From which the title of this post comes. Mark starts with a story from Melbourne about Barry McKenzie or something. Meanwhile, from today’s Cut and Paste in The Australian.

Oh dear. Annette Grossbongardt in Der Spiegel on February 7:

The East German state had a habit of taking children from politically undesirable parents and giving them up for adoption. It is a horrific aspect of the communist regime that has never received the attention it deserves.

Grossbongardt continues:

Parents were required to raise their children to become “active contributors to socialism”. If they didn’t do so sufficiently in the eyes of the state, then, in a worst-case scenario, their parenting rights could be withdrawn. This law, says a legal commentator, “opened the door” to punishing aberrant behaviour displayed by parents … Fleeing the country, or even attempting to, was considered a “seriously negligent breach of duty”, the lawyer says. Parents could also lose their children for “subversive agitation”. Indeed, “essentially anything that was adversarial to the state” was considered a violation, “including saying anything that was critical of the regime or reading the foreign press”. The law also foresaw another political justification for interfering in a parent’s rights: a “non-socialist lifestyle”. That applied to people who were active in the church, to those who did not fulfil the “obligation to work”, or to women who frequently changed partners and had many children.

Meanwhile in Canada: Canadian Court: Father Found Guilty of Family Violence for Calling Daughter a Girl.

The Supreme Court of British Columbia, Canada, has ruled that a 14-year-old girl can, without parental permission, get hormone treatments to change her sex, and it has also ruled that the father is guilty of “family violence” because he called her a girl.

Back in February of this year, the girl’s father was ordered to stop calling her a girl and calling her by her birth name, which he refused to do. To stop that crime, the Supreme Court issued a “protection order” mandating that her father be arrested immediately without a warrant, if calls her a girl privately or publicly or speaks about the case at all.

So the courts in Canada will now force parents to indulge the delusions of minor children who think they’re members of the opposite sex.

Virtually proving that the opposition to the move is correct in its belief that this is craziness, the court also expunged court records of the names of two doctors who were in favor of a gender transition for the girl, one doctor of whom, Dr. Wallace Wong, is catching flak for “diagnosing as much as 20 percent of the children in his local orphanage system with some form of gender dysphoria,” reported The Federalist.

And this, just for emphasis: Father Gagged, Found Guilty Of ‘Family Violence’ For Calling His Trans Daughter A ‘She’.

The court also emphasized that Clark must not allow relevant documents (petitions, affidavits, letters, court orders, etc.) to come into the hands of third parties not “authorized by order of this court,” or with “written consent” from his daughter.

While forbidding Clark to speak to the public about his daughter’s case, [bc supreme Court Justice] Marzari stated that she was not overriding Clark’s “freedom of thought and speech.” “There is no requirement that [Clark] change his views about what is best for [Maxine],” she explained. “It is only how he expresses those views privately to [Maxine] and publicly to third parties that is affected.”

The fact that Clark is now not allowed to express his views publicly to anyone at all was, apparently, understood to be a fairly imposed consequence for his previous court-objected behavior. Had he strictly abstained from referring to his daughter “as a girl or with female pronouns,” he might not have been guilty of family violence and so subject to this order.

While the judge’s view of matters enjoys support on the political left, some feel the ruling is biased and politically motivated. Kari Simpson, president of Canadian pro-family organization Culture Guard, argued that Marzari’s decision severely limits Clark’s freedom of speech. Citing Marzari’s significant and recent history of LGBT and pro-abortion activism before her 2017 appointment to the BC Supreme Court, Simpson argued that she was operating as an “activist judge” more interested in delivering a ruling convenient to her cause than enforcing laws designed to protect families and children.

Unfortunately, the gag order on Clark makes it difficult to report his reaction to this new development in his case. In the meantime, his appeal of the court’s original ruling regarding testosterone injections is set to be heard on May 14.

Freedom of speech in Canada includes the provision that a judge can stop someone from saying what they think in public. A totally moronic age, perhaps, but actually an age of deep evil, which is getting worse! The thing is that everyone knows how insane all this is, but no one is allowed to say it.