Gender ideology, a weapon of cultural Marxism

Kamala Harris and Tim Walz Agree: Anti-Life, Anti-Christian, Communist

Leer en Español

This article examines just two policy areas in which Vice President Kamala Harris and Minnesota Governor Tim Walz have expressed similar positions: unfettered abortion access and gender reassignment. It is important to note that they agree on many other policy positions. Still, these two are enough to make a human being despise them and not vote for them, regardless of their political, racial, or gender color.

1. Unlimited Access to Abortion

Both Kamala Harris and Tim Walz have expressed support for protecting and expanding access to abortion without limits, to the extent that they agree to terminate the pregnancy and life of the unborn and even those born in cases of failed abortions.

Kamala Harris' Position:

• She has defended the right to abortion as a fundamental part of what she calls reproductive health care that should more properly be called the right to terminate the unborn.
• She advocates codifying Roe v. Wade into federal law to perpetuate abortion legally and to be able to end the lives of the unborn.
• Opposes state restrictions on abortion, including gestational time limits.
• Has proposed measures to protect access to abortion at the national level.

Tim Walz's Position:

• Has signed laws in Minnesota to perpetuate and expand access to abortion and end the lives of the unborn and even those born after a failed abortion.
• Supports abortion rights without gestational time restrictions in Minnesota.
• Has declared Minnesota a "sanctuary state" for those seeking abortion or life-saving services.
• Opposes abortion restrictions implemented in other states.

2. Gender Changes and Related Medical Procedures

 

Direct link: https://cubanamericanvoice.com/pwa.html

Harris and Walz have expressed support for the rights of transgender people, including access to unlimited gender-affirming medical care by any method whether hormonal, surgical or by mutilation of genitalia or breasts. This care may include various medical procedures for individuals seeking to align their physical characteristics with the aberration of their gender identity.

Kamala Harris' Position:

• Advocates for the protection of transgender rights at the federal level.
• Supports access to gender-affirming (biological sex change) health care, including for minors.
• This care may include procedures such as:
  • For women, they call persons assigned female at birth who identify as male: bilateral mastectomy (removal or excision of breast tissue).
  • For people, they call people assigned male at birth who identify as female: vaginoplasty (creation of a vagina).
• Opposes state laws that restrict gender-affirming or gender reassignment treatments.
• Advocates for inclusive policies in schools and workplaces for transgender people.

Tim Walz's Position:

• Has signed executive orders protecting the rights of LGBTQ+ people in Minnesota.
• Supports access to unlimited gender-affirming health care in Minnesota (biological sex change), including for minors.
• This care can include procedures such as:
  • For people, they call assigned female at birth who identify as male: hysterectomy (removal or extirpation of the uterus) and oophorectomy (removal or extirpation of the ovaries).
  • For people, they call assigned male at birth who identify as female: orchiectomy (removal of the testicles).
• Opposes bans on gender-affirming treatment implemented in other states.
• Implemented policies to protect and encourage transgender students in Minnesota schools.

2023 Legislative Updates and Comparison to Kamala Harris

Tim Walz's 2023 Legislative Actions:

1. Ban on certain therapeutic practices:
   • In 2023, Walz signed into law a bill that prohibits healthcare professionals from providing what are called "conversion therapies" or therapy to change the gender of LGBTIQ+ individuals.
   • This law extends to practices that seek to change a person's gender identity, including efforts to reverse or stop previously initiated gender-affirming treatments.
   • Specifically, the law prohibits health professionals from assisting individuals, including minors, who wish to discontinue or reverse previously performed hormone treatments or sex change surgeries.
   • This legislation has generated debate about the options available to individuals reconsidering past decisions related to gender-affirming treatments. Walz prohibits helping adolescents who regret gender transformation recover from the harm caused when they began taking hormones or had their genitals removed.
2. Sanctuary state" law:
   • Also in 2023, Walz signed a law designating Minnesota as a "sanctuary state for transgender people."
   • Protecting abortion access and human rights for trans people.
   • This law seeks to protect transgender people who travel to Minnesota for gender-affirming medical care, including hormone treatments and surgeries.
   • The legislation also protects healthcare providers who offer these services from potential legal action from other states.

Comparison With Kamala Harris’ Position:

Kamala Harris as vice president, does not have the authority to sign state laws like Walz. However, her position on these issues shows similarities and some slight differences:

1. On therapeutic practices:
   • Harris has expressed opposition to "conversion therapies" at the federal level in line with Walz's policy.
   • However, she has not made specific public statements on banning aid to people who wish to reverse gender-affirming treatments.
2. Transgender rights protections:
   • Harris has advocated for federal protections for transgender people, similar to the "sanctuary state" concept implemented by Walz.
   • She has criticized state laws that restrict access to gender-affirming (gender reassignment) care as has Walz.
3. Access to health care:
   • Both Harris and Walz support access to gender-affirming (gender reassignment) health care for transgender people, including minors.
   • There is no public record of Harris commenting specifically on policies that limit options for those who wish to discontinue gender-affirming (gender reassignment) treatment.
4. Focus on legal protections:
   • Both politicians have prioritized the implementation of legal protections for the LGBTQ+ community, with a particular emphasis on transgender people.

It is important to note that these policies have generated significant debate because of their unnatural and anti-Christian character. Proponents argue that they protect the rights and health of transgender people, while critics express concerns about the impact of these policies, especially on minors.

The medical community continues to study the long-term effects of gender-affirming treatments, and policies in this area remain a topic of active public and political discussion.

It is important to note that these medical procedures must be performed by health professionals following established medical protocols and with the informed consent of the patient and parents in the case of minors. In the case of minors, parental or guardian consent and a thorough psychological evaluation should be required.

Harris and Walz's positions on these issues are so extreme, callous, and dehumanizing that they should be disqualified. Proponents argue that these policies protect fundamental rights and promote equality, while critics express concerns about the limits of abortion and the impact of gender-affirming treatment, especially on minors.

Additional Considerations on Abortion Policies and Transgender Care

1. Alternative Options for Abortion

While Kamala Harris and Tim Walz have expressed support for unrestricted access to abortion, it is important to consider other options available to pregnant women that do not involve the extreme termination of life that they advocate:

• Pre-birth adoption: this option allows pregnant women to make an adoption plan before the baby is born. It includes:
  • Selection of potential adoptive parents
  • Possibility of open or semi-open adoption agreements
  • Support during and after pregnancy
• Support services: Many organizations offer help to pregnant women, including:
  • Counselling
  • Financial and material assistance
  • Prenatal health care

These options are not always prominent in policy debates on abortion, but they are important alternatives to consider.

2. Regulation of Gender-Reaffirming Surgeries on Minors

Regulation of gender-reaffirming procedures for minors is a topic of growing debate:

• Variation by state: Some states have implemented bans or restrictions on these procedures for minors, while others, such as Minnesota under Walz, allow and promote them.
• Moratorium proposals: There are discussions about the possibility of a national moratorium on irreversible procedures for minors until more scientific studies are done on their long-term effects.
• Scientific debate: The medical community is divided on the balance between the potential benefits and risks of these procedures on minors.

3. Role of the Federal Government and the Supreme Court

The federal government and the Supreme Court play crucial roles in these issues:

Federal Government:

• Currently, under the Biden-Harris administration, the federal government supports abortion access and unrestricted interruptions as well as transgender rights.
• It has implemented measures to protect access to abortion in the wake of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision.
• Has proposed regulations to protect the rights of transgender people in areas such as health care and education.

Supreme Court:

• The Supreme Court could intervene in cases involving:
  • State restrictions on abortion
  • State laws limiting, prohibiting, or permitting gender-affirming procedures
  • Conflicts between state and federal laws on these issues.
• Possible actions by the Court:
  • Clarify the constitutional limits of state and federal regulation on these issues.
  • Balancing individual rights with state interests
  • Interpret the application of federal non-discrimination laws to gender identity issues.

It is important to note that the composition of the Supreme Court could significantly influence future decisions on these issues.

Conclusion

Let's vote to prevent these two monstrosities from disappearing from the American political map and so that Make America Great Again! returns with pro-life leaders like Donald J. Trump and J. D. Vance.