Recent data from Pew Research indicates that roughly half of America’s Christians believe that casual sex and premarital sex are sometimes or always acceptable.According to Pew,
Half of Christians say casual sex – defined in the survey as sex between consenting adults who are not in a committed romantic relationship – is sometimes or always acceptable. Six-in-ten Catholics (62%) take this view, as do 56% of Protestants in the historically Black tradition, 54% of mainline Protestants and 36% of evangelical Protestants.
Attitudes toward premarital sex between adults who are in a committed relationship reflect a similar trend:
A majority of Christians (57%) say sex between unmarried adults in a committed relationship is sometimes or always acceptable. That includes 67% of mainline Protestants, 64% of Catholics, 57% of Protestants in the historically Black tradition and 46% of evangelical Protestants.
Unsurprisingly, these findings come at a time when American Christians areincreasingly caving to pressure from the LGBT movement. Both of these trends indicate that the American church has lost sight of the goodness of God’s design for sexuality. When Christians reject God’s design for sexuality, they reject God’s word, as well as theglorious picture of Christ and his church that marriage as God designed it offers.
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.
Two more Minnesota cities have adopted counseling bans that intrude on counselor-client relationships by allowing the city council to dictate what kind of help young people struggling with gender dysphoria or unwanted same-sex attraction may seek out. Winona and West Saint Paul’s bans, both of which passed on Monday night, bring the total number of Minnesota cities that have adoptedthese counseling bans up to six.
These bans make it punishable for a licensed counselor or therapist to discuss a full range of optionswith their clients. Counseling bans are especially concerning when it comes to teens struggling with gender dysphoria. Even though the vast majority of young people struggling with gender dysphoria and do not “transition” become comfortable with their biological sex as they get older, these bans would usher young people into social transition and medical “treatments” that carry life-long effects and do not improve mental health outcomes. City officials do not have the right to decide that a young person struggling with gender dysphoria cannot receive help in the form of watchful waiting and counselinginstead of being rushed into a “transition” that will affect them for the rest of their lives, nor do they have the right to limit the free speech of counselors in this way.
As the LGBT movement gains widespread popularity,dissenting voices, including those who have left the LGBT lifestyle, are increasingly being silenced. Facebook has recently joined this trend,enforcing a new “hate speech” policy to remove posts fromorganizations that offer counseling to people dealing with gender dysphoria or unwanted same-sex attraction from Facebook and Instagram. After a targeted campaign from pro-LGBT groups, Facebook decided to remove posts from two non-profits, Core Issues Trust (CIT) and Restored Hope Network, and announced that it would be introducing a new policy classifying content that promotes “conversion therapy” as hate speech under their community guidelines, explaining that they would be doing so because they “don't allow attacks against people based on sexual orientation or gender identity.”
The counseling that Facebook is targeting under this new policy is not an “attack” on anyone, but voluntary talk therapy for people facing gender dysphoria or unwanted same-sex attraction. Ryan T. Anderson pointed out that under Facebook’s new approach, “Content about therapy to help a teen with a body-image struggle due to anorexia would be allowed, but content on the same therapeutic techniques to help a teen with a body-image struggle due to gender dysphoria would be removed.” Family Research Council noted that if Facebook was really interested in free expression, as Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg recently told Congress, they would immediately reverse the decision to engage in this viewpoint discrimination.
Schools in Madison, Wisconsin have decided to adopt a policy that allows children with gender dysphoria to secretly “transition” at school behind their parents’ backs. Under the policy, teachers are prohibited from informing parents if their student chooses to adopt a new name and pronouns and gain access to restrooms and locker rooms designated for members of the opposite sex. This policy was adopted in 2018 and was challenged by parents living in the Madison Metropolitan School District in December of last year when they sent a letter informing the district that they would sue if the policy was not changed. After the district refused to back down, the parents filed a lawsuit against the school district with the help of Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty (WILL) and the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF).
The school district’s guidance and policies handbook explains to teachers that, unless if a student gives the school permission to inform their parents, the school should not do so. The handbook goes on to say that,
All staff correspondence and communication to families in regard to students shall reflect the name and gender documented in Infinite Campus unless the student has specifically given permission to do otherwise. (This might involve using the student’s affirmed name and pronouns in the school setting, and their legal name and pronouns with family).
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.
“Who am I to impose my beliefs on someone else?” has become an increasingly prevalent attitude among Christians, especially young Christians, as seen in recentdata indicating a growing acceptance of the LGBT movement among Evangelicals. According to political scientist Paul Djupe, 90% of Evangelicals believed their religion forbade homosexual behaviors in 2007. By 2020, that number had dropped by almost 30 percentage points. According to anotherresearcher, this is especially prevalent among young Evangelicals, with roughly 50% of Evangelical Christians between 18-35 affirming same-sex marriage in 2018. Alongside of this trend, many young people in the church have adopted a deeply secular attitude and treat Christian faith as simply one belief among many. Because of this, they increasingly see standing up for biblical teaching on sexuality as “imposing” their beliefs on others.
Christianity is not simply one belief among many equally valid options.The world is not a neutral space. As Abraham Kuyper put it, “There is not a square inch in all of creation over which Christ, who is Lord of all, does not declare, ‘Mine!’” God reveals himself both in Scripture and in nature, and what he reveals about himself and his handiwork in nature is in harmony with what he reveals in Scripture because God is consistent and does not change (Numbers 23:19). This means that we can and should expect to see nature affirming what the Bible teaches about sexuality, and we should point others to the way that nature affirms biblical teaching on sexuality and the family.
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.
A year ago next Monday, Former Vice President and presumptive Democratic Presidential Nominee Joe Biden declared the LGBT agenda to be his number one campaign priority. Although he is currently centering his campaign around this issue, the former vice president’s shift to embrace this radical agenda has been gradual. His critics on the left have described him as slow to outline policy proposals advancing the LGBT movement and Senator Bernie Sanders has criticized Biden’s record as not being pro-LGBT enough.One liberalcommentator pointed out that this shift is typical of Biden’s stance—he begins moderate and then moves to a more extreme position. While Biden may have a history of being less extreme than other left-wing politicians, the policies outlined by his current campaign are anything but moderate. In fact, he has centered his campaign around some truly radical viewpoints, which has earned him an endorsement from the largest LGBT organization in the U.S.
In the time since he publicly declared the LGBT agenda to be his top campaign priority, Biden has, among other things, publicly committed to making Equality Act legislation a priority within the first 100 days of taking office if he is elected. The so-called Equality Act would make gender identity and sexual orientation a protected status under the Civil Rights Act. This would mean that if a biological male claiming to be female demanded entry to female locker rooms or restrooms, it would be a civil rights violation to deny him entry. His “gender identity”would override the privacy rights of women and girls. Similarly, schools would be required to allow male athletes who identify as female to compete on girls’ sports teams. Biden’s proposed policies would also allow male inmates to be housed in women’s prisons on the basis of genderidentity, with Biden explaining, "In prison, the determination should be that your sexual identity is defined by what you say it is [and] not what the prison says it is."
The early days of the COVID-19 outbreakcoincided with ongoing efforts in multiple states to keep radical, agenda driven comprehensive sex education (CSE) out of children’s classrooms. Parents in Washington state have been working to repeal a recent mandatory comprehensive sex ed law, finding ways to creatively connect with other parents and get the word outduring a pandemic, while in Texas, parents have been fighting Austin Independent School District’sexplicit sex ed program that was expected to be taught in May. After the stateprevented schools from using Planned Parenthood’s curriculum, the school district opted for an even more radical curriculum from a Canadian abortion provider.
Concerned parents had planned an organized sit out, which then moved to an online event. As schooling shifted online, the school district suddenly chose to cancel sex education for the year. While they did not cite parental concernsas their reason for the sudden decision, the number of parents speaking up probably did not make the school eager to bring this controversial curriculum into students’ homes. If Austin ISD had not cancelled their sex ed program for the year, what might those parents have discovered being taught in their children’s online classrooms?
The California legislatureis considering a bill that, if passed, would establish a taxpayer fund that would pay for “gender affirming healthcare services” such as hormone therapy and “gender reassignment” surgery. Assembly Bill 2218, which is expected to be brought to a voteon May 18, would put $15 million toward “treatments” that have never been approvedby the Food and Drug Administration. In a letter to California lawmakers, Family Research Council’s Peter Sprigg points out that this bill also funds “programming that essentially amounts to ideological indoctrination” by funding educational materials from organizations that affirm transgender ideology while denyingfunding to groups that do not encourage people to “transition.”
Earlier this year, The Public Discourse pointed out that the best studies on the effects of transgender “treatment” have shown the worst results.Despite the evidence of the harm caused by ideology-driven practices, California’s bill would require healthcare providers receiving grant money to partner and consult with trans-led organizations in order to implement a “trans-inclusive healthcare program.”
Attorneys helping three high school girls fight to protect girls’ sports in Connecticut are asking a district judge to recuse himself after he forbid them from referring to two biological males as males. In February, three high school girls filed a lawsuit against the Connecticut Interscholastic Athletic Conference with the help of Alliance Defending Freedom, challenging the decision to allow male athletes who identify as female to compete in female sporting events. During the 2018-19 competition season, two male athletes had dominated high school girls track, costing Selina Soule, Alana Smith, and Chelsea Mitchell competitive opportunities and chances at scholarships. Attorneys are asking district judge Robert Chatigny to recuse himself after he informed them that they must refer to the two male athletes as transgender females. According to Chatigny, referring to them as males is inaccurate, inconsistent with science, and “needlessly provocative.” He went on to say, “This isn’t a case involving males who have decided that they want to run in girls’ events. This is a case about girls who say that transgender girls should not be allowed to run in girls’ events.”
The problem with Chatigny’s statement is that this is a case involving males who have decided they want to run in girls’ events. By requiring the attorneys to use the term “transgender females” instead of “males,” Chatigny has already taken a side, and his claim that this is consistent with science is simply not true. Science confirms that men and women are different, and that these differences give male athletes a competitive advantage over female athletes. Men have larger heart and lungs than women, denser bones, and more muscle mass, and hormone therapy does not remove these physiological differences. Asking for these differences to be recognized in order to protect girls’ sports is not discriminatory, but refusing to protect competitive opportunities for women and girls will spell the end of women’s sports.
With the disruption of the past few weeks, it can be easy to forget what day it is, so let us do you a favor by reminding you that tomorrow is April Fools’ Day, that delightful day dedicated to pranks and jokes. Unfortunately, it is no joke that tomorrow the Saint Paul City Council is introducing a counseling ban that would prohibit licensed therapists from helping their clients explore all options to address questions over sexual orientation.Due to the remote nature of this meeting, the public is able to listen, but not to commentand voice their concerns over the proposal.
Nearly a year after her daughter went missing, the mother of a 15-year-old was notified by a friend that pornographic photographs and videos of her missing daughter had begun to appear online. Her daughter was alive and being trafficked and abused by a man twice her age. The discovery led to the child’s rescue, but not before her abuser impregnated her and forced her to have an abortion and had uploaded 58 separate videos of her being raped and abused onto Pornhub to be consumed for other people’s sexual enjoyment.
When the news of her exploitation and rescue first broke, Pornhub tweeted that the victim had been a verified user, before quickly deleting the tweet when they realized that they had admitted to being complicit in her abuse. Their attempt to save face does nothing to change the fact that this is not an isolated incident.Other abuse survivors have come forward to point out Pornhub’srole in perpetuating their suffering,and a recentlawsuit exposed and shut down a popular channel featured on Pornhub that was illegally produced by means of coercion and deception. Even after the settlement, Pornhub has continued to circulate the videos.
Last week Missouri lawmaker Ben Baker introduced legislation that would give a parental advisory board final say over library events and would penalize libraries that expose children to material that is not age-appropriate. This bill is being proposed in response to Drag Queen Story Hour events, a phenomenon that began in San Francisco in 2015, and within the next few years made its way across the country. The popularityof these events across the country last summer drew widespread attention to their problematic nature.
Here in Minnesota, Hennepin County libraries scheduled fifteen “Stories Together With Drag Performers” events in 2019. At one of these events, the performer wore a miniskirt with his legs spread at eye-level with the children he was reading to. This is not the only time that these events have gotten out of hand. Last summer photos of a drag queen story hour event at a Portland library showed children lying on topof drag queens in a sexual manner. The photos were taken down shortly after they began to draw attention online. And as Libby Emmonspointed out, there would have been no reason to remove the photos had they been innocent. Emmons goes on to write of the event,
…photos of kids laying atop grown men who are wearing sexualized female costumes, and encouraging gender fluidity gives truth to the lie that drag story hour isn’t about sexuality or sexualizing children. Children are drawn to sparkles and glitter, and using those things to make sexuality seem like mere play is nothing more than grooming kids to be sexual objects, not participants.
It is not fear-mongering to say that children are being sexualized at these events. These events really put children’s safety at risk, and there is no acceptable reason for parents or libraries to hold these events.
Last week, four members of Congress sent a letter to Attorney General Barr calling on the Trump administration to follow through on a campaign promise to enforce obscenity laws to stop the spread of pornography.
The letter, sent by Jim Banks (R-Indiana), Mark Meadows (R-North Carolina), Vicky Hartzler (R-Missouri), and Brian Babin (R-Texas), points out that the explosion of pornography coincides with increases in human trafficking and violence toward women. It also makes the point that children are increasingly exposed to pornography on the internet.
Pornography takes sex, something designed by God for good, and distorts it by divorcing it from its purpose. Rather than an expression of intimacy between husband and wife, pornography treats sex as a commodity in which human beings become objects to be viewed and used the sexual gratification of another.
Although many defenses of pornography emphasize “consenting adults,” the reality is that pornography is fed by and fuels human trafficking. Content on pornography websites frequently shows the rape and abuse of sex trafficking victims. When people are treated as objects rather than humans violence follows, and there is no way around the fact that pornography monetizes sexual violence. Pornography commodifies women (and men) and this is not without consequences. Violence is mainstream in the pornography industry, and it isn’t just conservatives who are pointing this out. Feminist activists, and even porn producers have called attention to the increasingly violent behavior that is normalized through pornography.
MINNEAPOLIS – Today the Minneapolis City Council voted to enact a ban on so-called “conversion therapy” after holding a public meeting on the subject earlier this week. The ban is an attack on individual choice in health care as well as on the constitutional rights of therapists, patients, and families. Minneapolis’s 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. “Throughout this debate, we’ve heard from men and women with moving stories of how sexual orientation change counseling helped them meet their therapeutic goals. At the end of the day, the Minneapolis City Council just outlawed a type of mental health care with no real justification.”
Recentresearch from the New York Times has revealed that there are over 45 million videos and images of child sexual abuse online. These numbers represent an exponential increase from a decade ago. Even more sobering, behind those numbers is the harrowing reality of millions of children who have been exploited and abused, their lives upended, and their innocence destroyed.
In light of this horrifying reality, will people wake up and replace thesexualization of children with focused efforts to protect their innocence? A great starting point for Minnesota would be to stop the push for radical Comprehensive Sex Education (CSE) in children’s classrooms.
For years there has been ongoing debate about whether or not same-sex attraction is genetic, including speculation over the possible existence of a “gay gene.” When a study was released this week by Science magazine, many sources reported that this study has resolved the debate. The problem? Depending on where you look, commentary on this study either claims that the study unequivocally proves that same sex attraction is genetic, or insists that the study forever puts to rest that claim.Who should we believe?
What you should know about the study:
Lead study author Andrea Gannastated, in light of her findings, that “There is no ‘gay gene.’” The study found genetic patterns that indicate that same-sex attraction has a genetic component, there was no evidence of a single gene that determines a person’s sexuality. The study found that genetics could explain8-25% of sexual behavior. In other words, genetics do not explain at least 75% of a person’s sexual behavior.
Recently, Superior became the eighth Wisconsin city to instate a counseling ban on “conversion therapy,” preventing teens who are struggling with unwanted homosexual attraction from seeking the help they want. The Star Tribunereports that a number of Minnesota cities are considering similar measures, after a state-wide ban failed to pass last session. If this is the case, it is certainly cause for concern, as these counseling bans are an attack on free speech, and an intrusion upon counselor-client relationships.
