Garden State Equality (GSE) is the statewide advocacy organization that developed a pilot program schools can use to fulfill the LGBT curriculum law. This specific “contribution” law is separate from the new sex ed learning standards, and the recently approved sexual orientation and transgender diversity lessons in kindergarten. This was a requirement for middle and high school classes to share about the “contributions” of those who identify as LGBT. We repeatedly warned parents that the pilot program material far exceeded fact-based historical contributions. However, all of GSE’s downloadable lessons were limited to 6-12th grade.

Until now.

GSE has developed same-sex diversity lessons for 2nd grade. Click here to view their lesson that teaches 7-year-old children that there are no fixed gender characteristics, nothing is morally wrong with same sex relationships, and that they need to reflect on their new thinking regarding family structures. 7-Year-Olds…?

This is completely unconstitutional.  Parents have the right to teach their own moral framework to their children. When the state government imposes a morality that contradicts the values that are taught in the home, it violates the long-established constitutional rights of parents. Please understand, if your ethnic culture or world religion teaches the importance of fathers and mothers, the government schools will tell your young children your family is morally wrong for holding such a view.

It would be a different case if schools taught older students that same sex relationships and marriages exist – but that is not what is happening in our schools. Instead, they impose an ideology with the written intended goal for students to revise and rethink their moral and religious beliefs regarding sex and gender.

For a practical example, it would be allowable to teach Jewish students that pork roll and cheese sandwiches exist. It is unavoidable to see the many roadside signs across our state that promotes them. However, schools cannot teach Jewish students that it is morally good that people eat pork combined with cheese. That is a total violation of their deeply held beliefs about kosher meal requirements.

In the end, diversity and inclusion are banal words repeatedly used with no true meaning or purpose. If students remain faithful to adhere to the practices and teachings of their religion, they will be stigmatized and unaccepted by their peers.

We should teach students to be tolerant of other beliefs, respectful of our differences, and to be kind to their classmates. You must not compel them to adopt new sexual beliefs in contradiction to the deeply held religious beliefs of their families. New Jersey schools must do better.

Protecting your family,

Shawn Hyland
Executive Director

The images will not be forgotten. The fall of Afghanistan to Taliban Islamic Extremists is devastating to watch. I am sure this grief is equally shared among all faiths and cultures. Women and children will once again suffer unspeakable oppression. Our Christian brothers and sisters’ lives are at risk.

The collapse of the secular government was inevitable, but the chaos was not. What foreign policy analysts failed to predict was how quickly the Afghan military would give up the fight. They overestimated the will and preparedness of the armed forces and were therefore unprepared without a contingency plan to get Americans and our allies safely out of the country.

Some members of the Afghan military might have thought, “If we are not going to win, then why try?” If you cherish freedom, such a pessimistic surrender is unthinkable.

But do you cherish it?

I am concerned today that many people in New Jersey feel the government is going to do what they want. Families think, “They will eventually, either incrementally or abruptly, take away our religious and parental rights – so why try? Why protest? Why send letters? Why vote?”

It is true that Governor Murphy’s administration is actively working against the rights of parents and people of faith.

  1. In January 2020, they removed the religious exemption that protected churches from paying for abortion inducing drugs in their insurance plans.
  2. In February 2021, they passed a law that prohibited police from informing parents if their child was caught using marijuana. *This has now been changed due to public outcry.
  3. In July 2021, they passed a law that removed the parental consent requirement to distribute health surveys about sex and sexuality to students.

In addition, they have tried to remove the religious exemption from mandatory vaccinations and codify into law forever, a ban on parental notification for a minor seeking an abortion. These bills have not been passed, but the lame duck session this November will most likely see them arise as possible priorities for the current administration.

Are you willing to fight to maintain your religious and parental rights? Or will you become discouraged and walk away? Our struggle is not equivalent to the atrocities experienced by the Afghan people. There is no comparison, but our response when we see our constitutional freedoms at risk might be similar. We give up too easily! I want to encourage you to stay committed. Family Policy Alliance of New Jersey, along with our coalition partners across the state, is ready to protect your religious and parental rights.

Praying for you and the people of Afghanistan.

Shawn Hyland
Executive Director

You have heard about it all over the media. It has really come to a head now that it is infiltrating our schools; many parents are upset, even those who typically support more “progressive” educational approaches.

What is Critical Race Theory? (CRT) That is actually a more difficult question than you might first think, and frankly creates some of the problems surrounding it. As the American Bar Association states, “Crenshaw—who coined the term ‘CRT’—notes that CRT is not a noun, but a verb. It cannot be confined to a static and narrow definition but is considered to be an evolving and malleable practice.” It’s pretty hard to have an intelligent discussion about such a controversial issue if you can’t even define it or use the term correctly (I have yet to hear anyone on either side of the argument use it as a verb).

That said, the most consistent explanation I’ve seen is that CRT focuses on the idea that racism is embedded in the nation’s institutions and that they seek to maintain the dominance of white people in society. It asserts that unequal outcomes are the result of subtle societal and institutional biases, and that historical patterns of racism are ingrained in law and other modern institutions, rather than racism of individuals per se. I think I am safe assuming that the theory would posit that if institutions, law, etc. in general have racist biases, they had to come from somewhere, and that “somewhere” are the racists in the past and present who set up and perpetuate these elements of society. So fundamentally, I would assert that it actually is individual racism at its core.

Now that we have that out of the way, let’s ask ourselves a question. Are our nation’s institutions, laws, and other societal elements racist? I think we would all agree that racism still persists in many of these places – to what extent would depend on the particular institution or element of society. The nexus of racism and our country’s history cannot be denied, particularly towards those who are black.

So then, where is the problem and why all the controversy? There are two reasons, I believe.

First, those who currently are using CRT to advance their causes want the American public to view everything through the lens of racism. In other words, everything in our society is suspect and seemly neutral concepts almost always have deep racial significance. Frankly, this is ridiculous.

Let me give you an example. If you are Norwegian, then you can view everything through racism towards Norwegians, whether correct or not. You didn’t get that car loan – racism in banking institutions. Your daughter didn’t get into that elite college – educational racism. The police pull you over more often than other drivers – law enforcement racism. You see where this is going don’t you? Never mind that your credit score is low, your daughter typically gets mediocre grades, or that you have a tendency to speed. “They’re all out to get me. I’m always a victim because I’m Norwegian.” As they say, people see what they want to see, and if you want to see racism everywhere, you will.

The second reason CRT has sprung to the forefront is that it now involves our children. It’s one thing if something adversely affects us as adults, but it’s entirely different if it affects our kids, particularly when it comes to what they are being taught. My wife refers to this as the “mama bear effect”, although I would maintain that we dads can also turn into bears when appropriate.

That is why you are seeing such pushback. You have educators saying that there is no CRT being taught in their schools, based on their definition of CRT. Parents on the other hand are up in arms that the school is blatantly teaching CRT to their children, based on their definition. Take the following examples.

Sources: The Daily Caller and Washington Examiner

The list of examples is startlingly long, but I’m here to tell you the good news that parents are pushing back, and pushing back hard. This past legislative session, five states passed anti-CRT schooling bills and another 17 introduced such bills into their state legislatures. We were not one of these states, primarily because our legislature ran out of time with the issue coming to the forefront nearing the end of session.

Parents are ousting school board members who want to embed CRT into curriculum. In liberal Loudoun County, Va., there was strong opposition to the district’s plans to adopt new diversity initiatives. As a result, there was an attempt to recall board members. In a Connecticut school district, three incumbent school board members that supported CRT were voted out and replaced by parents opposed to the curriculum being taught to their children.

In a recent poll, 58 percent of Americans had an “unfavorable view” of critical race theory, compared to only 38 percent of Americans with a “favorable view”. Most telling however was that 71 percent of independents had a “very unfavorable view”. Keep in mind, this issue will very likely have ramifications for the next election cycle too.

What can you do to make sure CRT does not infiltrate our North Dakota Schools?

First, get involved at the school board level. The North Dakota Department of Public Instruction is not going to determine whether CRT is taught in your particular district, the school board will. Make sure you have the right people on your local school board who will not promote CRT theory or curriculum.

Second, contact your legislators and ask that they pass an anti-CRT bill in our state. Start letting them know now – the next legislative session will be upon us before you know it.

Let me assure you that our organization will continue to fight to keep CRT out of North Dakota schools. We want an accurate portrayal of our county’s history and current situation to be taught to our children, even if we have to go all “mama bear” to make it happen.

For truth,

Mark Jorritsma
President and Executive Director


The lyrics are rather disturbing…

You say we all lead lives you don’t respect. But you’re just frightened. You think that we’ll corrupt your kids if our agenda goes unchecked. Funny, just this once, you’re correct.”

“We’ll convert your children – happens bit by bit, quietly and subtly and you will barely notice it…”

“Just like you’re worried, they’ll change their group of friends, you won’t approve of where they go at night. And you’ll be disgusted when they start finding things online that you kept far from their sight…”

In case you missed it,  the San Francisco Gay Men’s Choir (SFGMC) released a video on July 1, proclaiming to America that they are going to convert your children. The well-produced song declares that it is only a matter of time before the gay agenda “comes home” – to your home that is.

While it is hard to listen to this message, it is essential that parents do in fact listen and take heed.

The Choir claimed after its release that the song was completely “satirical” and intended as “tongue-in-cheek humor,” but the video belies the truth of a persistent agenda playing out daily in entertainment, pop culture, corporate America, public policy, politics and education.

The song happily tells parents that regardless of the spiritual values children are taught at home, the LGBT movement has aims to unapologetically undermine those values in order to advance their cause.

From the Biden Administration all the way down to your city council and local school board, LGBT activists are working to quietly write public policy that will coerce not only a tolerance of LGBT lifestyles, but also in many ways, require an acceptance and affirmation of those lifestyle choices. Corporate America, Hollywood and Big Tech are all there too.

Here are just a few ways this is playing out before our very eyes:


The Equality Act – currently under consideration in Congress – would place sexual orientation and gender identity into the US Civil Rights code as a protected class along with race, national origin, veteran status and others. This would make any disagreement with this sexual ideology considered “illegal discrimination”—by parents, in schools, in doctor’s offices, on sports teams, in the marketplace, in any public place, and even in churches and faith-based schools or other organizations. It is the most dangerous legislation we’ve seen come out of Congress.

In a stunning act of administrative action, the Biden administration has now—without the real authority to do so—rewritten Title IX to require public schools across the US to validate gender identity – that means bathrooms, locker rooms and sports teams no longer must conform to children’s real biological sex as male or female. It’s a sad irony, given that Title IX was originally enacted to ensure that girls had equal access to educational and athletic opportunities with boys.

Similarly, many school systems have adopted policies that validate same-sex attraction or even transgenderism among students. A child may leave home as a boy but live and be treated as a girl at school. By design, parents generally have no idea this is happening as schools will not tell parents about the child’s new identity. It is all a secret, and the school is on board. The LGBT lobby frequently advances this very secret and subtle tactic, and it damages not only the transitioning child, but also leads to the indoctrination of all other classmates aiming to normalize homosexuality and transgenderism in public schools.

Local governments and even your Chamber of Commerce are in on the agenda too – passing so-called nondiscrimination ordinances that provide new protections for sexual orientation and gender identity under local laws that compromise changing rooms, locker rooms and bathrooms at public locations. These local efforts allegedly aim to benefit “equality” and even “economic development” but ignore religious beliefs, parental rights and safety.


American children can hardly watch children’s programming, much less television commercials, without being exposed to homosexuality or transgender ideology.  The entertainment industry is using popular cartoons such as Arthur, Clifford the Big Red Dog, Sponge Bob Squarepants and Doc McStuffins, just to name a few, to target children as young as toddlers with sexualized content. Through very subtle yet crafty portrayals, and “bit by bit” as the song goes; they are seeking to normalize homosexuality and transgenderism through their messaging to children – and you.

Social Media/Technology and Corporate America

Lastly, big tech, Google, YouTube, Facebook, Tik-tok and most other social media platforms seek to advance the LGBT agenda. Whether it is actively celebrating so-called PRIDE month in June, or more subversively censoring or downgrading content critical of the LGBT agenda, big tech is engaged in the persistent indoctrination process. The same goes for numerous corporations, many of whom classify a biblical view of human sexuality as hate, instantly dismissing parental rights and Christian beliefs.

So yes, parents, the SFGMC was telling the truth. The LGBT agenda is looking to change the values you are teaching your children.

So what do we do?

1. Engage our government –
We call this “biblical citizenship.” Our mission at Family Policy Alliance is to equip believers to easily take a stand on important issues like the Equality Act.So, when we send out an alert that something important is happening where your voice is needed to impact legislation or the outcome of an election, please take action!
  2. Learn –

Along with our friends at Focus on the Family, Family Policy Alliance produced a critical guide for parents called Back to School—for Parents on how to protect your child in the classroom, in sports, in the school clinic, and more! It also includes tips on how to talk to your child about these issues.

Download a copy today for free!

3. Pray –

Check out the first video in our new Ask Meridian video series! Meridian explores the important questions about how to share your faith and beliefs about sexuality with your LGBT-identifying neighbors, a prayer for them, and talks about how to show genuine love while disagreeing.

Watch now!

For truth,

Robert Noland
Communications Manager

On Thursday, June 24, the full state Senate voted on A5597. This bill amends the current law that gives schools the ability to administer student surveys on sensitive issues including sexual behaviors and attitudes. Presently, schools in New Jersey must send home forms for parents to grant permission for their student to participate in these personal and probing sexual health surveys.

The proposed change in New Jersey law would remove the requirement for parents to pro-actively opt their student into the health surveys. Instead, every student would automatically be given the survey unless their parent in writing requested for them to be excused from it.

What is the reason for this change? According to the language of the bill, not enough parents are giving schools the permission to ask their children these sex-based health questions. What do the bill sponsors recommend as the solution? Simple: stop asking the parents for their permission!

Two Republican senators stood up on the Senate floor to urge Democrats to amend this bill or vote against it.

First, Senator Steve Oroho (R–Sparta) made public comments against it.

“I rise in opposition to this bill. What it does is take away the proactive parental consent. Silence does not equal parental consent. There are some very controversial topics in here. I propose the bill is placed back on second reading for amendment.”

His request was rejected 25-15 on a partisan party-line vote.

Then, Senator Holly Schepisi (R–Westwood) stood in opposition, communicating the concerns she heard about this bill during the Senate Education Committee hearing.

“We had testimony from our superintendents and principals that they don’t want this bill either. Over the past year, there has been a complete eroding of trust between parents, board of education, superintendents, and principals. Through no fault of their own, they are in a very precarious place due to legislative initiatives that we put forth changing curriculum on them… Parents right now do not trust their boards of Ed of their schools… Superintendents and principals acknowledge this and said this bill, and the timing of this bill, is going to further erode that trust and create much more of an adversarial position between the schools, and the children, and the parents. For that reason, I would ask my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to respectively rethink their position of voting yes.”

Her request was once again denied on a partisan party-line vote.

The results are in.

YES vote = I do not believe
schools should ask
parents for their permission
NO vote = I believe schools should
ask parents to actively grant permission
James Beach, Cherry Hill (D) Christopher Bateman, Somerville (R)
Richard Codey, Livingston (D) Chris Brown, Linwood (R)
Nilsa Cruz Perez, Camden (D) Anthony Bucco, Denville (R)
Joseph Cryan, Union (D) Christopher Connors, Forked River (R)
Sandra Cunningham, Jersey City (D) Kristin Corrado, Totowa (R)
Patrick Diegnan, South Plainfield (D) Michael Doherty, Washington (R)
Nia Gill, Montclair (D) James Holzapefel, Brick (R)
Vin Gopal, Freehold (D) Thomas Kean, Westfield (R)
Linda Greenstein, Cranbury (D) Declan O’Scanlon, Holmdel (R)
Joseph Lagana, Paramus (D) Steven Oroho, Sparta (R)
Fred Madden, Turnersville (D) Joseph Pennacchio, Montville (R)
Nellie Pou, Paterson (D) Holly Schepisi, Westwood (R)
Ronald Rice, Newark (D) Robert Singer, Lakewood (R)
Teresa Ruiz, Newark (D) Michael Testa, Cape May Court House (R)
Nicholas Sacco, North Bergen (D) Samuel Thompson, Old Bridge (R)
Paul Sarlo, Wood-Ridge (D)
Nicolas Scutari, Linden (D)
Troy Singleton, Moorestown (D)
Bob Smith, Piscataway (D)
Brain Stack, Jersey City (D)
Stephen Sweeney, West Deptford (D)
Shirley Turner, Ewing Township (D)
Joseph Vitale, Woodbridge (D)
Loretta Weinberg, Teaneck (D)

Dawn Addiego, Medford (D) did not vote


Remember, you can hold your elected officials accountable both NOW by contacting them, and in elections!

Protecting your family,

Shawn Hyland,
Executive Director

Dear Friends,

This Thursday, June 10, the Senate Health Committee will hear Senate bill 3801 and Assembly bill 5597. This bill already passed the Assembly Health Committee on May 20.

It would amend the current law that gives schools the ability to administrate student surveys on sensitive issues including sexual behaviors and attitudes, drug use, physical activity and eating habits. Presently, schools in New Jersey must send home forms for parents to grant permission for their student to participate in this personal and probing sexual health survey.

The proposed change in New Jersey law would remove the requirement for parents to actively opt their student into the health surveys. Instead, every student would be passively opted into the survey unless their parent in writing requested for them to be excused from the survey. If a parent overlooks an email, misplaces an unopened letter, or the child forgets or even intentionally does not give their mom the opt out form – then the student will be surveyed about their sexual beliefs and activity. A parent’s silence does not mean a parent’s consent.

What is the reason for this change? According to the language of the bill, not enough parents are giving schools the permission to ask their children these sex-based health questions. What do the bill sponsors recommend as the solution? Simple: stop asking the parents for their permission!

The level of mistrust and deception parents already feel in their interactions with public schools will only be exacerbated by this overreach of state government to remove the parent once again from the equation!

Tell the Senate Health Committee to respect parental authority by voting NO on Senate bill 3801 and Assembly bill 5597.

Protecting your family,

Shawn Hyland
Executive Director


URGENT! We need all subscribers from the state of Wyoming to help us TODAY. An issue has arisen again in Laramie County School District #1, and all of Wyoming must take action to stop it or it will likely come your way.

As you know, waves of progressive ideology are sweeping the nation. These include the ideas that America is a racist nation, and that gender is based upon a spectrum of feelings rather than biology. Both have been used as wedge issues to drive children to adopt a new iteration of Marxism, an ideology our country fought to preserve the world from in the Cold War one generation ago.

The battleground for this ideological takeover? Our schools. There is an effort to make teachers take classes that teach the ideas of “Critical Race Theory” and use gender preferred pronouns. These teachings are enforced by “diversity coordinators” who are given authority over the future of a teacher’s career as they enforce this new ideology. Then, the teaching trickles down to our kids.

And now, it’s hitting home right here in Wyoming.

Recently proposed policies in Laramie County School District #1 would require teachers to teach divisive critical theory. The policy goes so far as to specifically ask them to name differences among students. Below are two slides from training given to LCSD1 employees:

If we do not stop these policies, diversity enforcers will have unbridled power to punish even unintentional infractions. The policy is not only a danger to our children, but also threatens the constitutional rights of teachers.

I am asking you to write to the LCSD#1 school board TODAY and ask them to reject any policy that would eliminate the due process rights of a teacher.

These comments are needed by tomorrow morning.

Please email these addresses:,,,,,,,

Please email the above addresses with a subject line something like “Comment on proposed LCSD1 School policy” and a paragraph like the following. Some changes to wording is good, but not vital.

Dear LCSD1 School Board Trustees:I am a concerned citizen of Laramie County. Please correct wrongful policy proposals now under review. The proposed changes to Chapter 6 (Personnel) and Chapter 8 (Students) for handling harassment and discrimination charges give inadequate regard for justice, due process, and constitutional rights. Extensive changes are needed. Please provide for constitutionally protected speech, change the standard of evidence to “clear and convincing,” broaden the bases for respondent appeal, and limit the extraordinary and excessive power of the “Title IX Decision Maker.”



Thank you for taking URGENT action!Nathan Winters w/caption

Nathan Winters

Nathan Winters
Executive Director


P.S. If you’d like to reference our more detailed recommendations, they are listed below. If you wish, you may use any or all of these in addition to the above paragraph for your email. However, the most important thing is to communicate the short paragraph, above.

Existing policies and proposed policy amendments posted here:

  1. Provide for constitutionally protected speech. A clause appears in one section, but this is needed in the overarching paragraph of each section governing discrimination for students and employees. In particular: Chapter 6 Section 23 page 257, Chapter 6 Exhibits Admin regs page 266, Chapter 8 Section 25 page 507 second paragraph, Chapter 8 Exhibits Admin regs pages 507 and 519. In these places, add a provision to read: Constitutionally protected speech, including reasonable expressions of academic, religious, or political viewpoints appropriate to the setting, may not form the basis of a finding of any form of discrimination, harassment or other violation unless it is sufficiently and objectively so serious as to: 1) cause substantial disruption in, or substantial interference with, the orderly operation of the school; or 2) substantially limit or deny a student’s ability to participate or benefit from an educational program.
  2. Change the Standard of Evidence from “Preponderance of evidence” to “Clear and Convincing evidence.” Finding teachers or students in violation of discrimination or sexual harassment policies is likely career-ending for employees, and expulsion would be emotionally and educationally crippling for students. Preponderance of the evidence is merely “50% likely, plus a feather.” The clear and convincing standard requires the decision maker to be clearly convinced that a violation happened in order to find anyone guilty of such weighty charges. This change should be made anywhere the “preponderance” standard is cited, including Chap6 page 275 5.c, Chap8 Sec25 page 275, Chap8 Exhibits page 529 IV.C.5.c.
  3. Broaden bases for appeal. If a broader scope for appeal is not provided, an unjustly accused respondent’s only recourse is to take the case to court: an expensive and divisive process for everyone. Anywhere bases for appeals are listed, insert as basis #1: “Unequal treatment under the policy based on protected class, denial of free speech or academic freedom, denial of due process of law, or violation of fundamental fairness.”
  4. Limit the extraordinary and excessive power of the “Title IX decision maker.” A specially trained advisor with such limited duties may or may not be needed, but the regular disciplinary process should determine guilt and disciplinary action. Currently, Title IX staff are being equipped with training materials provided by the activist organization WEEAC and certified in accordance with the gender-ideology of the ATIXA organization. They are not well suited to finally adjudicate these controversial cases in K-12 schools. Correct this problem by changing duties and process flow in the appropriate sections of Chapters 6 and 8 (including Exhibits).

In recent years, the far Left has been pushing radical policies in local school districts. This agenda forces girls to share locker rooms with boys, allows boys to steal sports opportunities from girls, and forces children to learn about gender ideology at a young age.

Now, the U.S. Department of Education is working to do the same thing- nationwide.

But you can help STOP THIS.

Similar to a local virtual school board hearing, on June 7-11 the President Biden’s Department of Education will be hosting a public hearing about incorporating “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” in national education policies. These policies will force girls to share locker rooms and showers with boys, impact girls’ sports opportunities, and punish those who disagree.

You can weigh in at this “national school board meeting” and tell the Department of Education you STRONGLY OPPOSE ANY CHANGES in their education policies that redefine “sex” to include “sexual orientation” and “gender identity.” Biden’s Education Department has no place attempting to implement this radical agenda into every local school district in the country.

Click here to submit your comment NOW! We’ve provided some comments for you to use, but the more personalized you can make your comments, the better!

Thank you for using your voice to protect children!

You can also sign up to speak for 3 minutes and tell the Department of Education to STOP their implementation of these radical and dangerous policies that violate children’s privacy, steal girls’ sports, and implement radical ideologies in schools.


Please note:

Don’t want to speak? No worries – simply submit your written comments here to make sure the Department of Education hears your voice!

For our children,

Nicole Hudgens
Government Affairs

A proverb often attributed to George Washington states: “Government … Like fire, is a dangerous servant, and a fearful master.”


While it’s uncertain that George Washington really spoke those words, the proverb still rings true and captures the challenge that has faced humanity since the first governments were formed in history. Government can not only allow us to protect ourselves from external aggression but can also be used to oppress and coerce citizens.

Unfortunately, history demonstrates that governmental oppression has been far more common than liberty – and this fact proves painfully true in the realm of education.

Last month, a parent from Sweden emailed a pastor named John Piper with a concern that struck close to home. In his email he described a national education system overtaken with the radical extremes of modern Marxist thought, specifically with ideas that teach that maleness and femaleness is defined by how you feel about your body rather than biology. He added that Sweden has placed so many restrictions upon Christian and private schools that they are forced into the position of teaching that same ideology. In Sweden, an attempt to remove your child from such indoctrination by teaching them within the home is grounds for the government to remove them from home and force them into foster care.

Such stories are rightly shocking to families in America, but we have to understand that it is a clash of worldviews that creates stories such as these. Central to the clash is the question of whether families or governments should have the primary responsibility of raising children.

There is no doubt that families can benefit when government supports the family structure. Also, government and civil society receive tremendous benefit from the traditional family.  The clash comes when some view government as the prime authority deciding what is best for the child.

That mindset is popular among some within the government and in academia. And because of that mindset among the liberal elites, Americans face growing pressure to bow to certain “experts” within the public school system. These “experts” teach ideas such as “Critical Race Theory” and the gender spectrum (including a “non-binary” gender in which someone is neither a man nor a woman). They teach that boys should be allowed to play in girls’ sports (disregarding the very real physical advantage boys have), and they instruct our children that the whole world is subdivided by a Marxist narrative of “The Oppressed” and “The Oppressor.”

When such ideas grow within a government, that government is on the cusp of changing from servant to master. Having recently fought against that change here in Wyoming, I ask all of you to stand firm in your calling to speak the truth in love as Christians and as American citizens.

Because of your help, Family Policy Alliance of Wyoming has been blessed to provide a greater voice in speaking about these crucial topics as they surface in Wyoming. Thank you for standing with us to ensure that the government is a source of protection, not tyranny.

For freedom,

Nathan Winter
Executive Director

You might be wondering, what is a “Vaccine Passport?” That’s a good question, as the term has been used to mean a variety of things. At a basic level, it means proof of vaccination against the COVID-19 virus (or, in some cases, proof of immunity either through vaccination or a recovered case of COVID-19). Countries could require this proof of vaccination or immunity for entrance. Domestically, private business owners might choose to require the same in order for patrons to enter their establishment. For example, someone might require that to attend a sports event, concert, or even college, you must provide proof of your vaccination (or potentially of your COVID immunity).

Should private businesses be allowed to make these requirements?

Two reputable Rhode Island physicians with national recognition do not think so. Dr. Michelle Cretella and Dr. Andrew Bostom contacted me for help to pass a bill that would ban vaccine passports in our state.  Rep. David Place (R-Burrville) also shares our concerns about government overreach relative to COVID-19 and the negative effects it has had and continues to have on families, schools and the economy. He views vaccine passports as another instance of that, at our request he submitted House Bill 6302 to protect Rhode Island citizens. It would ensure people in our state do not have to present proof of vaccination in order to access businesses, government property, or colleges and universities.

Both Dr Cretella and Dr. Bostom have been actively working to share their concerns about vaccine passports in recent weeks.

Dr. Michelle Cretella is the Executive Director of the American College of Pediatricians.  This was her testimony at the hearings H6302:

“The bill to ban on vaccine passports is critical. Vaccine passports are far more insidious than just mandates because they would punish those who make the informed choice not to take one of these experimental vaccines. Vaccine Passports would render all those unwilling to submit to these experimental injections second class citizens. A digital vaccine passport system is also such a gross violation of our right to privacy that even the liberal ACLU opposes it. No one has a right to our private health records, yet a vaccine passport system would make this private information available to government, businesses and others such that our COVID vaccination status would be used to deny unvaccinated individuals their most fundamental civil rights.

“From a scientific pediatric perspective, children and young adults have a near zero risk of suffering serious illness let alone death from the COVID-19 virus. Children and asymptomatic adults are not drivers of this pandemic; regarding COVID-19 children generally do not infect adults. Therefore, without long term data on the impact of these experimental vaccines on the young, it is both unethical and unscientific to mandate mass vaccination of young adults and children. Mass vaccination of this age group could result in significantly greater harm to them compared to their near zero risk from the COVID-19 virus itself.”

Dr. Andrew Bostom is a physician/epidemiologist affiliated with Brown University. His comments can also he heard on the Matt Allen program (WPRO). He said,  “…a rational, ethical, true prevention model alternative to ‘vaccine passports’ would be simple notifications, as part of formal policies, by public agencies and businesses that persons with active symptomatic, febrile (feverish) respiratory illnesses stay home from work, and refrain from patronizing businesses.”

Please let your legislators know that you are in favor of House Bill 6302 and a BAN on vaccine passports. It only takes a few seconds to send a message through our Action Center.

For Faith and Family in Rhode Island,Dave Aucoin
Aucoin signature
Dave Aucion
Chairman, Board of Directors – Rhode Island