When kindergarten isn't kindergarten anymore
A teacher in Oakland, California stood up to the trans mafia...and paid for it.
Oakland, California kindergarten teacher Mirella Ramirez loved her job. She has a passion for teaching, and has a passion for helping young children discover the world around them. But what this 2021 "Teacher of the Year” nominee never dreamed was that she’d be directed by her bosses to open her students’ eyes and minds to the darker aspects of the world around them, things that no five year-old should even know exist, let alone participate in. Part of her job, after all, is to protect her students and their innocence. Imagine the shock and horror that Mirella felt, then, when in September 2022 her boss informed Mirella that she must begin referring to her FIVE YEAR-OLD female student as a male, or face discipline. The student, Mirella was told, was “transitioning” from a female to a male, with the full support of the parents.
Yes, this was California. Yes, this was Oakland. But even for Oakland, this was a bridge too far. Mirella is a devout Catholic who is firm in her belief that there are only two sexes – male and female – and that each person is wonderfully and fearfully made by God. The Bible is clear on this point (see, e.g., Genesis 1:27; Genesis 5:2), and so is the Catholic Church (yes, Cardinal Dolan and Father James Martin, we’re looking at you). Nevertheless, Mirella was told by her “superiors” that she would be in violation of California law if she did not comply with the directive to participate in the child’s gender transition, and begin referring to the student by her “preferred pronouns”.
In defense of their indefensible position, the school administration cited California Education Code Section 220 which reads, in relevant part:
No person shall be subjected to discrimination on the basis of disability, gender, gender identity, gender expression, nationality, race or ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, or any other characteristic that is contained in the definition of hate crimes set forth in Section 422.55 of the Penal Code, including immigration status, in any program or activity conducted by an educational institution that receives, or benefits from, state financial assistance, or enrolls pupils who receive state student financial aid.
Apparently they stopped reading after “gender expression”, because as you can see this section also prohibits discrimination on the basis of religion! The school district also cited its Board Policy AR 5145.3, which provides that,
A student has the right to be addressed by a name and pronoun corresponding to their gender identity that is exclusively and consistently asserted at school. Upon request, a school shall recognize a student’s gender identity that is exclusively and consistently asserted at school. The intentional or persistent refusal to respect a student’s gender identity, as opposed to an inadvertent slip or honest mistake, is a violation of this regulation. For example, intentionally referring to the student by a name or pronoun that does not correspond to the student’s gender identity would violate this regulation.
The administrators in the Oakland Unified School District appear to be very well-versed in policies and regulations related to gender identity, but they are in dire need of some education on First Amendment law and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, both of which prohibit an employer (and, in the case of the First Amendment, any governmental body) from discriminating against a person on the basis of his or her religious beliefs. It is worth noting, as well, that both the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Title VII supersede any law of the State of California, according to principles of Constitutional law and the doctrine of federal preemption. Moreover, by punishing Mirella for refusing to use “preferred pronouns” when referring to the student, the school district was also compelling Mirella’s speech in violation of the First Amendment’s free speech clause.
So when Mirella contacted We The Patriots USA and asked if we could take her case, it was a no-brainer. The Oakland Unified School District has now placed Mirella on an unpaid suspension, as the final step toward termination of her employment. The school district has so clearly violated the U.S Constitution and federal law (not to mention California law against religious discrimination), that victory should be certain. However, as we all know, victory is never certain in this very uncertain world. If the district court and the Ninth Circuit do not rule in Mirella’s favor, we are committed to taking this case to the United States Supreme Court, a court which in recent years has demonstrated a strong desire to protect free speech and religious liberty, with decisions such as 303 Creative LLC et al. v. Elenis et al. in 2023 (ruling that the State of Colorado cannot force a web designer to create wedding websites containing designs and messages with which the designer disagrees, such as gay weddings) and Kennedy v. Bremerton School District in 2022 (ruling in favor of a high school football coach who was fired for praying on the field after games). Given such strong and recent precedent, it is almost unbelievable that the Oakland Unified School District feels that it can get away with compelling teachers to violate their religious beliefs.
But as we all know, almost nothing is unbelievable in this brave new world. Just a decade ago, it would have been unfathomable that teachers would be forced to participate in the gender transitions of kindergartners. We really should not be surprised, though. The Bible foretold the darkness of this age, and offers this stark warning to all who participate in it: “Woe to you that call evil good, and good evil: that put darkness for light, and light for darkness: that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter.” (Isaiah 5:20)
Please stand with us in the light. Please help us defend Mirella and all teachers like her by making a donation to her legal fundraiser here. The importance of this case cannot be overstated. A victory in this case could protect the right of every teacher and school staff member to stay true to his or her faith in the classrooms where we send our children to learn five days a week, and to refuse to participate in the transgender occultism. Parents can (and should) speak out at school board meetings at every possible opportunity, but in the end the schools will continue to inject this radical ideology into our children’s curriculum. With a victory for teachers who oppose it, however, parents will have allies on the inside, who will finally feel safe to refuse to teach it to our children. This is a critically important measure to protect our children, and the future of our nation. Please pray for Mirella and all teachers like her who have refused to bow to the “spirit of this age”.
For more on this case, listen to Steve Deace’s recent interview with Attorney Brian Festa, We The Patriots USA Co-Founder & Vice-President (the interview begins at about the 31-minute mark).
Thank you for highlighting Ms Ramirez's story. I am heartened to know that there is at least one teacher standing up for the kids.
My post on what's happening in BUSD: https://katemcvaugh.substack.com/p/from-female-impersonators-to-child
It is inevitable that there will be contradictory laws when the foundation for true justice is rejected.
California seems to have a strong tendency for contradictory laws. Several years ago, I heard a podcast about a California law that required a certain percentage of board members of a company to be female. They had another law that anyone was a female who claimed they were, no questions asked, whether they were actually “transitioning” or had any intention to “transition.” So, the law that was meant to equalize the presence of women on boards of directors (itself a misguided effort, like demanding that half of all car mechanics be women), could be turned on its head with another law that “recognized” men as women by a simple statement - “I’m identifying as a woman [for the next hour].”
I don’t know if this has been dealt with yet in California, but I have little doubt there are other such contradictions on the books.
Yes, this is what you get when God's standards are rejected.
In the Bible, we find, “A woman does not wear that which pertains to a man, nor does a man put on a woman’s garment, for whoever does this is an abomination to haShem your Elohim.” Devarim/Deuteronomy 22:5
God’s standards are incompatible with anything that promotes, allows, encourages, recognizes, supports, assists, etc. the trans mafia (I hadn’t seen that term before, but I like it, as well as the alphabet mafia).