California is literally kidnapping kids from other states

Let's say you met a 14-year-old kid online who didn't like the rules their parents set down, and you invited them to run away from home and come live with you. Once the kid was located, you would be arrested and face serious charges.

However, what if the state of California does the exact same thing? Well, apparently that's okay.

At the moment, there are no laws granting minors the ability to get dangerous transgender treatments without parental consent. That's the good news. The bad news is that often parents are scared into signing off on it by aggressive psychologists (who falsely claim that transitioning young is the only way out of a likely suicide), or custody rights in divorce cases are affected when one parent won't go along with the child's transgender claims.

But now California has decided they will be a "sanctuary transgender minors state", where they are inviting minors to run away from home, and the state will "grant emergency custody" of these minors to itself, and then grant them the operations or hormone treatments.

It's bill SB107, and it passed a few weeks ago. Not joking. While the link I'm going to post is from a right wing Christian site, you are welcome to google the matter, and you'll see it's exactly as described:

https://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/us/2022...ved-kidnapping



So imagine you've got a daughter who has never before presented with gender dysphoria, and all of a sudden at age 15, she says, "I think I'm a boy, I want to cut off my breasts and get on testosterone." You tell her that many teen girls with anxiety tend to end up with body confusion disorders, and that these manifest in various harmful ways. In the '80s and '90s, it presented as anorexia/bulimia, or cutting. Presently, it shows as temporary gender dysphoria. In 85% of these cases, the feelings completely resolve by adulthood.

Your daughter, however, is irrational, and demands these treatments. Not wanting to disfigure and sterilize her for life, you refuse to get these treatments for her, and instead want her to go to therapy.

Then she gets online, and realizes that all she has to do is make a (dangerous) self-trek out to California, and the state will take custody of her, and give her what she wants. She will also end up in the very troubled foster care system, even though she's presently in a very stable family with no issues.

Bill SB107 actually authorizes this, which seems to be a tremendous violation of states' rights, among other possible legal issues. It's also completely immoral.


LOL anyone who votes Democrat at this point

"kidnapping, also spelled kidnaping, criminal offense consisting of the unlawful taking and carrying away of a person by force or fraud or the unlawful seizure and detention of a person against his will."

Explain to me how what you describe is "literally kidnapping."

Are you saying that California Gender Affirming Rangers (GAR) are going to go into other states and grab kids in the middle of the night and then hold them against their will in California?

There are certainly disturbing elements to this bill (I think. It's pretty dense on first read) but you using inappropriate inflammatory language to dress it up makes your positiion weaker, not stronger.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbodoggins

"kidnapping, also spelled kidnaping, criminal offense consisting of the unlawful taking and carrying away of a person by force or fraud or the unlawful seizure and detention of a person against his will."

Explain to me how what you describe is "literally kidnapping."

Are you saying that California Gender Affirming Rangers (GAR) are going to go into other states and grab kids in the middle of the night and then hold them against their will in California?

There are certainly disturbing elements to this bill (I think. It's pretty dense on first read) but you using inappropriate inflammatory language to dress it up makes your positiion weaker, not stronger.

---

Ok simple fact. If they are encouraging a minor to elope from the state to Cali, it's actually a FEDERAL CRIME since it involves crossing state lines. Normally of course the FBI would get involved but seeing how the FBI has lost its weigh in actually doing its job except when it comes to political prosecutions of GOP while ignoring crimes just as serious if not more so regarding Democrat politicos and their families makes me suspect the FBI would look the other way despite clear violations of interstate enticement laws.

This of course is all dependant on how one views potentially 18 U.S.C. § 2423 - U.S. Code - Unannotated Title 18. Crimes and Criminal Procedure § 2423. Transportation of minors

The argument is certainly there that this law by Cali could very well be a direct violation of it at least in some form or fashion but its likely to face some serious court challenges if states decide to go after Californias law under that Federal Code section. It's a question of does one view as transporting a child across state lines for gender reassignment surgery quantify as doing so for criminal sexual activity potentially.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbodoggins

"kidnapping, also spelled kidnaping, criminal offense consisting of the unlawful taking and carrying away of a person by force or fraud or the unlawful seizure and detention of a person against his will."

Explain to me how what you describe is "literally kidnapping."

Are you saying that California Gender Affirming Rangers (GAR) are going to go into other states and grab kids in the middle of the night and then hold them against their will in California?

There are certainly disturbing elements to this bill (I think. It's pretty dense on first read) but you using inappropriate inflammatory language to dress it up makes your positiion weaker, not stronger.

---

Section 207b of the California Penal Code says this:

Quote:

---

Every person, who for the purpose of committing any act defined in Section 288, hires, persuades, entices, decoys, or seduces by false promises, misrepresentations, or the like, any child under the age of 14 years to go out of this country, state, or county, or into another part of the same county, is guilty of kidnapping.

---

Source: https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/defense/penal-code/207/

So I guess it's only kidnapping by California law by enticing someone under 14 to run away from home and to come be with you, but there's still definitely crime in enticing a minor 14-17 to run away from home and stay with you, even if there's no sexual element.

Regardless of the legal definition, it's unbelievable that California is actually doing this. The state government here is absolute shit, because it's under clear one-party rule, and they never have to fear that changing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Let's say you met a 14-year-old kid online who didn't like the rules their parents set down, and you invited them to run away from home and come live with you. Once the kid was located, you would be arrested and face serious charges.

However, what if the state of California does the exact same thing? Well, apparently that's okay.

At the moment, there are no laws granting minors the ability to get dangerous transgender treatments without parental consent. That's the good news. The bad news is that often parents are scared into signing off on it by aggressive psychologists (who falsely claim that transitioning young is the only way out of a likely suicide), or custody rights in divorce cases are affected when one parent won't go along with the child's transgender claims.

But now California has decided they will be a "sanctuary transgender minors state", where they are inviting minors to run away from home, and the state will "grant emergency custody" of these minors to itself, and then grant them the operations or hormone treatments.

It's bill SB107, and it passed a few weeks ago. Not joking. While the link I'm going to post is from a right wing Christian site, you are welcome to google the matter, and you'll see it's exactly as described:

https://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/us/2022...ved-kidnapping



So imagine you've got a daughter who has never before presented with gender dysphoria, and all of a sudden at age 15, she says, "I think I'm a boy, I want to cut off my breasts and get on testosterone." You tell her that many teen girls with anxiety tend to end up with body confusion disorders, and that these manifest in various harmful ways. In the '80s and '90s, it presented as anorexia/bulimia, or cutting. Presently, it shows as temporary gender dysphoria. In 85% of these cases, the feelings completely resolve by adulthood.

Your daughter, however, is irrational, and demands these treatments. Not wanting to disfigure and sterilize her for life, you refuse to get these treatments for her, and instead want her to go to therapy.

Then she gets online, and realizes that all she has to do is make a (dangerous) self-trek out to California, and the state will take custody of her, and give her what she wants. She will also end up in the very troubled foster care system, even though she's presently in a very stable family with no issues.

Bill SB107 actually authorizes this, which seems to be a tremendous violation of states' rights, among other possible legal issues. It's also completely immoral.


LOL anyone who votes Democrat at this point

---

Start from the beginning. No one is meeting a 14 year old on line, ever. If by some chance you are, then you are a mentally disturbed individual.
Rules and regulations designed to contain public behaviours are not specifcally aimed at those with psychotic tendencies.

Your efforts to portray such an anomaly as a weakness of a political party is hilarious.

What is with the need to click bait the world. "California is literally kidnapping kids"... I think that is a bit of an overstatement.
And with that you have a wee credibility problem at the least. You are discredited from here on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Let's say you met a 14-year-old kid online who didn't like the rules their parents set down, and you invited them to run away from home and come live with you. Once the kid was located, you would be arrested and face serious charges.

However, what if the state of California does the exact same thing? Well, apparently that's okay.

At the moment, there are no laws granting minors the ability to get dangerous transgender treatments without parental consent. That's the good news. The bad news is that often parents are scared into signing off on it by aggressive psychologists (who falsely claim that transitioning young is the only way out of a likely suicide), or custody rights in divorce cases are affected when one parent won't go along with the child's transgender claims.

But now California has decided they will be a "sanctuary transgender minors state", where they are inviting minors to run away from home, and the state will "grant emergency custody" of these minors to itself, and then grant them the operations or hormone treatments.

It's bill SB107, and it passed a few weeks ago. Not joking. While the link I'm going to post is from a right wing Christian site, you are welcome to google the matter, and you'll see it's exactly as described:

https://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/us/2022...ved-kidnapping



So imagine you've got a daughter who has never before presented with gender dysphoria, and all of a sudden at age 15, she says, "I think I'm a boy, I want to cut off my breasts and get on testosterone." You tell her that many teen girls with anxiety tend to end up with body confusion disorders, and that these manifest in various harmful ways. In the '80s and '90s, it presented as anorexia/bulimia, or cutting. Presently, it shows as temporary gender dysphoria. In 85% of these cases, the feelings completely resolve by adulthood.

Your daughter, however, is irrational, and demands these treatments. Not wanting to disfigure and sterilize her for life, you refuse to get these treatments for her, and instead want her to go to therapy.

Then she gets online, and realizes that all she has to do is make a (dangerous) self-trek out to California, and the state will take custody of her, and give her what she wants. She will also end up in the very troubled foster care system, even though she's presently in a very stable family with no issues.

Bill SB107 actually authorizes this, which seems to be a tremendous violation of states' rights, among other possible legal issues. It's also completely immoral.


LOL anyone who votes Democrat at this point

---

Logically, your argument fails. California Penal Code does not apply to actions committed in other states. Federal Law or the laws of the state where the alleged "kidnapping" occurred would be relevant for your argument.

Maybe focus on losing weight? Benjamin can't get the surgery yet, so its still too early for you to be obsessing over this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by limitles

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Let's say you met a 14-year-old kid online who didn't like the rules their parents set down, and you invited them to run away from home and come live with you. Once the kid was located, you would be arrested and face serious charges.

However, what if the state of California does the exact same thing? Well, apparently that's okay.

At the moment, there are no laws granting minors the ability to get dangerous transgender treatments without parental consent. That's the good news. The bad news is that often parents are scared into signing off on it by aggressive psychologists (who falsely claim that transitioning young is the only way out of a likely suicide), or custody rights in divorce cases are affected when one parent won't go along with the child's transgender claims.

But now California has decided they will be a "sanctuary transgender minors state", where they are inviting minors to run away from home, and the state will "grant emergency custody" of these minors to itself, and then grant them the operations or hormone treatments.

It's bill SB107, and it passed a few weeks ago. Not joking. While the link I'm going to post is from a right wing Christian site, you are welcome to google the matter, and you'll see it's exactly as described:

https://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/us/2022...ved-kidnapping



So imagine you've got a daughter who has never before presented with gender dysphoria, and all of a sudden at age 15, she says, "I think I'm a boy, I want to cut off my breasts and get on testosterone." You tell her that many teen girls with anxiety tend to end up with body confusion disorders, and that these manifest in various harmful ways. In the '80s and '90s, it presented as anorexia/bulimia, or cutting. Presently, it shows as temporary gender dysphoria. In 85% of these cases, the feelings completely resolve by adulthood.

Your daughter, however, is irrational, and demands these treatments. Not wanting to disfigure and sterilize her for life, you refuse to get these treatments for her, and instead want her to go to therapy.

Then she gets online, and realizes that all she has to do is make a (dangerous) self-trek out to California, and the state will take custody of her, and give her what she wants. She will also end up in the very troubled foster care system, even though she's presently in a very stable family with no issues.

Bill SB107 actually authorizes this, which seems to be a tremendous violation of states' rights, among other possible legal issues. It's also completely immoral.


LOL anyone who votes Democrat at this point

---

Start from the beginning. No one is meeting a 14 year old on line, ever. If by some chance you are, then you are a mentally disturbed individual.
Rules and regulations designed to contain public behaviours are not specifcally aimed at those with psychotic tendencies.

Your efforts to portray such an anomaly as a weakness of a political party is hilarious.

What is with the need to click bait the world. "California is literally kidnapping kids"... I think that is a bit of an overstatement.
And with that you have a wee credibility problem at the least. You are discredited from here on.

---

BRAVO TO CHRIS HANSON FOR SHUTTING YOU GUYS DOWN FOREVER THEN, I GUESS.

At least California isn't shipping illegal immigrants into other states like Florida Governor Ron DeSantis.


https://grrrgraphics.com/wp-content/...s-1024x757.jpg

Either you’re a sanctuary city or is it just lip service?

Apparently it’s lip service.

https://www.texastribune.org/2022/09...s-record-2022/

California taxpayers were going to pay for these procedures? If so, the appeal to a nation of children is - FREE!

I’ve obviously always ridiculed California but now I’m just incredulous

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sanlmar

California taxpayers were going to pay for these procedures? If so, the appeal to a nation of children is - FREE!

I’ve obviously always ridiculed California but now I’m just incredulous

---

Yes, the taxpayers would foot the bill. However, I find it much more offensive that California is literally going to steal custody of kids from parents of children in other states, just because the kids successfully ran away from home and crossed state lines.

Fortunately Benjamin is not showing any signs of wanting to be one of those trans kids. It also isn't nearly as common in the area of LA where I live. Anyway, if he ever did, there's no way I would let him get body-mutilating surgery or dangerous hormone treatments as a minor. I would take him to therapy, and tell him he needs to wait until adulthood to make these decisions, as most people with gender confusion in their teen years see it resolved by the time they're over 20. I think it is child abuse to do anything else but this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sanlmar

California taxpayers were going to pay for these procedures? If so, the appeal to a nation of children is - FREE!

I’ve obviously always ridiculed California but now I’m just incredulous

---

Yes, the taxpayers would foot the bill. However, I find it much more offensive that California is literally going to steal custody of kids from parents of children in other states, just because the kids successfully ran away from home and crossed state lines.

Fortunately Benjamin is not showing any signs of wanting to be one of those trans kids. It also isn't nearly as common in the area of LA where I live. Anyway, if he ever did, there's no way I would let him get body-mutilating surgery or dangerous hormone treatments as a minor. I would take him to therapy, and tell him he needs to wait until adulthood to make these decisions, as most people with gender confusion in their teen years see it resolved by the time they're over 20. I think it is child abuse to do anything else but this.

---

Been trying to tell people here for years how horrific this is

https://genderclinicnews.substack.co...-the-defensive
The gist

New Zealand’s Ministry of Health has quietly abandoned its public claim that puberty blocker drugs are a “safe and fully reversible” medicine for children who declare a transgender identity and want to interrupt their normal sexual development.

Since mid-August, there have been two separate breakthrough articles in NZ media by emeritus professor of epidemiology Charlotte Paul and health sociologist Dr Sarah Donovan.

Professor Paul’s comprehensive article published earlier this month in the New Zealand Listener magazine highlighted international concerns about puberty blockers, treatment regret and the capacity of children to consent to this intervention.

In the online platform newsroom on August 18, Dr Donovan asked why local news outlets had failed to report landmarks in the international debate such as the decision to close the world’s largest youth gender service, the London-based Tavistock clinic.

“How does the New Zealand model of child and teen gender services compare with the [U.K. National Health Service] model now being urgently overhauled? What a great piece of local investigative journalism that would make,” Dr Donovan wrote, expressing frustration at NZ “media silence” on the global gender clinic story.

As in other countries, the hormone suppression drugs used to block puberty are not approved to treat gender dysphoria, which involves a distressing feeling of conflict between the body and an inner sense of an opposite-sex “gender identity”.

An August 1 screenshot of the NZ health ministry’s webpage headed “Transgender New Zealanders: Children and young people” included the claim: “Blockers are a safe and fully reversible medicine that may be used to help ease distress and allow time to fully explore gender health options”.

Now that sentence reads: “Puberty blockers are a medicine that can be used to halt the progress of potentially unwanted puberty-related physical changes”.

The webpage states that it was last updated on September 16. Over the last two years, more than a score of New Zealanders concerned about the safety of puberty blockers had contacted the ministry to challenge its claim, but were stonewalled.

Although the general public is no longer reassured that puberty blockers are safe and reversible, the ministry still supports that claim indirectly when advising health professionals on how to respond to gender-questioning minors.

The ministry webpage “Providing health services for transgender people” links health professionals to the 2018 Guidelines for Gender-Affirming Healthcare, which claims puberty blockers are “fully reversible” and says there is “good evidence” they improve mental health.

The per capita usage of puberty blockers in NZ appears to be dramatically higher than at the Tavistock clinic, according to an analysis of official figures by Simon Tegg of the group Fully Informed, which seeks to shine a spotlight on youth gender medicine.

In 2020, for every 100,000 adolescents, NZ had 88 children aged 9-17 on blockers, compared with 7 per 100,000 in England and Wales, which are served by the stand-alone specialist Tavistock clinic.


"Kiwi's" are infested with The Dunning-Kruger effect more than anywhere else except Canada probably

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sanlmar

California taxpayers were going to pay for these procedures? If so, the appeal to a nation of children is - FREE!

I’ve obviously always ridiculed California but now I’m just incredulous

---

Yes, the taxpayers would foot the bill. However, I find it much more offensive that California is literally going to steal custody of kids from parents of children in other states, just because the kids successfully ran away from home and crossed state lines.

Fortunately Benjamin is not showing any signs of wanting to be one of those trans kids. It also isn't nearly as common in the area of LA where I live. Anyway, if he ever did, there's no way I would let him get body-mutilating surgery or dangerous hormone treatments as a minor. I would take him to therapy, and tell him he needs to wait until adulthood to make these decisions, as most people with gender confusion in their teen years see it resolved by the time they're over 20. I think it is child abuse to do anything else but this.

---

Of course, I agree. Passing stupid social policy and laws is one thing but when citizens of California actually pay for this out of their salaries - well that’s real commitment to depravity.

Why would anyone in America pay for these procedures themselves even if it’s just copay when Cali is offering? California theoretically would front a social program for a nation.

I mentioned the imminent prospect of states litigating one another in the Vineyard thread. This was consistent with a forecast of mine regarding growing states rights.

A different kind of civil war but here we are.

You lamented the one party state but that is what’s left of your democracy. I’m great at the California game but even I can’t see the endgame over there. Some kind of physical calamity - split would suggest it would be the hand of god - would probably be necessary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sanlmar

California taxpayers were going to pay for these procedures? If so, the appeal to a nation of children is - FREE!

I’ve obviously always ridiculed California but now I’m just incredulous

---

Yes, the taxpayers would foot the bill. However, I find it much more offensive that California is literally going to steal custody of kids from parents of children in other states, just because the kids successfully ran away from home and crossed state lines.

Fortunately Benjamin is not showing any signs of wanting to be one of those trans kids. It also isn't nearly as common in the area of LA where I live. Anyway, if he ever did, there's no way I would let him get body-mutilating surgery or dangerous hormone treatments as a minor. I would take him to therapy, and tell him he needs to wait until adulthood to make these decisions, as most people with gender confusion in their teen years see it resolved by the time they're over 20. I think it is child abuse to do anything else but this.

---

I finally figured out what's with the push to give minors "gender affirming" surgery.
Population control, that's the real motive.

A noose with a rock attached to these monsters and cast into the sea.

California is where the good guys get murdered and we get informed by 70,000 news stories of there suicide

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by splitthis

A noose with a rock attached to these monsters and cast into the sea.

---

Maybe we could shoot them in the back of the head and bury them on your farm, if you actually had one!

BUMP

This is now the law in California.


The state is now enticing all "trans kids" whose parents want them not to mutilate their bodies to run away from home, get to California somehow (you all know how safe it is for kids to hitchhike across the country), and the parents won't be able to legally take them back. The kids will be placed with "supportive" foster parents, who will then authorize these dangerous procedures.

This seems like a tremendous violation of states' rights, child abuse, and parental rights violations, among other things.

Gtfo of the west coast, it’s all gonna get dumped in the sea.