Tag Archive for: Religious Freedom

Denmark moves to ban Islamic call to prayer; minister says nation ‘shouldn’t sound like a suburb of Islamabad’

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by

Denmark’s Immigration Minister Morten Bødskov rightly has concerns about creeping Islamization in his country, as should every infidel country, given the expansionary character of the Sharia. At the same time, he also has concerns about whether banning the bellowing of the adhan over loudspeakers is “compatible with Denmark’s constitutional protections for religious freedom.”

The Sharia is not compatible with Western laws, as it is based on Islamic supremacy.

In the recent Jihad Watch post, Canada: Muslim call to prayer blares out in downtown Regina, the capital of Saskatchewan, I wrote:

The adhan is particularly disruptive at dawn before sunrise. It translates to this:

Allahu akbar (Allah is greater)

I bear witness there is none worthy of worship except Allah

I bear witness Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah

Come to prayer

Come to success

Allahu akbar (Allah is greater)

There is none worthy of worship except Allah

The adhan, when it is broadcast over loudspeakers, is not just a blaring public summons to ensure that every Muslim (and non-Muslim) can hear it, over and above all other sounds, it’s a declaration of supremacy, both in its content and in its sheer volume; especially in infidel lands.

Even in Saudi Arabia, “families had been complaining that competing speakers were keeping their children awake.” And so Saudi Arabia defended an order in 2021 to turn down the volume of the adhan.

Islam calls for violence against disbelievers in conquest; it promotes supremacy over infidels, male supremacy over females, wife-beating, female coverings from head to toe (lest women be abused), sex slavery, child marriage, murder of gays, and the list goes on to include myriads of verses that are incompatible with human rights and Western values. Would permitting all of this fall under the banner of religious freedom? Obviously not. Neither does waking up a neighborhood in the early hours for the provocative, supremacist, and loud declaration that Allah is greater than every deity.

“Denmark plans to ban Islamic call to prayer: ‘Shouldn’t sound like a suburb of Islamabad,’” by Olivia Allhusen, Daily Mail, June 24, 2026:

Denmark is planning to ban the Islamic call to prayer, with the country’s immigration minister claiming parts of the nation risk sounding like ‘a suburb of Islamabad’.

Morten Bødskov said the government would reopen an investigation into whether the Muslim call to prayer can be outlawed nationwide, arguing that what he described as creeping ‘Islamisation’ was taking up too much public space.

‘The call to prayer should not be heard over Danish rooftops,’ the Social Democrat minister told Danish news agency Ritzau.

‘It has no place in Denmark, and you shouldn’t be in any doubt whether you’ve ended up in a suburb of Islamabad when you walk around Denmark.’

The Adhan, the Islamic call to prayer, is traditionally broadcast five times a day to summon worshippers to mosques, often through loudspeakers mounted on minarets.

Bødskov’s proposal marks the third attempt by a Danish immigration minister to establish a legal framework for banning the practice, following similar efforts in 2020 and 2025.

Parts of Denmark already restrict public calls to prayer. In Copenhagen, strict local noise regulations effectively prevent mosques from broadcasting the Adhan through loudspeakers.

The minister said an investigation would examine whether a nationwide ban could be introduced while remaining compatible with Denmark’s constitutional protections for religious freedom…

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Michigan: ‘Each and every one of us is supposed to dream of the opportunity of engaging in jihad with the enemy’

UN Blames Israel for Rise in Child Marriage in Gaza

New Jersey Congressional Candidate Adam Hisham Hamawy: Devotion or Apostasy?

There Never Was ‘Starvation’ in Gaza

Ex-AP journalist: Hamas demanded AP conceal that its dead jihadis were counted as civilian casualties, AP complied

Canadian Muslim Public Affairs Council wants 60,000,000 taxpayer dollars to promote ‘Combatting Islamophobia’ guide

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

How Christians in Cuba Are Engaged in Civic Resistance under The Current Regime

/in , , , , , , , , /by

In his seminal work “The Politics of Nonviolent Action,” political scientist Gene Sharp cataloged 198 methods of nonviolent action. Wherever tyranny existed, the American scholar found a hopeful and creative form of civic resistance emerging from diverse populations. Through sit-ins, musical performances, and countless other forms of expression, men and women across the globe voiced their dissent against specific policies or systems.

Among these methods, Sharp included the “protest or support assembly.” He classified it as a method of “protest and persuasion,” aimed at making public support — or opposition — to a specific cause visible, while seeking to mobilize citizens and exert pressure on opponents without resorting to violence.

In Cuba, the long history of resistance against totalitarianism has involved recourse to both violence and peaceful demonstrations. And within this civic landscape, the protest or support assembly has carved out a space — one that is currently being championed by young Christians.

There are precedents. In April 2021, evangelical leader Marcos Antonio Perdomo was interrogated by the National Revolutionary Police (PNR) in Santiago de Cuba. He was reprimanded for continuing to hold worship services, thereby defying the Castro regime’s COVID-19 lockdown orders.

In solidarity with Perdomo, a group of some twenty believers gathered outside the Micro 9 Police Station and remained there until he emerged from the building.

Recently, there has been a surge in such displays of solidarity; their primary inspiration is a movement of young evangelical and libertarian influencers in Cuba that first emerged in late 2025.

The Christian content creators — Anna Bensi, Ernesto Ricardo Medina (of El4tico), Iván Daniel Calás, and David Espinosa — and, on the other side, the four members of the widely followed program Fuera de la Caja (Outside the Box), did not initially know one another. However, the thematic overlap in the issues they address eventually led them to collaborate, both on-camera and behind the scenes. The discourse of the Cristario axis — a blend of “Christian” and “libertarian” — is anti-socialist and pro-free market; it champions Cuba’s Christian heritage and envisions a future free from the leftist propaganda that has dominated the country for nearly seven decades. They represent a sort of crystallization of the “New Right” concept articulated by political scientist Agustín Laje: sovereigntists, patriots, conservatives, and libertarians united against totalitarian ideologies.

Since late 2025, this group has engaged in public education through videos disseminated via Facebook profiles and YouTube channels, covering topics such as the separation of powers, public service, totalitarianism, and religious and financial freedom; they have also dispelled myths surrounding the much-maligned concept of capitalism. This activity has placed them squarely under the regime’s microscope.

In an unfortunately familiar cycle — one seemingly lifted straight from the socialist political police’s playbook — repression begins in concentric circles radiating outward from the targeted individual.

First, the victim is “interviewed” and warned to abandon their dissident discourse; next, an attempt is made to recruit them as an informant for the intelligence apparatus; should they refuse to compromise, threats inevitably follow. The next circle to be targeted consists of friends and family members, who receive summonses and threats, pressured to “counsel” their loved one.

Thus, in April, the political police summoned Yusleidy Bosques — mother of Karel Daniel Hernández, a member of the group Fuera de la Caja (Outside the Box) — to the National Revolutionary Police (PNR) station located at Infanta and Manglar in Havana.

Caridad Silvente and Elmis Rivero (a U.S. citizen) — the mother and sister, respectively, of Anna Bensi — were also summoned and subjected to intimidation regarding the repercussions Bensi would face if she continued posting criticisms of the socialist system. Subsequently, both Silvente and Bensi were held under house arrest for a month and placed on the blacklist of “regulated” individuals — those barred from leaving the country.

However, alongside this subsequent wave of repression came a surge of solidarity. By my count, five solidarity gatherings took place within a span of seven weeks (from March 11 to April 25, 2026). On each occasion — during a summons issued to a member of the Eje Cristario or a family member — each woman gathered friends, followers, and leaders or brethren in the faith outside the police stations where the interrogations were taking place, remaining there until the interrogated individual emerged.

The solidarity assemblies held during this period were characterized by public prayers offered on behalf of the summoned individual, performed in circles formed directly in front of the police stations — all of which were located in Havana. Furthermore, each gathering was documented through selfies and photographs, which were uploaded immediately to social media; this revealed a shift in attitude regarding resistance to the totalitarian state — no longer marked by cautious apprehension, but rather by an openly displayed courage.

Another noteworthy element is that, from the very first assembly on March 11 (when Silvente went to the PNR Station in Alamar) to the one held on April 25 (the Bosques gathering at Infanta and Manglar), the number of participants steadily increased. While images from the first event show nine people gathered, the final assembly drew 19 attendees — an event that even featured a sort of bicycle caravan carrying a portion of the participants as they made their way to the police station.

Could these assemblies grow to become events involving dozens or even hundreds of citizens?

The regime shifted its strategy regarding summonses to police stations in May. Early that month, Castroist henchmen interrogated Amílcar Andrés Bravo — father of Abel and Bety, the young members of the Fuera de la Caja (Outside the Box) collective — but this time, the interrogation took place at his workplace: the Cuban Sports Research Center. Had the military authorities changed the location of the interrogation to prevent another solidarity assembly — one that might have been even larger than previous ones?

Alfredo G. Fominaya Roig, a student at the Pentecostal Theological University of Cuba, has participated in three of the recent solidarity assemblies held in Havana. Having himself become a influential figure — particularly through his Facebook profile — he has faced threats due to the videos he posts criticizing the regime.

The first solidarity assembly he attended was held in support of Anna Bensi, even though he knew her only through social media.

Alfredo recalls how the regime attempted to sabotage an assembly organized in support of the young woman. He was unable to attend another of the content creator’s summonses (on April 12) because the political police had — in a move described as “simultaneous and malicious” — issued a summons to David Espinosa; consequently, many people were already en route to support him in a different part of Havana.

Reflecting on the solidarity assemblies he has attended, he notes that while each offered a distinct experience, they shared certain common nuances. “The one constant is that we pray before the person who was summoned goes inside,” he says. “Then, during the wait, conversations spring up — along with mutual understandings, shared affinities, and friendships that grow increasingly solid with each passing time.”

Alfredo believes that “the dictatorship, in its attempt to sever that connection, has only succeeded in making us more united and stronger.”

These gatherings conclude only when the summoned individual emerges from the police station, where they are greeted “with joy and a keen curiosity to hear about their latest encounter with those Orwellian dogs,” recounts the young man affiliated with the Assemblies of God. In his case, he attended for the first time because he had asked a friend to let him know when the next solidarity assembly took place. He had seen photos of people gathered at a previous one and told himself that he was one of them. “In hard times, I couldn’t help but be where those who thought the same way I did were.”

The example of others who had come before him — spread through an open channel like social media — combined with ideological alignment and, most importantly, shared faith as a unifying bond, drew Alfredo to more than one of these acts of resistance. It remains to be seen whether the courage of others proves contagious and activates the civic responsibility of other Cubans during this decisive hour for the island.

AUTHOR

Yoe Suarez

Yoe Suárez is The Washington Stand’s international affairs correspondent. He is an exiled journalist, writer, and producer who investigated in Havana about torture, political police, gangs, government black lists, and cybersurveillance. A graduate of Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, he was a CBN correspondent, and has written for outlets like The Hill and Newsweek. He has appeared on Vox, Univision, and Deutsche Welle as an analyst on Cuba, security, and U.S. foreign policy.

RELATED ARTICLE:

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2026 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Four Key Cases SCOTUS Will Look at in 2025-2026 Term

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

Over the past year, the U.S. Supreme Court has made several significant decisions and rulings, from protecting children from online pornography, allowing parents to opt their children out of LGBT promotion in the classroom, and empowering states to defund Planned Parenthood to halting the abuse of universal injunctions, ending workplace reverse discrimination, and letting states shield children from harmful gender transition procedures. The Supreme Court’s emergency docket was also filled — and often — with the nation’s highest judicial authority frequently siding with President Donald Trump on everything from immigration to transgender-identifying military servicemembers.

The Supreme Court’s next term, beginning in October, promises to keep the nine justices just as active. Here are some of the most important cases already on the Supreme Court’s docket for the next year.

Little v. Hecox

In United States v. Skrmetti, decided earlier this year, the Supreme Court determined that states are free to protect children from transgenderism; now, the court will decide whether states are free to protect women’s sports. In 2020, Idaho approved H.B. 500, a law barring biological males who identify as women from competing in women’s sports. Lindsey Hecox, a biological male who identifies as a woman, challenged the law in an effort to compete on Boise State University’s track and cross-country women’s teams. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit determined that Idaho’s law violated the Equal Protection Clause and was, therefore, unconstitutional.

“Women and girls have fought for decades to achieve an equal playing field. Nowhere has that been more evident than in sports,” Idaho wrote in its appeal to the Supreme Court. The appeal continued, “The last decade has exhibited a growing trend of males identifying as females competing against — and beating — females in women’s sports across the country.” Idaho pleaded, “This Court’s review is urgently needed to resolve [jurisprudential] splits and preserve the equal playing field women have fought to secure. … Every day the Ninth Circuit’s decision stands, female athletes suffer injustice. The petition should be granted without delay.”

West Virginia v. BPJ

Idaho specifically requested that the Supreme Court also take up the similar case of West Virginia v. BPJ, in order to firmly resolve questions surrounding the legal definitions of sex and gender and their treatment before the law. In response to a West Virginia law blocking biological males from competing in women’s sports, transgender-identifying 12-year-old Becky Pepper-Jackson (the eponymous BPJ) filed a lawsuit, citing violations of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Equal Protection Clause, and Title IX. Clinton-appointed Judge Joseph R. Goodwin of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia originally prevented the state from enforcing the law but ultimately ruled that it was not unconstitutional. Last year, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit disagreed, writing that applying the law to BPJ “would treat her worse than people to whom she is similarly situated, deprive her of any meaningful athletic opportunities, and do so on the basis of sex.”

In its petition to the Supreme Court, West Virginia wrote, “This Court should set things right. The Fourth Circuit’s splintered decision casts into doubt similar laws in at least 24 other States, sows confusion about antidiscrimination law, ignores scientific evidence, and renders school sports an un-administrable morass.” The state continued, “In the end, the decision all but declares that any law recognizing differences between sexes is unlawful whenever that law runs counter to someone’s ‘gender identity.’”

Chiles v. Salazar

Idaho and West Virginia aren’t the only states tackling the issue of transgenderism. Colorado has also waded into the fray, but heading the other direction. In Chiles v. Salazar, Christian counselor Kaley Chiles is challenging a Colorado law banning “conversion therapy,” citing religious liberty violations. The law prohibits counselors and therapists from cautioning children against gender ideology and gender transition procedures but allows counselors and therapists to encourage gender ideology and gender transition procedures. Both a U.S. District Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit previously ruled against Chiles, allowing the Colorado law to stand.

The Ninth and Tenth Circuit Courts currently classify conversations between counselors and patients as “conduct,” which states are permitted to legally regulate, while the Third and Eleventh Circuit Courts recognize those conversations as constitutionally-protected free speech. “The Court should not allow this conflict to persist. Otherwise, counselors like Kaley Chiles and countless other professionals … will have First Amendment protections in some states but not others,” wrote Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) attorneys representing Chiles. “Constitutional rights should

not depend on geographical happenstance,” ADF attorneys wrote. They added, “This Court’s review is urgently needed to reaffirm that the government cannot censor messages ‘under the guise’ of regulating conduct…”

First Choice Women’s Resource Centers, Inc. v. Platkin

New Jersey’s Attorney General, Democrat Matthew Platkin, subpoenaed First Choice Women’s Resource Centers, a group of pro-life pregnancy resource centers, demanding information on donors and doctors affiliated with the group. Platkin claimed to be investigating potentially misleading business practices, but First Choice Women’s Resource Centers claimed in a federal lawsuit that the AG’s actions had a “chilling effect” on pro-lifers’ First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and freedom of association.

Both a U.S. District Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit dismissed the lawsuit, ruling that it properly belonged in a state court, not a federal court. While the Supreme Court isn’t expected to resolve the First Amendment claims, the justices will address the jurisdictional question, clarifying federal court jurisdiction over state actions infringing on First Amendment rights.

AUTHOR

S.A. McCarthy

S.A. McCarthy serves as a news writer at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Which States Are the Best and Worst at Protecting Religious Liberty?

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

That’s the question at the heart of the recently released annual “Religious Liberty in the States” report, produced by the Center for Religion, Culture, and Democracy at the First Liberty Institute, a prominent conservative legal organization.

Co-authored by Mark David Hall and Paul D. Mueller, the report examined the number of legal protections or “safeguards” for religious freedom each state has enacted. Researchers analyzed 47 distinct safeguards related to conscience protection.

Issues covered by these safeguards included euthanasia refusal, health insurance mandates, ceremonial use of alcohol by minors, designating clergy as mandatory reporters, foster parent requirements, absentee voting for religious reasons, and clergy nonparticipation in weddings.

This year, Florida assumed the top spot in the ranking as the best state for religious freedom with a score of 74.6%, taking the title from Illinois, which earned the No. 1 ranking in 2024.

“Florida is an exemplar for how state legislators can improve their state’s protection of religious liberty,” the report reads. “When we began the project, Florida protected a respectable 58 percent of the eleven safeguards we considered in 2022 and was ranked sixth in the nation. Today, it protects 75 percent of the twenty safeguards we consider and ranks first. Most of its improvement derived from legislation strengthening its medical conscience protections in 2023 and legislation protecting houses of worship from discriminatory treatment during pandemics and other emergencies in 2022.”

Montana ranked second with a score of 70.6%, followed by Illinois at 68.8%, Ohio at 66.9%, Mississippi at 66.4%, Arkansas at 62.9% and South Carolina at 60.8%.

Illinois fell 11 percentage points from 2024 to 2025, having previously received 85% in 2023 and 81% last year. Researchers say that religious freedom “now seems more tenuous in the Land of Lincoln” than it was when they began compiling the index, because the state has failed to implement new religious freedom protections enacted in other states.

Researchers stated that Illinois’s drop is, in part, due to the addition of several new religious liberty protections to their analysis, noting that “almost all of Illinois’s religious liberty protections were adopted between 1934 and 1998.”

“Although still among the top five states, Illinois fell from its first-place position in RLS 2023 and 2024. It now protects only 69 percent of the safeguards we consider, whereas in 2022 it protected 81 percent of them,” researchers wrote. “We add new religious liberty protections to the index as we discover them, as long as they have been implemented in at least one state.”

For the third consecutive year, West Virginia ranked last in religious liberty protections, earning a score of only 19.6%. The Mountain State previously received 24.7% last year and 14% in 2023.

Wyoming is the second-worst state for religious liberty safeguards, earning a score of 23.3%, followed by Michigan (27.4%), Nebraska (29.1%), and Vermont (29.3%).

Overall, the report stresses that about 76% of states (38) have adopted fewer than half of the analyzed religious liberty safeguards.

Since the inaugural report in 2022, the most improved state was Montana, which increased its score by 30.8% to 71% during that time, mainly due to the passage of increased conscience protections. Meanwhile, South Carolina wasn’t far behind with a 29.6% increase from 2022 to 2025. With a 17% increase from 2022 to 2025, Florida is the third-most-improved state.

While still highly ranked, Mississippi had the most significant decline of any state since 2022, with its score dropping 15.4% due to a lack of newly enacted religious liberty safeguards.

In a statement, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis (R) celebrated the news that the Sunshine State was ranked first in the report, highlighting the many efforts his administration has pursued on the issue, including laws that advance school choice, designate churches as essential services in case of emergency, and the creation of a school chaplain program.

“We’re grateful for this recognition from the First Liberty Institute, which has just named Florida the #1 state in the nation for protecting religious liberty,” he stated. “Religious liberty is critical to the foundation and function of America, and I am proud that Florida excels in protecting this right.”

This article originally appeared at The Christian Post.

AUTHOR

Michael Gryboski

Michael Gryboski serves as editor at The Christian Post.

RELATED ARTICLES:

A Moral Awakening: The Rise of the Social Conservative Movement

Mother of Kohberger Victim Shows How Christians Should Respond in the Face of Evil

Oregon Mom’s Biblical Worldview Protected by Federal Court in Adoption Case

Christian Photographer Wins Free Speech Lawsuit against New York

Christians Need to Step Up for the Homeless in Light of Trump’s Executive Order

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Two Polls Reveal Public Support Is Growing for Prayer, Chaplains in Schools

/in , , , , , , , /by

As some states struggle to display the Ten Commandments in public school classrooms, recent surveys indicate that a majority of Americans support teachers leading students in prayer, specifically referencing Jesus Christ.

Conducted from July 17, 2023, to March 4, 2024, the Pew Research Center surveyed 36,908 American adults about these key issues. The findings, released on Monday, revealed that “just over half of U.S. adults (52%) say they favor allowing public school teachers to lead their classes in prayers that refer to Jesus,” with 27% expressing “strong” support. Conversely, 46% either oppose or “strongly” oppose the practice, with notable variations across states.

Support is particularly high in Southern states. Mississippi leads with 81% in favor, followed by Alabama and Arkansas at 75%, Louisiana at 74%, and South Carolina at 71%. Most Midwest states also back the practice, with approval rates ranging from 53% to 65%. However, Pew noted, “In 12 states and the District of Columbia, more adults say they oppose allowing teachers to lead their classes in prayers that refer to Jesus than say they favor it.” Sixteen states remain relatively neutral.

Beyond geographical differences, the data also showed political divides. As the Christian Post reported, “With the exception of North Carolina and Georgia, the states where support for explicitly Christian school prayer was the highest voted for Republican President Donald Trump by double digits in the 2024 presidential election.”

There was also a distinction between what the researchers dubbed “generic” prayer versus “Christian” prayer. “Nationwide,” Pew added, “a slightly larger share of Americans say they favor allowing teacher-led prayers referencing God (57%) than favor allowing teacher-led prayers specifically referencing Jesus (52%).”

In a similar vein is another survey, conducted by the Associated Press (AP) NORC Center for Public Affairs Research. Of 1,158 U.S. adults, they found 58% believe “religious chaplains providing support services in public schools should be allowed.” According to the poll, “Republicans are more likely than Democrats to think religious chaplains providing support services in public schools (70% v. 47%), teacher-led prayers (60% v. 29%), and mandatory school prayer periods (49% v. 27%) should be allowed.”

AP went on to note, in relation to its findings, that while “about 6 in 10 U.S. adults say that religious chaplains should be allowed to provide support services for students in public schools … most do not think teacher-led prayer or a mandatory period during school hours for private prayer should be allowed in public schools.”

These findings raise the questions: What role should prayer or chaplains play in public schools, and will these survey results make a difference in policy? Arielle Del Turco, director of the Center for Religious Liberty at Family Research Council, told The Washington Stand, “For too long, the Left has dictated a narrative that said prayer and recognition of God must be pushed out of the public square to secure the ‘separation of church and state.’ This is a false narrative, and it’s good that more Americans are rejecting it.”

In his own analysis, Joseph Backholm, FRC’s senior fellow for Biblical Worldview and Strategic Engagement, observed that the regional and political differences in Pew’s poll align with broader religious trends. “More religious parts of the country are more comfortable with the idea of prayer in schools,” he told The Washington Stand, while “Democrats, who are generally less religious, are less inclined to want prayer in schools.”

On the concept of chaplains in schools, Backholm noted their value, drawing parallels to their role in the military. “It’s helpful to be counseled by people who share your view of reality,” he said, suggesting that “children in school would benefit in the same way” by receiving guidance that reinforces common values.

Looking ahead, Backholm expressed skepticism about whether these poll results will lead to policy changes. “I’m not sure these poll results will make any difference in what happens in schools,” he said, “but it is further evidence of how awkward our current one-size-fits-all education system is.” For Backholm, “it’s further evidence that we do not generally share the belief that we are one nation, under God, or the idea that we are obligated to submit to His plan for humanity.”

Ultimately, he asserted, this is all “because we don’t agree on those things,” nor do we “agree about what the outcome of education should be.” What that means, Backholm explained, is that “putting everyone in the same system guarantees conflict, and we’re seeing plenty of that. But having chaplains does seem to be a way to recognize and honor those differences.”

As debates over religion in public schools continue, these surveys underscore a growing openness to faith-based practices in education. And as Del Turco concluded, “It’s encouraging to see that Americans are increasingly recognizing the need for God in the public square, including in education.”

AUTHOR

Sarah Holliday

Sarah Holliday is a reporter at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Pete Hegseth Sparks Criticism for Prayer to ‘King Jesus’ at Pentagon Event

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth led a prayer during a voluntary event at the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia, on Wednesday that addressed Jesus as king and invoked His wisdom for guidance, prompting critics to accuse him of violating the U.S. Constitution.

“King Jesus, we come humbly before you, seeking your face, seeking your grace, in humble obedience to your law and to your word,” Hegseth prayed. “We come as sinners saved only by that grace, seeking your providence in our lives and in our nation. Lord God, we ask for the wisdom to see what is right and in each and every day, in each and every circumstance, the courage to do what is right in obedience to your will. It is in the name of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, that we pray. And all God’s people say amen,” Hegseth added, to which some in the audience replied, “Amen.”

Hegseth noted that the voluntary 30-minute prayer event, which was called the “Secretary of Defense Christian Prayer & Worship Service,” might become a monthly occurrence, according to The New York Times.

Hegseth appeared to mock The New York Times for its story on the service, noting how the left-leaning outlet was effectively forced to print a prayer to Jesus in its entirety. The New York Times has been critical of Hegseth, publishing stories implying he wants to start a new Crusade while highlighting his Latin “Deus Vult” tattoo, which drew scrutiny as the rallying cry of the First Crusade in 1095.

In January, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) sent a 33-page letter to Hegseth complaining about his tattoo, which she claimed indicated he is an “insider threat.”

Hegseth’s prayer this week has prompted pushback from some critics who claim it was a violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Retired Air Force Lt. Col. Rachel VanLandingham, a former Pentagon lawyer and now a law professor at Southwestern Law School, called the service “incredibly problematic,” according to CNN.

VanLandingham said the “core of the Establishment Clause is the state not endorsing a particular religion, but having a broadcast event is obviously an endorsement even if they don’t officially say, ‘this is a Pentagon event.’”

“I think it’s sponsorship in the true sense of the word, outside of funding — he’s advocating for this, he is putting his weight of the official Office of the Secretary of Defense behind a particular religious event and inviting someone to the Pentagon to conduct it,” she added. “That’s wrong.”

Military Religious Freedom Foundation founder Mikey Weinstein, whose nonprofit has endeavored to remove overtly religious symbols from the military for 20 years, invoked the Holocaust to criticize the prayer service, according to a Wednesday video he posted to his website.

“I’ve been asked by the media what I think this means and what the impact is, and my response is simple: it’s a holocaust, and I speak to you as somebody who suffered the fact that members of my family were actually slaughtered in the Nazi Holocaust,” he said. “It’s beyond description. It rips us under our Constitution [sic], and it’s something we can’t let happen.”

Erin Smith, who serves as associate counsel at First Liberty Institute, expressed support for Hegseth in a statement provided to The Christian Post.

Smith likened Hegseth’s religious exercise to that of the 26 U.S. Navy SEALs who sued the U.S. Department of Defense after being relieved of duty for refusing its COVID-19 vaccine mandate on religious grounds after being denied a religious exemption.

“Secretary Hegseth’s exercise of his religious faith is protected just like it was for the Navy SEALs we represented against the prior administration when it tried to kick them out for their faith objection to Covid requirements,” Smith said. “We commend Secretary Hegseth for standing up for the Constitution and against censorship.”

Phil Mendes, one of the SEALs in the lawsuit, was featured as a witness during Attorney General Pam Bondi’s first meeting of the Task Force to Eradicate Anti-Christian Bias in the Federal Government last month.

Also speaking at the Pentagon event with Hegseth was Brooks Potteiger, pastor of Hegseth’s home church Pilgrim Hill Reformed Fellowship, which was established 2021 in Goodlettsville, Tennessee, near Nashville.

Potteiger delivered a prayer that suggested President Donald Trump and other leaders were appointed to their offices according to God’s sovereignty, and asked God to provide the president with wisdom and protection.

“We pray for our leaders who you have sovereignly appointed — for President Trump, thank you for the way that you have used him to bring stability and moral clarity to our land. And we pray that you would continue to protect him, bless him, give him great wisdom,” he said. “We pray that you would surround him with faithful counselors who fear your name and love your precepts.”

Potteiger’s church is a member of the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches (CREC), which was cofounded by Douglas Wilson in 1998 and formerly called the Confederation of Reformed Evangelical Churches until its name was changed in 2011 to avoid association with the Confederacy.

This article was originally published in The Christian Post.

AUTHOR

Jon Brown

Jon Brown is a reporter for The Christian Post.

RELATED VIDEO: Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth: “Appealing to Heaven, to God, is a long-standing tradition in our military.”

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Trump Establishes Religious Liberty Commission

/in , , , , , , , /by

President Donald Trump has kept a campaign promise to establish a commission to fight infringements on religious liberty. On Thursday, he signed an executive order establishing the Religious Liberty Commission.

“The Founders envisioned a Nation in which religious voices and views are integral to a vibrant public square and human flourishing and in which religious people and institutions are free to practice their faith without fear of discrimination or hostility from the Government,” says the executive order.

The members will “offer diverse perspectives on how the Federal Government can defend religious liberty for all Americans” and produce a report on the current state of religious liberty in America.

It appears the commission will not back away from hot button issues where Christians currently experience repression from liberal, secular states. “Key focus areas include parental rights in religious education, school choice, conscience protections, attacks on houses of worship, free speech for religious entities, and institutional autonomy,” said a White House fact sheet that accompanied the announcement.

The committee will be chaired by Texas Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick (R) and co-chaired by former brain surgeon and former Trump Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Dr. Ben Carson. Its members include:

  • Ryan Anderson, the president of the Ethics and Public Policy Center and author of “When Harry Became Sally,” a groundbreaking book on the transgender phenomenon that was at times banished from Amazon.
  • Bishop Robert Barron, Roman Catholic bishop of the Diocese of Winona-Rochester in Minnesota.
  • Carrie Prejean Boller, a former Miss California who made waves at the 2009 Miss USA pageant for defending traditional marriage.
  • Cardinal Timothy Dolan, the Roman Catholic archbishop of New York.
  • Franklin Graham, president and CEO of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association and the relief organization Samaritan’s Purse.
  • Allyson Ho, an attorney at Gibson, Dunn, & Crutcher.
  • Talk show host Dr. Phil McGraw.
  • Eric Metaxas, a bestselling author and host of a syndicated talk show and host of a show on TBN.
  • Kelly Shackelford, president and CEO of First Liberty Institute, which defends religious liberty.
  • Rabbi Meir Soloveichik of Congregation Shearith Israel, who frequently fights for religious liberty alongside Christians and members of other faiths.
  • Paula White, the president’s faith adviser.

The actions came as the president celebrated the National Day of Prayer, which falls each year on the first Thursday in May. “From the earliest days of our Nation’s journey, America has been guided by the grace of Almighty God,” says his presidential proclamation. “This National Day of Prayer, we thank God for His endless blessings — and we ask Him to grant us fortitude, wisdom, and a renewed spirit of justice as we continue the work to save our country and restore our national promise.”

AUTHOR

Ben Johnson

Ben Johnson is senior reporter and editor at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Harvard Releases ‘Searing’ Report Acknowledging Extent of Anti-Semitism on Campus

Ark. Gov. Huckabee Sanders Signs Bill to Provide $2M to Pro-Life Pregnancy Centers

President Trump Launches Religious Liberty Commission

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

The Most Significant Accomplishments of Trump’s First 100 Days

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Since Franklin D. Roosevelt ushered in the New Deal in 1933 in just three months, historians have measured a president’s success or failure by its first 100 days. As we reach President Trump’s 100th day in office, the 47th president’s second administration has taken a whirlwind of decisive actions to protect life, end artificial support for extreme transgender ideology, uphold religious liberty, secure America’s southern border, restore national sovereignty, and return to a traditional America First foreign policy fostering peace and prosperity.

President Trump’s second first-100-days in office have been “all about one thing: promises made and promises kept. And we have pages and pages and pages of those promises being kept already in just 100 days,” Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-La.) told “This Week on Capitol Hill” host Tony Perkins ahead of this week’s milestone.

Here are some of the president’s most significant accomplishments since his recent return to the Oval Office.

Abortion: Protecting Pro-Life Rights

President Trump began protecting pro-life advocates’ unalienable right to freedom of speech, reversing his predecessor’s weaponization of government against pro-life Christians, and stopping pro-life taxpayers from financing abortion on day one. By the afternoon of January 20 — inauguration day — a Biden-era government website promoting abortion, ReproductiveRights.gov, had gone offline.

On January 23, Trump kept a campaign promise he had made at the 2023 Pray Vote Stand Summit by signing the pardon of 23 pro-life advocates jailed by the Biden-Harris administration. “This is a great honor to sign this,” said the president as he held the pardon aloft in the Oval Office.

The Biden-Harris Justice Department imprisoned many of those nearly two dozen pro-life advocates under a novel legal theory that accused them of violating both the Federal Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act and the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871. From this time forward, the Justice Department will only press charges under the FACE Act if the allegation results in “death, serious bodily harm, or serious property damage,” announced the Trump administration in a January 24 memo. “Cases not presenting significant aggravating factors can adequately be addressed under state or local law.”

Trump also protected U.S. taxpayers from funding foreign abortions and many abortions in the United States. A January 24 presidential memorandum reinstated his 2017 Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance (PLGHA), which assures U.S. taxpayers shall not be forced to pay any foreign organization that commits, refers, or advocates for abortion. The action also aims “to ensure that U.S. taxpayer dollars do not fund organizations or programs that support or participate in the management of a program of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization.”

The same day, Trump signed an executive order “Enforcing the Hyde Amendment,” which assures the nearly five-decade-old policy embraced by President Jimmy Carter will be respected for the next four years. Although a younger Joe Biden voted for the Hyde Amendment — which safeguards taxpayer funds from footing the bill for most abortions through Medicaid — the White House detailed how the Biden-Harris administration subsequently undermined this longstanding norm by compelling taxpayers to underwrite “abortion-related travel expenses,” while “the Department of Veterans Affairs allowed hospitals to provide abortions, and the Department of Health and Human Services paid for abortions for illegal immigrants.”

Additionally, in March the Trump administration held up tens of millions of dollars in Planned Parenthood funding over allegations the nation’s largest abortion business adopted so-called “diversity, equity, and inclusion” policies that violated federal civil rights laws. Leakers have said this may presage a larger administration initiative to defund Planned Parenthood, which received $699.3 million in taxpayer funding and carried out 392,712 abortions in its 2022-2023 fiscal year.

The Trump administration’s pro-life actions should prove popular. Three out of four Americans (73%) oppose taxpayer-funded abortions overseas, and nearly six out of 10 of Americans (57%) oppose using federal funds for abortions at home, according to a Marist poll released in January.

Symbolically, Vice President J.D. Vance delivered a speech in person at the 2025 March for Life, and Trump sent a recorded message to the annual pro-life gathering. In his first administration, Trump became the first sitting president to speak to the March for Life in the flesh.

Extreme Transgender Ideology

President Trump has opposed extreme gender ideology from day one, protecting children from transgender hormone injections or surgeries, sheltering battered women and female prisoners from men who say they identify as female, and maintaining fairness in women’s sports.

On his first day in office, Trump signed the executive order “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government,” which said the federal government recognizes only two sexes, based in observable biological reality, from the moment of fertilization. “‘Female’ means a person belonging, at conception, to the sex that produces the large reproductive cell,” says the order. “‘Male’ means a person belonging, at conception, to the sex that produces the small reproductive cell.”

Eight days later, the president’s executive order “Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation” ended taxpayer funding for transgender procedures involving minors, allows those subjected to such experimental medical interventions to sue, and may lead to the prosecution of those who carry out transgender surgeries. The predatory transgender industry’s “maiming and sterilizing a growing number of impressionable children under the radical and false claim that adults can change a child’s sex … will be a stain on our [n]ation’s history, and it must end,” the order declared.

Trump underscored this in a March 4 address to a joint session of Congress, when he told American youth directly, “Our message to every child in America is that you are perfect exactly the way God made you.”

Trump made it official policy that the military’s emphasis on winning wars and lethality is “inconsistent with the medical, surgical, and mental health constraints on individuals with gender dysphoria. This policy is also inconsistent with shifting pronoun usage or use of pronouns that inaccurately reflect an individual’s sex” in his January 27 executive order “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness” on January 27. The order reverses President Biden’s order opening the military to those who openly identify as transgender but grandfathers in those who have been “stable” for at least 36 months. The executive order stated that identifying as transgender prevents people from living an “honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle, even in one’s personal life.”

On February 5, Trump announced his administration would prosecute Title IX violations by schools or universities that force female students or athletes “to compete with or against or to appear unclothed before males.” Allowing males to compete in women’s sports is “demeaning, unfair, and dangerous to women and girls,” stated the executive order “Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports.” He also cut off student loan forgiveness for LGBTQ activists in a March 7 executive order, “Restoring Public Service Loan Forgiveness.”

The Trump administration has steadfastly implemented these orders against intransigent blue states such as Maine, led by Governor Janet Mills (D). On April 7, the Trump administration notified Maine officials that it would withhold all non-essential funding from the state Department of Corrections after it placed a 6’1” man who confessed to murdering both his parents (and his dog) in a women’s correctional facility. The Biden administration, by contrast, forced women to share prison cells with trans-identified male offenders and filed lawsuits against states that refused to go along with his orders. By January, 15% of all inmates in female correctional facilities were men.

On April 11, the Education Department announced it was moving to cut off all K-12 funding to the state of Maine for flouting federal law, cutting off prison funding. Similarly, Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins held up USDA funding for “administrative and technological functions” in Maine schools that forced girls to change in front of, or compete against, boys.

Th White House released a theologically rich and inspiring statement celebrating Holy Week. One year earlier, then-President Joe Biden placed the weight of his bully pulpit behind a campaign needling Americans to celebrate the “Transgender Day of Visibility,” which also fell on Easter Sunday. Biden’s transgender proclamation ran nearly seven times as long as his Easter statement.

Trump press aides have said they do not respond to questions from reporters who put their personal pronouns in their biographies or social media profiles.

Restoring Religious Liberty

President Trump has established religious liberty departments within Cabinet agencies and recently hosted a conference on the violation of Christians’ rights. The administration has pointedly denounced violations of religious liberty and free speech rights by U.S. allies in Europe. Vice President J.D. Vance told the Munich Security Conference in February that the continent’s “backslide away from conscience rights has placed the basic liberties of religious [believers], in particular, in the crosshairs.” Days later, police handcuffed a 74-year-old grandmother for silently offering to talk to mothers outside an abortion facility. They charged her with violating Scotland’s Abortion Services (Safe Access Zones) Act, which carries a potential fine ranging from £10,000 ($12,600 U.S.) to an unlimited amount.

Securing the Border

On the president’s signature issue, Trump swiftly returned order to the U.S. border by reinstating the Remain in Mexico policy, ending the policy of catch-and-release, designating criminal syndicates such as Tren de Aragua and MS-13 as foreign terrorist organizations or criminal enterprises, and using the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to deport illegal immigrants. He also signed the Laken Riley Act into law and turned the CBP One app from importing to exporting illegal immigrants. He has deported 135,000 illegal immigrants to date.

His policies have proven effective. “Illegal border crossings dropped precipitously. In March, U.S. Customs and Border Enforcement said 7,181 people were apprehended nationwide between border crossings — a 14% decrease from February and a 95% drop from March 2024,” reported the Associated Press. As Trump told Congress, “The media and our friends in the Democrat Party kept saying we needed new legislation. ‘We must have legislation to secure the border.’ But it turned out that all we really needed was a new president.”

National Sovereignty

President Trump has restored national sovereignty by withdrawing from the World Health Organization (WHO), effectively scuttling any chance the global body had of seeing significant progress on the WHO Pandemic Agreement. “WHO proved itself to be a corrupt organization run by the Chinese Communist Party and global leftists,” Senator Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) told “Washington Watch” earlier this month. “President Trump is acting boldly, swiftly, and decisively.” WHO reported a $2.5 billion budget shortfall shortly after Trump’s announcement.

The 47th president also promptly withheld U.S. taxpayer funds from the World Trade Organization (WTO), the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), and the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA).

The February 4 directive also ordered the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations to “conduct a review of [Ameria’s] membership in UNESCO,” the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. President Ronald Reagan exited the organization in 1984, but George W. Bush rejoined in 2003. Trump then withdrew again in 2018, but the Biden administration reversed that decision in 2023.

On February 6, Trump issued an executive order titled “Imposing Sanctions on the International Criminal Court,” rebuffing the ICC for investigating U.S. personnel “without a legitimate basis” and for “issuing baseless arrest warrants targeting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Former Minister of Defense Yoav Gallant” for committing war crimes in Israel’s response to the October 7, 2023, terrorist attack by Hamas.

Moving to Abolish the Department of Education and Hold the Federal Bureaucracy Accountable

In what may prove to be President Trump’s most consequential action, he has taken the first steps to abolish the Department of Education. On March 11, the Trump administration fired half of the Department of Education’s staffers. Although the DOE has spent more than $3 trillion since its formation by President Jimmy Carter in 1979, U.S. reading scores in 2023 were “not significantly different from the average score in 1971,” according to the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). The action fulfills a campaign promise made in a July 2023 online video and repeated at the 2023 Pray Vote Stand Summit to “move everything back to the states.”

The same order directs the secretary of Education to assure all public schools abide by the “requirement that any program or activity receiving Federal assistance terminate illegal discrimination obscured under the label ‘diversity, equity, and inclusion’ or similar terms and programs promoting gender ideology.”

Trump’s executive orders and actions have also rooted out racially discriminatory policies branded under the label “diversity, equity, and inclusion” — which often include LGBTQ indoctrination — from federal agencies and sought to thwart bureaucrats who simply maintained DEI policies and offices under different names. Meanwhile, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has exposed federal waste, fraud, and abuse, and sought to make the vast federal workforce responsive to the will of the American people.

In less than 100 days, President Donald J. Trump has “accomplished more than most politicians and presidents accomplish in an entire lifetime,” Speaker Johnson told Perkins.

AUTHOR

Ben Johnson

Ben Johnson is senior reporter and editor at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLE: EXCLUSIVE: JD Vance To Tout First 100 Days At USA Steel Plant 

RELATED VIDEO: POTUS Trump did more for the American people in his first 100 days than Biden in four years

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

National Guardsman Challenges ‘No Christian in Command’ Policy

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

A former Idaho National Guardsman is suing the Gem State after he was removed from command for expressing his biblical views on human sexuality.

Major David Worley of the Idaho Army National Guard and attorneys with Liberty Counsel filed a lawsuit last week, alleging that Worley was “unlawfully, unconstitutionally, and unconscionably subjected to investigation, discrimination, retaliation, and punishment for the simple exercise of his First Amendment rights … to exercise his sincerely held religious beliefs without fear of discriminatory reprisal from his chain of command.” According to the lawsuit, the discrimination against Worley is rooted in comments he made when campaigning for mayor of Pocatello and, later, for Idaho State Senate.

While campaigning, Worley expressed his opposition to drag queen story hours, pornographic material in public school libraries, and gender transition procedures for minors. Liberty Counsel noted in a press release, “All of Worley’s protected speech occurred off-duty in his private capacity and before he took command of the Idaho Army National Guard’s Recruiting and Retention unit.” In 2023, a fellow National Guardsman who identifies as homosexual filed a complaint against Worley, alleging that the major’s religious beliefs constituted discrimination.

The Idaho Army National Guard subsequently suspended Worley from command and “illegally pressured him to resign without benefit of any counsel or notice.” He was told that if he did not resign he would “face significant and life-altering disciplinary proceedings.” When Worley rescinded his resignation on the advice of counsel, the Idaho Army National Guard launched a formal investigation into the complaints against him.

Although the investigation found that the complaints against Worley were “unsubstantiated” and that there was “no evidence Worley did anything wrong in the workplace,” the National Guard branch recommended a new policy requiring candidates for command be investigated — with examination of private social media posts being a key factor in such an investigation — to ensure that they do not adhere to any “toxic” or “concerning ideologies,” a supposed effort to “ferret out” any “extremism.” Liberty Counsel dubbed the directive the “No Christians in Command” policy.

Liberty Counsel founder and chairman Mat Staver said in a statement, “The Constitution simply does not allow the military to punish those with sincerely held religious beliefs or to specifically target religion for disparate and discriminatory treatment.” He called on Idaho’s Republican governor to rectify the wrong. “Governor Brad Little must ensure that the Idaho Army National Guard upholds federal and state law and protects the free speech of its service members. This discrimination against Major Worley must stop and his record must be cleared and his career restored,” Staver declared.

In comments to The Washington Stand, Arielle Del Turco, director of the Center for Religious Liberty at Family Research Council, said, “The Idaho Army National Guard made an absolutely shameful decision when they removed an officer for his speech informed by his biblical worldview outside of his military role.” She continued, “We can hope that with the new Trump administration, we will see these violations of religious freedom in the military come to an abrupt halt. This highlights the importance for President Trump to set the tone as commander and chief and make it clear that the religious freedom of every servicemember and chaplain will be protected.”

Earlier this week, President Donald Trump issued an executive order terminating diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives — including LGBT activism — in the federal government. The order comes amid numerous moves by the Trump administration to exterminate identity-driven ideology from all areas of the federal government. For example, LGBT and Black Lives Matter (BLM) flags and signage have already been prohibited from government buildings and DEI-supporting military leaders have been fired. Trump, along with Secretary of Defense nominee Pete Hegseth, have also announced a plan to halt and block military investigations related to alleged “extremism.”

AUTHOR

S.A. McCarthy serves as a news writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLE: Trump Signs Executive Orders Restricting Transgender Troops, Ending Military DEI Practices

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

5 Ways to Pray for the Incoming Trump Administration

/in , , , , , , , , /by

On Monday, Donald Trump will take the oath of office as America’s 47th president. Christians are commanded to pray for governing officials, regardless of politics. So, as the country enters a new chapter of our history, here are five ways that Christians can pray biblically for the incoming administration.

1. Religious Freedom

First and foremost, we should establish the biblical basis for why Christians should pray for government leaders. Paul instructs his disciple Timothy, “First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way” (1 Timothy 2:1-2).

The context of this command is a letter focused on ordering the church and preserving the gospel, issues still central to Christian practice today. Not only does this increase our confidence in the ongoing relevance of this command, but it also leads us to infer that praying for government officials is appropriate to the context of the local church and consistent with the gospel we proclaim. This is not a distracting side issue.

Apart from a general description — “supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings” — Paul does not prescribe what or how Christians should pray for rulers, but he does explain why. These prayers are so that “we” — that is, Christians — “may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way.” In other words, Christians are to pray for governing officials so that the government will leave them alone to live the Christian life. This includes evangelism and discipleship, as the following verses imply (1 Timothy 2:3-4).

The incoming Trump administration is not “going to fix the problems in terms of what ails America,” said Family Research Council President Tony Perkins on “Washington Watch.” “It is not political. It’s spiritual. And so, it’s incumbent upon the church … to delve in, roll up their sleeves, and work with their neighbors and their communities.” But he added, “Where the government comes in is making sure that those people can do that in the name of Jesus, and they can live out their faith in a way that is unhindered and unrestrained by the government around them.”

The modern term that describes this situation is religious freedom. Christians should pray for governing officials so that governing officials will uphold and preserve religious freedom.

It is also worth noticing who Christians are instructed to pray for, since some Christians might be tempted to offer prayers for some leaders but not others. Some Christians might try to rationalize their prayerlessness by complaining that California Governor Gavin Newsom (D) is a petty tyrant, or that President Trump is a lying narcissist. Yet Paul urged Timothy to pray for “kings” which in its original context would have meant the famously immoral Roman emperors who persecuted the early church. And, lest we be tempted to exclude any particular rulers, Paul adds the comprehensive category, “and all who are in high positions.”

2. Economic Prosperity

Having established that Christians should pray for rulers, we can identify other biblical ways to pray for them by considering what the Bible calls upon rulers to do. Scripture recognizes that a basic concern for every governing authority is the economic prosperity of his dominion.

Of course, governing officials cannot directly create economic prosperity in most circumstances. But they do influence the factors that encourage or hinder the industrious labor of others. In Ecclesiastes 5:8-9, the preacher invites his audience to consider how economic prosperity can hardly coexist with injustice and oppression: “If you see in a province the oppression of the poor and the violation of justice and righteousness, do not be amazed at the matter, for the high official is watched by a higher, and there are yet higher ones over them. But this is gain for a land in every way: a king committed to cultivated fields.”

What point is the preacher — most likely Solomon — making? First, he acknowledges how common it is to see governing officials exploit those under their authority for their own personal gain; after all, they’re in a desperate struggle with others who are also trying to reach the top. Then he contrasts that self-interested official with one “committed to cultivated fields,” which is akin to economic prosperity in an agrarian economy. The preacher seems to have the following case in mind.

Consider a society with weak property rights, where the powerful regularly steal from the poor with impunity. Or consider a society with crushing taxation (or inflation, which is a subtle variation of the same), where the rulers skim off all the profits of the poor, leaving them with barely enough to live on. Such oppression leaves the industrious poor with no means by which to improve their land and labor, and it gives the rest of the poor no incentive to become industrious. In extreme circumstances, such as famine, such oppressive policies might even provoke those who can to flee their poverty-stricken situation in search of a better life in another land (see Ruth 1:1 or the U.S. southern border). The country’s situation becomes even worse as the industrious, intelligent, and wealthy jump ship.

What can forestall this downward spiral of oppression, misery, and flight? A ruler who is more concerned about making sure his people are secure and happy in the fruit of their labor than he is about lining his own pockets: “a king committed to cultivated fields.” While Christians don’t have a direct command to pray for such rulers, the preacher seems to invite such prayers, since such a “gain for a land in every way” is a gift that God can provide to the whole land in general.

3. Impartiality

Christians can also pray that government officials are impartial and unbiased in the way they carry out their official duties. (Put negatively, we might pray that they do not weaponize government for their own partisan agenda or create a two-tier system of justice.)

Impartiality is held out as an ideal for governing officials because it reflects God’s own character (Job 34:19, Romans 2:11). We see this, among other places, in Moses’s farewell speech to the people of Israel:

“So I took the heads of your tribes, wise and experienced men, and set them as heads over you, commanders of thousands, commanders of hundreds, commanders of fifties, commanders of tens, and officers, throughout your tribes. And I charged your judges at that time, ‘Hear the cases between your brothers, and judge righteously between a man and his brother or the alien who is with him. You shall not be partial in judgment. You shall hear the small and the great alike. You shall not be intimidated by anyone, for the judgment is God’s’” (Deuteronomy 1:15-17).

Practically, impartiality requires a governing official to faithfully discharge the duties of his or her office without playing favorites. Officials tasked with prosecuting crimes should prioritize their work based on the severity of the offenses, not based on the identity of their targets. Officials who swear to uphold the U.S. Constitution must do so even if it prevents them from achieving their policy objectives or scoring political wins.

Even if Christians don’t have a direct role in making these decisions, they can pray that officials who do wield power will do so in a just and impartial manner.

4. Judgment of Evil

A particular application of this impartiality is in the deterrence, prosecution, and sentencing of crimes. Paul describes governing authorities as God-instituted servants who “are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad.” A ruler ideally acts as “an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer” (Romans 13:3-4). In a world full of sinners, fear of punishment by the state acts as a deterrent upon many people who would otherwise commit wickedness.

This is a gift of God for the good of his people, and we should pray that it continues. Recent American history provides too many examples of people escaping the consequences of their actions due to the corrupt nepotism, political expediency, or ideological extremism of government officials. Let us pray that God will sovereignly work to reverse this trend, for our good and the good of our country.

5. Advocacy for the Voiceless

Finally, the Bible counsels governing authorities to use their power for good by defending the helpless and voiceless. Instead of wasting their strength on women and wine (Proverbs 31:3-4), rulers are instructed, “Open your mouth for the mute, for the rights of all who are destitute. Open your mouth, judge righteously, defend the rights of the poor and needy” (Proverbs 31:8-9).

Even in our wealthy, technologically advanced society — and perhaps in part because of it — there are many types of people who remain politically and economically powerless, or severely disadvantaged: the destitute, the fatherless, the homeless, the chronically and mentally ill. At the very least, government officials should “defend the rights” of such people and not deprive them of justice because of their inability to return the favor.

Digging deeper, we can think of even more helpless categories. Some people have been abducted, abused, and trafficked even in America, and government officials should seek to liberate them from their captivity and fear. The most helpless category of all is the unborn — who are literally voiceless. They need strong and persistent advocates against those who would take their lives in the womb — advocates not only in the church but in government too.

Christians can pray that government officials model this sort of wise leadership by thinking carefully and wisely about the best way for society to care for and protect people who are helpless, destitute, and even voiceless. We should pray most fervently for governmental advocates for those who are abused, trafficked, and targeted for death in the womb.

Conclusion

God wants his people to pray so that they would learn to rely on him in faith, and so that he might be glorified through answering their prayers. The prayers of God’s people waft up to his heavenly throne as the fragrant aroma of incense (Psalm 141:2, Revelation 5:8). The best prayers are those offered according to God’s word, when God’s people simply repeat God’s promises back to him and urge him to fulfill them (Exodus 32:13, 2 Samuel 7:25, 1 Kings 8:25). So, when we pray according to God’s word, believing with full confidence that God will do what he has said, God is glorified, and “we know that we have the requests that we have asked of him” (1 John 5:15).

Therefore, as God’s word commands, let us pray for our public officials according to God’s word, with confidence that God will be glorified and in hope that our nation might be blessed with good leadership — both from the incoming administration and from those that will succeed it.

AUTHOR

Joshua Arnold

Joshua Arnold is a senior writer at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

South Dakota, Texas Pursue Ten Commandments Displays in Schools

/in , , , , , , /by

After Louisiana became the first state to require the Ten Commandments to be displayed in public schools, a legal battle erupted. Republican Governor Jeff Landry signed the bill in June, and after months of litigation, it can finally be enforced in certain school districts. Now South Dakota may be headed for similar court battles.

Last week, South Dakota state Senator John Carley (R) and Rep. Phil Jensen (R), introduced Senate Bill 51. It reads, “The board of a school district shall display the Ten Commandments in each classroom in each school located within the district. The display must be a poster or document that is at least eight inches by fourteen inches. The text of the Ten Commandments must be the focus of the poster or document and must be printed in large, easily readable font.”

Like the legislation in Louisiana, this proposal also requires that the Ten Commandments be accompanied by a statement explaining their historical significance, which would apply to other documents like the Mayflower Compact and the Declaration of Independence.

“We need to illustrate our history and truth,” Carley urged. “[S]ome people may want to say, ‘We don’t want to talk about these topics,’ but the Ten Commandments certainly were a part of the founding of our country.” Carley also highlighted additional benefits of posting the Ten Commandments. As he put it, “If we find kids honoring their father and mother, a lot of parents will be happy about that. If we find people are not stealing, lying, or murdering, I think our Sheriff Department and law enforcement will certainly be happy.”

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), on the other hand, quickly criticized the legislation. They claimed it posed a risk of causing “students who don’t follow the state’s approved religious dictates to feel ostracized from their school community.” The ACLU of South Dakota argued that “the First Amendment guarantees families and faith communities — not politicians or the government — the right to instill religious beliefs in their children.” In their opinion, “Displaying the Ten Commandments in our state’s classrooms blatantly violates this promise.”

The group also claimed that “students already have the right to engage in religious exercise and expression at school under current law.” For instance, because students can “voluntarily pray, read religious literature or engage in other religious activities during recess or lunch,” the ACLU believes displaying the Ten Commandments would be a form of “religious conversion.”

On the other hand, South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley (R) supports the bill. On Monday, he said in a statement, “The Ten Commandments already are displayed in the U.S. Supreme Court and other public buildings. The Ten Commandments have influenced the creation of our nation and our rule of law.” A notable trend is forming of lawmakers introducing bills that require the Ten Commandments be displayed in public schools.

Just this week, Texas Senator Phil King (R) reportedly has plans to propose a bill of this same nature. He described the Ten Commandments as the “basis for much of American history and law.” As he put it, “It played such a role in our founding and among our founders. It’s part of our legal heritage.”

During the last Texas Senate legislative session, Lt. Governor Dan Patrick (R) had sought to bring the Bible back into Texas public schools. It was ultimately shut down in the Texas House. Allegedly, it is King’s intention to continue some of what Patrick started. In fact, Patrick had posted on X back in June that “Texas WOULD have been and SHOULD have been the first state in the nation to put the 10 Commandments back in our schools.” He went on to say that the House ultimately killing the bill was both “inexcusable and unacceptable.” But in response to King’s efforts to revive the bill, Texas Governor Greg Abbott (R) has already offered his support. As he said on X, “Let’s do it.”

Reflecting on these developments, Family Research Council’s Meg Kilgannon shared her excitement with The Washington Stand. “This is great to see other states attempting to include the Ten Commandments in schools,” she stated. “Regardless of your religious beliefs or lack of them,” she contended, “understanding the Law is important for any person’s educational formation.”

AUTHOR

Sarah Holliday

Sarah Holliday is a reporter at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Trump Picks Leader Of Key Catholic Political Org, Father Of Nine For Vatican Ambassador

/in , , , , , , , /by

President-elect Donald Trump nominated CatholicVote president Brian Burch to serve as the United States Ambassador to the Holy See.

Trump made the announcement on Truth Social Friday, praising Burch for “helping build one of the largest Catholic advocacy groups in the Country.” Burch is a devout Catholic and outspoken supporter of Trump who urged Catholics to vote for the president-elect over his support of religious freedom and pro-life policies.

“I am pleased to announce that Brian Burch will serve as the next United States Ambassador to the Holy See,” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post. “Brian is a devout Catholic, a father of nine, and President of CatholicVote. He has received numerous awards, and demonstrated exceptional leadership, helping build one of the largest Catholic advocacy groups in the Country. He represented me well during the last Election, having garnered more Catholic votes than any Presidential Candidate in History! Brian loves his Church and the United States – He will make us all proud. Congratulations to Brian, his wife Sara, and their incredible family!

The Holy See Ambassador serves as the official representative of the United States to the Vatican.

Burch took to X to accept the nomination.

“I am deeply honored and humbled to have been nominated by President Trump to serve as the United States Ambassador to the Holy See. Words cannot express my gratitude to all those that have helped me achieve this nomination,” Burch wrote. “I am committed to working with leaders inside the Vatican and the new Administration to promote the dignity of all people and the common good. I look forward to the confirmation process and the opportunity to continue to serve my country and the Church. To God be the glory.”

Burch openly supported Trump’s election run, issuing a memo urging Catholics not to vote for Vice President Kamala Harris and running mate Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, previously telling the Daily Caller News Foundation that the Democratic ticket “poses an existential threat to Catholics and all people of goodwill.”

“This is a candidate who doesn’t merely disagree with Catholics, but has a deep animus towards Catholics,” Burch warned at the time, adding that Harris has proven to have “broad hostility to Catholic institutions, Catholic moral beliefs, religious freedom and policies that would undermine the common good of the entire country.”

Trump’s victory on Nov. 5 was due in no small part to the Catholic vote, holding a double-digit lead over President Joe Biden despite losing the same group to him in 2020. Trump’s pro-life stance, defense of religious freedom and decision to pick Catholic J.D. Vance as his running may are all possible factors in Catholics’ voting trend this election.

AUTHOR

Jaryn Crouson

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLE: ‘Sign Of Great Hope’: Religious Leaders See A ‘Fourth Great Awakening’ As Americans Flock To Christianity

RELATED VIDEO: President Trump: “We do NOT answer to bureaucrats we only answer to God in Heaven.”

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

In Historic First, Nativity Scene Goes on Display at U.S. Capitol

/in , , , , , , , /by

For the first time in history, a Nativity scene was displayed on the steps of the U.S. Capitol Tuesday, marking what organizers say is a milestone for religious freedom and the First Amendment.

The display, accompanied by prayer, Christmas carols, and a reading of the Christmas story, was made possible by a landmark federal court decision that granted Rev. Patrick Mahoney and his supporters the right to peacefully celebrate the Christmas season on Capitol grounds.

Held on the southeastern steps of the Capitol, the display was the culmination of a legal battle that began over a decade ago when Mahoney, director of the Washington, D.C.-based Christian Defense Coalition, faced repeated threats of arrest for his attempts to read the Christmas story from the Bible and hold a Nativity display at the Capitol Christmas tree.

On Wednesday, Mahoney shared his gratitude for the chance to share the message of Christmas in such a politically significant location.

Sue Dorfman, a photographer for ZUMA Press, captured the moment with an image of the Nativity scene at the Capitol.

Mahoney wrote on X: “7 months ago, we would’ve been arrested for having this Nativity Display on the steps of the US Capitol. However, we won an historic federal lawsuit through the incredible work of the Center for American Liberty which allowed us on the steps!”

In his post, Mahoney tagged civil rights advocate Center for American Liberty Executive Director Mark Trammell and Harmeet Dhillon, a California civil rights attorney nominated by President-elect Donald Trump for a similar role at the U.S. Department of Justice.

In a statement, Mahoney offered his gratitude for making history. “We are so very thankful for the opportunity to share the joyful and powerful message of Christmas at the steps of the U.S. Capitol,” Mahoney said. “In a hurting and wounded world, there is no more redemptive and healing message than the Christmas story.”

The road to this historic moment was paved by Mahoney’s 2022 federal lawsuit, which challenged the Capitol’s restrictions on public demonstrations. Despite the federal government’s resistance, Mahoney argued that the U.S. Capitol — a place symbolic of democracy and freedom — should be a space where all Americans can exercise their First Amendment rights, including the freedom to express religious beliefs.

In his lawsuit, Mahoney stated, “The ‘People’s House,’ as the U.S. Capitol Building is so rightly called, must be a place where all Americans are afforded the right to come and peacefully celebrate and express their First Amendment rights. Tragically, those rights and freedoms are being denied and prohibited.”

He contended that while lawmakers, media, lobbyists, and tourists were free to enter and use the Capitol grounds, his own request for a peaceful demonstration was denied. Mahoney had sought permission to hold a Good Friday service, praying for peace, religious freedom, and the healing of nations.

In May 2024, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled in Mahoney’s favor, declaring the Capitol steps to be a public forum where peaceful demonstrations could no longer be prohibited. This decision set a precedent that ensured the steps of the Capitol could be used for public expressions of religious faith, including the display of a Nativity scene.

“This is also a significant victory for religious freedom and the First Amendment,” Mahoney said in a statement. “This event has ended and won the war on Christmas in the public square. For if Christmas can be celebrated and displayed in the most powerful public square in America, it can be celebrated publicly everywhere.”

This article was originally published by The Christian Post.

AUTHOR

Christian Post Staff

RELATED ARTICLES:

Hope amid Trial: ‘The God Who Has Been Sufficient until Now Should Be Trusted to the End’

A Silent Night for Israeli Hostages: ‘This Moment Must Not Be Wasted’

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Experts Point Out Harris’s ‘Double Standard’ in Speeches and Actions

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Media interviews, press briefings, and Q&As are opportunities for public figures to share their values, goals, concerns, and personalities with the world. In the public square, it’s particularly beneficial for candidates and political figures to use their media presence to both connect with their voters and convince others to vote for them. With a presidential election around the corner, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, as well as his running mate Senator J.D. Vance (R-Ohio), have made frequent public appearances to keep voters up to date on their beliefs. Vice President Kamala Harris, however, has been conspicuously absent.

Harris, who assumed the Democratic presidential nomination after President Joe Biden dropped out of the race, appears to be dodging the media. As guest host Jody Hice pointed out on Thursday’s episode of “Washington Watch,” other than various campaign ads, scripted rallies, and some brief statements here and there, the vice president “has not offered herself for an extended interaction with the press since June 24th.” However, Hice added, “If Vice President Harris won’t provide answers to the press, if she won’t provide answers to you on where she stands on all the issues, then we will.”

Meg Kilgannon, Family Research Council’s senior fellow for Education Studies, joined Hice in the discussion of what kind of message Harris’s absence sends to the American people. “Well,” Kilgannon said, “it says to me that she’s not interested in asking for my vote.” It’s becoming increasingly clear that “she’s delivered remarks exclusively to audiences that are places … she’s comfortable with.” But as Kilgannon emphasized, “[S]he’s not offering herself in venues where” someone outside her normal demographic “might notice her.”

“That’s a great point,” Hice noted. Ultimately, the press recognition is all “about reaching out to the voters.” The questions and the interviews are “about letting the people know where she and her running mates stand on the various issues.” And “when they hide,” Hice speculated, “it raises all sorts of questions.” But when Harris does emerge from the shadows, Kilgannon emphasized that much of what she has said publicly is nothing short of dishonest.

For instance, Harris made a comment during her speech at the American Federation of Teachers (ATF) Convention regarding some of the issues that differ between Democrats and Republicans. “Just think about it,” the vice president chortled. “So we want to ban assault weapons, and they want to ban books.” But as Kilgannon clarified, with that statement, Harris “set up this false choice.”

She continued, “[O]f course we don’t want to ban books. We simply don’t want pornographic material to be presented to school children as educational.” And “this is not anything any reasonable person doesn’t understand.” But evidently, Harris “wants to gloss over all of this to” characterize it as some kind of “religious right [push] to ban books,” and “that’s not exactly honest.” Not to mention, as Hice highlighted, when Oklahoma put into effect the requirement of teaching the Bible in public schools, the Left, “surprise, surprise, wants to ban the Bible.” And many of them, Kilgannon added, also want to ban “prayer in school.”

At the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) convention, Harris stated the Democrats are in “a fight for the future, and ours,” she specified, “is a fight for freedom.” But as Hice said, her comment begs the question: what does “freedom” mean in this case? According to Kilgannon, one of the freedoms most attacked in the U.S. is religious liberty. However, Harris “does not mention that in her list of freedoms that she feels like are under attack.”

Rather, Kilgannon said, the “main theme is freedom on … Democratic Party terms.” In other words, “freedom, not of people to practice their faith and to live out their faith, but rather freedom to abort your babies.” Or the so-called freedom “to present sexualized material to children. Freedom … to castrate … [and] sterilize [children] in these ridiculous so-called gender-affirming care experiments.” Really, she urged, “Those are the kinds of things that [the Harris] administration has advocated for, and that’s the kind of freedom that she imagines for the country.”

At the end of the day, Hice explained how “it sounds good to talk about freedom. But life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, [and] all of those things are freedoms that [Harris] restricts in what she and the Democratic Party … are trying to advance.” All of this, Kilgannon argued, points to “why it’s important to consume alternative media, [and] to listen to other voices who can add some context and some facts to this word picture that they’re painting.” Because “Kamala Harris [encouraging] her audience to fight for our country” carries an entirely different meaning than if “former President Trump or any Republican [were] to say the same.”

And the same is true of how the Democrats talk about the Biden administration’s Title IX rewrite. As evidenced by the White House briefing on Wednesday, Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre described the new rule that allows biological men into private women’s spaces to help “everyone” feel safe, as well as “an important” step in ending sexual assault. And yet, Kilgannon urged, “[T]hat’s certainly not what the rule” does.

She elaborated, “[I]t does not protect women and girls. It does not protect every student. It prioritizes some students over other students,” which “is certainly not the original intent of Title IX, nor is it supported by any kind of common sense.” The theme Harris “hits in her stump speech over and over again [is] this idea that, somehow, the Right is going to roll back protections for people,” but “it really is confession by projection.”

Because, ultimately, “[T]hey are the ones who are putting people in jail for praying in front of abortion clinics. They are the ones who have sponsored the lawfare that has harassed President Trump for all of these many, many months and years,” which also affects “other people around him [due to] ridiculous and pointless lawsuits. … [T]hey are the ones who are weaponizing government … not us.”

Kilgannon concluded, it’s “a clear double standard, but we’re kind of used to that” by now.

AUTHOR

Sarah Holliday

Sarah Holliday is a reporter at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘Is That A Trick Question’: Kamala Harris Rally-Goers Struggle To Explain Her Policies

Who Doesn’t Like Pregnancy Resource Centers? Kamala Harris

EXCLUSIVE: Pro-Life Org Sounds Alarm On ‘Extreme’ Agenda To Eliminate ‘ALL Limits On Abortion’

Virginia Gov. Bolsters Election Integrity Measures

RELATED VIDEO: Sara Carter: Harris Is Following Biden’s ‘Basement Strategy’

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Conservatives React to ‘Radical’ Harris-Walz Ticket

/in , , , , , , , /by

Conservative leaders and elected officials are warning that Vice President Kamala Harris and Governor Tim Walz (D-Minn.) represent the most far-left presidential ticket in American history. “This is the most Radical Left duo in American history. There has never been anything like it, and there never will be again. Crazy Kamabla is, indeed, CRAZY,” declared former President Donald Trump on Truth Social, in response to Harris selecting Walz as her running mate on Tuesday. Trump joked that the Harris-Walz ticket is so extreme that “THERE IS A BIG MOVEMENT TO ‘BRING BACK CROOKED JOE.’”

“I would say my reaction is I can’t believe it, I never thought he was going to be the one that was picked,” Trump told Fox News in a Wednesday morning interview. “He’s a very, very liberal man, and he’s a shocking pick. The former president added that he’s “thrilled” to be competing against such a stark contrast in November’s election, pledging to focus on Harris’s and Walz’s “radical” records. “He’s a smarter version of her,” Trump quipped, referring to the Democratic duo’s left-wing policies. He continued, “There’s never been a ticket like this. This is a ticket that would want this country to go communist immediately, if not sooner. … He’s very heavy into transgender — anything transgender he thinks is great. And he’s not where the country is on anything.” He added, “This is a really bad decision for the country. Ultimately, I want the country to have good decisions because, ultimately, what we want is for the country to do well. The country can’t do well with these two people.”

Trump’s own running mate, Senator J.D. Vance (R-Ohio), took a similar approach, saying on Tuesday that Harris’s selection of Walz “just highlights how radical Kamala Harris is…” He continued, “Tim Walz allowed rioters to burn down Minneapolis in the summer of 2020, and then the few who got caught, Kamala Harris helped bail them out of jail. So, it is more instructive about what it says about Kamala Harris.” He noted, “She doesn’t care about the border. She doesn’t care about crime. She doesn’t care about energy. And most of all, she doesn’t care about Americans who have been made to suffer under those policies.”

A U.S. Marine Corps veteran himself, Vance also criticized Walz for lying about his military record at a campaign event on Wednesday. “As a Marine who served his country in uniform when the United States Marine Corps, when the United States of America asked me to go to Iraq to serve my country, I did it. I did what they asked me to do, and I did it honorably,” Vance said. He continued, “When Tim Walz was asked by his country to go to Iraq, you know what he did? He dropped out of the Army and allowed his unit to go without him, a fact that he’s been criticized for aggressively by a lot of the people that he served with.” The senator added, “I think it’s shameful to prepare your unit to go to Iraq, to make a promise that you’re going to follow through, and then to drop out right before you actually have to go.”

Florida’s Governor Ron DeSantis (R) also blasted the Harris-Walz ticket, quipping the pair’s campaign slogan might be “Make America Burn Again.” At a press event, DeSantis noted the involvement of both Harris and Walz in 2020’s Black Lives Matter riots, saying, “Those were riots that Harris egged on and raised money to bail out the rioters with Minnesota Bail Fund, and they’re riots that Tim Walz as governor sat back and let happen. He sat back and let the city of Minneapolis burn. That city has been gutted as a result of those riots.” He continued, “This is a ticket that really represents the spirit of those 2020 BLM riots. You have a very vapid San Francisco Democrat and then you’ve got an Ilhan Omar-style leftist, Tim Walz, who has the same policies as his fellow Minnesotan Ilhan Omar,” referring to pro-Hamas “Squad” member Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.). The Florida governor added, “We do not need an America that represents the failed policies of San Francisco or the failed policies of Minneapolis. We do not need to see poop on the street and cities burning down. That is not a prescription for America to work its way back.”

DeSantis also observed that, in 2021, “Minnesotans were roughly five times more likely to move to Florida than vice versa. They were fleeing a state that, under Gov. Tim Walz, turned its back on law and order, increased taxes, and imposed unscientific coronavirus restrictions, harming children and destroying businesses.” He reiterated, “Walz is an unbridled leftist, an Ilhan Omar-style Democrat that puts ideology above all else.”

Republican Governor Greg Abbott of the Lone Star State branded Harris and Walz “the most radical and dangerous administration in modern history.” He stated, “Tim Walz will be a rubberstamp for Kamala Harris’ deadly open border policies, refusing to admit there is a border crisis, opposing border wall funding, and supporting sanctuary cities.”

“As Governor of Minnesota, Walz’s policies endangered the lives of those he was elected to protect — and we can only expect more of the same as Vice President,” Abbott continued. “Like Harris, Walz endorsed defunding the police, and under his watch, vehicle theft, aggravated assault, and even murder rates have gone up in Minnesota. And while Minneapolis was burning as riots overtook the city in 2020, Walz refused to call in the National Guard for three days.”

“Walz is also a climate radical who wants to destroy American energy independence and completely eliminate fossil fuels, killing hundreds of thousands of good-paying oil and gas jobs in Texas and across the country,” the Texas governor added. He concluded, “Tim Walz is in lockstep with Kamala Harris’ dangerous open border, anti-energy, soft-on-crime agenda that will hurt Americans and the future of our country.”

The Harris-Walz ticket shows that “the Democrat Party is all in on its far-left cultural agenda,” said Terry Schilling, president of the socially-conservative American Principles Project. “Walz is one of the few Democrats whose radical record rivals Harris’s own,” Schilling continued, citing the Minnesota governor’s left-wing track record. “There can be no doubt that a Harris-Walz administration would be a disaster for families. It’s critical that parents recognize the stakes. … Harris and Walz cannot be allowed to run or hide from this record, and we will make sure they are forced to confront it.”

Christian organizations have also sounded the alarm over Walz’s extremism. Robert Ketterling, founding pastor of the River Valley Church in Minnesota, and Samuel Rodriguez, head of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, issued a joint statement condemning the Harris-Walz pairing. “Walz has signed laws restricting free speech for pastors, made derogatory comments about conservatives, and embraced socialism — all of which make him an unappealing choice for those in the political center,” the pastors observed. They continued, “His lack of likability, often coming across as angry and on the edge of violence, only exacerbates his inability to connect with a broader electorate. … [Walz’s] liberal policies, ineffective crisis management, divisive rhetoric, and failure to appeal to independent and moderate voters make him a liability rather than an asset.”

The conservative Catholic League said in a statement that Walz’s “policies on religious liberty and sexual issues mirror” Harris’s. The Catholic League noted that, in addition to the Minnesota governor’s unabashed abortion and LGBT advocacy, he stripped religious liberty protections from Christians in 2023, barred Christian colleges and universities with statements of faith from participating in the state’s Postsecondary Enrollment Options program, and forced churches to remain closed during COVID-19 while he allowed retail stores, liquor shops, bars, casinos, and shopping malls to reopen. “Tim Walz is no friend of religious liberty, the rights of the unborn, and the welfare of young people. There will be no tension between him and Harris on any of these issues,” the Catholic League concluded.

Harris announced Walz as her running mate at a campaign event in Philadelphia on Tuesday. The vice president has faced criticism over her own far-left record, which includes abortion advocacy, LGBT activism, climate hysteria, an ongoing illegal immigration crisis, skyrocketing crime rates, rampant inflation, the aggressive prosecution of American Christians, and the cover-up of President Joe Biden’s cognitive decline, among others.

AUTHOR

S.A. McCarthy

S.A. McCarthy serves as a news writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED VIDEO: The Red Violin — Struggle Session

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.