## The Case: M.C. and J.C. v. Indiana Department of Child Services
Mary and Jeremy Cox, devout Catholics, found themselves at odds with Indiana officials when their son expressed a desire to identify as the opposite sex. In 2019, their son informed them that he identified as a girl. However, due to their religious beliefs that God created human beings with an immutable sex—male or female—, the Coxes could not bring themselves to refer to him using pronouns and a name inconsistent with his biology.
Investigated by Indiana Officials
In 2021, Indiana officials began investigating the Coxes after receiving reports that they were not using their child's preferred gender identity. Despite unsubstantiated claims of abuse, the state removed the teen from their custody and placed him in a "gender-affirming" home. The Coxes believed that their son was struggling with underlying mental health conditions, including an eating disorder, so they sought therapeutic care for both issues.
State Courts' Decision
State courts allowed Indiana to keep the child away from his parents' home because of their disagreement with his gender identity—a disagreement rooted in their religious beliefs. The court restricted visitation time between the Coxes and their child, barring them from discussing their religious views on human sexuality and gender identity.
The Legal Battle
Becket, a legal organization representing the Coxes, argues that no parent should endure what Mary and Jeremy have faced. Lori Windham, vice president and senior counsel at Becket, emphasizes that "keeping a child away from loving parents because of their religious beliefs—even when the state admits there was no abuse or neglect—is wrong and it’s against the law." Windham hopes that the Supreme Court will take up this case to protect other parents from similar situations.
Conclusion
The case of M.C. and J.C. v. Indiana is a case every parent has to keep an eye on. It deals with parental rights and the overreach of the state. It was at one time when kids had to obey their parents and follow their rules until their legal emancipation, usually around 18 years of age. Logically and biologically speaking, a child never ceases to be the child of parents. Parents conceived them and they have their genetic makeup. No state, no religion, no organization or institution can undue this or magically pretend it does not exist at a set age. Nevertheless, we see the latter take hold where the state feels it can infringe on the rights of parents. Granted, the state can and should intervene in cases where abuse is taking hold and the child does not know any better and cannot seek help or escape from the situation.
However, this story is different. A male child was conceived and was born. He is still a minor and is not being abused in any fashion. The only "crime" here is two Catholic parents raising their male son in that manner just like it has been done since Adam and Eve. They do not use pronouns other than the ones that semantically and logically apply to a male person. It is absurd that for simply using proper English and proper application of language their child was taken from them and they are being labeled as abusive parents. It is like we are in the Twilight Zone where illogical scenarios take hold defying explanation.
Many of them know how incompetent ACS or Child Services is. They love to remove children for no reason and love to prolong cases by fabricating claims of abuse which eventually get dismissed in court for lack of evidence. Minorities are disproportionately targeted by this institution in every state. Now Catholics are being targeted. T
his is about imposing anti-Catholic rhetoric on Catholic families. These parents are simply doing their jobs as parents raising their son in the manner they feel fit. No one has a say in this. Hopefully, the Supreme Court of the United States will right this huge error on the part of Indiana. If not, then anything goes. There will be no reason to have children. Parents cannot parent. They will just become baby factories for the state.
What do you think? Post your comment below on Disqus. Be sure to follow the rules so your comment can go through.
Source:
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for reading and for your comment. All comments are subject to approval. They must be free of vulgarity, ad hominem and must be relevant to the blog posting subject matter.