A question for transgenders who believe in God  

Do you think God considers you the man or woman he created you as, or the opposite sex you later reinvented yourself to resemble?

Perhaps this is the first time you've considered that question. 

If you choose the latter option, you're elevating your own will above God's. That would be foolhardy. (Don't oppose the Father; you will only fall to deserved ruination.)

God blessed some (not me) with surgical aptitude. I suppose pro-transgender partisans might argue that doctors performing 'gender reassignment' procedures do so in furtherance of Divine long-term charting and are utilizing their talents in accordance with Holy desire.

After all, skull fractures and broken limbs are recified through surgical attention. Physical conditions are restored to their proper states. Such instances exemplify medical legitimacy, and we all owe gratitude to doctors who make wrongs right.

But one's biological sex is not an injury or malady in need of alteration. It already is as it should be. As the Creator intended.

Remember, Jeremias related (in Jeremiah 1:5) that God revealed He had known the prophet even before he was formed in his mother's womb. It follows that the Father likewise knew all of us prior to our own gestations.

Again, my question: Do you think God considers you the man or woman He created you as, or the opposite sex you later reinvented yourself to resemble?

Invalid Biden imperils us all

If Joe Biden's family cared about him, they'd make him step down instead of exploiting him as a meal ticket. 

Recent days brought numerous accounts of his advanced "cognitive decline," including confusing world leaders with one another, claiming to have had contemporary converations with long-deceased figures, and inability to recall the year of son Beau's tragic demise and in what years he served as vice-president.

Those examples assume arrangement alongside sorry ones already documented, not least of which is his battle with finding his way off of stages; for that, he's frequently assisted by watchful staffers.

Following Biden's latest error-ridden press conference, Donald Trump accurately observed "He's falling apart big time!"

Special Counsel Robert Hur recently considered Biden's years-old habit of illegally retaining classified documents. Though he concluded the allegations were meritorious, Hur (bizarrely) elected against charging the president. 

"We have considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory," Hur's report said, per a Breitbart account.

Also from Breitbart: "Hur's report is riddled with examples and assessments that Biden's mental faculties have deteriorated, saying 'Mr. Biden's memory also appeared to have significant limitations.'"

No disrespect for the mentally diminished is intended here. Nor does the present author relish being acidic. 

Like millions of American families, mine was sadly touched by a parent's related plight. My mother, Jean Russell Larson, authored numerous childrens' books as well as poetic and other writings for adult readers. Her own dire medical situation made this issue real for me in a tortuous way. Because of that experience, I regard sufferers with compassion and understanding.

But the American presidency is the most powerful institution in the world. Those in that office wield tremendous authority. They conduct international affairs, enter into trade and other treaties, head our country's military, attend to the general welfare, request congressional authorization for warfare, and even access nuclear codes.

Such awesome responsibilty requires intellectual lucidity. It is not wise to entrust authority of that magnitude to a man so evidently wandering in the fog of compromised capacity.

Primary blame must be accorded family members who permit this abusive spectacle, and Democrat Party operatives manipulating invalid Biden for contemptible purposes. Voters aware of his obvious handicap but who still enable that dirty business share moral culpability.

Because of them, we all live in peril.

2024 Democrat Party doesn't represent longtime supporters, values     

Today's Democrat Party is dramatically different from recent decades' incarnations on major issues that once were dear to classical liberals. 

It doesn't matter whether longtime Democrat lever-pullers continue to support that party out of nostalgia, uncritical emotion, delusion, or misplaced loyalty. 2024's progressive Democrat Party simply doesn't share veteran backers' values or ideals. 

During his 1963 radio and television address on civil rights, President John F. Kennedy was blunt. "[R]ace has no place in American life or law...This is one country."

Contemporary Democrats abhor such notions. In their 2020 national platform they pledged to appoint "U.S. Supreme Court justices and federal judges who look like America..." 

As candidate for president, Joe Biden promised to nominate a black woman to the Supreme Court. He did, and Democrats cheered his discrimination.

The same year as Kennedy's appearance, the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. stood on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial and gave his famous I Have a Dream address. His phrasing of noble principle is widely known: "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."

But in 2017, progressive students at the University of Oregon proposed sand-blasting that King quote off a campus building. They complained that the historic civil rights leader had not been sufficiently "inclusive."

An activist hailed by today's progressive Democrats is Ibram X. Kendi. He encapsulated current Democrat Party philosophy in his 2019 book How To Be An Antiracist: "The only remedy to past racism is present racism. The only remedy to present racism is future racism."

That terrible philosophy is diametrically opposed to King's own. But it is Kendi's bigotry, and not King's advocacy of brotherhood, that today's Democrat Party champions.

The 2024 Democrat Party emphasizes differences far more than commonality. It divides citizens from one another, maintaining separate voter classes, congressional caucuses, and initiatives. 

The 2020 platform also endorsed "equity." That should not be confused with 'equality,' a very different and legitimate proposition, Achieving numerical sameness would necessitate racial discrimination against which liberals once remonstrated.

Do longtime Democrat voters support those sharp diversions from their past beliefs?

In their 1976 platform, Democrats promised they would push for implementation of Title IX and eliminate "discrimination against women in all federal programs."

But during her 2023 senate confirmation hearing, Biden Supreme Court nominee (now sitting justice) Ketanji Brown-Jackson could not even define "woman." Her claimed inability surely stemmed from progressive ideology and is widely shared by Democrats obsessed with placating the transgender lobby.

Title IX protected girls' rights to participate in federally funded scholastic sports. But in this era of Democrat Party progressivism, Title IX has been warped to grant inherently dissimilar biological males access to female competitions. 

As a result, girl athletes who trained all their lives suffer injuries and lose events, scholarships, Olympic opportunities, and ensuant commercial benefits.

1970s feminists were correct in condemning "sexual objectification" - the notion that women could be reduced to mere genitalia. But that erroneous and demeaning concept is exactly the one supporting transgenderism. Democrats in 2024 argue that surgical refashioning of one's exterior is all that's needed to establish womanhood.

Do longtime Democrat voters support those sharp diversions from their past beliefs?

Lastly, Democrats were once the party of free speech. The racial justice and womens-rights movements benefited enormously from First Amendment guarantee to untrammeled expression. 

Classical liberals of previous days championed controversial books, magazines, films, and speakers. With Warren Burger as chief justice, the supreme court issued rulings affirming citizens' related rights. 

Social satirist Lenny Bruce and authors Edgar Rice Burroughs, Maurice Sendak, and even Anne Frank suffered 1960s censorial attempts. Theirs and many other voices were rightly defended by liberals of that era.

In 1973, ACLU free speech absolutists even protected morally repugnant Nazis' First Amendment right to march in Skokie, Illinois. 

(Of course, that action was intended to be provocative and attention-getting, as Skokie was home to many Holocaust survivors. ACLU attorneys understood that, but correctly believed an important principle was at stake.) 

Now, Democrats oppose free speech, particularly for contrary political perspectives - including mainstream ones. From municipalities to state legislatures to the national level, unpopular statements are repressed under "hate speech" statutes and regulations. Even thoughts are criminalized as "hate crimes."

College campuses were once hotbeds of related activism. Berkley's 1960s Free Speech Movement defended critics of U.S. involvement in Vietnam. Across the nation, students printed alternative newspapers and posted flyers advertising actions and causes.

Those same campuses now teem with naive soon-to-be Democrat progressives who shout down speakers (violently attacking woman athlete Riley Gaines), agitate for oppressive speech codes, pressure administrations to 'deplatform' conservative student groups, obstruct counter-protesters exercising their Constitutional rights, and attempt to block cameras from documenting their bullyboy tactics. 

Only last year, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled against the Biden Administration in Missouri v. Biden, having found that government agencies pressured social media companies to monitor and suppress citizen speech. 

As this essay was being prepared proof emerged of another Democrat attempt to squelch citizen speech, as well as our liberty to read what we please: Government officials eemailed and met with Amazon representatives in hopes of banning books on that online-order site. 

Racial unity, women's rights, free speech - on these and other crucial issues, such as American pride, support for Jews, and the staunch anti-communism advocated by Kennedy and partisan fellows, the 2024 Democrat Party bears no likeness to its previous self. Why voters who then endorsed it continue to do so defies sensible explanation.

DC Larson is an Iowa author and blogger. He counts Daily Caller, American Thinker, and Western Journal among freelance credits.

Joe Biden's career of racial exploitation       

by DC Larson

Joe Biden is a politician in the very worst sense of that word. Throughout decades in America’s electoral sphere he has cynically manipulated voters, retailoring himself to befit cultural permutations and, by that disingenous doing, made a fortune for himself and his dysfunctional family.

That is not the principled statesmanship the founders extolled. Rather, it is the way of the deceitful and scheming political opportunist. It is Joe Biden’s way.

Like many 1970s Democrat senators, Biden inveighed against busing to integrate schools. He perceived some degree of popular opposition and rushed to cater to that racial animus.

“Unless we do something about this, my children are going to grow up in a jungle, the jungle being a racial jungle with tensions having built so high [sic] that it is going to explode at some point!” he thundered on a 1977 senate floor.

A 2019 NBC News subheadline summed up the divisive senator’s impact: “Joe Biden helped give America the language that is still used to oppose school integration today, legislative and education history experts say.”

NBC’s story revealed that in 1975, Biden had sponsored legislation that limited courts’ authority to integrate schools, and also an amendment that prohibited the federal government’s withholding tax monies from segregated institutions.

But in the same moment he wooed segregationists, cagey calculator Biden sought to placate civil rights forces by also professing sympathy with them by advocating for affordable housing.

During that era, chroniclers note, he maintained friendships with ardent segregationists James Eastland, Herman Talmadge, John Stennis, Strom Thurmond, and erstwhile KKK leader and long-serving Democrat Robert Byrd.

His fetid background returned to plague him during a 2019 presidential-candidate debate. Then-competitor Kamala Harris confronted Biden,

“There was a little girl in California who was part of the second class to integrate her public schools and she was bused to school everyday, and that little girl was me.”

In that same encounter, Harris said: “It was hurtful to hear you talk about the reputations of two United States senators who built their reputations and career on the segregation of race in this country. It was not only that, but you also worked with them to oppose busing.”

(Not long after this, Harris demonstrated her own inauthenticity by dispensing with pretended outrage and gigglingly becoming Biden’s vice-presidential colleague.)

When majority opinion evolved, finger-in-the-wind chameleon Biden suitably reinvented himself. No longer did he preach the supposed virtues of school segregation. Old racist pals had become liabilities. Today, he does not speak of them.

A 2020 Fox News report related that President Biden addressed Atlanta’s Ebenezer Baptist Church on the anniversary of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr’s birthday. He falsely claimed to have participated in the noble Civil Rights Movement as a teenager, and to have attended Wilmington, Delaware’s Bethel AME Church during that 1960s time.

According to the New York Post, when Biden withdrew from presidential campaigning in 1987 he confessed to reporters: “I was not an activist. I was not out marching. I was not down in Selma.” That he’s resumed lying to voters underscores his smug duplicitousness.

And as the Fox report noted: “Longtime [Bethel AME Church] congregants told the Washington Free Beacon at the time that they didn’t recall Biden attending the church.”

From the Ebenezer Baptist pulpit, he also repeated his discredited account of having been arrested by South African police during an attempted 1980s visit to then-imprisoned Nelson Mandela.

Undeterred by numerous press disputations of his falsehoods, and aides’ reported moves to dissuade him from continuing to promulgate them, Biden routinely includes them in addresses to applauding listeners.

Indeed, in his last month’s address to supporters at Charleston’s Mother Emanuel AME Church, Biden reiterated the ‘I attended a black church’ yarn. The uncritical audience rewarded dishonesty with applause and shouted “Four more years!”

Decades of successful exploitation taught the old political game-player the electoral utility of giving constituencies whatever they want, whatever it might be.

To Joe Biden, winning all that matters.