Category

YWA

YWA September Leader’s Call with Rep. Chip Roy

By | Education, News and Events, Religious Liberty, Sanctity of Life, YWA | No Comments

Rep. Chip Roy (Republican) serves the 21st District of Texas. At the end of July, Rep. Roy introduced the Protecting Life on College Campus Act of 2021 alongside Sen. Steve Daines (R-Montana) and Rep. Mary Miller (R-Illinois).

The Protecting Life on College Campus Act of 2021 would prohibit the federal government from funding “any institution of higher education that hosts or is affiliated with any school-based service site that provides abortion drugs or abortions to students of the institution or to employees of the institution or site.”

We are grateful to Rep. Roy for taking a firm stand for life and excited to have him join our YWA Leader’s Call on September 13.

Date: Monday, September 13
Time: 
5:30 p.m. Eastern (4:30 p.m. Central; 3:30 p.m. Mountain; 2:30 p.m. Pacific)
Register 
hereand please feel free to share the link with like-minded friends and family! An email with the link for the call and information will follow upon registration.

Best,
Annabelle Rutledge
National Director, Young Women for America

Statement for the Afghan Women and Girls Rally

By | Feminist / Women's Issues, News and Events, Sanctity of Life, YWA | No Comments

I saw a video posted by the New York Times of an Afghan woman named Crystal Bayat. On August 19th she helped organize a protest to celebrate Afghanistan independence. At great risk to her life, she and six other women marched through the streets of Afghanistan raising their country’s flag in defiance of the Taliban. She grew up in the freedom Afghanistan has experienced these last twenty years. This month was her first time ever coming face to face with the Taliban. They told her she had twenty days of freedom. Her response was, “Til they shoot me, I will strive, and I will seek my goals. I will not let them deprive me of my fundamental rights. I’m raising the voice of a million women.”

It brought me to tears. In Crystal, I see the same spirit of our Young Women for America leaders. As the Director of Young Women for America, I have the privilege and honor of working with young women across this country, from high schoolers to young professionals, who have this same bold spirit. They are strong, kind, smart, motivated, Christ-honoring individuals in diverse career paths who are using their gifts and talents to impact the world. I’m amazed at how they spend their time and the ways they are impacting their communities even now. As I consider their paths with endless opportunities in front of them, I can’t help but contrast it with the plight of women in Afghanistan at this moment. We must acknowledge what is happening to women in Afghanistan now and what we know will only continue to get worse. There is no future in the public square for women under Sharia law. They cannot safely leave their homes; they cannot leave their homes at all unless they have permission from men; their bodies must be covered head to toe; they cannot hold any positions of power; they cannot have jobs; they cannot drive. Images of women are being removed from public places. They are being beaten in the streets. Women in Afghanistan face a future of subjugation, rape, persecution, and even stonings. Women are dying and will continue to die.

The feminists are silent, but we will not be. At this very moment, across the country, Young Women for America leaders are joining you in prayer. From California to Pennsylvania and Alabama and beyond, YWA leaders are gathering their chapter members and friends or bowing their heads privately to come before the throne of God in unity. We can’t physically show up in Afghanistan, but right now, we are putting on the armor of God and engaging in spiritual battle. We are going to war against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places on behalf of our Afghan sisters.

And we trust in our God. We serve an awesome, all-powerful, all knowing, loving, and present God. He is among us. He hears us.

You’re Guilty: Reparations in Light of Redemption

By | News and Events, YWA | No Comments

By Britton Miller, YWA Ambassador at Liberty University

In June, the United Nations Human Rights Council published a report[1] concerning the necessity of responding to the issue of racial injustice. Detailing a proposal to resolve such abuses of human rights, the report called for reparations on behalf of those affected by deliberate discrimination. As cultural institutions demand reparations and retribution on behalf of history, the widespread victims of injustice seem to endlessly increase in count. Whether some member of an individual’s family tree participated in the inexcusable horror of slavery or the relocation of indigenous people, the culture will, case by case, affirm the marred past of society’s oppressors and the necessity of reparations. Even those apparently blameless or significantly applauded by the media fall short of innocence: Vice President Kamala Harris’ Brahmin ancestors[2] historically oppressed the Dalits, the lowest members of Indian society. According to this movement, the only fathomable way to right the scaring injustices of the past is to offer extravagant services and privileges to those wronged and, in doing so, deny self-respect in shame. The mantra reads: the debt incurred is unforgivable; yet, people must embrace responsibility and bear retribution. The present must be held accountable for the past. As this message gains traction, the stories of oppressed multitudes resurface, echoing the reminder that none are free from some history of oppression or innocent of association with injustice practices. All owe retribution. For a cause so progressive and emphatically collective, it rings of the core of human nature: None are without fault. The Truth is that the more society exposes the oppressed and identifies the oppressor, the more it will come to light that all are … fallen. Woven into the course of history is a simple fact written in the Book of Life[3], “There is no one righteous, not even one.” What nation, culture, or family escapes the train of oppression? Unearthed again by a societal agenda, the devastating predicament of all people looms in the light.

However, beyond the cry for reparations and retribution arises an answer. No human extravagant act of self-denial or honor could ever atone for the occurrences of injustice marked across time. People cannot wholly make right the past or place an adequate balm upon insurmountable wounds. When the weight of all of humanities’ atrocities is measured, no retribution suffices. Only, a perfect Deity could ever atone for all the sins of humanity, assuage the pain of the suffering, and clear the guilt incurred by society – and the Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.

Even when the masses demand what some may deem an impossibility, the reality of humanity glimmers through their darkened mentality. Do we deserve retribution? Most definitely. Could human reparations ever satisfy the injustice of centuries? Only wishfully. Yet, the Just One bore our retribution and made reparations on our behalf through bodily absorbing oppression. And, we stood once again – the oppressors. Try as we might, all attempts at reparation will be insufficient and futile in atoning for humanity’s past. Even so, this anthem of atonement reveals a Truth society longs to forget … only the Lord Jesus Christ could ever rescue and redeem both the oppressor and the oppressed. A human rights council’s aim to resolve societal issues may originate from admirable intentions, but human reparations and retribution for some only reiterate the desperate need for reconciliation with the Father for all.


[1] United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner. (2021) Report: Agenda Towards Transformative Change for Racial Justice and Equality. <https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G21/122/03/PDF/G2112203.pdf?OpenElement>

[2] Mason, Melanie and Shashank Bengal. (2019, October 25.) The Progressive Indian Grandfather who Inspired Kamala Harris. Retrieved August 5, 2021, from <https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2019-10-25/how-kamala-harris-indian-family-shaped-her-political-career>

[3] The Holy Bible, English Standard Version. ESV® Text Edition: 2016. Copyright © 2001 by Crossway Bibles, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers.

 

Why Christians should reject Critical Race Theory

By | Education, National Sovereignty, News and Events, Religious Liberty, YWA | No Comments

What is Critical Race Theory (CRT)? CRT is a lens through which people can choose to view the world, and it presents a society in which there are two categories oppressor (white) and oppressed (non-white). CRT has grown under the false notion that it seeks to provide empathy and reconciliation for past wrongs in America. Many believe that it is an avenue to discuss injustice, history, race, and civil rights.

Supporters claim, “The movement champions many of the same concerns as the civil rights movement but places those concerns within a broader economic and historical context. It often elevates the equality principles of the Fourteenth Amendment above the liberty principles of the First Amendment.” However, CRT is the antithesis of the civil rights movement. It does not seek equality—it seeks equity. Critical Race theorists actually stand against some of Martin Luther King Junior’s founding ideas.

“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” – Dr.Martin Luther King Jr.

Critical Race theorists believe this concept of colorblindness in itself is racist because it “ignores” disparities toward black and brown people of color. CRT theorists believe that people should and must see color in order to combat white supremacy.

“Colorblindness neutralizes non-neutral baselines. It makes it seem like race is introduced when we think about racial disparity as if race is not already there,” – Kimberlé Crenshaw, co-pioneer in the CRT movement.

Many Christians are allowing Critical Race Theory to shape their worldview, albeit actively or passively, but there are three distinct reasons why Christians should reject CRT outright.

First, CRT teaches the sin of partiality. The theory leaves little to no room for other factors in disparities; instead, it separates based on skin color. CRT shares the fundamental belief with the concept they claim to fight against—white supremacy. Both concepts share the foundational belief that white skin is superior and, therefore, results in benefits in society. Followers of Christ are instructed to not partake in favoritism or partiality toward any group— including based on economic status, ethnicity, or race, as seen in Leviticus 19:15, 1 Timothy 5:21, and Deuteronomy 1:17.

“If you show favoritism, you sin and are convicted by the law as lawbreakers” (James 2:9).

The CRT lens of oppressor (white) – oppressed (non-white) offers no forgiveness to those who look like people who committed past wrongs. The theory claims that white Americans, regardless of their personal experiences, must unlearn their inherent racism and are responsible for the disparities in society. This concept imparts guilt to the guiltless. Believers should reject this as we know racism is a sin problem, not a skin problem, and we cannot justify hatred toward our fellow man (1 John 4:20).

Further, CRT states that our core identity is in our skin color rather than Christ. Christians, on the other hand, place Christ as the center and embrace all peoples because God created us all. All people are fearfully and wonderfully made in God’s image (Psalm 139:14). Our core identity is in Christ, not the color of our skin (2 Cor 5:17). I may be fearfully and wonderfully brown, and a brother or sister may be fearfully and wonderfully white. However, these characteristics are not our identities.

Third, CRT justifies covetousness. CRT claims to advocate for equality and equal opportunity, but, in reality, it advocates for equity and equal outcomes. Those are not the same. Equal opportunity guarantees that we are all treated the same, but equity demands that we all obtain the same success, regardless of circumstances. It encourages us to see our success in terms of my neighbors, promoting envy. If I am not as successful as my white classmate, it must be because the school is discriminating against me for being brown.

Equity is not Biblical. In Luke 12:13-15, Jesus warns us about the dangers of coveting:

“Then one from the crowd said to Him, ‘Teacher, tell my brother to
divide the inheritance with me.’ But He said to him, ‘Man, who
made Me a judge or an arbitrator over you?’ And He said to them,
‘Take heed and beware of covetousness, for one’s life does
not consist in the abundance of the things he possesses.’”

The man in the crowd assumed that Jesus would split the inheritance because of the injustice or unequal outcome, but Jesus saw it far more important to warn of the root problem of the issue—the condition of his heart. The sin of covetousness is masked under the false sense of “equality.” Christians should beware of CRT’s perhaps unintended push towards covetousness.

As British author and evangelist Campbell Morgan once said, “To divide property between covetous men is to prepare for future strife. To make men free from covetousness is to make peace.”

CRT does not teach true history, nor does it seek to unify people; rather, it reaches far into the past of American history to blame injustices on one particular group that, in reality, had nothing to do with the injustices of the past. Why would we, as believers, hold bitterness and animosity toward our white brothers and sisters who have not committed these injustices? Scripture tells us, “Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice” (Ephesians 4:31).

As believers, we should speak the truth in love as we pray for wisdom and boldness to speak against these social theories that go against the Gospel. Samuel Sey, author of Slow to Write, said it well, “The most tempting thing about critical race theory for me isn’t that I will sin by embracing its false Gospel. The most tempting thing about it for me is that I’ll sin by reacting against it in a manner unworthy of the Gospel.” Let us remember his words and stand against CRT in a manner worthy of our calling to be disciples of Christ.

YWA July Leader’s Call with Rep. Kat Cammack

By | News and Events, YWA | No Comments

Young Women for America invites you to join our Zoom call with Rep. Kat Cammack (R-Florida), who serves Florida’s 3rd Congressional District. As the youngest Republican woman, she has great insight into what it means to be a strong conservative female voice in Congress.

Serving on the Congressional Women’s Caucus, Law Enforcement Caucus, Campus Free Speech Caucus, and Pro-Life Caucus, Rep. Cammack holds many of the same values and is joining our YWA Leader’s Call to chat with us about the work she is doing.

Date: Monday, July 12
Time: 5:30 p.m. Eastern (4:30 p.m. Central; 3:30 p.m. Mountain; 2:30 p.m. Pacific)
Register here, and please feel free to share the link with like-minded friends and family! An email with the link for the call and information will follow upon registration.

Best,
Annabelle Rutledge
National Director, Young Women for America

CWA Court Update This Monday

By | Dobbs, News and Events, YWA | No Comments

Young Women for America invites you…

There’s been a lot of buzz around the fact that the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) has decided to hear oral arguments this coming fall in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, a Mississippi law that puts strict limits on abortions after 15 weeks. Learn what all the buzz is about from Mario Diaz, Esq., Concerned Women for America’s General Counsel, who is joining us on our June YWA leader’s call.

Mario will also discuss the latest opinions handed down by the Supreme Court this June when the last Supreme Court decisions are made from the current term. This is traditionally a month that will find groups like CWA/YWA outside the Supreme Court rallying. This term, we await an important religious liberty case called Fulton v. Philadelphia, having to do with adoption and foster care agencies. Don’t miss the call to learn more about all things SCOTUS!

Date: Monday, June 14
Time: 5:30 p.m. Eastern (4:30 p.m. Central; 3:30 p.m. Mountain; 2:30 p.m. Pacific)
Register: Register here. Please share the link with other likeminded friends and family. An email with the link for the call and other information will follow upon registration.

Florida Governor Protects Female Athletes

By | News and Events, Sexual Exploitation, Women's Sports, YWA | No Comments

(L-R: Annabelle Rutledge, Gov. Ron DeSantis, Terri Johannessen)

Concerned Women for America (CWA) of Florida State Director Terri Johannessen and Young Women for America (YWA) National Director Annabelle Rutledge joined a host of female athletes and other supporters of girls’ athletics at a bill signing ceremony with Florida’s Gov. Ron DeSantis on Tuesday. June 1. It was an important and energetic win for female athletes in Florida, and we applaud the boldness of Gov. DeSantis in signing the Fairness in Women’s Sports Act. Refusing to bow to leftist bullies and the NCAA is a sign of true leadership, and we are thankful to every governor who is standing for truth on this issue.

It was a special Day for CWA and YWA, and we are grateful to have had a presence in the room for such a historic moment for women and for truth! Gov. DeSantis had his sweet little girl handing him pens as he signed, a reminder that protecting women isn’t only about our athletes competing today, but it is paving the way for future generations.

Why Christians Support Israel

By | News and Events, YWA | No Comments

By Lela Gallery, YWA Ambassador – Mount Holyoke College

Whenever the question arises about why Christians–specifically, Evangelicals–support Israel so staunchly, some point to a surface-level and one-dimensional answer: preparation for Armageddon. Armageddon is the end-times battle mentioned in Revelation 16:16 where earthly kings under demonic leadership will wage a great war against God’s forces in Megiddo, Israel. During this time, Jesus Christ will come again to save millions of Jews from dying, and the nation of Israel will accept Jesus as their Savior, which would begin a thousand-year reign of peace.

The first step towards this second coming of Jesus was the rebirth of the Jewish state in 1948–a prophecy predicted in Ezekiel 20:33-38 and Ezekiel 22:17-22. Now whenever Israel gains more political traction, from acquiring new boundaries and territory to the U.S. recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, end-times are getting closer and closer. The argument is that Evangelicals lobby for Israel’s interests to accelerate the second coming of Jesus so that all Israelites will convert to Christianity and live in their promised land in peace.

While this answer is fascinating (and was what I was taught when I took a class about the Israel-Palestine conflict), not all Christian Zionists share this view. Theological reasons to support the Jewish nation run much more deeply than these apocalyptic New Testament prophecies.

They go back to the beginning of Judaism in Genesis with the Abrahamic covenant. After the fall of man, God established a covenant with Abraham to redeem the fallen world. He told Abraham that He would bring forth a great nation that would bless the rest of the world and show that only one God exists. He would bless anyone who blesses this nation and curse anyone who curses this nation (Genesis 12:1-3). This nation became the nation of Israel. So, to stand against Israel is to be cursed by God.

Interestingly, world history shows that any nation that stood against and oppressed the Jewish people faded into the background of history. For instance, where is the great power that Egypt once was? Where are the Assyrians? The Babylonians? How about the Romans? Hitler’s Third Reich? They’ve all disappeared into history. Yet, despite centuries of dispersion, oppression, and genocide, the Jews–along with Israel–continue to exist!

When God issued the Abrahamic covenant for the third time to Abraham, God also acted as a real estate agent, promising the whole land of Canaan (roughly where modern Israel is today) to the Jewish people in Genesis 17:7-8. In this passage, God twice called this covenant “an everlasting possession.” Because of this promise, the Jews are the only nation with a God-given right to a piece of land. They don’t occupy the land of Israel, as many who oppose the Jewish nation claim; they own the land yesterday, today, tomorrow, and forever.

Throughout history, Jews have struggled to remain in their homeland. Yet, God’s promise to Abraham is an unconditional covenant, meaning that there is a fixed outcome that will supersede any circumstance. His promise to the Jewish people still stands; He can’t lie or go back on His promise, as Hebrews 6:17 and Numbers 23:19 state.

To Christians, Israel is more than a social, political, or compassionate issue; it’s a matter of the absolute faithfulness of God. If God can’t keep His promise to the Jewish people–especially an unconditional one–He can’t keep His promises with us.

God loves the people of Israel, and as Christians, we must pray for them and seek their good. Israel and Jewish people face active physical, ideological, and financial threats; this is as true today as it has been throughout history. Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran currently seek to annihilate the Jewish state. The Boycott, Sanctions, and Divestment (BDS) movement, and the plethora of misinformation surrounding the Jewish nation in the media, also seek to kill and destroy the state of Israel. Israel needs our support.

As Psalm 122:6-9 says: “Pray for the peace of Jerusalem! ‘May they be secure who love you! Peace be within your walls and security within your towers!’ For my brothers and companions’ sake I will say, ‘Peace be within you!’ For the sake of the house of the Lord our God, I will seek your good.”

A Conversation with CWA’s VP of International Relations

By | News and Events, YWA | No Comments

Join Young Women for America via Zoom for an interview and conversation with CWA’s newest team member, Neydy Casillas, Esq.

Neydy is serving as CWA’s Vice President of International Affairs and comes to us with a wealth of experience. Neydy graduated in 2002 from the Panamerican University of Guadalajara, Mexico with her law degree. Neydy’s expertise is in protecting life and family through challenging the misuse of international law, but she has truly done it all.

The work Neydy has done from advising public policy in Mexico to working at the UN and most recently as Senior Legal Counsel at ADF International, is too much to cover in a simple bio so join us via Zoom next Monday to hear about her work firsthand.

Here are the details:
Date: Monday, May 10
Time:
5:30 p.m. Eastern (4:30 p.m. Central; 3:30 p.m. Mountain; 2:30 p.m. Pacific)
Register here. An email with the link and information will follow registration.

Christian Institutions Adopting Anti-God Rhetoric?

By | News and Events, YWA | No Comments

By Rachel Culver, YWA Ambassador, Fresno Pacific University

In August of 2020, I had just entered my freshman year at Fresno Pacific University, a Christian college. Only one week into my freshman Bible course, Jesus and The Christian Community, my professor analyzed the Bible through a Marxist lens. We spent 85% of our class time reading from a book that was full of heresy. I was taught that the woman of Matthew 15 was oppressed, that capitalism was oppressive, and colored people were disadvantaged.

The adoption of anti-God rhetoric as a mainstream narrative has been a slow process. Critical Theory emerged in the 1960s from the Frankfurt Philosophy school in Germany. In response to the failure of Karl Marx, the Frankfurt philosophers sought “to address structural issues causing inequity.”[1] Ultimately, Critical Theory was a framework designed to identify broken systems rather than sinful hearts.

Over two decades later, academia began to adopt critical studies. Critical Theory, as defined by the Frankfurt School, evolved into what is commonly known as Critical Social Justice or Critical Race Theory (CRT). According to UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs, “CRT recognizes that racism is engrained in the fabric and system of the American society … Legal discourse says that the law is neutral and colorblind; however, CRT challenges this legal ‘truth’ by examining liberalism and meritocracy as a vehicle for self-interest, power, and privilege.”[2]

This theory is no longer just an idea taught in schools; it has become a worldview, a lens through which our students are being trained to see themselves, our nation, and the world.

Christian colleges are not exempt from this worldly influence. In recent years, Christian colleges around the nation have chosen to adopt Critical Race Theory, which is often disguised as standpoint epistemology. This analytical tool focuses on the opinions and experiences of the reader based on their social location rather than the truth of God’s Word.

During the spring semester of 2021, I was enrolled in a Medieval History course that included an overview of Muslim philosophy. My professor invited a Muslim leader to provide pathways to peaceful racial reconciliation. The leader said, “We first must be willing to dig into our own selves to break down biases. We need to understand that just saying we are not racist is not good enough if we uphold the painful realities that exist.”

Two months later, my Bible Literature professor assigned reading from a book titled Story Formed Pathways to Peace by Dalton Reimer. In the book, Dalton said, “Given the disproportionate prospects for people of color, one can understand why the slogan ‘Black Lives Matter’ is so compelling.” Reimer inserted Black Lives Matter without sufficient evidence or reason to believe his claim.

In another instance, my Bible Literature professor required attendance at a lecture on the Joseph narrative. The speaker claimed that the Joseph story of the Bible demonstrated open borders and a pathway to racial reconciliation. However, Genesis 40-50 never mentioned racial reconciliation or national sovereignty. The Joseph narrative demonstrates God’s faithfulness, exemplifies brotherly forgiveness, and exemplifies Daniel 2:21. The Joseph narrative is not a guide to racial reconciliation, open border immigration, or social justice.

Ultimately, Marxism “is a repudiation of common grace … It militarizes society and makes ordinary life a theater of war, turning civilians into terrorists.”[3] Remember that Marx called religion “the opium of the people.” [4] Marx not only despised religious people, but he hated God. In the eyes of Karl Marx, “man himself is mutually of no value.” [5] So if Marx advocated for a governmental system that would declare humanity as worthless scum, why should it be used to analyze the Bible? Marxism must be denounced and disregarded.

Marxism has infiltrated our churches, schools, and Christian academia through the disguise of Critical Race Theory. Pastors are preaching systemic racism from their pulpits. Christian colleges are preaching systemic racism in the classroom. Students are being taught to read their Bibles through a worldview that is antithetical to the Gospel.

Jesus did not come to advocate for social reform. Jesus lived, died, and rose again so that sinful humanity could be reconciled to a holy God. Paul said, “You were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you once walked, following the course of this world … But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which He loved us … raised us up with Him and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus.” [6] The Gospel of Jesus Christ brings hope to the sinner and life to a dead, calloused heart. Social reform will not save a dead soul. Only Jesus Christ can save.

——

Sources:

[1] Baucham, Vodie. “Thought Line.” Fault Lines: The Social Justice Movement and Evangelicalism’s Looming Catastrophe, Salem Books, 2021, pp. xi -xiv.
[2] “What Is Critical Race Theory?” UCLA School of Public Affairs | Critical Race Studies, 4 Nov. 2009, spacrs.wordpress.com/what-is-critical-race-theory/.
[3]Strachan, Owen. “Marxism Is a Repudiation of Common Grace. Not Only Is the Human Heart Sinful by Nature, but Oppression Is Truly Everywhere. Marxism Annihilates and Extinguishes Common Grace. It Militarizes Society and Makes Ordinary Life a Theater of War, Turning Civilians into Terrorists.” Twitter, Twitter, 24 Apr. 2021, mobile.twitter.com/ostrachan/status/1386057754188603394.
[4]Marx. Marx, A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right 1844, 2009, www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1843/critique-hpr/intro.htm#05.
[5] Marx, Karl. “Comments on James Mill, Éléments D’économie Politique.” Economic Manuscripts: Comments on James Mill by Karl Marx, www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/james-mill/index.htm#078.
[6] Ephesians 2:1-6

Biden Administration Allows Doctors to Dispense Abortion Pill by Mail

By | News and Events, Sanctity of Life, YWA | No Comments

In light of COVID-19, the Biden Administration is temporarily allowing doctors to dispense the abortion pill by mail, making it a lot easier for women to perform at-home abortions.

This action will lift the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) former restrictions on abortion drugs and reverse a Trump Administration policy that was backed by the Supreme Court in January.

Current acting FDA Commissioner Janet Woodcock informed the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) that allowing patients to receive abortion pills will not increase risks and will keep people safe from contracting the virus.[1]

Last year, ACOG requested that the FDA lift its requirement on the abortion drug, Mifepristone (also known as Mifeprex), arguing that the in-person requirement was unnecessary and placed patients and medical staff at risk of COVID-19.[2]

While ACOG and the FDA believe that it is unnecessary for abortion pills to be dispensed by a doctor in person, let’s just examine the FDA’s background on Mifepristone and what exactly it does to a woman and her baby.

FDA history:
Mifepristone was approved by the FDA in 2000 for up to 10 weeks’ gestation with an explicit warning that buyers should not purchase the drug over the Internet “because they will bypass important safeguards designed to protect their health.”

However, the FDA updated its website Tuesday, April 12, noting that it had conducted a “careful scientific review” of in-person and by-mail dispensing of the drugs “either by or under the supervision of a certified prescriber, or through a mail-order pharmacy when such dispensing is done under the supervision of a certified prescriber.”

“The FDA’s intent to exercise enforcement discretion with respect to these requirements during the public health emergency is the result of a thorough scientific review by experts within FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), who evaluated relevant information, including available clinical outcomes data and adverse event reports,” the FDA’s website said. [3]

What takes place during a medical or chemical abortion?
When a medical or chemical abortion takes place, Mifepristone is used together with another drug called Misoprostol (also known as Cytotec) to end the woman’s pregnancy.

In order to cut off blood and nourishment to her baby, Mifepristone will begin to block the mother’s natural production of “progesterone,” causing her child to starve to death.

Between 24-48 hours later, the woman will take Misoprostol which will cause her to contract and bleed in order to force the dead baby out of her womb. [4]

Several known risks of Mifepristone and Misoprostol include severe cramping, contractions, and heavy bleeding, as well as potential abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, headache, and excessive bleeding. However, one of the biggest concerns with the drug is that since it has only had approval since 2000 in the United States, women are being subjected to a medical event with unknown risks.

According to Live Action’s websites, maternal deaths have even occurred. [5]

Conclusion:
While “health experts” think that the risk of contracting COVID-19 outweighs the dangers of lifting restrictions on the abortion pill, we can see that increasing the ability to perform DIY abortions results in many health risks for mothers (known and unknown) and an increasing number of babies innocently murdered from abortion.

We must now more than ever not only stand up for the innocent unborn but also for women who are being deceived into believing that abortion is safe and that it is their only option.


[1] Alice Miranda Ollstein and Darius Tahir, “FDA lifts curbs on dispensing abortion pills during pandemic,” Politico, 4/12/2021, https://www.politico.com/news/2021/04/12/abortion-pills-481092

[2] Kate Smith, “Biden administration to lift abortion pill restriction amid pandemic, “ CBS News, 4/13/2021, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/abortion-pill-restrictions-lifted-pandemic-fda/

[3] Mary Margaret Olohan, “Biden Administration Lifts Restrictions On Abortion Pill Despite Risks, Allows Them To Be Delivered By Mail,” The Daily Caller, 4/13/2021, https://dailycaller.com/2021/04/13/biden-fda-abortion-drugs-by-mail/

[4] Dr. Levatino and Live Action, “Abortion Procedures,” Abortion Procedures, a project of Live Action, https://www.abortionprocedures.com/abortion-pill/#1465365765676-e088639b-872e

[5] Ibid

Biden’s First 100 Days – Recording Available

By | YWA | No Comments

Click here to watch the archived event hosted by Young Women for America.

Biden’s First 100 Days

  • With less than 100 days of the Biden Administration under our belt, faith-based organizations can already tell it will be a bumpy four years in the continuous fight for everything we hold dear.
  • In the history of the United States, we have never seen a frontal assault on our religious liberty and rights of conscience like we are witnessing today.

Administration and Appointees

  • The most important thing to note in a presidential administration is appointed personnel. Personnel equals policy.
  • We need to be deeply concerned about the impact of the thousands of people staffing our cabinet agencies, appointed judges, and staff in the White House who have a fundamentally unconstitutional view of religious liberty and rights of conscience.
  • Particular agencies to be concerned about: Department of Justice (DOJ), Department of Education (ED), Health and Human Services (HHS), and Department of Defense (DOD).
  • President Biden’s appointment and the Senate’s confirmation of Xavier Becerra as HHS Secretary is perhaps the most concerning. He is an attorney with no healthcare background. During Becerra’s time as California’s Attorney General, he targeted crisis pregnancy centers, trying to enforce a law that would mandate pro-life clinics to have to refer women to abortion centers.
  • This Administration’s HHS will be the strongest opposition to religious liberty we have seen in American history.
  • As President Biden’s Secretary of Education, Dr. Miguel Cardona has the power to directly impact the rights and conscience of Christian schools, Catholic schools, and all other forms of private education.
  • Office of Legal Policy (OLP) is an office within the DOJ which frames policy and has direct impact on religious liberty and conscious laws.
  • President Biden’s Secretary of Defense, Gen. Lloyd Austin, took less than two weeks to formalize policies for sexuality questions, training, critical race theory, etc. We are watching the “wokeism” of the American military and Pentagon.

Legislation Supported by the Administration

  • The Equality Act is the single most dangerous piece of legislation in the realm of religious liberty that has ever been voted on in the House and introduced in the Senate.
  • H.R. 1 is equally as dangerous as the Equality Act as far as the integrity of our elections. The Democrats have said this legislation is their top priority.
  • H.R. 1 is the federalization and the unconstitutional grabbing and directing of all of our elections.
  • H.R. 1 and its Senate counterpart, S.R. 1, essentially claim the Founders were wrong in allowing states to create their own election laws. If our election laws are federalized, the first goal would be to clamp down on people of faith through securing elections that favor Democrat candidates.

Maintaining Hope 

  • A huge beacon of hope for us as conservative Christians is the Supreme Court.
  • These four years may be concerning, but we can be encouraged by the lifetime appointment of the Supreme Court Justices.
  • Our foundational rights are not something our government should be able to take from us because they don’t come from the government, the Founders, or our founding documents. Our rights are given to us by God.

Online Event: Biden’s First 100 Days

By | News and Events, YWA | No Comments

Join us for this informative event hosted by Young Women for America.

The first 100 days of an Administration are a critical period. In those months, it becomes apparent what the focus and priorities of the new presidential administration are. We are currently three months into the Biden Administration.

Joining us to discuss the Biden Administration’s impingements on rights of conscience and religious liberty is Tim Goeglein, Vice President of External and Government Relations for Focus on the Family. Tim is the former Special Assistant to President George W. Bush and Deputy Director of the White House Office of Public Liaison.

Join us via Zoom to take stock of what is going on in our country and what is on the horizon.

Here are the details:
Date: Monday, April 12
Time: 5:30 p.m. Eastern (4:30 p.m. Central; 3:30 p.m. Mountain; 2:30 p.m. Pacific)
Register here for the event. An email with the link for the call and information will follow registration. We invite you to share this event with family and friends.

YWA’s viewpoints “too risky” for tech platform

By | News and Events, YWA | No Comments

By Annabelle Rutledge, National Director of YWA

I recently had an informational Zoom call with the owner of a company I was hoping to work with as the National Director of Concerned Women for America’s (CWA) Young Women for America (YWA) program. He seemed optimistic about the possibility of working with us, but then as we discussed our conservative values and the current “cancel culture” climate, things seemed to change.

A few days later, I received an email stating that he regretted they would not be able to work with YWA due to “potential business risk factors.” The risk factor? Our Christian, conservative beliefs. The goal of YWA is to train and equip high school and college female leaders who take a stand on campus for the Biblical values and conservative principles in which they believe.

At the risk of sounding like a victim, I challenge you to find another group of people in America more targeted for viewpoint discrimination than conservative women and other conservative minorities. Spend some time talking to a conservative woman of color, and you won’t believe the stories they have to tell.

While I have had my share of insults hurled my direction (namely something about being a “gender traitor” because I want little humans to have a chance at life outside the womb), I have never felt so directly “on trial,” if you will, for my beliefs than talking to this man discussing a possible business partnership. But this is not an isolated incident. The young women I represent and conservative women everywhere experience this discrimination on a regular basis.

What we were seeking was simply a platform to track projects and engagement from our student leaders with a built-in incentive program. Social media is, of course, a huge facet of digital advocacy and one of the main ways to track how engaged our leaders are in sharing our content. It was because social media is a part of this conversation that the topic of de-platforming came up.

From there, he told me that our content would be monitored and asked if our student leaders advocate violence. I found this offensive. I don’t even have to wonder if someone whose website promoted Black Lives Matter or supported Planned Parenthood would be asked the same question. We all know they wouldn’t dare.

The question is also pointless, isn’t it? Neither CWA nor YWA would ever advocate violence, but does what I say matter when objective truth has been completely thrown out the window and replaced with abject subjectivity?

A cursory glance at our website tells you that we are unapologetically pro-life. We are pro-life because the value of human life is not diminished by the minutes, hours, days, or years we have lived. We are also pro-life because we have great compassion for everyone touched by abortion providers who care more about their bottom line than the mothers, fathers, children, and families who are left in the devastating wake of the decision to abort. We advocate life, not death.

However, there are individuals on the other side of this issue who label those who stand up for unborn lives as domestic terrorists. The fact that it is all a lie seems to make no difference in today’s day and age.

I explained that to the representative of the company. I could not help but point out the awkward position I’m in as a conservative woman of faith having to endure this sort of interrogation and be forced to prove my worth via a Zoom call because of my viewpoint on social-political issues.

This small tech business entrepreneur may not be actively trying to discriminate against me or Young Women for America. As a business owner, it is his prerogative to deny a client. But why did he decline to work with us? Because he is a coward. He is afraid of being canceled and losing other left-leaning beauty bloggers and makeup guru clients he has.

Sadly, there are not many business platforms that offer the service for which YWA is looking. This platform rejecting us based solely on our viewpoint puts an undue burden on us to find an alternative that we are not sure exists.

One thing is certain. Conservatives are systematically being targeted, both actively and passively, when it comes to the marketplace of ideas. Viewpoint discrimination against conservatives is being normalized, and our society is the collective loser.

Women may have had to shatter glass ceilings throughout history, but as Sen. Lindsey Graham noted during Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s Supreme Court hearing, conservative women are still fighting to break through the reinforced concrete barrier society wants to constantly keep building over us.

ERA Talking Points

By | YWA | No Comments

The Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) proposes that “Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex” and that “The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.”

      • The ERA may sound good, but in reality, it would erase the legal distinction between men and women, deny female dignity, and leave women unprotected.
      • Women are already equal under U.S. law. Women’s “equality of rights under the law” is already recognized in the 14th Amendment.
      • Through established law such as Title IX, Equal Opportunity Act of 1963, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and Equal Pay Act, women have made huge strides against institutional discrimination in education, employment, sports, politics, and many other aspects of society.
      • By adding an equality amendment based on “sex,” the ERA could have a reverse effect on women’s progress.
      • Under the ERA, legal gains, programs, and policy reforms that are aimed at benefiting women could potentially be declared unconstitutional, such as
        • Provisions in the Violence Against Women Act
        • Programs such as Women, Infants, and Children (WIC)
        • Special protections in marriage, divorce, alimony, and child custody
        • Accommodations for pregnant women in the workforce
        • Spousal social security benefits
        • Female protections on college campuses relating to safety
        • Title IX scholarships and admissions
      • The ERA could also be a tool to promote abortion [1] by enabling courts to rule that any restrictions on abortion would “perpetuate gender inequality.” [2]
      • The ERA would allow federal courts and legislative powers to reinterpret every law making a distinction based on sex or gender. This means that
        • Any limits on abortion or denying taxpayer-funded abortions would be seen as sex discrimination.
        • Women-only safe spaces like sex-segregated bathrooms, locker rooms, or domestic violence shelters could be seen as a form of sex discrimination.
        • A woman could potentially be forced into military services against her will.
      • Erasing the legal distinction between men and women denies female dignity and leaves women unprotected. In order to support and uphold the rights, dignity, and opportunities of women, we must oppose the ERA.

————————————————————–

[1] NARAL Pro-Choice America. (n.d.). ERA Y-E-S. Retrieved from https://www.prochoiceamerica.org/campaign/era_yes/

[2] Image of national email alert from NARAL Pro-Choice America, March 13, 2019, asserting that “the ERA would reinforce the constitutional right to abortion . . . [it] would require judges to strike down anti-abortion laws . . .”. (2019, April 1). Retrieved from https://www.nrlc.org/federal/era/image-of-national-email-alertfrom-naral-pro-choice-america-march-13-2019-national-alert-asserting-that-the-era-would-reinforce-theconstitutional-right-to-abortion-it-would-require-judg/


Dear Reader: Like the quality of the work we do? Donate now to keep the information flowing!

Equality Act Talking Points

By | YWA | No Comments

Equality Act Talking Points

  • The Equality Act’s unverifiable and unscientific attempt to address discrimination by elevating protections for certain groups on the basis of a new definition of sex is a direct threat against every woman in America.
  • The Equality Act would upend the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by replacing “sex” with “sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity.”
  • The word “sex” would no longer be understood as “biologically male and female” in civil rights law.
  • All federally funded entities would be forced to interpret “sex” as including multiple and fluid gender identities, or “the gender-related identity, appearance, mannerisms, or other gender-related characteristics of an individual, regardless of the individual’s designated sex at birth.
  • There are virtually NO limitations, and “gender Identity” Is totally reliant on self-identification.
  • The Equality Act would force public facilities to allow men and boys who identify as women or girls to use the same bathrooms, locker rooms, showers, domestic violence shelters, and prisons as women or girls.
  • The Equality Act would force employers to hire or assign men who identify as women to jobs requiring sensitivity to the physical privacy rights of women and girls such as intimate medical examinations, supervision of domestic violence shelters or prisons, airport security pat downs, strip searches, or supervision of overnight school field trips.
  • The Equality Act would deny female athletes a fair playing field in sports competitions.
  • Any current law or policy gains traditionally and specifically aimed at benefiting women could legally be used by men identifying as women.
  • The Equality Act elevates “gender identity” over the protected class of “sex,” threatening gains women have made in law, programs, and policy reforms over the past decades.
  • The Equality Act prohibits anyone from making a claim or raising a defense against these special protections under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). It is a blatant effort to diminish religious freedom and force people of faith to conform to gender ideology under threat of law.

Taken from CWA’s letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee.


Dear Reader: Like the quality of the work we do? Donate now to keep the information flowing!

Violence Against Women Act Talking Points

By | YWA | No Comments

Violence Against Women Act Talking Points

  • The purpose of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) from its inception has been to protect, support, and seek justice for women who have suffered assault or abuse.
  • Current VAWA law grants special protections to people who identify themselves as female but are biologically male, both by defining them as “underserved populations” and elevating their rights above those of women seeking refuge from violence.
  • There is no reason to compromise a female victim’s privacy and safety by granting access to male-bodied transgender individuals in women’s shelters.
  • Title XI of the bill gives preferential placement decisions to males in custody asserting identity as women.
  • Nondiscrimination provisions in current law weaponize transgender activism against biological women.
  • VAWA reauthorization must ensure that nothing in the intent or implementation of its provisions can be interpreted as a requirement to compromise, threaten, or undermine the privacy, safety, and rights of females in order to accommodate transgender individuals.

Taken from CWA’s letter to the House of Representatives.


Dear Reader: Like the quality of the work we do? Donate now to keep the information flowing!

Sharia Law Talking Points

By | YWA | No Comments

On International Women’s Day (Monday, March 8), Young Women for America (YWA) National Director, Annabelle Rutledge, was honored to interview Mariam Ibrahim, a Sudanese woman who was sentenced to death in Sudan for refusing to renounce her Christian faith. During our interview, we were inspired by Mariam’s boldness and gained a better understanding through her story of what it is like living under Sharia Law.

If you missed YWA’s leader call and want to watch it back, you can view it here. Below are key talking points on Sharia law.

  • Sharia is the fundamental religious concept of Islam – namely, its law is derived from the Qur’an, Hadiths, and Sunnah.
  • For any nation under Sharia law, the idea of separation of church and state is non-existent and Islamic concepts govern all areas of life.
  • The Islamic law includes extreme facets that degrade the value of human life, such as:
    • A Muslim who leaves Islam must be killed immediately.
    • Non-Muslims are forbidden to marry Muslim women.
    • Sharia dictates death by stoning, beheading, amputation of limbs, flogging, and even for crimes of sin such as adultery.
    • There is no age limit for the marriage of girls. The marriage contract can take place any time after birth and can be consummated at age eight or nine.
    • Rebelliousness on the part of the wife nullifies the husband’s obligation to support her, gives him permission to beat her, and keeps her from leaving the home.[1]
  • Thankfully, here in the United States, we do not embody the principles of Islamic law. Muslims living in the U.S. are free to practice their religion, but like every other citizen, they are only permitted to do so within the bounds of the U.S. Constitution.
  • Even still, the United States has seen several instances of Muslims acting within the Sharia law and outside the bounds of the Constitution.
    • For example, on January 1, 2008, an Egyptian living in Texas shot his own two daughters in a parked car simply because they were dating Americans. [2]
  • Of course, not every Muslim living in the United States abides by Sharia law; however, it is important that we understand that Islamic law is dangerous and that we fight against any effort to allow it to creep into American society and courts.
  • There have been instances of Islamic husbands trying to use Sharia law as legal foundation in United States courts.
    • In 2010, a New Jersey court saw a case in which the husband had repeatedly abused his wife and told her their religion (Islam) was the basis for his abuse. The court allowed an Imam to offer expert testimony in which he said, according to Islamic law, the wife is required to submit to the husband’s demands and that there was no criminal intent since the husband was operating within his religious beliefs.
    • The judge allowed this testimony to supersede state law. Thankfully, the decision was reversed, but it highlights a legitimate concern as Islam is antithetical to the ideas of freedom in the U.S. Constitution. [3]
  • Though we are called to love those practicing different religions and do, that does not mean we should disregard dangerous and evil practices. We should be alert in making sure that political correctness is not weaponized to allow for evil.
  • As Christians, we should ultimately be praying for those in the radical Islamic faith who are stuck in a system that does not value human life. Despite the dangers they may face for leaving the Muslim faith, our strongest desire should be that they find salvation in Jesus Christ.

[1] Nonie Darwish, “Sharia for Dummies,” Front Page Magazine, August 26, 2010, https://archives.frontpagemag.com/fpm/sharia-dummies-nonie-darwish/.

[2] Claire Cardona, “Video offers glimpse into relationship slain Lewisville sisters had with father accused of killing them in taxi,” Dallas News, February 2, 2017, https://www.dallasnews.com/news/2017/02/03/video-offers-glimpse-into-relationship-slain-lewisville-sisters-had-with-father-accused-of-killing-them-in-taxi/.

[3]Maxim Lott, “Advocates of Anti-Shariah Measures Alarmed by Judge’s Ruling,” Fox News, August 5, 2010 https://www.foxnews.com/us/advocates-of-anti-shariah-measures-alarmed-by-judges-ruling

 


Dear Reader: Like the quality of the work we do? Donate now to keep the information flowing!