(The opinions expressed in guest op-eds are those of the writer and do not necessarily represent the views of RedState.com.)

This past July, California Gov. Gavin Newsom was palpably angry when members of the media criticized his hypocrisy for enrolling two of his children in a summer sports camp that did not require masks, in violation of state policy (the ethics, wisdom, and science supporting this measure are another topic for another time)…snarling that they were being “weaponized.” At the time, he and First Partner Jennifer Siebel Newsom – via a spokesperson – claimed to have missed the particular email from the camp stating it wouldn’t be ”enforcing masking guidance” (How one squares the enforcement of guidance remains a mystery).

His objection to being called out in the media was wholly unfair because, as the saying goes, what goes for the goose must necessarily go for the gander – never mind his pattern of forgetting that pesky axiom. Thus, it is not improper to pose these three questions to the Newsoms. Their children are California children and are therefore subject to the same exposure that he has mandated for the state’s children. You might call it “equitable treatment.”

By way of the Emergency Powers he granted to himself 19 months ago –  and to which he still clings, despite what he boasts as the state’s low infection, hospitalization, and death rates (that the difference between this state and others is minuscule – a fraction of a person – should be noted), Newsom has mandated that all California schoolchildren, whether in public or private settings, receive a Covid-19 vaccination in order to be educated. Since the State will know which vaccine every child has been given, arguably California parents have the right to know which vaccine the Newsoms will have administered to their children when the time comes.

QUESTION ONE: Will you tell them? Governor, you shared which drug company’s shot you decided to take back in April: the standard viral vector vaccine by Johnson & Johnson’s, Janssen. This one is most similar to the formula for the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination – which is already required (rightly so, considering the severity of those illnesses) for school children. Anyone who follows the science also knows that the shots by Moderna and Pfizer utilize the new mRNA technology platform. Given the novelty of the latter (and absence of long-term studies), the decision is a critical one for parents of children possibly as young as five years old.

QUESTION TWO for the Newsom parents: How will you protect your children from the devastating psychological effects of Critical Race Theory education? Will you tell them to shake it off because dad was feeling political pressure (and has greater political ambitions) to instate a curriculum that teaches self-loathing and nihilism while instilling racist, segregationist ideals to all children of all colors, creeds, and ethnicities – or, do you really believe this philosophy of “a racial extinction plan” which “murders the souls of white children,” as professor Jason D. Hill characterizes it, will make your offspring better adults and American citizens?

It is worth noting that CRT is necessarily anti-Israel, which makes the launch of the Governor’s Council on Holocaust and Genocidal Education all the more confounding (to parse the difference between antisemitism and disdain for Israel is intellectually dishonest).

THIRD AND FINAL QUESTION: Will you be cool if any of your kids, after turning twelve, were to dial you out of the decision to take puberty blockers and/or cross-sex hormones – much the way you did to California parents when you signed into law AB 1184, which prohibits insurance companies from notifying them when a minor child consents to such procedures (despite the fact that the parents have financial responsibility)? The new law is considerably more expansive and thus, controversial. But for the purposes of this interrogative, this question is satisfactory unto itself.

PARENTS WHO DON’T HAVE A VOICE or the time to keep up with every stroke of the governor’s pen have the right to know how you both will navigate the choppy waters you have prescribed for their families. Won’t you kindly consider furnishing some answers?

(EDITOR’S NOTE: Letzgeaux Brande Hahn is a pseudonym for a California parent employed in the entertainment industry who fears reprisal if their full name is used, and who speaks for hundreds more who are in similar situations. Because of this, an exception to our regular guest opinion piece guidelines was granted.)