In a surprising twist, California Governor Gavin \u200bNewsom has vetoed the\u200d controversial\u200c AB-957<\/a>, one of four new bills<\/a> aimed at undermining \u2062the child custody rights\u2063 of parents who \u2063don’t conform to the \u200cstate’s\u200d radical gender beliefs.<\/p>\n

Whether driven by political strategy or Newsom’s conciliatory\u200d statement<\/a> that California \u200dcourts already consider\u200d “the parent’s affirmation of the child’s gender identity” in custody decisions, \u200dthe veto shows that the growing number of parents concerned about government interference in their parenting is\u200d making an impact, even\u2062 in \u2062California.<\/p>\n

AB-957 \u200bwould have required judges\u2064 in \u200dchild \u2064custody cases to consider whether parents “affirm” their\u2063 child’s gender identity. This law would have politicized child custody and violated parents’ constitutional right to choose the\u200b best care for their child.\u2062 By introducing\u200d an\u2064 experimental and\u2063 controversial standard of care for gender dysphoria\u200b into \u200bthe sensitive realm of child custody,\u2063 this legislation would have forced\u200b parents to comply\u200c with California’s\u200d ideology \u200cor risk losing contact with their\u2063 children.<\/p>\n

Pediatric Gender <\/strong>Regimen Ignores Scientific Evidence<\/strong><\/h2>\nAB-957 would have\u2064 also pressured \u200dparents to accept harmful and experimental use of puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones<\/a>, and even surgeries, or risk being deemed insufficiently “affirming” of their child’s\u2062 gender \u2062identity\u200d and losing \u200bcustody. However, a\u2062 growing body of evidence, including several<\/a> systematic reviews<\/a> conducted in Europe<\/a>, has failed to prove the \u200csafety\u200b and effectiveness of these interventions for treating gender\u2064 dysphoria in\u2063 children.<\/p>\n
That’s why many\u2064 countries and medical practitioners in\u200c the U.S. prioritize compassionate and effective mental health care<\/a> for children. However, AB-957 would\u200b have punished parents who\u2064 choose to follow scientific \u2064evidence instead of subjecting their children to harmful\u2063 treatments. This\u2064 legislation would violate parents’ right to make important decisions<\/a> without government coercion, putting their custody at\u200b risk.<\/p>\n
Politicizing Child Custody Undermines Religious Freedom<\/h2>\n
Furthermore, laws \u2062like AB-957 target religious parents \u2063who strive to live according to their \u200cfaith. This\u2064 law\u2063 would have undermined the parental rights of faithful adherents of various religions, including Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, simply because they hold firm to their beliefs about gender. AB-957 would have violated every\u2064 parent’s freedom to believe and act \u2064in accordance with those beliefs when raising their children.<\/p>\n
<\/div>\n
While the veto of AB-957 brings some relief to California\u2064 parents fighting for their right to raise and\u2063 care for their children, the battle against “California’s\u200c War \u2064on Parents”\u2063 is far \u200dfrom over.<\/p>\n
California’s Ongoing Assault on Parents’ Right to Protect Their Kids<\/h2>\n
For \u200dinstance, the California legislature also\u2062 passed AB-665, which grants \u2062therapists\u2064 and other “professionals” the power to determine if a 12-year-old \u200bis mature enough to consent\u2064 to mental health \u200dtreatment without their parents’ knowledge. \u2063This means children \u200ccould receive experimental psychological services<\/a> without their parents’ involvement, potentially \u2062leading them down \u2063a path of irreversible\u2064 treatments.<\/p>\n
AB-665 allows strangers\u200d to make decisions about a child’s best interests, disregarding the parents who know and love them\u200b the most.<\/p>\n
<\/div>\n
Embrace \u200cGender Ideology, or Else<\/h2>\n
These laws send \u200ba clear message: conform to California’s radical gender ideology or risk losing\u200d control of your children.<\/p>\n
If parents don’t push back \u2063against this government overreach and if\u200b courts don’t protect their fundamental rights, parents may lose custody for trying to protect their \u200cchildren from harmful treatments.<\/p>\n
This assault on parental rights is not limited to California. States like Minnesota<\/a> are following suit with similar laws, and courts across \u2062the country (such as in Indiana<\/a> and Ohio<\/a>) are taking custody away from loving \u2064parents who question harmful protocols and procedures.<\/p>\n
America Must Fulfill a New Promise to Parents<\/h2>\n
Parents must continue \u200dto resist this\u200c government overreach that threatens their rights. Congress and state\u2064 legislatures need to act swiftly to pass legislation that protects parental rights and ensures\u200c government accountability, \u2063choice, and transparency, as\u200d outlined in the “Promise to \u200dAmerica’s Parents.”<\/p>\n
When California sneezes, America catches a cold. We \u2063must \u200dprevent our nation from catching this cold. The well-being of our children depends on it.<\/p>\n
<\/div>\n
\t\t\t\t\t \t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n
rnrn <\/p>\n
What was the purpose of AB-957 and why did Governor Newsom \u2064veto it?<\/h2>\n
California Governor Gavin Newsom \u2064has vetoed a controversial bill, AB-957, which aimed \u2064at undermining the\u2064 child custody rights of parents who do\u200c not conform to the state’s radical gender beliefs. This surprising \u200cdecision shows that \u2064the growing number of parents concerned about government interference in their parenting is making an impact.<\/p>\n
AB-957 would have required judges in child custody cases to consider whether parents affirm\u200b their child’s gender identity. This law would have politicized child custody and violated parents’ constitutional right to choose the best care for their child.\u2064 It would have forced parents to comply \u2064with California’s ideology or risk losing contact with their children.<\/p>\n
Furthermore, this bill would have pressured\u200b parents to accept\u200b harmful\u200c and experimental use of puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgeries, or \u2063risk\u200b being deemed insufficiently affirming of \u200btheir child’s \u2063gender identity \u2063and losing custody. However, there is a \u200dgrowing \u2064body of evidence that \u2064fails to prove the safety\u200c and \u2064effectiveness of these interventions for treating gender dysphoria<\/a> in\u200b children.<\/p>\n
Many countries and medical practitioners prioritize compassionate and effective \u2062mental health care for children. AB-957, on the\u2063 other hand, would have punished parents who choose to follow\u2064 scientific evidence instead\u200c of subjecting\u200b their\u200c children to harmful treatments. \u2064This legislation would have violated parents’ right to make important decisions without government\u200c coercion.<\/p>\n
In addition, AB-957 would have undermined the parental rights of religious parents who strive to \u200clive according to \u2063their faith. This law would have violated every parent’s \u200cfreedom to believe and act in\u200c accordance with those beliefs when raising their children.<\/p>\n
While the veto of AB-957 brings some\u200b relief to \u2062California parents fighting\u2062 for their right to \u2063raise and care for their \u200dchildren, the \u2062battle against “California’s War on \u200cParents” is far from over. The state legislature has also passed other bills, such as AB-665, which grants therapists and other professionals the power to determine if a 12-year-old is mature enough to consent to mental health<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
In a surprising twist, Gov. Gavin Newsom of California vetoed AB-957, a contentious bill aimed at diminishing child custody rights for parents who don’t conform to the state’s extreme gender beliefs. Newsom’s decision, whether driven by political strategy or a conciliatory stance, acknowledges that California courts already consider “the parent’s affirmation of…”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2466,"featured_media":2057486,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mo_disable_npp":"","fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/cndimages.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com\/breaking-news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/IMG_2758-scaled-1.jpg","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[546],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2057485","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-the-federalist"],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/cndimages.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com\/breaking-news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/IMG_2758-scaled-1.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2057485","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2466"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2057485"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2057485\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2057486"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2057485"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2057485"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2057485"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}