Wyoming Rescue Mission Settles Case to Exclusively Hire “Like-Minded” Christians
As part of the Wyoming Rescue Mission v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission settlement, the Department and the EEOC agreed to pay the rescue mission’s attorneys’ fees. In addition, the court dismissed EEOC from the case and signed a consent decree settling it with the state.
A lawsuit filed two months ago against government officials threatening to punish the Wyoming Rescue Mission for exclusively hiring like-minded Christian employees has settled.
The Mission sought help from Alliance Defending Freedom after the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and the Wyoming Department of Workforce Services (Department) launched a 16-month-long investigation to determine whether the non-profit engaged in religious discrimination prohibited by law.
The investigation began after the Mission chose not to hire a “self-proclaimed ‘non-Christian’” for one of their thrift store associate positions, according to the suit. As a result, the applicant filed a religious discrimination charge, and government officials began investigating the Mission.
The faith-based Mission assists Casper residents through a homeless shelter, recovery programs, and a clothing voucher service. The Mission also owns two Rescued Treasures thrift stores that “make clear that they are a ministry of Wyoming Rescue Mission,” the suit states.
Related Posts:
You Might also like
-
The Religious Marriage Paradox: Younger Marriage, Less Divorce
The religious model of marriage and family appears to boost the odds that young adults can marry before 30 without increasing their risk of landing in divorce court.
The new marriage norm for American men and women is to marry around the age of 30, according to the U.S. Census. Many young adults believe that marrying closer to age 30 reduces their risk of divorce, and, indeed, there is research consistent with that belief. But we also have evidence suggesting that religious Americans are less likely to divorce even as they are more likely to marry younger than 30. This paradoxical pattern raises two questions worth exploring: Is the way religious Americans form their marriages different than the way marriages are formed by their more secular peers? And do religious marriages formed by twenty-somethings face different divorce odds than marriages formed by secular Americans in the same age group?
The answer to that last question is complicated by the role of cohabitation in contemporary family formation. Today, more than 70% of marriages are preceded by cohabitation, as Figure 1 indicates. Increased cohabitation is both cause and consequence of the rise in the age at first marriage. But what most young adults do not know is that cohabiting before marriage, especially with someone besides your future spouse, is also associated with an increased risk of divorce, as a recent Stanford study reports.
So, one reason that religious marriages in America may be more stable is that religion reduces young adults’ odds of cohabiting prior to marriage, even though it increases their likelihood of marrying at a relatively young age. Accordingly, in this Institute for Family Studies research brief, we explore the relationships between religion, cohabitation, age at marriage, and divorce by looking at data from the National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG).
Researching Religion and Family
To address the questions addressed in this research brief, we merge data from the National Survey of Family Growth from 1995 to 2019, using responses from over 53,000 women ages 15 to 49 to recreate their individual-level family histories. (We focus on women because men were not included in the NSFG until recently.)1
The NSFG included two important questions about religion: first, the respondent’s current religious affiliation, and second, what religion they were raised in. Current religious affiliation is not a very informative variable for understanding how religion influences family life because, for example, marriage might motivate people to become more religious (or cohabitation might motivate people to become less religious). But religious upbringing (measured by a woman’s reported religious denomination “in which she was raised” around age 14) occurs before the vast majority of marriages or cohabitations, so is not influenced by them.
Thus, we explore how religious upbringing influences family life. Young adults don’t choose what religion they’re raised in, so this is about as close as we can get to what researchers call “exogenous” treatment, meaning something like experimental conditions. But because religious upbringing could be correlated with many other variables, we also include some important controls: a woman’s educational status in each year of her life (i.e., enrolled in high school, dropped out, enrolled in college, college graduate, etc.), her race or ethnicity, her mother’s highest educational attainment, and whether she grew up in an “intact” family. We also control for survey wave and decade.
Does Religion Influence Marriage and Cohabitation?
In the 1960s, about 5% of newlyweds cohabited before marriage. In the 2010s, it was more than 70%, an enormous increase. After incorporating the effects of control variables, Figure 2 shows2 that in a typical year of life, about 5% of nonreligious women ages 18-49 who have not yet married or cohabited will begin a cohabiting union. That figure is nearer 4% for women with a Christian upbringing, nearer to 3% for women with a non-Christian religious upbringing (i.e., Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses as well as Jews, Muslims, Hindus, and others), and about 4% for religious women on the whole. In other words, after controlling for a variety of background factors, women who grew up religious are about 20% less likely to begin a cohabiting union in any given year than their non-religious peers. As a result, by age 35, about 65% of women with a non-religious upbringing had cohabited at least once, versus under 50% of women with a religious upbringing. Not only does religion reduce the odds that young adults cohabit, it also increases the odds that they marry directly, or without cohabiting first.
Figure 3 illustrates3 the links between religion and what we call direct marriages, that is, marriages that did not include premarital cohabitation. The trends depicted below in Figure 3 show up in similar form for all marriages, but direct marriages are particularly important because they are a closer proxy for the “traditional” relationship pathways promoted by many religions.
For women with a non-religious upbringing who have not yet married or cohabited, about 1% are likely to begin a direct marriage in a given year. For religious people generally, it’s a little more than 1.5%. But for women with Evangelical Protestant or Non-Christian Religious upbringings, the rate of entrance into marriage is over 2%: this is twice the rate of entrance into “direct” marriage. By age 35, about 28% of women with a non-religious upbringing had entered a direct marriage without cohabiting, compared to approximately 43% of women with a religious upbringing. In other words, religiosity is associated with vastly greater likelihood of going directly from singleness to a married union, and generally at younger ages.
Overall, then, religion greatly influences the nature and age of relationship formation. Young women raised in a religious home cohabit less, but they marry more, and especially earlier: in this sample tracking marriage patterns over the last 40 years, women with non-religious upbringings wed around age 25, religious women wed generally around age 24, and women with Evangelical Protestant upbringings wed around 23.5.
Does Religion Influence Breakup and Divorce?
Earlier marriage is a known risk factor for divorce. Premarital cohabitation is too. Since religiosity tends to motivate earlier marriage but less cohabitation, the effects on divorce are not easy to guess. What we really want to know is: conditional on getting married, do religious people get divorced less?
The answer appears to be yes. Without controls for age at marriage or an indicator for premarital cohabitation, women with a religious upbringing do have slightly lower likelihoods of divorce. As shown4 in Figure 4, the annual divorce rate among married women with a nonreligious upbringing is around 5%. For religious women, it’s around 4.5%. The effect is clearest for Catholic and Mainline Protestant women, and less clear for Evangelical Protestant women. Overall, if we control for basic socioeconomic background and a woman’s educational career trajectory, the typical marriage of a woman with a religious upbringing is about 10% less likely to end in divorce within the first 15 years of marriage than the typical marriage of a woman with a non-religious upbringing.
Read More -
A Plea to Missouri Presbytery From A Fellow Presbyter
I trust that you are men driven by Christian character who will not countenance watching a sound church of Jesus Christ – your church – be torn asunder, especially by a small minority. If this is true, then give no support, encouragement or succor to any man who would refuse now to submit wholeheartedly to the will of the brethren.
Dear Brothers:
Pondering the dangerous and seemingly unquenchable division in our nation right now the thought has occurred to me that sometimes men just have to “slug it out.” Boxers, pre-fight, stare at each other with absolute malice in their eyes and the visceral desire to kill or seriously wound the other. Honestly, there is no way that this aggression is going to be defused without a fight. However, after the match the combatants usually hug and congratulate each other as reconciled enemies. The hostilities have abated, and the two stand with a unique and very strong bond as brothers in arms.
Around 160 years ago our nation was torn apart by a bloody civil war. Young men chomped at the bit to move onto the field of battle and unleash lethal force upon their neighbor.
However, after four years of bloodshed men on both sides had had enough and were ready to be at peace. General Robert E. Lee did much to help bring about that peace.
It is reported that President Jefferson Davis desired to continue to fight a guerrilla war against the U.S. However, knowing the costs of dividing a nation and the price of war, Lee said, “No.” Instead, he went on an extensive campaign throughout the South to help heal the rift that had formed. He encouraged Southerners to forget the past, to lay aside revenge and not to engage in continued warfare against the Union. Did Lee suddenly think that his reasons for fighting were wrong? No, however, what he saw was the greater good of peace and unity that stood before a nation torn apart by a four-year war.
Interestingly, the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA), our denomination, has been at civil war for the same number of years. It was in 2018 that a member church of your presbytery stunned the denomination by hosting Revoice, a Side-B gay affirming conference. Letters and articles were written addressing genuine concerns. Greg Johnson went on a speaking campaign via podcasts, magazines, twitter and finally a book.
The Heart of the People
Brothers, the rollout of Side-B was orchestrated in your presbytery. I am not going to get into all of the evidence of this in this letter, but suffice it to say, the evidence is clear. Now, I do not think that you all planned to “take down” the PCA. I simply believe that you misread the heart and mind of the denomination; a heart and mind that has been clearly demonstrated over the past two General Assemblies.
At GA 2021, the GA voted to pass overture 23 by well over 2/3 of the body. The overture clearly expressed the will of the denomination that a man not be allowed to serve as a church officer who professes to be a “gay Christian,” “same-sex attracted Christian,” “homosexual Christian,” or like terms. Many in the PCA wanted their feelings expressed and did so.
Those on the other side were successful in scuttling the overture by seeing that it did not reach the high threshold for ratification by 2/3 of presbyteries. Nonetheless, the vote was very close to the two-thirds of presbyteries needed.
So, the elders of the denomination came back together in 2022 and passed yet two more overtures dealing with the matter. Overture 29 only had 200 votes against it. Overture 15, with specific language referring to those claiming to be homosexuals, and despite arguments that it wouldn’t be able to pass the 2/3 threshold, still passed GA by nearly 55% of the body. The point in all of this is that the denomination has spoken. It does not agree with Side -B-gay-but-celibate ideology. The sentiment is overwhelming. The war is over.
Jolene
Back in the early ‘70s Dolly Parton sang a song about a woman who came from a position of admitted weakness, begging her antagonist, who was beautiful and seductive, to have a heart and not take away her only love, just because she could.
Our denomination finds itself coming to you in a position of weakness. Those who support Side B could wage a guerilla war within our denomination. 1) They could work to scuttle the overtures again, frustrating the will of the members, and we could debate them again at GA after GA. Or 2), they could allow the overtures to pass, but simply not obey their spirit while hiding within sympathetic presbyteries and an effete Standing Judicial Commission. Certainly, PCA members would be very frustrated. Or 3), they could even engage in a tactical retreat in order to hide out and replan, only to spring another surprise on the Church in a few years. In short, those supporting Side B ideology could do much to sow discord and in so doing destroy the peace and health of the PCA, something they swore not to do in their ordination vows.
The reality is it is time for those who support Side B-gay-but-celibate ideology to submit to the will of their brethren, also a part of their ordination vows and bring an end to the lost-cause campaign.
This is where you step in to be the Robert E. Lee of our age. The denomination needs you to say, “Enough. It is time for peace and submission.” Many of those who support the other side of this issue look up to you all – particularly certain members of your court who perhaps have served them at the seminary.
Fool Me Thrice
There is an old proverb: “Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.” Even though I have had my trust abused on numerous occasions by fellow PCA presbyters and ought to know better, I am just a sucker. I trust that you are men driven by Christian character who will not countenance watching a sound church of Jesus Christ – your church – be torn asunder, especially by a small minority. If this is true, then give no support, encouragement or succor to any man who would refuse now to submit wholeheartedly to the will of the brethren. Make every effort to root out rebellion, and counsel men of the need to uphold their vows.
It is understood that some will conscientiously be unable to submit to the will of the brethren in this matter. They must be encouraged to exit the denomination for one that suits them better.
Brotherhood Again
The fight has been long, tiresome and costly. We have slugged it out, so to speak. It is time to shake hands, come together and be one church with the same heart and mind. It is incumbent upon you to rally together to restore peace and unity in the PCA, to strengthen the PCA for the good of Christ’s Church.
Sincerely in Christ,
Jim Shaw is a teaching elder in the Presbyterian Church in America serving Redeemer Presbyterian in Brunswick, GA.
Related Posts: -
The (Consistently) Gospel-Centered Shepherd
When we’re sitting in our studies with a desperate, beloved child of God, too often the first words that come to our minds have a taproot in our flesh. Instead of drawing up fresh gospel water to soothe parched throats, we offer shots of the burning liquor of the law: “Do better. Try harder. Buckle down. White-knuckle it. Suck it up. Get to work.”
When I was a kid, nothing drove me crazier than rules inconsistently applied. When my older cousins got away with things that would have gotten me in a mountain of trouble, or when my siblings got access to privileges that I didn’t, it frustrated me to no end. I had what we might call a “strong sense of justice” (read: I was the fairness police). Now, while that instinct might have been a bit, say, keenly attuned, there was some reality to what I was feeling. It is tough to be a kid in a world where the rules seem to arbitrarily change.
Pastor, unless we are careful, we can do the same to the precious flock with which God has entrusted us.
Here’s what I mean.
The funny (or, not so funny) thing about human nature is that we’re deeply inconsistent. I need look no further than me to realize this. I speak from the pulpit about the need for holiness, and no later than that afternoon, I’ve fallen into sin. I disciple young believers in the importance of a daily regimen of scripture and go to bed that night with my Bible uncracked. I talk a good game about the importance of gospel-centeredness, but far too often, I’m a law-mind.
It’s that last one that can set us up to deeply injure members of our flock. When we’re preparing a sermon, we have the chance to sift our thoughts and curate our words. This allows us to ensure that what we preach has the gospel as its unshakeable core.
But when we’re sitting in our studies with a desperate, beloved child of God, too often the first words that come to our minds have a taproot in our flesh. Instead of drawing up fresh gospel water to soothe parched throats, we offer shots of the burning liquor of the law: “Do better. Try harder. Buckle down. White-knuckle it. Suck it up. Get to work.”
We ask our people to knock back four or six of these great tips to beat anxiety, sin, grief, financial worries, or marital struggles and send them on their way, staggering drunk on the homemade moonshine of get-your-act-together. We ask exasperated questions like, “Why do you still feel this way?” “How is it that you’re still struggling with this?” “What am I going to have to do to help you finally get past this?” Too often, we cram law-shaped words into gospel-shaped holes.
Read More