Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

International

German parliament passes law allowing minors to change their legal gender once a year

Published

6 minute read

Olaf Scholz

From LifeSiteNews

By Andreas Wailzer

“An exception to the unrestricted change of gender entry applies to men if the request for change is obviously in connection with an impending conscription in case of national defense,” the NZZ article states. “In such a case, the gender entry cannot be changed. Men must then remain men.”

The German parliament has passed the so-called “self-identification law,” which allows people confused about their sex, including minors, to change their legal gender once per year.

vote in the Bundestag (German federal parliament) on April 12 saw the law passed as 374 MPs voted in favor, 251 voted against, and eleven MPs abstained.

The new legislation, proposed by Germany’s left-wing government coalition, will allow anyone to change his or her legal gender entry once per year by simply stating their desire to do so to the registry office. Parents can decide to change the legal gender of their children under the age of 14 with their offspring’s “consent.”

Minors between the ages of 14 and 18 can apply to change their gender entry themselves but will need their parents’ consent. However, in the case of a disagreement between parents and their children, a family court can make a decision based on the “best interests of the child.”

Leaked communications of top pro-LGBT doctors have shown that so-called “gender-affirming care” can cause severe mental and physical disease and that it is impossible for minors to give “informed consent” to it.

These doctors “indicate repeatedly that they know that many children and their parents don’t understand the effects that puberty blockers, hormones, and surgeries will have on their bodies,” journalist Michael Shellenberger wrote in his summary of the leaked files. “And yet, they continue to perform and advocate for gender medicine.”

While the “self-identification law” does not include any provisions on medical interventions such as gender surgeries or puberty blockers, a website established by the German government has promoted blockers and hormone injections for gender-confused children.

The head and co-founder of the German pro-family organization DemoFürAlle, Hedwig von Beverfoerde, criticized the new law and pointed out that “socially transitioning” by changing one’s name and legal gender increases the likelihood that minors will go down the path of medical “transition,” even though most children and adolescents grow out of their gender-confusion once they hit adulthood.

“Even if the [German] government claims that the SBGG [self-determination law] has nothing to do with trans-medical measures, this law removes all protective barriers.”

“This is happening at a time when more and more countries are banning the use of puberty blockers, and the evidence from studies is becoming increasingly clear. Most recently, for example, a comprehensive study commissioned by the British Health Service (‘Cass Review’) shows that social transition with name and pronoun changes fuels medical transition and that most young people reconcile with their biological gender if they are given sufficient time to think about it,” she continued.

Von Beverfoerde concluded by calling on the German government to ban puberty blockers, cross-sex hormone injections, and surgical interventions for minors.

READ: UK’s National Health Service to stop prescribing puberty blockers to gender-confused children

Chancellor Olaf Scholz from the Social Democratic Party (SPD) welcomed the law: “We show respect for transgender, intersex and non-binary people – without taking anything away from others.”

“This is how we continue to drive forward the modernization of our country,” he added.

The law was criticized by the politicians from the Christian Democrats (CDU/CSU), the Alternative for Germany (AfD), and the Bünsdnis Sarah Wagenknect (BSW).

AfD MP Martin Reichardt said the law was “ideological nonsense” promoted by “trans-extremists” and that his party rejected the “ludicrous law” in its entirety.

Under the new law, anyone who reveals the former name or true gender of someone who changed their legal registry can be fined up to € 10,000 ($ 10,672) if they share this information “with the intent to harm.”

However, as a report by the newspaper NZZ points out, in the case of war, gender ideology has to take a back seat.

“An exception to the unrestricted change of gender entry applies to men if the request for change is obviously in connection with an impending conscription in case of national defense,” the NZZ article states. “In such a case, the gender entry cannot be changed. Men must then remain men.”

The Self-Determination law is due to come into force on November 1, 2024.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Health

RFK Jr’s argument for studying efficacy of various vaccines

Published on

From HHS Secretary Robert F Kennedy’s Facebook Page

To elevate America’s health, restore public trust, and reclaim our reputation for integrity and gold-standard science, President Donald J. Trump’s HHS will challenge even the most sacred public health dogmas through open debate and disciplined scientific scrutiny.

Continue Reading

Censorship Industrial Complex

Pro-freedom group warns Liberal bill could secretly cut off Canadians’ internet access

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

“The minister could order this dissident’s internet and phone services be cut off and require that decision remain secret”

Free speech advocates have warned that the Liberals’ cybersecurity bill would allow them to block any individual’s internet access by secret order.

During an October 30 Public Safety committee meeting in the House of Commons, Canadian Constitution Foundation (CCF) counsel Josh Dehaas called for Liberals to rewrite Bill C-8, which would allow the government to secretly cut off Canadians access to the internet to mediate “any threat” to the telecommunications system.

“It is dangerous to civil liberties to allow the minister the power to cut off individual Canadians without proper due process and keep that secret,” Dehaas testified.

“Consider for example a protestor who the minister believes ‘may’ engage in a distributed denial of service attack, which is a common form of civil disobedience employed by political activists,” he warned.

“The minister could order this dissident’s internet and phone services be cut off and require that decision remain secret,” Dehaas continued, adding that the legislation does not require the government to obtain a warrant.

In response, Liberal MP Marianne Dandurand claimed that the legislation is aimed to protect the government form cyberattacks, not to limit freedom of speech. However, Dehaas pointed out that the vague phrasing of the legislation allows Liberals to censor Canadians to counter “any threat” to the telecommunications system.

Bill C-8, which is now in its second reading in the House of Commons, was introduced in June by Minister of Public Safety Gary Anandasangaree and contains a provision in which the federal government could stop “any specified person” from accessing the internet.

The federal government under Prime Minister Mark Carney claims that the bill is a way to stop “unprecedented cyber-threats.”

The bill, as written, claims that the government would need the power to cut someone off from the internet, as it could be “necessary to do so to secure the Canadian telecommunications system against any threat, including that of interference, manipulation, disruption, or degradation.”

“Experts and civil society have warned that the legislation would confer ministerial powers that could be used to deliberately or inadvertently compromise the security of encryption standards within telecommunications networks that people, governments, and businesses across Canada rely upon, every day,” the Canadian Civil Liberties Association wrote in a recent press release.

Similarly, Canada’s own intelligence commissioner has warned that the bill, if passed as is, could potentially be unconstitutional, as it would allow for warrantless seizure of a person’s sensitive information.

Continue Reading

Trending

X