Menu Home

CBOR-GS: The Gender Standardization Amendment

SECTION 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of gender identity.

SECTION 2. No gender identities besides “male” and “female” shall be recognized or imposed within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

SECTION 3. The Congress and the several States shall have concurrent power to require declaration of gender identity and sex, and to require such declarations be consistent over time in the absence of legal changes supported by medical diagnoses.

SECTION 4. All children born within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction, shall be assigned at birth a gender identity and a sex. No child born within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction, shall be assigned at birth a gender identity inconsistent with its sex unless its sex cannot be reasonably determined to be either male or female according to its external sex characteristics.

SECTION 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce Section 1 of this article by appropriate legislation. The Congress and the several States shall have concurrent power to enforce Sections 2, 3, and 4 of this article by appropriate legislation.

SECTION 6. The Congress shall have power to deny immigration and naturalization to persons who refuse to declare gender identity or sex.

SECTION 7. No governmental entity shall make a law, policy, regulation, or rule which constrains or penalizes the use of words pertaining to gender identity.

COMMENTARY:

I got the idea for this Amendment at the beginning of the debate over transgender use of restrooms. The acrimonious tone on both sides of the debate was shocking to me, indicating that America truly is in the midst of a culture war. Mind you, that bathroom debate arose with merely two genders in mind. What happens when people want more genders than just the traditional, recognizable two? What will the culture war look like then?

In fact, we’re already heading in that direction – particularly in the state of Oregon, but also at the federal level, and now dread portents are coming from one of the most influential states in the nation, California. Some people are choosing – and, more importantly, judges are allowing them – to identify as “non-binary” rather than as “male” or “female”. Part of the reason for this is transgenderism – is a woman with male parts accurately described as “female”, or is a man with female parts accurate described as “male”, or should they be called something else altogether? Part of this, however, is simply an unwillingness on some people’s part to identify with one traditional gender or the other, regardless of their private parts being so well-defined there’s no biological confusion as to what they actually are. This unwillingness in particular is rebellious nonsense, and it must stop. Society can only accommodate so much willful deviance from the norm.

Of course, biological realities are what they are, and there does exist such a biological condition called “intersex” in which a person’s sexual parts fall somewhere on a spectrum between male and female, and it’s foolish to try to deny that reality. But that’s biological reality – what we’ve come to think of as “sex”. Psychological perception – what we’ve come to think of as “gender” – is another matter. Society is not obligated to respect anyone’s particular self-defined gender when accepting such definitions opens the door to all sorts of gender-related craziness that, judging by the restroom debates, Western civilization is neither equipped nor particularly inclined to accommodate. This is supposed to be a world of men and women only – that anything biologically “in the middle” ever occurs is a sign we live in a tragically imperfect world, not an indication of heretofore unknown “complexity” that needs to be extended to the psychological realm, too.

Consequently, this Amendment breaks down what was previously known only as “sex” into “sex” and “gender identity”, and right off the bat it ensures that the voting rights previously guaranteed without regard to “sex” by the 19th Amendment are also guaranteed without regard to “gender identity”, just so there can never be any confusion about that particular matter.

After that come the real “power sections” of the Amendment: Although no restriction is placed on categories of sex (because, like I said, “intersex” is a real biological category, and medical professionals may need to know it), this Amendment restricts a person to a gender identity of “male” or “female” only – no in-betweens, no Baskin Robbins 31 genders like a New York poster once showed. As far as gender identity is concerned, you can be male, or you can be female, but that’s it. And the government will have power to penalize you if you do not declare one way or the other. Moreover, this declaration cannot be changed by personal fiat, but only through a legal process supported by a medical opinion – i.e., you can’t decide to be male in the morning but female in the evening, at least as a matter of law.

A further section prohibits that new, fashionable form of child abuse which is refusing to declare one’s child’s gender for the record at birth, as if the child’s gender is something that should remain unassigned until the child itself decides on a gender later in life. The child absolutely can decide later in life to switch genders – in case it isn’t clear, nothing in this Amendment tries to roll back the clock on whether a person can legally change one’s gender identity – but no child should have to go through life unidentifiable according to gender, so at birth a child’s gender will be assigned corresponding to his/her biological sex insofar as it is possible to make that assignment at a glance (no DNA testing necessary). It is a social injustice to the child to leave the child in “gender limbo”; it is appalling that some parents actually do engage in this abuse.

The last part of the Amendment simply makes it possible for Americans to continue speaking in the same terms they always have as pertains to male and female. It may be that society someday decides on its own to get rid of gender-tailored words, opting instead for gender-neutral pronouns and such, but it won’t be the government forcing that linguistic change on society.

The Cultural Bill Of Rights
–CBOR-7Y: The Seven Years Amendment
–CBOR-RF: The Religious Freedom Amendment
–CBOR-2A: The New Second Amendment
–CBOR-CP: The Capital Punishment Amendment
–CBOR-ED: The Eminent Domain Amendment
–CBOR-17: The Senate Restoration Amendment
–CBOR-SC: The Supreme Court Amendment
–CBOR-CV: The Citizen Voters Amendment
–CBOR-GS: The Gender Standardization Amendment
–CBOR-MS: The Marriage Standardization Amendment
–CBOR-PM: The Protection of Minors Amendment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *