• Skip to main content
Daily Citizen
  • Subscribe
  • Categories
    • Culture
    • Life
    • Religious Freedom
    • Sexuality
  • Parenting Resources
    • LGBT Pride
    • Homosexuality
    • Sexuality/Marriage
    • Transgender
  • About
    • Contributors
    • Contact
  • Donate

transgender

May 20 2025

Parents’ Rights Groups Sue Colorado Over Radical Trans Law

On Monday, May 19, four parents’ rights organizations sued the state of Colorado over its recently enacted radical transgender legislation.

Plaintiffs in the lawsuit claim the new law, HB25-1312, violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution because it compels state-sponsored speech and is unconstitutionally vague.

Background

The measure received nationwide attention in the last month due to its brazen language threatening free speech, religious freedom and parental rights.

Focus on the Family joined widespread objections to the law. President Jim Daly, spoke out against the bill online. Three analysts from the organization testified against the measure, and in support of parental rights and free speech, at the state capitol.

Despite the constitutional concerns raised by many Coloradans, the legislation was signed into law by the governor on May 16.

Complaint

Plaintiffs in the lawsuit are Defending Education, Colorado Parent Advocacy Network, Protect Kids Colorado, Do No Harm and Dr. Travis Morrell.

The complaint alleges the new law “punishes Coloradans for their speech and compels them to use language endorsing the State’s views on highly contested and highly political matters of sex and gender.”

Plaintiffs assert this law was “designed to punish disfavored speech.”

The purpose of H.B. 25-1312 is clear. The law punishes those who refuse to speak using chosen names and pronouns, and it does so in order to suppress traditional beliefs about sex and gender. In other words, the law openly discriminates based on viewpoint.

They continue, “The state cannot place its thumb on the scale to favor one side of a contentious public debate. It certainly cannot stifle viewpoints it doesn’t like simply because it finds those views offensive or disagreeable.”

The complaint goes on to cite several examples of bill sponsors confirming that the measure’s purpose is to suppress traditional views about sex and gender, including an example of lawmakers likening parental rights groups to Nazis and the KKK.

In an exclusive interview with Focus on the Family’s Daily Citizen, Vice President and Counsel for Defending Education, Sarah Parshall Perry, explained why the new law is especially dangerous.

This is Colorado’s maneuver to prevent any public disagreement with gender ideology anywhere, for any reason. The state has just taken a sledgehammer to free speech principles and free exercise of religion principles — both of which are guaranteed by the Constitution’s First Amendment. That kind of breathtakingly unconstitutional action should worry not just Coloradans, but every American in the country. 

Specific Violations

The complaint alleges HB25-1312 violates the constitution in four specific ways.

First, plaintiffs argue that the law’s use of the phrases “gender expression” and “chosen name” violates the First Amendment because it unconstitutionally compels speakers to use state-approved language.

Second, the complaint alleges Colorado’s Anti-Discrimination Act (CADA) unconstitutionally includes a provision that prohibits making people feel unwelcome based on a protected characteristic. That provision is a violation of the First Amendment, plaintiffs claim, because it prohibits speech on gender and sexuality contrary to the state’s approved content and viewpoint.

Third, the lawsuit contends the law defining “chosen name” and “gender expression” is “impermissibly vague” under the Fourteenth Amendment, which will lead to arbitrary enforcement. Arbitrary enforcement is illegal because it violates the core principles of due process and equal protection.

Fourth, plaintiffs allege the unwelcome provision in CADA is “impermissibly vague” under the Fourteenth Amendment which will lead to arbitrary enforcement. When a law is arbitrarily enforced, individuals do not have fair notice of what conduct is prohibited and it invites biased enforcement of the law.

Parental Rights

This radical trans law continues to threaten parental rights.

Defending Education Vice President, Sarah Parshall Perry, had this to say about what is at stake for parents:

House Bill 25-1312 punishes Coloradans for their speech and compels them to use language endorsing the State’s views on highly contested and highly political matters of sex and gender.

Among its victims will be parents of children who might believe themselves to be transgender and with whom those parents disagree. If any parent in Colorado enters a place of public accommodation — which is described so broadly as to include virtually any public space — with that child and “misgenders” that child, the parent can be hit with a charge of discrimination under state law.

The law doesn’t just target parents who oppose gender ideology, it forces mandatory pronoun use on every Coloradan in a public place. 

Request for Relief

Plaintiffs in the case have asked the court to issue an injunction barring the state from prosecuting anyone for violating the law while the case is litigated.

The lawsuit also asks for judgment declaring HB25-1312 violates the First and Fourteenth Amendment and it be stricken down.

The case is Defending Education et al v. Sullivan et al.

The Daily Citizen will provide updates to this developing story.

Written by Nicole Hunt · Categorized: Culture · Tagged: Colorado, LGBT, transgender

May 19 2025

Colorado Governor Signs Extreme Act: ‘Legal Protections for Transgender Individuals’

Colorado Governor Jared Polis signed an extreme “transgender” bill into law that threaten the rights of all Coloradans in homes, schools, the workplace – and more.

House Bill 1312, Concerning Legal Protections for Transgender Individuals, was opposed by thousands of Colorado citizens who signed petitions, attended rallies at the Capitol, testified against the measure and made phone calls and sent emails to the governor and legislators.

More than 700 people registered to give public testimony on this bill in the Senate Judiciary Committee – 80% of those individuals opposing the measure.

The Colorado General Assembly ignored opposition to the measure, as the act passed along party lines with a Senate vote of 20-14 and a House vote of 38-20.

Governor Polis signed the heavily contested measure administratively, meaning he allowed the bill to become a law without physically signing it, on Friday, May 16.

As reported by the Daily Citizen, the legislation received such severe opposition – even radical LGBT activist groups expressed concerns about it – that it was heavily amended by the Colorado General Assembly.

Despite those amendments, the law still targets free speech, religious freedom and parental rights.

HB 1312, was labeled the “Kelly Loving Act,” after a transgender-identified man who lived as a woman.

Loving was killed in the horrific Club Q shooting in Colorado Springs by a “transgender” man who identified as “non-binary.”

Here’s how the unconstitutional measure threatens a variety of rights:

  • The law forces educators and schools, both public and charter, to permit students to choose their own name, mandating that educators must lie if a student identifies as something other than their natural sex and chooses a name to match that identification.
  • It requires public and charter schools to allow “each student to choose from any of the options provided in the dress code policy.” So boys may wear girls clothing – and vice versa.
  • HB 1312 allows individuals to change their sex designation up to three times on identification documents. Courts may allow even more changes if “the sex designation change is required.”
  • County clerks must allow individuals to change their name on marriage licenses.
  • The law adds “chosen name” to the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act and defines “gender expression” as “an individual’s way of reflecting and expressing the individual’s gender to the outside world, typically demonstrated through appearance, dress, chosen name, and how the individual chooses to be addressed.”

That last provision is especially important, as it adds the refusal of any citizen to use a “chosen name” to the state’s non-discrimination laws.

Teachers could be charged for refusing to acknowledge a student’s “transgender” status and could report parents who don’t affirm a child’s sexual identity confusion.

Colorado Child Protective Services and courts could consider a parent’s refusal to affirm their child’s disorder as discrimination, affecting custody rights and disputes. This was happening even before the act was passed.

Businesses and workers could be charged with discrimination if they fail to acknowledge the lie that a person can somehow be transformed into the opposite sex or a new, made-up “gender identity.”

In her testimony against HB 1312 in the Senate Judiciary Committee, Daily Citizen writer Nicole Hunt excoriated the bill, saying, “This bill is misleading titled ‘Legal Protections for Transgender Individuals.’ A more accurate title would be ‘How to break up families and use the law to steal children from their parents.'”

By adding “chosen name” to the definition of gender expression,” parents could be viewed as discriminating against their own children.

Hunt stated the harms to children from pushing them toward transitioning.

“It would force parents to support dangerous, experimental drugs, hormones and surgeries for their children struggling with sexual identity confusion.”

“This is an obvious attempt to force state-sponsored radical gender ideology speech on Colorado families and it’s unconstitutional.”

She added, “Focus on the Family firmly believes that parents have the fundamental right to direct the upbringing of their children including their healthcare decisions and their moral or religious training.”

Real protections for civil rights don’t take away the civil rights of others – as HB 1312 does. Opponents are already planning lawsuits against the act to protect Coloradans rights.

Related Articles and Resources

Colorado Legislature Passes Radical ‘Transgender’ Bill With Amendments

Education Department Warns Colorado: Children ‘Do Not Belong to Government’

Focus on the Family Testifies Against Nightmare Bill, Colorado’s Radical ‘Trans’ Legislation Advances

Oppose Colorado’s Radical Abortion and ‘Transgender Rights’ Legislation

Radical Colorado ‘Transgender’ Bill Threatens Parents’ Rights and Free Speech

Image from Shutterstock.

Written by Jeff Johnston · Categorized: Culture · Tagged: Colorado, LGBT, transgender

May 14 2025

A Useful Summary of Trump Administration Actions Against Gender Ideology

Genspect, a non-partisan, international organization founded in 2021 by Irish psychotherapist Stella O’Malley, actively promotes “a healthy, evidence-based approach to sex and gender.” They seek non-medicalized solutions to gender distress, including support for non-medical gender transitions. Their mission statement:

At Genspect, our mission is to support individuals in expressing their true selves without unnecessary medical interventions. We emphasize the importance of psychological and social support grounded in scientific integrity, striving to create a world where gender non-conformity is respected and understood.

Of course, there are things in this stated mission – like respecting gender non-conformity – that Focus on the Family cannot support. However, we have generally appreciated important parts of their work as co-belligerents in the overall fight to regain some sanity in the international onslaught of gender deception and the medicalization of children.

With this caveat, we want to commend a very helpful, short report Genspect has just produced that is worthy of all pro-family citizens’ attention and perusal.

This useful resource, from Genspect USA, is a complete and useful summary of the various strong actions the second Trump administration has taken toward returning the United States to objective sanity on the basics of biology. And regardless of your feelings about President Trump, each of these executive actions are necessary and laudatory.

The report also catalogues the fourteen legal challenges that have been filed against these common-sense measures, largely by activist organizations and judges.

Daily Citizen has documented, explained and applauded these actions from executive orders and government agencies as they happened: here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here. Yes, we have been busy because the President and his appointees have been busy in support of issues that affect families.

We thank Genspect USA for fully documenting and appreciating the great work done by our nation’s current executive office to protect God’s very good creation of male and female. This national return to reality is essential and must continue.

You can find Genspect’s report here.

Written by Glenn T. Stanton · Categorized: Government Updates · Tagged: LGBT, transgender

May 09 2025

Boise and Salt Lake City Adopt Pride Flags as ‘Official’ City Flags

Defying Idaho and Utah laws, Boise and Salt Lake City adopted the LGBT Pride flag as official city flags. Currently, both states ban unofficial flags on government owned properties.

Unlike state and city flags, which represent all legal residents, Pride flags are inherently divisive; they honor a small group of people for no other reason than their sexual attractions, behaviors and identities.

Pride flags also are an affront to people of faith, who believe God’s creation of humanity in His image – male or female – and who believe in His good design for marriage between a husband and wife, which creates the best environment for raising children.

Governor Brad Little (Idaho) signed a law banning non-official flags on April 3, covering state, county, municipal and school properties. But Boise kept a Pride flag flying over the city hall ever since.

The Utah mandate became law March 27, without Governor Spencer Cox’s signature. Cox continued “to have serious concerns with the policy but chose not to reject it because his veto would likely be overridden by the Republican-controlled Legislature,” Associated Press reported.

The move was a coordinated effort by both cities’ mayors, with Boise Mayor Lauren McLean and Salt Lake City Mayor Erin Mendenhall offering each other support, AP stated.

In a May 6 Boise City Council meeting, as reported by Fox News, McLean said:

On April 28 I signed an official proclamation that retroactively established three flags as official Boise flags: the blue flag, the one we love, with the monochrome image of the Capitol building and the words “Boise, City of Trees”; the rainbow flag, commonly referred to as the Pride flag, and the flag that represents and gives voice to the fact that we are a welcoming city; and a flag representing National Donate Life Month [promoting organ, eye and tissue donations].

One speaker said the Pride flag was related to “diversity, equity and inclusion,” which she called “right and just” and “fundamental to America,” representing “our values sewn in color and cloth.”

While Christians practice kindness and offer grace to all people, the Pride flag certainly doesn’t represent our moral and sexual values.

Mendenhall also pointed to “diversity,” explaining her decision to propose the measure to the city council,

“My sincere intent is not to provoke or cause division. My intent is to represent our city’s values and honor our dear diverse residents who make up this beautiful city and the legacy of pain and progress that they have endured.”

Both mayors don’t understand that Pride flags cause deep discord, promoting a sexualized, socio-political agenda. Idaho Representative Heather Scott, who sponsored the state bill banning non-official flags, explained the purpose behind it, saying “We don’t want government to be promoting division or political ideology or any social movements.”

Idaho’s law does not have an enforcement mechanism, while the Utah law can lead to fines of $500 a day for governmental entities that flout the law.

Related Articles and Resources

Countering The Cultural Confusion: Answering Frequently Asked Questions About Homosexuality

Five Things for Christians to Remember During ‘LGBT Pride Month’

Focus on the Family: Counseling Consultation and Referrals

Focus on the Family: Transgender Resources

Focus on the Family: Understanding Homosexuality

How the “Trans” and Gender Redefinition Issue Attacks the Family

Navigating ‘LGBT Pride Month’ – How Should Parents Respond?

There is No Pride in Denying Reality or the Image of God in Humanity

What Does the Bible Say About Homosexuality? When Children Encounter ‘LGBT Pride’: Resources for Parents

Written by Jeff Johnston · Categorized: Culture · Tagged: LGBT, transgender

May 02 2025

HHS Releases Report on Harms of ‘Transgender’ Medical Interventions for Minors

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) released an important evaluation of the evidence for how best to treat children and adolescents with “gender dysphoria.”

Not surprisingly, the comprehensive review, Treatment for Pediatric Gender Dysphoria Review of Evidence and Best Practices, showed serious problems with treating minors with “gender-affirming care,” which can include body damaging, experimental and risky puberty suppressants, hormones and surgeries.

A news release from HHS clearly explained the troubling paucity of evidence and grave risks for confused children who receive these medical interventions:

This review, informed by an evidence-based medicine approach, reveals serious concerns about medical interventions, such as puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgeries, that attempt to transition children and adolescents away from their sex.

The review highlights a growing body of evidence pointing to significant risks – including irreversible harms such as infertility – while finding very weak evidence of benefit. That weakness has been a consistent finding of systematic reviews of evidence around the world.

Treatment for Pediatric Gender Dysphoria is 409 pages long and covers everything from the history of transgender medicine to current treatment practices to the effects of harmful medical interventions on minors. It’s release was accompanied by a 173-page appendix which explained the methodology and gave a synthesis of the evidence.

Director of the National Institutes of Health Dr. Jay Bhattacharya emphasized the primary goal in treating children with sexual identity confusion should be to safeguard their health.

He said, “Our duty is to protect our nation’s children – not expose them to unproven and irreversible medical interventions. We must follow the gold standard of science, not activist agendas.”

The report explains that activist agenda comes from groups like the Endocrine Society, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH). These groups have labeled their treatment “gender-affirming care,” which means affirming a child’s sexual identity confusion and allowing the child to try to live as the opposite sex, or a combination of the two sexes, or no sex, or some self-defined, pseudo “gender.”

These minors are then encouraged to use dangerous and powerful puberty blockers, proceed to body-damaging opposite sex hormones, and then undergo irreversible surgeries. An executive summary of the literature review states the seriousness of these treatments for children who have nothing wrong with their brains or bodies:

Nevertheless, the “gender-affirming” model of care includes irreversible endocrine and surgical interventions on minors with no physical pathology.

These interventions carry risk of significant harms including infertility/sterility, sexual dysfunction, impaired bone density accrual, adverse cognitive impacts, cardiovascular disease and metabolic disorders, psychiatric disorders, surgical complications, and regret.

The executive summary explains that there is little evidence that “gender-affirming” care is even helpful.

“Meanwhile, systematic reviews of the evidence have revealed deep uncertainty about the purported benefits of these interventions.”

One section of the extensive report details the “International Retreat from the ‘Gender-Affirming’ Model,” known as the Dutch Protocol, first published in 2006, which advocated for “gender-affirming care.” This medicalized approach initially expanded, based on two flawed, unreplicated studies with “serious limitations.”

In 2015, the meta-analysis explains, the number of youth identifying as “transgender” surged dramatically, “first gradually, then suddenly,” with a large number of female adolescents wanting to live as boys.

Given its shaky foundation researchers in different countries began conducting their own studies of “gender-affirming care,” and the report details the growing international movement away from using medical interventions to modify children’s bodies:

Finland subsequently became the first country to revise its national guidelines, sharply limiting medical interventions based on the findings of an SR [systematic review]. In the years that followed, other countries began conducting their own evaluations of the evidence and arrived at similar conclusions.

A global trend has since emerged, away from use of PBs [puberty blockers], CSH [cross-sex hormones], and surgeries in youth with GD [gender dysphoria].

Treatment for Pediatric Gender Dysphoria describes England’s review of “pediatric gender medicine” that began in 2020, with the final report, The Cass Review released in 2024. This led to the closing of the country’s Gender Identity Development Service and a move away from puberty blockers, hormones and surgeries for children.

The new HHS report lists other countries that have stopped or limited these harmful, disfiguring treatments, including Denmark, Sweden, and Norway, adding,

“Most recently, hormonal interventions have been restricted in Brazil, Chile, the province of Alberta in Canada, and the state of Queensland in Australia.”

The meta-analysis makes clear that it is not a clinical practice guideline, while emphasizing it “describes the very low-quality evidence underpinning treatment approaches in pediatric gender medicine” and “contains an extensive description of potential or plausible harms associated with certain treatment options (namely, hormonal interventions and surgeries), some of which are significant.”

It concludes that current transgender medical interventions for children and adolescents “are inconsistent with widely endorsed principles of medical ethics.”

There’s much more in Treatment for Pediatric Gender Dysphoria Review of Evidence and Best Practices, and the Daily Citizen will detail these findings in the weeks ahead.

Related Articles and Resources

If you or someone you know is struggling with transgenderism, Focus on the Family offers a one-time complimentary consultation with our ministry’s professionally trained counseling staff. The consultation is free due to generous donor support.

To reach Focus on the Family’s counseling service by phone, call 1-855-771-HELP (4357) weekdays 6:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. (Mountain Time). Please be prepared to leave your contact information for a counselor to return a call to you as soon as possible. Alternatively, you can fill out our Counseling Consultation Request Form.

Addressing Gender Identity with Honesty and Compassion

Cakegender? Genderfaun? Orbgender?

Colorado Counselor Asks U.S. Supreme Court to Hear Free Speech Case

Counseling for Sexual Identity Concerns: A Measured, Careful, and Compassionate Approach.

The Journey Back to My True Identity

New Video Equips Parents and Counselors to Help ‘Gender Dysphoric’ Children

Questioning Drugs, Hormones and Surgery for Youth Confused about Their Sexual Identity

The Shifting Ground of ‘Gender-Affirming Care’

Transgenderism and Minors: What Does the Research Really Show?

UK Bans Puberty Blockers for ‘Transgender’ Minors

U.K.’s Review of Child Gender Policy Reveals Profound Failures That U.S. Still Defends

What is ‘Gender Identity’

Written by Jeff Johnston · Categorized: Culture · Tagged: LGBT, transgender, WPATH

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 18
  • Page 19
  • Page 20
  • Page 21
  • Page 22
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 33
  • Go to Next Page »

Privacy Policy and Terms of Use | Privacy Policy and Terms of Use | © 2026 Focus on the Family. All rights reserved.

  • Cookie Policy