The recently passed Assembly Bill 957 in California was quietly amended after hours to include a new requirement that parents in the Golden State must now be “affirming” of their children’s sexual “transitions” or else face potential “child abuse” charges.
Written and introduced by Assembly Member Lori Wilson (D-Suisun City) on February 14 – Wilson’s child self-identifies as transgender, by the way – and co-sponsored by state Sen. Scott Weiner (D-San Francisco), AB 957 centers around the handling of child custody cases based on how “gender-affirming” the parents are.
In order to comply with California’s official standards of parental responsibility and child welfare, AB 957, with the new amendment that was added post-passage by the state Assembly, parents must “affirm” their children’s “gender identity as part of the health, safety, and welfare of the child.”
The change represents a fundamental alteration to the California Family Code, which will now cater exclusively to LGBT-affirming parents in custody cases. Should a “trans” child end up torn between two separate or divorced parents, judges will now only side with the trans-affirming parent – or in the event that neither parent is affirming, the child will be handed over to the state.
“California courts would be given complete authority under Section 3011 of California’s Family Code to remove a child from his or her parents’ home if parents disapprove of LGBTQ+ ideology,” reports The Daily Signal.
“By changing the definition of what constitutes the ‘health, safety, and welfare of [a] child,’ schools, churches, hospitals, and other organizations interacting with children would be required to affirm ‘gender transitions’ in minors by default – or risk charges of child abuse.”
(Related: California is also trying to force pastors to push LGBT affirmation from the pulpit, or else.)
Parental rights are gone in California – the state now owns your children
Another thing the amended version of AB 957 does is expand which organizations can now provide “evidence” of gender “nonaffirmation” to California’s courts. The addition of “gender affirmation” to its tenets means that the court system can now accept reports of gender “abuse” from far-left extremist groups just so long as they claim to provide “services to victims of sexual assault or domestic violence.”
One example of how this might play out is a young boy who reports his non-affirming parents to his local school’s Gay-Straight Alliance club, or whatever other similar organizations are present. That club or organization can then report the boy’s parents to the courts for “child abuse,” potentially resulting in his being forcibly separated from his parents by the government.
Perhaps the most concerning aspect of AB 957 is its open-ended definition of “nonaffirming,” which could constitute just about anything if successfully argued in a court of law by a savvy pro-LGBT lawyer or LGBT-pushing organization with lots of power.
“The bill makes no distinctions regarding the age of a child, how long a child has identified as transgender, or affirmation of social transition versus medical sex-change treatments,” further pointed out Susannah Luthi of The Washington Free Beacon.
At the current time, there are now laws or other precedents on the books that California courts can use as a citation in determining whether or not a parent is guilty of “nonaffirming” a child’s self-chosen gender identity.
Last year, Wiener authored Senate Bill 107 which makes California the first state in the country to offer “sanctuary” for minors who want to undergo transgender mutilation procedures that are illegal or unavailable in their home states. Gov. Gavin Newsom gleefully signed SB 107 into law as he, too, loves to mutilate minors for fun.
Source: California bill would charge parents who reject transgenderism with “child abuse” – NaturalNews.com