Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Trans women in sports is not a fairness issue, it’s a political one

Opinion

Trans women in sports is not a fairness issue, it’s a political one
Getty Images

Swearengin is an author, emotional & spiritual well-being coach, podcaster and content creator through his social media presence as Unconventional Pastor Paul. He talks religion and politics at times joined by his wife Ashley, a former elected official and community leader. Find him at Pastor-Paul.com.

The issue of trans women competing in women’s athletics has stirred up intense conversation - and 556 pieces of proposed legislation across forty-nine American states. But is this truly a fairness issue, as some can logically argue? Or is it political culture rhetoric crushing a chance to "love our neighbors"?


I'm a fan of women's athletics. I was a sportscaster in the 90's when federal enforcement of Title IX forced colleges to provide fair athletic opportunity for females. History has borne out the positive impact of that legislation. Yet, the numbers simply don't support the narrative that trans women are the new threat to those hard-earned athletic opportunities.

Save Women's Sports, an anti-trans organization, identified only five transgender athletes competing on school girls teams for grades K-12 in 2022. Estimates say maybe as few as a dozen trans females are competing in women’s collegiate athletics. That's a total of seventeen athletes. Is that number worth the hub-bub of more than five-hundred pieces of legislation, including one in the Republican-led U.S. House of Representatives?

The irony here is that those who are now championing this legislation to "save women's sports" are of the same ideology of those who opposed Title IX enforcement, categorizing it as “taking money away from the boys when girls don't even want to play.” That hypocrisy, and the sheer volume of legislative actions, tell us this is a political culture war issue. And since, sincere-hearted people can think they are caring for women, we must speak up of how that support is being used for a bevy of rights-crushing laws that include everything from criminalizing parents who offer gender affirming health care to their children (as well as a few states attempting to eliminate that care for adults) to legalizing trans discrimination in employment, housing and basic human rights.

"Doesn't an athlete who went through male puberty present a physical danger to biologically female athletes?"

Perhaps, yet few can point to actual instances where a trans woman has caused a severe sports injury specifically due to birth gender differences. My limited research shows that by far the most serious injuries in women’s sports happen in cheerleading, where no interpersonal violence occurs at all. The greatest threat of serious injury or even death in women's sports is a softball from the bat or arm of a bio-born woman.

The sad part of this is that sports has been so groundbreaking through people like Jackie Robinson, Billie Jean King and Tiger Woods. Yet, the arguments of fairness have persisted through the ages to exclude marginalized people from sports and to ostracize groups of them.

Many proclaimed it unfair that "pretty Chrissy Evert" had to compete against that "muscular" Martina Navratilova - a thinly veiled homophobic shot at the skillful and powerful Navratilova. Similar words have been spoken about Serena Williams or Britney Griner, as well men like football player Jim Brown or college superstar hoopster Patrick Ewing. We must take caution in allowing anecdotal stories of genetically caused unfairness to be used for exclusion, all the while knowing that injuries are an unfortunate and largely unavoidable component of sports, as well as genetic differences for all gender identities.

Righting wrongs always carries a cost. Accepting trans female athletes will inevitably squeeze some women out of college athletic scholarships. Were it my daughter that lost a scholarship to a trans woman I can honestly say we’d grieve the loss, but also know that our sacrifice for the affirmation of the humanness of nearly two-million Americans is worth the cost. In nearly every human spiritual tradition, there's a version of the Christian edict to “love your neighbor as yourself” and in each of these religious traditions “love” carries a cost. Trans women are more likely to self-harm than almost any other people group in our country. Shouldn't a "pro-life" be willing to sacrifice to keep others alive?

And the numbers will be very small. Remember, these are not men throwing on skirts and saying, “I’m a female athlete now.” The transition of genders takes long months of care and hard work through the red tape of the American healthcare system. The idea that males are going to transition simply to get a scholarship in female athletics costing women hundreds of scholarships is patently absurd.

As for loving our trans neighbors, it may be that Utah's Republican Governor Spencer Cox said it best:

"I struggle to understand... and the science is conflicting," Cox wrote as he described why he vetoed an anti-trans athlete bill that had come to his desk. "When in doubt however, I always try to err on the side of kindness, mercy and compassion."

Cox went on to explain that the bill was addressing four kids out of 85,000 Utah school aged athletes (only one of whom was playing girl’s sports).

"Four kids who are just trying to find some friends and feel like they are a part of something," Cox continued. "Rarely has so much fear and anger been directed at so few. I don’t understand what they are going through... But I want them to live. And all the research shows that even a little acceptance and connection can reduce suicidality significantly... I hope we can work to find ways to show these four kids that we love them and they have a place in our state."

The next day, the Republican dominated legislature overrode Cox's veto and banned trans athletes from participating in girl's sports. I guess they don't consider trans people to be their "neighbors".

The fury over trans athletes is not a fairness issue. It's political people demonizing a people group in order to acquire political power - and I have 556 legislative receipts to prove it.

Read More

Understanding the Debate on Health Secretary Kennedy’s Vaccine Panelists

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., January 29, 2025 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Chen Mengtong/China News Service/VCG via Getty Images)

Understanding the Debate on Health Secretary Kennedy’s Vaccine Panelists

Summary

On June 9, 2025, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), dismissed all 17 members of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). Secretary Kennedy claimed the move was necessary to eliminate “conflicts of interest” and restore public trust in vaccines, which he argued had been compromised by the influence of pharmaceutical companies. However, this decision strays from precedent and has drawn significant criticism from medical experts and public health officials across the country. Some argue that this shake-up undermines scientific independence and opens the door to politicized decision-making in vaccine policy.

Background: What Is ACIP?

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) is a federal advisory group that helps guide national vaccine policy. Established in 1964, it has over 60 years of credibility as an evidence-based body of medical and scientific experts. ACIP makes official recommendations on vaccine schedules for both children and adults, determining which immunizations are required for school entry, covered by health insurance, and prioritized in public health programs. The committee is composed of specialists in immunology, epidemiology, pediatrics, infectious disease, and public health, all of whom are vetted for scientific rigor and ethical standards. ACIP’s guidance holds national weight, shaping both public perception of vaccines and the policies of institutions like schools, hospitals, and insurers.

Keep ReadingShow less
MQ-9 Predator Drones Hunt Migrants at the Border
Way into future, RPA Airmen participate in Red Flag 16-2 > Creech ...

MQ-9 Predator Drones Hunt Migrants at the Border

FT HUACHUCA, Ariz. - Inside a windowless and dark shipping container turned into a high-tech surveillance command center, two analysts peered at their own set of six screens that showed data coming in from an MQ-9 Predator B drone. Both were looking for two adults and a child who had crossed the U.S.-Mexico border and had fled when a Border Patrol agent approached in a truck.

Inside the drone hangar on the other side of the Fort Huachuca base sat another former shipping container, this one occupied by a drone pilot and a camera operator who pivoted the drone's camera to scan nine square miles of shrubs and saguaros for the migrants. Like the command center, the onetime shipping container was dark, lit only by the glow of the computer screens.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Trump 2020 flag outside of a home.

As Trump’s second presidency unfolds, rural America—the foundation of his 2024 election win—is feeling the sting. From collapsing export markets to cuts in healthcare and infrastructure, those very voters are losing faith.

Getty Images, ablokhin

Trump’s 2.0 Actions Have Harmed Rural America Who Voted for Him

Daryl Royal, the 20-year University of Texas football coach, once said, “You've gotta dance with them that brung ya.” The modern adaptation of that quote is “you gotta dance with the one who brought you to the party.” The expression means you should remain loyal to the people or things that helped you succeed.

Sixty-three percent of America’s 3,144 counties are predominantly rural, and Donald Trump won 93 percent of those counties in 2024. Analyses show that rural counties have become increasingly solid Republican, and Trump’s margin of victory within rural America reached a new high in the 2024 election.

Keep ReadingShow less
Hands Off Our Elections: States and Congress, Not Presidents, Set the Rules
white concrete dome museum

Hands Off Our Elections: States and Congress, Not Presidents, Set the Rules

Trust in elections is fragile – and once lost, it is extraordinarily difficult to rebuild. While Democrats and Republicans disagree on many election policies, there is broad bipartisan agreement on one point: executive branch interference in elections undermines the constitutional authority of states and Congress to determine how elections are run.

Recent executive branch actions threaten to upend this constitutional balance, and Congress must act before it’s too late. To be clear – this is not just about the current president. Keeping the executive branch out of elections is a crucial safeguard against power grabs by any future president, Democrat or Republican.

Keep ReadingShow less