It's hard not to conclude that this is simply a case of a woman, the "mother", intent on destroying a boy, and a judge intent on destroying a white boy.

From what I've read elsewhere, the boy is the father's natural son. But the mother used donor-eggs and had invetro. That makes the severing of the father's parental rights even more infuriating.

And the judge is a black, liberal activist judge who decorates her bench with her own photos and gawdy flowers that would make a south New Orleans voodoo preacher envious, and who dresses like a rodeo clown.

I'm having a hard time with this "news" article. And the first sentence could be a tad misleading. We have an ex-husband petitioning the court for sole custody of both kids. Seems he (and his attorney?) decided to put his fate in a jury. I dont think the jury or the court decided he cant stop his son from transitioning (all though that will be the possible result) but that he cant have custody or make any medical decisions for the boys.

Lot of red flags to this story, I wouldnt light the pitch forks until I read the trail transcript and see what evidence the wife's side put forth as to his ability to be a parent.

Found this in another article about dad:

The couple married in 2010 and sought an annulment in 2016, with a court ordering Mr Younger pay his ex-wife damages of $US45,000 for theft and ruling he had committed fraud by “inducing” her into marriage by lying about his employment history, income and military service.

Are you fucking kidding me? She wants to destroy her ex husbands son. That kid had his head filled with shit from some progressive twat and will kill himself if he is turned into a science experiment.

Headline should read: Non-custodial father has no say in seven year old son's gender reassignment.

That judge and the mother are going to hell.

Tony.

The picture of that "judge" reminds me of a clown I saw when at a circus when I was a kid.

Now, to the issue of "dad" and the court: My step dad was divorced and had 2 kids (who were in Ex's custody, he only had to pay child support and alimony).

At the divorce court step dad had witnesses to the fact that "wife" was caught in the act, in the back seat of a car with some guy she had picked up at a bar.

Step dad filed for divorce, had 2 witnesses to the "wife's conduct/infidelity.

Judge in the divorce gave full custody, child support, wife support TO THE WIFE!!!!

Judge (male) said it was wrong for step dad to follow wife around to get evidence for a divorce. Stepdad paid child support for about 12 years, alimony until the ex-wife died, about 30 years later.

So this BS favoring females in court is not new and has nothing to do with the actual law or what is right.

To the original issue, just one more idiot activist, so-called "judge" turning our country into another 3rd world shit hole.

reminds me of this two articles:

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-11814300

https://embryo.asu.edu/pages/d...oversy-johnjoan-case

Just another point not mentioned in the linked article - the 'mother' is not the biological mother of the child. She had an egg transplant and carried the child, but is not biologically related.

quote:

Originally posted by Southflorida-law:
I'm having a hard time with this "news" article. And the first sentence could be a tad misleading. We have an ex-husband petitioning the court for sole custody of both kids.

Not according to the story from The Texan. He was responding to her petition to the court to force him to call the boy 'Luna':

https://thetexan.news/breaking...d-transgender-child/

The mother filed a request with the court to modify their joint managing conservatorship by requiring Jeff to follow the recommendations of the therapists to “affirm” James by calling him by the name “Luna.”

The father responded to the request with his own: to become the sole managing conservator over James and his twin brother Jude.

The Governor is referring the matter to the Attorney General’s Office and the Department of Family and Protective Services for review.

ARTICLE

quote:

Originally posted by Micropterus:
It's hard not to conclude that this is simply a case of a woman, the "mother", intent on destroying a boy, and a judge intent on destroying a white boy.

From what I've read elsewhere, the boy is the father's natural son. But the mother used donor-eggs and had invetro. That makes the severing of the father's parental rights even more infuriating.

And the judge is a black, liberal activist judge who decorates her bench with her own photos and gawdy flowers that would make a south New Orleans voodoo preacher envious, and who dresses like a rodeo clown.

Except that they put the custody question to a jury, not the judge. Damn those pesky facts getting in the way of your preconceptions.

He bet on a JURY and couldn't convince them. He must have some serious flaws.

Also, look at Southflorida-law's points about not knowing what came out at trial.

(This doesn't change my views about "transitioning" children, but blaming the judge is probably wrong.)

Gee, the name of the clinic that recommended hormone therapy was Dallas Rainbow Clinic. Do you think their recommendations could be biased?

SHOCKER!

quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:

quote:

Originally posted by Micropterus:
It's hard not to conclude that this is simply a case of a woman, the "mother", intent on destroying a boy, and a judge intent on destroying a white boy.

From what I've read elsewhere, the boy is the father's natural son. But the mother used donor-eggs and had invetro. That makes the severing of the father's parental rights even more infuriating.

And the judge is a black, liberal activist judge who decorates her bench with her own photos and gawdy flowers that would make a south New Orleans voodoo preacher envious, and who dresses like a rodeo clown.

Except that they put the custody question to a jury, not the judge. Damn those pesky facts getting in the way of your preconceptions.

He bet on a JURY and couldn't convince them. He must have some serious flaws.

Also, look at Southflorida-law's points about not knowing what came out at trial.

(This doesn't change my views about "transitioning" children, but blaming the judge is probably wrong.)

I dont give a flip about the character of the father. I care that a mother and a judge have decided to chemically mutilate a little boy. This is so dastardly that I believe physical force to protect the boy would be justified. That Texas men could let this happen regardless of the law is unbelievable.

A child has no business making adult decisions. Period.

How the hell did raising children in this country get so messed up? And people wonder why I never had kids.

quote:

How the hell did raising children in this country get so messed up?

Leftists destroy everything they touch.
Where do I start? The breakdown of the family springs in part from the leftist replacement of the role of the father by government. Radical feminism, cultural rot coming from Hollywood. Public education is socialist education. Even the decline of religious institutions and membership begins with the leftist/marxist "liberation" theology taught and the acceptance of homosexuality in seminaries which leads to the abuse of young boys.

Medical Ethics - hopefully not an oxymoron...

That said, what physician/surgeon would even consider doing a sex change procedure on a minor? Perhaps not as egregious, but prescribe hormone therapy in the absence of clinical disease?

Thoughts?

The "mother" and the judge need to have someone explain the consequences of their actions - to them!

quote:

Originally posted by tleddy:
Medical Ethics - hopefully not an oxymoron...

That said, what physician/surgeon would even consider doing a sex change procedure on a minor? Perhaps not as egregious, but prescribe hormone therapy in the absence of clinical disease?

Thoughts?

Sadly, it would probably take all of 30 seconds and access to Google to find a doctor who is ready, willing and able to do it. There are thousands of activist doctors out there who would jump at the chance to do this.

quote:

Originally posted by sgalczyn:
The "mother" and the judge need to have someone explain the consequences of their actions - to them!

The 'mother' (she is not the biological parent) is a pediatrician.

" Texas Governor Greg Abbott has announced that the Texas Attorney General’s Office and the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services are investigating the case of James Younger . . . " LINK

Yep, and try to get an countering decision, it will get pricey really, really fast.

An experienced psychologist would charge a significant amount for an independent evaluation, but it should not exceed the price of two kidneys. The problem is complex, controversial, and clinically complicated. If you are disagreeing with another professional you better have all your ducks in a row. That sort of thing adds to the cost. Many psychologists do not do forensic or child custody work because of the emotions involved, and the difficulty in dealing with the legal system.

Seems like mommy has been drilling this idea into the child's head when he was 3 years old. - that he is a girl, not a little boy.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?...nue=60&v=tnLwbu4npp4

It is obvious the "mother" has a problem and has been brainwashing the kid since a toddler.