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

Judge Subramanian DENIES Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs Bail for the Fifth Time – Disgraced Rapper Will Remain in Prison Pending His October 3rd Sentencing

Published

15 hours ago

on

August 5, 2025

By

Judge Subramanian: no “exceptional reasons” to release Diddy before sentencing.

Recent Judge Subramanian’s decisions may indicate hard times for Diddy come sentencing.

We have been following the pre-sentencing motions in the high-profile criminal trial of rap mogul Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs.

The defense: ‘Sean Diddy’s Combs’ Conviction Is Racist and Sexist’, Say Disgraced Rapper’s Lawyers on Yet Another Legal Filing Trying to Release Him on Bail Pending Sentencing

The Prosecution: Prosecutors Oppose Sean Diddy Combs’ 50M Bail Package, Ask for ‘Substantially Higher’ Sentence Than Before

Look who appeared: Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs Trial: Ex-girlfirend Who Disappeared and Did Not Testify Against Rapper as ‘Victim 3’ Now Writes Letter to Judge to Grant Him Pre-sentencing Bail

Diddy has had his request for bail denied for the 5th time.

Today, we learn that federal judge Subramanian has yet again declined to grant Sean “Diddy” Combs bail, saying he found no ‘exceptional reasons’ to release him pending his October sentencing.

ABC News reported:

“Combs was convicted of transportation to engage in prostitution, which the judge said mandates incarceration. His sentencing is set for Oct. 3.

Judge Arun Subramanian said Combs remains a risk of flight and a danger to the community, pointing to the violence exhibited on 2016 hotel surveillance footage that shows him kicking and dragging Cassie Ventura.”

Combs remains a risk of flight and a danger to the community: Judge.

The judge ruled that the ‘swinger lifestyle’ argument does not fly in a case that includes ‘evidence of violence, coercion or subjugation in connection with the prostitution’. And the record, he wrote, contains evidence of all three.

Subramanian: “’While Combs may contend at sentencing that this evidence should be discounted and that what happened was nothing more than a case of willing ‘swingers’ utilizing the voluntary services of escorts for their mutual pleasure, the Government takes the opposite view: that Cassie Ventura and Jane were beaten, coerced, threatened, lied to, and victimized by Combs as part of their participation in these’.”

Read more:

As He Awaits Sentencing in Prison, Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs Joins ‘Self-Improvement’ Program To Curb Drug Use and Violence Against Women

The post Judge Subramanian DENIES Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs Bail for the Fifth Time – Disgraced Rapper Will Remain in Prison Pending His October 3rd Sentencing appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Continue Reading

Politics

Nearly 78,000 New Applicants Flood ICE Recruitment to Help Crack Down on Illegal Immigration (VIDEO)

Published

15 hours ago

on

August 5, 2025

By

In a scorching new development under the Trump-backed ICE reign, Acting Director Todd Lyons confidently announced that “we have almost 78,000 applicants since we opened up,” referring to the agency’s massive recruitment surge launched just one week prior.

This seismic surge in interest aligns with ICE’s newly launched “Defend the Homeland” recruitment blitz, unveiled by the Department of Homeland Security on July 29, 2025.

ICE is budgeting for 10,000 new agents, dangling $50,000 signing bonuses, student‑loan forgiveness, enhanced overtime pay, and upgraded retirement plans to attract recruits.

According to the press release:

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) today launched a new U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) campaign to recruit brave and heroic Americans to join ICE as federal law enforcement agents and remove the worst of the worst criminal illegal aliens from America’s streets.

“Your country is calling you to serve at ICE. In the wake of the Biden administration’s failed immigration policies, your country needs dedicated men and women of ICE to get the worst of the worst criminals out of our country,” said Secretary Kristi Noem. “This is a defining moment in our nation’s history. Your skills, your experience, and your courage have never been more essential. Together, we must defend the homeland.”

To support this effort, ICE is offering a robust package of federal law enforcement incentives, including: 

  • A maximum $50,000 signing bonus
  • Student loan repayment and forgiveness options
  • 25% Law Enforcement Availability Pay (LEAP) for HSI Special Agents
  • Administratively Uncontrollable Overtime (AUI) for Enforcement Removal Operations (ERO) Deportation Officers
  • Enhanced retirement benefits

Backed by significant new funding through the recently signed One Big Beautiful Bill, ICE is rolling out patriotic recruitment posters and benefits to attract the next generation of law enforcement professionals to find, arrest, and remove criminal illegal aliens.

During the Fox interview, Todd Lyons delivered the incredible news.

“We have almost 78,000 applicants since we opened up. We’re going through and finding those people who really want to serve the country and truly be in law enforcement. I think it’s a great way to recruit now.

We’re taking back our re-hired annuitants — people who left the job early because they weren’t allowed to do the law enforcement mission.

But we have so many people who are now interested in working with ICE because, under Secretary Nome’s leadership, they’re seeing that we have a viable law enforcement partner in the community. You’re actually out making a difference. We’re really ecstatic about seeing the increase in new recruits who are applying.”

WATCH:

The post Nearly 78,000 New Applicants Flood ICE Recruitment to Help Crack Down on Illegal Immigration (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Continue Reading

Politics

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene Calls on Trump to Commute George Santos’ Excessive 7-Year-Sentence: ‘Some Members of Congress Who’ve Done Far Worse Still Walk Free’

Published

15 hours ago

on

August 5, 2025

By

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R‑GA) has formally thrown down the gauntlet.

On Monday, she submitted a letter to the Office of the Pardon Attorney pleading for President Trump to commute the 87-month federal sentence of ex‑Congressman George Santos (NY‑03)—a punishment she calls “a grave injustice” and emblematic of a justice system fractured by politically selective persecution.

Greene wrote on X:

“BREAKING: I just sent a letter to the Office of the Pardon Attorney urging President Trump to commute the sentence of former Congressman @MrSantosNY.

A 7‑year prison sentence for campaign‑related charges is excessive, especially when Members of Congress who’ve done far worse still walk free.

George Santos has taken responsibility. He’s shown remorse. It’s time to correct this injustice. We must demand equal justice under the law!”

Greene signed her letter Aug. 4 to Pardon Attorney Edward Martin Jr. at the Justice Department, demanding Trump use his executive power to undo what she calls a “grave injustice.”

Drawing on inside knowledge, she described Santos as “without a prior criminal record,” “sincerely remorseful,” and portrayed his case as campaign-related maleficence, nothing warranting “one of the most extreme sentences in recent history.”

Green also reminded officials of the roster of current or former lawmakers who actually broke laws or ethics rules yet never lost a day.

The letter reads:

“I am writing to request that your office urge the President to commute the sentence of former Congressman George Santos. In April 2025, Mr. Santos was sentenced to 87 months in federal prison for wire fraud and aggravated identity theft charges. I wholeheartedly believe in justice and the rule of the law, and I understand the gravity of such actions. However, I believe a seven-year sentence for such campaign-related matters for an individual with no prior criminal record extends far beyond what is warranted.

As a Member of Congress, I worked with Mr. Santos on many issues and can attest to his willingness and dedication to serve the people of New York who elected him to office. He committed himself to serving his constituents and did whatever it took to represent their interests in Washington, D.C. He is sincerely remorseful and has accepted full responsibility for his actions. Furthermore, my office has spoken with a pastor of his who discussed the regret and remorse of Mr. Santos, agreeing that the sentence imposed is a grave injustice.

While his crimes warrant punishment, many of my colleagues who I serve with have committed far worse offenses than Mr. Santos yet have faced zero criminal charges. I strongly believe in accountability for one’s actions, but I believe the sentencing of Mr. Santos is an abusive overreach by the judicial system.

Commuting his sentence would acknowledge the severity of his actions and simultaneously provide a path forward in allowing him to make amends for his crimes and strive to better serve the people in his community.

I respectfully request you to urge the President to commute the sentence of Mr. George Santos.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.”

According to the Advocate, Trump can pardon Santos, but has not been asked about it.

The Advocate reported:

“He lied like hell, and I didn’t know him,” Trump told Newsmax host Rob Finnerty during an interview at the White House. “But he was 100 percent for Trump. I might’ve met him. Maybe, maybe not, but he was a congressman and his vote was solid.”

[…]

In the Newsmax interview, Trump seemed to question the severity of Santos’s sentence. “It sounds like a lot,” he said. “Is it seven years he just went away? It’s a long time.”

Trump went on to say that while he hadn’t been approached about pardoning Santos, the door remained open. “Nobody’s talked to me about it,” he said. “They really haven’t talked to me about [Santos]. They have talked to me about Sean [Combs], but they haven’t talked to me about [George]. But again, with him, I have the right to do it. Nobody’s asked me, but it’s interesting.”

In April, U.S. District Judge Joanna Seybert sentenced Santos to 87 months in federal prison for wire fraud and aggravated identity theft after a guilty plea in August 2024.

Those charges stemmed from fabricating donor names, laundering campaign funds, misusing donor money, and claiming unemployment while campaigning.

Santos took to social media earlier this year to criticize the ruling and pleaded with President Trump for leniency.

He wrote:

This is the hardest statement I have ever written. I write this humbled, chastened, and fully accountable for choices that shattered the faith so many placed in me.

I betrayed the confidence entrusted to me by many. For that, I offer my deepest apology.

When I pled guilty, I did so without reservation. I said then, and I repeat now, that my conduct betrayed my supporters and diminished the institution I was privileged to serve. Those words have weighed on me every day since.

I cannot rewrite the past, but I can control the road ahead. I asked the Court for a sentence that balances accountability with the chance to prove through sustained, measurable action that I can still contribute positively to the community I wronged.

I believe that 7 years is an over the top politically influenced sentence and I implore that President Trump gives me a chance to prove I’m more than the mistakes I’ve made.

Before the sentencing, Santos had slammed federal prosecutors for going easy on violent criminals while trying to make an example out of him.

“I will however remind everyone that they want me to go to prison for 87 months while they let sex traffickers walk freely, they give drug lords slaps on the wrist and most importantly refuse to prosecute the cabal of pedophiles running around in every power structure in the world including the US Government,” he wrote on X.

The post Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene Calls on Trump to Commute George Santos’ Excessive 7-Year-Sentence: ‘Some Members of Congress Who’ve Done Far Worse Still Walk Free’ appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Continue Reading

Trending