Republicans are making moves left and right these days when it comes to the ever-controverted transgender question. Of course, Republicans sympathize with the concerns of those who experience a discontinuity in their mental identity and their biological identity. We love them and we wish them the best — genuinely.
But as Republicans, we are against indoctrinating children into this rather new ideology. That principle held good today when two Republicans promoted a bill allowing transitioned people to sue the doctors who transitioned them.
Children are too young to make the sorts of decisions that go into a typical gender reconstructive surgery. These are life-altering decisions, and one cannot decide lightly on these matters. Our justice system hinges on the idea that children cannot make a number of rationally deliberative decisions that adults can.
This applies, for instance, to sexual consent. So, Republicans, when they war against gender ideology and its every increased infatuation with younger children, are actually appealing to a much older principle that nearly everyone accepts. We all know children. We know how they act, how fleeting and unfixed their desires are. It is not fair to them to allow them to make such a life-altering decision at such a young age.
Republicans generally agree. Real Republicans are America First patriots after all. And two significant Republicans are taking action. A new piece of legislation pushed by Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas and Representative Jim Banks of Indiana will allow people who medically transitioned to sue their doctors if they transitioned as minors.
As Fox News reports:
“Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., and Rep. Jim Banks, R-Ind., are introducing legislation Wednesday in Congress that would allow adults to sue doctors who perform gender transition procedures on them up to 30 years after they turn 18.”
The bill — The Protecting Minors from Medical Malpractice Act — does the following:
“Under the Protecting Minors from Medical Malpractice Act, patients or their legal guardians would be able to seek declaratory or injunctive relief against such practitioners, as well as compensatory damages and attorneys’ fees. The provisions would apply only to procedures performed after the bill becomes law.
The proposed law also clarifies that federal law cannot be construed to force medical practitioners to offer such procedures and prohibits federal health funds from going to states that force doctors to perform them.”
We applaud this legislation. We are happy that Republicans are bringing this conversation to the mainstream. We concur with Cotton in saying:
“Unfortunately, radical doctors in the United States perform dangerous, experimental, and even sterilizing gender-transition procedures on young kids, who cannot even provide informed consent… Any doctor who performs these irresponsible procedures on kids should pay.”
We cannot agree with this sentiment more.