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.
Within hours of President Joe Biden’s inauguration yesterday, he signed an executive order advancing the transgender agenda. Expanding on last summer’s Bostock decision, which redefined “sex” to include sexual orientation and gender identity under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, this order requires all federal agencies to accept this definition of sex in their policies against sex discrimination. When the Supreme Court ruled on Bostock, the majority held that “bathrooms, locker rooms or anything else of that kind” were questions for another day. Yesterday’s executive order makes these questions a pressing concern for today.
The order specifically states that Bostock’s definition of sex should be applied to Title IX as well as the Fair Housing Act. This will mean that federal policy will require male athletes who identify as female to be allowed to compete on girls’ sports teams, and that women’s shelters would not be allowed to deny housing to biological men who identify as women. The Biden administration has set a course to deny athletic opportunities to our nation’s girls, as well as disregard the safety and privacy of women and children.
In March of 2018, the city of Philadelphia issued an urgent call for more foster families, saying that they were in need of 300 families who would be willing to open their homes to vulnerable children in the city. At the time, there were 250 children in Philadelphia in group homes waiting for family placement. These children needed compassion, stability, comfort, and security as they processed and healed from recent abandonment, neglect, abuse, or loss. As the city drew attention to this urgent need, they also made the sudden decision to stop working with Catholic Social Services (CSS), one of the 30 private foster care agencies the city contracts with to help place children with foster families.
CSS has been faithfully ministering to the city of Philadelphia for 200 years. What caused the city to suddenly end their relationship at a time when CSS’s services were more needed than ever? CSS upholds Christian teaching on marriage and sexuality. As such, if they were ever approached by an LGBT couple looking to become foster parents, they would refer the couple to another agency. Despite the fact that this has never happened, that there have been no complaints about this policy, and that CSS has always been one of the top-ranking foster care agencies in Philadelphia, the city stopped referring foster children to them and demanded that they abandon their sincerely held religious beliefs if they wanted to continue serving in foster care in Philadelphia.
Some Christians have “freedom fatigue.” I recently heard someone say, “I’m not sure if Christians should really be so concerned about religious freedom. It seems kind of selfish, and I think it hurts our witness.” This sentiment is growing increasingly common, both from Christians who have honest questions about the importance of religious freedom, as well as from opponents of religious freedomwhocriticize religious freedom cases as nothing more than a “weapon” for “control.
Our political engagement should always be driven by humble faith in God and love, not byfear and resentment or a desire to “get what we deserve.” But this does not mean that seeking to preserve religious freedom is a selfish endeavor or that Christians cannot speak up when religious freedom is threatened. Quite the opposite. Religious freedom is a matter of justice and as such, we should speak up to defend it.
When considering the value of religious freedom, we should make sure we understand what religious freedom is. Luke Goodrich, a religious freedom attorney for Becket Religious Fundoffers the following definition: “[R]eligious freedom is a basic issue of biblical justice, rooted in the nature of God and the nature of man.” Humans are created for relationship with God. If thegovernment interferes with that, either bycoercion or bytaking away the right to worship freely and practice one’s beliefs,they are committing an injustice by demanding that we render unto Caesar what belongs to God. Desiring justice is not selfish, because justice is not reserved for select groups. Supporting religious freedom means supporting religious freedom for all.
On Friday, a federal district court halted the enforcement of a Louisville, Kentucky ordinance that would have penalized Chelsey Nelson, a Christian wedding photographer and blogger, for running her business in accordance with her beliefs. Last year, the city of Louisville adopted an ordinance that prevented Nelson from refusing to participate in a same-sex wedding. The ordinance would have also prevented her from explaining her beliefs about marriageon her website or her social media accounts. In other words, the Louisville ordinance would have kept Nelson from publicly statingor acting on her beliefs.
In response to this law, Nelson filed a lawsuit, pointing out that she was being required to choose to “violate the law, forsake her faith, or close her business.” The judge’s decision on Friday allows Nelson to continue to operate her business in accordance with her beliefs as her case continues to move forward. In a statement, Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Jonathan Scruggs said,
The court was right to halt enforcement of Louisville’s law against Chelsey while her case moves forward. She serves everyone. She simply cannot endorse or participate in ceremonies she objects to, and the city has no right to eliminate the editorial control she has over her own photographs and blogs.
In a Friday night decision, the Supreme Court denied a Nevada church’s petition to block enforcement of Governor Steve Sisolak’s restrictions limiting religious gatherings to 50 people, regardless of the size of the building. Under Governor Sisolak’s orders, casinos, restaurants, and movie theaters are allowed to open at 50% capacity, rather than being limited to a strict number limit the way that churches are. In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court allowed Nevada to continue to discriminate against churches by holding them to stricter limits than secular gatherings, thus communicating that to both Nevada and the majority on the Supreme Court, entertainment is more essential than the free exercise of religion.
In response to the Court’s refusal to block enforcement of Governor Sisolak’s orders, Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel David Cortman said,
The First Amendment requires the government to treat religious organizations, at a minimum, the same as comparable secular organizations. When the government treats churches worse than casinos, gyms, and indoor amusement parks in its COVID-19 response, it clearly violates the Constitution. As Justice Alito noted, ‘The Constitution guarantees the free exercise of religion. It says nothing about the freedom to play craps or blackjack, to feed tokens into a slot machine, or to engage in any other game of chance.’
One month after the Supreme Court’s Bostock ruling,the ACLU has filed a lawsuit against a Catholic hospital that refused to perform a hysterectomy on a woman struggling with gender dysphoria.St. Joseph Medical Center was founded in 1864 by Sisters of St. Francis of Philadelphia and has continued to operate in accordance with their beliefs for over 150 years. Because of those beliefs, the hospital canceled Jesse Hammons’s hysterectomy as it would have removed a healthy organ and left her sterilized. The ACLU argues that, in light of the recent Supreme Court ruling, the hospital’s actions are discriminatory.
In an ACLU press release, Hammon said, “The hospital will perform hysterectomies for everyone else, but they did not think that my life, as a man who is transgender, is equally worthy of protection.” This claim is false. St. Joseph’s Medical Center does not perform hysterectomies for “anyone else,” but instead, only performs them when medically necessary. In a letter to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the general counsel for the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops wrote in 2016,
A hospital does not engage in ‘discrimination’ when, for example, it performs a mastectomy or hysterectomy on a woman with breast or uterine cancer, respectively, but declines to perform such a procedure on a woman with perfectly healthy breasts or uterus who is seeking to have the appearance of a man.
The New York Times recently proclaimed, “Churches were eager to reopen. Now they are a major source of coronavirus cases.”The since-modified headline is a gross overstatement and makes it sound as if churches have played a significant role in the spread of COVID-19. As Ed Setzer pointed out in Christianity Today, the New York Times reported that 650 cases had been linked to churches since the beginning of the pandemicwhen there have been over 3 million cases in the U.S. during that time. “650 nationally out of 3 million cases is a headline looking for a story,” writes Setzer. “The real story is this: churches are gathering and remarkably few infections are taking place.” Furthermore, out of over 300,000 churches in the U.S., only 40 have been linked to COVID outbreaks. Making the argument that the majority of churches are disregarding the safety of their parishionersand becoming a major source of the virus’s spread is ridiculous.
With religious gatherings being unfairlytargeted, this kind of reporting from the New York Times is dishonest and irresponsible. Churches are not compromising public safety, and they have not been a significant source of the spread of COVID-19. In the past week, there have been an average of 62,000 new cases reported per day. In other words, the number of cases per day is almost a hundred times as many as there have been linked to churches since March.
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Supreme Court issued two 7-2 rulings today that are big victories for religious freedom. First, in the Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru case, the Court ruled that religious schools cannot be forced to hire and employ teachers that don’t hold fast to the school’s faith and religious practices. Next, in the Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania case, the Court upheld the Trump Administration’s rule that said religious employers cannot be forced to provide contraceptives and abortion-inducing drugs in their health care plans, if doing so would violate that organization’s religious beliefs.
Religious schools, not the government, should have the final say in their hiring and firing decisions. The Court’s ruling protects the First Amendment by acknowledging that. Justice Samuel Alito wrote,
The religious education and formation of students is the very reason for the existence of most private religious schools, and therefore the selection and supervision of the teachers upon whom the schools rely to do this work lie at the core of their mission. Judicial review of the way in which religious schools discharge those responsibilities would undermine the independence of religious institutions in a way that the First Amendment does not tolerate.
On June 30th, the Supreme Court upheld religious freedom in education by ruling against a provision in the Montana state constitution that was used to excluded religious schools from tax-funded scholarship programs in Espinoza v. Montana. The case was brought before the court by three families who were recipients of the Big Sky scholarship fund, which focused on providing educational opportunities to low-income families and families of children with disabilities. Big Sky was part of a state program that granted a tax-credit to anyone who donated to participating scholarship organizations, which would then enable students to attend private schools by sending money directly from the scholarship organization to the school on behalf of the student.
When Kendra Espinoza, Jeri Anderson, and Jaime Schaefer attempted to use the fund to send their children to Stillwater Christian school,they were blocked by the Montana Department of Revenue on the basis of a “no-aid” provision in Montana’s state constitution. This no-aid provision was based on the Blaine Amendment, a proposed amendment to the U.S. Constitution in the late 1800s specifically designed to block funding to Catholic schools. While the amendment failed to pass the U.S. Senate with the necessary 2/3majority, similar amendments were adopted by over 30 states. These amendments lead to policies that single-out religious schools for different treatment simply for being religious, blocking them from grants and scholarship programs that are available to other private schools.
“But seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the Lord on its behalf, for in its welfare you will find your welfare.” Jeremiah 29:7
This weekend, we celebrate our nation’s birth, not because our nation is perfect, but because our founding 244 years ago was the down payment on the promise of self-governance that could improve our nation over time.
That bold statement is possible because our Founding Fathers provided the longest-lasting framework of government in which “We the People” have the privilege and responsibility to exercise our rights as citizens “in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, promote the general Welfare and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.” (Preamble to the U.S. Constitution)
I never thought I would have to tell my children that there would be negative consequences for believing that God created us distinctly male or distinctly female, or, that the U.S. Supreme Court would redefine “sex,” in certain provisions of the law, contradicting basic biology.
Earlier this week, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark opinion concerning the meaning of the word “sex” in Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Acts. Six unelected Justices on the U.S. Supreme Court turned biology and the English language on its head when the majority held that “sex” has the same meaning as “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” in discrimination claims.” Dissenting, Justice Alito, stated “There’s only one word for what the Court has done today: legislation…A more brazen abuse of our authority to interpret statutes is hard to recall.” Citing to the myriad of unsuccessful attempts by Congress to change the meaning of the word “sex” in Title VII, he explained, “[t]he questions in these cases is not whether discrimination because of sexual orientation or gender identity should be outlawed. The question is whether Congress did that in 1964. It indisputably did not.”
Casting aside biological realities will have consequences, despite the majority’s contention that “bathrooms, locker rooms, or anything else of the kind” are for another day. We’re still left wondering about the impact of this ruling on religious freedom – particularly religious schools and other ministries. And what about the impact on women? We’re still left to wonder, can a male identifying as a female really win a women’s sports title? This decision certainly serves as an invitation for lower courts to continue building on this narrative, further redefining the meaning of the word “sex.” The consequence are real, and the outcomes are unpredictable, as the Court left many of these questions unanswered. Surely a myriad of lawsuits seeking these answers are forthcoming.
Yesterday the St. Paul City Council voted unanimously to enact a ban on so-called “conversion therapy,” following Minneapolis’s lead last fall. Despite the rhetoric, the ban is actually an attack on individual choice in health care as well as on the constitutional rights of therapists, patients, and families. St. Paul’s proposed ban could prevent mental health professionals from helping patients explore all options when addressing questions over sexual orientation and gender identity, something they should be free to do. “Young people should have access to voluntary, compassionate, client-driven care in the field of sexual identity that pursues the goals of the patient, including living in accordance with biblical teaching on sexuality or becoming more comfortable with their biological sex,” said John Helmberger, CEO at Minnesota Family Council.
The difference between what these bans claim to address and what they actually target is significant. Proponents of “conversion therapy” bans frequently point to horror stories of extreme, abusive instances of aversion therapy tactics. No one is arguing that these unethical practices should be used. Any licensed mental health professional who attempts to utilize such methodsshould lose their license. But as World magazine noted regarding Minneapolis’s ban, “Minneapolis council members… missed one glaring problem: Most tales of abuse apparently do not involve a licensed mental health professional.” These bans only address the actions of licensed mental health professionals who are already held to a standard of ethics that keeps them from resorting to the tactics described by proponents of these bans. If so-called “conversion therapy” bans were really addressing abusive situations, they would be redundant. The “conversion therapy” that these bans seek to limit is talk therapy, in which a licensed mental health professional helps their client through questions and conversation.“Conversion therapy” bans limit what counselors can say and what kind of questions they can ask when their client is dealing with questions regarding their sexual identity.
Like the rest of the nation, New York City has seen protestors flood the streets in response to the killing of George Floyd. And yet, as protestors gather by the thousands, the city is still technically under lockdown and is scheduled to begin phase one of reopening next week. Throughout the state,worship services are still limited to gatherings of no more than 10 people and New York Mayor Bill de Blasio has threatened to permanently close churches in New York City that hold worship services without his permission. A week ago he said that it would be “very dangerous” to reopen churches, saying that “it is not the time to start large gatherings of any kind.”
In a press conference yesterday, Mayor de Blasio was asked why the city is applying one standard to protestors and another to everyone else. De Blasio responded by saying,
When you see a nation, an entire nation simultaneously grappling with an extraordinary crisis seeded in 400 years of American racism… That’s not the same question as the understandably aggrieved store owner, or the devout religious person who wants to go back to services. This is something that’s not about which side of the spectrum you’re on. It’s about a deep, deep American crisis…
In the days following May 25, the world witnessed the horror and injustice of George Floyd’s death, face down on the ground with Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin’s knee on his neck. In killing Floyd, Chauvin demonstrated a complete disregard for Floyd’s value and dignity as one of God’s image-bearers. It was a violation of the 5th Commandment, and those of us who are pro-life should be as outraged and grieved by Floyd’s murder as we are by abortion. In both cases, the destruction of human life is a grievous sin and a crime.
God hates injustice, and George Floyd’s death should grieve and anger us because it grieves and angers God. All earthly injustice finds its final, eternal end in the justice of God. This is a source of hope in the midst of evil; ultimately, justice will prevail. It is also the reason that we love and pursue justice now. We seek earthly justice because we love the God who is just and because earthly justice points people to who God is.
Right now Minnesota is facing tragedy upon tragedy and injustice upon injustice. In the time since George Floyd was killed, we have watched as our cities have erupted in flames and rioters and looters have exploited the situation, drowning out the voices of peaceful protestors,endangering people, destroying homes, and robbing people of their livelihoods. The actions of the rioters display a disregard for human life and dignity as they wreak havoc and desolation on communitiesthat are already struggling from the economic implications of COVID-19. What we are witnessing in our cities right now is the devastation that human sinfulness unleashes on fellow image-bearers.
Beginning today,churches in Minnesota will be allowed to once again gather for worship, according to a revised order from Governor Walz on Saturday and updated guidelines from the Minnesota Department of Health.
On May 18, Governor Walz’s shelter in placeorder was replaced with the Stay Safe Minnesota order, which outlined the first phase of the gradual reopening of the state. To the disappointment of many people of faith, the new order left places of worship in limbowhile allowing secular businesses to open up.Many churches had been preparing safe opening plans, only to be told that church services are “unpredictable” and therefore less safe than going shopping. As Minnesota Family Council’s Renee Carlson pointed out, “If any predictable ordered gathering exists it is worship services,” a fact that Walz has since acknowledged.
In the most recent Executive Order 20-56 addressing Minnesota’s COVID-19 rules, Governor Walz made significant changes for some and not others. The basis for these orders continues to be "predictability." Ironically, the governor is still prohibiting some of the most predictable and controlled events and gatherings - the order expressly prohibits “gatherings of 10 or more” including “faith-based gatherings.” But other industries, businesses, and big box stores are opening soon pursuant to suggested state and federal guidelines. Even the Mall of America is predicted to reopen in some capacity on June 1st, along with some bars and restaurants.
In his announcement Wednesday evening, Governor Walz commented that it is easier to predict interaction in the aisles of a store than it is to predict or control interactions in other settings, including “faith-based gatherings”. For a moment I thought I misheard him, which was not the case. Two emotions were most prevalent following this statement and throughout the rest of the announcement. First, I’ll admit, I was quite baffled. Ask any Pastor, even under these fluid circumstances, and he or she can tell you their exact location at any given moment throughout a worship service. The location and interactions of most any church staffer and member of the congregation is equally predictable. Even more, any church pastor, staffer or congregant can also tell you a number of other specifics that no retail or business can "predict", including but not limited to: 1) a specific time in which the service commences and concludes; 2) traffic flow of persons entering and exiting the building; 3) the exact number of people allowed to enter and exit the building, while also closing and limiting capacity; 4) deliberate space and cessation of movement between individuals; and 5) specific hygiene and sanitary regimens before, during and after each service. If any predictable ordered gathering exists it is worship services. Arguably, this applies to all types of worship services - Mosques, Synagogues, and all Catholic and Protestant denominations.
A senior Army chaplain stationed at U.S. Army Garrison Humphreys in South Korea,is facing backlash for sharing Coronavirus and Christ, a book written by the former pastor of Bethlehem Baptist Church in Minneapolis, with several other military chaplains. In late March John Piper, who currently serves as Chancellor at Bethlehem College and Seminary, wrote Coronavirus and Christ, a short book to encourage believers amidst the unknowns of COVID-19. After reading it, Senior Chaplain Col. Moon H. Kim passed a PDF of the book along to several of hisfellow chaplains. In his email he wrote, “This book has helped me refocus my sacred calling to my savior Jesus Christ to finish strong. Hopefully this small booklet would help you and your Soldiers, their Families and others who you serve.”
Although there was nothing out of line in Kim’s actions, he is now facing calls for disciplinary action to be taken against him. Michael “Mikey” Weinstein of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation penned a letter on behalf of 22 clients who have chosen to remain anonymous describing Kim’s email as “shocking” and calling his choice to send Piper’s book to other military chaplains “egregious and deplorable.” Weinstein writes that MRFF “demands that Army Chaplain (Colonel) Kim be officially, swiftly, aggressively, and visibly investigated and disciplined in punishment for his deplorable actions...” He told the Christian Post that he is calling for Kim to be subject to general court-martial.
Pastor Kevin Wilson of Lighthouse Fellowship Church in Virginia received a criminal citationafter holding a Palm Sunday service with 16 people in a sanctuary that can hold up to 293 congregants, potentially facing a year in jail and a fine of $2,500. On April 5, police entered the sanctuary and informed those gatheredthat, even with everyone amply spaced,they could not hold a service with 16 people. After the service Pastor Wilson was served a summonsand informed that if he held services on Easter, everyone in attendance would face the same charges.
In response to this incident, Lighthouse Fellowship filed a lawsuit against Virginia Governor Ralph Northam, with the help of Liberty Counsel. The complaint points out that, while religious gatherings are not allowed to have more than 10 people, even if they are able to maintain social distancing, non-religious entities, such as retail stores, businesses, and law firms, are not subject to that same 10 person limit if social distancing guidelines are being followed. It goes on to note that Lighthouse Fellowship does not have the resources or equipment to offer internet-based services, and even if they did, many in their congregation have limited internet access and would not be able to utilizeinternet-based church services. Lighthouse Fellowship also requested a temporary restraining order to block enforcement of Northam’s orders, but was denied on Friday.
Imagine being deemed an essential service and being encouraged to continue operating, only to be arrested for doing so. That’s exactly what happened to pro-life sidewalk counselors in Charlotte, North Carolina earlier this month when they were arrested for offering sidewalk counseling outside of an abortion facility.David Benham is chairman of the boardof Cities 4 Life, a pro-life organization that offers counseling, housing assistance, baby showers, groceries, and financial support to expectant mothers. On the morning of April 4, he received a call from one of the sidewalk counselors outside of Preferred Women’s Health Center letting him know that the police had shown up. Shortly after arriving on the scene,Benham was arrested.
Under both state and local guidelinesCities 4 Life, as a federally recognized 501(c)(3) charity that provides social services, had permission to continue operating and was encouraged to do so. They had even confirmed with local police officials that they had permission to continue offering sidewalk counseling just a few days earlier. The same order that gave Preferred Women’s Health Center permission to operate also gave Cities 4 Life permission to operate, but only Cities 4 Life faced targeting from local authorities. As Benham has rightlyobserved that “This is nothing less than viewpoint discrimination.”
