By Ryan FoleyChristian Post Reporter Tuesday, August 13, 2024

An exchange debating whether a Minnesota law allows the state to take away trans-identified children from parents who refuse to provide them with hormonal or surgical sex interventions is reigniting a conversation about media bias, with one advocacy group accusing ABC News of engaging in “disinformation.” .”

Republican vice presidential candidate Sen. JD Vance of Ohio appeared Sunday on ABC's “This Week” during an interview with ABC News' Jonathan Karl.

The conversation ended with Karl pressing Vance about comments that former president and Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump made at a rally in Montana over the weekend claiming that Democratic vice presidential candidate and Minnesota governor Tim Walz had signed a law “letting the state kidnap children” if their parents didn't provides them with gender transition interventions.

Get Our Latest Free

Subscribe to receive a daily/weekly email with the best stories (plus special offers!) from The Christian Post. Be the first to know.

“What he said wasn't true,” Charles insisted.

Vance pushed back, stating, “Tim Walz supported taking children from their parents if the parents don't agree to gender reassignment.”

After Vance described the legislation as “crazy,” Karl continued to reject the bill's characterization.

“He didn't sign a law allowing the state to kidnap children,” Karl stated.

As Vance asserted, “You shouldn't be able to take people's children away from them.” Carlos declared: “That is not what he offers.” Vance replied, “He suggested that.”

“What I just described to you, I would describe as kidnapping,” Vance stated. “You shouldn't be able to take people's children away from them if you disagree with gender reassignment decisions. Yes, he suggested that, Jon.”

The bill discussed by the two is House file 146which Walz signed into law last year after the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives passed the measure in 68-62 vote and the Democrat-controlled Minnesota Senate approved it in a 34-30 vote. The vote fell mainly along party lines, with Democrats supporting it and Republicans opposing it. One House Democrat joined Republicans in voting against the legislation.

HF 146 states that “A court of that state has temporary emergency jurisdiction if the child is present in that state” and “the child has been unable to obtain gender-affirming health care.”

The bill defines “gender affirming health care” as “medically necessary health care or mental health care that respects the patient's gender identity,” including “interventions to suppress the development of endogenous secondary sexual characteristics” and “interventions to align the patient's appearance or physical body with the patient's gender identity.”

The socially conservative advocacy organization American Principles Project elaborated on the implications of the bill, warning that “an adult bringing a child into the state to receive transgender medication or surgery could petition the court in Minnesota, rather than in the child's home state, for custody of the child and potentially receive custody. . . “

According to the American Principles Project, “The law also prohibits state agencies from cooperating with another state's custody if the order would remove the child from a parent or guardian, allowing him to receive transgender or surgeries. This could, in practice, prevent a child from being reunited with his or her parents if those parents oppose his or her receiving those medications and/or surgeries.”

In a statement, American Principles Project president Terry Schilling cited Karl's claims about HF 146 during his interview with Vance as an example of media bias in favor of Democrats.

“For years, public trust in the legacy media has declined, and it's no secret why. News outlets have become increasingly overt in their advocacy for Democrats, efforts that have included outright lying on behalf of candidates like [Democrat presidential nominee] Kamala Harris and Tim Walz.”

“ABC News' Jonathan Karl this Sunday is just the latest example,” Schilling said. “If the legacy media wants to regain the trust of Americans, they should apologize for their past disinformation like in this episode and instead commit to covering the news in an unbiased manner. Otherwise, all they will accomplish in their continued attempts to gaslight the public will be the complete destruction of his remaining credibility.”

The provision of gender transition procedures and drugs such as puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones for minors has become a contentious issue due to concerns about the long-term effects of such interventions.

The American College of Pediatrics warned that puberty blockers, referred to in HF 146 as “interventions to suppress the development of endogenous secondary sexual characteristics”, can cause “osteoporosis, mood disorders, seizures, cognitive impairment, and, when combined with cross-sex hormones, sterility.”

The ACP lists possible side effects as “increased risk of heart attacks, stroke, diabetes, blood clots and cancers throughout one's lifetime.” The most controversial gender transition procedures offered to children in some cases involve the removal of healthy body parts and/or the creation of artificial body parts that align with a child's declared gender identity.

Chloe Cole, a detransitioner who once identified as a member of the opposite sex but saw her gender dysphoria subside, filed a lawsuit claiming that the double mastectomy she received as a minor left her with suicidal thoughts. She lamented that her experience left her with “deep physical and emotional wounds, severe regrets, and distrust of the medical system.”

Twenty-six statesincluding Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, West Virginia and Wyoming have banned some or all sexual interventions for minors.

Meanwhile, Minnesota took the opposite approach on the matter. HF 146 also prohibits cooperation with investigations by parents who travel to Minnesota from a state where the procedures are prohibited.

States which decreed similar legislation to HF 146 are California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington.