Senator Beck should drop support for trans-men in girls' toilets bill

If we are to avoid another performance like 2015, the Republican legislative caucuses of both chambers should use 2016 to prepare for 2017.  The most important thing is to do yourself no harm. 

We've detailed before how bills like S-283 have no base of support and how they could do enormous damage -- not only to the prospect of turning out our base -- but with any voters who believe in privacy between the sexes and with protecting vulnerable women and girls.  Polling shows large majorities in favor of traditional privacy no matter how the question is posed. 

Such a poll was recently conducted in the Eleventh Legislative District in Monmouth County.  More on that later.

Suffice it to say that modesty might draw barbed mockery from some, but in a district in which 48 percent of all registered Republicans are aged 60 or over and 66 percent of Republican super voters (3 of 4 or above) are aged 60 or over, it is a safe bet that it still counts for something.  And we can't wait to find out.

When educated as to the number of convicted male sex offenders who could use a law like S-283 to gain access to girls and women for their self-gratification, the response is off-the-charts.  Republicans, Democrats, Independents -- it doesn't matter.  Many in the LGBT community break ranks with their lobbyist class and oppose S-283 on the grounds that it leaves too many people vulnerable to sexual abuse, rape, and even murder.

We understand from a highly placed source in the Legislature that S-283 will be making an appearance again.  This source also confirmed that S-283 will have GOP support. Prominent among those GOP supporters is Senator Jennifer Beck, a co-sponsor of S-283.

We didn't expect such a betrayal of the Republican base in an election cycle as rebellious as 2016-17 is turning out to be.  Of course, Senator Beck is making a lot of noise on other issues in an attempt to get conservative voters to forget who she really is, and her decades-long record as a lobbyist and legislator devoted to the liberal causes dear to the heart of the political and corporate establishment.     

If passed into law, Beck's legislation allows a man, with a penis, to become a legal "woman", simply by saying that he is seeing a therapist and then re-submitting his birth certificate to reflect his "new sex".  No surgery required. 

And it won't be recorded as an "amended" birth certificate.  It will be filed as the original.  The government will pretend that it can go back in time to correct the "perception" of the doctors and nurses who saw a child with a penis and checked "male".  The government will, in fact, lie and pretend that the attending physician checked "female" when, of course, he did not.    

What S-283 will do is endanger the lives of women and girls in New Jersey.  And come election time every legislator who supports S-283, regardless of their party, is going to have to answer some tough questions from average constituents about why you had to do this and not something important, like lowering property taxes, ending the tax on retirement income, or fixing the Transportation Trust Fund. 

Watch the video below and see if you are ready to answer those questions:

Senator Brain Fart Beck

brain fart

noun

informal

noun: brain fart; plural noun: brain farts

1.    a temporary mental lapse.

"I try to think of something, but experience a brain fart"

Well, it could have been a worth-while discussion.   Traditional conservatives and libertarians alike believe that a user tax is fairer than a progressive tax imposed on everyone.  It is practically holy writ among conservatives -- just ask Paul Mulshine, New Jersey's most respected conservative columnist.

http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2016/06/tranbsportation_package_has_taxes_going_to_the_rig.html

But that's conservatives and libertarians who think that way.  Then there are Republicans like Jennifer Beck.  Senator Beck thinks that "progressive" taxation on everyone is better than making people who use a service or convenience pay their own way.  Of course, Senator Beck is a "progressive" Republican.

Senator Beck is a co-sponsor of S-283.  Her legislation allows a man, with a penis, to become a legal "woman", simply by saying that he is seeing a therapist and then re-submitting his birth certificate to reflect his "new sex".  No surgery required. 

And it won't be recorded as an "amended" birth certificate.  It will be filed as the original.  The government will pretend that it can go back in time to correct the "perception" of the doctors and nurses who saw a child with a penis and checked "male".  The government will, in fact, lie and pretend that the attending physician checked "female" when, of course, he did not.    

Yep, it could have been a serious policy discussion.  Beck could have argued her point, respectfully disagreeing while working towards a consensus that would help the people of New Jersey.  Instead, Senator Beck decided to turn it into a political talking point.  You see, having lost her two running mates last year to the Democrats, she plans to use this issue to run with two NEW running mates next year.  Oh yes, her plan is to screw over conservative Republican Caroline Casagrande.  Too conservative.

So instead of an open, honest, and adult discussion with Republican Senators Steve Oroho and Joe Kyrillos, Senator Beck does the talk radio routine and holds rallies -- lots of shouting and noise and emotion.  Designed to stop action but not to get anything accomplished. 

Could it be that Jennifer Beck knows that her so-called plan was conceived in the midst of a brain fart -- with all the hype and lack of substance of a poorly planned contestant at a talent fest?  Does Beck, deep down, know that her plan won't stand up to the scrutiny of a public debate?

Transsexual rape in LGBT toilet

The threat to women and girls by men with access to their toilet facilities was brutally made clear over the weekend when a "transgender woman" (that is, a man who "presents" as a woman or a woman who "presents" as a man) was allegedly raped while using a public toilet.  The crime occurred inside the famous Stonewall Inn -- an LGBT landmark where the "gay rights" movement began back in the 1970's.  The New York Post reported on the incident yesterday:

A transgender woman says she was raped in a unisex bathroom at the Stonewall Inn — and police are searching for the suspect who they say regularly frequents the landmark gay bar.

Video surveillance clearly shows the woman entering the single-occupancy bathroom late Saturday, soon followed by a man believed to be in his 30s, police sources say.

They remained in the bathroom for about eight minutes. That’s when the alleged rape took place, sources said. The suspect exited the bathroom, then walked back in.

The woman, who was believed to be heavily impaired by alcohol and possibly prescription pills, alerted friends and called 911 a short time later, sources said. She was taken to Lenox Hill Hospital for treatment.

Sources said the suspect regularly patronizes the Christopher Street bar on Saturday nights and may have been dealing drugs there.

“People inside the Stonewall know him,” Chief of Detectives Robert Boyce said. “We hope to have him identified in the next coming days.”

Stonewall Inn, site of the Stonewall riots of 1969, is famed as the birthplace of the modern gay rights movement.

“It’s a very disturbing incident taking place in a site that’s very important historically, where something good happened in terms of creating more opportunity for people to live their lives,” Mayor Bill de Blasio said, “and to see a violent incident like this is very troubling.”

The Stonewall Inn is a sacred icon to the LGBT community.  This is like a rape occurring in Independence Hall -- except that the people who run Independence Hall probably would have banned the alleged rapist, who also allegedly deals drugs, from the premises.  But this points up the danger when staff, who are after all more concerned with serving alcoholic beverages, fail to monitor who is being followed into toilet facilities.  Imagine what will happen when fully functioning males, with penises, have the LEGAL RIGHT to follow any woman or girl they want to?  And it will make no difference at all if the man who believes himself to be a woman has a criminal conviction for violent sexual assault, sexual harassment, sexual abuse, rape, or murder.  It will be his right.

Any piece of legislation (like S-283) that proposes such an eventuality, places women and girls at risk of becoming victims of sex crimes.  Such legislation should include a mandate that every public toilet in the state have a panic button installed at every stall and that armed security be present at all facilities of a certain number of stalls or more.  The cost for such should be borne by increased taxes on very rich people like Donald Edward Newhouse (estimated net worth: $10.5 billion), the 2nd richest resident of New Jersey and the 56th richest person in the United States.  Revenue could also be found by taxing corporations like Advance Publications, the 4th largest private company in the NY area and the 44th largest private company in the United States.

Remember, if we prevent just one woman or girl from suffering a criminal sexual assault the increased taxation on these very rich people and corporations will have been worth it.

Do politicians need more protection than vulnerable women?

If we are to avoid another performance like 2015, the Republican legislative caucuses of both chambers should use 2016 to prepare for 2017.  The most important thing is to do yourself no harm. 

We've detailed before how bills like S-283 have no base of support and how they could do enormous damage -- not only to the prospect of turning out our base -- but with any voters who believe in privacy between the sexes and with protecting vulnerable women and girls.  Polling shows large majorities in favor of traditional privacy no matter how the question is posed.

When educated as to the number of convicted male sex offenders who could use a law like S-283 to gain access to girls and women for their self-gratification, the response is off-the-charts. Republicans, Democrats, Independents doesn't matter.  Many in the LGBT community break ranks with their lobbyist class and oppose S-283 on the grounds that it leaves too many people vulnerable to sexual abuse, rape, and even murder.

Now comes this new threat to the fate of the GOP caucuses in 2017:  Legislation that puts politicians ahead of vulnerable women when it comes to the issuance of handgun carry permits. Here's what the sponsor said about his bill:

“I believe that if vulnerable public officials do not have to fear violent reprisals related to their duties, they will be able to better carry out their mission to serve the people of New Jersey. Our dedicated public servants are some of our greatest resources..."

And what about the vulnerable women who have suffered violence and sexual abuse?  What about women who have court orders against abusive individuals? 

The sponsor is a Republican member of the Senate, so we will refrain from naming names at this point, but a rethink is in order because some in the Second Amendment movement have caught wind of it and are pissed.  And if you think about it for more than ten seconds, you can see why. 

This proposed law lets the average New Jersey voter know that they have the standing of Medieval peasants -- that their lords and noblemen have the right of self-protection but nobody else's life is worth it. 

We exist at a moment when one major political party rigged its delegate-selection process to deny a populist (Senator Sanders) a shot at the nomination, while the other major political party is desperately looking for a way to deny another populist (Mr. Trump) its nomination.   When you consider the implications, laws like this one (and S-283) couldn't come at a worse time.  They ram home the point that average voters simply don't matter.  Their lives can be expended on ridiculous fashion-statement legislation.

How do legislators come up with stuff like this?  Who is advising them?  Do they exist in a bubble -- apart from the real world of everyday life, of voters and elections and consequences?

Ronald Reagan famously said that "personnel is policy."  He understood that it is no good having the best conservative intentions, if all you appoint around you to carry out those intentions is liberal wannabe Democrats and Republicans of convenience.  Sometimes we have to look behind the legislator and see who is whispering in his ear, gate-keeping, setting the agenda -- waiting on that pension to accrue and for the pay-day that comes when you can leave to become part of the lobbyist class.  How much good is trashed, how many legislators lose, because some staffer doesn't want to offend someone they expect to do business with as a lobbyist?

Isn't it time to examine those people of power who operate behind the scenes, out of sight -- like parasitic worms, eating away at the sinew and muscle of the party they don't care about? Isn't it time to examine them

We understand that the Center for Garden State Families will be conducting polling on issues like those above in key districts around the state.  No details yet as to which districts.  Stay tuned...

Senator Vitale endangers women

We understand from a highly placed source in the Legislature that S-283 will be making an appearance again.  Apparently Senator Joseph "I managed to make it through the 12th Grade" Vitale (D-McGreevey) is salivating over the prospects promised by this legislation.  This source also confirmed that S-283 will have GOP support.  Ouch, we didn't expect such a betrayal of the Republican base in an election cycle as rebellious as 2016-17 is turning out to be.   

If passed into law, S-283 allows a man, with a penis, to become a legal "woman", simply by saying that he is seeing a therapist and then re-submitting his birth certificate to reflect his "new sex".  No surgery required. 

And it won't be recorded as an "amended" birth certificate.  It will be filed as the original.  The government will pretend that it can go back in time to correct the "perception" of the doctors and nurses who saw a child with a penis and checked "male".  The government will, in fact, lie and pretend that the attending physician checked "female" when, of course, he did not.    

Now there is no public or private data that we can find to indicate any reason in a representative democracy for this legislation to enjoy such support.  So it seems that once again some billionaire is financing some backdoor lobby effort to get his little wet dream pushed ahead of all those issues he considers "minor" -- like child hunger, foreclosure, unemployment, debt, and the highest in America property taxes.

What S-283 will do is endanger the lives of women and girls in New Jersey.  And come election time every legislator who votes for S-283, regardless of their party, is going to have to answer some tough questions from average constituents about why you had to do this and not property tax relief. 

Watch the video below and see if you are ready to answer those questions:

Men say we have nothing to fear from them in our locker rooms, bathrooms, and sleeping spaces. We say: Decide for yourself.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzwMJAFWLtQ&feature=youtu.be

Are NJ Legislators sexualizing childhood?

Less than a week after Assembly Speaker Vinnie Prieto (D-Sacco) promised to make New Jersey's historically high child poverty his top concern, that appears to have been pushed aside in favor of the top issue of the swingers' lobby -- women with penises.  You know how it is, poor children can't afford a lobbyist.  Rich and influential sexual swingers can buy whatever strikes their fancy.

The swingers want to see legislation (S-283) passed so that a man, with a penis, can become a legal "woman", simply by saying that he is seeing a therapist and then re-submitting his birth certificate to reflect his "new sex".  No surgery required. 

And it won't be recorded as an "amended" birth certificate.  It will be filed as the original.  The government will pretend that it can go back in time to correct the "perception" of the doctors and nurses who saw a child with a penis and checked "male".  The government will, in fact, lie and pretend that the attending physician checked "female" when, of course, he did not.    

This has long been the goal of a branch of therapy that is well organized and represented by a number of professional associations who lobby extensively.  They are followers of the Kinsey model of human sexuality, which gained traction in the 1950's.  This model embraces the idea that there should be no sexual taboos or restrictions, since all behaviors lay within the spectrum of sexual diversity, and that spectrum includes sex between the powerful and their subordinates, sex for pay, adult-child sex, and even incest. 

These therapists and the educators and politicians they influence promote the theory -- remembering that in the field of therapy, everything is "theory" -- that there are a "range" of genders, not restricted to male and female, and that all types of erotic preferences and lifestyles are variations of healthy sexuality.  They reject the labels normal and abnormal.  Nothing is abnormal, it just is. 

In 1999, the leaders in this field of therapy condemned Congress for withdrawing public funding from a controversial study by Dr. Bruce Rind (Temple University), Dr. Robert Bauserman (State of Maryland), and Mr. Philip Tromovitch (University of Pennsylvania).   These three experts in human sexuality advanced the idea that not all sexual intercourse between adults and children is necessarily harmful.

In 1998, their findings were published in the Psychological Bulletin, an academic psychology journal published by the often-cited American Psychological Association.  These psychologists analyzed 59 studies of college students who said they were sexually abused in childhood, and concluded that the effects of such abuse ''were neither pervasive nor typically intense, and that men reacted much less negatively than women.''

The study found that adult predatory sexual behavior towards children ''may represent only a violation of social norms with no implication for personal harm.'' The psychologists suggested that the term ''adult-adolescent sex'' or ''adult-child sex'' be substituted, in some cases, for ''child sexual abuse.''   

The North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) strongly endorsed the study.  The study also received support from organizations like the Society for the Scientific Study of Sex; the American Association of Sex Educators, Counselors, and Therapists; the National Coalition Against Censorship; and the American Association for the Advancement of Science. 

We list them, along with the American Psychological Association, because  Senator Joseph Vitale (D-McGreevey), the chairman of the senate committee through which the "therapy + penis = woman" legislation must pass, is fond of citing "experts" who support his position and dissing those who don't.  To be fair, he should know fully on whose team he is playing in advance of the 2017 primary, when that "team" will be detailed within the houses of worship that serve his district.

The idea that a government can alter a human being's genetic makeup simply by passing a law is a shade of King Canute.  It is also antithetical to Science itself.

Every Senator who supports S-283 should be aware of the inevitable conflicts that will arise when the attempt is made to brainwash young children into believing that a man can become a woman merely by "believing" it, finding the odd therapist to support you in your belief, and finally to alter a government document.  Vulnerable children will inevitably be required to undergo a species of the notorious SAR program.

SAR or Sexuality Attitude Restructuring, is a tool developed to increase students’ comfort with a broad range of behaviors.  During the SAR, films, slides, and audio of explicit sexual behaviors -- heterosexual, homosexual, group, oral, child-adult -- are projected on multiple screens for hours at a time, followed by group discussions.  In the 1970’s, SAR got the moniker "F*ck-O-Rama."  SAR is required for certification by some therapy associations.

Children's advocate Dr. Judith Reisman describes SAR as “a critical tool to reshape views of human sexuality”.  It desensitizes and disinhibits the brain, she explains, “to allow a shift in pedagogical attitude and performance”. 

On Monday, January 25, 2016, the Senate Health, Human Services and Senior Citizens Committee will be holding a hearing on S-283.  The public hearing will be held at 1 PM in Committee Room 1, on the First Floor of the State House Annex in Trenton, New Jersey.

Members of the swingers lobby will no doubt be present to propagate their world view.  Those of us who have not yet undergone SAR retraining should also attend to add our voices... while we are still permitted them.

---

Senate Health, Human Services and Senior Citizens Committee will be holding a public hearing on S-283

MONDAY, JANUARY 25 - 1:00 PM

COMMITTEE ROOM 1, FIRST FLOOR

STATE HOUSE ANNEX

TRENTON, NJ