that their child was being discriminated against by not being alowed to use the girls’ restrooms, but the board supported the school’s decision. The Maines’ then acquired an attorney, and filed a suit against the Orono school board. The district court heard the case and it too upheld the decision of the school board, saying that the child wasn’t being discriminated against. That decision was appealed again, and last week the Maine Judicial Supreme Court overturned the lower court decision saying that the actions of the school board violated the state’s anti-discrimination laws. Once again, what I perceive to be, a liberal court overruled the wishes of the majority of the people.
The school, the board, and the district court all went above and beyond in allowing this 5th grade child be able to use the unisex bathroom instead of the boy’s bathroom, which in realty he should have been required to use because he was a male. But the state supreme court in its infinite and secular wisdom said all of you are wrong, we are the all-mighty court and we are smarter than all of you. This decision by the court is sad, but what is even sadder is the politics of this case. At 10 years old this child should have been playing with G.I. Joes or Barbie Dolls, or some kind of toy, and not being used as a political pawn by the gay and lesbian lobby and some attorney wanting to get their name in the newspaper.
What’s ironic about this case is our society doesn’t believe that this child is responsible enough to vote, drive a car, go in the military, purchase cigarettes,get a tattoo, buy beer, or even see a PG-13 movie without a parent or guardian; but he is responsible enough to decide that he wants to live the rest of his life as a woman instead of becoming what he was anatomically born to be…a man. Am I the only one on this planet to see just how ludicrous it is to allow a 5th grader to make a decision of this magnitude? Heck most 5th graders aren’t even responsible enough to remember to bring a note home from their teacher or turn their homework in on time. But this court allowed this 10 year old, who is now the ripe old age of 16, to make a life altering decision, instead of requiring that child receive counseling on what it is to be a man and a woman.
If an adult wants to be gay, straight, transgendered, or anything else; it ought to be their choice, they will have to answer to God for their decisions, just as I will have to answer for mine. But when parents and the courts start allowing, and in realty condoning, a child deciding on an alternate sexual life-style, then we as a society are in bad shape. Hopefully this case will go to the Supreme Court, and it will make the right choice and overturn this terrible decision, because if it doesn’t our country takes one step closer towards Sodom and Gomorra and we all know what happen to that city.
Hi Mike. AS you know we ain't sat down to victuals yet but we do talk via the blog mail system. I am glad you surfaced the article here. You already have my views to scrutinize. Now, hopefully, some of the bloggers will step up to the plated and give their two cents worth.
It deserves discussion.
And the moral rot continues.
I am sorry for the poor misguided child.
The parents are a sorry mess.
This new world continues to crumble.
Thanks Jimmy, and as you see, I did modify one area of the context clarifying further "my opinion", after you offered your view. And I appreciate your opinion as always, though we do disagree.
TimeTarget I agree, and feel, though I didn't specify this in the commentary, that the parents should have had the child taken away from them by DFCS. I feel that they were irresponsible and placed the child in an unhealthy environment. Unfortunately as values of society are perverted and decay, what once was regarded as irresponsible and unhealthy is now looked upon as acceptable, and probably to some as ideal...that is sad.
MikeLongCounty, Thank you for posting this blog.
I had heard about this case some time back.
It is such a sad commentary of just how sick this society has become as the shameless liberal influence of our masses have voted ever increasing numbers of UNGODLY intrepratations of laws and rules.
Sodom and Gomorra grows closer as we speak.
MLC,, this is a powerful story in regards to parents not being the role model and leader for guidance to their children. Additionally it shows a clear example of when liberalism is 100% wrong.
Ah the certitude of the right. A wonder to behold.
I suppose all of yall are students of the Neurological nuances of Genetic Predisposition and Psyche Social development. Right? I mean you DO know what you're talking about don't you? Or is this just another simplistic Conservative attempt that naturally leads to a simplistic conservative explanation of "this is just another example of LIBERAL social engineering!"
So now fellas we are leaving briefly the political field and jumping into Sexual Orientation?? I can't wait to see where this one will lead.
Anybody looked into whether this trans-gendered individual has started any hormonal injections yet in anticipation of any forthcoming transsexual surgery?
One or more of yall need to get on the phone right now and check with Phil Robertson about all this nonsense. He is on the same page with you on this one. Trust me.
Jimmy, do you agree or disagree that the parents should have explained the natural role of a boy and a girl to their child and then send the child to therapy to get some professional advice to help resolve or facilitate the situation?
And it is quite clear that Wyatt/Nicole wasn't discriminated against; so yes the liberal court did impose social engineering.
Hi Funk. I don't know what the parents did or did not explain to the child. I do not know if the child had or did not have at any time any psycho-sexual identity counseling.
I do tho KNOW what I believe. I believe human's do not CHOOSE their sexual orientation. At one time the Medical Establishment classified homosexuality as a psychiatric disorder and gave it a DSM code and protocols were established to 'cure' it.! Developmental Neurological Science eventually removed the 'diagnosis of homosexuality' by removing homosexuality from its Diagnostic Manuals as it was proven NOT to be medical nor neurological disorder.
In layman's terms, we must ask ourselves why would ANYONE CHOOSE a lifestyle that for so long, up til now anyway, has\was frowned upon and bore the brunt of possible violence being visited upon them? Doesn't make sense. You CANNOT MAKE someone a homosexual(unless you have a 300 lb. cellmate named Tyrone the Bull) anymore that you CAN them hetero or bisexual or transgendered.
Another thing I do KNOW is that we are a Nation of Laws and not prejudicial attitudes, even if it appears at the time that the law conflicts with 'majority' opinion. After all Funk, at one time in our history a majority of folks said Black people could not go to the same schools as whites, had to drink from different water fountains, and sit at the back of the bus or give up their seat to any White person that wanted the seat. It took Liberal activism and Federal Law to nullify the prejudicial 'majority' and correct the error of their ways.
Like it or not, we all must abide by the law even if we find disagreement with it on issues. This one being sexual predisposition.
"But when parents and the courts start allowing, and in realty condoning, a child deciding on an alternate sexual life-style, then we as a society are in bad shape."
Amen. As to the restroom issue, it would be better to just have "unisex bathrooms," no? But that would require children to behave like adults (whatever that means), wouldn't it?
Children are impressionable enough, but to interject the possibility of "alternate gender determinations" into routine adolescent physical and emotional development just shows you how twisted our society has become.
Hi Sebe: I see it as a 'free to be you and me' thing. I see it as (one of your favorite words :)" EVOLUTION of societal sexual norms. Many may not like it, but there exists thousands, no probably MILLIONS of Gays, Lesbians, Bi-sexuals, and the Transgendered in our Society. Change sometimes can be a difficult process (see women gaining the right to vote, Blacks eating in the same restaurants as Whites...)
I don't foresee any of us going to Hell by affording avenues of societal accommodation for these human beings. Rather the opposite IMHO.
Since most of us are in agreement on this issue, and Jimmy is the lone dissenter I really hate to "pile on" but then again I know Jimmy can take it so I will...be it ever so gentle.
"Ah the certitude of the right."
Jimmy there are a lot of issues today that I do feel are debatable, but there are a few that are not. This issue is just a "symptom" of the larger "disease" which is slowing killing our country today...the attack on the family. And when I say family I mean a husband and a wife, or someone who chooses to live their life alone. This issue wouldn't be in the news if it were not for our society, or this sinful world, perverting and distorting that definition. And it is very simple, and as you say, I am very "certain" that this decision by the court and parents is wrong...period. I base that view on what is clearly stated in the Bible and also what is a scientific fact...without heterosexual relationships, homosexuals would become extinct. And yes we can talk about artificial insemination, but that still is simply a scientific way to unite a man and a woman. And I know there are a lot of verses in the Bible, especially in the Old Testament, that can distorted and are often taken out of context when people like myself use it as an arguing point, and that is another issue for another day. But when it comes to the issue of the family there is no debate, because it is an analogy for the relationship between Christ and His church. In this case the father of this child is ultimately responsible for what has happened to this child and this family in Maine. He will be held accountable, just as you will be for your family as you raised them, I will be for my family, all the other husbands commenting on this blog, and every husband alive. This boy who is now 16 has been allowed to take estrogen since he was 14 years old, from what I have read. Like I already said, the child can't get a tattoo, buy cigarettes, drive, or do a lot of other things, but at 14 he was allowed to permanently alter his body. And you know what, that is wrong. If the kid grew up, and decided to do all of this as an adult, then it would be on him. But now it is on that family, the state, and the courts. And that is sad. And just another note, the family has sought monetary damages from the Orono school system...go figure. I guess this case wasn't simply about doing what they felt was "best" for their little girl, oh wait little boy, now wait a minute...well you know who I'm talking about.
Hi Mike. I think I can understand what you are saying. And that maybe the parents should have waited until the child 'was of age' (18?) before allowing him\her to come out? I kinda agree with that but the other side of that coin is denying the child's emotional and sexual identity for 18 or more years. To me, that could pose major negative psychological problems and confusion for the child. I am not the parent of this child. I really do not know the whole story. However, I do believe that transgender children are born into this world. They are creations of God. As far as parenting goes, if it was my male child that "wanted to be a girl" I would have gone and taken my child at the very first instance to a Certified Diagnostic Psychiatrist or Dr. of Psychology. As well as a neurologist for a complete and thorough multi-disciplinary assessment.
In this case we are discussing now, I will say that if the above evaluations were NOT done, than they, the parents, were at the least unwise and at the most neglectful.
As I mentioned to you via private e-mail: you might want to run this by my brother. He as you know has an opinion on everything and is a licensed shrink.
Good discussion. And you are right, I am out-numbered here but....I can take it.
Digressing a bit here, what I am about to say may astonish some...on the left and on the right.
I think that there should be a LICENSING STANDARD in place regarding folks that wish to reproduce. Course it will cost mucho deniro to fund but in the long wrong will bode well for society. e.g. SSI, Welfare, Foodstamps, generational poverty, Hospital and medical expenses and equipment, etc. will all result in a major cost reduction. Folks can have the right to love each other and adopt but in some cases they should not be allowed to reproduce. (Think drug addicts and alcoholics here)
Ya gotta have a license to fish and hunt, to get married, to carry a gun, to drive a car, etc. etc. There should be standards and benchmarks regarding couples wanting to giving Birth IMHO.
How bout them apples?
".....but there exists thousands, no probably MILLIONS of Gays, Lesbians, Bi-sexuals, and the Transgendered in our Society."
Perhaps, but the other 300 MILLION of us should not have to eat crap and have our societal norms turned upside down in order to accommodate them.
Hi Sebe. These people are humans whether one agrees with their sexuality or not. Exclusion is NOT the answer to this very real societal issue. Inclusion is the answer. These people are not going away. I suppose we could work out something with a Republican majority to give them all their own state to live in, but I doubt that is going to happen.
Some here may like it better in Iran where Amadinahjad has stated emphatically that "homosexuals" do not 'even exist in IRAN.' You wanna know one of the reasons why that may be true? They behead or hang ANYONE suspected of being gay, bi, or Allah forbid, transgendered.
We cannot demonize these people. Well...I guess you can...but it is not the right thing to do. The Catholic Church in my opinion has created so much sexual havoc over the decades and centuries via denial than any openly gay individuals ever could.
You do not have to embrace their lifestyle or sexual preference, but you do have to acknowledge their existence. Repression is not the answer. That solves nothing.
What would Jesus do regarding these people gentlemen? Since they are creations of God should the Church, individual families, and society in whole SHUN THEM?? Is God NOT capable to save those who come to his son?
Are homosexual Episcopalian ordained Priests damned to Hell?
When I taught a Sunday School class a few years ago I was asked what would I do if a homosexual couple came into the class. I told that person I would welcome them, gather their information, ask them if they wanted to join the class, and I would teach whatever lesson was scheduled for that week. There would be no indirect points, directed at them, and they would be welcome members in my class. Just like those of us who literally commit adultery, those of us who commit it in our minds, those of us who view xxx on the internet, those of us sleep with others before we are married, and those of us who commit any other sexual sin. And all of the rest of us who commit other sins not involving sex, also would be welcomed. But just as I wouldn't direct any point at the couple, I also wouldn't dodge the issue, when it applied to the lesson, saying that the Word of God says that homosexuality is a sin, just like I would say adultery and sex outside the confines of marriage is a sin, when it applied to the lesson. It's not my job to convict a person as to sin in their life, that is up to the Holy Spirit, but it is my job as a Christian to use whatever spiritual gifts and resources that I have to get the Good News out in the world. I have said this many times and will continue to say it, "I may not always do what is right, but I do know where to find out what right is...and that's in the Bible." I don't believe that Jesus would have shunned, them just as He didn't shun any sinners. But I also don't believe Jesus would have denied telling them that they were committing sin, just as He told others they were committing sin. We as Christians are to strive to treat everyone as we would our-self...or in simple terms, treat people the way we would want to be treated. But the Bible also says that we are not to distort the Scriptures. There is a lot that is hard to understand in the Bible, I'm in the Old Testament now, and I have to read a separate daily devotional just so I don't get so bogged down. But there is also a lot that is simple. What we are discussing now is part of that simple part. I'm no preacher and I am probably the biggest sinner of all of us commenting on this blog page, and I can guarantee I've sinned more than this young kid in Maine, but I will never intentionally distort what the Bible says, if I can help it. Jesus loves all of us, even me, and I know that isn't easy a lot of the time. And no Jimmy, homosexual Episcopalian ordained Priests are not damned to Hell...not if they are saved by the Grace of Christ. Just like MikeLongCounty isn't damned to Hell for the sin in his life. But those priests are to repent, and strive to turn away from that sin, just like I am to repent and strive to turn away from the sin that I struggle with too.
You Mike have identified the resolution to this issue: Acceptance of Christ as the Son of God, Jesus, is the Answer.
Love conquers all.
One day I will share with you how I found HIM.
MikeLongCounty, your post above on Monday, Feb 17, 2014 at 17:56 PM. is the most profound statement I have seen on any blog since I started visiting this site.
Your family must truly be proud of you.
"And no Jimmy, homosexual Episcopalian ordained Priests are not damned to Hell...not if they are saved by the Grace of Christ. Just like MikeLongCounty isn't damned to Hell for the sin in his life. But those priests are to repent, and strive to turn away from that sin, just like I am to repent and strive to turn away from the sin that I struggle with too."
But first, they have to ADMIT their sin. Validating, rationalizing, legitimizing, legalizing, and aggressively promoting SIN is not part of the formula for repenting their sin. Those actions constitute ADVANCING sin.