Patriots of Kingston and surrounding Towns,
Our local School Board will discuss their “Transgender Students” policy this coming Wednesday at 6 PM at the Sanborn High School in Kingston.
I need at least 10 of you to PLEASE attend this meeting. I will speak at the mic, and we have Board members brave enough to address this policy as well.
WE NEED PEOPLE SITTING IN THE AUDIENCE TO SHOW SUPPORT. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO SPEAK BUT HAVING YOU PRESENT IS VERY IMPORTANT.
The “Trans Student” policy is attached if you’d like to read it.
The policy to be discussed has 3 main problems in my view. I’ll present them to the Board on Wednesday. My points are shown below, if you want a ‘preview.’
Thanks for your help – let’s peacefully push back, show our concerns, and save our kids AND parents’ rights!!!
——
3 Problems with District’s Transgender Policy:
1) On page 2, the Policy allows the building Principal to decide whether “abuse” may occur if parents are informed of a student’s “trans” status. This policy effectively cuts off parental rights to supervise their own children and remain informed, and it appears to violate NH law which states only the courts have jurisdiction over matters involving “abuse” of children (RSA 169-C:18).
2) On page 3 & 4, the policy mandates that Trans students be permitted to participate in intramural sports along with the sex with which they “identify.”
The problem is that there are well-known cases of serious physical harm which have come to female students playing against male athletes who claim to be female. Is the district willing to risk placing girls in harm’s way with this policy?
Page 4 mandates that the School District follow NHIAA (Interscholastic Athletic Assoc.) policies on Trans players in women’s athletics. NHIAA appears to leave student athletes’ gender designations up to the school district and to Title IX policies.
https://www.nhiaa.org/ckfinder/userfiles/files/4HB%2024-25%20%20II%20Eligibility.pdf
In addition, a major legal battle is underway concerning Title IX and whether it protects women’s sports from “trans” participants. A federal judge just blocked the Biden Administration’s attempt to modify Title XI to allow non-women into women’s restrooms and women’s athletics: https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/education/federal-court-halts-bidens-title-ix-regulations-four-new-states
3) Page 4 of the Policy mandates that “all members of the school community… treat one another with kindness and respect” or face a “disciplinary response.” What would constitute an act of “Kindness”? The policy doesn’t define it. Suppose a staffer or student suggests that a “trans” student seek professional psychological therapy. Many of us might consider that an act of kindness – especially in light of the fact that medical associations in several European countries are now recommending it – and characterize “gender-affirming” interventions for children as 1) experimental, 2) high risk and irreversible, and 3) producing growing numbers of regretful participants now wanting to “de-transition.”
Mandating that “Kindness” be defined in a specific manner ignores that there is a firestorm of debate taking place regarding the propositions that there are multiple (more than 2) genders and that one can “transition” to a different sex. A federal judge ruled that restricting speech such as the statement that ‘there are only two genders’ – “violates government employees’ First Amendment rights” by controlling what they can say about both gender identity and sexual orientation.
