Gender medicine has become one of the most emotionally charged and confusing issues of our time, especially when it involves children. I have watched this debate unfold with growing concern, not because I lack compassion, but because compassion must be anchored in truth. When adults intervene medically in a child’s developing body, we are not talking about feelings or self expression. We are talking about permanent biological consequences that a child cannot fully understand or consent to.
My position is not rooted in politics or fear. It is rooted in biology, responsibility, and Scripture. Even if faith is removed from the conversation entirely, serious questions remain about altering a child’s body while it is still forming. When faith is included, the moral clarity becomes even stronger.
Featured Snippet Takeaway: Protecting children from gender medicine is not hate or denial of care. It is a moral and biological responsibility to safeguard developing bodies from irreversible harm.
We are living in a cultural moment where caution is labeled cruelty and restraint is treated as oppression. That inversion alone should concern every parent and every honest adult. Children are not experiments. They are entrusted to adults who are called to protect them, not affirm every internal feeling at the expense of their future.
Why Gender Medicine and Childhood Do Not Mix
Childhood and adolescence are critical windows of development. Hormones are not cosmetic. They are signaling systems that guide brain development, bone density, fertility, and long-term health. Interrupting those systems does not pause development safely. It redirects it, often permanently.
Puberty is not a disorder. It is a natural process designed to unfold over time. Medical interventions that suppress or override that process are not neutral acts. Even supporters of these treatments admit that long-term data is limited. That fact alone should demand humility and restraint.
You do not permanently alter a developing body without permanent consequences. That principle is not religious. It is biological. We already recognize this reality in every other area of law and medicine. Children cannot consent to sterilization, elective amputations, or experimental procedures simply because they feel distress. Development matters. Maturity matters.
This is why legislation that draws a protective boundary around children is not extreme. It is responsible. Anyone can read exactly what the bill does in the official summary of the Protect Children’s Innocence Act on Congress.gov.
Compassion Versus Affirmation
One of the most misleading arguments in this debate is the claim that opposing these interventions means denying care. That framing is dishonest. Care and compliance are not the same thing.
Children experiencing confusion, anxiety, or distress deserve patience, counseling, and stability. They deserve adults who are willing to walk with them through difficulty, not rush them toward irreversible decisions. True compassion asks what protects a child ten or twenty years from now, not what relieves discomfort today.
Parents say no to children every day for their own good. We do not allow children to drive, drink, or sign contracts because we understand that capacity develops over time. Medical interventions that permanently alter the body belong in that same category of protected decisions.
Culture has confused affirmation with love. When questioning medical harm is treated as hatred, something has gone deeply wrong.
A Biblical View of the Body
When I approach this issue as a Christian, the clarity sharpens. Scripture teaches that the human body is created by God and entrusted to us, not owned by us. We are stewards, not authors, of our design.
The Bible does not present the body as meaningless or malleable according to personal desire. It presents it as purposeful and sacred. The apostle Paul reminds believers of this truth in the biblical teaching that the body belongs to God, a truth that grounds Christian obedience regardless of cultural pressure.
Children are described in Scripture as a trust. Adults will be held accountable for how they protect and guide them. That is why the idea of medicalizing childhood confusion should alarm believers. It contradicts both biological wisdom and biblical stewardship.
If surrendering to God’s design feels countercultural, that is because it is. I have written before about how obedience requires laying down personal desires in What Spiritual Surrender Really Looks Like in Everyday Life, and that principle applies here as well.
The Role of Law and Moral Boundaries
Some argue that government should stay completely out of this conversation. I disagree. The state already intervenes when children are at risk. We accept this principle without hesitation in cases of abuse, neglect, or exploitation.
When adults authorize irreversible medical procedures on minors, the state has a duty to act. Laws exist to draw lines precisely because power can be abused, even with good intentions. Doctors, parents, and institutions carry authority, and authority must be restrained when vulnerable lives are involved.
This is not about punishing children or demonizing struggle. It is about holding adults to account and acknowledging that restraint can be an act of love.
Adults, Autonomy, and Consistency
I know this is where my view becomes controversial, but consistency matters. If these interventions are harmful because they reject biological reality and permanently alter healthy bodies, that moral concern does not magically vanish at adulthood.
From a biblical perspective, autonomy is not the highest good. Truth is. Freedom is not found in redefining ourselves, but in aligning ourselves with God’s design. That tension between truth and cultural pressure is something I addressed directly in The Christian Response to Gender Ideology.
Speaking truth with love is still love. Anything less is sentimentality.
Where I Stand
Protecting children from gender medicine is an act of courage in a culture that has lost its moral bearings. It is grounded in biology, reinforced by common sense, and illuminated by Scripture.
Children deserve time. They deserve patience. They deserve adults willing to say not yet, even when the world demands immediate answers. They deserve protection from decisions that cannot be undone.
History will judge how we handled this moment. I want to be on the side of restraint, responsibility, and truth. I want to be on the side that chose to protect children.
Arch Kennedy
Bold, Unfiltered, and Unafraid
Watch my full commentary below:
Why Children Should Never Be at Drag Shows
Leave a Reply