The 3 - November 28, 2021

This week's edition of The 3, highlighting three relevant topics impacting the Christian community, includes the conclusion of a lengthy court case of a Washington state woman who bravely fought the good fight regarding religious freedom.  Also, California's highest court will be hearing a case involving the use of pronouns corresponding to so-called "gender identity," rather than biology.  And, new language being issued by the State Department affirms so-called "reproductive rights," and could be interpreted to mean support for abortion.

Action against florist in Washington State who declined to provide products for a same-sex wedding ceremony ends

The struggle for religious freedom for Barronelle Stutzman, a florist in the state of Washington, has ended, but not with the victory she had hoped; a story on the Alliance Defending Freedom website reports that after almost a decade, she "has chosen to retire so her beloved employees can run her business, Arlene’s Flowers. She will withdraw a pending petition for rehearing at the U.S. Supreme Court and make a payment of only $5,000 to the two men who sued her."

They sued her because she politely declined to provide flowers for a same-sex wedding ceremony. ADF said that man who had initially contacted her "...never filed a complaint with the attorney general’s office, which brought an unprecedented action against Stutzman because of news reports based on social media posts." The story also notes that the men did sue Barronelle "through attorneys with the ACLU."

The ADF website documents more of the process:

Stutzman asked the U.S. Supreme Court to take her case after the Washington Supreme Court ruled against her in June 2019. The U.S. Supreme Court vacated the state high court’s ruling and ordered it to reconsider in light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2018 ruling in another ADF case, Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission. The state court then issued essentially the same ruling. Stutzman again asked the U.S. Supreme Court to consider the cases, but the high court declined to hear the case over the objection of three justices, resulting in her rehearing request.

The site relates that the "settlement agreement...ends a lawsuit brought against floral artist Barronelle Stutzman nearly a decade ago without forcing her to act against her religious beliefs or to pay potentially ruinous attorneys’ fees."

Top California court to hear case involving pronouns based on "gender identity"

The controversy over whether or not people who insist on being referred to with pronouns that contradict their biological gender will now visit the California Supreme Court, according to an article on the ChristianHeadlines.com website, which states that, regarding a law prohibiting what is termed, "misgendering:" 

The multi-faceted law placed new restrictions on long-term care facilities and was geared toward protecting LGBT residents – yet a section on pronouns has sparked major pushback.

The controversial section makes it unlawful to “willfully and repeatedly fail to use a resident’s preferred name or pronouns after being clearly informed of the preferred name or pronouns.” Violating the law could subject the employee to criminal penalties, including fines and jail time.

This follows a court decision earlier this year on the law, which was signed by then-Governor Jerry Brown in 2017. In the decision, "a three-judge panel of the California Court of Appeals unanimously struck down the controversial pronoun section of the law."

Administration inserts so-called "reproductive rights" into religious freedom report

Throughout our government, religious freedom protections are being challenged, and an article that was published on the Family Research Council and re-published at The Christian Post highlights yet another example.  According to author Arielle Del Turco, who has been a guest on The Meeting House:

Secretary of State Antony Blinken reinstated an Obama-era addition to the State Department human rights report—reporting on foreign countries’ laws and programs regarding abortion and contraception. The new addendum to the 2020 report released in March now features sub-sections on “reproductive rights” in the individual evaluations of every member country of the United Nations.

The term “reproductive rights” is code for abortion, and its use in official U.S. human rights reports is inappropriate. A “right” to abortion is nowhere to be found in international human rights law; meanwhile, the right to life certainly is.

What are the implications? Del Turco notes, "State Department reports set the tone for U.S. human rights advocacy and are frequently referenced by NGOs and international bodies. The topics that the United States chooses to cover in these reports conveys to the rest of the world what the United States considers human rights and what type of human rights issues our foreign policy will prioritize."

She adds, "Instead of leveling the playing field, legalized abortion pressures women into viewing their children as enemies of their success. Abortion is not necessary to ensure equality—having equal protections and rights under the law are." She also writes, "Rather than monitoring (and by doing so, implicitly promoting) access to abortion around the world, the State Department should re-focus its efforts on addressing the truly pressing human rights abuses that are unique to women and girls."

The 3 - November 21, 2021

This edition of The 3 features the decision of the governmental agency in charge of enforcing the Administration's COVID vaccine mandate to abide by a court decision and halt further enforcement action.  Also, a Virginia teacher who spoke up about a proposed policy forcing educators to call students by their preferred pronouns has been exonerated.  And, it appears that religious freedom protections for federal contractors will be curtailed.

OSHA decides to wait out court action

The Biden Administration's attempt to force businesses who employ 100 or more to enforce mandatory COVID vaccines on its employees has been met with swift and strong opposition in the courts: from state governments to companies and even some ministries.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit was the first to put the mandates on hold.  The National Law Review documented the progression regarding the Emergency Temporary Standard issued by OSHA, a division of the U.S. Department of Labor:

On November 6, 2021 the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals (based in New Orleans) issued a very short preliminary ruling “staying” implementation of the ETS pending further briefing in the court. Then, on November 12, 2021 the Fifth Circuit entered a long opinion in which it has issued a preliminary stay of the law.

In doing so, the court signaled in the strongest of possible terms that it was poised to find that the rule does exceed OSHA‘s statutory authority in several ways and is unconstitutional. 

The website announced that on November 17, "OSHA has suspended all activities relating to the implementation and enforcement of the ETS pending further litigation. However, this is still a temporary ruling and will be appealed, most likely all the way to the Supreme Court, which would make the final decision."

There are other cases making their way through the courts - for instance, the 6th Circuit has been designated to hear further challenges to the mandate, according to the Alliance Defending Freedom.

Teacher returns to classroom with clean record

ADF also represents Tanner Cross, the teacher in Loudoun County, Virginia, who was suspended due to his public comments at a school board meeting in opposition to calling students by their preferred pronouns corresponding to their so-called "gender identity." He has had his record restored following a positive ruling from the Virginia Supreme Court, according to the legal organization's website, which says:

In settlement of the original claims that Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys filed on behalf of Leesburg Elementary School teacher Tanner Cross, the Loudoun County School Board has agreed to a permanent injunction prohibiting it from retaliating against Cross for expressing his constitutionally protected views on the board’s transgender policy.

And, there's more good news, according to ADF: "As part of the settlement, the Loudoun County School Board also agreed to remove any reference to Cross’ suspension from his personnel file and to pay $20,000 toward Cross’ attorneys’ fees."  Court action will continue, though, involving other teachers in the district.  The website relates:

In August, the court allowed ADF to amend its original complaint to add new claims against newly enacted Policy 8040 and to include Loudoun County High School history teacher Monica Gill and Smart’s Mill Middle School English teacher Kim Wright as clients alongside Cross. That portion of the lawsuit will continue against the board.

Federal agency to rescind religious freedom protection

Federal contractors may face a reduction in religious freedom as the result of a new proposed rule change, according to The Christian Post, which reported:

The Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, a U.S. Department of Labor division, has proposed rescinding a federal contractor rule adopted under President Donald Trump in 2020.

The article stated, "In the proposed rule change, published in the Federal Register...the OFCCP argued that the Trump administration rule was too broad compared to previous administrations and ran afoul of discrimination measures governing federal contractors."

The Christian Post report goes on to say:

The Trump-era rule came in response to an Obama-era directive that added sexual orientation and gender identity to the list of protected employment classes governing federal contracts. Critics feared the Obama-era rule could put faith-based contractors in jeopardy of losing their contracts if their hiring policies don't comply with the federal government's interpretation of LGBT discrimination law.

Now, in an effort to prevent so-called "discrimination" on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity, it appears the Department of Labor will now place greater scrutiny on contractors who claim a religious exemption from compliance.  As the Christian Post article points out, "Many religious organizations that contract with the federal government have required their staff to agree to statements of faith and conduct themselves in accordance with the organizations' statements of faith."

The 3 - November 14, 2021

This week's edition of The 3 includes court action involving religious protections against attempts to grant unique considerations to people based on sexual orientation and gender identity.  Also, a federal appeals court has doubled down on its halt to the enforcement of the Administration's vaccine mandate. And, the governor of Oklahoma has stated that he has never directed the state's health department to begin issuing "non-binary" birth certificates.

Judge supports religious protections from so-called LGBTQ "discrimination"

The Bostock decision by the U.S. Supreme Court has had a chilling effect in the arena of providing considerations on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity; in that case, companies were ordered to protect the so-called "rights" of LGBTQ employees, even to the detriment of company policy.

But, what happens when a company owner's religious perspective is informing the policy?  Such was the case in Texas; as ReligionNews.com reported about one of the plaintiffs:

Braidwood Management Inc. does not employ individuals “who are engaged in homosexual behavior or gender non-conforming conduct of any sort,” does not recognize same-sex marriage or extend employee benefits to same-sex partners and enforces a sex-specific dress and grooming code, according to court documents.

Bear Creek Bible Church in Plano was another plaintiff. For both, according to the article: "U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor in Fort Worth held that Braidwood Management Inc., which operates three Christian health care businesses in Katy, Texas, is exempt from LGBTQ anti-discrimination protections in Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act under both the First Amendment and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act." The judge also ruled that the church "can fire or refuse to hire LGBTQ employees under Title VII’s religious exemptions."

Court reinforces its stay of White House vax mandate

Last week, I reported about the decision out of the U.S. Court of Appeals for Fifth Circuit placing a hold on the regulation from the U.S. Department of Labor forcing employees of companies who employ 100 or more people to either get the COVID vaccine or face testing requirements at the employee's expense. Some across the nation have faced termination as the result of vaccine mandates.

There have been statements from the Biden Administration urging companies to ignore the previous court ruling.  Last week, the court issued a stronger statement, according to CBN.com, which reported:

The three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled that "a stay is firmly in the public interest" as the number of lawsuits against the measure increases.

"From economic uncertainty to workplace strife, the mere specter of the Mandate has contributed to untold economic upheaval in recent months," the 22-page ruling reads. "IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that OSHA take no steps to implement or enforce the mandate until further court order."

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton stated on Twitter, according to the article:

"Citing Texas' 'compelling argument(s),' the 5th Circuit has delayed OSHA's unconstitutional and illegal private-business vaccine mandate. WE WON! Litigation will continue, but this is a massive victory for Texas and for FREEDOM from Biden's tyranny and lawlessness..."

OK Governor says non-binary birth certificates are not OK

Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt, in light of action by the state's Department of Health to add a so-called "non-binary" option to birth certificates, has declared that the practice will end in an Executive Order, according to an article at The Hill, which points out that:

The order mandates the Oklahoma State Department of Health (OSDH) to “cease amending birth certificates” in any way that is inconsistent with state law, and to “remove from its website any reference to amending birth certificates” that doesn’t align with state law.

Stitt further urged the Oklahoma state legislature to “immediately pass legislation that will clarify, to the extent necessary, that changes in sex or gender on a birth certificate, or a designation of non-binary is contrary to Oklahoma law.”

The article reports that the health department stated it is committed to upholding the law, as it sees it, which sets up a showdown in the state. The Hill notes that the governor had said: "I believe that people are created by God to be male or female. Period...," adding that, "There is no such thing as non-binary sex and I wholeheartedly condemn the purported OSDH court settlement that was entered into by rogue activists who acted without receiving proper approval or oversight..."

The 3 - November 7, 2021

This week's edition of The 3, featuring three stories of relevance to the Christian community, highlights court action regarding the Administration's mandate directed at many businesses in the nation, which would impact millions of employees.  Also, the U.S. Supreme Court was hearing an abortion case out of Texas this week.  Plus, there is a Christian faith element in the outcome of the Virginia statewide elections this past week. 

Court fight against vaccine mandate - round 1 goes to challengers

Just like clockwork, as soon as the OSHA guidelines were announced for the vaccine mandate to be slapped on employers who have 100 or more employees, plaintiffs, including states and business concerns, lined up to file suit, and within days, a federal court had already called a halt to the enforcement of it, at least until the cases can make their way through the system.

Round 1 goes to those who filed suit in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The Epoch Times quoted from the order:

“Because the petitions give cause to believe there are grave statutory and constitutional issues with the mandate, the mandate is hereby STAYED pending further action by this court,” a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit said in the brief order.

The halt of the mandate, which was unveiled this week, is temporary as the case moves forward.

First Liberty Institute represented two large Christian ministries, and a press release stated:

First Liberty Institute petitioned the Fifth Circuit on behalf Daystar Television Network and American Family Association to review the mandate.

“We don’t live in a dictatorship where a President can issue an edict and take over all of the large companies in our nation and the lives of over 84 million Americans,” said Kelly Shackelford, President, CEO, and Chief Counsel for First Liberty Institute. “The mandate is massively unconstitutional and violates statutory law as well. We’re pleased that the Fifth Circuit has stopped it from being implemented.”

The Epoch Times reported that "The case was brought by multiple businesses...; multiple individuals; and several states, including Texas, Utah, and Mississippi."

But the Fifth Circuit is not the only place where the action is. Alliance Defending Freedom reported on its website that in the 11th Circuit, it is representing two Christian schools and said, "The lawsuit—in which ADF attorneys represent the Christian schools, and the attorneys general of the states of Florida, Alabama, and Georgia represent their states as lead petitioners—will explain that the Biden administration lacks constitutional and statutory authority to issue the employer mandate, and that the mandate failed to meet the required procedural hurdles. In short, Florida and the Christian schools argue that the federal government cannot coerce individuals nationwide to undergo medical treatment, and it lacks authority to conscript employers to compel that result."  ADF's website also reported it has cases in the 6th and 8th Circuits.

High court hears arguments on Texas abortion law

You can expect the vaccine mandate to ultimately end up in the U.S. Supreme Court, which had its hands full this past week with yet another appeal of the pro-life law out of the state of Texas, banning most abortions once the heartbeat of an unborn child is detected. The Director of the Center for Human Dignity at Family Research Council, Mary Szoch, made these comments at the Supreme Court: 

"I'm Mary Szoch and this is my son, Joe. Joe is three and a half months old, and in four countries around the world, Joe could have been aborted right up until the moment of birth three and a half months ago. And sadly one of those countries is the land of the free--the United States. But not in Texas. Texas found a way to defend the unborn child in the womb. Texas found a way to say, 'the abortion movement will no longer prey upon our women and children.' And thank goodness, because the world could use a lot more Texans!"

Travis Weber, Vice President for Policy and Government Affairs, Director of the Center for Religious Liberty of Family Research Council, wrote...

...the Court was merely examining two legal questions not directly related to abortion at all:

1) Whether the federal government (in this case the Biden administration Department of Justice) can intervene and sue over a state law like this, and

2) Whether a state can confer upon private citizens the authority to enforce a law like this, while barring the state itself from enforcing it.

The Supreme Court will decide these questions as it determines whether or not the Act can continue to be enforced while the lawsuit filed by the Justice Department can move forward.

Faith plays role in Virginia victories

This week, there was an election in Virginia, and despite claims by some that it was a vote that was representative of "white supremacy," the voters of the Commonwealth delivered a diverse slate for its top three constitutional offices, and GetReligion.org pointed out a Christian faith presence.

It referred to an article at the website, A Journey Through NYC Religions.  In its story on the Virginia elections, it stated (beginning with a reference to Governor-elect Glenn Youngkin):

Youngkin goes to an evangelical Episcopal church Holy Trinity Church and provides a retreat center for FOCUS (Fellowship of Christians in Universities & Schools), an evangelical outreach to prep school students. In UK Youngkin served on the executive committee of Holy Trinity Brompton (the home church of the Alpha course).

The GOP Lt Governor-elect Winsome Sears is an African American who headed a homeless ministry for the Salvation Army (as well as being vice president of the Board of Education for Virginia, an elected official, and a Marine).

Attorney General-elect Jason Miyares is a Latino Christian, a member of Galilee Episcopal Church, an evangelical leaning Episcopal church.

The writer of the article, Tony Carnes, who is also Editor and Publisher of the site, mused: "...underneath, I wonder. did the deep connections to the people in the pews and the balance and gentleness of the Spirit play a role?

Carnes continued:

Or as Youngkin put it with a bit of hyperbole and spiritualized metaphor in his speech last night: “A campaign that came from nowhere. But we were joined by neighbors and friends of all races, of all religions, of all ages, of all political ideologies, and it turned into a movement. This stopped being a campaign long ago. This is the spirit of Virginia coming together like never before.”

Youngkin's website states that he has served on the boards of Museum of the Bible and the Meadowkirk Retreat Center, which is apparently a center that is based on Christian principles. It also notes that has has been Church Warden at Holy Trinity Church.