This is very disturbing.

It turns out that Minnesota isn’t the only state where the Democrats are determined to normalize pedophilia. Connecticut, too, is taking steps to redefine its Human Rights laws to eliminate restrictions on the definition of “sexual orientation” to include paraphilias that are so offensive that legislators specifically banned their consideration for inclusion in protected classes.

The Family Institute of Connecticut caught the sly changes to the law, which lay the groundwork for including pedophilia as a state-recognized sexual orientation worthy of protection.

As with Minnesota, the changes do not legalize pedophilic acts–it is, thankfully, going to remain illegal for adults to rape children. However, being a “Minor Attracted Person” is no longer sufficient to exclude you from polite society, and may even entitle one to special protections from the state.

CT House passes HB6638 Pedophile (and more) Anti-Discrimination Bill https://t.co/zqX5VO1vEm @megbasham @RealKyleMorris @FoxNews @againstgrmrs

— Family Institute CT (@FICAction) May 16, 2023

The law in question is HB6638. It changes the definition of “sexual orientation.” In current law sexual orientation specifically excludes people whose people whose behavior violates state law, including pedophiles.

Makes sense.

However, what about pedophiles who have violated the law and been released from prison? Or people whose sexual preferences are such that acting upon them would violate the law–pedophiles who have, for instance, sex dolls representing children, and who post photos of scantily clad children on their walls? Those who frequent playgrounds but have not committed crimes or been caught violating the law?

Can I, as a landlord, refuse to rent to them? Or could a daycare provider refuse to hire or even fire somebody who gets off on changing a child’s diapers? What if the person in question goes on vacations to engage in pedophilic activities in placed where it is legal? Not too long ago the Cultural Minister of France did precisely that, even writing about the exquisite nature of his experience, and it presented no barrier to his political power.

Under current law the answer is that you can exclude such people as you like, from employment to housing to…just about anything. If you don’t want to associate with pedophiles, have at it. I kinda like that, and so do the people of Connecticut. Or at least they used to.

Under the changes to the law? Ask a judge, and the answer could easily be “No.” Pedophilia is a protected sexual orientation. You can fire somebody for wearing a MAGA hat, but perhaps not somebody who wears a shirt saying “kids are sexy.”

Untied from the orientations of “heterosexuality, homosexuality or bisexuality” the law will be changed to prevent discrimination of any “identity”.  Identities related to any romantic, emotional or sexual attraction towards a gender.

Even people with sexual attractions like pedophilia and nepiophilia would be protected from discrimination. Protected even though the associated behavior would be criminal per CGS 53a-73a. HB6638 would not legalize those crimes.  But Connecticut citizens and businesses could not deny persons with those professed sexual attractions and identities from working or volunteering in our homes, hospitals, and schools, or otherwise “discriminate” based on those professed attractions. And that is nuts. 

Instead, YOU may be prosecuted for refusing a professed pedophile’s application to be a daycare worker, teacher or bus driver.  YOU may be brought before the Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities (CHRO) for removing a professed nepiophile from working in a baby nursery.

In what universe is such a change in law sane? There is a reason why the prior iteration of the law was written into statute. And the reason is very simple: it is insane to allow people with dangerous or just plain sick sexual attractions to spend time around the objects of their desire. A pedophile who has yet to be convicted of a crime is not a “safe” adult to have around children.

That’s not the position of a growing cohort of psychologists who are arguing that Minor Attracted Persons (MAPs) need to be accepted into society and not vilified as they currently are. This is not a fringe view. You can find articles from credentialed, practicing researchers and therapists who argue that it is damaging or unfair to vilify pedophilia, and that it is a legitimate sexual orientation.

Evil

— Christina Pushaw 🐊 🇺🇸 (@ChristinaPushaw) August 11, 2022

Defenders of the changes to the law argue that they are simply updating the language to more accurately reflect current mores, and that they have no plans to legalize pedophilia, or even define pedophilia in law as a protected class.

Perhaps, but 1) by not excluding pedophilia from protection, this throws the question to courts and bureaucrats to decide what is an is not protected, and the legislature’s guidance is clear: they excluded it before, and decided to remove the exclusion; and 2) as we have seen in the past decade or three, what “nobody is going to legalize” gets legalized within a few years.

What slippery slope have we NOT slid down in recent years? Who expected schools to drag kids to drag shows where men in skimpy clothes collect money from children while trotting around sexually with almost nothing on? 10 years ago teachers would be fired for doing so; today they are celebrated by the White House.

If citizens don’t stand up and shout now, we will soon be treated to love stories between adults and “consenting” children. Children today are not just allowed, but encouraged to sterilize themselves by lawmakers. They argue that 8, 9, and 10-year-olds can consent to medical procedures at such ages. Consenting to sex with adults is no more, and arguably less extreme than that.

If you live in Connecticut you know what to do: call, write, protest, and vote the bastards out.