Fierce Patriots

Conservative Political News

  • Subscribe

Social Justice

Far-Left Democrats Propose 'Transgender Bill of Rights'

by Leave a Comment

Radical House Democrats introduced a bill on Tuesday that would enshrine “gender identity” into discrimination law and prohibit religious objections.

The bill, named the “Transgender Bill of Rights” would amend the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to outlaw discrimination on the basis of “gender identity” in public accommodations and federally funded programs and activities. The legislation is led by Reps. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) David Cicilline (D-RI), Marie Newman (D-IL), Mark Takano (D-CA) and Ritchie Torres (D-NY) .

The bill “explicitly clarif[ies] that it is illegal to discriminate on the basis of…gender identity or sex characteristics in public accommodations and services on religious grounds…” The legislation is out of touch with the views of the majority of Americans, 60 percent of whom believe sex is determined by biology, recent polling shows.

The bill also takes aim at Republican state laws that protect women and girls’ spaces. The bill would force states to allow males who believe they are females to play women and girls’ sports. The bill would also force schools to allow students to use “facilities that best align with their gender identity.” This element to the bill makes no mention of males’ biological advantages in sports, or the potential for males dressed as females to assault women and girls in bathrooms, locker rooms etc. Giving transgender people access to women and girls’ spaces and sports teams is also largely unpopular with voters, with 63 percent opposed, according to a new NPR/Ipsos poll.
Additionally, the bill would ban “conversion therapy” — a leftist label for any kind of therapy that rejects the idea that people can choose their own sex. The new definition of “conversion therapy” is notably devoid of its historical context, which sometimes involved brutal and even illegal treatments perpetrated against same-sex attracted people.
At the same time, the bill would eliminate any government restrictions on access to “gender-affirming” medical care for adults and minors. “Gender-affirming” healthcare is a far-left euphemism intended to make mutilation sound like a compassionate course of action. This type of care involves the administration of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones, of which many long-term side effects are unknown, as well as sex change surgeries. Some surgeries include the creation of breasts, cutting off breasts, and surgery on the genitals or reproductive organs, including building penises from the tissue of another body part. 
The bill would prohibit states from punishing healthcare providers that provide sex change treatments to “transgender and nonbinary people,” like Alabama’s law, which makes it a felony to conduct gender transition surgeries or provide puberty blockers and other hormone treatments to children under the age of 19.
Not to miss an opportunity, the legislation seeks to codify Roe v. Wade, “guaranteeing the right to abortion” for “everyone, including transgender and nonbinary people.” While many voters seem to be confused about what the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe means for abortion nationwide, more voters favor allowing states to decide abortion law or a federal ban, rather than national law allowing abortions.
The legislation additionally proposes that “gender identification” requirements be eliminated from government documents. If elimination is not possible, it suggest an  “X” marker be provided on those documents.

The bill is strikingly similar, though equally or more radical, to the Equality Act, which passed the House in February of 2021. However, the “Transgender Bill of Rights” has far less Democrat support than the Equality Act, with 85 co-sponsors compared to 224.

Woke Service Members Question Loyalty to Country After Overturning of Roe v. Wade

by Leave a Comment

Some woke members of the military are publicly questioning their oaths of enlistment after the United States Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in a recent court ruling.

One Army captain tweeted after the ruling came down, “I’m supposed to defend this country?” The tweet was later deleted.

An active-duty Army judge advocate general tweeted: “this may be dramatic but how I do reconcile with myself that I feel as though I serve a country that doesn’t view me as a full person, a country that doesn’t protect me back?”

Another active-duty U.S. Army captain tweeted: “Pack the fucking court.”

An Army medic with 4,940 followers on TikTok — whose bio read “My account absolutely reflects the [Department of Defense]” — posted a video in which she is shown first wearing her Army uniform and later civilian clothes, saying:

How am I supposed to swear to support and defend the Constitution and a country that treats its women like second-class citizens? How am I supposed to do that? How am I supposed to do that with pride? How am I supposed to do that with love and honor? How am I supposed to wake up every day and put on a frickin’ uniform that says United States Army when the United States doesn’t even give a rat’s ass about me. It gives more of a rat’s ass about the guns they’re allowed to buy that kill the children that I’m forced to give birth to think about that.

She tweeted the caption: “raw and unfiltered. I am heartbroken. I am enraged. I am terrified. #roevwade #scotusupdate #keepyourlawsoffmybody #deployment #armywomen #army #miltok”

@rahasenfratz / TikTok

She also tweeted that she was “embarrassed to put on my uniform.”

“This morning I was embarrassed to put on my uniform. For the first time. And then I was embarrassed all over again to feel the privilege of this being the first time that I ever felt that way, not only in my time in the army but also in my life.”

The Army said in a statement to Breitbart News that “politically charged” opinions on social media are permitted but run the risk of constituting banned political activity if they mention a candidate or political party or if they threaten good order and discipline in the workplace. The Army did not elaborate on what would threaten good order and discipline in the workplace.

Retired Army Lt. Gen. Thomas Spoehr, the Heritage Foundation’s director of its Center for National Defense, said that while there is leeway on what service members can say online as long as they are not criticizing the commander in chief, superior officers, or crossing the line into subordination and disrespect, it is not a good idea to weigh in on political matters, particularly as an officer or as a non-commissioned officer.

“If you’re leading people and you’re out there very publicly with your political views, you run the risk of alienating people in your organization who have a different kind of view,” he said in an interview with Breitbart News on Thursday.

“When you’re in leadership, you know, you kind of held to a higher standard, you’re trying to command respect and loyalty of everybody underneath you. And so, you know, coming out with something which is liable to turn off or cause people you lead to question you, it is not probably a good leadership technique,” he added.

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin himself waded into the politically charged topic, vowing to provide troops with access to abortions.

He released a statement that said, “Nothing is more important to me or to this Department than the health and well-being of our Service members, the civilian workforce and [Department of Defense] families. I am committed to taking care of our people and ensuring the readiness and resilience of our Force. The Department is examining this decision closely and evaluating our policies to ensure we continue to provide seamless access to reproductive health care as permitted by federal law.”

His statement inspired jubilation from some leftist groups, which claimed that the Pentagon would defy or ignore the Supreme Court decision.

The socialist Occupy Democrats tweeted: “BREAKING NEWS: President Biden’s Pentagon defies the extremist Supreme Court, announces that it will not recognize any anti-abortion laws enacted by the states as a result of the Supreme Court’s decision. RT IF YOU SUPPORT THE PENTAGON’S DECISION.”

His statement also prompted criticism from the right. RedStates’ Mike Miller wrote:

Clearly, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin’s allegiance — he all but said it with his disgraceful “Nothing is more important to me” comment — is to the Biden White House and the Democrat Party, and the radical left, all of which are doing their damnedest to destroy America as we know it, not to the military strength and combat readiness of America’s Armed Forces.

On Tuesday, Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness Gilbert Cisneros tried to clarify the DOD’s policy, sending out a memo that said the current federal law still applies.

Currently, under 10 U.S.C. §1093, military medical facilities and funds available to the DOD may not be used to perform abortions, except where the life of the mother is in danger or in the case of rape or incest. DOD healthcare only covers abortion in those cases. Troops may seek abortions at non-military facilities in other cases, however. With the new ruling, they may have to travel out of state if the state where their base is located bans abortion.

Cisneros emphasized in his memo, however, that existing Department policy authorizes active duty service members to travel as necessary to receive abortion care “either as Government-funded, official travel for a covered abortion, or at the Service member’s own expense on regular leave for all other cases.”

“Access to emergency or convalescent leave remains unchanged for all Service members,” he added.

Spoehr said while the defense secretary is a political appointee and does not have to be apolitical, Austin’s statement could have been worded differently.

He said Austin was essentially affirming that the current law — which allows the DOD to provide abortions in extremely limited circumstances — would stand, but “he could have used different words” that would have proved less contentious.

“They could have said, ‘We will abide by…’ or something like that, and it would have gotten completely out this political discussion,” he said. “That would have been a safer thing to say, I think, rather than kind of dipping his toe in the political waters.”

Spoehr said the perception that the Biden Pentagon is wading into “wokeness” is hurting recruitment at a time of historic recruiting challenges.

For the first time in history, the Army announced earlier this year that it would reduce its size due to recruiting difficulties, and with only three months left to go in the fiscal year, the Army has only met 40% of its recruitment goal.

“The White House in particular is pushing a number of policies, which kind of suggest to Americans that [the military is] becoming woke, pushing policies which favor progressive policy over military readiness,” Spoehr said.

“At the same time you don’t hear much discussion about military readiness, but you hear about policies and whether it’s completely accurate or not, the average American gets that sense when they read these stories that the military is becoming politicized. And I think that’s not helpful for the military and particularly not helpful for the recruiting crisis,” he added.

“Military recruitment has been on a knife edge for the last few years. … The tight labor market right now makes things harder. And that this idea of a politicized military increasing military civilian divide, I think pushes it into the red zone,” he said.

Follow Breitbart News’s Kristina Wong on Twitter or on Facebook.