When degendering marriage through the legalization of same-sex marriage was being proposed by activists decades ago, those who opposed it were regularly told to settle down because the change would never impact them. It was a merely a private matter between two people. “How will my private same-sex marriage ever harm you?” we were repeatedly told. That was wholly disingenuous. 

A United States district judge ruled in November that World Vision, a global Christian relief ministry based in the Seattle area, has no right to hold its employees to biblical Christian sexual ethics.
In January 2021, World Vision withdrew an offer of employment to Aubry McMahon as a customer service representative upon learning she was in a same-sex marriage. Same-sex marriage, of course, is at dramatic odds with Jesus’ clear teaching.
Rather than respecting World Vision’s right to adhere to the clear convictions of the world’s largest religion, McMahon took the Christian ministry to court.
Initially, U.S. District Judge James L. Robart sided with World Vision, agreeing in June that the organization has the constitutional right to make employment decisions in line with its designation as a Christian ministry.
Now this new ruling signifies a surprising flip-flop by the judge, declaring the case can proceed “to trial to determine the appropriate relief that should be granted”to McMahon by World Vision.
This ruling makes all Christian ministries who seek to live faithfully by the teachings of Jesus deeply vulnerable to the controlling power of the new sexual regime, regardless of how hard they try avoiding LGBT topics.
It is not a matter of how “kind” or “winsome” the ministry is. World Vision is as winsome a ministry as they come. It is whether you insist on adhering to a biblical ethic of sexuality and the family that makes all of us vulnerable. All Christians must appreciate that is precisely what this ruling signifies.
Judge’s Ruling
This federal judge ruled that World Vision rescinding its offer of employment to McMahon “facially discriminates on the basis of sex, sexual orientation, and marital status in violation of [federal] Title VII and WLAD [Washington Law Against Discrimination].”
The judge’s statement curiously admits that “the ministerial exception [of the First Amendment] ensures that courts ‘stay out of employment disputes involving those holding certain important positions with churches and other religious institutions.’”
Read More
Related Posts:

Whenever the nature of male and female are attacked or redefined, as pride month and gender ideology do, every Christian must fully appreciate that it is the very image and likeness of God Himself that is being attacked. Pride month and gender ideology attack the image of God. This is no small thing and something no Christian can pretend does not matter, much less support

We are now constantly reminded that June is so-called “pride month” and everyone is expected to take note, happily get on the bandwagon and celebrate accordingly. But how can pride month be starting when last year’s pride month never really ended? LGBT pride has now gone yearlong, literally 365. The ideology is constantly being forced upon us and our children at regular turns. Who doesn’t feel just like this anymore?
Regardless, it must be declared that there is no pride whatsoever in redefining and denying reality. This is precisely what the gender ideology behind pride month and every presentation of its flag does.
Here is the unavoidable truth: Humanity, across the great diversity of human culture and time, exists as male and female. Those are the only two options. Whenever or wherever you met a person, that person is either male or female, and they were born as such. This is certainly not just a traditional, conservative or Christian ideal. It is a universal truth, an objective biological fact.
It was not long ago that leading progressive French feminist philosopher Sylvaine Agacinski wrote assertively and unapologetically in her book The Parity of the Sexes,
One is born a girl or boy, one becomes woman or man.
The human species is divided in two, and, like most other species, in two only. This division, which includes all human beings without exception, is thus a dichotomy. In other words, every individual who is not man is woman. There is no third possibility. … Humankind does not exist outside this double form, masculine and feminine.
This is so obvious it hardly needs saying. And it certainly was not controversial when she wrote these words to her very progressive audience not that long ago.
But pride month and allyship with LGBT ideology demands we all reject this fundamental human truth, something no reasonable person can do.
In fact, they declare this common-sense, basic biological fact not only wrong, but one of the greatest evils of our times: It is transphobic and threatens the very lives of young people. Of course, neither accusation is true. Both accusations are meant to bully us into submission, and they have been quite effective.
“Non-binary” is not a thing. There is no third, fifth, twelfth, or seventieth gender. A woman cannot become a man or vice versa. No one is born in the wrong body. God does not make mistakes. The family and the future of humanity are founded upon male and female. Pride month and the ideology behind it categorically reject all of this.
Everyone who virtue signals their support for pride and the never-ending evolution into oblivion of the pride flag is indicating their opposition to basic human reality.
Read More
Related Posts:

Rufo ends this revealing article with the smart and hopeful observation that such deception will ultimately reveal itself, as great evil always does. “When parents, voters, and political leaders understand the true nature of Drag Queen Story Hour and the ideology that drives it, they will work quickly to restore the limits that have been temporarily – and recklessly – abandoned.” Thankfully, members of Congress have introduced an important bill to stop our tax dollars from going to these truly dangerous events in schools and community libraries. This is a very good first step.

We have all heard of Drag Queen Story Hour being featured in public and school libraries across the nation and wondered why any sensible librarian, regardless of their politics, would ever say to her or himself, “Yes, men dressed as cartoonish women dancing provocatively is exactly what we should provide for the young patrons of our library!”
That question is even more disturbing when one digs into the true intentions of those who founded and are pushing Drag Queen Story Hour (DQSH) around our nation and the world. That is exactly what Christopher F. Rufo, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, did in a very important exposé in the most recent issue of City Journal. (He also published an abridged version at Foxnews.com)
Rufo explains, “The drag queen might appear as a comic figure, but he carries an utterly serious message: the deconstruction of sex, the reconstruction of child sexuality, and the subversion of middle-class family life.”
He adds, “By excavating the foundations of this ideology and sifting through the literature of its activists, parents and citizens can finally understand the new sexual politics and formulate a strategy for resisting it.”
And resist it we must!
DQSH is certainly not harmless fun, nor is it “family friendly” as its promoters happily claim. Rufo uncovers a much darker, sinister story, “The ideology that drives this movement was born in the sex dungeons of San Francisco and incubated in the academy.”
What is now manifesting itself in our children’s innocence started in the academic and wholly subversive, unscientific bowels of “queer theory.” It celebrates any and everything that challenges and overturns the fundamental human reality of what male and female are and how they both come together to create the family and the next generation of humanity through marriage and the family.
Rufo meticulously details the poisonous contribution of these academic theorists, but his article becomes most interesting to Daily Citizen readers when he explores the very recent writings of the founders and promoters of Drag Queen Story Hour itself, as drag went from an aberrant undercurrent in society to “good old-fashioned, glamorous American fun” with the likes of prime-time cable entertainers like RuPaul. Rufo explains, “Television producers packaged this new form of drag as reality programming, softening the image of the drag queen and assimilating the genre into mass media and consumer culture.”
This created an opportunity in which a “genderqueer” college professor and drag queen named Harris Kornstein, aka, Lil Miss Hot Mess, began to exploit.
Read More
Related Posts:

The so-called “gender affirming” model puts young people on track to start an often deeply invasive, irreversible, and radical medical and surgical regimen at odds with where biology and their own natural development would have taken them.

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), a 92-year-old, 67,000 member organization, prides itself as the paragon of wisdom on all things good and wise concerning the medical health of our children. But facts say otherwise.
It is no secret that the AAP has been captured by radical leftist politics of late, even to the serious detriment of their professional mission. This is particularly true when it comes to their policy statements and actions on gender ideology. In fact, this organization has been utterly captured and controlled by radical gender activists. Fortunately, its positions are being challenged by some important voices in the medical community.
A major article in the online magazine Quillette details much of the AAP’s troubling and unscientific gender activism, demonstrating how it is contrary to the health of children. The author, Stella O’Malley, a parent and psychotherapist living and working in Ireland, has become deeply critical of the ideological capture taking place in too many professional medical and mental health organizations. She believes too many professional medical organizations are being overrun by gender dogmatists pushing dangerous views of what it means to be male and female at the expense of good science. In her Quillette piece, O’Malley explains the foundations of the AAP’s problematic position on children and gender issues,
And so the AAP continues to endorse an affirmation model whereby “social transition” begins in kindergarten or grade one, with five-year-olds being encouraged to inform adults of their preferred name and pronouns, and to seek entry into bathrooms corresponding to the opposite sex. Children aged between eight and 12 can be given puberty blockers and, following this, in their teen years, cross-sex hormones, followed by possible surgical procedures that alter their appearance, sex characteristics, and reproductive system. The age of consent for cross-sex hormones and surgeries varies depending on the state, but children as young as 13 are sometimes able to get their breasts removed. These steps often lead to the patient becoming permanently sterile and unable to achieve orgasm.
This so-called “gender affirmative” model is what some are selling as health care, essentially setting the patient up as the one making the diagnosis and the medical professional is discouraged from asking tough diagnostic questions to determine if the very young patient might have some other type of co-morbidity driving their gender confusion. This turns the medical profession on its head. That patient tells the doctor what the solution is and the doctor must do the patient’s bidding. Questioning the patient’s self-diagnosis is called “transphobic.”
This is not only bad science for obvious reasons, but also because most young people who report gender dysphoria end up naturally aligning with their natal gender by the time they reach puberty. This fact is well documented in the academic literature. This means the so-called “gender affirming” model puts young people on track to start an often deeply invasive, irreversible, and radical medical and surgical regimen at odds with where biology and their own natural development would have taken them.
Read More
Related Posts: