Last month, it was revealed that the Democrat-controlled Minnesota legislature was on the verge of changing the legal definition of “sexual orientation” in a way that could potentially lead to the inclusion of pedophilia within the broader scope of “sexual orientation.” Specifically, language directly excluding “sexual attachment to children by an adult” was removed from the state definition of “sexual orientation.”
It is important to clarify that this does not imply the immediate legalization of pedophilia in Minnesota. However, by removing the clause that excludes pedophilia from being classified as a protected sexual orientation, there is a concern that pedophiles could potentially be recognized as a protected group, entitling them to the same legal protections against discrimination that are currently afforded to individuals identifying as gay, lesbian, transgender, and others.
Outrage soon followed, and Minnesota Democrats were forced to put the language explicitly stating that pedophile is not a protected sexual orientation back into the bill’s language. It’s impossible to fathom why it took mass outrage for the Minnesota House of Representatives to put the language back in but even more impossible to understand why the Minnesota Senate struck it again.
On the left is the language Democrats want removed from the MN Human Rights Act.
On the right is the amendment they unanimously supported on the House floor but then removed during conference committee.
It is now a "dangerous lie" and "misinformation" to point this out. pic.twitter.com/pF8zg50OWY
— Alpha News (@AlphaNewsMN) May 12, 2023
The main objective behind the amendment to Minnesota law was to incorporate “gender identity” into the state’s definition of classes protected from discrimination. It hardly seems a coincidence that it was decided to remove the clause explicitly excluding pedophilia as a sexual orientation at the same time “gender identity,” was being added. It’s also not a coincidence that the author of the bill, Rep. Leigh Finke (D-St. Paul) identifies as transgender. Remember how I wrote earlier this year that the transgender movement would be the catalyst for the normalization of pedophilia? How much more proof do you need that I was right?
Yet it’s also not surprising that fact-checkers are trying to tell us that this isn’t happening at all. According to Politifact, claims that the bill removes “anti-pedophile language” are false, and pedophiles won’t become a protected class. Why? Because apparently, it is universally understood that pedophilia isn’t a sexual orientation.
“Textually, then, the phrase ‘sexual orientation’ does not require a disclaimer to rule out non-gender-based aspects of attraction,” David B. Cruz, Newton Professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Southern California Gould School of Law, told Politifact. “With nothing more, this makes it inconceivable that the proposed change to Minnesota law would affect the scope of the protections it affords.”
If that were the case, why did the original version of the bill contain the language “‘Sexual orientation’ does not include a physical or sexual attachment to children by an adult.” Clearly, someone thought it was necessary to point this out. Why was it necessary in the past but no longer necessary now? If it is understood that pedophilia isn’t a sexual orientation, why are left-wing academics trying to normalize it? Can Politifact explain this? It can’t and won’t.
So this means that even reporting on the facts of this case puts us at risk of being censored by Big Tech. We’re not afraid to call out the radical left, but we need your help to survive if we get censored for reporting the truth. By becoming a VIP member of PJ Media today, you are helping us fight the censors who are apparently trying to protect those who would harm the most innocent among us. Click here to defend conservative journalism from Big Tech censorship — and don’t forget to use promo code SAVEAMERICA to receive a 40% discount off your annual membership!
Join the conversation as a VIP Member