Toxic Empathy is a Thing

 

G. K. Chesterton anticipated the problem of “toxic empathy” more than 100 years ago, explaining both its origin and its destructive potential: pic.twitter.com/dbSwzslReh

— Doug Ponder (@dougponder) March 3, 2026

Revisting the transgender books on our library shelves

 By Gretchen Garrity

🚨 BREAKING: The Supreme Court just handed a historic victory to parents over California's secret gender transition policies today, ruling 6-2 in our case Mirabelli v. Bonta.

DECISION AND REACTIONS: https://t.co/Yu41PvYANU

California required schools to secretly facilitate… pic.twitter.com/e6MlloErVI

— Thomas More Society (@ThomasMoreSoc) March 2, 2026

From the article referenced:

"In a historic and groundbreaking ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court today granted the Thomas More Society’s emergency application in Mirabelli v. Bonta, holding that secret gender transition policies in schools violate the religious liberty and due process rights of parents. The ruling restores the class action injunction that Thomas More Society had secured against the State of California for parents across the state who object to the state’s directives requiring schools to conceal children’s gender transitions from their own parents, facilitate those transitions without parental knowledge or consent, and compel teachers to actively deceive families.

The landmark 6-3 decision is the most significant parental rights ruling in a generation. The Court found that California’s secret transition regime likely violates parents’ rights under both the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, holding that the state “cut out the primary protectors of children’s best interests: their parents.”

Below are some of the books STILL ACCESSIBLE TO CHILDREN IN OUR LIBRARY. Why are they not relocated? At the behest of Christian County taxpayers, our county commissioners appointed board members whose focus was protecting children and making sexually explicit and age-inappropriate books accessible only to the adults in their lives.

Why, after months of discussion and a new executive director, is there not a collection policy for children and teens? Why would a policy need to be implemented on an "incremental" basis? What possible reason could there be to delay providing a policy that would help the library make informed decisions on books for our children? Something is rotten in the state of Denmark, to quote Shakespeare's Hamlet.

• Beyond Magenta in the Sparta teen section (ages 12-17)
  
• Some assembly required : the not-so-secret life of a transgender teen in the Sparta teen section (ages 12-17)
• Born Ready: the true story of a boy named Penelope in the Clever children's section (ages 4-8)
  
• It's perfectly normal : changing bodies, growing up, sex, gender, and sexual health in the Nixa teen section (ages 12-17)
  
• Identity : a story of transitioning in the Ozark teen section (ages 12-17)
• I'm Not a Girl, a board book in the Sparta children's section (3-6 years)
• Trans Teen Survival Guide, in the Ozark teen section (ages 12-17)
• When Aidan Became a Brother, a picture book in the Ozark children's section (ages 4-8 years)
• This Book is Gay in the Ozark teen section (ages 12-17)
• I Am Jazz in both the Clever and Ozark children's sections (Under 12)
  
• Jack Not Jackie (location is hidden at this link)
• Sex Plus in the Nixa teen section (ages 12-17)
  

Dystopian Truth

From: Hollywood Reporter

 When you are faced with the reality of what is happening in our state and nation, it is intolerable to be a pro-life incrementalist. Voting for the 2026 Amendment 3 is not the solution. Click through to read the whole tweet. Soylent Green level horror:

People aren't generally aware of this. Some 80 percent of abortions are done at home... with a pill. The unborn child is expelled into the toilet and flushed, as per healthcare professional recommendation.

That baby is then in the waste water, which is processed at water… https://t.co/6I55WjazCU

— Andrew Zywiec, M.D. (@AndrewZywiecMD) February 28, 2026

SJR72 (Senate Joint Resolution) will be heard in our legislature on Monday at 1p.m., Senate Hearing Room 1.  Witness forms can be filled out and submitted here:

https://www.libertytools.org/LibertyTools/witness/witness2.php?template=139

SJR 72 is a constitutional amendment that should be on our ballot in November. There is no reason why it cannot go forth with the execrable Amendment 3 so voters can vote on both. SJR72 states in part:

"That the term "person" under this constitution includes every human being with a unique DNA code regardless of age, including every in utero human child at every stage of biological development from the moment of conception until birth."

Incrementalists are Inconsistent

 

It’s time for those that consider themselves to be “pro-life” to more deeply consider the words that we use when describing our position. The words that we choose matter. Otherwise, we might find that our position is more arbitrary than principled.https://t.co/w3AnZft7a8

— Gary Humble (@garyhumble) February 27, 2026

This is a highly worthwhile essay. Very short, but it addresses the inconsistencies that "pro-life" advocates have accepted into their value system over the decades. This is another argument against incrementalism. Incrementalists are consistently worn down over time and begin to compromise.

Republicans in both the Christian County Missouri Republican Assembly (MRA) and the Christian County Republican Central Committee (CCRCC), as well as organizations like Missouri Right to Life and Freedom Principle Missouri, have all compromised on a consistent value system that would uphold the equal protection bills in our legislature. They are lukewarm.

Our elected representatives have been influenced to do the same. No one has the right to murder a human being. No one. The pro-life movement is morally atomized. In order to succeed at saving babies, they must do the work of coming together with a morally cohesive platform and end the infighting.

The abolitionist movement is not going away. It is growing. It is morally consistent. It is hated because the world hates truth. Pro-life individuals and groups must learn to love the truth again. The lives of countless children are at stake.

Abortion is murder. Women who abort their children have committed murder. Doctors who perform abortions are murderers.

Our legislature must pass personhood and equal protection legislation.

Sen. Moon's Personhood Bill to be Heard...

 

📷 ACT4MO ACTION ALERT — SJR 72 Hearing Monday 📷
Sen. Mike Moon’s SJR 72 will be heard Monday, March 2 @ 1:00 PM in SCR 2 (1st floor).
What is this SJR 72? A constitutional amendment to recognize personhood from conception and apply equal protection to unborn children—so…

— Act for Missouri (@ActforMissouri) February 27, 2026

Get that home library started!

 

Umberto Eco, who owned 50,000 books, had this to say about home libraries:

“It is foolish to think that you have to read all the books you buy, as it is foolish to criticize those who buy more books than they will ever be able to read. It would be like saying that you should use… pic.twitter.com/uU0M5gAaGu

— Reads with Ravi (@readswithravi) February 25, 2026

I wonder how libraries could help...

 

JUST IN - Rapid declines in childhood literacy rates across the U.S. are prompting Nationwide Children’s Hospital to begin screening for literacy skills. Nationally, just over 30% of fourth graders are considered proficient in reading, meaning about 70% are incompetent — AP pic.twitter.com/f7cqdFcVJQ

— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) February 25, 2026

Library Derangement Syndrome

How menopausal do you have to be to post something like this--over a discussion of taxpayer funding for services? A little background on the play referenced in the screenshot.

For the Taxpayer

 

Last year, about $24,000 of taxpayer funding for the library provided free mobile hot spots to library patrons. The program was instituted in the library in June 2019. In 2020 the Library added 21 mobile hot spots from a program administered by the state. That funding has since ended. The St. Louis Public Library details how they are phasing out the hot spots due to loss of funding. 

At one point, the Christian County Library had 45 mobile hot spots, but seem to have just under 40 devices now.

At the Feb. 24, 2026 meeting, mobile hot spots were discussed. A great deal of information was shared regarding the usage and cost of these hot spots, both pro and con. The video of the meeting, when it comes out, should be of interest to citizens. I will post it, along with other information. In the meantime, I am requesting more information, as noted below.

Custodian of Records
Christian County Library
Via email: sunshine@christiancountylibrary.org

February 25, 2026

This is a request for records under the Missouri Sunshine Law, Chapter 610, Revised Statutes of Missouri. I request that you make available to me records pertaining to the following information regarding the library's mobile hot spots and related services:

1. Without exposing any personally identifiable information (PII), please provide the number of unique users who have checked out mobile hot spots in the last four months (from October 1, 2025, to February 1, 2026).
   

2. Of the total number of Verizon billable line items, please provide the breakdown of how many are cell phones and how many are mobile hot spots. Please provide copies of the Nov. 2025, Dec. 2025, Jan. 2026, and Feb. 2026 Verizon invoices, restricted to "Overview of Lines" pages 1-5, that detail this information.

3. Regarding the status of the seven mobile hot spots mentioned at the Feb. 24, 2026 Board meeting, please provide an explanation for why the Library District pays for mobile hot spots that are not being utilized and have zero data usage. 

4. Whether any of the mobile hot spots are issued to staff members for work-from-home: please provide any policies, assignment records, or memos that address this.

5. Whether the library changes passwords on mobile hot spots each time they are checked out: please provide any policies that describe the checkout process for these devices as related to passwords.

6. Whether an internet filter is installed on the mobile hot spots: please provide any policies related to content filtering on these devices.

If any portion of the requested records is closed under the Sunshine Law, please provide the open portions and cite the specific statutory exemption for any redactions or withholdings.

Please provide these records in electronic format via email. I would like to inspect the records if electronic copies are not feasible. Please inform me in advance if the cost of fulfilling this request exceeds $25. If the cost will be higher, please provide a detailed estimate before proceeding.

If you deny any part of this request, please provide a written explanation for the denial, including a reference to the specific statutory exemption(s) authorizing the withholding of the record and a brief explanation of how the exemption applies to the record withheld.

Thank you for your assistance. I look forward to your response within three business days, as required by law.

Thank you kindly.

The People of Omelas

From: Mr. Biggs

By Gretchen Garrity

"They all know it is there, all the people of Omelas. Some of them have come to see it, others are content merely to know it is there. They all know that it has to be there. Some of them understand why, and some do not, but they all understand that their happiness, the beauty of their city, the tenderness of their friendships, the health of their children, the wisdom of their scholars, the skill of their makers, even the abundance of their harvest and the kindly weathers of their skies, depend wholly on this child's abominable misery." -- The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas

In a recent article (HERE) I wrote that Missouri's parental consent law for procuring abortions for minors requires at least one parent sign off on the procedure. That statute was added in 2019 and you can read it HERE.

However, according to Kate Sickles, a spokesperson for Freedom Principle Missouri (FPM), the Amendment 3 that passed in 2024 (see HERE) is said to strip parental consent rights from the law. The full text of the 2024 amendment is here:

Be it resolved by the people of the state of Missouri that the Constitution be amended:

Section A. Article I of the Constitution is revised by adopting one new Section to be known as Article I, Section 36 to read as follows:

1. This Section shall be known as "The Right to Reproductive Freedom Initiative."
2. The Government shall not deny or infringe upon a person's fundamental right to reproductive freedom. which is the right to make and carry out decisions about all matters relating to reproductive health care: including but not limited to prenatal care. childbirth. postpartum care. birth control. abortion care. miscarriage care. and respectful birthing conditions.
3. The right to reproductive freedom shall not be denied. interfered with. delayed. or otherwise restricted unless the Government demonstrates that such action is justified by a compelling governmental interest achieved by the least restrictive means. Any denial. interference. delay. or restriction of the right to reproductive freedom shall be presumed invalid. For purposes of this Section, a governmental interest is compelling only if it is for the limited purpose and has the limited effect of improving or maintaining the health of a person seeking care. is consistent with widely accepted clinical standards of practice and evidence-based medicine. and does not infringe on that person's autonomous decision-making.
4. Notwithstanding subsection 3 of this Section, the general assembly may enact laws that regulate the provision of abortion after Fetal Viability provided that under no circumstance shall the Government deny. interfere with. delay. or otherwise restrict an abortion that in the good faith judgment of a treating health care professional is needed to protect the life or physical or mental health of the pregnant person.
5. No person shall be penalized. prosecuted. or otherwise subjected to adverse action based on their actual. potential. perceived. or alleged pregnancy outcomes. including but not limited to miscarriage. stillbirth. or abortion. Nor shall any person assisting a person in exercising their right to reproductive freedom with that person's consent be penalized. prosecuted. or otherwise subjected to adverse action for doing so.
6. The Government shall not discriminate against persons providing or obtaining reproductive health care or assisting another person in doing so.
7. If any provision of this Section or the application thereof to anyone or to any circumstance is held invalid. the remainder of those provisions and the application of such provisions to others or other circumstances shall not be affected thereby.
8. For purposes of this Section, the following terms mean:

(I) "Fetal Viability" - the point in pregnancy when. in the good faith judgment of a treating health care professional and based on the particular facts of the case. there is a significant likelihood of the fetus's sustained survival outside the uterus without the application of extraordinary medical measures.

(2) "Government" -

a. the state of Missouri or

b. any municipality, city, town, village, township, district, authority, public subdivision or public corporation having the power to tax or regulate, or any portion of two or more such entities within the state of Missouri.

At a meeting on Feb. 19 in Nixa, Kate Sickles asserted that the current Missouri Constitution, Art. 1, Sec. 36, has taken away parental right of consent to a minor's procurement of an abortion. She specifically mentioned the use of the word "person" in the amendment as justification for that viewpoint. GOP groups like Freedom Principle Missouri aver that the language of Article I, Section 36 allows for minors to obtain abortions without parental consent. In essence, they are interpreting Art. 1, Sec. 36 to state that point. 

"PERSON" NOT LEGALLY DEFINED

Nowhere in the amendment language is "person" legally defined.

While the Missouri Constitution does take precedence over any conflicting state statute, the current abortion law as stated does not specifically define a person in such a way that it conflicts with state law protecting parental consent rights.

In fact, Missouri's constitution does not clearly define "person." In state statute, there are many legal definitions of the word defined for the specific purposes of various laws. For instance,  in Missouri's Revisor 1.020, "person" "may extend and be applied to bodies politic and corporate, and to partnerships and other unincorporated associations..."

And in Missouri's Revisor 527.130:  "Person" defined. — The word "person", wherever used in sections 527.010 to 527.130, shall be construed to mean any person, including a minor represented by next friend or guardian ad litem and any other person under disability lawfully represented, partnership, joint-stock company, corporation, unincorporated association or society or municipal or other corporation of any character whatsoever."

Go HERE and scroll down to the definitions of "person" in our state statutes. Click on any of them for the legal definitions used in each particular statute. The individuals who wrote and approved the wording of 2024's Amendment 3 did not define "person" for the purposes of the amendment.

Interesting.

Why then does Kate Sickles--who spoke at a meeting in Nixa last week--assume that parental consent rights have been abrogated and that minors under the age of 18 can obtain a legal abortion without them? And why did the authors of the new Amendment 3 add in additional wording "...ensure parental consent for minors' abortions...?" In my opinion, they were gilding the lily, so to speak, as a way to convince Christian voters to vote for abortion as delineated in the new amendment.

There is nothing in the 2024 constitutional amendment that explicitly abrogates parental consent rights over minors. It is a convenient excuse to exploit advocating for the new Amendment 3--which codifies the murder of certain preborn persons and is being sold to Christian voters as "good." The new amendment would constitutionally codify parental rights over abortion for minors, however, it does not ensure parental rights over minors for any other legal issue that may arise.

If equal protection rights and personhood bills were passed, none of this endless scrabbling for a bit of turf would be an issue.

Incrementalism, which is pushed by many in the GOP establishment and pro-life movement, has failed as a workable strategy. Incrementalism is a slippery slope, which over decades has lowered the ethical and moral standards of Christian voters. We are now to the point where our local political leaders and elected representatives feel it is moral to vote to kill some so that others may live. In essence, "Let us do evil that good may come."

But there are a few champions. Sen. Mike Moon delineates what would work in this press conference:

Wednesday was Abolish Abortion Missouri Org Day at the State Capitol. Here is the press conference held that day. This is a must-watch video! Please take a few minutes to call Senator Justin Brown (573-751-5713) and ask him to finally give MO State Senator Mike Moon SJR 72 a…

— Act for Missouri (@ActforMissouri) February 20, 2026

 The short testimony of Rebecca Kiessling who was conceived in rape, is particularly touching. That so-called Christian Republicans are asking voters to approve the murder of innocent children conceived by rape or incest, is sickeningly similar to the philosophy expressed in author Ursula K. LeGuin's short story "The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas." 

From: Ursulakleguin.com

By attempting to vote in a constitutional amendment in Missouri that allows for some children to be aborted in order that others may live, we will be doomed to yet another generation of murdered babies. The citizens of Ursala K. LeGuin's short story justified committing evil "for the greater good." This is not a Christian precept.

We are assured incrementalism via Amendment 3 is the only way. But codifying the sacrifice of some babies so others may live is satanic. Sickles had to admit that chemical abortions will continue even if Amendment 3 passes. She also had to admit that taxpayers will continue to pay for abortions. And, she conceded there is no provision in the amendment to determine whether a woman was actually assaulted who claims rape in order to procure an abortion.

PARENTAL CONSENT CHALLENGED

In October 2025, a lawsuit that challenged Missouri's parental consent law for minor abortions was thrown out of court. The subhead of an article about it actually states, "The Jackson County judge didn’t draw any conclusions about whether the current parental consent law is unconstitutional under the reproductive rights amendment."  

The article further states, "[Judge] Castle didn’t draw any conclusions in her Tuesday decision about whether the reproductive rights amendment approved by voters last year renders either law unconstitutional. Missouri’s parental consent law requires a minor attempting to access abortion receive at least one parent’s consent. The other parent must also be notified. If that’s not possible, they can also ask a judge to bypass the requirement. 'Today’s victory ensures that Missouri’s parental consent laws will continue to safeguard young girls, hold abortion providers accountable and uphold the values of Missouri families for generations to come,' Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway said in a statement Wednesday."

It would take the courts striking down Missouri Revisor 188.028 thereby affirming parental consent laws have been struck down by the 2024 Amendment 3 in order for Sickles to be correct in her view. If Sickles was willing to deceive voters about this one aspect of Amendment 3, what else in her presentation was incorrect?

NOT ALL WHO CALL THEMSELVES PRO-LIFE ARE PRO-LIFE

Not all "pro-life" organizations are truly pro-life. Some have been infiltrated by political interests far different than those who focus on opposing abortion. While Christians focus their energy on ending abortion, their attention is diverted from other issues like taxes, schools, free elections and data centers. It is to the benefit of lobbyists to keep abortion as a perennial issue.

Certain interests at the top of the political food chain are united regardless of party, and the desire to control those on either side of the abortion issue is a powerful strategy that has worked for decades. 

Now, however, it is dividing those in the same party.

For evidence that citizens are being manipulated HERE is an article from a few days ago that revives the "fight the good fight" mantra against abortion yet one more time. Rep. Brian Seitz is quoted and it's really a perfect example of how the top-tier political interests have reset the issue back to square one:

“'This type of legislation keeps (abortion) on the front burner, that people are aware in Missouri that we, particularly in the Republican Party, are continuing to fight for life regardless of the outcome of the new Amendment 3,' said State Rep. Brian Seitz, a Branson Republican, referencing the November vote on abortion. 'We will continue to advance protections for the mother and for the infant in the womb. We’re not done. This is not the end.'”

And here is an article that details the issues that have been spawned by the 2024 amendment. One can imagine that the new Amendment 3 would also be a boon for lawyers and pro-life and pro-abortion organizations. From the article: "Dozens of restrictions — targeted regulation of abortion providers, or TRAP, laws — are being challenged as unconstitutional under Missouri’s voter-approved reproductive rights amendment. The outcome of this case will determine the future of abortion access in Missouri. In the months ahead, Jackson County Judge Jerri Zhang will decide which restrictions survive— and which vanish."

PERSONHOOD AND EQUAL PROTECTION

By passing personhood and equal protection laws most of these issues would end. Missouri's GOP super majority could have passed these bills easily the last few years. They could easily pass them this year. They will not. 

Why not? Because many of our Republican legislators are owned by those who know that abortion is a lucrative business for diverse interests. Business is good for abortion doctors, clinics, Big Pharma, lawyers, and activists when it remains legal, even if there are some restrictions.  Restrictions just give more business to the lawyers and activists.

And your Republican legislators will willfully believe what they are fed and then regurgitate it to you--that polls tell them a personhood bill will fail. Oh, they promise that in the future a personhood bill will pass (magically) but not now. Now, incrementalism is needed. The ritual sacrifice of babies must continue until the tea leaves forecast a fortuitous moment.

Trust us, they whisper. We know what we're doing. We've been doing it for 50 years now. 

FIFTY YEARS.

Time to break the spell. Walk away from Omelas and don't vote to murder some babies so others might be saved and one can feel justified. We must pass the personhood and equal protection bills in our legislature.

I hope Christians who are considering voting for Amendment 3 understand the moral stakes. If you voted NO on the 2024 Amendment 3 you are not culpable for the abortions that are currently being performed in Missouri. If you vote YES on the new Amendment 3, you have taken the side of legalizing abortion. You will, in essence, have voted YES to legally murder unborn persons.

A YES vote on A3 kicks the can down the road of incrementalism--a road the pro-life movement has been traveling for over fifty years now. In the following video you will hear why equal protection is important and why incremental regulation is a failed strategy: