The 3 - December 25, 2022

This week's edition of The 3, highlighting three stories of relevance to the Christian community, highlights a recent federal appeals court ruling that upheld one state's action of allowing biological males to compete in female sports.  Also, hundreds of instances of violence against churches have been reported, bringing security concerns for the Church.  Plus, a group of lawmakers have challenged officials regarding the military paying for abortion-related services, including transportation of members to other states.

Court rules male athletes can continue to compete against females

In a case out of Connecticut that was spotlighted in a Meeting House conversation with Christiana Kiefer, who is Senior Counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled against four female athletes who were challenging the ability for biological males claiming to be female to compete against them. 

ADF's website reports that the lawsuit was "filed on behalf of four female athletes who were consistently deprived of honors and opportunities to compete at elite levels because the Connecticut Interscholastic Athletic Conference adopted a policy that allows males who identify as female to compete in girls’ athletic events..."

Kiefer is quoted as saying: "The 2nd Circuit got it wrong...Our clients—like all female athletes—deserve access to fair competition. Thankfully, a growing number of states are stepping up to protect women’s athletics. Right now, 18 states have enacted laws that protect women and girls from having to compete against males, and polls show that a majority of Americans agree that the competition is no longer fair when males are permitted to compete in women’s sports. Every woman deserves the respect and dignity that comes with having an equal opportunity to excel and win in athletics, and ADF remains committed to protecting the future of women’s sports.”

Hostility against churches continues

We have continued to spotlight acts of violence against pro-life ministries and churches dating back to just after the draft of the majority opinion in the Dobbs case was leaked. In fact, over the past few years, there have been a concerning number of attacks on churches in general, according to a disturbing report by Family Research Council.

In a press release, FRC stated that, "A total of 420 acts of hostility against churches occurred between January 2018 and September 2022 across 45 U.S. states and Washington, D.C." The study also notes, "There were at least 57 pro-abortion acts of hostility against churches from January 2022 to September 2022."

FRC President Tony Perkins stated, "As a former commissioner and chairman of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom..., I've seen the warning signs of this gathering like clouds across the Atlantic. As the mainstream culture moves further and further away from a biblical worldview, I've witnessed the hostility to moral truth creep closer to our shores. The West, once the safe haven of free speech and religion, is turning cold to our religious foundations that have helped us thrive..."

  

He called for the current Administration to "do more" relative to attacks on churches. He added: 

"Christians must not live in fear. We must not be intimidated; we must continue to stand upon the truth of God and defending the freedom of all to live out their faith free from the fear that they will be subject to a violent attack."

The report's author, Arielle Del Turco, Assistant Director of the Center for Religious Liberty at FRC said that, "When faced with such blatant violence and disrespect against churches (and religion more broadly), our response must be to condemn these acts and reaffirm the right of all people to worship and live out their faith freely -- including the freedom to live without fear that they will be the next target of such an attack."

Lawmakers warn Defense Department that federal law prevents it paying for abortions

It is unfortunate and offensive that we have numerous lawmakers across America who support the taking of the lives of unborn children through abortion - and then want taxpayers to pay for it!  A group of members of Congress have taken the Department of Defense to task, sending a letter to the Secretary of Defense calling him out for supporting taxpayer-funded abortion. 

The Daily Signal reports:

“Both the law itself and Congressional intent are clear: the U.S. military may not fund elective abortion,” the bicameral group of lawmakers said in a letter first obtained by The Daily Signal. “This necessarily includes funding for any activity necessitated by the abortion, such as travel and transportation.”

Representatives Chris Smith and Vicky Hartzler and Senators Steve Daines and James Lankford were responsible for the letter, which, according to the article...

...references the Pentagon’s Oct. 20 memorandum announcing that the Defense Department would establish “travel and transportation allowances for Service members and their dependents … to facilitate official travel to access non covered reproductive health care that is unavailable within the local area of a Service member’s permanent duty station.”

The report also notes:

The lawmakers called on Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin to explain whether the DOD has begun providing transportation and travel for abortions, and if so, where the money is coming from to fund this “illegal policy.” They also demanded specifics on during “what week gestation would travel and transportation to obtain an elective abortion be provided”—including whether the DOD would implement the illegal policy up until birth.

The 3 - December 18, 2022

This week's edition of The 3, focusing on three recent stories of relevance to the Christian community, includes a toy manufacturer's inclusion of gender identity-related subject matter in a guide it has made available.  Also, a flight attendant who lost her job due to her expression her pro-life views on personal social media has received not only a financial settlement, but a court has order that her employment be restored.  Plus, a second federal appeals court has ruled against what is known as the "transgender mandate," which would require medical professionals to perform sex-change surgeries, which they find objectionable due to conscience.

Toy manufacturer creates uproar due to its embrace of gender identity messages

Last week, I noted that actor Kirk Cameron had been rejected in attempts to schedule the reading of his latest book at libraries across the country.  He had been quoted by Fox News Digital as saying: "This is proof that more than ever, we are getting destroyed in the battle for the hearts and minds of our children."

Another instance of what Cameron was addressing comes from a major toy manufacturer.
CBNNews.com reports that:

American Girl has published a guide that advises girls as young as three to transition their gender, also promoting puberty blockers – and it is sparking outrage.

The American Girl website is selling "A Smart Girl's Guide: Body Image Book" for $12.99. The 96-page book, authored by Mel Hammond, shows four girls of different backgrounds on the cover and the subtitle reads, "how to love yourself, live life to the fullest, and celebrate all kinds of bodies."

According to CBN, "But screenshots shared by the DailyMail and parents on Facebook reveal that there is more to this guide than advertised."  The article notes:

The book normalizes being transgender, promotes the use of puberty blockers, and encourages free gender expression.

"If you haven't gone through puberty yet, the doctor might offer medicine to delay your body's changes, giving you more time to think about your gender identity," reads a snippet.

The article states, "Earlier this year, American Girl's parent company, Mattel, released a transgender Barbie doll." 

The CBN article referenced a Christian Post piece written by Anne Young, who is the mother of two girls.  She wrote:

I am calling on American Girl to stop publishing books that teach girls to destroy their bodies by changing their sex. I am calling on American Girl to go back to creating dolls and stop sending these destructive messages. I have loved this brand since my daughters were babies and we want to continue enjoying their products. But we can no longer do so unless they choose to change course. I emailed the executives and I encourage everyone to do likewise.

Families like mine go to the American Girl store to purchase dolls, not gender ideology. What they are pushing on our girls is horrific and it must be stopped.

Flight attendant suspended for pro-life views to be reinstated

A flight attendant who posted her pro-life views online, fresh off winning a court case several months ago, is now in position to get her job back, according to LifeNews.com, which reported that Charlene Carter...

...worked as a flight attendant at Southwest for nearly 21 years. In 2017, she was fired after sharing her pro-life beliefs on Facebook and speaking out against the Transportation Workers Union of America (TWU) Local 556 spending members’ dues on pro-abortion activities.

In July, a federal district court in Dallas, Texas awarded her $5.1 million, but she pressed on with her legal battle because of her love for her job and the customers she serves and carter hoped to get her job back. A judge has ruled that will now happen.

Decision Magazine reported that the latest ruling...

...also requires Southwest to rehire Carter with full seniority and benefits, send a copy of the jury’s verdict and judgement to all its flight attendants and post the documents on internal bulletin boards for at least 60 days, and inform flight attendants that the airline is not allowed to discriminate against them for expressing their opinion about abortion on social media.

The article noted that "...the judge limited the amount of damages to $810,180, which includes $300,000 each from Southwest and the union in compensation, $150,000 in back pay, and $60,180 in prejudgment interest."

Another federal appeals court blocks administration rule forcing medical professionals to perform transgender surgeries

Just a few weeks ago, the Administration allowed a deadline to pass to appeal a ruling by a Federal appeals court against a rule made by the Department of Health and Human Services that would force medical professionals to violate their conscience and be involved in surgeries intended to help a person change his or her gender.  

Another appeals court has issued a similar ruling, and Baptist Press reports:

The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Dec. 9 a permanent injunction that barred enforcement of a Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) rule that has become known as the “transgender mandate.” A three-judge panel of the appeals court, which is based in St. Louis, unanimously affirmed a North Dakota federal judge’s decision that the Catholic entities that challenged the regulation were entitled to protection under a federal law that guarantees free exercise of religion.

In August, a three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans unanimously endorsed a permanent injunction against the HHS rule issued by a federal judge in Texas. The Biden administration declined to appeal the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court by the 90-day deadline in late November.

Luke Goodrich, a former Meeting House guest who is Vice President and Senior Counsel at Becket, issued a statement from which the article quoted; he said: “The federal government has no business forcing doctors to violate their consciences or perform controversial procedures that could permanently harm their patients,” adding, “The government’s attempt to force doctors to go against their consciences was bad for patients, bad for doctors, and bad for religious liberty.”

The Baptist Press article pointed out the attempt on the part of HHS to change language to have a different meaning; it noted:

During the Obama administration, HHS’ original mandate, issued in 2016, defined sex to include “gender identity” and “termination of pregnancy.” The Trump administration issued a rule in 2020 that rescinded the Obama-era policy by returning to the ordinary interpretation of the word “sex.”

Under President Biden, however, HHS announced in May 2021 a reinterpretation of sex discrimination to include discrimination on the basis of both sexual orientation and gender identity. Sexual orientation includes homosexuality, bisexuality and pansexuality, while gender identity refers to the way a person perceives himself or herself regardless of biology at birth.

The 3 - December 11, 2022

In this week's edition of The 3, offering three stories of relevance to the Christian community, the so-called Respect for Marriage Act returned to the U.S. House after being amended and passed in the Senate, where it was approved again, amidst concerns of a lack of religious liberty protections.  Also, the U.S. Supreme Court held oral arguments in a case involving a graphic artist and web designer who did not wish to be forced by her home state to communicate messages about same-sex marriage that violate her religious beliefs.  Plus, a flight attendant will be getting her old job back after being dismissed for expressing her pro-life views. 

U.S. House passes Senate-amended version of so-called Respect for Marriage Act

This bill called the "Respect for Marriage Act," which actually does not show respect for marriage that consists of one man and one woman but reaffirms the concept of same-sex marriage, has now completed its journey through Congress, passing the U.S. House a few days ago - the chamber had passed the bill originally; after being amended in the Senate, it returned for another vote.

The Daily Citizen reported on the bill, which passed the House 258-169. It stated that it "embeds a false definition of marriage into the American legal fabric" and "repeals the Defense of Marriage Act," the 1996 bill that "defined marriage as the union of one man and one woman." The Respect for Marriage Act, the article says, "also codifies 'same-sex marriage' into federal law."

The article included a quote from Focus on the Family President Jim Daly, who said that: "Enshrining into law a destructive definition of marriage that undermines and expresses hostility towards God’s sacred design of a multi-millennia old institution invites the inevitability of unintended consequences. It also threatens to criminalize people of faith and jeopardize organizations that have done so much good for so long."

Kelly Shackelford, President and Chief Counsel of First Liberty said, "As our legal experts have made clear, this bill is a threat to religious liberty. It punishes the free exercise of religion by letting radical activists harass faith-based institutions in court because of their religious beliefs about marriage."

U.S. Supreme Court holds arguments in free speech case

Early last week, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case of a Colorado graphic artist and web designer who does not wish to be forced to communicate messages on same-sex marriage to which she objects, based on her Christian beliefs.  The case is 303 Creative v. Elenis, and Alliance Defending Freedom is representing the designer, Lorie Smith. Matt Sharp, Senior Counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom, discussed those oral arguments in a recent Meeting House conversation on Faith Radio. 

SCOTUS Blog reported:

Smith is challenging a Colorado law that prohibits most businesses from discriminating against LGBTQ customers. Requiring her to create websites for same-sex weddings, she argues, would violate her right to freedom of speech.

At the oral argument, Justice Sonia Sotomayor asserted that a ruling for Smith would be the first time that the Supreme Court had ruled that “commercial businesses could refuse to serve a customer based on race, sex, religion, or sexual orientation.” But Chief Justice John Roberts countered that the Supreme Court has never approved efforts to compel speech that is contrary to the speaker’s belief, and his five conservative colleagues signaled that they were likely to join him in a ruling for Smith.

The article notes that ADF CEO, President, and General Counsel "Kristen Waggoner emphasized that Smith 'decides what to create based on the message, not who requests it.'"

Actor rejected in numerous attempts to schedule the reading of a Christian story in public libraries

While the concept of the Drag Queen Story Hour has continue to spread, apparently, among taxpayer-funded public libraries, some libraries that allow these events have not been open to allowing a reading of a Christian story, according to a FoxNews.com report, which said that, regarding actor Kirk Cameron's request to read his book, As You Grow...

...over 50 public libraries have either outright rejected him or not responded to requests on his behalf.

A story-hour program for kids and parents connected to new book releases is an activity that many libraries typically present to their patrons and communities.

Many of the same libraries that won't give Cameron a slot, however, are actively offering "drag queen" story hours or similar programs for kids and young people, according to Cameron's book publisher and according to a review of the libraries' websites and current program listings.

The Fox article, published on December 7, noted that:

Reacting to the news that he has yet to be booked into a single children's story hour at a public library in America for his new book — and commenting on the rejections and comments he's received — Cameron told Fox News Digital, "This is proof that more than ever, we are getting destroyed in the battle for the hearts and minds of our children."

The 3 - December 4, 2022

This week's edition of The 3, featuring three recent stories of relevance to the Christian community, includes a court victory against a mandate for health professionals to be involved in so-called "gender assignment surgeries."  Also, another federal circuit court ruled in favor of Air Force members who have objected to the COVID vaccine for religious reasons. Plus, a majority of the U.S. Senate has caved on upholding religious freedom in approving the so-called "Respect for Marriage Act."

Deadline passes for administration to challenge court decision on transgender surgeries

Back in August, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit struck down a mandate that originally had been put in place since the Obama administration that, according to FoxNews.com, "required doctors and hospitals to performance [sic] gender reassignment surgeries on any patient – including children – even if it was against a doctor’s conscience or medical judgment."

At the time, the Biden administration was given a deadline of November 25 to appeal that decision - and it took a pass, meaning the mandate is no longer in effect.   Former Meeting House guest Luke Goodrich of Becket stated: "The final demise of this unconscionable mandate is a major victory for conscience rights and compassionate medical care in America," adding, "Thousands of doctors will be able to do their jobs without the government requiring them to perform harmful, irreversible procedures against their conscience and medical expertise."

One of the groups challenging the mandate, the Christian Medical and Dental Associations, issued a statement, in which CEO Mike Chupp is quoted; he said, "This key legal battle is a hard-fought victory that impacts and protects the rights of healthcare professionals across this country...After more than six years of fighting this case in federal court, we have now set a national precedent and ensured we can continue to provide the best and safest care to our patients.”

FoxNews.com also noted that, "A similar case is pending in the Eight Circuit Court of Appeals."

Air Force members receive relief concerning vax mandate

Attempts to mandate the COVID vaccine to members of the military have received quite a bit of pushback from numerous members, including those who have requested a religious exemption from the requirement to be vaccinated in order to serve. 

Liberty Counsel reports on its website that:

The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously upheld a classwide injunction that protects U.S. Air Force personnel from the COVID-19 shot mandate since it violates their religious freedom under the First Amendment and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA).

There were 18 active duty or reservist plaintiffs in the lawsuit.  The lower court allowed that to be expanded to a class of thousands of Air Force members.

The Christian legal organization, which presents a daily commentary from its Founder and Chairman, Mat Staver, on Faith Radio, said:

After the Air Force ordered all service members to get vaccinated against COVID-19, approximately 10,000 members requested religious exemptions from this mandate. However, the Air Force granted only about 135 of these requests and only to those already planning to leave the service. By July 2022, the Air Force had “administratively separated” 834 members. Yet it has granted thousands of other exemptions for medical reasons, such as a pregnancy or allergy, or administrative reasons, such as an impending retirement. 

Judge Murphy of the Sixth Circuit wrote, "Under RFRA, the Air Force wrongly relied on its ‘broadly formulated’ reasons for the vaccine mandate to deny specific exemptions to the Plaintiffs, especially since it has granted secular exemptions to their colleagues. We thus may uphold the Plaintiffs’ injunction based on RFRA alone."

Staver is quoted as saying: "No service member should be required to choose between service to the country and service to God. This will be a good precedent for our upcoming argument at the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals and our January trial seeking a permanent classwide injunction for the U.S. Marines.”

Respect for Marriage Act endures challenges on religious liberty basis, passes U.S. Senate

An amended version of the so-called "Respect for Marriage Act," which not only is a legislative action upholding same-sex marriage, but presented valid religious liberty concerns, according to a number of Christian organization, after attempts to strengthen religious liberty protections failed, was passed by the U.S. Senate.  It now goes back to the House for affirmation.

The James Dobson Family Institute posted a statement from its Founder Chairman, James Dobson, who is heard on Dr. James Dobson's Family Talk Saturday mornings on Faith Radio, and the Institute's Senior Vice-President of Public Policy Gary Bauer; they stated:

The proponents insisted they were merely trying to protect same-sex marriages, but same-sex marriage is under no imminent threat. Instead, the bill struck a dangerous blow against Americans’ fundamental right of religious freedom, and the potential ramifications are distressing.

The post noted some of those ramifications:

1. It will make it easier to override legal protections for religious freedom.
2. It sets the stage for government agencies to proclaim, and courts to find, a governmental “compelling interest” that justifies forcing religious entities to recognize same-sex marriages.
3. It takes a step toward revoking the tax-exempt status of religious organizations whose views do not align with the LGBTQ agenda.
4. It could force faith-based foster and adoption care agencies to place children with same-sex couples.
5. It could mandate that religious organizations hire and retain staff who publicly repudiate the entity's beliefs about traditional marriage.