Print 
PDF
You wouldn’t think it could ever happen in America, but the very institutions created to protect children — from Child Protective Services to the foster care system — have done irreparable harm to kids and their families.
Here's a true story of one Christian family.
Be informed, not misled.
In a new docuseries available now, "Separated: When The State Takes Your Kids", the Daily Caller Original Series highlights the stories of three families who paid an awful price for refusing to participate in left-wing gender madness. The first episode follows John Doe II and Jane Doe, an anonymous Christian family from Prince George’s County, Maryland, who lost custody of their son after refusing to affirm him as a transgender girl during a stay at Children’s National Hospital.
Daily Caller should be commended for producing this docuseries.
It could be a significant resource for you or someone you know who is facing the tragedy of losing their child to the state because of their Christian biblical beliefs.
Here's their story.
In July 2021, as John was out shopping for his youngest son’s birthday, his wife called him in a panic. Local cops and a state child welfare worker had arrived at their home, attempting to take away their 16-year-old autistic son and claiming that the family’s refusal to affirm his new sexual orientation was tantamount to child abuse. The local child welfare department had adopted a radical transgender affirmation program that punished Christian parents who did not allow their children to transition or identify as transgender.
Less than six months after the shocking visit, John and Jane would lose custody of their son.
John and Jane are African-American and devout Christians, yet their life was ruined by state officials and a legal system seemingly hell-bent on punishing people like them. Decent people who wouldn’t cave to a radical ideology that flew in the face of their own religious and parental rights. It didn’t just happen to them, either. Countless families across the country have suffered at the hands of an unjust system that seeks to treat normalcy as abusive.
You can watch the full series by subscribing to their website.
Some would ask why I promote other ministries when you need support for your own ministry.
The answer is because the biblical message is always of greater importance than the messenger.
And this is an important message to our country.
Parental acceptance of trans children has become a big legal issue.
NBC News said last month, "The Supreme Court on Tuesday appeared likely to rule for parents in Maryland who objected on religious grounds to books made available in a school district's elementary schools that feature stories about gay and transgender characters."
That's not entirely true. We talked about it on our radio program at the time it happened.
The parents were very upset about the books the school featured in their teaching materials.
But the parents' question was, "Who is best qualified to raise the child: the parent or the state?"
It was about opting their child out of the presentation.
NBC reported, "Members of the 6-3 conservative majority, which often backs religious rights, seemed sympathetic during the lively 2½-hour oral argument toward the parents’ claims that the Montgomery County Board of Education violated their religious rights by failing to provide an opt-out for their children."
The Supreme Court's ruling is expected in June.
This case is a profile of Leftist thinking on matters like parental authority and, generally, the thinking about the great social divide in our culture.
A social profile of the deep and wide gap between biblical Christians and the Leftists.
The conversation at the hearing should be a clarion call to every Christian conservative parent in America.
One book, "Uncle Bobby’s Wedding," features a gay character who is getting married. Another, called "Born Ready," is about a transgender child who wants to identify as a boy.
Some parents, including Muslims and Orthodox Christians, objected on religious grounds under the Constitution's First Amendment, saying their children should be able to opt out of any exposure to the content.
This is part of NBC News' account of the conversation:
( indent down to and including "It's not just exposure to the right idea, right?....)
Conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch was one of several justices who raised comments made by a former member of the school board, Lynne Harris.
She had suggested in a media interview cited in court papers that a student who objected to the books was "parroting dogma" passed on by her parents and compared their complaints to those of white supremacists who opposed civil rights laws.
“Does that suggest a hostility toward religion?” Gorsuch asked, citing a 2018 ruling in which the court ruled for a Christian baker who refused to serve a gay couple on the grounds that a state civil rights commission had shown anti-religious animus.
Other conservative justices expressed disbelief that the school board found it too difficult to provide an opt-out.
“Why isn’t that feasible?” Justice Samuel Alito asked.
“I’m not understanding why it’s not feasible,” Justice Brett Kavanaugh added.
Chief Justice John Roberts seemed skeptical of the school board's argument that the policy did not require the children to affirm or support the content of the books.
"Is that a realistic concept when you are talking about a 5-year-old?" he asked.
Along similar lines, Justice Amy Coney Barrett said the content of the books appeared to be presenting children with more than just neutral facts about the existence of LGBTQ people in society.
"It's not just exposure to the idea, right?" she asked. "It's saying this is the right view of the world. This is how we think about things. This is how you should think about things. This is like 2 plus 2 is 4."
NBC says," Liberal justices were more sympathetic to the school board, with Justice Elena Kagan wondering whether a ruling for the parents would lead to an increase in religious objections and, in some situations, lead schools to have to abandon some aspects of the curriculum altogether because of the difficulty of providing opt-outs."
"So I'm just wondering if that's the next step here," she said.
Fellow liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson also appeared skeptical, noting that parents have other options if they do not like what their children are taught in school.
"If the school teaches something that the parent disagrees with, you have a choice. You don't have to send your kid to that school," she said.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, the other member of the liberal minority, questioned how much exposure to the contested contents children actually had.
"Haven't we made very clear that the mere exposure to things that you object to is not coercion?" she said.
She referred to "Uncle Bobby's Wedding," wondering whether a religious objection could be based solely on the depiction of two men getting married.
"None of them are even kissing in any of these books. The most they are doing is holding hands," she said.
Alito, focusing on the same book, took a different view of the same content.
"The book has a clear message, and a lot of people think it's a good message, and maybe it is a good message, but it's a message that a lot of people who hold on to traditional religious beliefs don't agree with," he said.
"I don't think anybody can read that and say, 'Well, this is just telling children that there are occasions when men marry other men,'" he added.
Takeaway
The views of the Leftist Justices reflect those of the far Left: Trying to normalize that which is not normal. Trying to teach our children how to become "progressive" and deny common sense and Nature's God, our Creator.
Proverbs 29:2 says, "When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice: but when the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn."
The Bible also says there are none righteous---no, not one.
But we should rejoice when leaders commit themselves to policies that support righteousness.
Rejoice. Pray for President Trump.
Be Informed. Be Discerning. Be Vigilant. Be Engaged. Be Prayerful.
