How many  people back in 2008 envisioned that Barack Obama’s “fundamental transformation”  of America included a change of the meaning of the word “sex”?
                  Probably a  few. But many didn’t, and now his agenda is running into headwinds, with yet  another lawsuit against his administration.
                The newest lawsuit is being brought by the Becket Fund on behalf of Texas, Wisconsin,  Nebraska, Kansas, Kentucky Gov. Matthew Bevin, the Franciscan Alliance,  Specialty Physicians of Illinois and the Christian Medical & Dental  Associations.
                It challenges  a new Department of Health and Human Services regulation that changes the  meaning of the word “sex.”
                Previous  lawsuits have challenged an Obama order to public schools to allow children to  use gender-specific facilities according to their gender “identity” rather than  their biological sex.
                He’s also  ordered federal facilities to do the same.
                The new  lawsuit charges the Department of Health and Human Services is attempting “to  impose these dramatic new requirements by redefining a single word used in the  Affordable Care Act: ‘sex.'”
                “For decades,  across multiple federal statutes, Congress has consistently used the term ‘sex’  to refer to an individual’s status as male or female, as determined by a  person’s biological sex at birth,” the complaint says.
                “But in the  regulation, HHS redefines ‘sex’ to include ‘an individual’s internal sense of  gender, which may be male, female, neither, or a combination of male and  female, and which may be different from an individual’s sex assigned at  birth.'”
                 
                
                  
                     The mandate also requires “virtually all private insurance  companies and employers to cover gender transition procedures or face stiff  penalties and legal action.”
                  
                
                 
                The  regulation, the lawsuit explains, creates a “massive new liability for  thousands of healthcare professionals unless they cast aside their medical  judgment and perform controversial and even harmful medical transition  procedures.”
                Congress had  refused to redefine the word, and courts also had declined to make such a move.
                But the  lawsuit explains the Obama administration went ahead with it, basing  nondiscrimination requirements on a “sense of gender” that could force  health-care professionals “to violate their deeply held religious beliefs.”
                The redefinition  means a physician would not be allowed to use his or her own best judgment  regarding the advisability of a sex-change procedure, the lawsuit says.  Including on children.
“No doctor  should be forced to perform a procedure that he or she believes will harm a  child,” said Becket Fund senior counsel Lori Windham
                “Decisions on  a child’s medical treatment should be between families and their doctors, not  dictated by politicians and government bureaucrats.”
                The issue is addressed  on a new website, HHS Transgender  Mandate.
                 
                
                 
                It explains  the HHS rule mandates “that doctors must perform gender transition procedures  on any child referred by a mental health professional, even if the doctor  believes the treatment or hormone therapy could harm the child.”
                The mandate also requires “virtually all private insurance  companies and employers to cover gender transition procedures or face stiff  penalties and legal action.”
                “To be clear,  this is not a question of access to care but of forcing a political ideology on  doctors against their medical judgment. This mandate would be unique in  requiring doctors to violate their Hippocratic Oath,” the site explains.
                The complaint  gets specific: “The regulation … undermines the longstanding sovereign power of  the states to regulate healthcare, ensure appropriate standards of medical  judgment, and protect its citizens’ constitutional and civil rights. Under this  rule, states are now required to force all healthcare professionals at  state-run facilities to participate in medical transition procedures (including  hormone therapy, plastic surgery, hysterectomies, and gender reassignment  surgery), and to cover those procedures in the states’ health insurance plans,  even if a doctor believes such procedures are harmful to the patient.
                 
                “We read  popular reports about plans for medical and surgical interventions for many  prepubescent children, some as young as six, and other therapeutic approaches  undertaken for children as young as two. We suggest  that no one can determine the gender identity of a two-year-old."
                 
                “This case  boils down to a very simple question of statutory interpretation: Can HHS  redefine the term ‘sex’ to thwart decades of settled precedent and impose  massive new obligations on healthcare professionals and sovereign states?
                “The answer  is ‘no.'”
                The complaint  points out that almost all of the children who exhibit behaviors such as a boy  playing with dolls grow out of them.
                “The new  regulation applies to 900,000 doctors — virtually every doctor in the U.S.,  many of whom have chosen the medical profession because they are inspired by  their faith to serve those in need and to heal others,” the legal team says.  “They have taken an oath to put the needs of each patient first and do no harm.  But this regulation violates doctors’ ability to exercise both their best  medical judgment and their religiously inspired desire to care for society’s  most vulnerable.
                “It will also  cost health-care providers and taxpayers nearly $1 billion,” the group says.
                  Even though  Congress included in the law an exemption for religious organizations, the rule  states that anyone who objects “could assert claims under existing statutory  protection,” and it does not “provide any mechanism by which a religious entity  could determine if it was entitled to any existing religious protections.”
                The case  asserts the Obama administration violated the Administrative Procedure Act, the  First Amendment, the Fifth Amendment, the 10th Amendment and the Religious  Freedom Restoration Act.
                The lawsuit  asks for a ruling that the regulation is invalid and unconstitutional and seeks  a permanent injunction preventing its use.
                WND reported that a major  new study from Johns Hopkins psychologists Lawrence Mayer and Paul McHugh  warned against children being subjected to transgender treatment, such as  hormone therapy or surgery.
                Mayer is a  scholar-in-residence in the Department of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins  University and a professor of statistics and biostatistics at Arizona State  University. McHugh is a professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at the  Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and was for 25 years the  psychiatrist in chief at the Johns Hopkins Hospital.
                  Children who  express any identification with the opposite gender almost always leave those  expressions behind as they grow, they argue.
                “Despite the scientific uncertainty, drastic  interventions are prescribed and delivered to patients identifying, or  identified, as transgender. This is especially troubling when the patients  receiving these interventions are children,” the authors wrote in the study, “Sexuality and  Gender: Findings from the Biological, Psychological, and Social Sciences,” published in The New Atlantis.
                “We read  popular reports about plans for medical and surgical interventions for many  prepubescent children, some as young as six, and other therapeutic approaches  undertaken for children as young as two.
                “We suggest  that no one can determine the gender identity of a two-year-old. We have  reservations about how well scientists understand what it even means for a  child to have developed sense of his or her gender, but notwithstanding that  issue, we are deeply alarmed that these therapies, treatments, and surgeries  seem disproportionate to the severity of the distress being experienced by  these young people, and are at any rate premature since the majority of  children who identify as the gender opposite their biological sex will not  continue to do so as adults.
                
                  “Outlasting the  Gay Revolution” spells out eight principles to help Americans with conservative  moral values counter attacks on our freedoms of religion, speech and conscience  by homosexual activists 
                
                “Moreover,  there is a lack of reliable studies on the long-term effects of these  interventions. We strongly urge caution in this regard.”
                See a  discussion of the study: Read More 
                 
                The New Atlantis
                A Journal of Technology and  Society: Gender study
                
                 
                Above article by Bob Unruh, August 23, 2016, WND
                (Underlines added by Webmaster.)
                _______________________________________________
                 
                
                  Note: Any discussion outside the politically correct one designated by progressive socialists is always met with school-yard types of attacks, typical of those found in the dangerous Third Reich and its desire to prove that the Arian Race was the only superior race; been there done that! - Webmaster