MINNEAPOLIS - Minnesota’s largest Christian public policy group, Minnesota Family Council, made the following statement about today’s Supreme Court ruling in June Medical Services v. Russo.
Today’s decision shows once again that the Supreme Court’s whole approach to abortion jurisprudence is antithetical to the goal of protecting human life. As Justice Thomas wrote in his dissent, “[The Court's abortion decisions] created the right to abortion out of whole cloth, without a shred of support from the Constitution’s text. Our abortion precedents are grievously wrong and should be overruled.”
Minnesota Family Council’s Director of Public Policy, Veronica, Faye, made the following statement: “Let’s be clear: when abortion businesses, who do not have women’s best interests at heart, are allowed to speak for women in courts of law, we are letting the fox guard the henhouse. Under the Louisiana law the Court struck down this morning, the state required abortion clinics to abide by the same standards of care required of other ambulatory surgical centers. By holding abortion clinics to a lower standard, the Court is failing women and girls. Abortion always kills a child, and often hurts a woman. All of Louisiana’s abortion clinics have been cited for safety violations - why would the Court trust them to have women’s best interests at heart? Minnesota Family Council will continue to work in state and federal legislatures, and in the court system, to fight for the God-given right to life.”
This week marked 48 yearssince Title IX became law,opening the door for women and girls to have equal opportunitiesto compete in sports. In the time since then there has been a remarkable increasein female involvement in athletics. Now, two in every five girls plays sports, ten times the number that did when Title IX went into effect.In less than 50 years, Title IX has created opportunities for women and girls offering advantages that go far beyond the accolades of the playing field.
Lisa Hoffer is one of those young women.Lisa began playing softball when she was five and basketball when she was seven. An accomplished athlete, she received multiple awards throughout high school, including All Conference Honors in both sports, the ExCEL Award during her junior year, and becoming her high school’s All Time Women’s Leading Scorer in basketball during her senior year. She has gone on to play both sportsat Bethel University where her basketball team qualified for the NCAA tournament this year.
I never thought I would have to tell my children that there would be negative consequences for believing that God created us distinctly male or distinctly female, or, that the U.S. Supreme Court would redefine “sex,” in certain provisions of the law, contradicting basic biology.
Earlier this week, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark opinion concerning the meaning of the word “sex” in Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Acts. Six unelected Justices on the U.S. Supreme Court turned biology and the English language on its head when the majority held that “sex” has the same meaning as “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” in discrimination claims.” Dissenting, Justice Alito, stated “There’s only one word for what the Court has done today: legislation…A more brazen abuse of our authority to interpret statutes is hard to recall.” Citing to the myriad of unsuccessful attempts by Congress to change the meaning of the word “sex” in Title VII, he explained, “[t]he questions in these cases is not whether discrimination because of sexual orientation or gender identity should be outlawed. The question is whether Congress did that in 1964. It indisputably did not.”
Casting aside biological realities will have consequences, despite the majority’s contention that “bathrooms, locker rooms, or anything else of the kind” are for another day. We’re still left wondering about the impact of this ruling on religious freedom – particularly religious schools and other ministries. And what about the impact on women? We’re still left to wonder, can a male identifying as a female really win a women’s sports title? This decision certainly serves as an invitation for lower courts to continue building on this narrative, further redefining the meaning of the word “sex.” The consequence are real, and the outcomes are unpredictable, as the Court left many of these questions unanswered. Surely a myriad of lawsuits seeking these answers are forthcoming.
Many abortion activists insist that “abortion is a decision between a woman and her doctor!” This line of argument is used in an attempt to shut down the abortion debate, painting the pro-life movement as an intrusion on women’s privacy and healthcare. But how accurate is this claim? The claim that abortion is “between a woman and her doctor” makes two assumptions. First, that the woman seeking an abortion is the only person affected by her decision,and secondly, that abortion is performed exclusively for medical reasons.
Regarding the first assumption, we have to keep in mind that abortion is really about the life of the child in the womb. Neither a woman nor her doctor have the moral right to make a decision to end the life of another human being. Because of this, we cannot say that abortion is a private decision that ought to be kept between a woman and her doctor. In no other circumstances would we say that two people have a right to make a “private decision” determining whether or not another person should live or die. The death of millions of innocent humans is an issue that touches every single member of our society because disregard for the value and dignity of human life anywhere is a threat to human life everywhere. It is not up to a woman and her doctor to decide that a child does not get to live.
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.
In March, as nursing homes were beginning to limit visitors in order to slow the spread of COVID-19, the heartwarming story of a man visiting his father at a Minnesota nursing home every day, sitting outside his window while chatting with him on the phone, made its way into many social media feeds. The story offered encouragement and hope in the midst of uncertainty. Come what may, the most vulnerable members of our communities would be cared for and we would weather this storm together. Putting nursing homes in lockdown and keeping families away from loved ones may be difficult, but if it was keeping people safe, it must be worth it, right?
By late Aprilthings had shifted. It became clear that elderly populationsmight not be as safe in nursing homes as people had hoped, and by the third week of May, Alpha News reported that Minnesota had the highest percentage nursing-home related COVID-19 deaths nationwide. What happened? Minnesota had followed New York and other states in funneling COVID-19 patients out of hospitals and into nursing homes.
During the height of the COVID-19 lockdowns, the Abortion Pill Rescue Network received a record number of calls. In February a mother gave birth to twins who were saved through the abortion pill reversal. Early this year a little boy named Isaiah celebrated his first birthday thanks to the Abortion Pill Rescue Network. To date the Abortion Pill Reversal Network has saved over 1,000 babies. Now abortion pill reversal websites are currently under attack as a pro-abortion “watchdog” group, Campaign for Accountability (CFA), demands that the FDA remove these websites.
Abortion pill reversalwebsites offer lifesaving hope. When a woman begins the abortion reversal process, the abortion industry has already made their money off of her, so why are the abortion industry’s allies dead set on taking down these websites? Because women who change their minds and find help from abortion pill reversal groups to save their babies challenge the abortion industry’s narratives. By choosing hope, they demonstrate that women do not need abortion in order to be successful and they promote a culture of life through their actions. Abortion pill reversals empower women to choose life, and that threatens the abortion industry and their allies.
Like the rest of the nation, New York City has seen protestors flood the streets in response to the killing of George Floyd. And yet, as protestors gather by the thousands, the city is still technically under lockdown and is scheduled to begin phase one of reopening next week. Throughout the state,worship services are still limited to gatherings of no more than 10 people and New York Mayor Bill de Blasio has threatened to permanently close churches in New York City that hold worship services without his permission. A week ago he said that it would be “very dangerous” to reopen churches, saying that “it is not the time to start large gatherings of any kind.”
In a press conference yesterday, Mayor de Blasio was asked why the city is applying one standard to protestors and another to everyone else. De Blasio responded by saying,
When you see a nation, an entire nation simultaneously grappling with an extraordinary crisis seeded in 400 years of American racism… That’s not the same question as the understandably aggrieved store owner, or the devout religious person who wants to go back to services. This is something that’s not about which side of the spectrum you’re on. It’s about a deep, deep American crisis…
In the days following May 25, the world witnessed the horror and injustice of George Floyd’s death, face down on the ground with Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin’s knee on his neck. In killing Floyd, Chauvin demonstrated a complete disregard for Floyd’s value and dignity as one of God’s image-bearers. It was a violation of the 5th Commandment, and those of us who are pro-life should be as outraged and grieved by Floyd’s murder as we are by abortion. In both cases, the destruction of human life is a grievous sin and a crime.
God hates injustice, and George Floyd’s death should grieve and anger us because it grieves and angers God. All earthly injustice finds its final, eternal end in the justice of God. This is a source of hope in the midst of evil; ultimately, justice will prevail. It is also the reason that we love and pursue justice now. We seek earthly justice because we love the God who is just and because earthly justice points people to who God is.
Right now Minnesota is facing tragedy upon tragedy and injustice upon injustice. In the time since George Floyd was killed, we have watched as our cities have erupted in flames and rioters and looters have exploited the situation, drowning out the voices of peaceful protestors,endangering people, destroying homes, and robbing people of their livelihoods. The actions of the rioters display a disregard for human life and dignity as they wreak havoc and desolation on communitiesthat are already struggling from the economic implications of COVID-19. What we are witnessing in our cities right now is the devastation that human sinfulness unleashes on fellow image-bearers.
