This is to save lives, goy

Hey – it just makes common sense.

We have to save lives by giving out fentanyl to kids.

National Post:

In what constitutes a clear trampling of parental rights, British Columbia recently authorized the provision of “safer supply” fentanyl to youth across the province, regardless if parents are informed of, or agree to, this measure.

The provincial government has provided limited access to safer supply fentanyl since at least 2020, primarily through small-scale pilot projects. However, last August the British Columbia Centre on Substance Use (BCCSU), an influential research organization, published protocols permitting doctors and nurses to prescribe “safe” fentanyl tablets to adults and minors. The organization confirmed to me in an email that it had been contracted by the province to produce these documents “to further support clinicians prescribing safer supply across the province.”

While the B.C. government generally promotes its commitment to safer supply, it was oddly silent in this instance. I became aware of the new protocols only because two concerned addiction physicians contacted me shortly after their publication.

As there has been zero media coverage of this development — excluding a report I authored for the Macdonald-Laurier Institute (MLI), published last month — the provincial government has been able to ramp up the distribution of “safe” fentanyl with almost no public scrutiny.

This is a shame, as the new protocols are full of red flags, including a jarring near-absence of safeguarding measures when giving fentanyl to minors, to say nothing of the obvious ethical issues around underage consent.

The only special requirements for underage patients is the use of a “two prescriber approval system,” wherein one prescriber conducts the patient intake interview and another reviews the client’s charts before signing off.

A number of addiction experts have criticized this as deeply inadequate. Dr. Leonora Regenstreif, a Hamilton-based addiction physician, said she found it hard to imagine that two doctors or nurses working in the same clinic would significantly challenge each others’ prescribing decisions.

The protocols do not provide a minimum age for when youth can receive recreational fentanyl. When I asked the BCCSU whether a minimum existed, they did not reply.

The documents also make absolutely no mention of the rights and roles of parents of drug-addicted minors.

In an email, I asked the BCCSU: i) why the fentanyl protocols made no reference to parents; ii) what would the organization say to parents who do not want their children to receive “safe” fentanyl; iii) whether the BCCSU believes that drug-addicted youth can provide informed consent regarding “safe” fentanyl; and iv) what can parents do if they believe that their children are being harmed by safer supply fentanyl?

The BCCSU did not respond to these queries, despite generally answering other emails of mine over the past year.

If the province is going to dole out recreational fentanyl to minors, it should probably have strong evidence backing this decision — but apparently it doesn’t.

The protocols clearly state that, “To date, there is no evidence available supporting this intervention, safety data, or established best practices for when and how to provide it.” In fact, “a discussion of the absence of evidence supporting this approach” is actually required for securing informed consent from patients.

It seems that parents will actually be powerless to stop the government from supplying their children with fentanyl, as safer supply technically counts as a health-care intervention and youth have substantial control over their own medical decisions in Canada.

While some provinces set a minimum age (typically between 14 and 16 years old) for when minors can make such decisions, British Columbia has no minimum and relies instead on a fluid idea of “capability” — youth in the province are considered “capable” if they understand what a medical intervention involves, why it is needed and its risks and benefits.

Yet it is hard to imagine any scenario where a drug-addicted minor would be capable of providing informed consent for safer supply fentanyl, given that addiction hijacks the brain and inhibits rational decision-making. While adults have extensive rights to personal self-determination, which permits them to make impaired or self-destructive decisions if they so choose, it is hard to see why this same freedom should be extended to youth when it comes to using hard drugs.

It is true that many drug-addicted youth are in foster care or estranged from their parents, and that, for them, securing parental consent is near-impossible. Yet making an exception for this subpopulation, and permitting them to receive free fentanyl, could incentivize other underage drug users to cut ties with their families and run away from home to secure free drugs.

As parents are often a youth’s greatest asset for recovery, any safer supply system that undermines child-parent relationships is harmful.

In a sad twist, the same laws that allow the government to give recreational fentanyl to kids without parental consent also prohibit parents from sending their children to involuntary addiction treatment — in other words, the government won’t help you force your kid to get clean, but they will give them unlimited “safe” drugs against your will.

No one ever said a liberal utopia would be easy.

Or pretty.

They might not have told you that the streets of the utopia would be lined with junkies, but they also didn’t tell you that wouldn’t be the case.

Well, here’s your update on this.

AP:

Parts of a controversial Southern California school district policy that require school staff to tell parents if their child asks to change their gender identification will remain halted after a judge granted a preliminary injunction Thursday to block them until a final decision is made in the case.

The ruling by San Bernardino County Superior Court Judge Michael A. Sachs, who called portions of the policy unconstitutional, came after another judge temporarily halted the policy in September. California Attorney General Rob Bonta, who filed a lawsuit against the Chino Valley Unified School District in August, said the policy is harmful to transgender and gender-nonconforming students.

“This case is about a policy that is discriminatory,” Delbert Tran, a deputy attorney general representing the state, said at the hearing.

The Chino Valley school board approved the policy over the summer to require school staff — including principals, counselors and teachers — to notify parents in writing within three days of the school finding out their child asks to be identified as a gender different from what is listed on official records. The policy also requires staff to tell parents if their child begins using bathrooms designated for a different gender.

Sachs denied on Thursday the state’s request to block another part of the policy requiring school staff to notify parents if their child asks for information in their student records to be changed.

Emily Rae, a lawyer representing the school district, said at the hearing that parents have the right to know if their child asks to identify as a different gender so that they can better support the child’s needs.

“Chino Valley implemented this policy because it values the role that parents play in the educational process and understands that giving parents access to important information about their children is necessary,” Rae said.

Several other school districts near Chino Valley, which serves roughly 27,000 students, and in other parts of the state have debated or adopted similar policies. Last month, a federal judge blocked a policy at the Escondido Union School District in Southern California that requires staff to refrain from notifying parents if their child identifies as transgender or gender-nonconforming unless the student gives them permission.

I don’t know why we keep publishing these stories.

It happens every day – some kind of update, where a school bans telling parents or bans not telling parents or a judge tells them to do one or the other thing.

It’s all obviously being set up for the Biden Administration to come in, after the election, and pass some sweeping tranny school bill, that basically says parents have no rights at all, because it’s child abuse to not turn your kid into a tranny if the school (or the mom) says it’s a tranny.

I don’t know how many times I’ve told you this, but it has probably been exactly six million: everything to do with these states battling tranny surgeries, trannies in school, trannies in the bathroom, age of tranny injections and cock-chopping, is currently happening at the state level.

This is meant to be a huge frustrating mess.

What the Brandon Administration is planning to do is wait until after the election, when he will once again have full control of the government, and pass federal regulations on this. There is already a total framework for it, because of what the federal government has done with women and the blacks. They just include trannies in that group.

Easy peasy lemon squeezy.

Life Site News:

A Wisconsin court agreed Tuesday to block staff at Kettle Moraine School District in Waukesha County from “socially transitioning” gender-confused students without their parents’ knowledge or consent, ruling that doing so was in violation of parental rights.

Since 2021, the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (WILL) and Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) have been representing two sets of area parents against KMSD over school officials treating children as members of the opposite sex without parents’ permission.

One of the families involved said the school actually refused their request to use their daughter’s actual name and female pronouns, resulting in moving the child to a different school and getting her counseling (the girl later came to accept her actual gender).

On Wednesday, a Waukesha County circuit court ruled in favor of the parents, determining that KMSD’s policy “violates parents’ constitutional right to determine the appropriate medical and healthcare for their children,” and enjoining the district “from allowing or requiring staff to refer to students using a name or pronouns at odds with the student’s biological sex, while at school, without express parental consent.”

“The School District could not administer medicine to a student without parental consent,” the court observed. “The School District could not require or allow a student to participate in a sport without parental consent. Likewise, the School District cannot change the pronoun of a student without parental consent without impinging on a fundamental liberty interest of the parents.”

They mention the Wisconsin state constitution and blah blah blah.

But the federal government has an absolute ability to bypass all of that.

And they will.

Biden has already said as much on several occasions.

He’s also issued several executive orders.

And there have of course be multiple rulings by federal judges.

He just needs to streamline this with a bill in Congress.

I would also suspect he will move to ban home schooling as well.

He might even go after the Amish and try to turn them into trannies.

🚨🚨Randi Weingarten likened parental rights and school choice advocates to segregationists:

She says the words “choice” and “parental rights” are the same kind of words that were used in reaction to school desegregation by opponents of the Brown v. Board of Education decision. pic.twitter.com/XDvP12pWbU

— Nicki Neily (@nickineily) September 13, 2023

It’s so funny that “parental rights supporter” is now a term like “racist.”

The Jews can do this to anyone, you see. Any idea, no matter how reasonable and obvious, can be made into something evil by the Jews.

New York Post:

National teachers union boss Randi Weingarten likened the rhetoric of supporters of school choice and parental rights initiatives to that of segregationists, sparking an outcry from supporters of the movements.

The explosive comparison of Jim Crow-era racists to modern-day activists pushing for school districts to allow parents to have more input in their children’s education was made by the American Federation of Teachers president during a Tuesday interview with Northeastern University’s Burnes Center for Social Change senior fellow Seth D. Harris.

“The same kind of roots that happened in the aftermath of Brown v. Board, those same words that you heard, in terms of wanting segregation, post Brown v. Board of Education, those same words you hear today,” Weingarten, 65, said in response to a question about the differences in the political discussion surrounding schools now compared to the 20th century.

Desegregation was another Jewish hoax, by the way.

So it’s not really altogether untrue what she’s saying here.

“I was kind of gobsmacked when I was talking to Southern Poverty Law Center, and they showed me the same words: choice’, ‘parental rights’ and attempts to divide parents versus teachers, and at that point, it was white parents versus other parents. But it’s the same kind of words,” she added.

…

The extremism watchdog argues that “Today’s so-called parental rights activists have also copied and pasted from the scripts of past groups, adapting old racist and homophobic ideas, as well as conspiracy theories asserting Marxist indoctrination. They are now adding a dash of QAnon rhetoric, accusing progressives of attempting to groom and sexualize children.”

Parents did believe they had a choice whether or not their kids went to school with negroes.

I don’t really understand why they wouldn’t have that choice?

It’s because Adolf Hitler forced people to climb trees and then chopped the trees down when they were at the top?

And the Nazis would throw three babies into the air and shoot them all with one bullet?

And the Nazis drowned babies in buckets?

I don’t really understand how these things are related, but okay, Jews – I’ll just believe you because you’re God’s chosen people, after all.

EXTREMELY GRAPHIC: @OKCPS offers students the pornographic book “wait, what?”

The book has an activity which prompts students to draw penises and vaginas and contains graphic depictions of genitals.

This is what they’re giving your kids in schools. pic.twitter.com/hqfZUuJ0hr

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) September 14, 2023

Video from when it happened

It turns out that allowing the school to turn you kid into a trans and then suing them could be a quick way to moderate profits!

Fox News:

In what’s been called a landmark victory for parental rights, a California school district has settled for $100,000 with a mother who said her daughter was “socially transitioned” to a boy without parental knowledge or consent.

Jessica Konen said her 11-year-old daughter, Alicia, was told by her school in the Spreckels Union School District in Monterey County that she may be upset because she didn’t know who she “truly was inside.” From there, the school allowed her to use the boy’s bathroom, used male pronouns to refer to her and was “socially transitioned” away from her biological gender.

Once Konen found out that her daughter was being identified as a male and socially transitioning without her knowledge, she sued the district. Her daughter has since decided to re-identify as a girl, and the California single mother vowed to keep fighting for parental rights after the settlement in which she was represented by the Center for American Liberty.

It turns out, she was actually upset that her single mother is a whore who tries to look like a teenager. Well, it looks like she’s going to get $100,000 worth of new surgeries and botox injections, so maybe will actually become a teenager again???

What a disaster.

There are all of these kids being raised by single mothers who have all of these problems, and when the teachers see it, they tell them “you’d feel better if you went trans.”

Fox news goes on to glorify the single mother as a real trooper.

Okay.

It could’ve ended worse

If you don’t want your kids turned into trannies in secret by the government school, the FBI will send masked goons to beat you in the streets.

CBS News:

About 200 people marched through downtown Los Angeles today in support of parental rights and notification policies in schools, while a separate group gathered nearby to rally in support of LGBTQ+ youth, ultimately leading to an unlawful assembly declaration and three arrests.

Two people from the LGBTQ+ supporters and one from the parental rights side were arrested.

…

The parental rights march was organized in a social media campaign under the Instagram moniker Leave Our Kids Alone, supporting parental rights and opposing “indoctrination,” “sexualization” or “grooming” of children in schools.

That group backs policies adopted by some Inland Empire school districts requiring schools to notify parents if their children identify as transgender or try to identify as a gender other than the one listed on their birth certificate.

The Leave Our Kids Alone group assembled outside Los Angeles City Hall, then marched to Los Angeles Unified School District headquarters at Third Street and Beaudry Avenue, where some participants sat in the intersection, ultimately leading police to declare an unlawful assembly.

Meanwhile, members of the smaller counter-protest, some of whom waved Pride flags, assembled nearby, prompting officers to set up skirmish lines to keep the groups separated. According to reports from the scene, police attempted to push the counter-protesters back, but two people allegedly resisted and were taken into custody.

Opponents of parental-notification policies say such requirements can put LGBTQ+ students at risk if their families are not accepting of their gender identity.

Organizers of Tuesday’s counter-rally, including Ground Game LA and Queer Nation Los Angeles, accused the parental-rights group of “trying to bring their hate to Los Angeles City Hall,” and of promoting a “hate-filled, fascist agenda of fear.”

Some people in the Leave Our Kids Alone group waved American flags while others carried signs with slogans such as “Parental Rights Matter” and “Parental rights are non-negotiable,” and many wore shirts saying “Leave our kids alone.” One held a sign reading “Teach the Bible, not porn.”

The California government is investigating whether it is legal in California to tell parents their kids are being groomed to be trannies.

Until there is an iron law of dick chopping, these Antifa – a violent group of drug addicts paid by the government to attack people on the streets – will attack you on the streets.

Nathalie Godbout

They’re going to keep hitting you from every angle.

But you knew that.

We’re approaching the point where kids of two pureblooded parents will just be pulled out of the house by the government and given to homosexuals.

Daily Mail:

A divorced anti-vaxxer dad from New Brunswick, Canada, has lost his right to see his three children in person after refusing to get the COVID shot.

The unidentified dad has an immunocompromised 10-year-old daughter but he and his new partner have refused to get the Covid-19 vaccine, leading Justice Nathalie Godbout of the Court of Queen’s Bench to order him to stay away from all three kids.

Godbout wrote that the she was ruling ‘with a heavy heart’ but that the pair were ‘well-positioned to transmit the virus’ to the children despite their best efforts, especially to the father’s at-risk daughter, who needs specialized care for non-cancerous tumors in her blood vessels.

Her ruling last Monday also made sure to debunk the fathers ‘research’ on the Pfizer vaccine.

‘His own anecdotal research on such a highly specialized topic carries little to no weight in the overall analysis when measured against the sound medical advice of our public health officials,’ Godbout wrote.

‘It is no contest: the current science in the face of a highly contagious virus far outweighs Mr. F.’s layman wait-and-see approach,’ she added.

Despite losing in-person access to his kids, Godbout granted the father ‘generous’ visiting rights via Zoom.

If he decides to get the jab, he can return to court to ask for a change to the decision.

According to the attorney who represented the mother in the case, the three children have already received their first doses of vaccine after Godbout ruled that the mother could get her children vaccinated without their dad’s permission.

‘She was ecstatic in some regards,’ said Grant Ogilvie, her lawyer. ‘But this isn’t a case where she wants to take the children away from their father. This is what’s best for the children, period. She’s acknowledged this is going to have an impact on the children, but she said, ‘I have to do what’s best for them.”

She’s not a vindictive cunt, you see.

Like all single mothers, she just really loves her kids.

If there’s one thing we all know about single mothers, it’s that they really, really love their kids.

If my son was vaxed, I’d tell his whore mother she’s going to have to deal with the medical costs and care burden of the inevitable health conditions he’s going suffer from, and then flee the country.

But I understand most men are not that hardcore, and that isn’t really the point. The point is that judges are now separating families based on coronavirus theories and the vax religion.

Breitbart:

A judge in the Canadian province of Quebec has suspended a father’s right to see his 12-year-old child because the father has not been fully vaccinated against the Wuhan coronavirus.

Superior Court Judge Jean-Sébastien Vaillancourt temporarily denied the father’s access rights to his child in a judgement dated on December 23rd and reported this week, arguing that it was not in the child’s best interest to have contact with this father due to the man’s vaccination status.

“It would normally have been in the best interests of the child to have contact with his father, but not in his best interest to have contact with him if he is not vaccinated and is opposed to sanitary measures in the current epidemiological context,” Judge Vaillancourt stated, newspaper Le Devoir reports.

The mother of the child has full custody rights and previously agreed to grant the father access every other weekend and for a week during the holiday season but the mother objected when the father requested an extra day of access during the holidays.

In her objection, the mother stated that the father was a “conspiracy theorist” and was not vaccinated against the Wuhan coronavirus. The woman also produced alleged Facebook posts showing the father opposed the coronavirus vaccines.

The 12-year-old, meanwhile, is fully vaccinated but the judge stated that it was not enough for the child to be safe around their unvaccinated father, stating, “it is judicial knowledge that the protection is not total and that it even seems to be reduced in the face of the Omicron variant, which is currently spreading in Quebec. It is also known that this variant is highly contagious.”

The judge has also ruled that the case will be re-examined in February, stating that the father may be vaccinated within that time frame or the pandemic situation itself may change.

The case is the first of its kind in Canada according to family lawyer Sylvie Schirm, who said that judges decide cases in terms of what is in the child’s best interest.

It’s so horrible that women are allowed to raise children.

But if they vax them, they vax them, and there’s nothing you can do but write them off and flee the country. At this point, you’ll probably have to do it on a boat.

Related and hilarious

Remember when we said they were going to take your kids away?

That was a conspiracy theory when we said it.

What are we saying now that’s a conspiracy theory?

Breitbart:

A Spanish court has ruled that a mother who attempted to flee to Portugal to prevent her two children from being vaccinated cannot have any contact with them or approach them.

The mother of the two children, identified as Christine M.C., was released by a court in Seville following her arrest after taking her two children, aged 12 and 14, to neighbouring Portugal in an effort to stop them from being vaccinated.

The 46-year-old fled Spain with her children to the town of Aljezur in the Algarve in November of last year after the children’s father David K. had wanted the children to take the vaccine.

A Spanish judge agreed with the father after the disagreement was brought to court and Christine M.C was later arrested on Wednesday and brought back to Spain, newspaper El Mundo reports.

Borja Gómez Martínez-Fresneda, the lawyer for the mother, stated that her client had taken the children in order to prevent any possible side effects from the vaccine.

The court has since agreed to release the woman on bail but ordered that she not contact them or approach them, temporarily withdrawing her custody rights after it was revealed she had not let the children return to school or see their father after she had taken them.

It’s all happening.

All of it.

It’s all going to happen.

A school policy in Delaware is promoting children chopping their dicks off without the parents knowing.

Tucker tracked down one of the people supporting this policy and handled him in the appropriate fashion.