This news story happened recently, and I think it’s worth blogging about to show how secular leftists see marriage, family, and parent’s rights. Now, you would think that since 1) the parents are paying the salaries of the secular leftists in government and 2) parents are paying the bills for all of the children’s needs, that secular leftists would respect parent’s leadership. Let’s take a look.

Here’s the first article from Daily Signal:

California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a bill into law Monday banning schools from implementing policies that require parents be notified if their child requests to be identified as a different gender.

AB 1955, also known as the Support Academic Futures and Educators for Today’s Youth (SAFETY) Act, strikes down policies that some California schools have already implemented protecting parents’ rights to be made aware of issues and make decisions regarding their children.

So, parents are “good enough” to pay the salaries of secular leftists in the California government and public schools. But they are not “good enough” to be told what is happening to their own children in the schools that they are paying for. Parents and families have no role to play in the lives of young people. Only the secular leftists are allowed to teach the children about anything.

Secular leftists think that parents are just slaves, and that the slaves have to let the masters take their money and indoctrinate their children. The masters don’t want the slaves to tell their children that the masters are bad. But when the children run into problems, it’s the parents they turn to for love and support. The masters don’t spend their own money and time fixing anyone’s problems. They’re “generous” with other people’s time and money, not their own.

And it’s not just California, it’s in the Biden administration as well. This is how the federal government thinks, too.

Here’s another article from Daily Signal:

The chief pediatrician at Texas Children’s Hospital resigned in April 2022 after just seven months in her role, shortly after Gov. Greg Abbott forced the hospital to pause attempted sex-change procedures on children, such as puberty blockers, hormones, and surgeries.

Now she’s working for President Joe Biden’s administration in a high-ranking position at the National Institutes of Health as Biden’s Justice Department targets whistleblowers exposing alleged ongoing transgender practices at Texas Children’s.

[…]This appointment came after conversations with trans-identifying Rachel Levine, the biologically male assistant secretary at HHS who identifies as a woman, according to emails obtained by America First Legal (AFL) through litigation against HHS.

AFL believes that the emails illustrate “the Biden administration’s conscious decision to continue pushing the harmful practice of child transgender surgeries and to assist in stepping up HHS Office for Civil Rights (OCR) investigations in Texas following the state’s ban of such medical treatments on children in March 2022.”

Something to think about now that we are having elections. Have you checked voter guides to see which candidates are the most conservative? I have. Make sure you let all your friends know who you are voting for and why, so they can vote too.

I’m trying to find good articles to tell me who the replacement candidates are, and what are the complications with choosing one of these replacements at this late date. In this post, we’ll look at three potential candidates, and talk about the complications of changing candidates after the primary is already over.

Here’s the first article from Daily Signal.

First, what will happen at the convention?

Democrats already have held their primary elections across America. The result was a resounding victory for Biden in a virtually uncontested race. Their options are now limited.

The party can’t hold another primary and the Democratic National Convention, set to begin Aug. 19 in Chicago, is just around the corner.

[…]Biden’s 3,896 pledged convention delegates are free to vote for a replacement at the Democratic National Convention. The total number of Democratic delegates is 3,949, so the president had nearly all of them. If the delegates don’t reach a majority decision with 1,976 votes on a nominee, the party’s so-called superdelegates, over 700 of them, will decide who to nominate.

Superdelegates are party leaders, and the list typically consists of officeholders and former officeholders.

That convention process leaves the field open in a limited sense. To get into the running at the convention, a candidate would have to receive over 300 signatures from delegates. Only a maximum of 50 delegates may come from individual state delegations.

The article mentions California governor Gavin Newsom, Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer, and vice president Kamala Harris. They think that Harris is the most likely candidate to replace Biden, and they note that she is polling well against him:

A CBS/YouGov poll reported last week that Trump leads Harris 51% to 48% in a hypothetical match-up by popular vote. But Forbes reports that the Democratic polling firm Bendixen & Amandi showed Harris could beat Trump 42% to 41%.

Harris has early endorsements from Biden himself, and the Clintons, and she has easier access to Biden’s election campaign money. If she is the nominee, then she gets all of the $91 million.

This editorial from Fox News explains:

If Kamala Harris becomes the Democrat Party presidential nominee, does she get access to the campaign cash?

Yes, because when the Biden for President committee filed its registration statement with the FEC, it registered itself as the “principal campaign committee” for both Joe Biden and Kamala Harris.

If someone other than Kamala Harris becomes the presidential nominee, can that individual access the $91.5 million for his or her presidential campaign?

No, under FEC regulations, the new nominee would have no access to or control over the Biden for President campaign cash. Biden for President would be limited to giving no more than a $2,000 contribution to the new presidential nominee’s campaign committee.

Could the funds be transferred to the Democratic Party?

Yes, under FEC regulation 11 CFR 113.2, there is no limit on the transfer of funds from a candidate committee to party committees. Biden for President could, therefore, transfer all of its cash to the Democratic National Committee, Democratic congressional and senatorial committees, and state and local party committees, which could then use the money to support their federal, state and local candidates. Additionally, pursuant to the regulation, it could make donations to “State and local candidates subject to the provisions of State law.”

However, because political party committees have expenditure limits (a vestige of the 1970s post-Watergate federal campaign finance reforms), the DNC is limited in the amount of its expenditures that it is permitted to make in coordination with the new nominee’s campaign committee.

For the 2024 campaign, the limit is $32.4 million. A party committee could make independent expenditures regarding the presidential campaign, but it could not make unlimited coordinated expenditures of the newly transferred funds.

The article also notes all the money could be sent to Democrat SuperPACs, but there cannot be any coordination between them and the new nominee’s campaign.

I scanned some articles from the secular left news sites, and they seemed to think that Harris was going to be the nominee. I guess we’ll find out on August 19th. If they go with her, then they won’t have to change the names on all the state ballots. But if they choose someone else, there could be problems changing the name.