Today’s LGBTQ+ activists have moved far beyond seeking tolerance. We live in an age of pronoun enforcement, a view a step beyond progressive activism that is at odds with the sacred triumvirate of the Declaration, Constitution, and Bill of Rights.
People should not be legally compelled to acquiesce to what is untrue or is a matter of preference. Leftists who seek to enforce the use of gender pronouns must consider the fatal flaws of their view: sexual behaviors, fetishes, and preferences are not the same as ethnicity.
First, gender pronoun enforcement is inconsistent with free speech. The freedom of speech that allows a person to identify as a different gender (she/her, he/him, they/their, or one of the 400-plus genders now available that are supposedly fluid and changing) is the same freedom that allows other Americans to reject using a transgender person’s preferred pronouns. Preferred pronoun enforcement should not be about feelings; it is about freedom.
Second, gender pronoun enforcement blurs biological facts. Yes, a person can identify as male, female, and even as an inanimate object such as a tree or rock, but that doesn’t make it true. A transgender person’s desire to identify as a gender different from one’s birth does not require that others accept their choice.
Third, gender pronoun enforcement is inconsistent with other areas of life.
In 2016, a Florida man faked being a doctor despite being only 18 years old. He was arrested for impersonating a doctor and practicing medicine without a license. American law does not accept a person identifying as something he or she is not in the medical field or other areas of life. Why would such a view be enforced when it comes to a person’s preferred pronouns?
Europe is a step beyond our nation in the ongoing slippery slope regarding preferred pronoun enforcement. A teacher in Ireland was arrested and spent 100 days in jail for refusing to use “gender-neutral pronouns” at the school where he worked. Within days of being enacted April 1, 2024, a Hate Crime law in Scotland led to 7,000 claims against people who oppose the belief that a man can become a woman (and vice versa).
Incrementally, the anti-reality, anti-freedom of thought and speech LGBTQ+ idealogues are using legal means to take away Americans constitutionally-protected freedoms. This cannot be allowed to continue.
Moral implications when one you know is delusional
Psychologists define a delusion to be a fixed belief counter to reason, counter to reality, and/or personally detrimental, and which is not relinquished even when shown facts to the contrary. For the first time in American history, the general population is being expected to acquiesce to the demonstrably false assertion that gender is a matter of changeable choice.
What about someone who is anorexic— starving themselves to death, yet are convinced that they are fat? An anorexic person’s self-identification is counter to reality. Should the people around them just smile and politely agree with the delusion? — No. The most mature, reasonable thing to do when one is deluded about their ontological state is not to passively assent— but to speak truth.
The “all” beyond “all”?
Our country currently struggles over the alleged “rights” insisted upon by advocates of trans ideology. According to pro-gay lobbyists since the 1970s— and trans “Reichsleiters” now— there must be additional rights apportioned beyond the natural rights guaranteed for “all” by our Constitution. This cannot be.
Should those confused about their gender be treated with compassion and respect? Absolutely. But special/contrived rights for any reason— not to mention compelled speech and forced acquiescence to that which is rooted in personal delusion— are unconstitutional; anti-misgendering laws will be (and are) illegitimate.
(Editor's Note: This article was posted first on Dr. McFarland's website HERE.)
