Pete Hendrickson (@LostHorizons)

A Legislative Agenda For The Protection Of Our Children And Our Culture ...from grotesque medical and judicial malpractice, and from a dangerously arrogant technocratic governmental apparatus. I WAS SHOCKED AND DISMAYED the other day... I saw a report that a three-judge panel of the 8th federal Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld a preliminary injunction against the enforcement of Arkansas's 2021 ban on the mutilation of children with the chemical and surgical destruction of perfectly healthy body parts and functions under the influence of so-called "trans health care" madness issued by a federal district court judge in a suit against the ban brought by the ACLU. The ban was enacted with a super-majority of the Arkansas legislature-- the gold-standard of the people's expression of their sovereign will-- but is thwarted (for the moment, and for so long as the people of Arkansas are willing to let their sovereignty hinge on approval by judges appointed for life by those with their own political agenda and who reside 1500 miles away). The judicial reasoning for the interference by these arrogant judges, as reported by Jurist[.]org, is that the Arkansas act, "prohibits medical treatment that conforms with 'the recognized standard of care for adolescent gender dysphoria,' that such treatment 'is supported by medical evidence that has been subject to rigorous study,' and that the purpose of the Act is 'not to ban a treatment [but] to ban an outcome that the State deems undesirable.'" LET'S START BY OBSERVING THAT "ban[ning] an outcome[s] that the State deems undesirable" is the very point of a state's police power. Any judge that doesn't understand this-- and the federalism that leaves such matters solely in the hands of the individual states-- should be removed from the bench. It may be little known in this ill-educated day and age, but the notion of federal veto power over state legislation was proposed in the Constitutional Convention in 1787 and was defeated. The Fourteenth Amendment, often cited as a justification for federal interference in state sovereignty of the sort to which Arkansas is now being subjected, merely obliges states to apply their laws even-handedly, employ due process before depriving anyone of life, liberty or property, and (perhaps redundantly) respect the "privileges and immunities" of citizens of the United States. Nothing in these provisions can reasonably be construed to thwart a state's authority to prohibit the mutilation of children, as long as the mutilation of ALL children is prohibited, not just the mutilation of Asian children, for example, or just the mutilation of left-handed children. Continued at https://losthorizons.com/N/208.htm#1