Five years ago, as senior citizens, the life my wife and I were enjoying in retirement underwent a major change. We took two young brothers into our home, then aged 3 and 5, later adopting them. Out in public, the sight of a young voice yelling out “Dad,” drawing a response from an old man responding, “Yes, son,” generated befuddled looks among those within earshot who assumed the father/son relationship was one established the traditional way.
While being a father again, with some grandchildren older than my current brood, has its rewards, it has not been without challenges. Not even two-plus decades of Marine Corps leadership experience prepared me for dealing with the escapades this “two-boy” demolition team could wreak – their actions sometimes demanding the intervention of fatherly authority and discipline. The problem was complicated by the fact their father’s memory is not as sharp as it was his first time around as a parent.
That faulty memory resulted in my violation of one of parenting’s cardinal rules for families with two or more children – avoiding even the appearance of favoritism of one child over another. It is imperative a parent demonstrate love, and discipline, for each child equally. As my two boys microscopically analyze punishments I impose upon them individually for misbehaving, they ensure my disciplinary actions never run afoul of the cardinal rule.
A parental decision, disciplinary or otherwise, that benefits one child over another, especially if done intentionally, is bad parenting. This cardinal rule was alluded to in a statement made by Education Secretary Miguel Cardona during his confirmation hearing. He said in part, “I think that it’s critically important to have education systems and educators respect the rights of all students. …” The key word here is “all,” which clearly suggests no student is to be shown favoritism over another. Yet, the rest of his statement gave a mixed signal when he added, “including students who are transgender, and that they are afforded the opportunities that every other student has to participate in extracurricular activities.”
Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 emblazoned a cardinal rule that prohibited sex discrimination in any education program that was receiving federal financial assistance. Until then, women had been denied equality in sports participation and facilities, just like they had been denied the vote until passage of the 19th Amendment in 1920, simply due to their biological distinctions.
But on his first day in office, President Joe Biden muddied the Title IX waters by signing an executive order on sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination, seeking to give transgenders the equality enjoyed by the biological gender they choose. The way to achieve this was to allow transgenders to declare a new gender affiliation and then enjoy the facilities or sports provided. Contrary to the laws of science, it simply allows gender change to be announced to receive its benefits as the NCAA has yet to provide details on testosterone levels. But, just like any one motivated by ill intent taking advantage of our laws, there will always be those claiming transgender status for predatory motives.
Liberals want us to believe that one convinced one’s birth sex is wrong can transition to the opposite sex virtually overnight, entitling him or her to equal treatment as any other member within that same biological sex group. The world records for fastest times in track and heaviest weight in weightlifting are held by men because they, by nature, are physically superior in speed and muscular ability to female competitors. In track, for the mile, the men’s record is almost 30 seconds faster than the women’s record; in weightlifting, the heaviest lift (snatch) by males is 223 kilograms while the women’s record is 155.
Taking certain drugs reduces the testosterone levels of a transgender “woman” but will never completely negate the physical differential advantage. Thus, allowing transgender women to compete side-by-side with biological women is not respecting “the rights of all students.” Rather than an act of equality, it becomes one of favoritism, clearly demonstrated by the number of biological women in certain sports consistently losing to transgender women.
Common sense tells us gender identity demonstrates transgender female favoritism by denying biological females equality. Not only are the latter forced to compete, physically, on an uneven playing field, but their personal safety is put at risk by stronger faux women.
Common sense has never been a constant in American society’s evolution. What it dictated centuries ago on issues is totally different today. The common sense of the 18th and 19th centuries, until the 19th Amendment became law in 1920, was women could not vote. Imagine, prior to 1920, the public reaction a transgender male making the case to vote would have received. Common sense of the 18th and 19th century would have rejected such logic.
But, on this issue, common sense has retrograded. The common sense liberals have adopted today, contending one’s biological sex can be changed by virtue of one’s will to do so, along with the aid of a surgeon and drugs, ignores that what God has created, man seeks to put asunder. With the whisk of a pen, liberals contend, a transgender is simply deleted from one biological sex list and added to another.
But this flies in the face of what science tells us – it is impossible to “reassign” a person’s sex physically. Regardless of what measures transgenders take, their sex, as determined by their DNA, will always remain fixed – one’s lifetime gender never differing from one’s natal sex. It is ironic that liberals who condemn our Founding Fathers for their failure to embrace 21st century human equality standards during the 18th century today condemn conservatives embracing 21st century science.
The only way both the transgender and biological sex can truly enjoy absolute equality without unfairly inhibiting one group over another is by creating separate but equal facilities and sports participation programs for four separate but equal genders. The cost of doing so would be outrageous, but so then is the claim that transgender and biological women can fairly compete against each other.
As a senior citizen parent, I feel guilty whenever forgetfully assessing one child a slightly harsher punishment than the other, quickly correcting my error when the offending child points out the discrepancy. Unfortunately, Biden can dictate social policy free of any similar guilt over unfair application.
Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].
This article was originally published by the WND News Center.