There was once a time when people understood that the expectation to recite a public formulaic pronouncement—a liturgy—was, in fact, religious expression of belief. People also once understand that teaching a person to accept a set of beliefs uncritically was, in fact, indoctrination. Paired together, people once recognized this for what it was: religious indoctrination.^[1]

I’ve written repeatedly against censorship, so it should come as no surprise that I oppose religious indoctrination, especially when mandated by the State. Indeed, I even encourage my own children to think critically about what they believe: to examine if what I say is true. So when I see attempts to coerce religious indoctrination, by way of legislation or other forms of social coercion, I oppose them.

The United Kingdom does not have a First Amendment. And so it uses the power of the state to coerce religious expression through indoctrination and the silencing of dissent. This is censorship. People should be free to choose for themselves what they believe.

So let’s start by acknowledging that the trans ideology—which should be treated the same way as any other religion—is not only a religious movement, but one established by the State in direct violation of the principle of freedom of speech and the freedom of religious expression.

Let’s also acknowledge that “trans affirmation”—as well as pronoun exchange rituals—is coerced religious expression.

Footnotes

^[1] Society accepts that indoctrination of children (e.g. by parents) vs adults (e.g. by governments) is not morally equivalent. For the purposes of this post, we are only referring to the latter.