Author archives: Worth Loving

A True Blue Congress

by Worth Loving

March 14, 2019

Without a doubt, life, family, and religious freedom are under an unprecedented all-out assault in our nation. Many left-leaning states are following New York’s lead and further undermining the right to life. Others are embracing various aspects of the radical transgender agenda by forcing it on schools, businesses, and non-profit organizations. And, the fundamental building block of any successful society—the family—is under vicious attack from all fronts.

Despite that reality, Congress is actually more pro-life, pro-family, and pro-religious freedom than ever before. Each year, FRC Action releases our congressional scorecard, grading members of Congress on how they vote on a number of bills, nominations, and resolutions related to our core issues of faith, family, and freedom. Members who score 100 percent are named our “True Blue” members and invited to receive an award at our annual reception on Capitol Hill. Our most recent scorecard included votes on the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, judicial nominees, and Planned Parenthood, among others.

This year, we set a record for the most True Blue members of Congress ever. A record 276 members of the House and the Senate received a True Blue award for their 100 percent rating on our congressional scorecard. That’s over half of Congress that stands 100 percent for life, family, and religious freedom! On February 28, many of these members joined us at the Capitol Hill Club in Washington, D.C. for our annual True Blue reception. Each member had the chance to receive an award and speak with our president, Tony Perkins. FRC Action staff also had the opportunity to talk to each member and thank them for standing with us on the foundational values of life, family, and religious freedom.

At a time when life, family, and religious freedom are being ferociously attacked, it’s refreshing to see so many members of Congress who are 100 percent committed to standing with us and fighting every day for the unborn, the family, and the persecuted. This is further evidence that our election efforts each year are paying off! Check out our scorecard to see if your members of Congress support faith, family, and freedom. If not, contact them and tell them to start standing for our shared values right away. Also, check out our Twitter page to see what our True Blue members had to say about the work of FRC Action and about standing for life, family, and religious liberty at such an important time in our nation’s history.

On the Fighting Side of Life

by Worth Loving

March 5, 2019

On January 22, 2019, the 46th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo signed into law the Reproductive Health Act, one of the most radical late-term abortion laws in the nation. A few days later when asked about a similar bill proposed in the Virginia House of Delegates, Governor Ralph Northam went a step further by advocating for infanticide. The actions in New York and Virginia have since spawned a domino effect throughout the nation, with liberal politicians in several other states proposing their own radical abortion bills.

Responding to the mad rush to legalize late-term abortion and infanticide, Senator Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) introduced the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, a bill designed to protect babies born alive from botched abortions. Sadly, when this legislation came up for a vote in the Senate last week, 44 Democrats voted against it. Furthermore, Democrats have blocked 11 requests for unanimous consent on this legislation, 10 times in the House of Representatives and once in the Senate. The second vote in the Senate last week was to end debate on the bill and force a vote. That’s right, Democrats have voted against protecting babies born alive from botched abortions 12 times.

Despite these setbacks, we are fortunate to have many members of Congress willing to fight for life, no matter the political repercussions. Last week, Congresswoman Martha Roby (R-Ala.) stopped by our Washington, D.C. headquarters to discuss how she and her colleagues in the House and Senate are standing up to the radical abortion agenda. In addition to the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, Congresswoman Roby has cosponsored several other pieces of pro-life legislation including the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, the Life at Conception Act, the Heartbeat Protection Act, the Defund Planned Parenthood Act, and the Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act. Declaring her intent to fight for life, Congresswoman Roby stated unequivocally: “I will continue to use my platform in Congress to serve as a vocal advocate for the unborn.” In the midst of the rush to deny innocent babies the right to life, how refreshing it is to see so many members of Congress working hard to pass legislation to protect them.

To learn more about the congressional fight to protect the born and unborn, please take time to listen to Congresswoman Roby’s presentation. Then, contact your members of Congress and tell them to pass the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act immediately so that it can be sent to President Trump’s desk for his signature. Lastly, please visit EndBirthDayAbortion.com to learn how you can send a clear and direct message to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to protect babies now. Together, we will create a culture in which all human life is valued and equally protected.

Elections Have Consequences

by Worth Loving

February 15, 2019

Many Americans were understandably horrified when New York passed one of the most expansive late-term abortion laws in the country a few weeks ago. When asked about a similar bill proposed in his own state, Virginia Governor Ralph Northam not only defended the bill but also argued for infanticide. Now, states like Vermont and Rhode Island have been emboldened to pursue even more radical abortion bills.

The rush to lift restrictions on late-term abortions reveals a common theme—elections have consequences. For example, consider New York. While pro-choice Governor Andrew Cuomo was elected in 2011, Republicans regained control of the New York Senate. Since becoming Governor, one of Cuomo’s promises has been to legalize late-term abortion. However, the Republican-controlled Senate has continually stood in his way. But in the 2018 midterm elections, Republicans lost their majority in the state senate. This created a trifecta, with Democrats controlling the Assembly, Senate, and Governor’s Mansion. Once the new legislature convened on January 9, they wasted no time in fast-tracking the Reproductive Health Act to passage on January 22. Governor Cuomo signed it into law the same night. In New York, the 2018 elections had serious consequences for unborn babies.

Virginia also provides a prime example of why elections matter. While pro-life Republicans have not held the governorship since 2013, they have controlled the House of Delegates since 2000 and the Senate since 2013. In 2017, Republicans nearly lost control of both houses. The Senate remained in their control by one seat while control of the House of Delegates was decided by a name drawing. After Republican incumbent David Yancey and Democratic challenger Shelly Simonds each received 11,608 votes in District 94, the Virginia Board of Elections drew their names from a bowl. Yancey’s name was drawn first, allowing Republicans to retain a narrow 51-49 majority in the House of Delegates. If the outcome had only differed by one seat in each house, Delegate Kathy Tran’s New York look-a-like bill championed by pro-choice Governor Ralph Northam may very well have passed both houses and been signed into law. In Virginia, elections had serious consequences for babies, both born and unborn.

As we approach the 2020 elections, abortion will once again be a front-and-center issue. Even more so will be the issue of infanticide. An overwhelming 77 percent of voters support federal legislation known as the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act that would protect infants who survive a botched abortion. Despite this support, Democrats continue to block this bill in both the House and Senate.

So remember when you go to the polls on November 3, 2020—the lives of perfectly viable children are in your hands. Together, let’s send a message to the Democratic Party that the United States stands resolutely against infanticide and that their refusal to condemn it is grossly out of touch with mainstream America. Let’s remind them that elections have consequences. 

Why We March: The Civil Rights Movement of 2019

by Worth Loving

January 23, 2019

Yesterday marked the 46th memorial of perhaps the deadliest decision in world history, Roe v. Wade. This Supreme Court decision legalized abortion-on-demand across America and has resulted in the deaths of some 61 million people, more than the Civil War, both world wars, and the Holocaust combined. Abortion was the leading cause of death worldwide in 2018, killing an estimated 42 million and surpassing deadly diseases such as cancer, heart disease, and HIV/AIDS.

Despite the deadly decision, the Supreme Court did leave room for Congress and the states to regulate abortion. In 1976, Congress enacted the Hyde Amendment, an annual legislative provision that bars federal funding of abortion and has been renewed every year since. President Bush signed the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act in 2004 after President Clinton had vetoed several previous efforts to outlaw the barbaric practice. The Supreme Court upheld the law in the 2007 case of Gonzalez v. Carhart. In 2017, President Trump signed the first federal pro-life law in 13 years that allowed states to withhold Title X funding from Planned Parenthood. President Trump has also appointed a record number of pro-life judges, reinstated the Mexico City policy, and barred U.S. funding of UN programs that promote abortion.

However, more progress seems to be happening at the state level. In the last decade, many states have passed laws requiring waiting periods, counseling, ultrasounds, or parental notification. Some are passing laws mandating that abortion facilities meet hospital standards, shutting down many of them as a result. Several states have enacted legislation to defund Planned Parenthood and to ban abortions after 6, 12, or 15 weeks.

One of the other few bright spots from Roe v. Wade was the vast pro-life movement that it spawned. From public policy organizations to crisis pregnancy centers to pro-life student groups, Roe v. Wade ironically “birthed” thousands of warriors for life across the entire country. One of the most visible proofs of this is the annual March for Life in Washington, D.C. Since the first March for Life on January 22, 1974, it has become the largest human rights gathering in the world; and we will continue to come back every year until Roe v. Wade is overturned.

Despite this progress, there is still so much more that must be done to eliminate abortion in America. For example, abortion is still legal in the U.S. after 20 weeks, putting us in a league with totalitarian regimes like China, North Korea, and Vietnam. New York just legalized abortion up until the point of birth. We cannot call ourselves the freest country in the world if we continue to allow the most innocent and vulnerable among us to be murdered while we turn a deaf ear and a blind eye to their cries of pain. Despite all the progress since Roe v. Wade, hundreds of children will die just today in the U.S. because abortion is still legal.   

You may be wondering, “I’m just one person. How could I possibly make any difference?” There’s actually a lot you can do as one person. Here’s a few practical steps that you can take today:

  1. Pray. Pray that God would protect every unborn child from abortion and allow them to be born into loving homes. Pray for our leaders in all three branches of government that they would protect life and overturn Roe v. Wade once and for all. Pray for those that remain defiantly pro-choice or are indifferent to abortion that God would soften their hearts to the plight of the unborn. Pray for all abortion doctors, nurses, and clinic workers that their minds would be opened and that they will cease abortions today. And last, pray for those standing in the gap to eliminate abortion in America—legislators, public policy organizations, crisis pregnancy centers, student groups, and many more. The environment in which they work is more hostile than ever before, and they need our prayers for God’s protection and for them to have courage and boldness to press on.
  2. Contact your members of Congress. There are several pieces of legislation that have already been introduced that will further protect the unborn. Call, write, or email your member of Congress and ask them to support legislation such as the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, the Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, and the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act. These are common-sense bills that should pass with wide bipartisan support but haven’t yet done so because not enough people contact their members of Congress and voice their support. I have been told by several people who work on Capitol Hill daily that if a member receives at least 10 phone calls, letters, or emails on a particular bill or issue, he or she will give it more attention.
  3. Educate yourself and those around you. Start with our resources here at FRC, such as “Top 10 Myths About Abortion,” “Planned Parenthood is Not Pro-Woman,” “The Best Pro-Life Arguments for Secular Audiences,” and “Stem Cells, Cloning, and Human Embryos.” Visit our website to get copies for yourself and your friends and family.
  4. Support a pregnancy resource center in your area. These centers support women with counseling, supplies, and medical care completely free of charge. Above all, they lovingly urge the women who come to them to keep their babies. Thousands of lives have been saved as a result of pregnancy resource centers. Many need volunteers and are always in need of funds. Consider raising money for your local pregnancy resource center at your church through “The Baby Bottle Campaign.”
  5. Attend the March for Life in Washington, D.C. or one near you. Making your support for the unborn public sends a message to government leaders every year that we are serious about ending abortion.

Abortion is the civil rights issue of our time and the greatest human rights violation in history. There is no greater cause for which to fight than the cause of life. I am reminded of two leaders who fought against the humanitarian evils of their day, William Wilberforce and Dietrich Bonhoeffer. While fighting the slave trade of the British Empire, Wilberforce told those unsure of whether to support banning the practice that “you may choose to look the other way, but you can never say again that you did not know.” And speaking of the evils of Nazi Germany, Bonhoeffer famously said “Silence in the face of evil is itself evil. God will not hold us guiltless. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act.”

We know what abortion is, and we know how rampant it is in America. Now is not the time to be silent or indifferent. It’s time to pick a side and take action to stand for life. The future of the free world depends on it.

Religious Tests Have No Place in America

by Worth Loving

January 11, 2019

Article VI, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution states that “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.” The Founders included this clause so that any American, regardless of religious affiliation, could serve their country. Unfortunately, it seems that this clause has been forgotten by some of the very people who swore an oath to uphold it.

In the first two years of the Trump presidency, at least four nominees to various federal offices have faced questions about their religious beliefs, with several senators implying that those beliefs disqualify them from serving. Most recently, this happened to Brian Buescher, President Trump’s nominee to be a U.S. District Court Judge for Nebraska. During his confirmation hearing, Buescher faced questions and criticisms from Senators Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) and Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) over his membership in the Knights of Columbus, with Hirono stating in her questionnaire that the Knights of Columbus holds “a number of extreme positions.” Founded in 1882, the Knights of Columbus is a Catholic fraternal organization that does charitable and volunteer work around the globe, including feeding the poor, picking up trash, and collecting coats for children. Both senators attacked Buescher and the Knights of Columbus for their beliefs, which are loyal to Catholic teaching that abortion is wrong and that marriage is between one man and one woman. And Buescher isn’t alone. Just a few weeks ago, Hirono and Harris attacked Paul Matey, President Trump’s nominee to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, for his membership in the Knights as well.

But that’s not all. In 2017, Russell Vought was nominated by President Trump to be Deputy Director for the Office of Management and Budget. During the confirmation hearing, Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) angrily questioned Vought over his belief as an evangelical Christian that Muslims are “condemned” in the eyes of God. Later that year, Amy Barrett, the nominee for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, faced similar scrutiny. A devout Catholic, Barrett was berated by Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) for adhering to her Church’s teaching on abortion, with Feinstein stating: “the dogma lives loudly within you and that is a concern.”

This is certainly not what our Founding Fathers envisioned. The United States was founded as a haven for religious freedom, not an oligarchy for the elite few. In fact, it was one of the main reasons that the Pilgrims and other religious dissidents made the treacherous journey across the Atlantic. They were so desperate to escape religious persecution that they risked their own lives and the lives of their families. During that day in Great Britain, sworn loyalty to the king and membership in the Church of England were required to serve in public office. Other religions need not even attempt a run for office. The colonists wanted the freedom to practice their faith openly and be able to participate in society at the same time, including serving in public office.

Since our founding, every public servant has sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution; and while a person’s religion affects his worldview, each one is bound to that oath, regardless of their religion. In fact, it was a diversity of religions that helped form the Constitution. What these recent attacks represent is a disturbing trend and a very real threat to religious conservatives who want to serve in public office. As a nation, we are getting precariously close to the religious tyranny the Pilgrims experienced under British rule, the very tyranny by which patriot blood gained independence. Thousands more have died in the decades since to preserve this sacred human right. We must continue to defend the right of every individual, regardless of their religion, to serve in public office. And we must pressure elected officials to uphold all of the Constitution, not just the parts that fit their agenda. If we don’t, religious freedom—and the Republic—is in grave jeopardy.

Putting Patients First

by Worth Loving

June 12, 2018

With so many advancements in the field of medicine, people have access to more life-saving treatments than perhaps ever before. Hundreds of thousands of federal tax dollars go towards research of such treatments with the goal of giving people the best quality of life possible. However, the Left has exploited this funding to accomplish their own radical agenda, often at the expense of the well-being of patients.

One of these cases involves stem cell research. When National Institutes of Health (NIH) director Francis Collins began his tenure in 2009, he specifically directed funding to be used for embryonic stem cell research—to the tune of 200 million taxpayer dollars per year. We know that the embryo is a human life and that destroying it for research is not only profoundly evil but a blatant breach of basic ethical scientific practice, a fact which Dr. Collins either ignores or denies. But as director of an institution designed to help Americans live better lives, he also ignores established research about stem cells.

According to Dr. David Prentice of the Charlotte B. Lozier Institute, embryonic stem cells have failed to produce even one cure for a deadly or debilitating disease. On the other hand, adult stem cell research has produced over 70 treatments for deadly and debilitating conditions such as cancer, lupus, and scleroderma. To date, adult stem cell research has helped over one million people. Every year, there are 20,000 adult stem cell transplants in the United States alone that help Americans live better lives.

There are two fundamental principles at stake in this debate. First is the morality of ending a human life. Taxpayers should not be forced to violate their conscience by paying for embryonic stem cell research, and our government should certainly not be involved in it. The other fundamental issue is if we want to support research that would improve people’s lives or continue promoting a destructive agenda at their expense.

In 2017, Rep. Jim Banks (R-Ind.) introduced the Patients First Act that would direct the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the NIH to instead spend that $200 million every year on adult stem cell research. Rep. Banks recently stopped by FRC headquarters to tell us more about his bill and how it would protect the consciences of taxpayers and help those dealing with deadly and debilitating diseases. Check out his lecture here

Finally, contact your representative in Congress and ask them to co-sponsor the Patients First Act.

Banning Sexual Orientation Change Efforts is Denying People’s Right to Change

by Worth Loving

June 6, 2018

In the last several years, there has been a growing movement in the United States to ban sexual orientation change efforts (SOCE), which liberals often call “conversion therapy,” a practice that uses psychological and spiritual means to change an individual’s sexual orientation from homosexual or bisexual to heterosexual. Since 2013, twelve states plus the District of Columbia have passed statutes banning SOCE for minors, several of which were signed by Republican governors. Just last month, Maryland and Hawaii became the eleventh and twelfth states respectively to ban the practice. As of May, legislation to ban SOCE has been introduced or is pending in 13 states. Nearly 40 cities and municipalities around the country have also passed ordinances banning the practice for minors.

At the national level, the Therapeutic Fraud and Prevention Act has been introduced in both the House and Senate and would ban any SOCE performed in exchange for monetary compensation. On April 19, by a vote of 50-18, the California Assembly passed a bill that bans the sale of goods or services related to any SOCE. Although strong opposition has been raised in California, few would be surprised if the bill is passed by the state senate and signed into law by Governor Jerry Brown later this summer.

In the rush to ban SOCE, proponents are ignoring several basic constitutional rights. Many of these misguided bills seek to ban the sale of goods or services designed to change a person’s sexual orientation, a gross violation of the free speech rights of many counselors and Christian ministries. SOCE advocates simply want the right to offer their goods and services in the marketplace like anyone else. They aren’t forcing their goods and services on anyone, as SOCE opponents have argued. The California bill is particularly concerning as it could lead to banning the sale of the Bible and other materials used by Christian counselors and ministries who participate in SOCE.

Banning SOCE for minors is also a significant violation of parental rights. In banning this type of therapy, the state is essentially saying that it knows what is better for a child than the parent does. It also prevents many young people who want to change their sexual orientation from getting the help they need to do so.

Perhaps the most devastating consequence of all in the rush to ban SOCE is taking away the opportunity for people to seek change. Yes, there are doubtless many people who do not desire to leave their homosexual lifestyle or change their homosexual desires. But there are also many other people who seek to change their same-sex attractions. To put it simply, banning SOCE denies people with unwanted same-sex attractions the right to seek change.

Banning SOCE will put the United States on a slippery slope of more constitutional rights violations. Not only does it violate free speech and parental rights, it also harms the very people it intends to help. The right to change and the right to offer goods and services to those seeking change are fundamental human and constitutional rights that must be protected.

Defending the Free Speech Rights of Pregnancy Centers

by Worth Loving

May 22, 2018

Pregnancy can be one of the most vulnerable times in a woman’s life, especially when the pregnancy is unexpected. It’s extremely important that a woman have a strong support group during such a time. For many women facing unplanned pregnancies, pregnancy resource centers provide the support needed for the woman to carry her baby to term and equip her to raise the child in a loving home.

There are two types of crisis pregnancy centers, licensed and unlicensed. Unlicensed pregnancy centers are authorized to provide any type of non-medical support including pregnancy kits, education, support groups, clothing, and so on. Licensed pregnancy centers provide all these services as well but are also authorized to provide limited medical services. Unlike Planned Parenthood, pregnancy resource centers charge nothing for their services. Oftentimes, pregnancy centers are strategically located in poor communities where medical care is hard to find. No one seeking their services is turned away.

Now, the very mission of these pregnancy centers is under attack in California through a law known as the California FACT Act. Passed in 2015, the law requires pregnancy centers to promote a message directly contrary to their mission. For licensed facilities, the law requires a state-approved message regarding abortion referrals to be posted in the pregnancy centers. Interestingly, the law doesn’t require licensed pregnancy centers to promote wellness and nutrition programs for women, infants, and children or anything of the sort. For non-licensed facilities, the law requires that the pregnancy center post a message explaining that they are not a licensed medical facility and therefore cannot provide any related services, something these pregnancy centers have never claimed to do.

Shortly after the passage of the California FACT Act, the National Institute of Family and Life Advocates (NIFLA) with the help of Alliance Defending Freedom filed a lawsuit against California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, arguing that the law violated the free speech rights of pregnancy centers. After working its way through the lower courts, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case of NIFLA v. Becerra in November 2017. Oral arguments were heard on March 20, and a decision is expected to be announced at the end of the Court’s term next month.

It certainly appears that precedent is on the side of pregnancy centers. Several cases have been decided in favor of private individuals and institutions who were being compelled to promote or participate in a message or action contrary to their beliefs or mission. It also appears that the current justices have serious reservations about the constitutionality of the California FACT Act. During oral arguments for NIFLA v. Becerra, several of the more liberal justices voiced concerns that the law was not only burdensome but specifically targeted pregnancy centers, something Justice Elena Kagan called a “serious issue.”

Defendants in the case, including the state of California, argue that pregnancy centers are willfully deceiving women into believing that abortion is not an option and that they must disclose abortion services. In the end, though, Attorney General Becerra’s legal team conceded that no charges have ever been filed against a single pregnancy center in the state of California; and they have yet to bring forward a woman who has been harmed by a pregnancy center.

Pregnancy centers have never claimed to be full service. Their goal is to provide services to a mother in need so that her baby may develop fully and that she may love and nurture the child. What’s at stake in this case is the First Amendment right of pregnancy centers to refuse to promote a message directly contrary to their mission. Last week, Congressman Andy Harris, a medical doctor from Maryland, spoke on the importance of this case at FRC. As he said, “The First Amendment gives you the right to say things. It also gives you the right not to say things, and that’s what this case is about.” To find out more about this critical case and how you can support pregnancy centers in your area, watch Rep. Harris’ full lecture.

Putting Children Before Politics

by Worth Loving

May 1, 2018

For decades, faith-based adoption and foster care organizations have played a critical role in providing services to children in need. They have excelled in this and serviced the neediest of these already needy children. As reported by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), 45 percent of the 3,794 adoptions completed by Catholic Charities in 2009 were of children considered to have special needs. Also in 2009, 32 percent of the 1,716 adoptions completed by Bethany Christian Services were of hard-to-place older children previously in foster care.

It is imperative for these children that all agencies, both faith-based and secular, remain in the adoption and foster care system. Without them, many children would have no place to turn. Today, 440,000 children are in foster care, and 100,000 of those are awaiting adoption. The opioid crisis is only adding to these numbers. In 2016, 92,000 children alone were in foster care because of drug abuse in the home. In fact, drug abuse is the number one reason why children are placed in foster care. With so many children desperate for stable homes, it would seem obvious to provide every avenue possible for that to happen. However, there is a growing movement to remove faith-based adoption agencies from the equation. Due to their deeply held religious beliefs, many faith-based adoption agencies seek to place children in homes with a married mother and father. Recently, in the scramble to embrace “LGBT equality,” lawsuits were filed in Michigan and Texas, challenging each state’s laws protecting faith-based adoption agencies. In Washington, D.C., Massachusetts, and California, similar lawsuits succeeded, resulting in the shutdown of several Catholic adoption organizations. In Illinois, approximately 2,000 children were displaced as a result of one of these lawsuits despite that fact that every state allows LGBT adoption and has numerous agencies willing to facilitate these adoptions.

Such threats to the well-being of children prompted Representative Mike Kelly (R-Penn.) to introduce The Child Welfare Provider Inclusion Act (H.R. 1881) in the House of Representatives and Senator Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.) to introduce it in the Senate (S. 811). This bill protects faith-based adoption agencies from discrimination by letting them continue their work of placing children in adoption and foster families while remaining loyal to their deeply held religious beliefs and does nothing to prevent LGBT adoptions. The bill simply seeks to keep faith-based agencies in the business of helping children, free of government discrimination.

Those fighting to remove faith-based agencies from the table have a specific agenda in mind, an agenda that seeks to silence those with whom they disagree while trampling on the best interests of children. The fight to protect faith-based adoption agencies is about ensuring families have a wide range of options to select an agency that meets their physical, emotional, financial, and spiritual needs. It’s about ensuring that some of the most overlooked members of our society will no longer be forgotten.

The House sponsor of this bill, Rep. Mike Kelly, spoke at FRC this past Thursday on the importance of passing this bill. Speaking on the importance of keeping faith-based agencies at the table, he said:

All service providers, religious or secular, who work to provide children with loving families should have a seat at the table and never be disqualified from doing so because of their deeply-rooted religious beliefs. The more groups providing these crucial services, the better.

How ironic that leftists want to exclude faith-based agencies from placing children in loving homes while rabidly defending federal funding for Planned Parenthood, a group that only provides one adoption referral for every 82 abortions.

Our goal should be to place children in loving homes. Any agency that provides this service should be allowed a seat at the table. To learn more about the Child Welfare Provider Inclusion Act, please watch this FRC Speaker Series event. And then, contact your U.S. Representative and both U.S. Senators and ask them to support this bill.

Scalia’s Legacy Lives On

by Worth Loving

April 24, 2018

As a nation, there are many days we set aside throughout the year to commemorate victories in war or honor those who have served our country in some capacity. Personally, many of us celebrate birthdays and anniversaries of loved ones and friends. Up until a year ago, April 10 didn’t mean much to most people. But, this year, it’s a very significant date for conservatives. It was on April 10, 2017, that Neil Gorsuch was sworn in as the 101st Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. Only a year into his tenure, Justice Gorsuch has already left a mark.

Justice Antonin Scalia’s untimely death in February 2016 rocked a nation that was already in the midst of a tumultuous presidential election. For months, talk of his replacement dominated the news cycles and the presidential debates.

In the view of many Americans, the 2016 Republican and Democratic presidential primaries both yielded less than desirable candidates. But there was one overarching issue that drove people to the polls, something that would shape America’s future for decades to come—the Supreme Court. Pollster George Barna said it was a defining issue among SAGE Con (“Spiritually Active, Governance Engaged Conservatives”) voters, of whom 94 percent voted for Donald Trump. An NBC News exit poll found that 7 in 10 voters nationwide said that the Supreme Court was either the most important factor or an important factor in whom they voted for.

With Scalia’s death, the high Court was split between four reliably conservative justices (except on social issues, on which Justice Kennedy voted with the liberals), and four staunchly liberal justices. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell refused to allow a vote on President Obama’s nominee, Merrick Garland, ensuring that the next president would have that privilege.

With the help of the Heritage Foundation and the Federalist Society, apparent GOP nominee Donald Trump developed a list of 21 conservatives whom he pledged to choose a Supreme Court nominee from if elected president. On January 31, 2017, President Trump fulfilled that promise by nominating Judge Neil Gorsuch from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.

After receiving Senate confirmation on April 7, Gorsuch was sworn in on April 10, 2017. A year later, he has yet to disappoint conservatives. Last summer, Justice Gorsuch showed his commitment to the First Amendment and religious freedom by ruling with the 7-2 majority in Trinity Lutheran Church v. Comer. In this case, Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbus, Missouri, applied for a state grant for playground safety enhancements but was denied because of its religious nature. Yet the First Amendment prevents the government from doing this; it may not exclude a religious entity from a public program and treat it worse off simply because it is religious. The majority ruled in favor of Trinity Lutheran Church, with Justice Gorsuch joining Justice Clarence Thomas in a concurring opinion strongly protective of religious freedom.

Justice Gorsuch has also shown a strong inclination to protect First Amendment rights to religion and speech in two cases to be decided in June this year. In Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, Gorsuch appears concerned that baker Jack Phillips’ First Amendment free speech and free exercise rights have been trampled on by state authorities who forced him to create a custom wedding cake for a same-sex marriage. Additionally, a few weeks ago at oral argument in NIFLA v. Becerra, Gorsuch expressed deep unease that a California law requiring pregnancy resource centers to promote abortion violates the First Amendment prohibition on government-compelled speech.

Candidate Trump promised to nominate someone in the mold of the late Justice Scalia, an originalist who would strictly adhere to the Constitution and be a staunch defender of life and religious liberty. After a year on the bench, Justice Gorsuch hasn’t disappointed and has proven that he was the right choice for the job.

  • Page 1 of 2
  • 1
  • 2
FRC Action Blog blog_goto
A True Blue Congress
by Worth Loving (March 14, 2019)

...

Instagram ig_follow