The 3 - September 2, 2018

Another week, another edition of The 3, spotlighting three relevant stories to the Christian community.  One story involved a cheerleader unit that has been in and out of court for some six years over the issue of Scripture on football posters through which the players run before a game.  Also, there was an event at the White House this week involving around a hundred Christian leaders.  And, a sudden turnaround in California, where a bill that could have had a chilling effect on pastors and counselors was withdrawn by the sponsor.

3 - Another round in court goes to the Kountze cheerleaders

I don't know how the high school football team in Kountze, Texas is doing on the field, but the school's cheerleaders are on a winning streak. Just this week, KDFM.com reports that "...the Texas Supreme Court today denied Kountze ISD's petition for a review of a lower court ruling allowing cheerleaders to create Bible verses on run-through football banners, according to information David Starnes, the attorney who represented the cheerleaders, provided to KFDM/Fox 4 News."

The Kountze Independent School District has been filing a series of legal challenges essentially against its own students ever since the Freedom from Religion Foundation contacted officials and said the banners were unconstitutional.  This was in 2012.  The television station's story stated:

The Ninth Court of Appeals in Beaumont sided with the cheerleaders in a September opinion, then denied the district's request for a rehearing in October.

The Kountze ISD attorneys responded by saying the appeals court opinion, "that the run-through banners are neither government speech nor school sponsored speech, leads to absurd results."

Kountze ISD requested the Texas Supreme Court clarify the opinion, citing conflicts with precedent set by previous rulings in federal court.

Hiram Sasser of First Liberty, one of the attorneys for the cheerleaders, in a quote on the law firm's website, is quoted as saying: "As the football season kicks off across Texas, it’s good to be reminded that these cheerleaders have a right to have religious speech on their run through banners—banners on which the cheerleaders painted messages they chose, with paint they paid for, on paper they purchased. School districts everywhere should learn an important lesson from this failed litigation by the Kountze Independent School District: stop harassing cheerleaders and accept that they are free to have religious speech on their run through banners."

2 - Evangelical leaders dine at White House

There is a significant number of Christians who made the choice in 2016 to vote for Donald Trump for President, believing that he was a better option than his opponent.  He has acted strongly on behalf of pro-life policies, has appointed two traditionalist judges to the U.S. Supreme Court, one of which stands confirmation hearings beginning this week, and has been a clear defender of religious freedom.

So, it's not surprising that the White House would invite a number of Christian leaders, about 100 in all, for a special dinner recently.  Religion News Service reported on the occasion.  The report stated:

Calling America “a nation of believers,” President Trump said at the event that they had gathered to “celebrate America’s heritage of faith, family and freedom.”

“As you know, in recent years the government tried to undermine religious freedom, but the attacks on communities of faith are over,” the president said. “We’ve ended it. We’ve ended it. Unlike some before us, we are protecting your religious liberty.”

Reports about those in attendance include a the names of number of Faith Radio programmers, including Jim Garlow, David Jeremiah, Greg Laurie, Eric Metaxas, and Tony Perkins.  Franklin Graham was also in attendance.

The President ended his remarks, according to the story, by saying, "The support you’ve given me has been incredible, but I really don’t feel guilty because I have given you a lot back — just about everything I promised, and, as one of our great pastors just said, ‘Actually, you’ve given us much more, sir, than you’ve promised,’ and I think that’s true in many respects.”

Some of the reporting, including this story, has centered on the apparently non-formal remarks that were recorded and sent to the New York Times, in which the President encouraged those in attendance to make sure their constituents voted and made reference to those that would overturn the gains on religious liberty, "quickly and violently."

1 - California bill that would have limited freedom of speech pulled by sponsor

After the California Senate passed a bill, AB 2943, that could have resulted in the banning of counseling for people seeking to overcome unwanted same-sex attraction and the sale of resources in the state to that end, it looked as if a pending vote in the other chamber, the Assembly, would go in a similar direction; after all, the chamber had originally passed the bill and had to vote again because of Senate changes.

However, on the final day the bill could be passed before being sent to the governor, the sponsor, Assemblyman Evan Low, pulled it from consideration.  The Los Angeles Times reported:

But after religious groups assailed the proposal, calling it a threat to their right to practice their faith, Low went on a listening tour to meet with clergy across the state. Low ultimately decided to pull Assembly Bill 2943 before final approval in the Assembly, he said.

“I believe we are on the side of the angels on this issue,” Low said. “Having said that, in order to get it right, why wouldn’t we want to engage in meaningful, thoughtful, transformational relationships and conversations?”

The article goes on to say:

The bill was staunchly opposed by practitioners and adherents of “conversion therapy,” who argued it deprived adults of the choice to pursue such a practice. Others said the measure infringed on religious practices and could even be used to ban the Bible or other printed materials. The bill was amended to clarify that only services, not goods, would be subject to the law.

Still, faith leaders considered the bill’s language to be overly broad, sparking fears that pastors or church counselors could be subject to lawsuits if they ministered to people grappling with their sexuality.

One of those was Azusa Pacific University chaplain, Kevin Mannoia, who was one of those clergy with whom Low met.  Mannoia had written in an op-ed in the Orange County Register this week, “The breadth of the language in AB2943 will limit the ability of California’s pastors to engage fully with the real struggles of their people,” adding, “Mr. Low has said that is genuinely not his intent. I am hopeful that he and the LGBTQ Caucus may still collaborate with churches and institutions to preserve their freedom of ministry while at the same time protecting LGBTQ people from harm.” In the op-ed, he took a swipe at so called, "reparative therapy," calling into question its effectiveness, which is a position that is certainly not universally held by Christian leaders, especially those who work in the area of helping a person experience freedom in Christ.

Jonathan Keller of the California Family Council stated:

“AB 2943 would have tragically limited our ability to offer compassionate support related to sexual orientation and gender identity, and even to preach Jesus’ message of unconditional love and life transformation.”