Surprising: Similar Legislation To Alabama’s Ban On Transgender Surgery For Kids Introduced By SC Democrat

The heinous idea that children ought to be able to get gender reassignment surgery, often without the consent or knowledge of the parents, is naturally facing pushback from anyone who could consider themselves even remotely ethical or sane. But we see here a rather interesting and surprising story.
 ​
Weeks following the Alabama State Senate passing a bill which would outlaw hormone therapy and gender reassignment surgery for children, a South Carolina state Representative Cezar McKnight has introduced a similar bill to the state House.
 
The bill is called the “South Carolina Vulnerable Child Compassion and Protection Act” (literally borrowing the name of Alabama’s bill but adding “South Carolina” in the front) and, as one might expect, it does the same things that the Alabama bill does.
 
It bans minors from being able to receive gender reassignment surgery as well as hormone treatment such as puberty blockers, charging anyone who does these things to a child with a felony and up to 20 years in prison.
 
The bill states: “… no person shall engage in, counsel, make a referral for, or cause any of the following practices to be performed upon a minor if the practice is performed for the purpose of attempting to alter the appearance of or affirm the minor’s perception of the minor’s gender or sex, if that perception is inconsistent with the minor’s sex as defined in this chapter:…”
 
It outlaws the prescribing, dispensing or otherwise supplying of puberty blockers, supraphysiologic doses of either testosterone or estrogen to females or males respectively, perform surgeries which would sterilize or otherwise destroy the genitals, perform surgeries which would artificially construct tissue to make it look like genitalia which differs from the person’s sex, or remove healthy or nondiseased body parts or tissue.
 
In simple terms, it protects children from a lifetime of suffering induced by pedophilic psychos who view children as sexual objects and would eternally alter their appearance and chemical makeup.
 
The fact that this bill was introduced altogether is not the surprising part, of course. It makes sense that there’d be legislators out there who are concerned about children being sexually exploited by people using the umbrella of “progress” to further their evil and Satanic goals. The fact that this legislation was introduced by a DEMOCRAT is what’s surprising.
 
Now, let me preface this by pointing something else out. Rep. McKnight, the Democrat legislator introducing this bill, told the following to the Associated Press: “Black Democrats tend to be more conservative than white progressives. I would not have ever put this bill forward if I didn’t think the people in my district wouldn’t be receptive, and they are. Pastors, young parents, older parents, they all tell me the same thing: if you want to do this, wait until you’re 18.”
 
It’s worth mentioning that his district is two-thirds black and votes heavily Democrat.
 
But what’s wrong with what he said here? I agree with the first part, black Democrats tend to be more conservative than white progressives. This is because black people, like all sane people do, value the nuclear family. The ideal family is a mom, dad, and children. This is the nuclear family. And while there are issues within the black community of absent fathers, this is still the ideal family unit for any and all people. It’s why the BLM terrorists once had LGBT crap in their “About Us” page: they want the black community to abandon the nuclear family standard or ideal.
 
In ways like these, white liberals tend to be outright demonic in their agendas, and black people still tend to at least somewhat believe in God and seek Him as best they can.
 
But it’s the second thing that I have a problem with. He wouldn’t have put this bill forward if he didn’t think the people in his district wouldn’t have approved of it? Politically, it makes sense. A legislator is a representative and they get elected to represent the will of the people who elected him.
 
However, this statement calls into question the guy’s morals and ethics. He didn’t put this bill forward because it was the right thing to do. He did it for political points. Ultimately, this is the right thing to do, of course. Children should be protected from these pedophilic devils who want to alter their physical and chemical makeup and to destroy their lives forever. This bill does a marvelous job of that and the legislators who wrote it and brought it up, namely McKnight, ought to be commended for doing so.
 
But it doesn’t appear as though he is doing it for the right reasons. In his own words, there was a condition to having put this bill forward and that is that he believes the people whom he represents approve of it. I certainly believe they do (hopefully) and again, it’s ultimately the right thing to do. But were they to disapprove of this bill, would he no longer support it?
 
Does his ethical code stem not from God or even a consistent worldview but from political tides? Were he a representative in Commiefornia in a district filled with these pedophiles and demons, would he introduce bills which would FACILITATE the mutilation and suffering of children?
 
I don’t want to attack the guy too much because, again, he’s ultimately doing the right thing and this is a very good bill which achieves a wonderful goal of protecting children from nefarious and evil individuals. But there are more important things than politics and scoring political points with your voters and constituents. Namely, doing the right thing is more important, and doing it simply BECAUSE it’s the right thing.
 
But in any case, again, this is a wonderful bill which would go a long way towards protecting kids from pedophilic bastards who seek their own sexual pleasure and satisfaction in truly disgusting ways. I hope and pray that this bill will be passed (23 Republicans have signed on to this and R’s hold 81 of 124 seats, not to mention McKnight is a Democrat) both in the House and Senate (GOP also controls the Senate with 30 of 46 seats) and eventually signed into law by Gov. Henry McMaster (who is also a Republican, so he definitely should sign it).
 
Further, I hope that this bill is also further replicated in other states, in as many as currently realistically can be.
 
There is no excuse for abandoning children and leaving them to predatorial wolves.
 
Matthew 19:14
“But Jesus said, ‘Let the little children come to me and do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven.’”