Nathan Berkeley, associate vice president for U.S. strategies at the Religious Freedom Institute (RFI), says religious liberty in this case means the right of healthcare providers with sincere religious objections to say no, they will not give puberty blockers to minors.
In Maryland, only kids who are 15 or younger are required to get parental consent before getting puberty blockers.
"Kids who are 16, 17, or 18, they do not have to receive parental consent first before receiving such treatment," Berkeley explains. "Last year, the same delegate who introduced this bill called the Protect Kids Act tried to fill that loophole with legislation. It failed, and what she has done now coming back this year is to introduce a bill (HB 1399) that prohibits any use of puberty blockers for the purpose of enabling so-called gender transition for any minors 18 and younger."
That state delegate's name is Lauren Arikan (R). Her proposal to prohibit healthcare practitioners from treating minors' "gender nonconformity" is in a committee of jurisdiction and will hopefully move on to the House floor for further consideration.
Berkeley says this paradigm that natural bodies do not matter should concern everyone.
"It's people of faith who tend to raise objections to this," he notes. "Bills like this in the state of Maryland would protect those people. These are religious families and religious healthcare providers who have conscientious objections to enabling a child, in particular, to go down this path of so-called gender transition."
His organization maintains that Americans' religious objections should be respected, especially considering the irreversible harm these interventions pose.
