5 thoughts on “British Columbia”

  1. “Her DNA will not change through all these experiments that they do.”

    Well that’s got to be some kind of hate speech right there.

  2. “The court went so far as to threaten to penalize the father’s speech.”

    I think that the girl (referred to as A.B.*) is the one who wishes to be penalized, if I’m not mistaken.

    * A.B… A.B. Normal.

  3. “The B.C. Supreme Court ruled that the girl (referred to as A.B.) “is exclusively entitled to consent to medical treatment for gender dysphoria and to take any necessary legal proceedings in relation to such medical treatment,” and that “attempting to persuade A.B. to abandon treatment for gender dysphoria; addressing A.B. by his birth name; referring to A.B. as a girl or with female pronouns whether to him directly or to third parties; shall be considered to be family violence under s. 38 of the Family Law Act.””
    In any civilized country, that would be considered child abuse.

    1. By the court’s logic, if a child suffered from Body Integrity Identity Disorder (a weird psychological malady where they believe they’re not supposed to have certain parts such as an arm or a leg), then the court would force the parents and a doctor to perform an unnecessary amputation on a child. When a court is ordering the unnecessary and extremely damaging dismemberment of an innocent minor, it’s time to find new judges or new laws.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *