Anne Georgulas

(Anne Georgulas, above, is James Younger's mother.)

We've already made a few posts on James Younger: first post, second post, third post, fourth post. I believe this is our fifth post on the case.

James Younger update

BREAKING: the judge in the #ProtectJamesYounger case has ruled that the father will have a say over medical decisions, including the "transition" of his son. This is the best outcome we could hope for in a horrible situation all around. I think our outcry made a real difference.

— Matt Walsh (@MattWalshBlog) October 24, 2019

I'm less sanguine about this development. It may well be that the judge was caught off-guard by the scale of the backlash, both popular and by other segments of the TX political establishment. But the judge has the final say, and to my knowledge the judge has consistently sided with the mother.

My suspicion is that the judge's action is a ruse to preempt the state investigation (by the TX Attorney General's office and the Texas dept. of Family & Protective Services). It takes some pressure off the judge. The story dies down. The judge might then side with the mother on puberty blocks and cross-hormone "therapy". While that would instigate a new campaign and might launch a new state investigation, it buys the mother time to press ahead with her plans to chemically castrate the boy. 

Keep in mind, too, that you can't count on having social conservatives in the TX political establishment in years to come. The balance of power might shift. 

BTW, the judge is up for reelection. Hopefully voters will turn her out of office.  

So I'm inclined to be cynical about the judge's latest ruling. The only outcome that matters is what actually happens to the boy. It would be fatally naive for social conservatives to assume we "won", that's safely behind us, and it's time to move on to other issues. Don't take your eyes of this case. Keep monitoring developments. 

Dad tries to save son from transgenderism

If we’re hearing all the relevant information about this story (and I urge “if,” because I haven’t seen the full trial transcripts circulated), it’s one of the worst state abuses of power I have ever heard of -- an act of child abuse encouraged and facilitated by the state. https://t.co/LqBFRUfWD2

— Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) October 23, 2019

And to piggyback on Steve's post as well:

1. If all the reports are accurate, then I couldn't agree more. It's maddening, infuriating, lamentable. The kid has no more hope for a happy childhood.

2. Not to mention by all accounts I've read the 7 year old boy doesn't want to be a girl but his mother is forcing her choice onto the boy. Does this set a precedence for parents to transition their children into a different sex against their children's wills? At this point, it looks like progressives are arguing women should be able to abort their child even as newborns no longer in the womb and women should be able to turn their children into whatever sex they wish their children to be despite biological realities. Is there anything women can't do to their children according to progressives?

3. The mother is a pediatrician who should know better. However she's a terrible and evil person. Indeed, it seems to me there are many women like her.

4. Women have had a loud and clear voice for generations, but who will speak on behalf of men? Men seem to be increasingly unfairly discriminated against in our society. Boys and men are increasingly tyrannized by third wave feminists and progressives in general. For example, Christina Hoff Sommers has documented a lot of this.

5. I don't know if there's any more hope for the father to win a court case. I don't know if he can appeal. Or even take it to the Supreme Court.

6. However, if there are no more legal options open to the father, and assuming most people bow to the evil judicial decision, then if it were me I think I'd consider trying to "kidnap" my son (in fact both of my sons since they're twins) and fleeing to another state or even another nation. I realize this is desperate, but I don't know what else the father can do. It seems he's only left with hard choices for his sons: a choice between state-sponsored child abuse under an evil mother in the US vs. a more normal childhood under a good father but living life on the run. But I think this kind of "kidnapping" is arguably justifiable on Christian ethics.

7. Remember this case whenever you hear liberals and progressives say things like "transgenderism doesn't harm anyone", "transgenderism is not a mental illness", "everyone should get a choice", "it's their choice, not yours", "you're bigoted against transgendered peoples", etc. The truth is liberals and progressives are always pushing their abnormal values onto normal people, but acting like they're the victims when normal people dissent.

Judicial child abuse

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/breaking-jury-rules-against-dad-trying-to-save-his-7-year-old-from-gender-transition

Because human beings are social creatures, there's an inbuilt tendency to submissively follow orders. No one should enforce the judge's ruling. The time is long past due for Americans to defy judicial tyranny. 

And what does it say about the moral blindness of the jury. A Texas jury, no less. 

What Sort Of Judges Would Trump Appoint?

See here. Even if his comments cited by Ponnuru aren't representative of what Trump would do in office, why trust him? Why take the risk when such better presidential candidates are available?

Trump supporters often cite illegal immigration as a major, primary, or sole reason to vote for Trump. But think of all the steps needed to get to the point where Trump's position on illegal immigration would be implemented. You have to:

1.) Think he'll get elected, despite his big electability problems.

2.) Think Trump will do what he says he'll do, despite his character problems and long record of inconsistencies.

3.) Think the Republican Congress, who Trump supporters keep denouncing, will pass his immigration plan.

4.) Think the judiciary, including judges appointed by Trump in the future, will refrain from significantly altering his immigration plan once it's enacted.

Let's see if people like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity give prominent attention to the issue Ponnuru has raised, putting it at the top of their radio programs and denouncing Trump in strong terms, as they would if Ponnuru's post were about somebody like Jeb Bush or John Kasich instead. And let's see if Evangelicals and other people supporting Trump do enough research, and have enough discernment, to find information like what Ponnuru writes about and react appropriately to it. Or will they just keep following the lead of Limbaugh, Hannity, et al. so uncritically?

Why Not Polygamy?

Here's an article by Berny Belvedere at American Thinker, regarding state recognition of polygamy.