New Ontario Law Allows Gov’t To Steal Kids From Parents Who Oppose “Gender Identity”
By Rachel Blevins
ActivistPost.com
JUNE 11, 2017
Ontario has just set a startling precedent with the passage of a new law that could lead to the government seizing children from parents who oppose the “Gender Identity” agenda.
Bill 89, the 2017 Children, Youth and Family Services Act, passed by a vote of 63-23 on June 1. The new law will have jurisdiction over child protective services, and adoption and foster care services.
One of the most notable parts of the bill is that when it comes to the state’s process for deciding which home a child should live in, it takes out the consideration of “the religious faith in which the child is being raised,” and replaces it with the child’s “gender identity” or “gender expression.”
Differences include: the current Act includes the child’s cultural background in this list while the new Act includes the child’s cultural and linguistic heritage; the current Act includes the religious faith in which the child is being raised while the new Act includes the child’s race, ancestry, place of origin, color, ethnic origin, citizenship, family diversity, disability, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression.
Jack Fonseca, senior political strategist for Campaign Life Coalition, warned that the new law does not just affect parents who are facing the risk of having their children seized by the state, it also affects parents who are looking to adopt.
“With the passage of Bill 89, we’ve entered an era of totalitarian power by the state, such as never witnessed before in Canada’s history,” Fonseca said. “Make no mistake, Bill 89 is a grave threat to Christians and all people of faith who have children, or who hope to grow their family through adoption.”
Another troubling aspect in the new Ontario law can be found in what the government determines to be the “least disruptive course of action.” With Bill 89, it argues for the use of “prevention services, early intervention services and community support services.”
The least disruptive course of action that is available and is appropriate in a particular case to help a child, including the provision of prevention services, early intervention services and community support services, should be considered.
The Rest…HERE
