Having trouble viewing this email? View it in your web browser

The "Equality" Act is Back in a Big, Bad Way

The U.S. House of Representatives is expected to vote next week on House Resolution 5 (H.R. 5), the so-called “Equality Act,”a measure that will have disastrous consequences for women, children, people of faith – all Americans. 

H.R. 5 adds the legally undefined “sexual orientation and gender identity” (SOGI) to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other federal non-discrimination laws. The bill redefines “sex” to no longer mean the biological “male or female.” Instead, “sex” would include sex stereotypes, sexual orientation, and gender identity. 

H.R. 5 brings the police power of the federal government against those who believe the biological truth of God's design, that "male and female He created them" (Genesis 5:2). The bill labels Christian beliefs about marriage, sexuality, and family “discriminatory.” It empowers the federal government to punish disagreement on this important issue.

This dangerous bill provides no religious exemptions. In fact, it explicitly exempts the Religious Freedom Restoration Act as a defense for violations. 

Similar SOGI laws have been passed in many states and local municipalities, so we already know some of the negative consequences, including: 

• Private facilities – dressing rooms, showers, and restrooms – would be open to those who believe they are the opposite sex.  
• School children would be introduced to transgender ideology and concepts such as sexual orientation as early as pre-school. 
• Biological males would be permitted to compete against women in school, amateur and professional sports.  
• Faith-based charities who work with federal agencies – such as adoption agencies or homeless shelters – would be forced to violate their religious beliefs.  
• Medical professionals would be forced to provide drugs, hormones, and surgery to those experiencing gender dysphoria – against medical or conscience-based objections. 

As soon as the vote date is made public, you'll see an action alert from us allowing you to contact your U.S. Representative directly. The bill will also be introduced in the U.S. Senate next week.

Page Amendment Threatens Parental Rights, Does Nothing to Solve Achievement Gap

In the past twelve months, COVID-19-related lockdowns and school closures have highlighted education achievement gaps throughout Minnesota and brought increased attention to the struggles facing families in failing public schools. In response to this, Minnesota lawmakers recently proposed an amendment to the Minnesota Constitution stating that all children have a “fundamental right” to a public education. Unfortunately, the proposed amendment offers no real solutions but instead threatens parental rights in Minnesota and doubles down on failed educational policies by providing legal pressure to pour more taxpayer funding into them.

Proposed by retired Minnesota Supreme Court Justice Alan Page and Minneapolis Federal Reserve head Neel Kashkari, the Page Amendment would add a right to a public education in the Minnesota Constitution. Currently, Minnesota’s constitution says,

The stability of a republican form of government depending mainly upon the intelligence of the people, it is the duty of the legislature to establish a general and uniform system of public schools. The legislature shall make such provisions by taxation or otherwise as will secure a thorough and efficient system of public schools throughout the state.

The Page Amendment would replace this with,

All children have a fundamental right to a quality public education that fully prepares them with the skills necessary for participation in the economy, our democracy, and society, as measured against uniform achievement standards set forth by the state. It is a paramount duty of the state to ensure quality public schools that fulfill this fundamental right.

Rather than simply directing the legislature to establish and maintain a public education system, as our state constitution currently does, the Page Amendment would make a “fundamental” right to a public education the paramount duty of the state and would evaluate whether that right is being fulfilled based on a uniform set of achievement standards set forth by the state. It sounds benign, but declaring public education to be a “fundamental right” is legal code for giving the state an excuse to take over control and funding of local schools.

Members of Congress Call on FDA to Remove Abortion Pill Safety Requirements

Pro-abortion lawmakers in Congress recently called on the FDA to lift abortion pill safety requirements. This comes after the Supreme Court’s January decision ending months of back-and-forth over the attempt to deregulate the abortion pill amid pandemic-related lockdowns. Because of their known risks, chemical abortions are regulated under the FDA’s Risk Evaluation Mitigation Strategy (REMS) protocol. Among other things, this means that women cannot obtain abortion pills without an in-person examination and the first of the two pills must be taken in the presence of a medical provider.

After the Court determined that the state did not have the authority to waive these guidelines, pandemic or no pandemic, members of the House Oversight and Reform Committee sent a letter to the FDA petitioning them to remove abortion pill safety requirements.

The known risks of the abortion pill are serious and potentially life-threatening. On top of that, a recent study called into question how well abortion pill complications are being traced and reported when the number of women who go directly to the emergency room rather than rather than returning to the prescribing clinic are taken into account. Currently, abortion pill prescribers are required to report complications to the FDA. The abortion pill manufacturer, Danco, is also required to report adverse events when they are made aware of them. The study authors pointed out that many women who obtain chemical abortions are “lost to follow-up,” meaning that the prescriber has no information about the health of the mother because she never returned to the clinic. Hospitals, emergency rooms, and private clinics are not required to report abortion pill complications to the FDA.

The study authors acknowledged that, because abortion providers and the abortion pill manufacturer are the only ones required to report abortion pill complications, they are working with incomplete data. However, based on the evidence that is available, there is good reason to believe that complication rates from the abortion pill are considerably higher than what is reported to the FDA. The authors report that out of over 2,000 surgical interventions required to manage abortion pill complications, “the surgical management of over half the complications was performed by someone other than the abortion provider, yet treating physicians are not required to report complications.”

 Thank you for sharing Minnesota Family Council’s vision for strong families, communities and culture through Christ. As we rise to meet challenges at the state and federal level, we need your support now more than ever. Click here to give now. We are grateful for your partnership with us through prayer and financial support.

For life, family, and religious freedom,