This is the article that appeared in Scotland on Sunday – It is interesting that many people who are not Christians agreed. Also interesting that SOS described me as ‘having a reputation for making controversial statements’! Who says? Who determines what is controversial? I guess in todays culture teaching the Bible is controversial.
It was also interesting that Stonewall just came up with the usual ‘misinformed’ jibe. Perhaps next time Stonewall could actually say what was wrong with my statements and give us some facts, and not just the usual glib emotive soundbites?
Gender law plan ‘recipe for child abuse’ says church leader
Scotland on Sunday 10 Apr 2016
A church leader has stoked controversy after comparing plans to reform gender recognition legislation to child abuse.
In an attack on First Minister Nicola Sturgeon and LGBTI campaigners, the moderator of the Free Church of Scotland warned that Scotland’s teachers will be “sent for re-education” as part of proposals he believes will create a “world of confusion, distortion and insanity” where people change gender to “further their career and job prospects”.
In his broadside at the Scottish Government and the wider political establishment, Rev David Robertson – who has a reputation for making controversial statements – stressed the policy will bring “untold disaster and harm upon Scotland’s children”, describing it as “nothing less than state-sponsored indoctrination of the weakest and most vulnerable members of our society”.
He said: “To tell children they can choose their own gender is a recipe for misuse and abuse. I would go as far as to say that teaching children they can choose their own gender is itself arguably a form of child abuse.”
Sturgeon has vowed that, should the SNP be returned to power after next month’s Holyrood election, it will look to overhaul gender recognition law for trans people, including those of non-binary gender. LGBTI campaigners have given a warm welcome to her plans, while other parties have pledged similar action, with Scottish Labour saying it would remove the psychiatric diagnosis requirement from legal gender recognition.
However, Rev Robertson, named last year as among the 100 most influential Christians in the UK, said parties across the UK were in a “progressive race to the bottom” over the issue, but reserved scorn for the SNP, stating: “We are not in a society where ordinary people run anything. We have government by the 1 per cent for the 1 per cent.”
In a comment piece for Christian Today, he said that “no-one dares challenge the narrative” of LGBTI activists and argued that, given four of the six party leaders are gay, “it is a little difficult to claim the mantle of the persecuted minority”.
Catherine Somerville, campaigns manager at Stonewall Scotland, said that it was “really sad” to see Rev Robertson’s “misinformed opinion” about changes “designed exclusively to improve the lives of some of the most marginalised people in our society”.
As far as the MSM are concerned LGBTI campaigners never say anything controversial. That term is reserved for those with whom they disagree. The same applies to the pro-abortion lobby. Only pro-life people say anything controversial. Same with anything, really, that the MSM does not support. If they don’t like what you say they call it controversial. It’s just another technique they use to marginalise people who express views they don’t agree with.
Reblogged this on Talmidimblogging.
‘To tell children they can choose their own gender is a recipe for misuse and abuse. I would go as far as to say that teaching children they can choose their own gender is itself arguably a form of child abuse… progressive race to the bottom…. We are not in a society where ordinary people run anything. We have government by the 1 per cent for the 1 per cent.’
Excellent
Good to see the Media putting your comments into the public square. I have no doubt that many Scots share your opinion but are either scared to voice it or are unable to articulate it. I also suspect that many are confused by all this gender ideology and have a”gut” feeling that they are being sold something that doesn’t seem right. A good example would be the journalist who told you off the record that this was all very confusing. Good to see truth and light being spoken into the culture.
Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free
John 8;32
David,
What I get from people sometimes with the comedy I do is accusation of blasphemy. This alleged “controversy” that you do is going to come forth from the press. It’s the same for any on e of us who dare to challenge the status quo and we all need a thick skin if this is what we are going to do to take the flack.
Stay strong in the Lord dear brother and put on the full armour of God!
More importantly, the issue of transgender. I agree. Children being prescribed medication for example to delay the onset of puberty or go through surgery before they are cognitively fully developed to predict future consequences for choices in the present is something that can reasonably called child abuse.
Would you give the keys to a Ferrari to a 14 year old?
A facebook “freind” of mine that I served in the Air Force with was Martin and now is Heather. My response? I respected his/her freedom to choose but don’t consider it a matter of “social justice” to be some kind of “warrior” to compel anyone to support such choice of face life in the social wideness with alleged “trainsphobia”. The “collective wisdom” seems to be that is someone is suicidal, then the thing to do is to help and support “transition”.
What if the reason for the feelings of suicide have nothing to do with feelings of gender and what if these feelings remain after transitioning. Tragic enough for an adult but what about a child who has been “helped” by adults?
Also in the case of Martin/Heather the attention is on him/her and their feelings. What about the pain that the wife and daughter are experiencing?
Note – I am not making a case against gender dysmorphia or any claim that someone feeling they are a woman in a man’s body or vice versa is a symptom of a mental illness.
I just think that in the case of children it’s not appropriate to be taking steps to “transition”. It’s been shown that the brain does not stop developing until the mid 20’s and the last thing to develop is the ability to predict future consequences for present day choices and actions. I would suggest that this be the point that any steps to transition be considered, not before.
And indeed with children, in today’s language it can be considered to be child abuse. Haven’t some called raising children as Christians to be child abuse?
“..changes “designed exclusively to improve the lives of some of the most marginalised people in our society”. Ms Sommerville appears to have spoken truly. The measure may indeed be designed exclusively for the most marginalized, but any design that fails to take account of the laws of nature, as established by God, is a flawed design, just as a structure lacking a proper foundation is flawed. Implementation of a flawed design intended excsively for a tiny minirity usually brings negative consequences for the majority.