By Judi McLeod ——Bio and Archives--June 12, 2021
Cover Story | CFP Comments | Reader Friendly | Subscribe | Email Us
Now that he’s relegated his own mother to “Birthing People” Status— it’s hard to believe that ole’ Joe when he was first learning to yammer away from his baby crib—like everyone else cried out “Mama!” whenever he woke up hungry or needed a diaper change.
All infants cry out for ‘Mama’, the age-old umbilical cord of their first language.
That Democrat politicians would move to replace “Mama” with “Birthing People” shows how demented and out of touch they really are.“The Biden administration appears to have adopted the term “birthing people” from far-left activists who preach that references to biological sex are not “inclusive” of all “LGBTQ” people.” (Catholic Vote)Just like the rest of us, all “LGBTQ” people” came into the world as babies and cried “Mama!”—not “Birthing People”—when crying out from their cribs to their now cancel-cultured Mothers. Biden and the Democrats unrelentingly profess to be defenders of Women, a Big Lie that keeps them truckin’:
“Women’s advocates object to the strange verbiage, which they say “erases” and otherwise denigrates women and the unique role of mothers. (Catholic Vote) “100% of birthing people are, and have always been, women,” tweeted author Abigail Shrier. “By not saying ‘women’ you are making your feelings about us pretty plain.”
“Biden’s budget would literally erase the word ‘mother’ and replace it with the woke and watered-down term ‘birthing people’ in relation to maternal health,” tweeted Jessica Anderson of Heritage Action. “Why does Biden want to cancel mothers?” (Catholic Vote)The answer to that one is really quite simple. He wants to cancel Truth, everything decent, and everything inherently American!
“Acting Office of Management and Budget director Shalanda Young explained the use of the term “birthing people” on Wednesday. “There are certain people who do not have gender identities that apply to female or male,” she said. “So we think our language needs to be more inclusive in how we deal with complex issues.” (Catholic Vote)Dealing with complex issues, by complicating our language and renaming everything in God’s little green acres?
“Biden’s budget is, by all accounts, the first federal document to include the controversial term,” the Washington Free Beacon reported.(Catholic Vote) “As Journalist Cathy Young pointed out this week, the word seems to have been shoehorned into the text of the Biden budget, further indicating that it was intended as an ideological gesture for the benefit of the far-Left. “This from the Biden budget is so weird,” Young wrote. “‘Maternal’ throughout, ‘women of color,’ but ‘birthing people’ in a place where the phrase is totally unnecessary … Clearly someone decided a nod to gender-neutral language re: birthing was needed.”
Support Canada Free Press
“Republican Senator James Lankford of Oklahoma asked Becerra about the decision to include the term in his budget work instead of “mother.”Lankford asked, “…can you help me get a good definition of ‘birthing people?’”
“Becerra seemed to struggle to come up with an answer, instead using the term in the definition when he answered, “Well, I’ll check on the language there, but I think if we’re talking about those who give birth, I think we’re talking about — uh — I don’t know how else to explain it to you other than —” (Daily Wire) “Lankford said he was a little taken aback when he saw it and wanted to know if it was a direction in which Becerra was going, and if there are regulatory changes happening related to the decision. “Becerra said he would need to look at the language that was used in the budget, adding, “…I think it simply reflects the work that’s being done.”
“Lankford acknowledged, “The language is important always. We don’t want to offend in our language. I get that, but would you at least admit calling a ‘mom’ a ‘birthing person’ could be offensive to some moms? … Can you at least admit that term itself could be offensive to some moms?” (Daily Wire) “Becerra again said that he would go back and look at the terminology that was used, but said, “we’re trying to be precise in the language that’s used.” "Lankford provided a mic-drop moment, saying, “‘Mom’s a pretty good word. That’s worked for a while, and I think that’s pretty precise, as well.” “The Biden administration has begun using the term “birthing people” in an apparent attempt to provide inclusivity to those who do not identify as “women,” but still give birth, further blurring the lines of distinction between the sexes. As Lankford alluded to, however, demeaning women to the act of giving birth could be offensive to mothers who see their role as much broader than an act of biology. “In a congressional hearing on Wednesday, Deputy Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Shalanda Young stood by the use of the term in the budget proposal when she was asked about it. “As reported by Yahoo News, Republican Representative Jason Smith of Missouri pressed Young on the topic.
“The budget requests $26 million to reduce maternal mortality and eliminate race-based disparities in outcomes among ‘birthing people.’” Smith said. (Daily Wire) “This is a shift from recent budgets that referred to maternal health issues as women’s issues. I’ve never heard the term before, can you explain what it means?” “There are certain people who do not have gender identities that apply to female and male, so we think our language needs to be more inclusive on how we deal with complex issues,” Young responded. “…So is the administration’s official policy to replace the term ‘woman’ with ‘birthing people’?” Smith asked. “Young replied, “I think our official policy is to make sure that when people get service from their government that they feel included, and we’re trying to use inclusive language.”Meanwhile, if any word needs radical and swift changing, it’s Joe Biden’s $6 trillion budget which should be changed to “RIPOFF”.
View Comments