The Family Beacon

The Blueprint: Progressive Activists Reveal Plans to Transform Education

Curtis Ferrin

Recently, Marvel Studios released a new show on Disney+ titled Secret Invasion. It’s a tale of alien shapeshifters attempting to take over the Earth, but I’m not writing to inform you about the latest in pop culture. What if I told you that there’s a real invasion, a secret war going on against our children in some American schools? Thanks to a report from the UK’s Daily Mail, plotters of this war here in the Midwest were recently exposed working on transitioning our kids “subversively and quietly,” as one progressive educator explicitly put it. The wagers of this war are not aliens—they’re activists disguised as friendly teachers and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) officers, and their often-subtle agenda of “gender affirmation” in classrooms is but one front of the larger war destroying our children while pitting them against their parents. 

Earlier in June, the Daily Mail obtained access to an online private workshop attended by dozens of teachers from states including Illinois, Ohio, Michigan, Iowa, and more. The federally funded four-hour event was hosted by the Midwest and Plains Equity Assistance Center (MAP), a subgroup of the Great Lakes Equity Center, and focused on how teachers can further push LGBTQ doctrine on students amidst recent red state policies on “gender, pronouns, parents' rights, bathroom access, and sports teams.” Also, as MAP specialist Angel Nathan said during the seminar, the group discussed ways to “remedy” what they believed to be the policies’ “marginalizing effects” on transgender students.

Reading the report, it’s clear that this wasn’t a vague discussion about these teachers’ general convictions or support for the LGBTQ movement. This workshop was more akin to creating battle plans for introducing young people to progressive ideas about gender and sexuality- without informing parents.

How Roe v. Wade Poisoned the Abortion Debate for Fifty Years

Patience Sunne

A few days ago, we celebrated one year in a post-Roe America. As we acknowledge this important milestone, it’s worthwhile to look at how a decision handed down by a Supreme Court Justice from St. Paul, Minnesota, still shapes the way our nation thinks about the humanity and rights of the pre-born after five decades — especially since a closer examination of the standard the Court offered reveals it to be capricious and arbitrary at best.

In the Roe v. Wade decision, Justice Blackmun’s opinion presented “viability” as the cut off for when an abortion ought to be legally and morally accepted. He also presented a trimester framework for thinking about abortion and its limits. In the first trimester, “the abortion decision and its effectuation must be left to the medical judgment of the pregnant woman's attending physician,” Justice Blackmun wrote. The state could offer restrictions in the second trimester that were “reasonably related to maternal health." For Justice Blackmun, the beginning of the third trimester—28 weeks—was the point of “viability.” At this point, the state’s interest in "the potentiality of human life" allowed for abortion to be banned, as long as it allowed for exceptions for the life and health of the mother .

This framework was offered not by medical experts or in consultation with them, but by the judges of the Roe majority.

Land of 10,000 Blessings: Why Minnesota is Worth Fighting For

Curtis Ferrin

This task is daunting, but now is the time to get in the game, get serious, and be willing to do whatever it takes to not only protect this land from the works of darkness but also to promote a better vision for Minnesota’s future and our children. Good things are never achieved without toil and sacrifice, and the enemy only wins when we surrender. Let’s radically love our Minnesota neighbors according to God’s standards, not those of the world, by staying in the battle and striving for what’s good. Let’s glorify God by remaining faithful in our state. This state is a wonderful gift worth fighting for and has so much potential, during the fight and until God gives us victory. I am more than ready to win for our state, and I pray you are too.

The Rampant Pace of Legislative Change is Not Inevitable

Guest User

Former President Barack Obama recently highlighted the rampant pace of legislative change in Minnesota so far this year to point out that elections have consequences. This is absolutely right – the narrow wins for progressives in the 2022 elections did have consequences. And those consequences are having reverberations for our entire state. This year, we saw a party with a one-seat majority disregard Minnesotans’ values to advance a radical agenda. Unsurprisingly, at the end of the legislative session, the majority of Minnesotans said they believe the state is on the wrong track.

  • The first bill passed and signed into law this year was the “Protect Reproductive Options” or “PRO” Act, establishing a “right” to abortion through all nine months of pregnancy, as well as a “right” to sterilization. Senate Democrats rejected over 30 amendments to the PRO Act, including amendments that would have banned late-term abortions, partial-birth abortions, and abortion on the basis of sex, race, or disability; protected children from sterilization; and required abortion facilities to comply with basic health and safety measures.

  • The legislature also passed a law that allows the state to take custody of children with gender dysphoria whose parents refuse to subject them to puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones—treating concerned, loving parents as if they are abusers, simply for refusing to subject their children to risky treatments that are not evidence-based. 67% of Minnesotans oppose sex-change surgeries for minors.

  • Minnesota’s so-called “conversion therapy” ban intrudes on the counselor-client relationship, restricting the First Amendment rights of licensed counselors and therapists and preventing young people and vulnerable adults who are struggling with unwanted same-sex attraction and gender dysphoria from receiving wanted counsel and therapy.

  • In addition to these individual bills, the omnibus Health and Human Services bill repealed Positive Alternative Grant program, which funded life-affirming alternatives to abortion, gutted the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, and repealed significant portions of Minnesota’s abortion reporting requirements.

  • The omnibus education bill included language excluding colleges and universities that hold to a statement of faith from participating in the PSEO program. Families affected by this new law are already challenging it in court.

Progressives also passed laws protecting abortion providers facing criminal charges in other states, legalizing recreational marijuana, and removing language from Minnesota law stating that pedophilia is not a sexual orientation.

As we look at the results of this legislative session, it’s important to keep in mind that the majority held the Senate by only one seat—a seat which was won by a mere 321 votes. This means that things do not have to stay this way in Minnesota. After all, elections have consequences and it is the role of voters to keep our elected officials accountable when they act against the best interests of our state. It’s time to start thinking—and praying—about 2024.

ERA Passage Sets Dangerous Precedent for Minnesota

Moses Bratrud

This week, the Minnesota Senate passed a bill that would put the so-called Equal Rights Amendment on the 2024 ballot. This measure now heads to the Minnesota House.

As many have recognized, the ERA sounds like a good idea on the surface - after all, who doesn’t like equal rights?

But the rationale for the ERA in this day and age becomes much more confusing once you realize that discrimination on the basis of sex, race, or national origin is already illegal under federal and Minnesota law.

It’s important to understand that the 2023 Minnesota ERA bears only a superficial resemblance to the original federal ERA.

“Update” to Minnesota’s Human Rights Act Threatens Minnesota’s Kids

Patience Sunne

With the legislative session in its final weeks, focus has turned to omnibus bills as they make their way through conference committees, to the floor of each chamber of the Legislature, and then to the Governor’s desk. One such omnibus bill (the Judiciary omnibus bill – HF2890) includes the “Take Pride Act” (HF1655) which is being presented as an update to Minnesota’s Human Rights Act. This “update,” which equates gender identity with biological sex, would be a step backward for Minnesota. Among other things, it would prevent nonprofits that work with children and youth from upholding sex distinctions in staffing decisions.  

This is the same “Take Pride Act” that drew national attention for attempting to remove language from Minnesota law stating that attraction to children is not a protected sexual orientation. Fortunately, lawmakers listened to the voices of Minnesotans who spoke out and unanimously agreed to an amendment to protect children. However, that amendment appears to be missing from the Judiciary omnibus bill as of May 12, 2023.

Just to be very clear: removing language stating that pedophilia is not a sexual orientation is by far the most dangerous part of this legislation, but even with the most harmful aspect removed, this Act still wouldn’t be good for Minnesota.

Get Informed: MFC In The News - 4/28/23

MFC Editor

See how Minnesota Family Council leaders reacted to this week's news:

Star Tribune 4/27/23: 

"Today, Governor Walz signed three deeply concerning bills into law," said John Helmberger, Minnesota Family Council CEO. "Governor Walz says he wants Minnesota to be the best state in the nation for kids to grow up in — yet each of these bills puts Minnesota children further at risk." 

Daily Wire 4/27/23

Minnesota Family Council CEO John Helmberger told The Daily Wire that the organization appreciated the unanimous vote and expressed hope that both parties would work to protect children from exploitation. “We’re also extremely grateful that this amendment was adopted unanimously; that’s a great expression of the desire of legislators in both parties to protect children from exploitation,” he remarked. “However, we wish it hadn’t come to this point; we wish that the authors of this bill would have realized the potentially extremely dangerous direction this legislation would lead, and corrected it before it got to the House floor.”

Helmberger added that some lawmakers had told their constituents that the Minnesota Family Council was “misleading” the public on the dangers from the loophole for pedophiles offered by the initial amendment. “Yesterday’s unanimous vote shows that our concerns were grounded in fact, and Minnesota legislators realized that,” he continued. “We hope this is the start of a new bipartisan drive to protect Minnesota’s kids from exploitation.”

Minnesota House Passes Bill Discriminating Against Religious Colleges and Universities

Patience Sunne

This week the Minnesota House of Representatives passed an omnibus education finance bill with a provision that would exclude religious colleges and universities from participating in the state’s PSEO program. This change would affect thousands of students and their families and would blatantly discriminate against faith-based institutions. The Senate companion bill does not currently contain this language, but the Senate education policy bill does.

Roughly one in four PSEO students in Minnesota take classes at a religious college or university. They are not required to take courses at a religious school, but choose to do so. For some, this decision is driven by a desire to pursue particular programs and courses. For others it is based on location, ease of transfer to their target school, or the school’s values. In each case, it is a choice that is freely made for the sake of pursuing the best educational options for their family and their circumstances.

The state is not required to offer postsecondary enrollment options. Minnesota is one of only a handful of states that does. This program makes college more affordable and gives students the opportunity to begin working on toward a degree while still in high school. If the state chooses to fund this program, it does not get to discriminate against religious schools, which is exactly what this bill would do. 

What's Next In Abortion Pill Court Battle?

Guest User

On Thursday, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ended the FDA’s approval of mail-order abortions. This most recent twist in a long back and forth court battle over the abortion pill means that while the mifepristone abortion pill is, unfortunately, still legal in the U.S., it is once again under stricter regulations, including a requirement for in-person distribution. The Biden Administration has said that it intends to appeal to the Supreme Court with the goal of keeping mail-order DIY abortions legal.

The Fifth Circuit’s ruling partially upheld an earlier decision from U.S. District Court Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, a federal judge in Texas. Although it stopped distribution of the abortion pill by mail, the Fifth Circuit blocked enforcement of the rest of Judge Kacsmaryk’s ruling that would have banned mifepristone abortions entirely.

Judge Kacsmaryk’s ruling came out last Friday in response to a lawsuit from Alliance Defending Freedom and the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, a group that has been fighting the FDA’s irresponsible approval of the RU-486 abortion pill regimen for the past 20 years. In 2002, the group petitioned the FDA to reconsider its approval of the abortion pill regimen. The FDA denied the petition in 2016, at which point it allowed even more lax oversight of the abortion pill regimen. It denied another petition in 2021 and lifted in-person requirements, allowing the abortion pill to be distributed by mail.

Born Alive, Allowed to Die? Jean's Story

John Helmberger

“This is how I spent my shift that day, holding him,” Jean told us. “I was gazing at his perfect face as he took his last breaths and passed to the next life.”

The rest of Jean’s story will leave you outraged. Why? Because the baby in question had survived an abortion and was given no medical care, to ensure that he died.

Baby Boy Doe’s story comes from a registered nurse named Jean who previously worked in the NICU (newborn intensive care unit) at a large hospital in the Twin Cities. Jean was asked to attend an abortion since the pregnancy was far enough along that a live birth was possible and her training may be required.

The mother-to-be had tragically just been diagnosed with cancer and been told – incorrectly – that to undergo cancer treatment she must terminate her pregnancy. She was judged to be about 23 weeks gestation, right around the earliest point of viability, but no ultrasound was ordered to confirm this guess or the position of the baby in the uterus.

Women and Girls Deserve Better than the ERA

Guest User

The Minnesota legislature is currently considering two bills to pass “Equal Rights” amendments, one to amend Minnesota Constitution and one calling on Congress to ratify an amendment to the U.S. Constitution. These amendments, under the banner of “equality,” would strip women of opportunities and could be used as the basis of a constitutional “right” to abortion.

Women already have equal rights under the 5th and 14th Amendments, and numerous Minnesota laws prohibit sex-based discrimination. These proposed amendments are unnecessary and would do far more harm than good.

The federal Equal Rights Amendment officially failed in 1982 when it passed the agreed upon deadline without the necessary 38 ratifying states. Minnesota’s SF 47 (HF197) urges Congress to pass a resolution stating that the Equal Rights Amendment is ratified, despite the fact that three of the ratifying states missed the deadline by over 35 years, and five other states rescinded their approval. Even a staunch supporter of the amendment, the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, questioned the legitimacy of this tactic.

Fighting Commercial Surrogacy is the Next Frontier for the Pro-Life Movement

Guest User

Minnesota’s recent law imposing abortion extremism on the state raises questions about an additional threat to life and human dignity. It is possible that the vague wording of the law could be understood to create a “right” to gestational surrogacy in law. In gestational surrogacy, a couple or an individual commissions a child to be created in a lab, either using their own sperm and eggs or donor gametes. The embryo is then implanted in the womb of a woman who has been contracted to be the “surrogate mother,” who carries the baby to term and then relinquishes the child after birth. Under most contracts, the surrogate mother has no right to continued contact with the child she has carried.

As is typically the case with in vitro fertilization, surrogacy often involves the creation of more embryos than the couple intends to use. There are serious pro-life concerns that arise any time lives that cannot be sustained outside of the womb are created in a lab to be left to the mercy of cryogenic freezing, disposal, or “donation” to research. Additionally surrogacy often involves “selective reduction” of multiples and abortion on the basis of disability.

The surrogacy industry is a growing threat to the sanctity of human life and dignity. Fundamentally, it puts a price tag on women and children while also compromising their physical and emotional well-being.

Progressives Want Minnesota to Become the Next State to Legalize Marijuana

Guest User

A bill moving through the legislature would add Minnesota to the 21 states that have legalized recreational marijuana, following state lawmakers’ haphazard legalization of cannabis-infused edibles in July of last year. Unlike other states that have legalized recreational marijuana, Minnesota’s bill would not allow local communities to opt-out. Section 13 of the nearly 250-page bill prohibits local governments from banning possession or sale of marijuana, imposing the drug on the entire state, including in communities that are opposed to it.

Although it is often portrayed as harmless, marijuana is associated with a host of risk factors for public health, and legalization has come with adverse consequences in the states that have embraced it. However well-meaning, legalization does not solve the problems it claims to solve and is likely to be harmful to children, families, and entire communities.

Beginning with the harm caused to individual users, cannabis use has been linked to cardiac complications, an increased risk of suicide, psychosis, and schizophrenia. These affects are especially concerning among young people, with the New York Times reporting that,

In addition to uncontrollable vomiting and addiction, adolescents who frequently use high doses of cannabis may also experience psychosis that could possibly lead to lifelong psychiatric disorder, an increased likelihood of developing depression and suicidal ideation, changes in brain anatomy and connectivity and poor memory.

Radical Trans Bill Attacks Parental Rights and Hurts Vulnerable Kids

Guest User

On Tuesday the Minnesota House Judiciary Finance and Civil Law Committee heard a bill that would allow the state to take emergency custody of children with gender dysphoria if their parents do not consent to subjecting them to so-called “gender affirmation healthcare” such as puberty-blockers and cross-sex hormones. In the style of California’s recent law making California a “sanctuary state” for gender transitions for minors, this bill would also allow minors to travel to Minnesota to receive these “treatments” without parental consent, posing a threat to parental rights and the well-being of children, not just in our state, but across the nation.

Puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones have been found to have serious and often lifelong side effects. These include:

·      Loss of speed processing and memory

·      Bone density loss and stunted growth

·      Sterility and loss of sexual function

·      Increased risk of heart attacks, ischemic strokes, and pulmonary embolisms

Furthermore, studies claiming that these treatments are beneficial are questionable at best. A recent review of the evidence found that the studies supporting puberty-blockers and “gender transition” for minors rely on “low to very low quality evidence” in order to support their conclusions.

Minnesota Legislature Considering Extreme Abortion and Infanticide Bill

Guest User

Last week the Minnesota House voted in favor of the “PRO” Act, a bill that creates a “right” to abortion up until birth in Minnesota. With the Senate debating this bill on the floor today, another lethal abortion bill is quickly making its way through the Minnesota legislature. HF 91 and its companion bill, SF 70, acts as a “how to” for the PRO Act, moving from the broad “rights” language of HF 1 to specific abortion expansions. HF 91 would make Minnesota one of the most extreme abortion states in the nation, depriving unborn babies of any and all protections under law and even allowing infanticide.

In committee, the author of this extreme bill was asked “When is a baby a human?” Representative Liebling dismissed this question as “inflammatory rhetoric” and “completely irrelevant.” How can such a question be irrelevant to a bill that would deny babies the right to life up until and even after birth? Under Minnesota’s Born Alive Infant’s Protection Act, medical providers are required to give life-saving care to babies who survive abortions. HF 91 and SF 70 repeal that law, allowing medical professionals to leave babies to die of neglect on a metal table after botched abortions. This is nothing less than legalized infanticide.

HF 91 and SF 70 would also remove all restrictions on abortion, as well as repealing reporting requirements, informed consent laws, and health and safety requirements. Currently, Minnesota releases an annual abortion report providing information on how many abortions were performed throughout the state, the age of the babies who were aborted, reasons for abortion, and how many babies survived abortions each year. These reports are the reason we know that Minnesota commits roughly 10,000 abortions and that five Minnesota babies survived abortion and were denied medical care in 2021, the most recent year we have data on.

As Renee Carlson, General Counsel of True North Legal boldly stated while giving legal testimony on SF 70, “Cattle and reptiles will have more legal protections in Minnesota than Minnesota’s vulnerable preborn children.”

HF 91 and SF 70 even remove reporting requirements when a woman dies because of an abortion. This, combined with the repeal of other safety restrictions, shows an utter disregard for health and safety, and an unwillingness to require any accountability for the abortion industry.

Minnesota is joined by only a small handful of states — New York, Vermont, and California — in embracing this level of abortion extremism. This legislation would make us an outlier on the international stage, as well, joined by China and North Korea in a callous lack of protection for babies and their mothers. Live Action notes that the bill even prevents local jurisdictions from taking any actions to protect unborn babies.

The abortion agenda being advanced by the Minnesota legislature does not reflect the values of the people of our state. On Sunday, pro-life Minnesotans gathered at the state Capitol to march in honor of the unborn children who have been killed by abortion, to celebrate the reversal of Roe v. Wade, and to demonstrate their commitment to continue to stand for life. Together they sent a clear message to lawmakers: we say “no” to abortion radicalism. Marchers included men and women, young and old, people from a diverse range of backgrounds, all united in their stand for the unborn.

In the crowd were men and women who have faithfully marched and prayed every year for 50 years since the Roe v. Wade decision, continuing to work to protect unborn lives even when they wondered if Roe v. Wade would be overturned in their lifetimes. The crowd included pro-life lawmakers, activists and lobbyists, staff and volunteers from pregnancy resource centers who meet the needs of women and families, faithful citizens who have spent decades asking their lawmakers to stand for life and working to elect pro-life officials, women who have courageously spoken out about the reality of abortion regret, and families that have committed to caring for vulnerable children.

It is because God uses faithful people like them, who have committed to the long-term work of protecting life, that Roe is no longer the law of the land on the federal level. And when abortion is no longer the law of the land in Minnesota, it will be through God’s use of faithful people who are committed to honoring him by valuing and protecting the lives of those made in his image.

Tell Legislators: The "How To" Abortion Bill is Wrong for Minnesota

Moses Bratrud

Dear legislator,

Thank you for your service in the Minnesota legislature. As your constituent, I’m writing to ask that you oppose HF91/SF70, the bill that changes Minnesota statute in order to carry out the demands of the Protect Reproductive Options Act. HF91/SF70 dismantles Minnesota’s protections for children in the womb and for removes common sense health and safety protections for women snd young girls that may obtain an abortions.

I believe there are three main reasons why you should vote NO on this legislation:

  1. This bill would force all Minnesotans to pay for all abortion services through Medical Assistance

  2. HF91 repeals the law protecting children born during abortion surgery (Born Alive Infants Protection Act,) legalizing infanticide.

  3. HF91 repeals statutes which ensure that pregnant women give informed consent prior to abortion. 

There are many more reasons to oppose this comprehensive bill, but I think these three truly show the radical nature of this bill. Again, as your constituent, I’m writing to ask for your NO vote on this radical and dangerous bill.

Respectfully signed,

Proposed Statewide Counseling Ban Would be Disastrous for Free Speech

Guest User

This week the Minnesota House Human Services Policy committee held a hearing for HF 16, a bill that, along with its Senate companion bill, SF 23, would ban counseling for minors and vulnerable adults who are seeking help for unwanted same-sex attraction and gender dysphoria, and place restrictions on free speech in Minnesota.

This so-called “conversion therapy” ban represents a government intrusion on the counselor-client relationship and is a case of blatant viewpoint discrimination. True North Legal General Counsel Renee Carlson said in her testimony, “This bill distorts the usual functioning of the counseling relationship—a private medium of expression—to suppress speech the government disfavors.” The bill’s far-reaching ban could even be applied to books and conferences that present the biblical view of sexuality and identity.

Proponents of this kind of ban often employ a bait and switch, insisting that the bill is necessary to prevent abusive practices and then pushing for a ban on voluntary talk therapy. The reality is that abusive practices in counseling are already illegal.

Letter to Church Leaders from MFC's Acting Director of Public Policy

Moses Bratrud

Dear Pastors,

            Thank you so much for your continued lifting of the Minnesota legislature in prayer. The priorities laid out by the majority parties in both Houses are expanding so-called abortion rights, putting transgender surgeries over parental rights, and legalizing marijuana, among other issues. Minnesota Family Council and our legal initiative True North Legal are working around the clock to stop any and all of these bills during this session. This week I’ve been regularly reminded of Ephesians 6:12: “For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rules of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places.” My prayer of Thanksgiving this week is that God is just. He exacts justice for both the victims and the oppressors. It is our job to be messengers of truth. More information and more bills will be coming. Please keep our work in prayer.

Psalm 145:13: “Your kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and your dominion endures forever.”

In Jesus,

Becca Delahunt, Acting Director of Public Policy

(note that identical bills must pass the House and Senate to be written into law; hence bills have both a House file and a Senate file.)

Life

Protect Reproductive Options (PRO) Act (HF1/SF1)

Minnesota Family Council testimony here. There is so much that can be said about this bill’s extreme overreach. We addressed three significant problems with the bill:

·       The bill codifies the right to abortion through all nine months of pregnancy, up to the moment of a child’s birth, with no respect to a baby’s development or the health and safety of the pregnant mother. For context, it took 50 years to overturn the Supreme Court’s decision on abortion in the Roe v. Wade case. Roe was not statute – it was an interpretation of statute. It is often very difficult to overturn monumental laws.

·       The bill states that each individual has the right to “reproductive health care,” with no definition given for the word “individual.” This means that boys and girls have the right to “reproductive health care,” which the bill authors define as “ including but not limited to, contraception; sterilization; preconception care; maternity care; abortion care; family planning and fertility services; and counseling regarding reproductive health care.”

·       The bill legalizes the right of minors to sterilization without parental or guardian consent.

One other significant question regarding this bill that we do not have an answer for is whether this bill states that every individual has the right to commercial surrogacy. The bill is not comprehensive in its definitions. What does “including but not limited to” mean exactly? Pray for clarity and that the broad wording of this bill is its downfall.

The “How-to” of PRO Act (HF91/SF70)

I highly recommend that you watch the exchange between members of the committee in the bill’s first stop at the House Health Finance and Policy Committee. Start the video around minute 39.

·       HF91 forces all Minnesotans to pay for all abortion services through Medical Assistance (Medicaid.) Taxpayers currently pay for abortions done only in the cases of rape, incest, or when the life of the mother is in danger. According to 2021 reporting from Minnesota Department of Health, these scenarios accounted for less than a percentage of abortions in Minnesota (see pages 19 and 20.)

·       HF91 repeals the law protecting children born during abortion surgery (Born Alive Infants Protection Act,) legalizing infanticide.

·       HF91 repeals statutes which ensure that pregnant women give informed consent prior to abortion. 

Gender/Sexuality

Minnesota Family Council will testify on the multiple upcoming gender ideology and sexualization of children bills:

·       The Kidnapping Bill (HF146/SF63): this bill takes custody from parents or guardians when “gender affirming care” is denied to their minor son or daughter. “Gender-affirming care” includes puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and potentially sex mutilation surgeries.

·       The “Conversion Therapy” Ban Bill: (SF23/HF16): this bill bans mental health professionals from helping minors and vulnerable adults (yes, even adults with physical disabilities) as they struggle with sexual and/or gender identity. The bill states that it is illegal to help a minor or vulnerable adult who struggles with identity bring them into alignment with their created sexed body. Instead, mental health professionals will only be able to provide counseling that helps minors or vulnerable adults in “gender transition” or to take on homosexual identity.

·       Comprehensive Sex Education: (HF174): this bill mandates schools to teach children about the “spectrum” of sexuality. CSE exposes children to gender identity and trains them to think in terms of stereotypes. If the girl feels like she does not fit the stereotype of a girl, CSE encourages her to wonder whether the gender identity she was “assigned at birth” (female) may have been a mistake.

The Gender Unicorn - An image used in Comprehensive Sex Education curricula.

 

Tell Legislators: Oppose Counseling Ban

Moses Bratrud

Dear legislator,

Thank you for your service in the Minnesota legislature. As your constituent, I’m writing to ask that you oppose HF16/SF23, the Counseling Ban or so-called “Conversion Therapy” ban.

Under the guise of "protection," this bill violates the free speech rights of both clients seeking help on sexual attraction/gender identity and their counselors, as well as various ministries and others who seek to provide care.

Here’s a couple more reasons why I believe you should oppose HF16/SF23:

  • Politicians have no business telling people that their personal counseling goals are illegal.

  • If this bill passes, kids who want to transition will receive counseling. Kids who want counseling to live consistently with their biology will be denied counseling.

  • People should have the freedom to pursue the counseling they want. This bill threatens that.

  • The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that "professional speech" does not deserve any less speech protections.

  • Since the bill applies to any “service or product,” this bill could prohibit a counselor from helping even adult clients from exploring options to address questions over sexuality, an author from selling a book challenging gender ideology, and a church from hosting a ticketed conference addressing issues of human sexuality and gender ideology.

  • Politicians ARE creating a law that denies people the freedom to find counseling and resources to help them find happiness, and chilling the First Amendment speech rights of counselors and other organizations and individuals that provide those services.

In light of these facts, as your constituent I’m asking that you vote NO on HF16/SF23.

Respectfully signed,

Tell Legislators: The PRO Act is Wrong for Minnesota

Moses Bratrud

Dear Senator,

Thank you for your service in the Minnesota Legislature. As your constituent, I am writing with deep concern about HF 1/SF 1, the PRO Act, which seems a direct affront to commonsense protections for women and for the well-being of children in the womb. I am asking for you to vote NO on this legislation.

I am taking the time to write because I believe this bill is deeply dangerous to all Minnesotans. I'd like to outline a couple reasons why.


The Protect Reproductive Options Act would make Minnesota an outlier in the world with NO LEGAL PROTECTION for the rights of unborn children:

  • The bill codifies the right to abortion through all 9 months of pregnancy, with NO LIMITS or restrictions based on the child’s development in the womb.

    • The bill does not delineate between children and adults – minor girls will have the right to abortion without parental or guardian consent.

  • Few nations allow for such unrestricted access to abortion – North Korea, China, Vietnam, and Canada are the only countries which allow unrestricted access to abortion.

  • In codifying access to abortion throughout pregnancy, this bill also offers no regulation on health and safety standards of abortion facilities and abortion drug dissemination to pregnant women.

    • Health and safety standards exist for nearly every other surgery and drug. This bill orders no health and safety standards for abortion in Minnesota.

    • This bill would allow the abortion industry to profit from pregnant women without any protection for the health of mothers.

  • Far from a simple codification of reproductive rights for women, this bill allows the abortion industry to profit from pregnant women, both children and adults, without regulations and without regard for patient health.

  • Beyond its codification of complete abortion access, this bill’s broad language states that children and adults have the fundamental right to access other reproductive services, including sterilization and contraception.

  • Finally, the bill outlaws any local government regulations on these “reproductive care” services which would restrict the access outlined in the bill.

In view of these established facts, I'm asking you to vote NO on HF 1/SF 1. A NO vote on the PRO Act is actually a vote for the protection of women and children, and I respectfully ask you to vote NO on this bill. I know many of my fellow constituents feel the same way. Minnesota Family Council will keep me informed of your vote and I will take it into account in the next election.

Respectfully signed,