patrick.net

Trans rights are colliding with gay rights again, and guess which survives? The UK Daily Mail ran a story yesterday headlined, “Plans for a ban on gay conversion therapy are set to be ditched amid concerns about unintended consequences.”

“Gay conversion therapy” is a hysterical, made-up, liberal fund-raising bogeyman. Woke donors have been taught that dark Christian conservatives run covert camps deep in the forest where kidnapped gay teenagers are waterboarded and brainwashed, violently transforming them into self-loathing heterosexuals, or something. ...

The funniest part of their theory is that liberals also believe that gay sexual preferences are immutable biological characteristics than cannot possibly be changed. Except by Christian conservatives, apparently. That inherent contradiction is also the rationale for their suspicion and disgust: they say nobody should even try to change an immutable characteristic like an atypical sexual preference.

You see, sexual preference is not like your gender, for instance, which you can easily change by just amputating all your sex organs and taking powerful hormones for the rest of your life. But you can’t change sexual preference, no way, no how.

Anyway, the hysteria over “gay conversion therapy” fully blossomed, as these things always do, into woke censorship in the form of angry accusations the instant anyone questions whether sexual preference is an immutable characteristic or not. You’re trying to convert gay people! Fascist!

So starting with Boris Johnson, the UK government has long promised the British people a law to “ban” such odious conversion practices, to protect delicate gay folks from being exposed to any alternative ideas, by outlawing things like gentle spiritual counseling aimed at helping someone figure out whether their sexual preference is something they actually want or whether it might really be a harmful, tragic artifact left over from some childhood trauma.

Conversion therapy has been a hot topic lately, albeit somewhat under the radar. For example, back in July Michigan banned “gay conversion therapy,” joining 21 other blue states:







Suicide! Again. Suddenly, liberals have discovered kids are killing themselves in droves over their sex choices, which they previously didn’t even know about until they were older. Even with those high stakes, Michigan’s law was not quite as fulsome as proponents would have you believe. Excluding the enforcement language, Michigan’s new anti-ban law is only one short sentence:

A mental health professional shall not engage in conversion therapy with a minor.

So first of all … were Michigan’s “mental health professionals” driving lots of kids into suicide or something? Was that the problem Michigan’s democrats just fixed? Anyway. Obviously, the law doesn’t ban secret, deep-woods religious conversion camps. Or even the “conversion” of adults.

One suspects that the Constitution’s protection of religious liberties and free speech had a lot to do with them leaving the church completely out of it. And, even boiled down to that one line, Michigan’s new law remains susceptible to a First Amendment challenge, in my view. But that’s for another post.

Back to the Mail article. The news was the UK has now chucked its effort to enact a national ‘conversion’ ban right into the bin. The problem was, unlike Michigan, Britain was shooting for the Full Monte; they wanted to outlaw all conversations about people’s atypical lifestyle choices. But they just couldn’t figure out how to word the law without also roping in, get this, gender conversations.

Some ministers are said to be concerned that the ban could have 'unintended consequences' for parents and teachers dealing with trans children.

In other words, the pro-gay contingent crashed right into the pro-trans contingent: they worried that all the new “affirming” conversations with kids could be prosecuted as “conversion” under a broadly-defined law. Of course, most officials expressed it the opposing way, claiming they didn’t want to punish parents who question their child’s sudden new gender “decision.”

Bottom line, this is progress. Apart from some leftover virtue-signaling, so-called “gay conversion bans” seem to have run their course, now eclipsed by the faltering trans debate.

Canadian parents organized a massive national protest in cities and communities all across Canada this week that started Monday morning. It was called the “1 Million March 4 Children.” Counter-protesters showed up in large numbers clashing with parents.

A handful of people were arrested for violence (on the LGBTQ+ side) and at least two parents arrested for “displaying hateful material”, which apparently is a crime in Canada.

Gosh. Give me the power to arrest people for displaying hateful material! Just for one day. I’d have all this nonsense promptly resolved and the world running smoothly again in short order. But I digress.

Here in the U.S., Moms for Liberty faced a brief period of DOJ persecution during which heavily-armed FBI agents stormed the suburban homes of several stay-at-home moms who daringly but accurately called school board officials “poopy-headed fartmongers.” Canadian parents are facing an altogether new problem: fake parents. On Monday, the Toronto Sun ran a story headlined, “Even as 'spies' try to derail it, Hands Off Our Kids protest is set for Wednesday.”

Yep. LGBTQ+ activists pretended to be parents, joined local protest groups, and tried to sabotage protest logistics and event planning:

“It has happened,” said Toronto organizer Bahira Abdulsalam. Some of the people she thought were helping co-ordinate the Sept. 20 demonstration at Queen’s Park in Toronto, Parliament Hill in Ottawa and city halls across Canada were actually working to derail it. Abdulsalam said one claiming to be the leader “hijacked it” by saying they were “cancelling the protest.”

Kamel El-Cheikh said they have had similar issues for the Ottawa event as well. “Yes, they tried to sabotage,” he said. “We are now highly sophisticated as a result. We have our intelligence as well.”

The CBC conceded that policies are slowly emerging in school districts across Canada that require students to obtain parental consent before teachers may use different “preferred” first names or pronouns. Parent protestors want these policies to become the default standard. LGBTQ+ advocates oppose parental consent rules, claiming the policies “violate children's rights,” whatever that means, and argue that transgender kids should be able to be “out” to everyone except their own parents.

I mean, why should the parents want to know about something like that?

The archbishop of Europe’s largest archdiocese in terms of number of Catholic faithful has been criticized for releasing pastoral guidelines that appear to define homosexual attraction as love, and equating them to heterosexual relationships with respect to pastoral care.

In a pastoral proposal for 2023-2024, Archbishop Mario Delpini of Milan wrote that “particularly delicate attention given modern-day sensibilities must be devoted to accompanying and understanding the experience of love and the different nuances of attraction, both to people of different genders and to people of the same gender.”

The archbishop’s words are made in the context of assigning great importance to “accompaniment,” a term that figures prominently throughout the document, and he underlined that the Christian community must “assume the responsibility of teaching about love” in all its “sexual dimensions.”

Riccardo Cascioli, writing in the Catholic daily La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana, which he edits, believes that through such guidelines, the archdiocese of Milan “fully embraces the line drawn by the gay lobby that has now taken command of the Catholic Church.”

‘Monster’ nanny convicted of molesting 16 boys — some as young as 2 — in ‘vilest way’

A “monster” male nanny from Southern California has been found guilty of molesting 16 boys, including some as young as 2 — and filming many of the vile assaults.

Matthew Zakrzewski, 34, who billed himself as “the original Sitter Buddy” and “manny,” has been convicted by a jury of 34 felony counts, including lewd and lascivious acts with a minor under 14 and oral copulation of a child under 10, the Orange County District Attorney’s Office said.

“These young boys were forced to endure unimaginable terror as a result of the ultimate betrayal by a baby-sitter,” said District Attorney Todd Spitzer.





... The popular nanny first showed up on law enforcement’s radar in the spring of 2019, when a Laguna Beach couple went to the police to accuse Zakrzewski of inappropriately touching their 8-year-old son.

The Laguna Beach Police Department launched a probe into the nanny, which led to a second victim, a 7-year-old boy in Los Angeles.

From there, cops discovered a further 10 victims across Southern California. ...

Besides sexually assaulting boys and filming the abuse, the babysitter showed pornography to a 17-year-old with the intent to molest him, officials said.

Matthew Zakrzewski, 34, who billed himself as “the original Sitter Buddy” and “manny,” has been convicted by a jury of 34 felony counts, including lewd and lascivious acts with a minor under 14 and oral copulation of a child under 10, the Orange County District Attorney’s Office said.

“These young boys were forced to endure unimaginable terror as a result of the ultimate betrayal by a baby-sitter,” said District Attorney Todd Spitzer.

Former Democrat Mayor Patrick Wojahn Gets 30 Years in Prison for Child Porn

Former mayor of College Park, Maryland, Patrick Wojahn, a Democrat, was sentenced to 30 years in prison Monday over possession and distribution of explicit child porn material.

Wojahn pleaded guilty to over 100 counts connected to the child abuse material.

The former mayor, who was a regular White House guest and “mentee” of Pete Buttigieg, was arrested in March on child pornography possession and distribution charges, The Daily Fetched reported. ...

As we reported earlier this year, Wojahn was mentored by Pete Buttigieg and branded himself as an LGBTQ role model.

On Thursday, after a four-hour closed-door hearing in a lawsuit filed by Russia’s Ministry of Justice, Russia’s Supreme Court ruled that the LGBTQ+ “movement” operating in Russia is an “extremist organization” and banned it. Journalists were only allowed into the courtroom to hear the verdict from Judge Oleg Nefedov, who is not from Philadelphia, and so wore a face mask during the reading of the verdict, presumably for safety.

For over a decade, Russian President Putin has been publicly critical of the West’s love affair with previously perverted sexual practices. Over the past few years, Russia has gradually tightened its laws over the spread of so-called “LGBT ideology.”

As far as I can tell, despite the breathless hysteria over the decision in U.S. corporate media, the decision does not “outlaw gay people.” It appears to criminalize LGBTQ+ “activism,” especially where the activism is funded by or connected with international groups outside Russia. Russia seems suspicious that the international LGBTQ+ movement might not really be about advancing the sexual minority rights, but has some darker purpose, like population reduction or social destabilization.

It’s no longer clear that the Constitution would limit a similar decision here in the United States. Widespread, long-standing state laws criminalizing sodomy were found unconstitutional only in the last 40 years or so, on the strength of Roe v. Wade’s penumbral right to privacy. Not that there’s anyone brave or reckless enough to try, but the field appears open again for replacing those removed statutes.