A transgender pretender in Minnesota’s House of Representatives has shocked Republicans by introducing a bill that removes language that would prevent pedophiles from being a protected class when it comes to sexual orientation.

Here’s more:

A transgender state lawmaker in Minnesota introduced a measure that would remove language from the state’s Human Rights Act that currently declares pedophiles are not included in protections based on “sexual orientation.”

The proposed language has shocked and bewildered Republicans, but the bill’s author says nothing in the text would weaken pedophilia laws. The “Take Pride Act” (HF 1655) was introduced earlier this year by state Rep. Leigh Finke, a member of the Democratic–Farmer–Labor Party and the first transgender legislator in Minnesota House history.

The bill would amend Minnesota’s Human Rights Act, which is described by the state as “one of the strongest civil rights laws in the country.” The current Human Rights Act protects against discrimination based on sexual orientation, defined as “having or being perceived as having an emotional, physical, or sexual attachment to another person without regard to the sex of that person or having or being perceived as having an orientation for such attachment, or having or being perceived as having a self-image or identity not traditionally associated with one’s biological maleness or femaleness.”

The law also includes this caveat: “‘Sexual orientation’ does not include a physical or sexual attachment to children by an adult.” That language would be removed under Finke’s proposal.

Reached for comment Wednesday, Finke defended the bill and told Fox News Digital that the measure “updates outdated language that incorrectly ties pedophilia to a person’s sexual orientation.”

Leave it to a mentally confused person obsessed with sexual orientation to be offended by a law such as this. But honestly, his argument doesn’t hold up.

This line in the law prevents pedophilia from being associated with sexual orientation in order to protect children. It doesn’t “incorrectly tie pedophilia to a person’s sexual orientation”. It does the exact opposite.

I think this argument by Finke is intentionally misleading to conceal the real motive, which is to sneak open the door to pedophiles being a protected class. And that is absolutely horrific.