Minnesota True

Truth for Cultural Renewal

Designed with WordPress

  • The Prison Abolition Movement, Iryna Zarutska and Charlie Kirk: How it all Fits Together.

    September 17, 2025

    In this post I am going to discuss a movement within Critical Race Theory called “Prison Abolition.” The goal is as straight-forward as the names implies; to abolish prisons. The ideology behind it is more mainstream than you might think and underlies a number of disturbing trends in our criminal justice system. These issues have gained public attention in cases such as the murder of Iryna Zarutska. Zarutska was murdered by a man who should have been in jail. The judge who released Decarlos Brown Jr. most likely subscribes to the ideologies related to prison abolition which require a soft-on-crime approach as a means of racial reparation.

    As a branch of race-based critical theories, the prison abolition movement stems from the belief that our systems of crime and punishment are incurably racist, and that redefining crime and ending incarceration is the best way to balance out race-based inequalities. A driving concern is the fact that the number of incarcerated people in the US is disproportionately black. However, race is not the highest shared commonality among men in prison. The most common shared experience among prison inmates is fatherlessness. The bloated prison system and high rates of crime in our nation are not a symptom of racism, but of generations of offenses against children. Today, only about 50% of American children are growing up in a home with their married father and mother. Among black Americans, as few as 20% grow up with their mother and father in their home.* Even Barak Obama publicly noted this problem in a Father’s Day speech that he gave in 2008 saying, “If we are honest with ourselves, we’ll admit that way too many fathers are…missing from too many lives and too many homes.” **

    When children grow up feeling abandoned by either their father or mother (or both), the consequence is that those children are at a higher risk for crime and anti-social behaviors. Prison abolition is really quite superficial, looking only at skin color to explain incarceration trends. It tends to dismiss explanations like family break-down which is the leading predictor for criminal behavior across all races. Because the cause identified by prison abolition is superficial, the solution is also naive.

    We would never think that we had cured cancer by ceasing to diagnose or treat the disease. However, the prison abolition movement believes that the answer to our high rates of incarceration is to stop sending people to jail and stop calling crime “crime.” Now, in case you think that is a bizarre idea that no one could possibly be taking seriously, think again.

    • “Defunding the Police” is a preliminary step towards prison abolition.
    • In 2023 Minnesota adopted Ethnic Studies benchmarks that include introducing prison abolition to 9th graders. The benchmark is described this way: Explore how criminality is constructed and how social, political and legal systems define a person as a criminal, and the possible impact of that label on individuals and communities. While it would be possible to have an open conversation with varying viewpoints based on that prompt, the terms used here are straight out of the prison abolition playbook. Brian Lozenski, who was appointed by Governor Walz to oversee the Ethnic Studies standards, is an advocate for critical race theory and prison abolition. You can get a brief introduction to his ideas in the video clip below:
    • Prison abolition is mainstream enough to be the focus of a display at the Minnesota Science Museum. I am not sure how this made it into the science museum, but here you have it:

    Prison abolition falls under a larger ideological canopy called “Racial Capitalism” which the National Review describes this way:

    “The idea of ‘racial capitalism’ is breathtakingly radical. It delegitimates America’s free enterprise system, America’s legal system, and even the very belief that there can be such a thing as ‘crime,’ under current circumstances. Implicit in the racial capitalism concept — and sometimes explicit — is the belief that America’s unjust system may need to be swept away by a violent rebellion or revolution…This is what civics has become under the governance of Tim Walz.”

    These ideas are being imported to Minnesota students via the Ethnic Studies portion of Minnesota’s K-12 Academic Standards. These standards were adopted by legislators in 2023 but by 2026 they are expected to be fully activated in Minnesota’s social studies curriculum.

    Below is one example of the current Ethnic Studies standards for Kindergarten. This standard requires that students be able to “Describe how individuals have fought for freedom and liberation against systemic and coordinated exercises of power locally and globally.” And “Retell a story about an unfair experience that conveys a power imbalance.” (This should take tattling to a whole new level!) Can’t you just see a five year old running inside after recess to breathlessly tell Mrs. W. that she saw a power imbalance on the playground?

    The ideas of Racial Capitalism generally, and Prison Abolition specifically are on display in an illustrated book for kids. These are the kinds of ideas that the Ethnic Studies portion of Minnesota’s education benchmarks would hope to introduce to children. You can find the whole book at the link below, but I will share and discuss a few of the pages here:

    Link to Comic Book PDF

    I wonder why “many thousands” of people are fleeing countries that were “devastated by centuries of U.S. imperialism” and yet, they want to come to the U.S.? Only in Radical Left social theories do people flee into the loving arms of an Evil Empire that has devastated their own countries, expecting to find safety in that Evil Empire. And if this is one of their talking points, why did they choose the phrase ‘many thousands’ to refer to the estimate of at least 13.7 million illegal immigrants currently residing in the United States?

    This rather tiresome proposition of Critical Race Theory implies that if there had never been slave patrols, there would never have been police. This is absurd. There have always been people employed in law enforcement since the dawn of human civilization. Wherever there is a law, there are people who enforce the law. If the radical progressives ever do remake America into their dream utopia, there will most definitely be a set of people trained and empowered to enforce the laws of the new State. The applause and glee that the Left has displayed in celebration of the murder of Charlie Kirk shows that they will be more than happy to allow and encourage such “punishment” of all people who disagree with them, truly believing that they are doing the world a favor for removing the scum of the earth. To the Left, Tyler Robinson is a law enforcer, and Charlie Kirk is a criminal. Keep this in mind as you hear the prison abolition rhetoric. It is not about creating a civilization with no law. It is about creating a civilization with a radical new concept of law. This will be a complete reversal in the true meaning of Good and Evil.

    As you can see in the video clip above, Racial Capitalists like Brian Lozenski believe that America is irreversibly racist and must be overthrown. He has made a clear value-statement that racism is a great crime that is impossible to overcome in the present system. In his view, in order to bring about justice, the United States must be “overthrown.” Now, an overthrow is not a peaceful transfer of power. An overthrow is violent. We saw this play out in the protests following George Floyd’s death. Billions of dollars of property was destroyed all across the country and people (including black people) lost their homes, businesses and lives in the chaos and violence. Meanwhile the promoters of Racial Capitalism stood safely in their ivory towers, tapping away at their keyboards with praise for the violence and destruction. Why? Because they really believe that there must be a violent overthrow of the U.S. as we know it, in the hopes that out of the ashes and dust, a perfectly just society will arise. And in that new society, there will be no need for prisons.

    In this perfect society they are going to figure out how to make things so good that no one will want to commit crimes such as rape or murder:

    How do Prison Abolitionists envision a better and more just society?

    Has Rojava really created a peaceful utopia in the center of war-torn Syria?

    Let’s check out their Wikipedia page:

    This must be the Community Based Peace and Consensus Committee.

    Who needs 10,000 lakes, when you could have a sun-dappled view like this one?

    And finally, behold the glorious Someday Utopia envisioned by Prison Abolitionists:

    Whether you homeschool, send your kids to private school, or public school, I am a firm believer that in each of these situations we must equip our children to understand and recognize cultural trends and how they impact current events. Parents are responsible to teach their children a true understanding of sin, personal responsibility, crime, and justice.

    Romans 13:1-5 speaks to the legitimacy of the government in keeping law and order.

    “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore, whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer. Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience.” (ESV)

    Government is established by God to reward good and punish evil. But, when the government becomes unjust, we do not have to lose hope. Some day there will be a perfectly just judgment before the throne of God where all the records will be set straight.

    Revelation 22:11-16 gives us some of Jesus’ final recorded words in his message to John, who was also unjustly imprisoned on the island of Patmos:

    “Let the evildoer still do evil, and the filthy still be filthy, and the righteous still do right, and the holy still be holy. Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense with me, to repay each one for what he has done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end. Blessed are those who wash their robes so that they might have the right to the tree of life and that they may enter the city by the gates. Outside are the dogs and sorcerers and the sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices falsehood. I Jesus, have sent my angel to testify to you about these things for the churches. I am the root and descendant of David, the bright morning star.” (ESV)

    Know the truth, stand for the truth, teach your children the truth. And when you have done all that, stand firm. A day is coming when:

    Psalm 91:7-8

    A thousand may fall at your side,

    ten thousand at your right hand,

    but it will not come near you.

    You will only look with your eyes

    and see the recompense of the wicked.

    *”Turning the Corner on Father Absence in Black America: A statement from the Morehouse Conference on African American Fathers,” Morehouse College, fall 1998.

    **Obama’s Father’s Day remarks, New York Times, June 15th, 2008 here 

    One response to “The Prison Abolition Movement, Iryna Zarutska and Charlie Kirk: How it all Fits Together.”

    1. Avatar
      Anonymous

      Well, this is troubling to read, but not unknown…just seeing it all in words is sobering. “Let not your heart be troubled…” says Jesus. Thankfully, these destructive ideas are not quite so quietly sneaking in because people are starting to KNOW and SPEAK and ACT. God help us! Restore your Truth in our country.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

    Leave a comment

  • In Memory of Charlie Kirk

    September 11, 2025

    Charlie Kirk was a prophet in every sense of the word. A true prophet speaks the truth of God to the specific sacred sins of the day with absolute moral clarity. And if they are effective, they are often killed for their words.

    Sometimes a prophet can predict the future, not because of a special revelation, but because they are so equipped with understanding by the Spirit of God that they just know what is coming.

    Over the past two decades, I have often been dismayed and discouraged by the compromises coming from once trusted evangelical pastors, churches, colleges and other organizations. Even faithful Christians often speak in semi-coded lanaguage when broaching moral topics that our culture has labeled ‘political’. But these serious issues of moral rot will not dissipate under a nuanced response any more than cancer will go away with Tylenol. Charlie Kirk stood against these sheltered sins of our society with moral clarity that was so refreshing. He spoke clearly about abortion, transgenderism, homosexuality, communism, socialism, the history of America and the historical truth of the Bible. He loved those who disagreed with him and put his life on the line to bring others into the freedom of living in Christ. May God raise up thousands in his place who will testify to the truth with bold confidence. This world can take nothing that God will not restore a thousand times over.

    Hebrews 11:36-38

    Some faced jeers and flogging, while still others were chained and put in prison. They were stoned, they were sawed in two; they were put to death by the sword…the world was not worthy of them.

    Leave a comment

  • Update on Minnesota’s Education Budget

    May 23, 2025

    In February, I posted about Gov. Walz’s proposal to remove non-public student aide from the state’s education budget. Since that time, many students and administrators testified before the Education Finance Committee in multiple hearings sharing opposition to those cuts. I am happy to share that all of that funding has been retained in Minnesota’s budget, released last week. It is good to see government working, listening to ordinary people, and doing what is best for the common good!

    You can get an update on these and other budget highlights on Minnesota Family Council’s podcast.

  • Katy Faust: “This is a Child”

    The following is what Katy Faust calls her “Most Important Speech.” In it she summarizes the key points that she makes in her children’s rights advocacy with Them Before Us. Katy’s mission is to help the world see that we have to put the needs of children ahead of adult desires when it comes to issues of family and marriage. Katy gave me permission to post this speech in its entirety:

    In 1961, the Green Bay Packers squandered a fourth-quarter lead and lost the NFL championship. The following year the players gathered at training camp, demoralized but ready to master new strategies and plays. Instead, their coach, Vince Lombardi, walked into the locker room holding up a pigskin and began, “Gentlemen, this is a football.”

    Something had gone very wrong for his team to have lost what should’ve been an easy victory. Lombardi concluded that his players had forgotten the fundamentals of the game. So that season he started from scratch, as if these 38 elite players were blank slates, and rebuilt the team’s knowledge of the basics — how to block, tackle, pass — from the ground up.

    Similarly, the Western world lost what should’ve been an obvious win: the battle of marriage. We fumbled because we took our eyes off the ball and got distracted by religious liberty questions, the self-interest of adults, and accusations of being on the wrong side of history.

    Just like the Packers of 1961, conservatives must recover the fundamentals of the family. So, let’s start with the basics.

    “Ladies and gentlemen, this is a child.”

    A child is created when the gametes of one man and the gametes of one woman fuse to create her new, unique human life. Not only are this one man and one woman required for her life to begin, but they are also critical for her life to thrive. When one or both are absent, her body, mind, and heart suffer.

    Follow the Science

    The loss of a child’s father affects children at a cellular level. Fatherless boys especially have shorter telomeres, the end caps of their chromosomes. Losing a father to death or abandonment literally shortens this child’s lifespan. Daughters raised apart from their biological father begin menstruating, on average, one year earlier than their girlfriends being raised by their own fathers. The loss of a father alters children’s physical bodies.

    This is a child. As she grows, she deserves to be safe and loved. After decades of research, social scientists on the Left and Right have discovered the conditions that make it most likely she will be, namely being raised by the one man and one woman who gave her life. The data reveal that biological parents advantage children in ways that unrelated adults do not.

    Statistically, step-parents invest less time, money, and care into children’s upbringing. In blended families, biological children are 15% more likely to have regular medical checkups, 22% more likely to be buckled in the car, have 5% more money spent on their food, and are more likely to attend college. Step-parents save less money for children’s education and bequeath less to them when they die.

    Thankfully there are heroic step-parents who step up to fill the gap of a negligent biological parent. They deserve our recognition and support. But overall, the presence of an unrelated adult in a child’s home diminishes child outcomes. That is especially true when the unrelated adult is a man. If this child is living with her mother’s cohabiting boyfriend, she is 11 times more likely to be sexually, physically, or emotionally abused.

    Researchers Martin Daly and Margot Wilson found children were 120 times more likely to be beaten to death by a mother’s boyfriend or a step-father than their own dad. Sociologist Bradford Wilcox notes, “One of the most dangerous places for a child in America to find himself in is a home that includes an unrelated male.” The risk that unrelated adults pose to children is the very reason why adoptive parents like me were subjected to rigorous screenings and background checks prior to having a child placed in our home. Biology affords a level of protection to this child that a romantic interest in her mother or father simply does not.

    This is a child. The man and woman who made this child are the safest, most invested adults in her life. Being raised by those two adults is her best shot at being safe and loved.

    The man and woman who made her are also the only two humans on the planet that provide her with something she seeks: her biological identity. Children struggle to answer the question “who am I?” when they don’t know “whose am I?”

    Fifty years ago the majority of adoptions were closed, with no identifying information about or contact with the child’s first family. Today, 95% of adoptions have some degree of openness. That’s because both adoptees and social workers report that children fare better when they have as much contact with their first family as possible, even if they cannot be raised by them.

    Some children are intentionally severed from a biological parent at conception via sperm and egg donation. Far from regarding these donors as strangers who don’t matter because “love makes a family,” these children often embark on protracted internet searches or genetic investigations via 23 and Me to find their missing parent or dozens of half siblings.

    The largest study on donor-conceived children found they experience “profound struggles with their origins and identities.” One survey of sperm and egg donor children found 64% agree that “My donor is half of who I am.” Eighty-one percent often wondered what personality traits, skills, and physical similarities they shared with their donor.

    It seems that even when children are raised by a loving mother and father, they still long to be known by the one man and one woman who gave them life.

    This is a child. If she is raised by the two adults who gave her life, she will also developmentally benefit from the perfect gender balance in her home. Mom’s higher oxytocin levels optimize nurturing and bonding in her first three years. Dad’s increased testosterone transforms a laundry basket into a roller coaster ride. Her fine motor skills will be honed while chopping carrots with mom, her gross motor skills while racing down the street with dad.

    Her female parent naturally simplifies her language when talking to this child: “did you get a boo-boo?” Her male parent expands her cognitive development by talking to her like he talks to everyone else: “dang baby, that’s a gnarly road rash.” One parent’s default attitude is safety—“be careful on the monkey bars!” The other naturally pushes her limits: “you can make it next time if you get a running start.”

    This is a child. The one man and woman who made her also give her the distinct love she hungers for. Kids don’t just want to be loved in the abstract. They seek both maternal love and paternal love. Take it from the kids who had two moms or two dads.

    Theodore shares: “From an early age I found myself drawn to my friends’ fathers. I think my [lesbian] parents knew this was necessary for me. My best friend’s dad also probably recognized the role he was fulfilling in my life and did so willingly, something I’m forever grateful for.”

    Samantha remembers, “My 5-year-old brain could not understand why I didn’t have the mom that I desperately wanted. I felt the loss. I felt the hole. As I grew, I tried to fill that hole with aunts, my dads’ lesbian friends and teachers. I craved a mother’s love even though I was well-loved by my two gay dads.”

    The Rights of the Voiceless

    This is a child. She comes from one man and one woman. She craves the love of that man and woman. She discovers her identity through that man and woman. Her development is maximized by that man and woman. She is most likely to be safe and loved when raised by that man and woman. And according to biology, natural law, and 192 countries which have ratified the U.N. convention on the rights of the child, she has a right to that man and woman.

    There is one delivery system every society throughout human history has discovered, affirmed, and promoted to secure this child’s right to that man and woman all day, every day, for life. That system is marriage. When we understand that “this is a child,” the definition of marriage becomes a matter of justice. And redefining marriage to exclude a mother or father is an act of injustice.

    This is a child. The opinions of five Supreme Court justices cannot change her. Dystopic processes of creating children in laboratories cannot change her. Endlessly repeating “if the adults are happy, the kids will be happy,” will not change her. Our laws, our technology, and our culture will either recognize and respect who she is and what she needs, or will victimize her. Those are the only two options.

    This is a child. She’s not an item to be cut and pasted into any and every adult relationship. She is not an object of rights, she is a subject of rights. Respecting her rights requires that all adults—single, married, gay, straight, fertile, and infertile—do hard things on her behalf. Because the only alternative is to insist that she do hard things for them. That’s an injustice. A just society does not force the weak to sacrifice for the strong.

    This is a child. If she loses her mother and father due to abuse, neglect, or abandonment, adults do not have a right to adopt her. Rather, she has a right to be adopted. And whenever possible, she deserves to be adopted into a family where she can benefit from the maternal and paternal love that will maximize her development and satisfy her heart.

    This is a child. And in matters of marriage and family, she deserves your empathy. Not adults. It is the risk and instability of a revolving door of adults to which she’ll be subjected that should be at the forefront of your mind when reading that New York Times op-ed promoting open non-monogamy. It is this child, not just the florist or the baker, who needs defending when rejecting the laughably named Respect for Marriage Act. It’s this child’s mother-hunger and identity struggles that should govern your response when your favorite classically liberal podcaster creates an intentionally motherless surrogate baby, or two. Because it will always be this child whose rights and well-being are sacrificed on the altar of Modern Family.

    This is a child. She does not blog. She can’t submit amicus briefs. She cannot lobby her congressman. She cannot hire lawyers. She cannot speak at conferences. She cannot defend her own rights. This child is completely dependent on adults coming to her defense. And speaking up on her behalf.

    What happened to the 1961 Green Bay Packers? They became the best in the league at the tasks everyone else took for granted. Six months after Lombardi’s “this is a football” speech, the Packers blew out the New York Giants 37-0 in the NFL championship.

    Ladies and gentlemen, if you always remember that “this is a child,” you’ll never lose a marriage and family battle again.

    Watch Katy’s speech: here

    Katy’s substack

    One response to “Katy Faust: “This is a Child””

    1. Avatar
      Anonymous

      Again, excellent!

      Like

      Reply

    Leave a comment

  • How Minnesota’s Trans Refuge Laws Betray Children

    In the past ten years, a tidal wave of false ideology about gender and the body has swept throughout the world. In America these lies have become the standard operating framework for school counselors, therapists and doctors as they often encourage social and medical transitions, but abhor the idea of helping a child to love and be comfortable with his or her natural body and natural gender. Many of the children who were transitioned are now reaching adulthood and regretting the irreversible harm that was done to their bodies under the counsel of people who should have been protecting and caring for them.

    Clementine Breen, a current student at UCLA, began to take puberty blockers at age 12 and underwent a double mastectomy at the age of 14. Like many girls with gender and sexuality issues at adolescence, Breen experienced both sexual abuse by someone outside of her family, and physical abuse from an autistic older brother when she was a young girl. Yet no one looked into her past experiences or her need for healing from those traumas. Her “gender affirming” doctor, Johannah Olson-Kennedy even told her that her mastectomy was reversible. No one explained to Breen that she would never be able to breastfeed and might become infertile from the use of testosterone. Breen filed a medical negligence lawsuit against Olson-Kennedy on December 5th, 2024 in California. (Watch this Brett Cooper video for more on The Growing Regret Among Trans Teens).

    Meanwhile, back in 2023, Governor Walz declared that Minnesota is now a “Trans-Refuge State” and DFL lawmakers enacted legislation to ensure that Minnesota will protect the industry of pediatric transgender surgeries and medications. It needs to be stated very clearly that there are currently no states banning transgender surgeries or medications for adults. So being a Trans-Refuge State is 100% about medically transitioning children. Many states in the US and countries in Europe are passing laws to restrict sex reassignment surgeries, puberty blockers, and cross-sex hormones for children based on the testimonies of detransitioners, and studies that show no positive long-term outcome for those who undergo these procedures. The anxiety, depression and suicidal tendencies are statistically unchanged after transitioning. And furthermore, transitioners are left with a damaged body that can never be restored should they wish to be reconciled to their natural gender. Denmark restricted medical transitions for children in 2023 and the UK in 2024. But here in Minnesota, our DFL legislators are continuing to double down on support for these horrific procedures.

    According to the Minnesota Legislature website, the Trans-Refuge laws “prevent out-of-state laws from interfering in the practice of gender-affirming health care here.” They also “give Minnesota courts jurisdiction in most situations where a child is present in Minnesota for the purpose of obtaining gender-affirming care.” Included in this legislation, the state of Minnesota may even claim temporary emergency jurisdiction of a child who ‘has been unable to obtain gender-affirming health care as defined in section 548.415’.

    So, yes, you read that right. According to Minnesota law, the state can take “emergency” custody of a child under the age of 18 if the child has been:

    • abandoned
    • abused
    • unable to obtain a mastectomy on healthy breasts, castration, puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones
    One of these things is not like the others….

    Minnesota’s position as a Trans-Refuge state is very clearly promoting and protecting trans-medicine and surgeries for children. This is evil masquerading as compassion, and must be called out. Gender-transitions not only permanently damage healthy bodies, they also create life-long medical patients. It is no surprise that after Covid, when hospitals lost large amounts of money, it has become standard for most hospitals to have a “gender-affirming” department. These clinics are hardly concerned about the long-term health of the people whom they transition. They know that every medical transitioner is signing up for decades of medication and surgeries.

    Some people wonder how we got here. As our culture has moved recklessly from one stage of sexual autonomy to the next, you might be wondering what comes after this. Besides the logical step of identifying as an animal rather than a human, there is also going to be a push for the public acceptance of pedophilia. If the culture can accept that a child has the authority to change his or her gender, then a child should also have the authority to be engaged in a ‘consenting’ sexual relationship with an adult. Again, the DFL lawmakers are already testing out the waters here. In 2023 they struck language from an anti-discrimination law that excluded pedophilia as a protected category of sexual orientation. The law formerly read: “Sexual orientation does not include a physical or sexual attachment to children by an adult.” But this sentence was deliberately removed, leaving open the possibility that sexual orientation can include a physical or sexual attachment to children by an adult.

    We don’t have to go there. But we absolutely have to stop trying to CoEXisT peacefully with lies. We must say the truth out loud in public places. And I am hopeful that if the adults don’t do it, Gen Z and Alpha will. The girls who have been forced to change in front of a boy in their locker room are feeling justly violated. The California high school students who were given detention for wearing “Save Girls Sports” shirts are all the more determined to rebel against the adults in authority. And the detransitioners who are coming of age are revolting against the ideology that harmed them.

    Is there healing for those harmed by gender transitions? Yes! In Jesus there is hope and healing for a life scarred by transgender ideology. God created our bodies with meaning and purpose. He made us male and female. We must help children love and care for their natural bodies.

    1 Peter 2:24

    (Calligraphy by L. Courtright)

  • Jordan Peterson and Katy Faust on Pro-Child Politics

    This week’s post is short and sweet, because no one says these things better than Katy Faust. Make time to watch or listen to this, even if you can only do it in small parts at a time. It is a great introduction to the work that Them Before Us is doing on behalf of children. Take a deep breath and dive in. This interview is intense!

    Leave a comment

  • The Cobalt Problem and Minnesota’s Vanished Glaciers: Widening our Perspective on Climate Change

    For many years now, environmentalists have been pedaling a climate change narrative that is too often fueled by fear. This has resulted in accelerating policies which sometimes result in unnecessary harm and waste. As we advance in our knowledge of science and technology, we should aim to live efficiently on our planet and preserve the natural wonders of our world. But we must move forward with a wide-angle lens as we test new ideas.

    Most people today recognize a warming shift in our climate, with or without the assessment of climate scientists. Pan fish push farther north into Canada than they used to. Lobster fishing has also shifted up the coast of Maine. Some European ski resorts have closed permanently due to warming weather. The warming climate is also to thank for the discovery of Otzi the (perhaps) murdered ice-age man who was discovered in 1991 at the margin of melting glacial ice. These are just some of countless examples. I am not writing this post to question whether or not we are experiencing a warming trend. I am writing with the hope of adding some perspective to the dialogue.

    In 2022, California announced that they would ban the sale of gas powered vehicles by 2035 despite the fact that they already have difficulty providing their citizens with the electricity that they need. So far, Minnesota’s DFL lawmakers have followed all of California’s Clean Air Act mandates, without fully committing to this one. When people raised alarm over this possibility, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency stated that Minnesota’s Clean Car Rules “won’t automatically force the state to adopt the ban recently enacted in California.” Not automatically. Well, gosh, that is comforting. I will save my thoughts about astronomically expanding electric vehicles in a state with deep-cold winters. But beyond the question of practicality, there are ethical issues that are being misconstrued.

    While the wealthy people of the world split hairs over how to be the most environmentally virtuous, a new kind of slavery has been birthed in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Tens of thousands of people, including children and mothers with babies strapped to their backs are working in dangerous conditions to mine the cobalt that is needed for EV batteries. As Sidhartha Kara, author of Cobalt Red explains, “there is no such thing as a ‘clean’ supply of cobalt from the country.”

    In light of this, it is necessary to call out one of the bold lies of progressive environmental politics. Minnesota’s Green Car Flyer (which promotes increased production of electric vehicles) states that: Clean Cars Minnesota would “reduce harmful air pollution, which has a particular impact on lower-income and minority communities.” This suggests that poor people with darker skin will experience more negative effects from high carbon emissions than rich people with lighter skin who live on the same planet and breathe the same air. This is an odd claim, but the implication is that increasing EV production will make the lives of poor people with darker skin qualitatively better. And this is a lie.

    The reality is that when the wealthy state of Minnesota demands more EV cars, (Minnesota requires car dealers to stock a certain percent regardless of customer demand), an increasing number of poor Congolese men, women, and children will end up working in the toxic cobalt mines. These conditions will have a negative effect that is far more concrete and immediate than the imaginary one that is vaguely alluded to in Minnesota’s Green Car promotion. A University of Florida health page reports the following information about cobalt exposure:

    If you or someone you know has been exposed to cobalt, the first step is to leave the area and get fresh air. If cobalt came in contact with the skin, wash the area thoroughly.

    Cobalt poisoning can occur when you are exposed to large amounts of it. There are three ways that cobalt can cause poisoning. You can swallow it, breathe it into your lungs, or have it come in prolonged contact with your skin.

    Absorbing a large amount of cobalt over longer periods of time can lead to serious health problems, such as:

    • Cardiomyopathy (a problem where your heart becomes big and floppy and has problems pumping blood)
    • Deafness
    • Nerve problems
    • Ringing in the ears (tinnitus)
    • Thickening of the blood
    • Thyroid problems
    • Vision problems

    Yet, in order to supply the EV demand, people are mining this material with pick axes, transporting it in their bare hands and arms, and breathing in toxic dust for hours on end, day after day. In addition to the unavoidable cobalt poisoning, the natural beauty of the Congolese landscape is being bulldozed and gutted to unearth the high-demand ore. We must be willing to confess that our vain attempts at environmental moralism are held up by a supply-chain that is at complete odds with the movement’s most cherished values.

    Human rights activists are aware of the cobalt problem and are trying to raise awareness about the need to develop a safe mining industry. But when demand balloons, it becomes very difficult to develop regulated practices. For this reason, environmental policy changes must be made slowly with intentionality to engage the whole process. There must also be an awareness of the ripple effect that impacts people downstream from the policies. It is important that we remain honest about the fact that an environmental moral high ground might be difficult to secure. In addition, it is important to remain open-minded about whether or not we have the right narrative on climate change.

    What if the globe is warming, but carbon emissions have less to do with it than we think? What if carbon emissions are the main cause, but the solutions we are proposing are causing more harm than good? What if there are many factors that influence global climates and we do not even know the half of it? It is important to keep an open mind toward all the possibilities and continue to look at this complex situation from many different perspectives.

    Let us look at a few events in climate history to widen our perspective.

    The climate is changing today, as it always has been. The problem is that the prophecies of doom which fuel environmental policies are based on a view of earth history that is egregiously myopic. The earth has often been subject to catastrophic climate events. These are recorded in human history, geology, and in our soil. We know from studying these, that past climate events were on a scale far more dramatic than anything we have seen in recent history. The graph below, from an academic geology/archaeology paper, displays this reality. This graph shows temperature changes from the end of the ice age until now. That itty bitty millimeter at the end is supposed to be our current global warming “crisis”. It is the most boring part of this graph.

    BEFORE THE ICE AGE:

    Minnesota used to sit sideways on the equator.* Tectonic forces twisted the continent and shoved our state into the northern hemisphere. Somewhere along the way, Minnesota was nearly torn in two by a massive tectonic force and then squeezed back together. This incident left a gigantic scar – the mid-continental rift – below the surface of our topography. Between and around these catastrophic events, the northern part of the state experienced massive volcanic activity, a mountain building event, and a mountain eroding event which leveled our local Himalayas down to stumps and exposed deposits of iron and other minerals.

    THE ICE AGE

    Well. It’s hard to beat all of that excitement. But then there was the mysterious ice age. For some reason, ice began to accumulate in the northern hemisphere and on high mountain ranges until it built up to huge continent-wide sheets of ice. In Minnesota, glaciers covered the entire state, except for a bit in the southeastern corner. What climate crisis caused this? And what climate crisis caused them to melt? Certainly, this was all far more dramatic than our gradual warming trend. Geologists tell us that we are still technically at the end of the ice age. We are standing in a stream of a warming and melting history that started around the same time that people first entered the continent of North America. So, we should expect that we will continue to experience cycles of warm and cool weather, with an overall warming pattern (just like the graph above shows).

    At the peak of the ice age, some of the world’s current deserts were lush, fertile lands. The arid Southwest of the United States, the Sahara Desert, and the region of Bactria (now Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan) hold traces of some of the earliest signs of human occupation, lush vegetation and agriculture. Climate change happened to them. People moved and adapted. Or they stayed and adapted. We do not know how they dealt with it, but we are all here today and so they must have figured it out.

    THE GREENLAND SETTLEMENT WARMING PERIOD

    Beginning around 900 AD/CE, people from Denmark, Sweden and Norway found their way to Greenland and established farming settlements that lasted for over 400 years before the people mysteriously disappeared. So, what was going on during that period of Norse settlement? There was a significant warming period that made Greenland hospitable to farming and it lasted for several hundred years before the climate cooled so dramatically that the Scandinavian people abandoned their homes and immigrated back to Europe. All of this warming happened in recent history without any industrial-era carbon emissions. And then it cooled again for unknown reasons.

    THE LITTLE ICE AGE

    The abandonment of the Greenland settlements was due to the onset of The Little Ice Age, which started around 1300 and lasted until the mid-19th Century. This period of extreme global cooling had far-reaching societal effects that are documented in history around the globe. Mountain glaciers advanced. Ancient Chinese orange farms were abandoned. There were droughts, crop failure and famines. Dynasties collapsed. Merchants had to innovate new ways to transport their goods through the longer winters when rivers and canals froze. The extreme cold was blamed on witchcraft, Jews, women and any minority group that was easy to scapegoat. Climate change fearmongering is nothing new. People panic anytime the earth reveals that it is not tame.

    Being that the Little Ice Age ended in the 1800s, we should be expecting a warming trend, with or without carbon emissions. Our ancestors who survived the Little Ice Age would be puzzled as to why we are so terrified of our warming weather. They longed for it.

    The politically driven environmental narrative must be countered with the truth when it makes claims that are demonstrably false. We should acquaint ourselves with a better understanding of Earth’s history in order to see our present time in its proper context. We need to stop telling our children that it is up to them to save the earth, because clearly, that is not within human power. God created the world and He will sustain it until the day he chooses to draw this age to an end. We can trust him with that future while we strive to wisely balance the needs of all people who share this beautiful planet.

    Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation?
        Tell me, if you understand.     Job 38:4

    For more on the EV situation, check out this video: Ford’s $100 Billion EV Disaster…What Happened?

    *On Minnesota’s geologic past: My cited source says this happened 540 million years ago, but I do not believe this timeline. All of the pre-ice age drama happend during Noah’s Flood. More on that later. Here are 101 reasons to question the old earth paradigm.

    Leave a comment

  • The Serpent’s Lie

    In an age of aggressive lies, it can feel overwhelming to know what is true. There are false ideologies in the world and there are lies posing as new versions of Christianity. Understanding and dismantling every false worldview seems like a daunting task. But today, I am going to give you a tool that will simplify the work of being a lie detector. This tool is called “The Serpent’s Lie.” If you understand the first lie ever told to mankind, you will be able to recognize it in every false belief system. And I hope that you will be able to use your understanding of this lie when evaluating various ideas within our culture. So, let’s take a close look at it.

    God’s first command for Adam and Eve was this:

    You are free to eat from any tree in the garden, but you must not eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die. (Genesis 2:16-17 NIV)

    Then along came the devil, in the form of a serpent and he told a lie. But he did not start with a straight-up lie. He started out by casting doubt on God’s Word, and by making Eve feel like the victim of a slight injustice.

    Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?” The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’” (Genesis 3:1-5 NIV)

    When the serpent asked “Did God really say…?” he then added to God’s command. He asked if God had put all the trees off limits, when really, God had only put one tree off limits. Eve correctly stated that only the fruit from the tree in the middle of the garden was forbidden, but then she added ‘and you must not touch it’ which was not part of God’s first command.  She was wavering under the spell of the serpent’s faux sympathy. Remember that. There is always false sympathy involved with deception. Think of Ursula the Sea Witch singing “Poor Unfortunate Souls” to Ariel. This song is the perfect picture of the devil’s persuasive techniques. Ursula does not care at all about poor unfortunate souls. She wants to destroy them. The devil is the same way. First he will try to convince us that God is not fair, and that he can show us a better way. Then if we are decieved, he will lead us away from the safety of God’s good boundaries (Truth and Reality) and into a false freedom (A Lie) which always turns out to be a death trap.

    “You will not surely die,” the serpent said to the woman. “For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”

    This is THE lie. When you start looking for it, you will see that this lie is everywhere. You will not die. There are no consequences. You will be like God. You will decide what is good and evil. Not God, not his Word. You. Wonderful, enlightened, You.

    This lie is in every false religion from ancient pagan idol worship to gnosticism. And it continues to sprout new heads in every generation. This lie is easy to detect in the currently popular heresy called progressive Christianity. Progressive Christians are really into their own divinity. They talk much more about the divine in humanity than they do about the true character of God. They decide what is right and wrong in regards to moral law which is the same as whatever is cool with the culture. But it is important to note that in false religions, including distortions of Christianity, morality is not lost. It is switched. Good and Evil are labels that are still applied, but they are used according to human desires rather than according to God’s Word.

    The most common moral swap today is that personal holiness, especially in the realm of sexuality, is swapped out for culturally popular moral movements. Be skeptical when progressives pretend that they are free because they have set aside Biblical teachings about sex and marriage. In the past twenty-five years or so, I have seen individuals, colleges, churches and para-church institutions slide away from Biblical teaching on sex and marriage. But usually, they substitute those moral standards with a pursuit of righteousness via social justice work or environmentalism. They still want to save the world, save humanity, and save themselves, which calls for moral action. But they have settled on a ‘new’ works-based, human-powered way of getting there that does not require that they face the sin in their own body.

    So, to review these pages from the Devil’s playbook:

    STEP ONE: SOW SEEDS OF DOUBT

    • Make God look mean, unfair or irrelevant.
    • Feign sympathy and make your charge feel like a victim.

    STEP TWO: STRAIGHT-UP LIE. DENY CONSEQUENCES AND PROMISE ENLIGHTENMENT.

    • You will be like God.
    • You will know Good and Evil.

    If you are confused by a friend, a pastor, a popular podcaster or author, church or any other Christian organization and find yourself wondering if they are wobbling off the rails, watch for this pattern:

    DOUBT
    Are they casting doubt on the clear, historic teaching of Scripture in any way? Are they asking “Hath God really said…??” (You have to use the good old KJV for this question).

    DENYING CONSEQUENCES
    Are they giving off universalist vibes or questioning whether there could possibly be any such thing as an eternal divine judgment for unrepentant sinners?

    ENLIGHTENMENT
    Are they claiming to have a new, enlightened framework for understanding reality or the Bible? Are they affirming a new moral code that looks suspiciously like what the world says is good, lacks the costly grace of the cross, and comes with a new set of legalistic requirements?

    If you notice these patterns, be aware, and do not follow. As we are instructed in Romans 12:2, “Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is — his good, pleasing and perfect will.

    Psalm 119:118-120

    You reject all who stray from your decrees,

     For their deceitfulness is in vain.

    All the wicked of the earth you discard like dross;

    Therefore, I love you statues.

    My flesh trembles in fear of you;

    I stand in awe of your laws.

    Is My Favorite Influencer Going Progressive – with Alisa Childers

    Leave a comment

  • Understanding the Impact of Proposed Cuts to Non-Public Student Aid

    Governor Walz is planning to cut 100% of the funds for non-public student aid and transportation that have been a standard part of our education system since 1975. Until now, Minnesota has always allotted funds for private schools to provide part-time school nurses and guidance counselors as well as non-religious textbooks and transportation. The cuts amount to as much as 10% of some private schools’ operating budgets.

    Locally, in my hometown of Fergus Falls, MN, Hillcrest Lutheran Academy has 355 students enrolled in Pre-K through 12th grade. The proposed cuts would remove $125,340 which the school currently uses for a school nurse, guidance counselor and textbooks. Hillcrest does not use the public funds available for transportation. (I also reached out to our Pre-K-6 Catholic school, but did not get the numbers back in time for this post).

    A number of private school educators testified before the Minnesota Committee on Education Finance on February 5th, 2025. Andrew Hilliker, President of Stella Maris Catholic Academy shared a story that is important for everyone to hear.

    “When I came into…Catholic School leadership about…8 years ago, I attended an informational training session hosted by the Minnesota Department of Education. And as a newer independent school leader, I was impressed with the welcome message from the individual that provided that training. She started out by saying, ‘We are the Minnesota Department of Education,’ and she went on to say that, ‘The title of our department is very important, because it is not the Minnesota Department of Public Education. [We] are positioned and prepared to support all students for the essential needs for them to be successful across Minnesota regardless of where their families choose to send them to school.’”

    That was just eight years ago. What happened to the open-hearted mindset in which we used to value and support a wide diversity of education options? All taxpayers contribute to the state’s education fund. Those who choose private schools only see a small amount of their contribution come back to them in the form of non-public student supports. These funds are the most vital to private schools that are providing education options in low-income neighborhoods. In these areas, families are not able to provide the needed funds through higher tuition.

    In researching this issue, I was very encouraged to be given a glimpse into a quiet but mighty side of Minnesota that you may not see featured in the news.

    Some of the administrators who testified represent schools that are in the heart of metro neighborhoods where local public schools are struggling with dismal outcomes. But each of these schools shine a light of hope, offering education that works and a bright future to hundreds of children in vulnerable situations.

    Quentin Moore, the Vice President of Advancement for Ascension Catholic Academy, was one of several people who testified on February 5th.

    Quentin shared that his school operates four Pre-K-8 schools in Minneapolis and St. Paul neighborhoods. Ninety-six percent of those enrolled are students of color. Sixty-eight percent qualify for free and reduced meals. Forty-five percent identify as Catholic. Seventeen-percent are English Language Learners. Yet ACA students consistently outperform neighboring public schools even though the demographics are the same. Three quarters of ACA students maintain consistent attendance. And since 2016, nearly 100% of the school’s 8th graders have gone on to graduate from high school in four years.

    Wow. Put these people in charge of Minnesota’s public schools, please!

    Beyond these remarkable statistics, ACA successfully educates their students at half the cost of public schools. What do they have that the public schools do not?

    I reached out to Mr. Moore with these questions and I would like to share with you his answers because they provide a vision for what is needed for all children to thrive.

    In an email, Mr. Moore wrote, “I believe ACA’s success stems from our strong foundation in Catholic social teaching, which encourages scholars to see themselves as beloved children of God. Our consistent emphasis on fostering Christ-like character in the classroom, school, and broader community also plays a crucial role.

    Additionally, our commitment to ongoing professional development ensures that our educators are equipped to engage scholars who may be behind grade level. We provide individualized instruction alongside a continuously expanding team of trauma-informed staff, creating an environment of belonging and safety.

    Most importantly, in my opinion, the relationships our teachers and staff build with parents and caregivers are life changing. We prioritize not just academic achievement but also the holistic growth of each child, nurturing their values and emotional development in partnership with their families. We continue to strengthen a culture of high expectations as our families and scholars strive for prosperity and excellence”. 

    Could it possibly be, that teaching children that they are beloved children of God, and engaging in deeply rooted partnerships with families, can somehow accomplish what Social Emotional Learning and heavily funded public education cannot? I share Mr. Moore’s words because the seeds of this truth can be planted by anyone, in any community, starting right now, with no cost. We cannot overhaul the education system overnight. But starting today, you can look for ways to engage children in your own community with the life-changing truth that they are beloved children of God.

    In the meantime, get the word out about this potential cut in funding to private schools. It is vital to the schools that are doing the most remarkable work in the most challenging settings. If your representatives do not understand the importance of non-public student funds, contact them and share your concerns. Let’s work together to make Minnesota a state that welcomes and aids education options.

    Leave a comment

  • Reflecting on Minnesota’s Laws Regarding the Murder of Unborn Children

    Did you know that Minnesota Law affirms that abortion is a legal form of murder? Minnesota has laws against the murder of the unborn. And so, in order to allow abortion, an exception clause is added to the unborn child murder laws, excepting the cases when the death of the unborn is caused by an abortion. This clearly admits that abortion is identical to the act that is described in unborn child murder laws, and so it requires an exception for legalization.

    During the two years of trifecta Democratic control, Minnesota’s progressive politicians abolished every law restricting abortion, ultimately granting unlimited access to abortion for any reason, up to the moment of birth. Minnesota has made a loud and bold claim through this legislation that there is nothing human about a pre-born child, even up to the day, week, or month before she is born. The possibility that a pre-born child might be human and deserving of the right to live has been gunned down by legislation, bulldozed into a deep ditch and covered over with tidy words in black and white. You are supposed to gaze at this legislation and ask no questions about what just happened.

    However, an uncomfortable reminder of the humanity of pre-born children is still enshrined in Minnesota law. And these other laws do require us to continue to ask questions about the souls who have been dehumanized by abortion.

    Minnesota has several laws against the murder of unborn children. The murder of an unborn child is a felony in Minnesota and the required sentence is imprisonment for life. Enacted in 1986, Minnesota has laws against 1st, 2nd, and 3rd degree murder of the unborn, as well as against manslaughter of the unborn in the 1st and 2nd degrees, and assault of the unborn in the 1st, 2nd and 3rd degrees.

    There is only one stage in human development when a person is considered to be ‘unborn’. That period of time begins at conception and ends when a child has moved from his mother’s womb into the world outside. So, to be clear, unborn child murder and manslaughter laws cover the life of a child from conception until birth. All of the ordinary murder laws apply after birth. These laws exist specifically to affirm the full humanity of the child before birth, and to exact justice when the life of a child is wrongfully ended before birth:

    Minnesota statute 609.2661 MURDER OF UNBORN CHILD IN THE FIRST DEGREE.

    Whoever does any of the following is guilty of murder of an unborn child in the first degree and must be sentenced to imprisonment for life:

    • causes the death of an unborn child with premeditation and with intent to effect the death of the unborn child or of another

    Minnesota Law 609.2661 simply states that if someone causes the death of an unborn child with premeditation and with intent to effect the death of the unborn child they are guilty of murder. However, every year in Minnesota over 10,000 unborn children are killed by someone who has the premeditated intent to effect the death of these children, but alas, they are a protected class. At the end of the laws against the murder and manslaughter of unborn children there is listed this exception:

    609.269 EXCEPTION.

    Sections 609.2661 to 609.268 do not apply to a person providing reproductive health care offered, arranged, or furnished:

    (1) for the purpose of terminating a pregnancy; and

    (2) with the consent of the pregnant individual or the pregnant individual’s representative, except in a medical emergency in which consent cannot be obtained.

    When people in the pro-life movement say that abortion is the murder of unborn babies, they are being entirely consistent with Minnesota law. Abortion is legal murder. If it was not, the exception clause would not be attached to our law on first-degree murder of the unborn. The exception was added because it is so clearly obvious that what occurs in an abortion is described in statue 609.2661. So, in order to allow abortion, the exception had to be added.

    The pro-life position does not have different words for same-outcome actions. In a punishable murder of an unborn child, a person commits a premeditated act that has the effect of killing the child (or another person, ie. the mother and therefore the child as well). However, in most cases of unborn child murder, the child is not the purposed victim, but an incidental one. In an abortion, a doctor commits a premeditated, violent act with the sole intent of killing the child. Innocent blood is spilled either way. Innocent blood always cries out for justice, and it will never stop crying out until justice is served.

    When I was in college, I took a philosophy class at the University of Minnesota called “Moral Problems in Contemporary Society”. We learned both sides on issues such as the death penalty, abortion, and just war theories. Our professor believed that she was giving us the best academic papers on each side of every topic that we studied. When it came to abortion, she did not give us reels about women’s reproductive rights because she knew that those claims do not answer the pro-life position concerning the death of the child.

    The pro-choice argument we were given was Judith Jarvis Thomson’s essay “A Defense of Abortion”. The argument acknowledges that the thing in the womb is in fact a human being. However, the person in the womb is likened to an intruder or a parasite. The unwanted baby has come in uninvited like a thief in the night. And so, killing the intruder is justified, just as self-defense is justified if someone is breaking into your home.

    I appreciate that this argument understands that a moral defense of abortion must justify the intentional killing of an unborn child. When I hear pro-choice voices championing abortion, they usually use phrases like “reproductive rights” and “autonomy” and “freedom to choose” which focus on the plight of the mother in a tough situation. But they seldom actually make an argument for the morality of the act which kills a living baby. What my professor offered was a moral defense for the act of abortion. But this argument is not often used in social media wars, senate hearings, or on MPR musings because it doesn’t really sit well with the general public. Nonetheless, let us be fair and evaluate this argument on its own terms.

    First, we will compare it with the to the pro-life moral argument against abortion. The pro-life position has always been the same:

    Premise A: It is immoral to take an innocent human life.

    Premise B: Abortion intentionally ends an innocent human life.

    Conclusion: Abortion is immoral.

    The pro-choice position must either argue that an unborn child is not a human being, which is scientifically untenable. Or it must argue, as Thompson did, that the unborn child is not innocent.

    Alternately, it is more common to argue that a fetus is a human but not a person, and that a human fetus can be killed with just cause, but not a person. For one thing, this argument is unfalsifiable because it depends on invented categories (are ‘a person’ and ‘a human’ really different things?) and an unprovable premise that something significant happens at birth, or 22 weeks gestation, or whatever arbitrary point is chosen.  There is a wide sliding scale among those who argue this way and no one can agree on when this personhood begins. But this argument still falls apart because the unborn child murder laws show that we do not really believe that anything special happens at birth. If a wanted child dies at 19 weeks gestation due to an unwanted violent act, the actor is charged with the murder and sentenced to life in prison – the same sentence for murdering a five-year-old. This shows that the human/person argument is really just framed as a more palatable version of Thompson’s argument, as it does concede that an unborn human being may be killed if there is a good reason. So we are still just back to Thompson’s argument that the fetus has violated a woman’s body, entered in uninvited, and on those grounds can be justly killed.

    Now, perhaps you know that crime and punishment (if that is how we are to see parasite-babies and abortion as self-defense) depend on the criminal being both aware of and morally responsible for his or her harmful actions (womb-break-ins in this case).

    But in case I have to say it, babies cannot be likened to a thief breaking into a house as they have no moral agency nor capability to act in their own conception. But to push the point a little further, it would be better for unborn babies if in fact they were treated as thieves under Minnesota law, because the sentence for theft of any type is not death. In fact, no crimes are sentenced with death in Minnesota. The death penalty was abolished in our state in 1911. However, if my philosophy instructor correctly provided us with the best moral argument justifying abortion, and if Minnesota now has the most permissive abortion laws any state or nation could possibly have, then it stands to reason that the only people who are still executed for their crimes in Minnesota are womb-thieves.

    In this context, a passage from the prophetic book of Jeremiah speaks with chilling precision to our present times:

    On your clothes men find

    The lifeblood of the innocent poor,

    Though you did not catch them breaking in (2:34)

    While babies have a say in their existence 0% of the time, the vast majority of unwanted pregnancies occur when two people who do have moral agency happily engage in an act known to create babies. Therefore, the right thing to do when that activity actually results in a baby, is to at least let the baby have an opportunity to live. If possible, it is even better to let the baby have the chance to know and be loved by the biological family he or she was made from.

    The only difference between the illegal murder of the unborn and legal abortion in Minnesota is the desire of the adults involved. The effect and outcome from the child’s perspective are identical. The pain that both feel in death are the same. But much more seriously, each child is denied the right to live his or her own unique, never-to-be duplicated life.

    The right to life is not imputed by parents. The right that every human being has to his or her own life is inherent, and taking that life is a violation of the child’s right to his or her own body.

    Minnesota law 609.2661 affirms the full humanity of an unborn child throughout the whole length of a pregnancy, while HF1 denies the humanity of an unborn child throughout the whole length of a pregnancy. Both cannot be true at the same time.

    2 responses to “Reflecting on Minnesota’s Laws Regarding the Murder of Unborn Children”

    1. jheim98 Avatar
      jheim98

      Minnesota law 609.2661 directly contradicts HF1. It doesn’t make sense that both laws can be valid at the same time. Praying for a way forward for HF1 to be removed from MN law.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply
    2. Avatar
      Anonymous

      Great thoughts and information about how our MN laws work. Thanks!

      Like

      Reply

    Leave a comment