Tag: stance

California law will require judges to consider parents' stance on gender identity in custody battle

California approved a bill that instructs judicial courts in the state to consider, as one of its factors when making custody and visitation decisions, whether a parent affirms a child’s gender identify. Critics of the bill argue it will cause parents, who don’t support their kid’s desire to pursue gender-affirming surgery, to lose custody of their children. 

The California bill, AB-957, which passed in both houses of the state assembly on September 8, would consider parents’ “affirmation of the child’s gender identity or gender expression as part of the health, safety, and welfare of the child.” The bill awaits Governor Gavin Newsom’s, D-Calif., signature. 

Many parents are concerned this could mean that if they don’t accept their child’s use of puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones or surgery, they could face the prospect of losing custody of their children. 

“Affirmation includes a range of actions and will be unique for each child, but in every case must promote the child’s overall health and well-being,” the legislation states.

FEMINIST MEDICAL SCHOOL PROFESSOR SAYS TRANS KIDS IDENTIFYING AS ‘MINOTAURS’ ARE PART OF GENDER REVOLUTION’

In line with the intentionally vague language of the bill, the bill’s sponsor, California Assemblymember Lori Wilson, said “affirmation is left undefined to allow the greatest extent of judicial discretion.” 

There are no specifications in the bill about the age of a transgender-identifying child, how long they have identified as transgender or any recognition of the difference between the affirmation of a social transition in comparison to medical intervention. 

Wilson has made it clear that AB 957 adds a parent’s affirmation of their child’s gender identity as “one factor” that a judge must consider in a custody dispute. She has previously emphasized the bill’s focus on affirming a child’s choice of gender “whatever it is” adding it is “our duty as parents is to affirm our children.” 

“As you can imagine, there are plenty of things a parent can say that are protected by the First Amendment, but also can be considered in a custody dispute,” she said in a statement to Fox News Digital. 

Wilson blamed “online vitriol” over the bill on a “coordinated and sophisticated misinformation campaign that has been adequately fact-checked by the AP and others.” She said the focus of the bill is about “what is best for the child and there is a breadth of research that supports that affirmation of gender identity in the child’s best interest.”

WISCONSIN COUNTY CONSIDERS SANCTUARY STATUS FOR TRANSGENDER KIDS

In contrast, Protect Kids California spokesperson and recently elected school board member, Jonathan Zachreson, told Fox News Digital that California has established “very concerning” policies that lead children struggling with gender related issues towards a single path of lifelong medicalization. 

“AB 957 would be one more of those policies if signed by the governor,” he said. “Fortunately, Protect Kids California introduced an initiative to mitigate some of these harmful policies by prohibiting irreversible medical procedures that could possibly render someone sterile for anyone under 18.”

“We encourage everyone in the country to visit http://ProtectKidsCA.com to learn how they can help get this initiative on the November 2024 ballot,” he added.

Some new outlets, including the Associated Press, as mentioned by Wilson, have called out the “critics” of the bill, stating the legislation doesn’t use the word “surgery.” Although, some attorneys believe the vague language of the legislation is exactly what is harmful about it. 

Erin Friday, a California lawyer and mother to a daughter who transitioned and later detransistioned, told Fox News Digital that under this bill she would have lost custody of her daughter had it been in place when she was questioning her gender as she did not affirm her daughter in the transition. 

“Any parent who won’t affirm their child now, risks losing custody of their child,” Friday said. “California will be the first state to find parents abusive if they don’t agree to affirm their child’s gender identity, and we don’t even know what that means.” 

“957 is not limited to divorce situations, and this is what the author will tell you: it’s just a divorce, and it’s just one prong, and that is untrue,” she added. “Because the bill ties gender affirmation to three very important words and those are health, safety and welfare. Those words are magical words. They have a meaning in law, which the author doesn’t want you to know about.”

The California Family Code 3020 states it is public policy “to ensure that the health, safety, and welfare of children shall be the court’s primary concern in determining the best interests of children when making any orders regarding the physical or legal custody or visitation of children.”

Friday said “any” being the key word means “the judge must look at that in any custody claim, not just divorce.” In addition, “the penal code in California for abuse or neglect uses the words health and welfare,” she added. 

“They’re backdooring it,” Friday said. “They’re actually saying that the health, safety and welfare of all children is tied to affirmation and that’s how you get to where parents like me who did not affirm their child, could lose custody of their child.”

“Must they put them on puberty blockers?” she asked. “Must they cut their body parts off? Must they put them on cross-sex hormones, or must they just give them a haircut? What if the parents are religious and their religion says that they cannot affirm the child’s gender identity?”

“What happens when one parent is only willing to affirm by using a different name and the other parent is willing to cut the child’s gonads? Who wins?” she continued. “What happens if neither parent will affirm the gender identity? Who takes the kid?”

She said the vagueness of the legislation leaves parents wondering what “affirmation means,” but said the state is saying that in order to be a “good parent … You must affirm your child, otherwise you are undeserving of your children.”

MINNESOTA LEGISLATURE PASSES ‘TRANS REFUGE’ BILL OPPONENTS SAY WOULD STRIP CUSTODY FROM NON-CONSENTING PARENTS

Wilson introduced it the legislation alongside co-sponsor State Sen. Scott Wiener, who amended the bill to rewrite California’s standard of childcare under the California Family Code. Sen. Weiner has also advanced separate bills requiring foster parents to affirm the gender identities of children coming into their homes, as well as a bill that would make California a haven for LGBTQ children to obtain sex changes without parental consent. 

Conservative new outlet, The Daily Signal, warned that by changing the definition of what constitutes the “health, safety, and welfare of [a] child,” the bill would open parents, as well as other organizations like schools, churches and hospitals, who don’t affirm a child’s gender transition, to face charges of child abuse.

Friday described the bill as “frightening,” but said the law is unconstitutional and an abrogation of parental rights that will be challenged in court. 

Wilson said in a statement provided to Fox News Digital that she has consulted with judges and lawyers and feels “very confident” that there are no constitutional concerns with the bill. 

Wilson, who is the mother of a transgender son, said in a statement following the bill’s passage, which was forwarded to Fox News Digital, that she felt “extreme gratitude” to her colleagues for passing AB 957 “with such overwhelming and strong support.”

AB 957 is co-sponsored by the Women’s Foundation of California, Equality California, TransYouth Liberation, Los Angeles LGBT Center, TransFamily Support Services, Gender Justice Los Angeles, the EmpowerTHEM Collective and the California TGI Policy Alliance.

Equality California Executive Director Tony Hoang blamed other states in the U.S. for “attacking LGBTQ+ youth” which Los Angeles LGBT Center CEO Joe Hollendoner called “anti-trans legislation.”

“While states across the country are attacking LGBTQ+ youth, California continues leading the way to ensure that LGBTQ+ youth are protected, healthy, and can live their authentic life in an environment that accepts and supports them,” Hoang said. “Family acceptance of LGBTQ+ youth is strongly associated with positive childhood development, mental and physical health, and overall wellbeing.”

“Assemblymember Wilson’s AB 957 underscores familial acceptance as essential for transgender youth to live safely and proudly,” Hollendoner said. “As the tidal wave of anti-trans legislation continues to flood our country, it is especially vital for California to take a leading role in supporting the rights and dignities of our trans youth and their families.”

For more Culture, Media, Education, Opinion, and channel coverage, visit foxnews.com/media

Republican 2024 hopefuls respond to Tucker Carlson's questions about their stance on Russia-Ukraine war

Several of the highly-buzzed Republican presidential hopefuls have responded to Tucker Carlson’s questions pressing their stance on the ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine.

Last week, the Fox News host challenged the already-declared candidates as well as several prominent Republicans who have sparked buzz of potentially entering the 2024 race to answer a questionnaire that asked the following: Is opposing Russia in Ukraine a vital American national strategic interest? What specifically is our objective in Ukraine, and how will we know when we’ve achieved it? What is the limit of funding and materiel you would be willing to send to the government of Ukraine? Should the United States support regime change in Russia? Given that Russia’s economy and currency are stronger than before the war, do you believe that U.S. sanctions have been effective? Do you believe the United States faces the risk of nuclear war with Russia?

Two of the three declared presidential candidates, former President Trump and entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, responded to Carlson’s inquiry as well as former Vice President Mike Pence, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott and former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie.

Former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley was the only declared presidential candidate who did not respond to Carlson’s inquiry. Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin, New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu and former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson, all who have signaled a potential White House bid, also did not respond to the questionnaire. Former National Security Advisor John Bolton declined to comment.

Trump said, “No, but it is for Europe,” adding that European allies “should be paying far more than we are, or equal.” DeSantis told Carlson, “While the U.S. has many vital national interests… becoming further entangled in a territorial dispute between Ukraine and Russia is not one of them.” Noem pointed to China as being the “primary external threat” to the U.S. instead of Russia, saying the war in Ukraine “should be Europe’s fight, not ours.” Ramaswamy says it’s not vital to oppose Russia while stressing it is vital for the U.S. to have energy independence, insisting that had Europe relied more on the U.S. for oil and gas instead of Russia, the invasion might not have happened. 

WHITE HOUSE IS ‘ENCOURAGING PRESIDENT XI TO REACH OUT TO PRESIDENT ZELENSKYY,’ BUT NO CONFIRMATION OF MEETING

Meanwhile, Pence touted the “Reagan doctrine” of fending off enemies on their shores to prevent America’s direct involvement, telling Carlson, “There is no room for Putin apologists in the Republican Party. This is not America’s war, but if Putin is not stopped and the sovereign nation of Ukraine is not restored quickly, he will continue to move toward our NATO allies, and America would then be called upon to send our own.” 

Scott says it is a vital national interest to degrade Russia’s military. Christie similarly states, “Russia’s aggression against Ukraine is a national security issue that threatens our alliances and our standing in the world,” adding “this is a proxy war being waged by Russia’s ally China against the United States” and that “it would be naive to call this anything but Chinese aggression.”

Abbott did not specifically address this question.

Trump said the objective is to “help and secure Europe, but Europe isn’t helping itself,” telling Carlson it’s “very unfair” for the U.S. to largely foot the bill, especially since Europe “takes advantage of us on trade and other things.” DeSantis said “peace” is the objective while Pence told Carlson “victory for Ukraine” and having its sovereignty restored is the objective. Christie similarly said the objective is to “assist Ukraine sufficiently to enable them to defeat Russian forces and restore their sovereignty.”

Ramaswamy said the objective is to “respect any prior legal treaty commitments the U.S. has made,” citing The Budapest Memorandum that established Ukraine’s sovereignty. However, he added the U.S. achieved one objective in exposing Russian President Vladimir Putin as a “paper tiger” over his weak military capabilities while two outstanding goals would be to deter Putin from future aggression and “nudging” Europeans to “take care of themselves.”

Noem did not specifically state what the objective in Ukraine is but told Carlson, “If we had a president who pursued peace through strength, Putin never would have dared to invade Ukraine.” Neither Abbott nor Scott specifically laid out an objective, either. 

DeSantis told Carlson the U.S. “should not provide assistance that could require the deployment of American troops or enable Ukraine to engage in offensive operations beyond its borders,” adding that providing F-16s and long-range missiles would be “off the table.” He also said, “Our citizens are also entitled to know how the billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars are being utilized in Ukraine.” 

Ramaswamy said he would “limit any further funding or support to Ukraine” as president, adding European allies “need to do more, a lot more — it’s their backyard, it’s their borders.” Noem said “We should not waste taxpayer dollars at the risk of nuclear war,” adding “We’ve already over-extended ourselves in our largesse to Ukraine.”

Trump responded by saying it would “strongly depend” on him meeting with Putin but stressed “Europe must pay.”

UKRAINE WAS THE 3RD LARGEST IMPORTER OF ARMS IN 2022, THANKS TO AID FROM US, EUROPE

Pence said he does not support sending a “blank check” but warned “withholding or reducing support will have consequence” and that “the cost will be far greater” if Putin invaded NATO allies. Abbott slammed President Biden’s “blank check foreign policy,” telling Carlson, “Throwing money at Ukraine with no accountability or objective is clearly failing.” “Before [Biden] sends any more money or assets to Ukraine’s border, he must enforce our immigration laws and secure our southern border,” he added.

Scott called for having “accountability for every single dollar spent,” telling Carlson there would be “no such thing as a blank check” in that situation. Christie did not address whether there is a limit of funding and materiel but said, “It is on us to assist our democratic allies in defending themselves against authoritarian aggression.”

Both Trump and Ramaswamy flatly said, “No.” Noem replied “Not at this time,” warning of a potential destabilization of Europe and nuclear escalation. DeSantis knocked regime change policy as being “popular among the DC foreign policy interventionists” and suggested Putin’s successor “would likely be even more ruthless.” Pence responded by suggesting the question should be posed to the Russian people. 

Christie said supporting Ukraine “is not about regime change in Russia; it is about respecting the sovereignty of free nations.”

Scott did not provide a response to this question. 

Trump answered, “No, they have not been effective. Just the opposite.” Ramaswamy similarly replied “clearly not,” adding “Russia is stronger because of higher oil and gas revenue owing to higher prices.”

DeSantis said the Biden administration’s policies “have driven Russia into a de facto alliance with China” and since China has not been abiding by any embargo, “Russia has increased its foreign revenues while China benefits from cheaper fuel.” Noem said the U.S. “has come to rely far too heavily on financial sanctions as a weapon of deterrence,” adding “Sanctions against China, Iran, and Russia have bolstered the Russian ruble and enabled China to establish trade in Chinese money rather than in US dollars.”

RUSSIA’S ‘MASS MISSILE ATTACK’ ACROSS UKRAINE KILLS 6 AS ZELENSKYY RIPS PUTIN’S ‘PATHETIC TACTICS’

Meanwhile, Pence rejected the premise of the question, telling Carlson “Russia’s economy and currency are not stronger than before the war.” He insisted Russia’s economy is “in free-fall” and that its ruble is “still afloat because of the extremely costly measures Russia has taken to keep their currency at pre-war levels in the face of sanctions.” He also added that Russia is being “propped up by China” and without its support, “Putin could run out of money by as soon as 2024.”

Neither Abbott, Scott nor Christie addressed this question. 

Trump responded by saying, “It depends on who the president of the United States is” but that it is “absolutely” a risk under President Biden. Noem also slammed the Biden administration for “taking us quickly up the escalatory ladder with a series of provocative actions and statements,” adding, “We are closer now to the use of tactical nuclear weapons than we have ever been.”

DeSantis warned escalated U.S. involvement in the Russia-Ukraine war “would risk explicitly drawing the United States into the conflict and drawing us closer to a hot war between the world’s two largest nuclear powers.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Ramaswamy told Carlson the risk of nuclear war grows “the more that China begins to back Russia.” He called out the U.S. for giving up “negotiation leverage” as Russia has “brazenly violated every nuclear arms control treaty” and added “The global defense establishment must dig its head out of the sand and buck up to the fact that China, who is not constrained by any nuclear arms treaty, is secretly building up its nuclear stockpile.”

Pence called Putin “the small and bullying leader of Russia,” saying his nuclear threats a “bullying tactic” but stressed the U.S. “will not be bullied.”

Neither Abbott, Scott nor Christie specifically addressed this question. 

The 2024 GOP hopefuls’ full answers to Tucker Carlson’s questionnaire can be found on the “Tucker Carlson Tonight” Twitter account.