top of page

French Friday: Transgenderism & Parental Rights


It’s becoming increasingly clear that parental rights is poised to be a significant issue in the 2024 election, particularly as it relates to transgenderism and gender-affirming healthcare. Skye Jethani talks to David French about his recent editorial that provoked a backlash from both ends of the political spectrum. French explains why recent efforts in California and Texas, which take opposite positions on youth transgenderism, both violate the long-affirmed rights of parents to make healthcare decisions for their own children without government interference. Is it another case of both the Right and Left embracing illiberal and unconstitutional tactics to fight the Culture War? Or, does the rise of transgenderism among kids demand the government’s intervention regardless of what parents want?



0:00 - Theme Song

5:22 - Don’t Let the Culture War Degrade the Constitution

11:00 - Parental Rights in California

21:47 - Parental Rights in Texas

33:52 - Kaylee McGhee White’s Critique

46:52 - Navigating the polarization of our communities

1:01:40 - End Credits


Links mentioned in interview


Don’t Let the Culture War Degrade the Constitution





Yes, the state has both the right and the responsibility to restrict gender ideology



Other resources:



Support us and find premium content by going to


The Holy Post is supported by our listeners. We may earn affiliate commissions through links listed here. As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.

.






136 comentários


Perhaps also an interview with Charlie Baber would be good?

Curtir

Phil, Skye, have you guys heard of Revoice or Nate Collins? He's got a very interesting take on gay issues and Christianity, and I would love for you to interview him. https://www.sheologians.com/revoice-conference-nate-collins/

Curtir

I would love it if in maybe the next HP you guys could take some time to respond to some of the responses here. Was really hoping it would be a topic this week, but fingers crossed for next week or later...

Curtir

kacumen
kacumen
03 de abr. de 2023

There are 56 comments in this section. I have not read all of them but the majority seem to be from people who either lean left or are fully comfortable on the left. In other words, given what you are seeing here I think it's fair to conclude that most of your listeners are not white conservative evangelicals. And therefore, your responsibility is not to challenge white conservative evangelicals (because they don't listen to you) but to challenge your actual listeners (left leaning christians). This episode was a great way to do that. You should do it in more episodes. Your listeners need to be challenged. Your listeners do not need an echo chamber (or almost always an echo chamber).

Curtir
Respondendo a

I'll check him out. He seems rather sola scriptura, but then so is Skye, and despite my disagreement with Skye on some things (the recent discussion of Hell, for example), I like him on HP... (I would be best described as an Anglo-Catholic Episcopalian with a dash of Shinto.)

Curtir

Mark Norman
Mark Norman
03 de abr. de 2023

--See edit at the end of this comment--


Forgot one thing: Skye mentions the fact that the Texas law would classify the parents of intersex children as child abusers, but goes on to stress how extremely rare this set of conditions is. They are not that rare. The literature suggests between 0.018% to 1.7% of people are born on the intersex spectrum. That means it effects somewhere between 1.4 million and 136 million real people, leading real lives.


The fact that people are born intersex at all means sex and gender are not intrinsic or immutable. Suggesting otherwise is demonstrably untrue.


At a bare minimum, avoid ignorant platitudes like "God made everyone perfect as a boy or a girl." That's…


Curtir
Mark Norman
Mark Norman
03 de abr. de 2023
Respondendo a

My initial comment was in response to what Skye said on the podcast. You are correct that the senate amended the bill to exclude parents of intersex kids.


The main point I was making is that for millions of people gender is biologically and genetically ambiguous from before birth, so how can we possibly uphold a law based on the idea that its binary for everyone thereafter?

Curtir
bottom of page