Transgender “rights” are becoming a more and more talked about topic in the world, and not just Western civilization. But where should the line be drawn?

What exactly is a “transgender right”? Does a man have a “right” to put on a dress and prance around like woman? Does a man have the “right” to destroy their own genitalia to become more “like a woman”?

My opinion is that they have the freedom to do those things to themselves because no one else should have authority to tell them what to do with their body. Is it a good idea? Absolutely not!

But people are blurring the line of what a right actually is. Surely, a recent incident in Australia has gone too far and justice was not served.

A transgender “woman” (biological man) was just given his freedom back and escapes almost all punishment for one of the most terrible crimes imaginable: possessing photos of child sex abuse.

The reason why he was able to get the conviction overturned was that he was, “struggling with issues concerning his transgender identity.”

According to Pluralist,

“There were a total of 15 images depicting young boys between the age of five years and 16 years posing naked, performing oral sex or engaging in anal intercourse, either with other young people or adults,” the court said.

Last December, Bunton pleaded guilty in the District Court of Burbane to possession of child exploitation material.

During sentencing, Justice Brian Devereaux pointed out that Bunton had told a psychologist that she only got involved with child porn “out of curiosity and at a time when she was struggling with issues concerning her transgender identity and sexual identity.” She claimed to have stopped viewing the material at age 17.

The forensic psychologist, Dr. Gavan Palk, seemed convinced in his report to the court.

“She does not present as a person who is a risk to children. Her sexual offences appear situational and in the context of low self-esteem and lack of confidence due to teenage sexual adjustment issues,” he said. ‘There was no evidence of entrenched paedophilic tendencies.”

So if someone is struggling with something, especially something that doesn’t even exist, that person can have criminal convictions overturned? That is nonsense!