Recent reports have found that the U.S. birthrate dropped by 4% in 2020, bringing the number of births in the U.S. to the lowest number since 1979. While it is not unusual for birth rates to decline during a season of economic and political uncertainty, it is unlikely that this year’s drop is just a “blip on the radar” considering that birth rates were declining prior to the COVID-19 pandemic and hit a 32-year-low in 2018.
Alongside the drop in birth rates, there are also rising rates of hopelessness and despair among young Americans, a rejection of marriage and family, and a growing embrace of anti-natalism, an ideology that believes people have an obligation not to have children,usually rooted in fears of a looming climate catastrophe.
In the past week, more than 600 Minnesota Family Council supporters contacted their state senators asking them to support school choice and girls’ sports, and those actions had results! On Thursday the Minnesota Senate approved a bipartisan education budget bill that empowers families with school choice options and protects athletic opportunities for female athletes in Minnesota!
The bill includes the language from Senator Carrie Ruud’s Save Women’s Sports bill that would preserve women’s sports by ensuring that biological males are not allowed to compete in female athletics and clarifies that any school that allows male athletes to compete on girls’ sports teams is in violation of Title IX and existing Minnesota laws that protect athletic opportunities for women and girls.
The bill would also create Education Savings Accounts (ESAs) that would equip parents to pursue educational opportunities that fit their family’s values and their children’s educational needs. Under the ESA program, when a parent chooses to withdraw their child from public school, the child’s share of state education assistance would be deposited into a savings account that parents would be able to use for tuition and fees at a different school, online learning, instructional material, or other educational expenses.
These provisions are good news for Minnesota’s families! They recognize that parents are the ones who are ultimately responsible for their children’s education and equip them to pursue an education that is the best fit for their students, and they recognize the biological differences between men and women and preserve fairness and opportunities in light of those differences.
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.
This week Arkansas made history by becoming the first state to protect children with gender dysphoria from puberty-blockers, cross-sex hormones, and mutilating sex-reassignment surgeries. On Monday, Republican Governor Asa Hutchinson vetoed the bill, arguing that it abandons conservative principles of limited government. Thankfully, the legislature overrode his veto on Tuesday afternoon.
By claiming that this bill goes against conservative principles, Hutchinson disregards the seriousness of so-called “gender-affirming treatments” for children with gender dysphoria, which prevent the normal development that happens during puberty. These “treatments,” which often dismiss underlying mental health concerns, are experimental, and have dangerous side effects, leaving children chemically castrated. Chemical interventions are frequently followed by mutilating surgeries to create the appearance of opposite-sex genitalia, and double mastectomies have been performed on girls as young as 13.
“Limited government” does not mean that the government should allow experimentation on children, or that we cannot unequivocally say that it is wrong to tell a child that he or she was born in the wrong body. And “limited government” certainly does not mean that the government gets to abdicate its responsibility to protect children from abusive practices at the hands of adults.
On Thursday, President Biden signed the $1.9 trillion COVID-relief bill known as the “American Rescue Pan.” The bill has rightly been criticized as a “blue state bailout” and leaves out key pro-life provisions. It allocates $390 million simply to carry out the administrative costs of the legislation, while less than 9 percent of the $1.9 trillion will be going toward directly addressing COVID-19 through public health spending. One bright spot in an otherwise terrible bill is the expansion of the Child Tax Credit (CTC), a change that will benefit millions of families by helping them to prioritize their children.
This temporary change will expand the CTC from $2,000 annually to $3,000 per child between the ages of 6 and 17 and $3,600 per child under the age of six during the 2021 tax year. This will be a fully refundable tax credit, meaning that if the credit exceeds the amount of taxes owed, families will receive a refund.
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.
The U.S. House of Representatives is expected to vote next week on House Resolution 5 (H.R. 5), the so-called “Equality Act,”a measure that will have disastrous consequences for women, children, people of faith – all Americans.
H.R. 5 adds the legally undefined “sexual orientation and gender identity” (SOGI) to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other federal non-discrimination laws. The bill redefines “sex” to no longer mean the biological “male or female.” Instead, “sex” would include sex stereotypes, sexual orientation, and gender identity.
H.R. 5 brings the police power of the federal government against those who believe the biological truth of God's design, that "male and female He created them" (Genesis 5:2). The bill labels Christian beliefs about marriage, sexuality, and family “discriminatory.” It empowers the federal government to punish disagreement on this important issue.
This dangerous bill provides no religious exemptions. In fact, it explicitly exempts the Religious Freedom Restoration Act as a defense for violations.
In the past twelve months, COVID-19-related lockdowns and school closures have highlighted education achievement gaps throughout Minnesota and brought increased attention to the struggles facing families in failing public schools. In response to this, Minnesota lawmakers recently proposed an amendment to the Minnesota Constitution stating that all children have a “fundamental right” to a public education. Unfortunately, the proposed amendment offers no real solutions but instead threatens parental rights in Minnesota and doubles down on failed educational policies by providing legal pressure to pour more taxpayer funding into them.
Proposed by retired Minnesota Supreme Court Justice Alan Page and Minneapolis Federal Reserve head Neel Kashkari, the Page Amendment would add a right to a public educationin the Minnesota Constitution. Currently, Minnesota’s constitution says,
The stability of a republican form of government depending mainly upon the intelligence of the people, it is the duty of the legislature to establish a general and uniform system of public schools. The legislature shall make such provisions by taxation or otherwise as will secure a thorough and efficient system of public schools throughout the state.
The Page Amendment would replace this with,
All children have a fundamental right to a quality public education that fully prepares them with the skills necessary for participation in the economy, our democracy, and society, as measured against uniform achievement standards set forth by the state. It is a paramount duty of the state to ensure quality public schools that fulfill this fundamental right.
Twitter has slapped Minnesota Family Council with a temporary suspension for referring to Dr. Rachel Levine, President Biden’s nominee for Assistant Health Secretary, as a “man who identifies as a woman.” Although this statement is undeniably true (Dr. Levine, originally Richard, changed his name to “Rachel” in 2012), Twitter appears to believe that this tweet is hate speech.
Let’s be clear: Rachel Levine is a man who identifies as a woman. There is no process by which a man can become a woman.Thus, saying that a transgender-identified person has not changed their biological sex is not ill will but simple fact. God’s beautiful creation means that each of us is male or female, and we must affirm this truth even as we respond compassionately and with Christlike love to people going through gender dysphoria.
We live in a sexually broken society. Increasingly, sex is divorced from marriage, marriage is redefined, children are taught that gender identity exists apart from biological realities, and our culture struggles to even acknowledge that men and women are different. It’s a tragedy and one that requires the church to respond. Writing at The Public Discourse, Timothy O’Malleyrecently observed that at least one aspect of this sexual brokenness, “hookup culture,” is not simply about sexual excess, but is driven by fear of commitment and vulnerability, anxiety over the future, and ultimately, hopelessness. O’Malley argues that this anxiety and fear create a greater willingness to engage in casual sex. Behind much of the brokenness of the world around us is fear and despair.
O’Malley points out that, in order to respond to this, we need to commit ourselves to a high view of marriage and family. He writes,
What if religious and conservative higher education ceased speaking about marriage and family life as an accomplishment and began to treat marriage and children as that which enable human flourishing and a meaningful future?
All too often, marriage and family are treated as something extra, rather than something that is essential. God’s design for marriage, family, and sexuality is not theicing on the cake but necessary to human flourishing and part of the bedrock of a strong and stable society.
In a recently approved rule package for the 117th Congress, passed along partisan lines, the House of Representatives has House adopted “gender-neutral” language in the name of “diversity and inclusion.” The document removes sex-specific terms, replacing words like “father” and “mother” with “parent,” “aunt” and “uncle” with “parent’s sibling” and so on, attempting to erase the way that the differences between the sexes shape these relationships.
The push for “gender-neutral” language matters because words are never “just” words. Words are how we communicate with and about the world around us, and it’s important that the words we use tell the truth about the world. If they don’t, then we put ourselves at odds with reality. Insisting on “gender-neutral” language implies that humans are essentially “gender-neutral.” This simply is not the case. A person’s “true self” cannot be separated from their biological sex. To be a human is to have a body and to have a body is to be either male or female. We cannot deny this without denying reality itself.
Last month, the nine members of the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board voted unanimously to allow female toplessness in city parks by repealing Park Board ordinance PB2-21which stated, “No person ten (10) years of age or older shall intentionally expose his or her own genitals, pubic area, buttocks or female breast below the top of the areola, with less than a fully opaque covering in or upon any park or parkway, as defined in PB1-1…”
Under Minnesota state statute and Minneapolis city ordinance indecent exposure is prohibited, but neither specifically mentions female toplessness. The November 18 vote means that female toplessness in Minneapolis city parks is now allowed under any and all circumstances.
Late in the day on December 7, 1941, the Japanese high command was jubilant. Thick, black smoke rose over Pearl Harbor as fires raged on dozens of vessels that made up the American Pacific Fleet, including eight battleships!
One hundred and sixty-six years earlier on the north side of Boston, British forces celebrated as the upstart colonial militia withdrew at the end of what became known as the Battle of Bunker Hill.
Had they been able to see the future though, the Japanese, and the British before them, would have been a bit more circumspect. In the end, these wins were more like losses.
I think there’s a lesson here for many on the Left, who have been giddy with self-congratulations after last month’s election. They would be wise to consider the overall narrative, to observe which way the winds are actually blowing, and to plan accordingly.
That’s what we’re doing. Yes, there’s a sense of mourning among conservatives over the likely loss of the presidency, but we can’t afford to mourn for long – nor should we in light of the bigger picture. Now is the time to press on, prepare, and build on the positives.
It’s a paradox: there are more opportunities to connect and communicate with one another than ever before, and yet in many ways, people are more isolated, disconnected, and lonely than ever. This is especially true during a year that has been filled with lockdowns and canceled events, but the loneliness and isolation of a tech-driven culture were already prevalent before 2020. In many ways, technology has overpromised and underdelivered, and America’s teenagers are increasingly feeling this.Drawing off of research from Amy and Andy Crouch in their new book My Tech-Wise Life, Barna Group recently reported on this trend, writing,
Despite the promises of social media to help connect people, teens worry that technology is coming between individuals. In fact, data show that nearly seven in 10 teens (68%) agree that devices keep them from having real conversations, and a third (32%) says devices sometimes separate them from other people. Younger generations see a paradox in which tech simultaneously connects and disconnects them from their peers.
Barna also found that teens and young adults are also aware of the way that technology is affecting their attention span and work ethic.
When Barna asked how technology makes 13–21-year olds’ lives harder, top answers related to productivity, with over half of teens stating issues like wasting time (54%), procrastinating on work (53%) and being generally distracted (50%). Nearly two in five respondents (37%) admit they get bored easily when they are not online.
Between 2016 and 2017, the number of “gender transition” surgeries performed on adolescent girls quadrupled. This shocking increase in teenage girls suddenly claiming they were “born in the wrong body” and seeking life-altering, experimental surgeries is made even more alarming by the fact that this appears to be a “craze”—an intense and often short-lived cultural enthusiasm that spreads like a virus. Unlike other crazes that have affected teenagers in recent years, this one comes with lifelong effects and frequently encourages teens to completely alienate themselves from their parents.
In her recent book Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters, Abigail Shrier documents this disturbing trend. One of the contributing factors that she highlights is the role that many public schools play in fueling the transgender movement and undermining parents. Shrier reports that in June of 2019, the California Teachers Association’s policy-making branch voted on a proposal that would allow students to leave campus during school hours to receive puberty-blockers and cross-sex hormones without the “barrier” of parental consent. In January of this year, the CTA’s Civil Rights in Education Subcommittee recommended creating “school-based healthcare clinics” that would offer “cisgender, transgender and non-binary youth equal and confidential access to a broad range of physical, mental and behavioral services.”
“[T]he government cannot provide what children need specifically from a father: discipline, structure, protection,” wrote World magazine’s Tim Lamer in a recent article on the impact of fatherlessness. Drawing on US and international data, Lamer points out fatherlessness’s impact on economic disparities and high crime rates, especially in international settings, describing fatherlessness as “the worst systemic injustice in America.
The economic impact of fatherlessness touchesmillions of children throughout the U.S.,but the effects go far beyond economic outcomes. The Institute for Family Studies recently reported on a study from Social Service Review on the role that involved fathers play in their children’s lives. The study found that over a 10-year period, increased father involvement reduced behavioral outcomes such as aggression, depression, and delinquency by 30-50% in children who did not live with their father, and 80% in children who did live with their father. “The study shows the effects are long lasting, with a father’s earlier life presence having a significant impact on latter adolescent behavior,” wrote Brad Wilcox.
In other words, kids who are having trouble in their teens often lacked a fatherly presence earlier in their lives, not only during their teen years. Cash support—formal or informal—had little effect. It was the social engagement of the fathers that made the big difference.
Parents should know what happens in their children’s schools and they should be informed immediately if their child is experiencing or mental health struggles while they are at school. This is basic common sense. Unfortunately, Madison Metropolitan School District adoptedan update to their policies and guidelines handbook in 2018 allowing and encouraging teachers to deceive parents of children struggling with gender dysphoria. Under these guidelines, students are able to socially “transition” behind their parents back, adopting a new name and using opposite sex pronouns while at school without their parents ever knowing. The district encouragedteachers to exploit a legal loophole in order to conceal information from parents by filing “Gender Support Plans” in their personal notes instead of in the student’s official records. Earlier this year, a group of concerned parents filed a lawsuitchallenging this harmful policy and this week the court issued an injunction prohibiting the school district from deceiving parents. The injunction will be in place until the court rules on the case.
A policy that encourages children to live a double life and enables teachers to hide important information about a child’s mental health from their parents is unhealthy and troubling. In an expert affidavit, Dr. Stephen Levine wrote,
For a child to live radically different identities at home and at school, and to conceal what he or she perceives to be his or her true identity from parents, is psychologically unhealthy in itself, and could readily lead to additional psychological problems.
Like so many events this spring, my little sisters’ dance recital was canceled, causing much disappointment after months of hard work. My youngest sister has found solace in leaping and twirling around the house in her recital costume, with the undeterred enthusiasm of a four-year-old who fully intends to be a princess-ballerina when she grows up. From my own days as a dancer and from my younger sisters’ current experience, I know dance’s potential to be a source of enjoyment that also builds confidence, coordination, and discipline. Because of this, Netflix’s recently released trailer and promotional imagefor a film called Cuties disappointed me, to say the least. The film artworkwhich sparked an outcry on social media, causing Netflix to issue an apology and replace the image (without changing the content of the film itself)featured 11-year-old girls in revealing costumes and provocative poses accompanying the film description, “Amy, 11, becomes fascinated with a twerking dance crew. Hoping to join them, she starts to explore her femininity, defying her family’s traditions.”
Cuties is not the first time that Netflix has featured a film that portrays children in a sexualized manner. As World magazine pointed out, “It might be easier to give Netflix the benefit of the doubt on its artistic intent, though, if the company didn’t have such a poor track record featuring hypersexual material involving young characters.” Cuties is a symptom of a much deeper problem. It is a symptom of culture that does not understand human value and dignity and that views the human body as a commodity. This same mindset fuels the widespread use and acceptance of pornography and the hypersexualized images that are so often on display in the entertainment industry and on social media.
Marriage rates in the United States recently reached an all-time low.On top of that, it is currently estimated that only half of America’s children are raised by married parents. An increasing number of people are beginning to ask, “Are we seeing the death of the nuclear family?” What is particularly striking is that many of the people askingthis question do not see the death of the family as a bad thing. As lockdowns were put in place this springdue to COVID-19, severalvoices suggestedthat this ought to be the end of traditional family structures. Even well before COVID-19,the nuclear family was being challenged as sexist, oppressive, and even racist.
These critiques generally assume that the nuclear family is an invented concept. However, at the core of the nuclear family is marriage, which does not have a human inventor. Rather, it was created and ordained by God in the beginning. Because marriage is part of God’s good design, the benefits of stable, two-parent families are not a surprise, nor is it surprising that there are serious, tragic effects when God’s design is ignored. These effects do not come about because the nuclear family is an oppressive construct, but because the nuclear family is good.
