Pew Research recently released a report on an accelerating trend in the U.S. — adults who were raised in Christian homes and who formerly described themselves as Christian leaving the Christian faith and joining the growing number of religious “nones.” According to Pew, nearly a third of those raised Christian describe themselves as “nothing in particular” as adults. This trend is expected to continue in the next few decades. Combined with a decrease in “transference” — that is, children who were raised in Christian homes becoming Christians themselves — Pew’s research team predicts that between 2050 and 2070, the majority of Americans will not describe themselves as Christians.
This trend is sobering because it shows that a growing number of people are living their lives without the hope of the gospel. While some of the decline in Christianity in the U.S. is likely due to a shift in cultural attitudes toward Christianity leading to fewer people describing themselves as Christians without holding strong convictions, the rise of “deconstruction” has seen a not insignificant numberof young people who once expressed zeal for their faith now rejecting Christianity.
Pew’s prediction is that this shift won’t see its full effectuntil 30 to 50 years from now. However, their research and research from other groups show that America’s teens and young adults are already experiencing this shift. Atheism is more widespreadamong Generation Z than any previous generation in the U.S. Just over half of America’s teenagers are Christians, and a little less than half of adults in their 20s.
U.S. Senate Considers Abortion Extremism, Senator Tina Smith Praises Planned Parenthood
On Monday of this week, the U.S. Senate voted on the most radical abortion bill in history.The “Women’s Health Protection Act” would have established a “right” to abortion in federal law and removed state-level protections for the unborn, allowing abortion up until birth in all 50 states. The bill would also have preventedthe government from holding abortion facilities to certain medical standards and would have removed limits on mail-order abortions. In a vote that fell almost entirely along party lines, it did not receive the 60 votes it needed to pass. Both of Minnesota’s Senators, Amy Klobuchar and Tina Smith, voting in favor of abortion extremism.
Can you imagine being fired from your coaching job because you prayed on the football field? Religious freedom is under attack, but we’re fighting hard to ensure the inalienable rights of every American. Minnesota Family Council and twenty-eight other state Family Policy Councils are joining forces with Family Policy Alliance in favor ofCoach Joseph Kennedy, who was fired from a public school in Bremington, WA because he prayed briefly at the 50-yard line after football games.You can read the brief here.
Once, several of Coach Kennedy’s students inquired if they could pray with him and he readily agreed, stating that we live in a free country.
Following this event, Coach Kennedy’s employer at the public school informed him that he was not permitted to pray publicly going forward. While he did act in accordance with the order at first, it was not long before Coach Kennedy became firmly convinced that their orders were unjust under the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees every citizen the right to the freedom of speech and religion. With this growing conviction, Coach Kennedy boldly continued public prayer.
This week True North Legal General Counsel Renee Carlson and Minnesota Family Council’s Assistant Policy Director Rebecca Delahunt submitted written testimony forthe House Preventive Health Policy Division’s hearing on HF 2516, a so-called “conversion therapy ban” that would threaten First Amendment rights and would infringe on the client-counselor relationship by limiting what licensed therapists and counselors can sayto clients who are struggling with unwanted same-sex attraction or gender dysphoria. You can read Minnesota Family Council’s testimony below and True North Legal’s testimony here.
Minnesota Family Council represents tens of thousands of families across the state, and we urge you to oppose HF 2156.
The proposed “conversion therapy” ban is in fact a threat to the ability of all Minnesotans to set their own therapeutic goals and to receive the counseling they believe is right for them. It interferes directly in the relationship between mental health professionals and patients, and it would limit the rights of parents and children to seek appropriate care.
This week True North Legal General Counsel Renee Carlson and Minnesota Family Council’s Assistant Policy Director Rebecca Delahunt submitted written testimony forthe House Preventive Health Policy Division’s hearing on HF 2516, a so-called “conversion therapy ban” that would threaten First Amendment rights and would infringe on the client-counselor relationship by limiting what licensed therapists and counselors can sayto clients who are struggling with unwanted same-sex attraction or gender dysphoria. You can read True North Legal’s testimony below and Minnesota Family Council’s testimony here.
True North Legal is a non-profit legal organization that advocates for life, family, and religious freedom on behalf of all Minnesotans. We offer the following high-level analysis regarding significant legal and policy concerns relating to HF 2156.
“Conversion Therapy Ban” proposals prohibiting licensed mental health professionals in the state from practicing so- called conversion therapy raise significant legal and policy concerns relating to medical access for all Minnesotans. These bans are unnecessary, unconstitutional, and cause more harm than the good these bills propose to remedy.
The Supreme Court blocked the Biden administration’s vaccine mandate for businesses on Thursday. The vaccine mandate for healthcare workers at federally funded facilities has been left to go into effect.
In striking down the OSHA mandate for businesses, the Supreme Court recognized that the mandate was an instance of government overreach. In a statement, Renee Carlson, General Counsel of Minnesota Family Council’s True North Legal initiative said,
The Court correctly decided that OSHA engaged in significant government overreach, with an unprecedented broad general public health regulation, to the detriment of millions of Americans. Indeed, the Court correctly opined there is a “crucial distinction” between “occupational risk” and general risk we all face in our daily lives. And it is not for OSHA to assert itself beyond its authority as it did in this mandate.
A recent study released by George Barna found that 39% of Americans between the ages of 18 and 24 identify as LGBTQ and that 30% of adults under the age of 37 do. The study’s findings also point to a significant shift that is taking place in the worldview of younger Americans, especially when it comes to how they think about identity — the study reported that 75% of young adults are searching for a purpose and that, while over half describe themselves as religious, 74% believe that all faiths are equal.
While Barna’s numbers are significantly higher than those reported by Gallup earlier this year, both studies show that the number of young Americans who identify as LGBT has increased dramatically in recent years. Writers like Abigail Shrierhave pointed out that social contagion plays a significant role in the number of young people suddenly identifying as LGBT, and especially in the rise of transgenderism. As school curricula, the entertainment industry, woke corporations, and other champions of the LGBT movement insist on reducing male and female to rigid and cartoonish stereotypes, young people are encouraged “to look constantly for landmark feelings or impulses, anything that might point toward ‘genderfluid,’ ‘genderqueer,’ ‘asexual,’ or ‘non-binary.’”
Last week Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison joined 18 other attorneys in asking a federal court to remove religious freedom protections for colleges and universities. In an amicus brief filed with the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon, the attorneys general urge the court to rule against Christian colleges and universities in the case Hunter v. U.S. Department of Education. The lawsuitis seeking to stripreligious colleges and universities of fundingfor holding to Biblical beliefs on marriage and sexuality.As Al Mohler, President of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, put it, this lawsuit “is a deliberate effort by a major means of coercion to bring an end to institutions of Christian conviction, that operate as colleges and universities and seminaries.”
Although the case focuses Christian colleges and universities,initially, the only defendant in the case was the Department of Education. By suing the Department of Education, the lawsuit would have been able to target religious institutions without giving them an opportunity to speak in their own defense. This was especially concerning given the federal government’s reluctance to come to the defense of religious freedom.
“Until I’m told otherwise, I prefer to call you ‘they,’” wrote a Yale Law School professor in a Washington Post op-ed this week. Professor Ian Ayres explains that his new “default rule” of using gender-neutral pronouns until told otherwise keeps him from “misgendering” students. “I would never intentionally misidentify someone else’s gender — but I unfortunately risk doing so until I learn that person’s pronouns. That’s why, as I begin a new school year, I am trying to initially refer to everyone as ‘they,’” he explains. He goes on to encourage readers whose “preferred pronouns” are either he or she to adopt “he/they” or “she/they” instead “because it would give others the freedom not to specify your gender when referring to you.”
In other words, at one of the top universities in the world,a law professor would like all of his students, and for that matter, the population at large, to join him in a daily denial of the reality of male and female. To refer to someone as “they” until you have learned his or her “gender identity” is to pretend that humans are fundamentally gender-neutral. This denies an essential reality of what it is to be human. As Carl Trueman recently remarked in First Things, “when we decry pronouns that assume the reality of bodily sex, we are coming close to denying the universal truth that all humans are embodied beings.” To be human is to be embodied, and to be embodied means that we are either male or female — “he” or “she,” not “they.”
Even before the Pfizer vaccine received full FDA approval, public and private employers across the United States began to announce vaccine mandates for their employees. With the COVID-19 vaccine’s FDA approval, we will only see more of them. For many Christians, these mandates spark concerns about religious freedom as multiplestates have moved toward minimizing religious exemptions for vaccination requirements, and a growing number of employers, including here in Minnesota, have begun mandating COVID-19 vaccinations.
Vaccine mandates are a bad idea
Recently, one Minnesota employer expressed optimism that mandating vaccines would “help” any employees who were on the fence about the vaccine to change their minds. But coercion is not how “persuasion” works. Vaccine mandates show a deep disrespect for people’s ability to make rational decisions for themselves, and because of this, they remove the possibility of meaningful and respectful conversations about the vaccine. This kind of disrespect is on display in New York City right now, where anyone who wishes to dine indoors must present proof of vaccination. Recently, New York Mayor Bill de Blasioannounced that people may dine indoors immediately after receiving the first dose of the vaccine. Since immunity does not begin immediately upon receiving the first dose of the vaccine, there is good reason to suspect that this mandate has far less to do with preventing the spread of COVID-19 than it has to do with punishing those who choose not to get vaccinated.
In May of 2018, a nurse at the University of Vermont Medical Center (UVMMC) was called into the operating room to assist with a “surgery.” Upon arrival, she discoveredthat the “surgery” she had been called in to help with was in fact an abortion and that she had been lied to. Although she was on the hospital’s list of conscientious objectors who had made clear to the hospital that they were morally opposed to abortion and there were other nurses available who were not on the list, UVMMC staff refused to call in a replacement and she was faced with losing her job and possibly her license if she refused to participate.
In response to this clear violation of conscience rights, the Department of Justice filed a lawsuit in 2019 against the hospital, signaling their support for the religious freedom of healthcare workers. That changed in late July when the Biden administration quietly dropped the lawsuit, leaving the nurse with no further recourse.
You have probably heard much about the so-called “infrastructure bill” over the past few weeks, culminating with its passage in the United States Senate just a couple of days ago. The bill now heads to the House of Representatives for a vote. But did you know that the infrastructure bill isn’t just about highways, railroads, and broadband?
That’s right – tucked away in the bill are hidden provisions known as “SOGI language.” SOGI stands for “sexual orientation and gender identity.” The infrastructure bill, which just passed the Senate, proposes to elevate the SOGI groups to federally protected classes, even though those classes are poorly defined.
Parents and school board members in Russell County, Virginia rejected the Virginia Department of Education’s radical transgender policies in a unanimous vote last Friday.The policies were enacted by the VDOE after the Virginia legislature passed a bill mandating the change.However, as the Family Foundation of Virginia has pointed out,the policies required by the legislature present an unconstitutional attack on freedom of religion, free speech, parental rights, and the privacy and safety of students. The Family Foundation is also part of a lawsuit challenging the VDOE’s unconstitutional policies.
VDOE’s model policy would allow students to access restrooms and locker rooms on the basis of their “gender identity” rather than their biological sex, require students, teachers, and staff to refer to students using their “preferred pronouns,” disregarding any religious objections they may have, and event encourages schools to conceal information from the parents of students who are struggling with gender dysphoria and help students “transition” behind their parents’ backs. At a Russell County Board of Education meeting last month, parents pointed out that these policies are not rooted in science but are “a mandatory promotion of a sexualized agenda.”
21 state attorneys general are calling out the Biden administration’s pro-LGBT policiesfor threatening religious freedom, freedom of speech, and privacy rights. In a letter sent to the administration last week, the attorneys general address the recent guidance issued by the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission and the Department of Education expanding the definition of “sex” to include gender identity and sexual orientation in compliance with a January executive order from President Biden. The letter points out that States and individuals were not given any opportunity to submit feedback through the public comment process as the EEOC and Education Department finalized policies in response to a presidential executive order earlier this year. Instead, the guidance was issued unilaterally by the respective agencies.
Last year in Bostock v. Clayton County the Supreme Court redefined “sex” in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act to include gender identity and sexual orientation. Immediately after taking office, President Biden issued an executive order requiring all federal agencies to adopt the Court’s sweeping redefinition of the word “sex and to implement policies that include sexual orientation and gender identity in their definition of sex-based discrimination.
The Equality Act (read a quick summary here) is a threat to people of faith across the country. But are evangelicals partly to blame for it?
Evangelical theologian Matthew Lee Anderson has a long piece in Christianity Today (May/June 2021) arguing that evangelicals must realize our own role in the rise of the militant LGBT movement and its political successes.
The story that evangelicals are (merely) victims of progressive aggressors not only fails to account for the ways in which the LGBT movement was shaped by populist evangelical rhetoric and tactics. It also forgets that the gay liberation movement was a direct response to the systemic and pervasive exclusion of lesbian and gay individuals from the structures of our public life—including from America itself.
Anderson, a professor of ethics and theology at Baylor University, expands on his point. The Christian right, he writes, rose in the 1970s in opposition to the cultural excesses of the sexual revolution. It is surprising that he does not mention Roe v. Wade, which was certainly a larger motivator for the religious right than gay rights. As the Christian right rose to a position of political and cultural influence, Anderson argues, it weaponized biblical truths about sexuality (which Anderson accepts) in a way that “demeaned and disrespected our LGBT neighbors.”
The Biden administration is appealing a federal judge’sruling affirming that religious hospitals should not be required to perform gender transition surgeries in violation of their deeply held beliefs.
In January, U.S. District Court Judge Peter Welte cited the Religious Freedom Restoration Act when he ruled in favor of Sisters of Mercy, an order of nuns committed to providing medical care to people in need. The Biden administration wants to see this ruling overturned and has filed an appeal in hopes of forcing religious hospitals to comply with the transgender agenda. Recently appointed HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra is leading the charge.
On Monday evening, Bloomington became the ninthMinnesota city to adopt a so-called “conversion therapy ban.” Other cities that have adopted these bans include Minneapolis, Saint Paul, Duluth, and Rochester. With Bloomington joining their ranks, that means the five largest cities in Minnesota have adopted counseling bans. These draconianbans prevent minors who are struggling with unwanted same-sex attraction or gender dysphoria from receiving counseling to help them live in accordance with their biological sex.
By policing what a licensed counselor or therapist may say to his or her clients, these bans inappropriately infringe on the relationship between mental health care providers and their clients. Under Bloomington’s ban, mental health professionals can be fined $500 for their first violation and $1000 for subsequent violations if they offer counseling that does not fall in line with the LGBT agenda.
It is not the place of elected officials to determine who gets counseling care and who doesn’t, and yet that is exactly what these bans do. These bans prevent families and individuals from pursuing and licensed professionals from offering counsel that accords with their Christian beliefs.
For young people struggling with gender dysphoria, counseling bans leave them to be ushered into social transition and medical “treatments” that carry tragic life-long effects and do not improve mental health outcomes. The vast majority of minors struggling with gender dysphoria who do not “transition” become comfortable with their biological sex by the time they reach adulthood.
33 students and former students of Christian colleges and Universities are suing the Department of Education in an effort to strong-arm religious schools into accepting and promoting the LGBT agenda. Although the Department of Education is technically the plaintiff, the real targets are religious colleges and universities. The complaintlists 25religious colleges and universities and has serious implications for all religious schoolsthat receive federal funds. The students, all of whom identify as LGBT, are alleging discrimination because the religious colleges and universities that they attended or applied for prohibited sexual activity outside of marriage between one man and one woman and did not allow pro-LGBT student groups that were at odds with the school’s religious beliefs to be established on campus.
Most, but not all, of these colleges and universities are Christian schools and all of them maintainthese policies based on their deeply held and clearly stated religious beliefs concerning human sexuality. There is no reason whatsoever that these policies should have come as a surprise to these students. Each of these colleges and universities have made their stance on sexuality public for years. The students filing this lawsuit could easily have chosen to attend one of the myriads of schools that embrace the LGBT agenda. Demanding that religious colleges and universities either submit to the LGBT agenda or lose their funding is nothing other than a bully tactic to silence any and all disagreement.
As the Supreme Court prepares to decide the fate of religious foster care and adoption agencies in Fulton v. Philadelphia, Bethany Christian Services, the nation’s largest foster care and adoption agency, has announced that they will begin placing children with LGBT couples. This follows Bethany’s decision to avoid the legal fight for religious freedom by quietly choosing to place children with LGBT couples in states thatrefuse to work with religious agencies that hold to biblical sexual ethics. Now they have decided to make it their policy nationwide to place children with LGBT couples.
For many years, Bethany stated that they believed that “God’s design for the family is a covenant and lifelong marriage of one man and one woman.” This statement reflecting God’s design for the family was removed from their website in January. Speaking to the New York Times, Bethany’s senior vice president for public and government affairs, Nathan Bult, emphasized that Bethany’s board, which saw the departure of more than one of their more conservative members since 2018, now consists of members who have “diverse personal views on sexuality.”
Wow! We're amazed that thousands of Minnesotans took action on the three action alerts we sent out on Monday. I want to give you an update on the three major threats to life, family, and religious freedom that we saw unfold this week. The U.S. House of Representatives passed the so-called “Equality Act,” two Senate Committees held confirmation hearings for President Biden’s HHS nominee, Xavier Becerra, who is known for using his position as California Attorney General to attack the pro-life movement, and here in Minnesota, another hearing on a bill mandating “comprehensive” sex education in K-12 classrooms across the state moved that piece of legislation forward.
1. The Inequality Act
Yesterday, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Equality Act, which, if it passes the Senate, would make sexual orientation and gender identity a protected status under the Civil Rights Act. By equating subjective, fluid, and invisible qualities like sexual orientation and gender identity with race and ethnicity, this act presents a serious threat to religious freedom, free speech, and conscience rights. Additionally, it radically expands abortion “rights,” threatens the safety and privacy of women and children, and would destroy opportunities for female athletes.
