Oklahoma GOP Bills Would Criminalize Viewing Porn, Criminalize Drag Story Hour, And Ban No-Fault Divorce

Has Oklahoma already become a theocracy?  Is the will of the people not important, or only the doctrines of the fundamentalist Christ the majority of these people belong to so their god will be happy is important.  The voters don’t matter, the wants and needs of those who elect the lawmakers don’t matter, only pleasing their one version of a god out of 1100 other versions of god.  To hell with the rights of the people, to hell with the instruction of the woke hippy Jesus, just push the hates and desires of white males cis straight males to dominate and run everything.   As Roger says if they win how long will they start warring with each other for the top positions of speaking for their god?  Hugs

===================================================================

 

From Oklahoma GOP state Rep. Dusty Deevers:

Sen. Dusty Deevers, R-Elgin, announced on Tuesday a bold slate of eight legislative measures aimed at restoring moral sanity in Oklahoma. Together, these bills set a course for pushing back against the moral decay foisted upon Oklahoma by the far-left’s march through our institutions to destroy the moral foundations upon which the United States and Christian Civilization had long rested.

“Sadly, the left’s century-long assault on morality and decency has been so successful that some have come to accept as normal a society that is drowning in hardcore pornography, prenatal homicide, and sexual performances for children. None of this is normal. Each one of these evils is a result of a policy choice to not stand for what we know is right. Opposing these evils does not mean we are extremists. It means we are sane,” Deevers said.

“Contrary to what the left would have us believe, it doesn’t have to be this way. We can and should imagine and move toward a society that celebrates virtue in the public square rather than vice. We can restore normalcy, decency, and morality; we can protect the most vulnerable, restore a high view of marriage, and shield children from explicit material that can warp their innocent minds. We simply must have the courage to stand against the most radical and degenerate elements of the far-left.”

A sampling from Deever’s bills:

SB456 – The Abolition of Abortion Act

SB456 seeks to protect the lives of all preborn children in Oklahoma by closing the self-managed abortion loophole. While clinics may be prohibited from performing abortions, pro-life laws currently being enforced allow mothers to order abortion pills online and administer them herself. Recent research from the Foundation to Abolish Abortion shows that an estimated 3,274 self-managed abortions are taking place annually in Oklahoma.

SB593 – Prohibiting Pornography in Oklahoma

The bill prohibits pornography in general, providing for criminal penalties of up to 10 years in prison for production, distribution, or possession. It also provides heightened 10-to-30-year criminal penalties for organized pornography trafficking. “Pornography is both degenerate material and a highly addictive drug,” Deevers said. “It ruins marriages, ruins lives, destroys innocence, warps young people’s perception of the opposite sex, turns women into objects, turns men into objects, degrades human dignity, and corrodes the moral fabric of society. Any decent society will stand against this plague with the full weight of the law.”

SB550 – Prohibiting Drag Performances for Children

SB550 would ensure that Oklahoma kids are not subjected to adult cabaret performances including Drag Queen Story Hour. Under the provisions of the bill, the performer would be subject to a prison sentence of one-to-five years, while the organizer of the event would face up to one year behind bars.

SB228 – The Covenant Marriage Act

The Covenant Marriage Act would allow for couples in Oklahoma to opt into a covenant marriage, based on the traditional understanding of marriage as a binding legal contract with meaningful vows to one another. Covenant marriages would only be able to be dissolved in cases of abuse, adultery, or abandonment. Couples who opt into a covenant marriage would be eligible for a $2,500 tax credit.

SB829 – Prohibiting No-Fault Divorce

This bill would end no-fault divorce in Oklahoma by removing “incompatibility” as a justification for divorce, leaving abandonment, gross neglect, extreme cruelty, habitual drunkenness, insanity for a period of five years, adultery, unknown pregnancy, and fraudulent contract as the available justifications. It also establishes that the at-fault parent must pay restitution to the victims of divorce–that is, the children–in the form of a trust fund that they get access to when they turn 18.

Deever’s appeared here in January 2024 when he first tried to make viewing porn and sexting a consenting person a felony.

In March 2024, he declared during a Oklahoma House floor speech that all federal regulations are “against God’s law.”

In September 2024, he declared that people who vote for Kamala Harris are “possessed by demons.”

As you’ve probably already guessed, Deever’s is a pastor.

Report finds 266,000 LGBTQ+ young people left states with anti-LGBTQ laws

  • by Matthew S. Bajko, Assistant Editor

 

  • Wednesday January 22, 2025

Logan Casey, left, of the Movement Advancement Project, and Steven Hobaica, Ph.D., with The Trevor Project, worked on a report looking at LGBTQ+ youth who leave a state because of anti-LGBTQ laws. Photos: Courtesy MAP, Trevor ProjectLogan Casey, left, of the Movement Advancement Project, and Steven Hobaica, Ph.D., with The Trevor Project, worked on a report looking at LGBTQ+ youth who leave a state because of anti-LGBTQ laws. Photos: Courtesy MAP, Trevor Project

A new report estimates that roughly 266,000 LGBTQ+ young people and their families have uprooted their lives and left a state because of anti-LGBTQ politics or laws. It is also detailing in stark relief the positive outcomes on the health and wellbeing of LGBTQ youth that state lawmakers can have when enacting policy.

 

The eight-page research brief being released Wednesday by LGBTQ youth advocacy nonprofit The Trevor Project and the Movement Advancement Project used data sets from both organizations to draw its conclusions. It is the first time the two groups have utilized their data in such a way.

 

The report drew on the findings of Trevor’s 2024 U.S. National Survey on the Mental Health of LGBTQ+ Young People, which was based on the responses of 18,663 LGBTQ+ young people between the ages of 13 to 24 from across the country. And it incorporated MAP’s policy tally scores for all 50 states that it compiles based on what laws individual states have passed benefitting or targeting the LGBTQ community.

 

“Year over year has been a record-breaking year for anti-LGBTQ bills. And the attacks continue to escalate,” said Logan Casey, a queer and transgender man who is MAP’s director of policy research. “The more we can do to illustrate the harm of those attacks, and on the flip side the positive impacts of good policy, I think the better it will be to help us communicate to the public, policymakers and beyond that policies matter in shaping everyone’s individual lives, and that is true for LGBTQ people as well.”

 

One of the key findings in the brief is that an overwhelming 90% of LGBTQ+ young people cited “recent politics” as having impacted their well-being. Among transgender and nonbinary youth, the percentage was 94%.

 

Nearly half (45%) of the transgender and nonbinary young people reported considering moving to a different state because of their home state’s LGBTQ+ politics or laws. Among all LGBTQ+ youth, just 39% had done so.

 

“When we incorporated the MAP data, I was not surprised, but it was striking. It was very clear to me the data had a very clear relationship to how LGBTQ-related policy is related to relocation,” said Steven Hobaica, Ph.D., a Honolulu-based licensed clinical psychologist who is a research scientist at The Trevor Project.

 

According to the research brief, titled “How State Policy Affects the Well-Being and Relocation of LGBTQ+ Young People,” 12% of transgender and nonbinary youth said they had traveled to another state to receive medical care due to their own states’ policies. Among all LGBTQ+ young people, 9% reported doing so.

 

Twenty-seven percent of LGBTQ+ young people reported living in a state with a negative policy index, or within a particularly harmful policy environment, according to the brief. Unsurprisingly, LGBTQ+ young people in states that received a lower LGBTQ+ policy index from MAP, meaning their states have less LGBTQ+-affirming policy, were more likely to consider moving and to travel to another state to access health care, compared to those residing in states that have adopted more LGBTQ+-affirming policy.

 

“For me, I think sometimes when individuals approach policy surrounding a community they are not a part of, they often don’t understand the impacts it can directly have on that community. I hope it points to that,” Hobaica, who identifies as a member of the LGBTQ+ community, said of the research brief.

 

The Trevor project did not ask the youth what states they had moved to in order to find a more LGBTQ-welcoming legislative environment. It remains unclear how many LGBTQ youth and their families have relocated to California, one of a handful of states to declare itself a transgender sanctuary, to escape the anti-LGBTQ laws adopted in their former states.

 

Kathie Moehlig, executive director of Trans Family Support Services, told the Bay Area Reporter that her San Diego-based organization two years ago routinely had fielded calls from LGBTQ families wanting to move out of their states due to anti-LGBTQ laws, especially when it came to health care for their trans children. More recently, they have handled far fewer requests for such assistance.

 

“Most people who sat in a privileged position and could move out of state for care have done that,” said Moehlig, whose 24-year-old son is trans.

A graph shows the number of LGBTQ+ youth considering leaving a state because of its anti-LGBTQ laws. Image: Courtesy The Trevor Project  

Trump impact uncertain
She has not seen any numbers on how many such families have moved to California, but surmised relatively few have due to the high cost of housing in the state and other factors. What impact the Trump administration and its attacks on trans rights will have on such relocations remains to be seen, she added.

“With Trump, maybe more families will move. More likely families will be hunkering down, finding resources, staying connected to community, and staying engaged in what may be coming our way,” said Moehlig. “We really don’t know. We just have to wait and see.”

The researchers noted that only 4% of LGBTQ+ young people in the sample they used had reported leaving a state because of LGBTQ+-related policies. Using estimations that 9.5% of youth age 13 to 17 and 15.2% of young people age 18 to 24 in the U.S. are LGBT, they then deduced the 266,000 number for how many have relocated to a new state.

“Unsurprisingly, these issues are even more pronounced for trans and nonbinary youth,” said Hobaica. “It impacts the whole LGBTQ community, but especially trans and nonbinary youth are going to be the youth who feel the most impact and typically are attacked the most by policymakers.”

In Missouri, where Casey lives, LGBTQ rights have been under assault. It has a negative rating on MAP’s policy tally, with an over score of -1.5/49.

“Politicians here are playing games with LGBTQ people’s lives, in particular LGBTQ young people’s lives,” said Casey.

He has had friends leave the state for Minnesota, California, and Pennsylvania. Casey told the B.A.R. he had contemplated doing so himself but hasn’t yet because Missouri is his home, he grew up in Ferguson, outside St. Louis, and he can still access the health care he needs.

“What me and other trans people are watching is whether the state or the new Trump admin will cut off medical care. That is the line in the sand for many people who either choose to move or have to move,” said Casey.

Positive benefits
While the media’s and public’s attention are usually focused on the negative LGBTQ policies being adopted, and the impacts they have, what often goes missing from the discourse is how LGBTQ people, particularly young people, positively benefit when policymakers adopt affirming legislation, noted Casey. The research brief intentionally highlights those outcomes, noting LGBTQ+ young people are more likely to report being positively impacted by recent politics if they live in a state assigned a higher LGBTQ+ policy index by MAP.

“LGBTQ+ young people living in states with a higher LGBTQ+ policy index reported that recent politics were less likely to negatively impact their well-being. They were also less likely to report crossing state lines for health care or consider moving to another state,” noted the research brief.

Casey told the B.A.R., “It is not just bad policies lead to bad outcomes, it is the reverse is also true. Good policies lead to improved outcomes for mental health and all other kinds of outcomes.”

Shira Berkowitz, senior director of public policy and advocacy at PROMO, Missouri’s statewide LGBTQ advocacy group, believes the research brief will be beneficial to the lobbying efforts it and similar groups in other states undertake this year.

“We do significant policy work to change the landscape in this area so people feel Missouri is a state they can live and thrive in,” said Berkowitz, noting that “the most important thing to most lawmakers is the condition or ability for their state to thrive, or it should be.”

Hopefully the research brief will embolden lawmakers who want to help protect the LGBTQ community, said Casey.

“I hope it adds to the growing body of evidence that harmful policies have real costs on LGBTQ young people and their families across the country, but also that it will encourage legislators in states who want to do something proactive that they should,” said Casey.

For Moehlig, she would like to see pro-LGBTQ lawmakers make an effort to reach LGBTQ young people where they are at. It is not enough to just pass laws and talk about doing so at events, in media outlets, or on social media platforms that may not be reaching LGBTQ youth, contended Moehlig.

“I don’t think it is spoken enough in spaces where kids are going to hear that,” she said. “They need to be reaching in to where they are, whether on social media or whether communicating through their schools. They need to be finding those spaces so kids are hearing directly from the people who hold the power to say, ‘We’ve got you here.'”


Never miss a story! Keep up to date on the latest news, arts, politics, entertainment, and nightlife.
Sign up for the Bay Area Reporter’s free weekday email newsletter. You’ll receive our newsletters and special offers from our community partners.

Support California’s largest LGBTQ newsroom. Your one-time, monthly, or annual contribution advocates for LGBTQ communities. Amplify a trusted voice providing news, information, and cultural coverage to all members of our community, regardless of their ability to pay — Donate today!

Some The Majority Report from this last week. You should check out their YouTube channel and if you want to see the fun half free I can explain how. Hugs

Comedians Bill Burr & Jon Stewart Hilariously Dismantle Right-Wing LIES About LA Fires

NH man accused of civil rights violation in LGBTQ sign thefts

https://www.nbcboston.com/news/local/nh-man-accused-of-civil-rights-violation-in-lgbtq-sign-thefts/3605830/

Maga cult members and the fundamentalist Christians (maybe they are the same) are feeling very emboldened.  They feel they have the right to erase those they don’t like or agree with.  Remember their refrain is to make America great again and take back their country back.  Their country, only theirs.  No one else matters, no one else should be here if they disagree with them or live differently from the maga Christians.  They want a country for only them by only them.  We really have to fight this hard.  Hugs.

=================================================================

Frank Hobbs Jr. is accused of stealing signs supporting gay rights from an intersection in Goffstown, New Hampshire, during Pride Month

A New Hampshire man is under investigation for possible civil rights violations.

Frank Hobbs Jr. is accused of swiping someone else’s signs supporting gay rights.

New Hampshire authorities say Hobbs was caught on camera stealing signs from a Goffstown intersection.

A woman had lawfully placed signs in support of the LGBTQ community, and when one of them disappeared, she decided to do some detective work.

“She set up a trail camera to monitor the intersection and make sure her signs weren’t taken down,” said Senior Assistant New Hampshire Attorney General Sean Locke.

Sure enough, that camera recorded another theft taking place.

“She was able to capture someone on video coming to the intersection removing the signs and driving away,” said Locke.

It happened last June during Pride Month, and the New Hampshire Department of Justice has now filed a complaint against Hobbs accusing him of civil rights violations.

Local law enforcement said he was easily recognizable because he’s well known in the community.

According to court documents, Hobbs denied knowing anything about the incident, but when informed there were photos, he said he’d been told by people at Town Hall he could remove signs that displayed “pedophile symbols” and that he found the signs offensive.

“These identity-based or bias-based behaviors and unlawful acts create a perception in the community that this may not be a safe place if you’re a person who identifies as LGBTQ+ if these signs are getting torn down,” said Locke.

Hobbs has not returned multiple requests for comment.

He will have a hearing and is facing thousands of dollars in fines depending on what a judge decides.

META is “becoming” anti-woke with the announcement of moderation changes, but really…

As Zuckerberg Goes Around Whining About Biden, He Made Sure To First Get His New Approach Approved By Trump

from the you-realize-how-that’s-worse,-right? dept

Remember how Zuckerberg was “done with politics”? Remember how he promised that he was going to stop doing what politicians demanded he do?

Now it turns out that he not only did his big set of moderation changes to please Trump, but did so only after he was told by the incoming administration to act. Even worse, he reportedly made sure to share his plans with top Trump aides to get their approval first.

That’s a key takeaway from a new New York Times piece that is ostensibly a profile of the relentlessly awful Stephen Miller. However, it also has a few revealing details about the whole Zuckerberg saga buried within. First, Miller reportedly demanded that Zuckerberg make changes at Facebook “on Trump’s terms.”

Mr. Miller told Mr. Zuckerberg that he had an opportunity to help reform America, but it would be on President-elect Donald J. Trump’s terms. He made clear that Mr. Trump would crack down on immigration and go to war against the diversity, equity and inclusion, or D.E.I., culture that had been embraced by Meta and much of corporate America in recent years.

Mr. Zuckerberg was amenable. He signaled to Mr. Miller and his colleagues, including other senior Trump advisers, that he would do nothing to obstruct the Trump agenda, according to three people with knowledge of the meeting, who asked for anonymity to discuss a private conversation. Mr. Zuckerberg said he would instead focus solely on building tech products.

Even if you argue that this was more about DEI programs at Meta rather than about content moderation, it’s still the incoming administration reportedly making actual demands of Zuckerberg, and Zuckerberg not just saying “fine” but actually previewing the details to Miller to make sure they got Trump’s blessing.

Earlier this month, Mr. Zuckerberg’s political lieutenants previewed the changes to Mr. Miller in a private briefing. And on Jan. 10, Mr. Zuckerberg made them official….

This is especially galling given that it was just days ago when Zuckerberg was whining about how unfair it was that Biden officials were demanding stuff from him (even though he had no trouble saying no to them) and it was big news! The headlines made a huge deal of how unfair Biden was to Zuckerberg. Here’s just a sampling.

Image

Notably absent from this breathless coverage was any mention that Trump was the one who actually threatened to imprison Zuckerberg for life. Or that his incoming FCC chair threatened to remove Section 230 if Meta didn’t stop fact-checking.

Also conveniently omitted was the fact that the Supreme Court found no evidence of the Biden administration going over the line in its conversations with Meta. Indeed, a Supreme Court Justice noted that conversations like those that the Biden admin had with Meta happened “thousands of times a day,” and weren’t problematic because there was no inherent threat or direct coordination.

Yet, here, we have reports of both threats and now evidence of direct coordination, including Zuckerberg asking for and getting direct approval from a top Trump official before rolling out the policy.

And where is this bombshell revelation? It’s buried in a random profile piece puffing up Stephen Miller.

It’s almost as if everyone now takes it for granted that any made-up story about Biden will be treated as fact, and everyone just takes it as expected when Trump actually does the thing that Biden gets falsely accused of.

With this new story, don’t hold your breath waiting for the same outlets to give this anywhere near the same level of coverage and outrage they directed at the Biden administration.

It’s almost as if there’s a massive double standard here: everything is okay if Trump does it, but we can blame the Biden admin for things we only pretend they did.

I’m used to hypocrisy in the political world, but this is beyond ridiculous. It’s now being made clear that the Trump admin is actually doing the exact thing that people were (falsely, misleadingly) blaming Biden for.

And it’s just a random aside in a story, and no one seems to be calling it out. Other than us here at Techdirt.

Supreme Court to hear case on opting out of lessons with LGBTQ+ books

The fact is these kids are exposed to sex and gender as soon as they learn there is a difference between boy and girl.  Hey what do you tell a boy in kindergarten when they need to go to the bathroom.  That’s right in all their younger grades they are instructed to use the bathroom of their gender, boy go to the boys bathroom, girls go to the girls bathroom.  That teaches them gender regardless of these cis straight religious people want to admit it or not.  Plus their goal seems to deny their kids the idea that some people are different, have different feelings when those very kids are in their class and maybe their friends?  They seek to deny these kids friendships with people who are different from them.  It reminds me of the segregation issues in the southern state.  White supremacist did not want their pretty white kids in the same class as the black kids they felt were … something.   It is like they thought the black was able to spread and be caught.  No matter if these religious people like it or not the world has changed, society has changed and it is not the time of their bible nor the fabled 1950s they dream existed.  Trying to deny the existance of the LGBTQ+ is like trying to deny black people exist.   Hugs.  

===============================================================

Parents in Montgomery County, Maryland, want to be able to opt out of instruction on gender and sexuality that they say goes against their religious convictions.

January 17, 2025 at 6:54 p.m. 
 
A large group of parents protested in Rockville, Maryland, on June 27, 2023, in an effort to allow their children to opt out of books that feature LGBTQ+ characters in Montgomery County schools. (Sarah L. Voisin/The Washington Post)
 

The Supreme Court agreed Friday to hear a case about whether public schools must give parents of elementary schoolchildren a chance to opt out of instruction on gender and sexuality that they say goes against their religious convictions.

 

The case stems from a challenge by a group of parents in Maryland’s largest school system, who objected to Montgomery County Public Schools prohibiting parents from taking their children out of lessons that used storybooks with LGBTQ+ characters and themes.

 

Parents, who are Muslim, Roman Catholic and Ukrainian Orthodox, filed suit in 2023, saying the policy violates their First Amendment rights to freedom of religion.

 

The case puts the high court at the center of a contentious national debate over how to teach and treat gender and sexuality in schools, which has spurred fights over booksbathroom use and on which teams transgender athletes should be allowed to play.

 

Eric Baxter, an attorney for the families, said in a statement that the school system’s decision to disallow opt-outs was “cramming down controversial gender ideology” to 3-year-old pupils. Becket, a public interest institute that pushes for religious liberty, is representing the families, and has been involved in other cases on LGBTQ+ issues.

“The Court must make clear: Parents, not the state, should be the ones deciding how and when to introduce their children to sensitive issues about gender and sexuality,” Baxter said.

 

Montgomery County schools declined to comment, citing the pending litigation. But the district wrote in filings to the high court that an adverse ruling could upend long-standing legal precedent that guides how schools teach.

“Petitioners seek to unsettle a decades-old consensus that parents who choose to send their children to public school are not deprived of their right to freely exercise their religion simply because their children are exposed to curricular materials the parents find offensive,” attorneys for the schools wrote.

 

During the 2022-2023 school year, Montgomery County schools introduced a reading list of books that included LGBTQ+ characters as part of an effort to be more inclusive to its diverse student population. The lists were intended for students from prekindergarten to 12th grade and were created with parental feedback.

 

The school system required teachers to read at least one storybook a year from a group of titles that included “Pride Puppy,” which is about a gay pride parade; “Intersection Allies,” which is about a group of children discussing their differences; and “Love, Violet,” which is about a girl who has feelings for a female classmate.

“The storybooks are not used in any lessons related to gender and sexuality,” the school district wrote in its filing. “Nor is any student asked or expected to change his or her views about his or her own, or any other student’s, sexual orientation or gender identity. Instead, the books are made available for individual reading, classroom read-alouds, and other educational activities designed to foster and enhance literacy skills.”

 

The parents wrote in court documents that the Montgomery school board also issued guidance that instructed teachers to emphasize that “not everyone is a boy or girl” and that some “people identify with both, sometimes one more than the other and sometimes neither.”

 

As teachers started using the books in the classroom, some families wanted to opt their children out of the discussions due to concerns that the lessons and subsequent discussions would conflict with their religious views. The books that targeted elementary-aged students were particularly controversial.

Originally, some principals let families pull their children out of the classroom when the books were read. But in March 2023, the school system’s central office announced that opt-outs would not be permitted.

More than 1,100 parents signed a petition asking the district to restore the opt-out right and hundreds protested the decision. Maryland is one of 47 states and the District of Columbia that have opt-out or opt-in provisions for sex education in schools, according to the parents’ filing.

 
 

In May 2023, a group of parents filed a lawsuit against the school system, alleging that the district violated their First Amendment rights and that the decision went against a district policy that allows for religious accommodations. The parents are not asking the school system to drop the curriculum.

Other parents did not support opting out of the curriculum.

After the lawsuit was filed, the school system quietly stopped teaching two of the books referenced in the lawsuit because of concerns that it would “require teachers to explicitly teach vocabulary terms outside of the context of the lesson,” according to a district database.

The parents who sued the district asked a federal judge in Maryland for a preliminary injunction to restore the opt-out provision, but the judge denied the request, ruling the parents were unlikely to succeed because they could not show “that the no-opt-out policy burdens their religious exercise.”

 
 

That ruling was upheld by a divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit in Richmond, before the parents petitioned the Supreme Court to hear the case. Oral arguments in the case will be scheduled later.

Mark Eckstein, a Montgomery County schools parent and LGBTQ+ advocate, said he wasn’t surprised the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case, given that discussions around gender and sexuality have roiled school communities across the country.

“I strongly believe that the district court ruled correctly, and I’m hoping there will be a vigorous defense of the wisdom of that decision and MCPS’s policy,” he said.

Montgomery is one of a number of school districts where controversy has flared over books dealing with sexuality and gender. In 2023, a Georgia teacher was fired after she read a book about gender conformity to her fifth-grade class. She sued.

 
 

A group of parents in Dearborn, Michigan, sued the school district in 2022, seeking to remove books from school libraries they felt had inappropriate sexual content. Hundreds of mostly Muslim parents also protested at a school board meeting.

The effort was part of a broader push to pull some books from schools and libraries. The American Library Association found more than 4,200 book titles were targeted for removal from schools in libraries in 2023, greatly outpacing the 2,500 targeted the year before. Almost 50 percent of the titles dealt with gay and minority themes.

The Supreme Court has moved in recent terms to expand religion in education and the rights of the religious.

 

In 2o22, a divided court ruled that Washington state discriminated against a football coach who prayed at midfield after a high school football game. The same year, the high court ruled Maine could not exclude religious schools from a voucher program that provides public assistance for education.

Last year, the high court ruled that the constitution’s free speech provisions shield some businesses from being required to provide services to same-sex couples, after a web designer argued she should not have to do such work because of her religious beliefs.

===============================================

Justin Jouvenal covers the Supreme Court. He previously covered policing and the courts locally and nationally. He joined The Post in 2009. @jjouvenal
Nicole Asbury is a local reporter for The Washington Post covering education and K-12 schools in Maryland.@NicoleAsbury

The case was filed by the Catholic anti-LGBTQ hate group, the Becket Fund, whose senior counsel celebrates below.

The Becket Fund last appeared here in July 2024 when they sued to overturn Michigan’s ban on ex-gay torture.

In 2014, the Becket Fund joined with NOM, San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone, and Alliance Defending Freedom to form an anti-LGBTQ “supergroup” to battle same-sex marriage.

In 2013, the Becket Fund joined with major Catholic groups in sponsoring the so-called Manhattan Declaration, signers of which avow that they will “civilly disobey” laws that protect LGBTQ people from discrimination.

The Becket Fund was founded in 1994 by a former Reagan administration Justice Department lawyer who worked under future Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito.

The group is named for Saint Thomas Becket, who was Archbishop of Canterbury under King Henry II until he was murdered by followers of the King in the year 1170.

Outside of LGBTQ issues, the Becket Fund is best known for winning cases on behalf of the Little Sisters of the Poor and Hobby Lobby.

Texas GOP chair claims church-state separation is a myth as lawmakers, pastors prep for “spiritual battle”

https://www.texastribune.org/2025/01/15/texas-legislature-christianity-church-state-separation/

These people are driven and a serious threat to democracy.  They demand a theocracy of their god and a government enforcing their church doctrines.  No non-Christians may be tolerated.  Look at what they say, we don’t want government in our churches but we should be in government, and there is no separation of church and state.  Plus how would these people react if a Muslim group did this, a Hindu church, or even a Jewish temple?   They would lose their minds.   Somewhere in the past the atheist stopped fighting these people and let them use their endless supply of church members contributions to push their goals ever closer to taking over.  We must again fight back, get the people to understand the risk and what is true in history.   These people will rewrite every thing to prove their lies.  Hugs.

“There is no separation between church and state,” Republican Party of Texas Chair Abraham George said at a small rally with clergy and GOP lawmakers. “We don’t want the government in our churches, but we should be in the government.”

Polling from the Public Religion Research Institute found that more than half of Republicans adhere to or sympathize with pillars of Christian nationalism, including that the U.S. should be a strictly Christian nation. Of those respondents, roughly half supported having an authoritarian leader who maintains Christian dominance in society. Experts have also found strong correlations between Christian nationalist beliefs and opposition to immigration, racial justice and religious diversity.

One of his movement’s ultimate goals, he said Tuesday, is to draw a lawsuit that they can eventually take to the U.S. Supreme Court, which they believe will ultimately overturn the prohibition and unleash a new wave of conservative, Christian activism.

One Christian nationalism expert said Tuesday’s events showed how normalized the ideology has become among broad swaths of the Republican Party. “I’ve argued for years that, in the Trump era, charismatic evangelicals have displaced the old guard of the (Religious Right) and brought in a new, more aggressive evangelical politics,” Matthew Taylor, a senior scholar at the Institute for Islamic, Christian, & Jewish Studies, wrote on social media. “That was on vivid display in (Texas) today.”

Taylor has spent much of his career focused on the New Apostolic Reformation, a movement of “charismatic” Christians who often weave prophecy, “spiritual warfare” and demonology into their calls for Christians to take control over all spheres of society.

==============================================================

 

Abraham George’s comments are the latest sign of the state GOP’s embrace of fundamentalist ideologies that seek to center public life around their faith.

 
Landon Schott, pastor of Mercy Culture, leads a worship service in the state Capitol extension auditorium on the first day of the 2025 state legislative session in Austin on Tuesday, Jan. 14, 2025.
 
Credit: Eli Hartman/The Texas Tribune
 
 
Worshippers link hands in prayer while attending a worship service led by a variety of religious groups from across Texas, including My God Votes, in the Capitol extension auditorium.
 
 

Boy republicans and wealthy simply don’t stop do they

“But I don’t know. I can make all kinds of horrible theories up in my head, conspiracy theories and everything else, but it just seemed a little convenient that there was no water and that the wind conditions were right and that there are people ready and willing and able to start fires.

“And are they commissioned to do so or just acting on their own volition?” – Mel “Horse Paste Cures Cancer” Gibson, last night on Laura Ingraham’s show.

The QAnon nutbags are applauding.

Ogles last appeared here in August 2024 when the FBI raided his home over allegedly fraudulent campaign finance reports.

Weeks earlier, he appeared here when he filed articles of impeachment against Kamala Harris hours after she formally announced her bid for president.

Also last year, he introduced a bill that would ban gag orders for all federal defendants.

Shortly after he was elected, Ogles was found to have lied about his education and background, drawing comparisons to George Santos.

Recent federal disaster aid to Texas, Florida, North Carolina, Tennessee, Louisiana, and Georgia contained no conditions or “strings attached.”

Lucky the above guy who destroyed expensive public property did not get caught buying weed or being a doctor saving a woman’s life by giving them a needed abortion.   Hugs 

New: Meta has deleted trans and nonbinary Messenger themes, as well as the blog posts announcing them. Happens the same week that it has changed its rules to allow users to say LGBTQ+ people are "mentally ill"www.404media.co/meta-deletes…

Jason Koebler (@jasonkoebler.bsky.social) 2025-01-10T17:09:50.416Z

Despite the action noted above, the cult – led by Libs Of TikTok – is now attacking Lara for being gay.