The modern news cycle is merciless in its schizophrenia. Last week, it was all hands on deck to keep Jeffrey Younger's son, James, from being turned into the woke version of Frankenstein's monster down in Texas.
But this week the Washington Post has moved on to humping the leg of a dead terrorist, and it's tough to keep up with that many jihads against decency at once.
Yet we must.
Because even though James Younger was saved in part by the searing heat of a national spotlight, there are plenty of other kids in this country for whom the system is destined to disappoint them in its taste for unaccountability and malice.
For several years, one of them has been the young son of Flint, Michigan, father Stacy Swimp. Back in 2017, Swimp began suspecting that his then 1-year-old son was being exposed to drug use by his mother, with whom Swimp was estranged.
After drug tests validated Swimp's suspicions, he filed a police report as well as attempted to gain full custody of his son via child protective services. That's when the veteran of conservative political activism discovered that his child's well-being was far less interesting to the local political apparatus than was placing a target on his back.
Swimp was the one who was accused of "intentionally ingesting" his son with marijuana and cocaine while agents of the state attempted to remove the boy from his home instead of his mother's. During an 11-month stretch, Swimp was allowed to visit his son for only three hours of supervised time a week.
Ultimately, that tactic was the system's undoing because tests continued to indicate the boy was under repeated exposure to drugs. Still unwilling to grant Swimp any kind of victory, though, a court swooped in to exclaim that the boy could remain with his mother because the drugs in question were deemed to not be an inherently dangerous risk to the child's welfare.
You read that right — the court ruled exposing a child to illicit drugs was not an "inherently dangerous risk." And yes, that is insane. But it is a mad, mad, mad world of unknown genders and child castrations after all.
Swimp's partial custody of his child may have been restored, but his child's health and safety would remain in jeopardy. So he's fighting back now by attempting to have the government officials or judges who railroaded him punished or removed from office with the help of some loyal friends and community activists who have had enough.
As with the Younger case, Swimp is attempting to lay waste to a progressive soap opera of endless government propaganda, so that a child's welfare can be made the paramount concern for not only him but others down the road.
"What really upsets everybody is the absolute disgusting bias of the system," Swimp said. "It colluded against me. It treated me like I was a drug addict. And I don't think this is a bias that is unique to Flint. This is about justice. This is about my son's right to life."
And that right to life is of the same precious sort for Swimp's son, who is black and threatened by drug abuse, or Younger's son, who is white and threatened by chemical castration. Either way, true innocence is at stake while toxic agendas are allowed to sprint toward Gomorrah. Which is why sitting on the sidelines really isn't an option for anyone anymore.
Because maybe your kid is next on the chopping block.