We Hear You: The Equality Act and the LGBT Agenda

Ken McIntyre /

Editor’s note: The Daily Signal’s audience had much to say about our coverage of House Democrats’ Equality Act, which would create civil rights protections based on sexual orientation and gender identity rather than simply sex. A sampling leads off this week’s mailbag. You may write us at [email protected]—Ken McIntyre

Dear Daily Signal: Other than the usual protections of property and people (against violence and assault), there is no basis for granting special protection for transsexual behavior, the subject of the hearing on the Equality Act covered by Rachel del Guidice (“5 Key Moments From Equality Act Hearing”).

It is a whole different question than protecting people because of their innate qualities such as skin color. Passage of this legislation will severely damage other rights that we possess in the realms of free expression, religious faith, privacy, and more.

Finally, there is no imaginable way that the framers of the 14th Amendment would see that it would extend to the protection of behavior then considered insane, perverse, and immoral, as it remains for a great many people today.

Congress does not have the power to amend the Constitution by simple statute, and the fact that it has done so on other occasions merely points to the sad way our Constitution has been trashed by power-hungry politicians.

No society that panders to delusional behavior is a healthy one. The left has imposed its sicknesses and madness upon all of us, and the effects go way beyond harmful and damaging.

This is the legacy of the Supreme Court’s Lawrence v. Texas and Obergefell v. Hodges rulings, which must be reversed.—William James

170215_ds_letters-editor_v1_v3

Does anyone else think it’s more than a little coincidental that all this transgender nonsense has perked up in only the past decade or two? Right around the same time it started being propagandized in the media and in schools?

No one will ever convince me this is a legitimate psychological issue for the vast majority of  individuals who call themselves transgender. I think “transtrender” is the more accurate term.

For the ones who really are transgender: Well, I guess sexual dysphoria is still a mental illness, but for the sake of “feelings” they refuse to treat it appropriately.—Edward Morgan

***

The genie needs to be shoved back in the bottle. The more of it we allow out, the more harm will be done to the greater good. This nonsense is total bull and social suicide.—Jimmy Chonga

If Trump wants to take hormone therapy and come out as transgender, as Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., suggested at the hearing, I’m fully supportive of that.

Not for any equal rights reasons, I just think it’d be funny to watch MAGA people’s heads explode and their jaws drop off their bodies.—Edward Buatois

***

Our elected officials are supporting this? What did the Russians put in our water?—Raymond Hudson

***

Under the 14th Amendment, the original civil rights laws protected people from discrimination based upon innate qualities, such as the color of one’s skin (“Pelosi Is Hijacking the Civil Rights Movement to Force LGBT Ideology on Kids”).

This monstrosity of a bill, described in Autumn Leva’s commentary, protects behavior. And it is behavior that was considered morally repugnant or insane at the time of the 14th Amendment’s enactment.

Many of us still hold to that perspective. There is no constitutional authority to enable the Democrats’ so-called Equality Act.—William James

***

All this legislation does is give gay people the same protection from discrimination that Christians already have had for decades.

If The Daily Signal were a serious organization, you’d have been fighting those “special rights” for Christians for all those decades, instead of waiting until the law included a group you consider icky.—Rob Tisinai

***

For as long as there have been restrooms in public places, these facilities have been segregated by gender. The same is true for public locker rooms and shower rooms. Gay men used the facilities for men, and lesbians used the facilities for women.

Separation of such facilities by gender was more for the rights of privacy and protection of females than for males. It wasn’t a big deal. I don’t know why it has to be a big deal today.

We seem to be governed by polls these days. Majorities of opinions on any given subject are deemed newsworthy and are cited as proof of what public opinion favors by proponents of change.

If that’s how we are going to be governed, let’s take an opinion poll of all women of high school age and older to see what percentage approves of allowing males who identify as females into public bathrooms, locker rooms, and shower rooms.

Separate facilities for men and women may deny the preferences of a few suffering from gender dysphoria, but they do not deny anyone his or her rights.—Drew Page

***

In no place in Autumn Leva’s commentary did I see proof that schoolchildren would have to “carry water” for the LGBT agenda.—Andre Stephenson

***

California’s sex ed guidelines require teaching children about having multiple sexual partners and warning children about “religion abuse” that would include “forcing others to adhere to rigid gender roles” or not allowing a partner “to do things they enjoy.”  

So if I am reading this correctly, now schools are going to teach that your partner should be able to do whatever they enjoy? What happened to “No means no?” If a partner enjoys rape, we are supposed to allow that? Bring in the neighbors? Hold a knife to your throat?

All OK if that is what the partner wants? What the hell is going on in these schools?—Tanya Beckel Redfield

***

This bill described by Monica Burke’s commentary will be like Obamacare, thousands of pages long and they have to pass it to see what is in it (“Nancy Pelosi’s ‘Equality Act’ Would Be Disastrous. Here Are 5 Likely Victim Groups”). The people should have a chance to read every bill before it is passed.

Whether they like it or not, all senators, representatives, and other government employees work for us.

What we have now is a distinct class of untouchables, secure in their jobs, with work ethics that would get them fired in a week in the real world, getting paid more than average in the real world. The idea of government workers unions is ridiculous.—Audie Jordan

Thinking Twice About Transgenderism

Dear Daily Signal: So, a person who regrets his own personal transition and a woman who doesn’t accept her child’s decision to transition have taken it on themselves to contradict the rest of the medical world (“‘We Are Manufacturing Transgender Kids,’ Says Man Who Once Identified as Woman”).

Maybe panelist Walt Heyer’s decision and transition was ill-informed or made for the wrong reasons. Can he explain why he made the decision?

Rachel del Guidice quotes the mother of a daughter as saying at The Heritage Foundation event: “She has been a victim of ‘gender affirming’ medical procedures, and I was powerless to stop doctors from harming her. Someday, I hope she will realize that I am advocating for her health and for her future.”

Does the woman’s daughter agree with this statement, or is it her mother’s deep-seated fear or embarrassment of trans people?

Where is their evidence? These two are likely to be much less scientifically informed than the medical and psychological professionals involved.—Cahal Cassidy

***

As a tomboy back in the day, I’m so fortunate that the idea of “self-identified” wasn’t around (“Kids Aren’t Born Transgender, So Don’t Let Advocates Bamboozle You”). I’m sure I would have questioned myself and been “convinced” I was a boy simply because I preferred boy activities instead of girl activities.

Reading Walt Heyer’s commentary, I feel sorry for kids who have to suffer through these decisions due to public, parental, and peer pressure, all while they’re still too young and immature to make logical and intellectual life decisions. Such a shameful time in our history.—Marby Shivwitz

***

We should be compassionate to the mentally ill, but we should not celebrate their illness.—Mary Grace Shabazz-Epstein

***

Of course no one is born transgender. Transgender is merely a concept, it doesn’t mean anything really because it’s based on feelings.

Being born a male or a female does mean something, though. Being a female or a male is expressed in DNA, how one reproduces, and so on.

Nothing backs up the transgender lifestyle as being a legitimate way to live.—Jessica Jones

***

People are born either boy or girl. That’s basic biology (science, for those who are confused).

Just because you don’t like it doesn’t make it not so.—Tonya Acre Merrill

***

I saw the headline reading “Kids Aren’t Born Transgender,” and I have to call absolute bull.

I distinctly remember a moment of my birth where I was “welcomed” to this here planet Earth, and I had the feeling of male genitals between my legs. Instantly, I knew they were not supposed to be there.

That feeling of disconcertment has been a part of me for the past 37 years. Now my own mother is trying her hardest to say that I am not transgendered, although she was so accepting of knowing gay men in the military throughout her younger life.

Let’s see how it turns out next time she lets me go to a psychologist, who ironically now is supportive of me coming out.—Nikki Holmes

This and That

Dear Daily Signal: About Kelsey Bolar’s video report on how federal regulations hurt a Habitat for Humanity chapter, there are precious few things that the government should regulate (“Government Regulations Are Putting Some Homeowners’ Dreams on Hold”).

This is an example of how socialism is creeping in and taking away organizations’ rights to serve the people around them how they see fit.—Jordan Blackwood

***

Regarding Kevin Mooney’s report on the Southern Poverty Law Center: SPLC once had been the FBI’s “go to guys” when it comes to discrimination for decades—crickets from them as well (“Tech Giants Run Silent as Discrimination Charges Shake Up Southern Poverty Law Center”).—Rich Quitliano

***

To those who reference God and then discount the possibility that convict Casey Diaz’s conversion was real, judge not—from your podcast, it sounds like a lot more happened than a lawyer’s advice on how to beat a tough rap (“He Killed a Man. Then This Gangster Changed His Life”).

Diaz continues to spread the word, minister to the most vulnerable, and do good works. He has asked for forgiveness, served his time, and makes no excuses for the awful crimes committed as a child of violence.

As believers, we all ask for forgiveness for our sins, “as we forgive those that trespass against us.” God bless Mr. Diaz and the strong minister that brought about his conversion.

May he guide those that might have followed in his footsteps on the wrong path to the light and the right one.—Jonathan Freed

***

I have been downloading and listening to The Daily Signal’s podcast for a while now, and I really enjoyed intern Maranda Finney’s story about her own adoption (“‘I Was Almost a Victim of Abortion’: Star of ‘Unplanned’ Wants Movie to Change Hearts, Minds”).

As a parent of two adopted children from Liberia, my ears always perk up when the subject gets a mention.  Adoption is such a worthwhile thing to do.  We adopted older children, which has its own set of challenges, but I don’t regret doing it. 

My kids were born in the middle of the Liberian civil war and the adoption was made final right after the war ended. Today, both are healthy and happy in their lives as parents. We couldn’t have been more blessed by them. 

Perhaps you could spotlight adoption success stories from time to time, just to show there are folks out there who love an “unwanted” child.—Bernie Penkin

***

I really appreciated the brief interview on the podcast with the intern who was adopted. So many of those in the liberal media have this preconception that Christians care only about babies in the womb, but not afterward. Yet nothing could be further from the truth. 

I am blessed to come from a lengthy line of historic Protestants on both sides of my family. Not only is my daughter adopted, but so are two of my cousins.

There are some historic documents we tend to refer to as excellent expressions of our faith (a nice list is at https://reformed.org/documents/index.html). One is the Westminster Standards, a confession of faith and two catechisms approved in 1647. 

Both catechisms address adoption, but I’ll cite the shorter one:

Question 34: What is adoption? Answer: Adoption is an act of God’s free grace (1 John 3:1), whereby we are received into the number, and have a right to all the privileges, of the sons of God (John 1:12; Romans 8:17).

I continue to appreciate the work you all do on The Daily Signal.—Paul Singbusch, San Diego

Sarah Sleem and Courtney Joyner helped compile this edition of “We Hear You.”