Democratic governor forbids Kentuckians to talk kids out of sex changes



Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear signed an executive order Thursday forbidding so-called "conversion therapy" for Kentucky minors.

Radicals are still permitted to groom confused children into becoming transvestites even though Republicans have thankfully banned sterilizing sex-offender drugs and irreversible genital mutilation in the state.

However, medical and mental health professionals certified or licensed to practice in the state are now effectively barred from helping kids get over their gender dysphoria and accept their bodies.

The executive order — which both echoes and cites the Trevor Project as an authority on the subject despite the falsity of one of the radical activist group's core claims — defines conversion therapy as:

any practice, treatment, or intervention that seeks or purports to change an individual's sexual orientation or gender identity, including efforts to change behaviors or gender expressions or to eliminate or reduce sexual or romantic attractions toward individuals of the same gender.

This definition reflects the successful campaign by gender ideologues to bundle efforts to treat gender identity disorder with efforts to dissuade homosexuals from being gay.

Beshear, who unsuccessfully attempted to veto Republicans' ban on sex-change mutilations for kids last year, said, "This [EO] is about protecting our youth from an inhumane practice that hurts them."

'He can't just issue an executive order and prescribe law.'

The language of the executive order suggests that those professionals who would dare coach children through their delusions and to accept the reality of their biological sex could lose their licenses.

Beshear's order makes clear, however, that affirming a confused minor's "gender identity" and facilitating the minor's "identity exploration and development" are acceptable, as is "any practice, treatment, or intervention that assists an individual seeking to undergo a gender transition or an individual who is in the process of undergoing a gender transition."

Beshear has tasked state agencies with taking reports of offending professionals to their respective certification or licensing boards for potential disciplinary action.

The governor appears keen to pressure those institutions beyond his reach to fall in line, encouraging all professional certification or licensing boards, departments, and autonomous agencies in the state not subject to his supervision to "explore and implement all options to prohibit the practice of conversion therapy on minors and the referral of minors for conversion therapy."

The order also makes it illegal to use state or federal funds "for the practice of conversion therapy on minors, referring a minor for conversion therapy, or extending health benefits coverage for conversion therapy with a minor."

Chris Hartman, director of the LGBT activist group Fairness Campaign, said in a statement, "Today Gov. Beshear sends a crystal-clear message to all of Kentucky’s LGBTQ kids and their families – you are perfect as you are," evidently missing the irony that the order bars professionals from helping kids accept the physical reality of who they are.

'This EO stands to chill and stigmatize Christian counseling in the midst of a mental health crisis in KY.'

Richard Nelson, executive director of the Commonwealth Policy Center, told the Lexington Herald-Leader that the ban's failure to advance in the Kentucky legislature is evidence that it shouldn't be enacted unilaterally by Beshear.

"The legislative route has been tried, which is how we arrive at laws and public policy in the state, and they've not garnered legislative approval. There's a reason for that," said Nelson, adding that the ban might infringe upon First Amendment rights.

Conservative attorney Chris Wiest suggested to the Herald-Leader that it amounts to political theater.

"He can't just issue an executive order and prescribe law. This is really basic Con Law 101 stuff, and I think the governor knows it, frankly," said Wiest. "He's not stupid, but he gets the headlines and he excites the base."

Republican state Rep. Josh Calloway tweeted, "Why is [Andy Beshear] determined to keep vulnerable children confused? I will fight this with every fiber of my being."

"Leave the kids alone!" added Calloway.

"This EO, which similar forms have been determined to be unconstitutional, will have a chilling effect on Christian counseling, and possibly violate religious liberties...I expect this to be s[w]iftly challenged!" tweeted state Sen. Robby Mills (R).

"Parents have the right to raise their children in a manner that is based on biblical standards and to help their children receive faith based counseling. This EO stands to chill and stigmatize Christian counseling in the midst of a mental health crisis in KY," added Mills.

Matt Sharp, senior counsel at the Alliance Defending Freedom, told the Washington Post, "The government has no business censoring private conversations between clients and counselors, nor should counselors be used as a tool to impose the government’s biased views on their clients."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Time magazine tries defending Harris by fact-checking Trump — then forced into all-time correction



During Tuesday's debate, President Donald Trump said that Kamala Harris "wants to do transgender operations on illegal aliens that are in prison," adding, "This is a radical left liberal that would do this."

The liberal media dutifully rushed to defend the vice president, claiming that Trump's assertion was false — which it is not. In doing so, misleading publications like the New Yorker not only drew greater attention to Harris' desire to mutilate illegal aliens' genitals using taxpayer money, but to their own propagandic nature.

Time magazine, another publication whose writers evidently underestimated Harris' radicalism, was among the offenders. Confronted with the truth of Trump's claim, it had to issue an embarrassing correction Wednesday.

'The truth was too crazy for the fact checkers.'

On Monday, CNN's investigative outfit KFile unearthed an American Civil Liberties Union questionnaire completed in 2019 by then-Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), which revealed several of Harris' extreme positions and goals.

Harris indicated that she supported the decriminalization of all drug possession for personal use; statehood for Washington, D.C.; the repeal of the Hyde Amendment; ending illegal alien detention facilities; and cutting Immigration and Customs Enforcement funding.

Harris also vowed to ensure that "federal prisoners and detainees are able to obtain medically necessary care for gender transition, including surgical care, while incarcerated or detained."

Time magazine, which has previously concern-mongered about "disinformation" and "fake news," originally reported:

The former President repeated a baseless Internet rumor that migrant invaders were killing and eating pet dogs and cats in Springfield, Ohio, and falsely claimed that Harris 'wants to do transgender operations on illegal aliens in prison.'

The publication has since updated the article to read:

Trump glowered and grimaced, spewing old grievances and strange new attacks. The former President repeated a baseless Internet rumor that migrant invaders were killing and eating pet dogs and cats in Springfield, Ohio, and claimed that Harris 'wants to do transgender operations on illegal aliens in prison.'

The latest version contains a corrective note at the very bottom admitting that Time's original story "mischaracterized as false Donald Trump's statement accusing Kamala Harris of supporting 'transgender operations on illegal aliens in prison.'"

"As a presidential candidate in 2019, Harris filled out a questionnaire saying she supported taxpayer-funded gender transition treatment for detained immigrants," added Time's correction.

Donald Trump Jr. noted on X, "Unreal."

Former presidential candidate and entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy said, "Turns out the truth was too crazy for the fact checkers."

Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk tweeted, "Kamala, TIME, and ABC collectively got owned on one simple, easily confirmed fact-check. This is fantastic."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Instead Of Taking On The Billion-Dollar Trans Industry, The Los Angeles Times Attacks Its Victim, Chloe Cole

'Gender transition' advocates are monsters, mutilating children for money, but their former victims are finding the strength to fight back.

16 state AGs press SCOTUS to take up case about schools covertly transitioning children



Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares (R) and 15 other attorneys general have filed an amicus brief on behalf of their respective states asking that the U.S. Supreme Court take up a case regarding schools' covert efforts to transition children into sexually-confused transvestites behind their parents' backs.

"Parents have the right to be involved in major decisions affecting their children's lives. This case presents an opportunity for the U.S. Supreme Court to provide much-needed clarity and reaffirm that government officials cannot override parents' fundamental rights simply because they believe they know better," Miyares said in a statement.

Background

A group of parents in Wisconsin sued the Eau Claire Area School District in 2022 over the guidance it provided to schools and employees regarding how to handle students suffering from delusions about their gender.

The guidance, which wasconfirmed by a district spokesperson at the time, noted that some "transgender, non-binary, and/or gender-nonconforming students are not 'open' at home for reasons that may include safety concerns or lack of acceptance."

Accordingly, school personnel were instructed to first discuss the matter with the student before considering discussing the matter with the student's parents.

The parents' complaint claimed that the policy "mandates that schools and teachers hide critical information regarding a child's health from his or her parents and to take action specifically designed to alter the child's mental and physical well-being. Specifically, the Policy allows and requires District staff to treat a child as if he or she is the opposite sex, by changing the child's name, pronouns, and intimate facility use, all without the parents' knowledge or consent."

Teachers were apparently further instructed that "parents are not entitled to know their kids' identities" and that such "knowledge must be earned."

Educators in the district evidently took the guidance to heart, in one case textually informing students, "If your parents aren't accepting of your identity, I'm your mom now."

"The obvious purpose of such secrecy is to prevent parents from making critical decisions for their own minor children, from interfering with the school's ideologically-driven activities, from caring for their children, or from freely practicing their religion," read the parents' complaint. "The insidious invasion of parental rights at issue in this case cannot be tolerated by a free people who value liberty."

The plaintiffs, represented by the firms America First Legal and the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, claimed the district had violated their fundamental parental rights both under the 14th Amendment and under Article 1, Section 1 of the Wisconsin Constitution, along with their constitutionally-protected religious freedom.

Stephen Miller, president of America First Legal, stressed at the outset "Eau Claire schools have adopted a monstrous plan to secretly 'change' the genders of children as young as 5 — without parental consent — effectively subjecting them to unnatural ideological experiments contrary to their health and biology."

Setback

The case, Parents Protecting Our Children, UA v. Eau Claire Area School District, was kicked up through the courts to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

The appellate court ruled on March 7 that the district court was right to dismiss the parents' complaint "for lack of subject matter jurisdiction."

The court wrote that "Parents Protecting is clear that their members harbor genuine concerns about possible applications of the School District's policy. Unless that policy operates to impose an injury or to create an imminent risk of injury, however — a worry that may never come to pass — the association's concerns do not establish standing to sue and thus do not create a Case or Controversy. The district court had no choice but to dismiss the challenge for lack of Article III subject matter jurisdiction."

To the high court

Last month, the AFL and WILL filed a petition for writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court, stressing that the plaintiff and petitioner in the case — an association of parents who have children in the district — are both subject to the offending policy and directly harmed by it, contrary the conclusion reached by the district and appellate courts.

The petition posed the following question: "When a school district adopts an explicit policy to usurp parental decision- making authority over a major health-related decision — and to conceal this from the parents — do parents who are subject to such a policy have standing to challenge it?"

'Government officials cannot interfere with this right — 'perhaps the oldest of the fundamental liberty interests recognized by' this Court — just because the government officials believe that they know better.'

According to the petition, parents are injured in multiple ways, including by the loss of their exclusive decision-making authority over whether a sex-change transition is in their kid's best interest; by their inability to obtain information to which they are entitled, which is a "cognizable 'injury in fact' for purposes of Article III standing"; and by the strain placed on the parent-child relationship introduced by the policy's student-facing invitation to keep secrets from their parents.

It indicates also that the "policy facially deprives Petitioner's members of their statutory rights, which presently harms them by making it impossible for them to withhold consent from the application of the Gender Support Plan process to their children. The denial of this right to information, protected by the Constitution and by statute, constitutes concrete harm under Spokeo, Public Citizen, and Akins."

The amicus brief

The attorneys general for Virginia, Florida, Georgia, Texas, and a dozen other states filed an amicus brief in support of the parents in the case, stressing they too have a "compelling interest in protecting parents' fundamental right to make decisions about 'the care, custody, and control of their children.'"

"This case presents the opportunity for this Court to reiterate that government officials cannot interfere with this right — 'perhaps the oldest of the fundamental liberty interests recognized by' this Court — just because the government officials believe that they know better," said the brief.

The brief noted that Article III's standing requirement comes down to answering the basic question, "What's it to you?" and that the "answer in this case is plain": Parents have an interest in making decisions about their children and the interference by school officials clearly amounts to injury.

It further emphasized that "[s]chool districts have no interest, compelling or otherwise, in wholesale concealment of children's gender transitions from parents, absent any evidence of abuse or neglect. 'Simply because the decision of a parent is not agreeable to a child or because it involves risks does not automatically transfer the power to make that decision from the parents to some agency or officer of the state.'"

Virginia AG Miyares added in a statement, "It is essential that schools work with parents, not against them, to support a child's wellbeing."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

‘Nonbinary’ teacher pushes chemical castration for kids; Stuckey fights back with facts



Of all the debates raging between the left and the right, whether or not children should be allowed to medically transition is arguably one of — if not the — most important one.

Allie Beth Stuckey of "Relatable" has been unwavering in her position that children should not be allowed to medically transition, and she made her case during a recent debate with Desmond Fambrini on "The Ellen Fisher Podcast."

When Fambrini cites approval for puberty blockers from the American Psychiatric Association and the Trevor Project, Stuckey is ready.

“I would say, unfortunately, a lot of those institutions and the people in those institutions are captured by a particular ideology that really sacrifices the well-being of kids, so my answer to that question would be unequivocally no,” Stuckey says.

“If you’re thinking about puberty blockers, 10, 11, 12 years old, you certainly do not have the ability yet to understand the long-term consequences of what you’re putting your body through. Not only your body, but also your mind actually requires puberty to be healthy,” she adds.

Stuckey explains that these are “irreversible procedures and processes that kids cannot consent to because they do not have the mental ability to understand the long-term repercussions.”

One of those long-term repercussions is fertility, which Stuckey believes is one of the more important reasons not to medically transition children.

“Not everyone’s focus is fertility,” Fambrini fires back, before Stuckey explains that children don't know whether or not they’re going to want kids when they’re young — so to take that away from them is cruel.

“Also, for example, the decay of the uterus when you have too much testosterone in your body as a woman. All different kinds of physical maladies that come with trying to change your body into what it can never be,” Stuckey adds.

Not only are there physical maladies, but the pain of detransitioners around the world is hard to ignore.

“Not only did they detransition and realize, ‘Oh, I want to be a mom,’ they realized, ‘Oh, I really want to breastfeed. Now, I can’t do that.’ And unfortunately, the adults in their life had the same mentality that kind of you just expressed, that, ‘Well, if you can drive a car, you can decide to cut your healthy breasts off.’ And now they’re living forever with that guilt,” Stuckey explains to Fambrini.

When Fambrini notes that the stats reflect that individuals are happier after medically transitioning, Stuckey again disagrees.

“I am not basing my disapproval of and disagreement with transition on the rates of regret or not. I think it is objectively, morally, ethically wrong to mutilate your body, in particular as a child,” she explains.

“I am never going to be for the blocking of puberty or the chemical castration of a young person.”


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.

Science Keeps Obliterating The Left’s Favorite Transgender Narratives

The continued lack of evidence for ‘gender-affirming care’ is pushing gender ideologues to increasingly brazen lies as their position collapses.

Republican bill would throw Missouri teachers who transition students on sex offender registry



There are policies in place in various schools across the country that prevent educators and administrators from informing parents that their children are undergoing so-called transitions at school. In many cases, teachers and staff are actually encouraged to covertly aid confused students in masquerading as members of the opposite sex.

Missouri could soon do things a whole lot differently.

Rather than afford educators cover to transition kids behind parents' backs, Republican state Rep. Jamie Gragg and a few of his peers want to put them on a sex offender registry.

Gragg, of Christian County, introduced House Bill 2885 last month. The bill, which has since been co-sponsored by Republican Reps. Jeff Farnan, Hannah Kelly, and Brian Seitz, would amend state law concerning the registry of sex offenders and introduce a penalty for "the offense of contributing to social transition."

"Social transition" is defined in the legislation thusly: "the process by which an individual adopts the name, pronouns, and gender expression, such as clothing or haircuts, that match the individual's gender identity and not the gender assumed by the individual's sex at birth."

Under the proposed law, a teacher or school counselor acting in official capacity who "provides support, regardless of whether the support is material, information, or other resources to a child regarding social transition," can be charged with a Class E felony.

In Missouri, Class E felony convictions can land offenders a fine of up to $10,000 and four years in prison.

Offenders found guilty of socially transitioning students would have to register as a sex offenders. While grouped on the lowest tier, offenders would nevertheless be required to report to the chief law enforcement official annually.

Presently, Missouribars most sex offenders from loitering within 500 feet of a school when one or more minors are present; approaching or contacting children near a child care facility building; knowingly being present in or loitering with 500 feet of a public park or playground equipment; and knowingly coaching a sports team in which a minor is a member. Consequently, a conviction under this proposed law would likely amount to the end of an offender's career in education.

Gragg told KYTV-TV, "This bill was created and really submitted to help parents and families and to help teachers. I talk to parents every day who are frustrated with things that kids are being taught in school."

"I would say the large majority of teachers in our state, and also in our in our country, do a great job, they do a fantastic job," said Gragg. "This [bill] is to put the social learning development of our children back in the hands of the parents."

The Republican added in a statement to Newsweek, "Education begins at home, and it's time for the few liberal activists who've infiltrated the education system to stop interfering in the relationships between parents and their children. We need to make sure our teachers, those who spend their lives helping our children grow and prepare for the world, can focus on teaching. HB 2885 does just that."

LGBT activists have denounced the Republican proposal to protect kids from grooming efforts at school.

Aaron Schekorra, the executive director of the GLO Center, an LGBT activist establishment in Springfield, suggested to KYTV that HB 2885 "is just another in a long string of pieces of legislation that are meant to incite hatred and violence against the queer community. And it comes from a source that, frankly, has just been a bully to a lot of marginalized groups in our state."

Alejandra Caraballo, a radical transvestite and Harvard Law School clinical instructor, called the bill "insane."

LGBT activist Erin Reed noted it was unlikely that "something like this could pass, even in Missouri, but it's worth noting as it's rare we get 'new' anti-trans bills that haven't been written before." He added, "And in a much more fascist, right wing, anti-trans government, should they win, it wouldn't surprise me."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

'Parents should know': Kansas AG turns up the heat on school districts that 'socially transition' kids behind parents' backs



Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach is turning up the heat on "troublesome districts" that have doubled-down on policies allegedly allowing schools to "socially transition" students without parental consent. The Republican AG has narrowed the remaining offenders down to a handful of districts, which he appears keen to rein in.

"A child changing his or her gender identity has major long-term medical and psychological ramifications," Kobach said in a statement Thursday. "Parents should know, and have an opportunity to be involved in such an important aspect of their well-being."

According to the Washington Examiner, Kobach used Parents Defending Education's list of parental exclusion policies to pinpoint offending districts in Kansas. After drilling down on each district's policies and weighing their constitutionality, Kobach identified six school districts that were allegedly undermining parental rights.

The Republican AG penned letters to the districts in December, specifically challenging policies that require school staff to hide a student's transvestism or "gender non-conforming" status from their parents, reported the Associated Press.

The letters accused the districts of surrendering "to woke gender ideology" and stressed it "would be arrogant beyond believe to hide something with such weighty consequences from the very people (parents) that both law and nature vest with providing for a child's long-term well-being."

Kobach indicated Thursday that upon notifying the districts and asking whether they had collected parental input prior to adopting the radical policies, two districts — Belle Plaine and Maize — "responded that they had no intention of cutting parents out of the process and immediately rescinded or amended their polices."

"A lot of times these policies are pushed by outside activist organizations and adopted by school boards without being fully informed about what the policy would actually do," said Kansas Deputy Attorney General Abhishek Kambli. "Belle Plaine and Maize should be praised for responding swiftly when they saw what was going on."

Three of the four other districts — Kansas City, Shawnee Mission, and Topeka — refused to back down on keeping parents in the dark, according to Kobach.

The Olathe School District alternatively appears to have had a change of heart this week. The attorney general noted on X that the OSD has scheduled a meeting to discuss its policy.

OSD said in a statement obtained by KSHB-TV that they had developed "internal administrative guidelines" for staff, but that no formal policy has ever existed.

The OSD's "Guidance Related to Gender Identity," obtained by Parents Defending Education via a public records request, states the "best practice is for staff to obtain parental consent before addressing the student publicly by their preferred name and/or pronoun." However, it goes on qualify such disclosures, noting instances where parents could be left in the dark.

"Staff must be carefully to refrain from incautious disclosure of a student's gender status and/or sexual orientation. Informing the decision to disclose to a parent/guardian are considerations related to the age of the student; whether the student has developmental disabilities; protecting the privacy interests of the student; whether the communications with the parent would cause trauma to the student, and a fear for the child's health as a result of the communication," says the guidance.

If a child expressed delusions about their sex, teachers in the Shawnee Mission School District are apparently required to notify the principal, who in turn "meets with the student to share support and gauge the level of family involvement."

The Kansas City Kansas Public Schools' guidance that the PDE has on file states, "School personnel should not disclose information that may reveal a student's transgender status or gender or gender nonconforming presentation to others, including parents and other school personnel, unless legally required to do so or unless the student has authorized such disclosure."

Topeka Public Schools' revised 2018 guidance echoes the KCKPS recommendations.

Topeka told the AP that its practices are legal.

Shawnee Mission superintendent Michelle Hubbard claimed Kobach was relying on "misinformation" from "partisan sources" and indicated she took offense to his use of woke "as an insult."

KCKPS declined the AP's request for comment. The other outliers claimed they handled gender dysphoric students on a case by case basis and seek to work with parents.

"Parental exclusion policies purposely tarnish relationships between parents and children," Caroline Moore, vice president of Parents Defending Education, said in a statement. "Kansas is a great example of recognizing an issue that impacts all and correcting course, so these policies don't plague another generation of students and their families."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Viral video of mother having healthy boy transitioned into sterile neuter prompts renewed outrage



A video clip from an NBC News "Dateline" story about a young boy transitioned by his mother into a transvestite at the age of 6, then put on a cocktail of sterilizing chemicals just years later has gone viral once again, prompting renewed outrage about the medicalization of children and the insidious rhetoric used by sex-change advocates in support of child mutilation.

The video begins midway through a 2012 NBC News special entitled, "Living a Transgender Childhood," showing Johanna Olson-Kennedy of the Children's Hospital in Los Angeles discuss sex-change possibilities with Vanessa Romero and her young son Joey Romero — referred to in the video as Josie and who now reportedly goes by Sadie Croft.

"You are in the perfect place to begin on [puberty] blockers," says Olson-Kennedy, who runs the L.A. hospital's Center for Transyouth Health and Development.

The narrator indicates that Olson-Kennedy, who has elsewhere compared teen girls cutting off their healthy breasts to taking the SATs, "promises to begin giving [the boy] estrogen, female hormones, in two years."

"You're not going to develop breast buds on the blockers, but you're not going to wait until 16 to start, you know that," adds Olson-Kennedy.

The footage jumps ahead to the boy sobbing as sterilizing puberty blockers are surgically stuffed into his arm.

The boy's mother tells NBC News in an aside, "A lot of times it strikes me that had this happened just 20 years ago, I wouldn't have been able to give her blockers and she would have had to go through male puberty. That terrifies me. I don't know that she would have survived male puberty."

According to the mother's apparent LinkedIn page, she began work as a "TransParent Support Group Coordinator" in Tuscon, Arizona, "facilitating safe and healthy environments for gender creative children and their families through education and support," years before putting her son on puberty blockers.

In response to the renewed interest in the Romero case, Dr. Jordan Peterson noted that the "clinical literature shows the high probability that the parents of such children and often the mother are characterized by so-called Cluster B psychopathology."

"We're diagnosing and 'treating' the wrong people in such cases," continued the clinical psychologist. "It isn't that children are 'born in the wrong bodies' but placed in the hands of deeply confused and too-often narcissistic parents and the enabling professionals only too-willing to experiment on children. Unforgivable."

— (@)

Libs of TikTok captioned the recirculated video, "What you're watching is one of the greatest medical scandals in modern history. Thousands of kids & adolescents sold the lie that they're born in the wrong body and if they permanently alter their body they can be be happy. This video should infuriate you."

Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) wrote on X, "In some ways this video reminds me of German scientists who tortured victims to satisfy their own, cold curiosity. Some were even driven by a perverse belief that they were advancing the cause of humanity. Children have no capacity to consent to such things. Sheer cruelty."

Lee added in a subsequent post, "What civilized nation even allows for — much less celebrates — such barbarism?"

Sage Steele, the former ESPN "SportsCenter" anchor who drew the ire of radicals for her criticism of vaccine mandates, former President Barack Obama, and transvestites in women's sports, stressed that the so-called transitioning of children "is abuse and we must speak up."

Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R) similarly wrote, "This is child abuse!! Congress must pass my bill Protect Children's Innocence Act to make it illegal to perform this on children!!!"

The Idaho GOP wrote, "Deranged parents misguiding their own children, enabling mental instability and subjecting innocent kids to permanent lifelong mutilation. This must stop. This is criminal."

In the full "Dateline" episode, Vanessa Romero suggested that doctors told her Joey's "temper tantrums" at age 3 were indicative of depression. Their prescription: "14 different medications" including Prozac and drugs for sleeping issues, ADHD, Tourette syndrome, and anxiety.

The boy's mother apparently complied, subjecting her child to 17 doses of different pharmaceuticals every day.

"My child was broken and there was something really wrong," said Vanessa Romero. "I just wanted it fixed."

The idea that an entirely different set of pharmaceuticals could be the solution didn't occur to Vanessa Romero until a doctor told her Joey might have "gender identity disorder." The doctor apparently made his diagnosis solely off of a single instance when he saw the boy pretend to breastfeed a doll.

Once the seed was planted, Vanessa Romero told NBC News she turned to online "support groups" to learn more about her son's alleged condition. In short order, she replaced his wardrobe entirely with girls' clothing and encouraged him to cross-dress.

According to the NBC News report, after the boy began wearing girls' clothing, his parents took him off all the medication that he was previously taking, then concluded the transvestism had been the cure to his supposed depression.

This respite from pharmaceuticals was short-lived. As the boy began to mature into adolescence, he began to suffer renewed identity issues. After all, his male attributes were incompatible with the persona his mother championed.

Vanessa Romero claimed that the boy's mounting anxieties over his body prompted him to contemplate cutting off his penis. Apparently that job was best left to those Los Angeles surgeons paid to do it.

NBC News included shocking commentary from Dr. Margaret Moon, director of the department of pediatrics at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, that might not have been admitted on the network years later.

Moon indicated that puberty blockers might be helpful in "extreme cases" but was alarmed at Joey's age, especially as "the changes are irreversible and include rendering the child sterile," according to the report.

"Any change you make that is irreversible is harder to justify when the child is young," said Moon. "It's potentially an over-diagnosis issue."

Vanessa Romero ultimately took 9-year-old Joey to Los Angeles in September 2010 to start the process of his sex change, even though he admitted on camera, "I'm a boy inside and a girl outside. ... Sometimes I think I'm a boy, sort of."

Ahead of his irreversible transmogrification, Joey also hesitated on camera when his mother asked him whether he would admit to her that he wanted to grow up to become a man after all.

"Would you love me if I'm a boy?" he asked uncertainly.

— (@)

Vanessa Romero told NBC News, "The thought of her having made such a huge decision in her life all based on what she thought I wanted, that would be traumatic for me."

The mother evidently took the risk anyway.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

‘Escaping Twin Flames’ Shows How Easy It Is To Brainwash People With Radical Gender Ideology

‘Escaping Twin Flames’ illustrates the dangers posed by the rapid and unyielding endorsement of radical gender ideology.