Connect with us

Politics

Courts Hold Grooming Kids in School is Fine But Don’t You Dare Mention God

Published

3 months ago

on

In a recent case, Lee v. Poudre School District R-1, Colorado parents Jonathan and Erin Lee, along with Nicolas and Linnaea Jurich, sued their school district, alleging it groomed their daughters into the LGBTQ cult through secretive Gender and Sexualities Alliance (GSA) meetings. They claimed teachers misled their children about gender identity, encouraged them to hide it from parents, and caused severe emotional harm, including suicidal ideation.

Yet, on April 22, 2025, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the dismissal of their lawsuit because, according to the Court, the parents failed to prove the district’s policies directly caused their injuries.

Let’s rewind to 1992’s Lee v. Weisman, when the U.S. Supreme Court swooped in to “save” a defenseless girl from hearing a rabbi’s invocation at her graduation. The Court declared that even a brief prayer violated the First Amendment because of the potential coercive effect on the poor defenseless girl who was subjected to hear the Name of God. The Court feared that – God forbid – an atheist student may be persuaded to believe in God at a public school, and the Court could not take that chance. The Supreme Court sent a clear message: God has no place within America’s schools.

The Supreme Court as composed June 30, 2022, to present.
Credit: Fred Schilling, Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States.

But today the Courts have no problem with subjecting kids to the gospel of the LGBTQ religious cult. Journalists like Libs of TikTok have exposed the epidemic of blue-haired teachers, faces riddled with piercings, draping pride flags over classrooms and preaching the gospel of gender confusion to vulnerable children. These activists confuse kids—already grappling with the chaos of adolescence—pushing them toward identities and ideologies that tear families apart and in many cases lead to irreparable psychological injuries.

This is far worse than the Rabbi’s short invocation that the Supreme Court called coercive when they put an end to school prayer nationwide. Yet, when parents, like those in Lee v. Poudre, fight back, courts toss their cases. Courts will intervene to banish even the mention of God from the schools. But when it comes to protecting kids from relentless LGBTQ indoctrination, the Courts humbly decide not to get involve and to deprive the parents of their day in court.

The Lee v. Poudre Case: A Disturbing Case of School Grooming

In Lee v. Poudre School District, the parents alleged that a Wellington Middle-High School teacher had private talks with a 12-year-old student, urging her to reject feminine pronouns and inviting her to a “GSA Art Club” meeting that was actually a Gender and Sexualities Alliance session where a teacher lectured kids for 90 minutes about how discomfort with their bodies meant they were likely transgender and at higher risk of suicide. The teacher handed out LGBTQ-themed prizes to students who “came out” as transgender and warned them not to tell their parents, even giving out her personal contact info for secret chats. The 12-year-old, who had never before questioned her gender, declared herself transgender at the meeting but told her parents, who promptly pulled her from the district. Another sixth-grader was told the same alarming messages at similar meetings and spiraled into suicidal thoughts, believing her distress “proved” she was transgender. She later attempted suicide, and her parents also withdrew her from the school.

The parents pointed to district policies, like the Guidelines for Supporting Transgender and Non-Binary Students, which instructed staff to withhold students’ transgender status from parents unless legally required or authorized by the student. They argued these policies enabled a culture of secrecy, allowing teachers to manipulate impressionable kids without parental knowledge. The district defended itself, claiming the policies merely protected student privacy and created a “safe space.”

The Tenth Circuit, however, didn’t even address whether the policies violated parental rights. Instead, it ruled the parents couldn’t prove the district’s policies directly caused the teachers’ actions, like misleading kids about the GSA meetings or discouraging parental disclosure. In a concurring opinion, Judge McHugh acknowledged the policies could implicate parental rights by encouraging secrecy but agreed the parents’ specific injuries weren’t tied closely enough to those policies.

The Controversy: A Double Standard

The controversy in Lee v. Poudre is part of a broader cultural battle. Parents across the country are sounding alarms as schools embrace LGBTQ ideology, often without transparency. Teachers, emboldened by policies like Poudre’s, are accused of grooming kids into a cult-like mindset, convincing them that questioning their gender is a rite of passage and that parents can’t be trusted, actively undermining families.

But in Lee v. Weisman the Supreme Court didn’t hesitate to intervene. A rabbi’s prayer at a graduation was deemed so harmful that it warranted a nationwide ban on school-sponsored religious expression. The Court didn’t dodge the issue with technicalities; it acted decisively to purge God from public schools. Yet, when parents beg courts to protect their kids from ideologues pushing gender confusion, the response is a shrug. The Lee v. Poudre court could have tackled the question of whether schools can constitutionally hide critical information from parents but instead took the easy out, claiming the parents’ evidence didn’t meet the stringent standard for municipal liability.

Why This Matters

The Lee v. Poudre case exposes a double standard in how courts treat schools. When it’s about banishing religion, the judiciary leaps into action, as in Lee v. Weisman. But when schools are accused of grooming kids into the LGBTQ religious cult, courts hide behind legal technicalities, leaving parents powerless. This isn’t just a Colorado problem—it’s a national crisis. Libs of TikTok and others have documented countless teachers openly boasting about “queering” their classrooms, confusing students as young as elementary school age. The harm is undeniable: children suffer mental health crises, families fracture, and parents are left in the dark.

The significance of this case lies in what it reveals about judicial priorities. Courts have shown they’ll reshape school culture to align with secular values but won’t lift a finger to stop what many see as ideological grooming. The Lee v. Poudre ruling sends a chilling message: schools can push radical agendas on kids, and parents have little legal recourse. Until courts take parental rights as seriously as they take the separation of church and state, children will remain vulnerable to the LGBTQ religious cult’s influence in schools, and parents will keep fighting an uphill battle.

The post Courts Hold Grooming Kids in School is Fine But Don’t You Dare Mention God appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

GOP Senator John Thune Quietly BLOCKS Trump Recess Appointments with Sneaky Procedural Maneuver — Launches Series of Pro Forma Sessions to Keep Senate in Fake “Session” During August Recess

Published

9 hours ago

on

August 3, 2025

By

Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R‑SD) has unveiled a procedural scheme to block President Donald Trump from making any critical appointments during the August recess, effectively aiding the Democrats’ obstructionist agenda.

Under the U.S. Constitution, the president can make “recess appointments,” temporary appointments to federal positions, if the Senate is in recess and not conducting business. These appointments don’t require immediate Senate confirmation and can last until the end of the next session of Congress.

But there’s a loophole: if the Senate holds pro forma sessions, very short, symbolic meetings where no actual business is conducted, then technically, the Senate is still in session. That means the president cannot legally make recess appointments during that time.

John Thune has quietly secured unanimous‑consent for a paper‑thin Senate schedule through the Trump appointee confirmation deadline, ensuring only pro forma sessions on five key dates in early August.

Under the agreement, the chamber will adjourn after today’s business and reconvene without conducting any votes or business on:

  • Tue, Aug 5 – 1:00 p.m.
  • Fri, Aug 8 – 1:05 p.m.
  • Tue, Aug 12 – 8:00 a.m.
  • Fri, Aug 15 – 10:15 a.m.
  • Tue, Aug 19 – 10:00 a.m.
  • Fri, Aug 22 – 9:00 a.m.
  • Tue, Aug 26 – 12:00 p.m.
  • Fri, Aug 29 – 7:00 a.m.

WATCH:

Thune’s pro forma blueprint comes amid mounting pressure from Donald Trump, who has demanded the Senate remain open until all 150+ administration nominees are confirmed.

Under the Recess Appointments Clause, a president may only install nominees without Senate approval if both chambers are in formal recess for at least 10 days. By convening the Senate just long enough every few days, Thune blocks the possibility of Trump making unilateral appointees.

The Senate went into its August recess without confirming all of Trump’s pending judicial and district‑level appointments.

By the time lawmakers left town on Saturday evening, no deal had been reached to move dozens of Trump’s nominees, including U.S. district court picks, through final floor votes.

Only a small handful of nominees (such as Jeanine Pirro to be U.S. Attorney in D.C.) had advanced. Otherwise, nominees remained stalled in committees or waiting for cloture roll‑calls on the executive calendar.

Roughly 150–160 executive and judicial nominations, including over a dozen district court judges and U.S. attorney nominations, remained scheduled but unconfirmed.

The post GOP Senator John Thune Quietly BLOCKS Trump Recess Appointments with Sneaky Procedural Maneuver — Launches Series of Pro Forma Sessions to Keep Senate in Fake “Session” During August Recess appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Continue Reading

Politics

‘That’s What I Call Results!’: Trump Admin Saves Jobs, Kicks 1500 Non-English-Speaking Truckers Off the Road

Published

9 hours ago

on

August 3, 2025

By

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy revealed that there have been about 1,500 truck drivers who do not speak English taken off the roads as part of a push to ensure foreign truck drivers are not causing accidents.

Back in 2016, the Obama administration stopped enforcing English proficiency requirements for truckers, according to a report from The Daily Signal.

But in May, Duffy issued a guidance making clear that truck drivers who cannot demonstrate a proficiency in English cannot drive.

The 1,500 drivers were taken off the roads within the first 3o days of the rules once more being enforced, according to The Daily Signal.

“Since I took action to enforce language proficiency requirements for truckers, our state partners have put roughly 1,500 unqualified drivers out of service. That’s what I call results!” Duffy posted on X.

“If you can’t read or speak our national language — ENGLISH — we won’t let your truck endanger the driving public.”

He added, “America First = Safety First.”

Duffy’s concerns were far from unfounded.

In January, there was a truck driver involved in a fatal crash that had to use a language interpreter for the post-crash investigation, according to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.

Another incident from 2019 involved a truck driver who could not proficiently speak English speeding through signs that warned of steep grades and dangerous curves, all at more than 100 miles per hour.

Four people died in that crash, per the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.

President Donald Trump had likewise insisted with an April executive order that the move centered on public safety.

“They should be able to read and understand traffic signs, communicate with traffic safety, border patrol, agricultural checkpoints, and cargo weight-limit station officers,” the order said of truck drivers.

They also “need to provide feedback to their employers and customers and receive related directions in English,” a position the order called “common sense.”

“It is the policy of my Administration to support America’s truckers and safeguard our roadways by enforcing the commonsense English-language requirement for commercial motor vehicle drivers and removing needless regulatory burdens that undermine the working conditions of America’s truck drivers,” the notice added.

“This order will help ensure a safe, secure, and efficient motor carrier industry.”

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

The post ‘That’s What I Call Results!’: Trump Admin Saves Jobs, Kicks 1500 Non-English-Speaking Truckers Off the Road appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Continue Reading

Politics

Slovenia Imposes Arms Embargo on Israel, Citing Gaza Conflict

Published

9 hours ago

on

August 3, 2025

By

via Wikimedia Commons

Slovenia has imposed an arms embargo on Israel, banning the export, import, and transit of weapons to and from the country.

This decision was announced by Prime Minister Robert Golob following a government session on July 31, 2025.

Slovenia claims to be the first European Union member to take such a step, citing the EU’s inability to act due to internal disagreements.

The government stated that no permits for military exports to Israel have been issued since October 2023, when the conflict in Gaza began.

Officials emphasized that the embargo is an independent measure to address the humanitarian situation in Gaza. Slovenia has repeatedly called for a ceasefire and increased aid deliveries to the region.

In early July 2025, Slovenia declared two Israeli ministers, Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir, persona non grata, barring them from entry.

This action was based on their public statements regarding the conflict. Earlier, in June 2024, Slovenia recognized Palestinian statehood, joining countries like Ireland, Norway, and Spain in this move.

The conflict in Gaza started after the October 7, 2023, attack by Hamas on Israeli territory, which resulted in over 1,200 deaths and the taking of hostages.

Israel responded with a military operation aimed at dismantling Hamas infrastructure. Reports from Gaza’s health ministry indicate significant casualties, with ongoing international efforts to negotiate truces and provide aid.

Several other nations have taken similar diplomatic steps, including France, Britain, and Canada announcing potential recognition of a Palestinian state. Australia has also indicated that recognizing Palestinian statehood is under consideration.

Israel has criticized these declarations, arguing they could reward Hamas for its actions.

Israeli officials dismissed Slovenia’s embargo as insignificant, noting that Israel does not procure any defense materials from Slovenia.

An unnamed official stated that the country buys nothing from Slovenia, not even minor items.

Within the EU, there is growing pressure for measures against Israel, with Sweden and the Netherlands advocating for suspending parts of the EU-Israel Association Agreement.

The European Commission has proposed limiting Israel’s participation in the Horizon research program, though Germany opposes such steps.

German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul expressed concerns about Israel’s potential diplomatic isolation during a visit to Jerusalem.

The United States remains a key ally to Israel, with President Donald Trump warning that recognizing Palestinian statehood might benefit Hamas.

U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff recently met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to advance Gaza truce talks. These efforts aim to address the humanitarian crisis and secure a ceasefire.

The post Slovenia Imposes Arms Embargo on Israel, Citing Gaza Conflict appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Continue Reading

Trending