In 2023, the Minnesota Legislature and governor added a new category of so-called human rights, “gender identity,” to the Minnesota Human Rights Act. They included no corresponding religious exemption, however, demonstrating their intent to deny religious freedom to Minnesota citizens, churches, and schools and to engage in persecuting Christians and some other religious bodies....
In an attempt to correct this egregious law, Rep. Harry Niska, R-Ramsey, in this current session introduced an amendment to correct this violation of First Amendment rights....
However, in February and then again in March of this year, the Niska amendment was voted down in House and Senate committees, leaving the nullification of religious liberty in effect....
Minnesota government has crossed the Rubicon with this law. With similar laws in the past, the state has protected religious liberty by including an exemption clause. No more.
What shall we do? Christians cannot comply with this law since we are to “obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29). First, we need to pray to the one true God to remove this persecution from us and to guide us to deal with it in accordance with His will.
Second, we must lobby our legislators and governor, asking them to remove this religious persecution and to follow the U.S. Constitution....
Third, if no exemption is adopted, we should then file suit against the state to repeal this unconstitutional law....
Last but not least, we will put our trust in the God of heaven and earth, being confident that He will always be with us and looking forward to the day when He welcomes us into His victorious kingdom.
As you may know, Minnesota is the home to many Lutherans and to many Lutherans of all kinds. It is in the heart of the Midwest and yet politically and socially the state has become very progressive. Minnesota and North Dakota are the only two states in which Lutherans are a plurality of the population and would presumably be a large voting block except for the division between more conservative Lutherans (LCMS, WELS, ELS) and more liberal (ELCA). In any case, the move by the legislature to violate religious liberty and turn back attempts to restore it may end up in the Supreme Court. It is one more way in which we see how what cannot be accomplished politically has been co-opted judicially and this is a sad state of affairs when such ideology eclipses stated right.
3 comments:
"a new law in Minnesota that effectively infringes upon the religious liberty"
This is what the Minnesota voters get when they elect legislators and a governor who spew out political excrement as legislation.
And Lutherans pewsitters are still waiting for imprecatory prayers to be raised against the antiChristian, Satan-worshipping state officials who voted for or signed off on this "gender [sic] identity" legislation.
Since you are behind a bit in your reading, you might be encouraged to hear that the amendment to restore religious liberty to that previous bill in the State of Minnesota did pass and was signed into law, but without the outcry of many religious people (including LCMS, the Roman Catholics, and more general evangelicals), it probably would not have been.
The amendment is covered in the May 15, 2024, Star-Tribune article, "Walz signs bill clarifying constitutional protections for religious entities under Human Rights Act." The Star-Tribune notes the different views of what was done:
State Rep. Harry Niska, R-Ramsey, posted on social media, "Thank you to all who spoke up in support of religious freedom and applied pressure to get this fixed!"
But DFL House Speaker Melissa Hortman of Brooklyn Park said there was no fix, only a clarification that religious freedoms are protected under the state and U.S. Constitutions.
But then the Star-Tribune spins the article toward the DFL view, as if DFL legislators had always considered such religious freedom protections to cover the revised Minnesota Human Rights Act..
However, a May 8th Minnesota Reformer news article reported this exchange among Minnesota legislators:
When Rep. Harry Niska, R-Ramsey, suggested in a late February committee hearing that the DFL inadvertently forgot to include the religious exemption last session, committee chair Rep. Jamie Becker-Finn, DFL-Roseville, corrected him, saying, “It was not an oversight.”
Rep. Brion Curran, DFL-White Bear Lake, was visibly upset by religious leaders’ testimony in support of the exemption, calling it “disgusting,” “infuriating,” “disrespectful” and a direct attack on trans and non-binary people.
“I am appalled that we are having this discussion,” Curran said. “Where’s the dignity in not recognizing our fellow neighbors?”
One wonders if any member of an LCMS congregation in Minnesota has ever been excommunicated for publicly refusing to repent for being a member of the DFL Party.
Post a Comment