LGBTQ activists are attempting to redefine infertility so that same-sex couples get medical coverage for surrogacy and IVF

[rebelmouse-proxy-image,0,0,0 crop_info="%7B%22image%22%3A%20%22https%3A//" expand=1]

They’ve already deconstructed gender, villainized motherhood, and made up some fun new pronouns, so why not go ahead and add “redefine infertility” to the list?

Allie Beth Stuckey and guest Katy Faust, founder and director of Them Before Us, discuss exactly what the Alphabet Mafia is doing to undermine and redefine infertility.

“California and other blue states are trying to redefine infertility to include gay couples that cannot have a child biologically so that insurance companies would then be forced to cover things like surrogacy for two men who want a child,” says Allie.

“The medical definition of infertility is unprotected heterosexual sex for 12 months that doesn't result in a pregnancy or live birth,” Katy explains, “and now what they're saying is … no matter how much unprotected sex the same-sex couple has, they are never going to be able to produce a child” and “what biology cannot accomplish, the law needs to provide.”

The indisputable truth is that same-sex couples “will never medically be able to be diagnosed as infertile because they're not participating in the activity that would lead doctors to conclude that infertility is the problem, and yet they want the same kind of access, and they want the same insurance coverage,” Katy tells Allie.

According to the feelings > logic state of California, “it's discriminatory for heterosexual couples to be able to be designated as infertile and then receive coverage from their insurance companies,” so in the name of DEI, they intend to “redefine what infertility means.”

“So now the California bill and similar other bills across the country are seeking to define infertility as not a medical status but really a relational status,” says Katy, so people can be deemed infertile because of “the relationship [they’re in] or…because [they’re] not in a relationship at all.”

“What are some of the repercussions of green-lighting a bill like this?” asks Allie.

“The California bill specifically said insurance companies can't discontinue services and there is in essence unlimited supply of IVF transfers,” says Katy, “and we already have a situation in this country where we've got one million frozen embryos in storage right now, and oftentimes the only thing that keeps that in check is cost.”

However, with “insurance funded IVF transfers … why limit the number of embryos that you're going to create?”

“It is only going to increase the amount of children who are suffering indefinitely in a freezer or who are going to perish in the gauntlet that children have to undergo between freezer and implantation and then ultimately birth,” says Katy.

Further, “it is going to massively increase the number of children that are screened for sex or for … potential genetic markers that don't seem as desirable to the adults; in essence, it is going to contribute to the increased commodification of children where they are thawed and discarded, donated to research, or spend their life forever in a freezer,” she explains.

To hear their full conversation, watch the video below.

Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?

To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Dad fights to save his 3-year-old son from 'NON-BINARY' life forced upon him by mother

[rebelmouse-proxy-image,0,0,0 crop_info="%7B%22image%22%3A%20%22https%3A//" expand=1]

Harrison Tinsley was so excited when he found out he was going to be a dad. His story started in the same way many do – he met a girl, they fell in love, and a baby was soon on the way.

But a nightmare was waiting around the corner.

A few months into pregnancy, the mother of Harrison’s child became hostile toward him when he wouldn’t bend to her political ideology. The two had always been on opposite ends of the political spectrum, but until pregnancy, it had never been an issue.

“I was constantly getting threatened that I wouldn’t see my son if I wasn’t exactly who she wanted me to be, particularly in a political sense,” Harrison tells Allie Beth Stuckey.

“I’m not changing who I am; I’m going to love my son no matter what, and there’s no reason that we have to agree on everything to have a beautiful family,” he continues.

But clearly, the mother didn’t concur.

Their relationship ended, a cease-and-desist letter was issued to Harrison, all communication was cut off, and he was effectively barred from seeing his son.

Shortly after his son’s birth, however, he went to court to establish paternity, visitation, and custody, but the process took months, and by the time Harrison met his son, the boy was fifteen months old.

“Unspeakable heartbreak … it’s like a part of you is just gone that should be there,” he tells Allie.

Fortunately, however, Harrison was able to win half custody and begin making up for lost time with his son.

But then another nightmare reared its ugly head.

Harrison is now fighting for full custody of his son for a number of reasons, the main one being that the child’s mother is raising him as non-binary.

“She would post pictures of him in dresses and makeup,” he says.

But that’s just the beginning.

“There’s defamation of me on social media,” says Harrison – specifically claims that he was abusive during their relationship.

“Which was completely untrue, and I’ve proven that to be untrue in court,” he says.

Then Harrison discovered that his son’s mother was placed on a 5150, which is an involuntary psychiatric hold, for an incident involving head trauma.

“There’s the defamation of me, there’s the gender stuff,” and then “mom was arrested for child endangerment.”

“It was extremely, extremely scary,” he tells Allie.

A trial was held, and to Harrison’s dismay, the court ruled to keep custody the same.

“My son had to continue to see the doctor that the mom preferred, which is a doctor” who believes “it’s okay to treat kids as non-binary,” he explains.

But Harrison isn’t one to give up without a fight.

“If they’re not gonna’ protect my son, I am,” he says, “so I decided I’m gonna scream it from the rooftops and tell as many people … what’s going on and try to get support that way, and I’m appealing the court’s decision to a higher court.”

“That’s where I’m at now. … I’m just speaking out, and it’s now become more than just protecting Sawyer; it’s also about protecting all kids.”

To hear their full conversation, watch the clip below.

Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?

To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Co-founder of gay pride parade claims trans activists attacked him during Vermont parade

Fred Sargeant, a co-founder of New York City's first gay pride parade in 1970, alleged that transgender activists attacked him during a parade in Vermont on Sunday.

The 74-year-old is a prominent gay rights leader who participated in the 1969 Stonewall riots. Sargeant told National Review he attended the pride event in Vermont to protest the transgender movement by holding a sign and handing out pamphlets.

Sargeant said he believes the "gender identity movement" has stolen the "gay liberation movement." Once a founder of the pride event, he now feels it is "an exclusionary parade and a venue for groups dedicated to discrimination within the same-sex community."

"The concern I have is that the movement that I knew, the gay liberation movement, has metamorphosized into a gender identity movement that is quite misogynistic, homophobic – values that I can't share," Sargeant told National Review.

Sargeant said he no longer recognizes the movement he helped start decades ago.

During the parade, Sargeant held a sign with a red line through the phrases "Black Face" and "Woman Face." On the reverse side of the sign, it read "Gay, Not Queer."

"For some reason in society today, while no one would dare go in black face and expect to be taken seriously in the future, drag is celebrated, and I think that's wrong," Sargeant argued. "I think it's disrespectful for women."

Sargeant reported that as he stood facing the oncoming crowd, an individual approached him and took his sign.

"As best I could on a cane, but with a little adrenaline going, I kind of hobbled after him down the street, got my sign back," Sargeant told the news outlet.

After retrieving his sign, Sargeant said he returned to where he initially stood and continued silently protesting, but it did not take long for more activists to confront him.

A video posted to Sargeant's Facebook page showed a woman attempting to rip the sign from his hands. Another parade attendee accused her of assaulting Sargeant, and she replied by accusing him of starting the altercation by elbowing her friend.

Sargeant claimed that during the Vermont pride parade, he was shoved, smacked, and knocked to the ground by radical transgender activists. He also stated that the activists poured coffee on his head and stole his property.

He wrote on Facebook, "So, I went to Pride to protest their misogyny, homophobia, exclusionary policies and divisiveness. I was met by screaming, multiple assaults, ageist comments, shoving, slaps to the back of my head, pouring coffee on me and repeated attempts to steal my signs. Being unsuccessful in their attempts to disrupt my protest and drive me away, the mob pushed me to the ground as the parade ended, further injuring me."

He accused the trans activists of stealing roughly $600 worth of possessions from him, including a folding chair, umbrella, a box of pamphlets, and a new shirt.

"They put two and two together and took some trophies," Sargeant told the National Review. He reported that he was sent to the hospital for a CT scan and ultimately sent home to recover from the attack.

According to the National Review, police were notified about the incident twice, but it took nearly three hours to follow up with Sargeant regarding the attack.

\u201cWe are appalled by the news that Fred Sargeant - Stonewall veteran and co-founder of Pride - has been beaten and robbed at Burlington Pride, by attendees who take for granted the rights he fought for decades ago.\n\nWe send love and solidarity to Fred and wish him a swift recovery.\u201d
— LGB Alliance (@LGB Alliance) 1663618824

Video: Delta passenger kicked off flight over 'F*** Biden' hoodie, threatened with being placed on airline's no-fly list

A Delta Airlines passenger recorded video of an airline official kicking him off his flight and threatening him with being placed on the airline's no-fly list if he didn't comply.

Why? Because he was wearing a "F*** Biden" hoodie. And the Delta official also pointed out that he wasn't wearing a mask — but the hoodie took center stage in videos the passenger posted to TikTok.

What are the details?

In the first clip from @Jauneil51603 — he identifies himself as Jauneil Brooks in a subsequent clip — the airline official tells him she spoke to "corporate security" and that if he doesn't leave the plane with his "F*** Biden" hoodie turned inside out, she would have to deplane all the passengers. She adds that the decision is based on Delta "policy" and that "you cannot wear it."

The airline official adds to Brooks that he also would be placed on the "no-fly list" if he doesn't comply.

He then tells the Delta official that he needs to see the policy for himself, and she replies that they could look at the policy on a computer in the jetway. He then argues that he has the right to express himself under the First Amendment.

It isn't clear on what date the interaction took place, but Brooks posted the first clip on Wednesday.

Content warning: Profanity on hoodie visible in video:

Man was kicked off @Delta flight for wearing a shirt that\u2019s against Biden. They even threatened to put him on the no fly
— \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8Travis\ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8 (@\ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8Travis\ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8) 1646859285

In a second video, Brooks is standing in what appears to be the front of the plane, and he takes off his "F*** Biden" hoodie.

"You guys force me to wear my mask, I don't wanna wear it; I can't wear my hoodie. It's off," he says in the second clip. "I'm gonna go sit down. ... Whatever you guys ... say to me ... will be recorded, and you guys can get sued."

In a third video, Brooks is sitting in his seat again without his "F*** Biden" hoodie visible, but the Delta official tells him the captain wants him off the plane anyway — this time she says it's because he hadn't been wearing his mask.

"This is what's wrong with our country," Brooks says as he departs the plane.

@jauneil51603 I took off the hoodie and still got kicked off #delta #thepeoplesconvoy #wethepeople ♬ original sound - Jauneil51603

In a fourth video, Brooks walks through the jetway with his "F*** Biden" hoodie back on and speaks to the airline official who kicked him off the flight. He asks for his luggage under the plane, and he's told it would end up in Los Angeles, which is his final destination. He asks for the airline official's name and badge number, but she only tells him her first name.

Content warning: Profanity on hoodie visible in video:

In a fifth clip, a different airline official speaks to Brooks by an airport gate. She tells Brooks he was wearing an "obscene shirt" and that he "refused to remove it" and that he wasn't "being compliant with your mask."

Brooks argues that he did take off his hoodie and put on his mask and that proof is on video. The airline official is unsympathetic and simply tells Brooks that Delta has canceled his ticket and that he'd be refunded.

Content warning: Profanity on hoodie visible in video:

@jauneil51603 Because they didn’t like my hoodie they kicked me off the plane . #wethepeople #trump2024 #FJB #LGB #delta #deltairlines ♬ original sound - Jauneil51603

What did Delta have to say?

Delta Airlines on Thursday offered the following statement to TheBlaze: “Delta has long prohibited customers from displaying profane or derogatory words or images, and our expectation is for customers and our people to treat each other with dignity and respect, always. Nothing is more important than a safe, civil travel experience for all. We apologize to our customers for any inconvenience caused by the briefly delayed departure.”

While Libs of TikTok indicated it had chatted with a Delta rep who said passengers can wear whatever they want, Delta's "Contract of Carriage" for U.S. Travel; "Rule 7: Refusal to Transport"; "E) Passenger’s Conduct or Condition" states that "Delta may refuse to transport or may remove passengers from its aircraft ... When the passenger’s conduct, attire, hygiene or odor creates an unreasonable risk of offense or annoyance to other passengers."

Anything else?

Delta, like numerous airlines, has been in the news quite a bit over the last few years with regard to difficulties between flight crews and passengers:

  • Just last month Delta chief executive Ed Bastian said he wanted the U.S. government to place passengers convicted of onboard disruptions on a national "no-fly" list that would bar them from future travel on any commercial airline, Reuters reported.
  • Also in February a black passenger was asked to move to the back of a Delta flight in a story that was reported the world over. But the National Review looked into the matter a bit more deeply and spoke to a Delta employee with knowledge of the situation who said race wasn't an issue and that a number of tidbits were left out of initial reports.
  • In January 2021, Delta banned passengers for life who chanted “traitor” at Utah Sen. Mitt Romney during a flight, the Salt Lake Tribune reported.
  • Back in 2017 Delta passengers tried to sing the national anthem for a fallen soldier, but a flight attendant reportedly shut down the idea over airline policy.
  • And shortly after former President Donald Trump was elected in 2016, Delta banned for life a disruptive passenger who shouted pro-Trump and anti-Hillary Clinton remarks at fellow passengers on a flight, the New York Times reported.