Parents of gender-distressed children are following the Supreme Court case US vs. Skrmetti with great anxiety. The case raises the question of whether a Tennessee law banning puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones for purposes of changing a minor’s sex characteristics is unconstitutional. Oral arguments are set to take place Wednesday, though a decision is not expected until summer of 2025. The incoming Trump administration will inherit the case from Team Biden, which vigorously defended pediatric sex “changes” and the industry that supplies them. Trump’s folks can rescind the Justice Department’s appeal, potentially killing the case and leaving the question unanswered, or let it persist and have the court rule. Killing it would be a mistake. With a 6-3 conservative majority on the court, a compelling legal ruling from the Sixth Circuit where the case originates and an evidentiary record that shocks the conscience, a victory for Tennessee seems likely. That would be a huge victory for child welfare, as well. A ruling for Tennessee would not only effectively end constitutional challenges to the relevant child-protection laws in two dozen states; it would also have ripple effects directly touching the lives of millions of American families. Gender ideology has infiltrated not just medicine but K-12 education and child protective services as well. Parents who live in blue states and refuse to “affirm” the gender confusions of their children live in fear of child protective services. One of us, Erin Friday, knows this firsthand: CPS showed up at her doorstep following a contentious call with her daughter’s school, which insisted on calling her daughter by a male name, despite Erin’s contrary instructions. Doctors insisted Erin simply accept her daughter’s desires to be a boy. Yet Erin resisted, and two years later, her daughter embraced being a girl again, after avoiding medical intervention. Yet convinced that they are following evidence-based practices, schools across the country are socially transitioning children on demand — if necessary, behind parents’ backs. If the court so much as peeks behind the curtain of “gender-affirming care,” it’ll discover a medical scandal. Numerous briefs, including one by each of us, summarize how the medical profession went off the rails in this area. The leading organization promoting hormones and surgeries is the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, which is neither professional nor concerned about health in any meaningful sense. As court documents have revealed, WPATH commissioned evidence reviews — and then suppressed them when they did not support its preferred medicalized approach. It consulted “social-justice lawyers” who felt that the disappointing findings could place WPATH “in an untenable position in terms of affecting policy or winning lawsuits.” The lead author of WPATH’s most recent “standards of care” confessed that he knew “most” of the authors had conflicts of interest due to personal involvement in, advocacy for and benefit from administering these procedures. WPATH’s former president, Marci Bowers, one such author, admitted in a deposition to making over $1 million performing gender surgeries in 2023, for example. Nor did WPATH include more cautious and evidence-based perspectives on its guideline committee. Bowers admitted it was “absolutely” important for someone to be an advocate for [gender transition] treatments to participate in the guideline’s development. The “standards of care,” Bowers privately confessed to colleagues, reflect “a balancing act between what I feel to be true and what we need to say.” Within days of publishing “standards of care” in 2022, WPATH issued a correction eliminating age minimums for hormones and surgeries. As it turns out, it did so under pressure from Rachel Levine, the Biden administration’s assistant secretary for health and a transgender pediatrician, and the American Academy of Pediatrics. WPATH’s own leaders privately complained they were letting politics trump science. It’s a compelling record, especially since a minimum of 14,000 children underwent gender interventions between 2019 and 2023, according to the group Do No Harm. A Manhattan Institute analysis of “top surgery” — double mastectomy — found evidence of at least 5,200 such procedures on minors between 2017 and 2023. This includes 50 to 179 surgeries on girls ages 121⁄2 or younger. Americans are fed up with “gender identity” extremism. According to a recent YouGov poll, 54% of American voters believe minors should not have access to puberty blockers, compared to only 19% who say they should. A reckoning has already begun within the Democratic Party. The years ahead represent a unique window of opportunity to put the gender industry, with its pseudoscience and perverse incentives, on the defensive. Leon Sapir is a fellow at the Manhattan Institute. Erin Friday is an attorney and a leader at Our Duty USA.Person of interest in CEO killing had ‘everything going for him,’ classmate says
( MENAFN - Caribbean News Global) By Henry Campbell and John Coyne Youth radicalization and its connection to Political violence and terrorism is an urgent concern. Despite consistent warnings from intelligence and law enforcement, public discussion around this issue often falls short. We need to understand why it persists and how to disrupt it before it escalates. Youth radicalization and its connection to political violence and terrorism is an urgent concern. Despite consistent warnings from intelligence and law enforcement agencies in Australia and globally, public discussion around this issue often falls short. We need to understand why it persists and how to disrupt it before it escalates. Australian Security Intelligence Organization said on 6 December that about 20 percent of its priority counterterrorism cases involved minors. Since 2017, ASIO and the AFP has investigated 35 young Australians for violent extremism, some as young as 12. Young adults are also a risk factor, as illustrated this month by the apparently ideologically motivated killing of a healthcare CEO in the US. To address their radicalization, policymakers must grapple with agency: radicalized people are not just vulnerable and manipulated; political violence can be their response to both real and perceived grievances. A Five Eyes report issued this month highlights disturbing case studies of youth involvement in violent extremism across Australia, Britain, Canada, New Zealand and the United States. These case studies offer valuable insights but focus on social media. While digital environments are important, we risk overshadowing the deeper psychological, societal and cultural factors that underlie youth radicalization. We must determine what differentiates those merely exposed to extremist content and those who are radicalized by it. Online interactions may exacerbate radicalization but are not the sole factor. Multi-faceted vulnerabilities are part of the answer. For example, individuals who feel alienated, unsupported or marginalized may find a sense of belonging or purpose in extremist ideologies. Understanding complex factors, and their role in the cycle of radicalization, is necessary to disrupt the cycle. We must focus on understanding why certain individuals, particularly young people, are drawn to extremist ideologies in the first place. This includes understanding the uncomfortable issue of youth agency in radicalization. Agency is absent from the Five Eyes report and much of public discussion. We cannot view radicalized young people only as vulnerable victims. We must consider their conscious participation as an attempt to resolve real or perceived grievances. While agency is tricky to assess in the case of radicalized minors, it is particularly relevant in assessing cases of adult young persons, aged 18 to 25. This demographic is more likely to be politically aware and may be motivated to violent extremism due to a radical ideology or political grievance. The post We must understand why youth are radicalized: It's not just manipulation appeared first on Caribbean News Global . MENAFN26122024000232011072ID1109033656 Legal Disclaimer: MENAFN provides the information “as is” without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the provider above.Google Offers to Loosen Search Deals in US Antitrust Case RemedyFOXBOROUGH, Mass. (AP) — If Los Angeles Chargers coach Jim Harbaugh has given any thought to the possibility of clinching a playoff berth in his first season with the team with a win at New England on Saturday, he isn't letting it show. “Just attacking, that’s our mindset. Win the next game," he said. Harbaugh's relative silence on the topic isn't a total departure from his usual business-first approach, but there could also be something else at play. Aside from wrapping up what would be Harbaugh’s fourth postseason trip in five years as an NFL head coach, since the Chargers (9-6) have the tiebreaker over the Denver Broncos but not against the Pittsburg Steelers, Los Angeles would appear destined to be the sixth seed in the postseason. That would mean a trip to Baltimore and a possible Harbaugh Bowl 4 matchup opposite older brother and Ravens coach John Harbaugh. The Ravens beat the Chargers earlier this season 30-23. But first things first. And that's taking care of the Patriots (3-12), who have lost five straight games but showed several signs of offensive improvement during their 24-21 loss at Buffalo last week. Jim Harbaugh sees a dangerous group. And his players say they are locked in on the present. “Always one week at a time. We’ve got a lot of respect for this Patriots team," Chargers quarterback Justin Herbert said. "We know we’re going on the road and have to be prepared for everything.” If the Patriots are going to play the role of spoiler, it must start with rookie quarterback Drake Maye. He has thrown a touchdown pass in seven consecutive games, tied with Jim Plunkett (1971) for the longest such streak by a rookie in franchise history. But he has also thrown at least one interception in each of the past seven games. Overall, the Patriots have a minus-9 turnover margin. The Patriots did score 14 points in the first half during last week’s loss at Buffalo. Still, New England's offense has had trouble finishing drives, scoring touchdowns on only 47.7% of its chances in the red zone. Maye said that doesn't mean he plans to be timid over the final two games. “I think there’s definitely a way we need to cut down turnovers,” he said. “That starts with me protecting the football and throwing it incomplete or throwing it in the dirt or little things like that. I’m still going to be aggressive.” The Chargers could have a major weapon return in running back J.K. Dobbins, who has been on injured reserve after suffering a knee injury against Baltimore on Nov. 25. With Dobbins out of the lineup, the Bolts have struggled to have any consistency on offense. Los Angeles has averaged only 74.8 rushing yards in the past four games, which is quite a drop from the 118.1 they were generating before Dobbins’ injury. Dobbins was listed as questionable, while Gus Edwards — who rushed for two touchdowns and a season-high 68 yards in last Thursday’s win over Denver — was ruled out with an ankle injury. Kimani Vidal and Hassan Haskins would likely take over in the backfield if Dobbins also can't play. Justin Herbert, who has 20,466 career passing yards, needs 153 yards to surpass Peyton Manning for the most in a player's first five seasons in league history. Ladd McConkey is 40 yards away from becoming the first Chargers rookie receiver to reach 1,000 yards since Keenan Allen in 2013. The Chargers have won 11 of their past 13 when playing in the Eastern time zone, including last year’s 6-0 victory over the Patriots. Los Angeles has five of its nine games on Eastern time this season for the first time since 2005. They are trying to become the ninth team since 1988 on Pacific time to win at least four games when having to travel at least three time zones. The Chargers have given up two touchdowns and a field goal on the first possession in the last three games. They allowed only one touchdown on an opening drive in the first 12 games. Another cause for concern is that the Bolts have given up scores on the first two series in back-to-back games. AP Sports Writer Joe Reedy in Los Angeles contributed to this report. AP NFL: https://apnews.com/hub/NFL
Photographer catches impressive glimpse of Starliner docked to ISS
