In mid-March, Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey announced the establishment of an emergency hotline website for citizens to report cases of “gender-affirming care” targeting minors in his state. This action comes on the heels of publicity generated earlier this year by whistleblower Jamie Reed, who exposed atrocities going on at the Washington University Transgender Center at St. Louis Children’s Hospital. In the wake of Reed’s disclosures that hormones and puberty blockers were being prescribed and surgeries were being performed on minors — sometimes without the proper consent of parents — Bailey’s office acted. In addition to the hotline, the AG is filing a set of rules targeting gender-affirming care for minors with the goal of “restricting how doctors provide such care.” Yahoo News reported that “these rules include strict psychological therapy requirements for doctors providing care as well as banning care until all of a patient’s other mental health issues have been treated and resolved.” Bailey cites the troubling fact that Missouri has recently experienced “a massive increase in transgender surgeries.” In a March 20 press release announcing the proposed rules, he vowed: “As Attorney General, I will protect children and enforce the laws as written, which includes upholding state law on experimental gender transition interventions. Even Europe recognizes that mutilating children for the sake of a woke, leftist agenda has irreversible consequences, and countries like Sweden, Norway, and the United Kingdom have all sharply curtailed these procedures. I am dedicated to using every legal tool at my disposal to stand in the gap and protect children from being subject to inhumane science experiments.”

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops issued a statement forbidding the use of gender transition drugs and the performance of gender altering surgeries in Catholic hospitals and medical centers. LifeSiteNews.com reports that on March 20 the bishops issued an instructional document titled “Doctrinal Note on the Moral Limits to Technological Manipulation of the Human Body.” The bishops made a number of salient points, including the basic tenet of Christianity that God created humanity, that there is “order” to nature, and that this order “is good.” They point out that mankind did not create human nature and thus it is not ours to do with as we please. The bishops also rejected the argument that some individuals are born in the “wrong body,” noting that this is impossible: “The soul does not come into existence on its own and somehow happen to be in this body as if it could just as well be in a different body.” They further contend that each person’s body is “intrinsically connected” with the human sexual differentiation of that body. They write: “In the Book of Genesis, we learn that Man is created ‘from the very beginning’ as male and female: the life of all humanity — whether of small communities or of society as a whole — is marked by this primordial duality.” The document acknowledges that there are two scenarios recognized by the Church’s moral tradition “in which technological interventions on the human body may be morally justified: 1) when such interventions aim to repair a defect in the body; 2) when the sacrifice of a part of the body is necessary for the welfare of the whole body.” But they confirm that gender transition interventions “do not respect the order and finality inscribed in the human person” and thus may not be carried out in Catholic medical institutions.

Last month The Blaze reported on an incident at Kenwood Elementary School in Springfield, Ohio, when a group of black students “herded several white students over to the playground and violently coerced them to say ‘black lives matter’ against their will.” The coercion intensified to the point that the school was forced to call police. When the local TV station WKEF made a public records request for surveillance footage, it reported that the evidence corroborated what principal Evan Hunsaker told law enforcement officers who responded to the scene. Surveillance video showed a student in a white shirt being dragged to the playground “in the grips of two larger students” and shoved to his knees. On the way, one of the students who was violently pushing the boy “appeared to punch him in the head. Then another student ran over and joined in by tackling the victim to the ground and then beating him.” The parent of one of the white students made an astute observation: “Instead of activist-weaponized racial acrimony, [they] should just be worried about being children." Were it not for the relentless CRT propaganda taught in many schools, kids would likely not be fixated on the differences in their skin color. Ironically, while the local NAACP president said her organization agreed with the school’s handling of the incident, her fear was for the safety of the perpetrators over potential retaliation. But the police report admitted that “the alleged assaults were of an ‘anti-white’ nature,” and at a recent school board meeting, concerned citizens asked how the student perpetrators would be punished. Board President Chris Williams declined to say, calling the attack “an isolated incident” and citing state and federal laws preventing the release of personal information. One citizen who testified before the board pointed out that “no one asked for any personal information, but only if the offending students were being held accountable. It’s important that our kids go to school and not live in fear of being humiliated. These children were humiliated.”

Want to be notified of new Education Reporter content?
Your information will NOT be sold or shared and will ONLY be used to notify you of new content.
Click Here

Return to Home PageEducation Reporter Online - March 2023