The war for Britain’s independence didn’t involve muskets and cannons, but ballots. And [Thursday] night, the U.K. cast plenty of them in favor of leaving the suffocating authority of the European Union (E.U.). In a blockbuster vote that came down to the wire, the British people rocked the world with the decision to stand on its own in an increasingly dangerous world where autonomy could literally save people’s lives.

Despite calls from Prime Minister David Cameron, U.S. meddlers Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, and various E.U. leaders, a nation tired of having groupthink dictate its laws made its “Brexit,” sending shockwaves across the more than two dozen member states. After the U.K. voted 52-48 percent to take back its national identity, the floodgates across Europe opened. Suddenly, people in France, Italy, and the Netherlands are demanding their own referendums. Like the British, they see their individual needs vanish in a multicultural pot, as the E.U. consolidates more power. After decades of watching the Union’s courts and committees undermine British laws, the United Kingdom finally had enough.

Of course, it’s no surprise that America’s Left would intervene. President Obama and Hillary Clinton have been bullying world leaders on how to run their countries for eight years. But surely, Andrew Roberts scolds in the Wall Street Journal, “This is an issue on which the British people, and they alone, have the right to decide, without the intervention of President Obama, who adopted his haughtiest professorial manner when lecturing us to stay in the EU, before making the naked threat that we would be sent ‘to the back of the queue’ (i.e., the back of the line) in any future trade deals if we had the temerity to vote to leave.”

To the delight of conservatives like Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas), the British people rejected the unwelcome and unsolicited advice of this White House. “The British people have indicated that they will no longer outsource their future to the E.U.,” Cruz praised, “and prefer to chart their own path forward. The United States can learn from the referendum and attend to the issues of security, immigration and economic autonomy that drove this historic vote. In addition, we should treat the ‘Brexit’ as an opportunity to forge a closer partnership with our historic friend and ally…”

A teary Cameron, who stepped down in the wake of the seismic move for Europe, respected his country’s decision but believes he shouldn’t be the one overseeing the transition of a U.K. standing alone. Meanwhile, Boris Johnson, the biggest driver behind the “Leave” movement, celebrated a new dawn for Britain (as some resorted to their mindless name-calling chants of “hater” and “bigot,” “Fox and Friends” reported). In a nod to the oppressiveness of the Union, he cheered the opportunity for the nation to “pass our laws, set our taxes, entirely according to the needs of the U.K. economy…” More importantly, as terrorists march on the West and more than 350,000 people stream into his nation unchecked, he reassured voters that, “We can control our own borders, in a way that is not discriminatory but fair, and balanced and take the wind out of the sails of the extremists and those who would play politics of immigration. Above all, we can find our voice in the world again. A voice that is commensurate with the fifth biggest economy on earth – powerful, liberal, humane, an extraordinary force for good in the world.”

Here at home, Americans watched with fresh hope that they, too, can shrug off a radical and heavy-handed Obama administration, whose goal is to “fundamentally transform” our nation into just another liberal neighborhood in the global community. As Mark Davis pointed out in Townhall, “British voters trusted their instincts that several fundamental things in their nation were going very wrong, mostly at the behest of ideas that had subjugated their national identity. The same has happened in our own nation, and if we have the guts to vote accordingly in November, we can engineer our own exit, from years of inattention to the characteristics of a strong nation: borders that mean something, pride in who we are, and priorities that favor our own citizens.” If anything, Americans should be encouraged. Britain’s vote shows that resistance to globalism is still alive. And as much as the elites would like us to think countries can exist without borders, the people get it.

Originally published here.

With Liberty and Prophylactics for All…

Most of the Left’s “solutions” are actually problems waiting to be unwrapped. Comprehensive sex education is one such “solution.” Twenty-five years into the “if-it-feels-good-do-it-with-a-condom” approach, researchers are finding that “safe” sex is anything but. In fact, the approach championed by everyone from Planned Parenthood to President Obama actually made the situation worse. In one of the most important studies in a generation, Notre Dame experts have just finished what they call “The Incidental Fertility Effects of School Condom Distribution Programs” — a sweeping look at the condom-pushing school programs of the 1990s. And the results aren’t exactly glowing.

In schools that showered kids with free condoms, the teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease rates climbed. Turns out, pushing contraception on high schoolers may have advertised sex, but it certainly didn’t make it safe. Stunning authors Kasey Buckles and Daniel Hungerman, the team discovered a 10-12 percent bump in teen births and a spike in STDs in districts that pitched condoms. The results were disturbing for a number of reasons — not the least of which is the millions of tax dollars Americans have unwillingly poured down the drain of liberal sex ed (along with the $16 billion a year in STD treatments). Despite what liberals would have you believe, surveys have shown that parents on both sides of the political spectrum (76 percent of Democrats and 87 percent of Republicans) overwhelmingly prefer lessons on risk avoidance over risk reduction.

Unfortunately for our nation’s young people, that’s the opposite of this administration’s message. In fact, a recent Barna Group study pointed out, almost four in 10 teens said their health curriculum made sex feel like an expectation. That doesn’t surprise Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse, who calls the Left’s strategy of promiscuity “propaganda for the sexual revolution.” Dr. Michael New, a good friend of FRC’s, took a deeper look at Notre Dame’s findings and applauded what he calls an “impressive body of research which shows that efforts to encourage contraceptive use either through mandates, subsidies, or distribution are ineffective at best or counterproductive at worst.”

No wonder Congress is fighting to bring back sexual risk avoidance programs. In the omnibus pushed out the door last Christmas, conservatives did manage to include a modest $10 million bump in community-based grants for the kinds of messaging that moms and dads want. That’s also a nod to local communities, which the Journal of Adolescent Health just revealed, are increasingly frustrated with the unrestrained ideology of the Left. Like us, they don’t understand the rush for children to have sex — especially when as many as 60 percent of teenagers are willing to wait. Our young people have nothing to gain from this race to intimacy but shorter marriages, deadly infections, premature parenthood, negative self-esteem, and difficulties at school. Americans may disagree about condoms, but every study says the same thing about abstinence: the kids who practice it don’t get diseases and don’t get pregnant.

Originally published here.

Obergefell: One Year Later

It’s been nearly a year since the Left told us that the legal redefinition of marriage to include same-sex couples would have no negative effects. And yet, in the year since the Obergefell v. Hodges decision, we have seen dramatic evidence to the contrary. From its impact on families and churches to the inevitable legal fallout, the Supreme Court’s redefinition of marriage has indeed altered some of the most vital aspects of our society. On Friday, FRC hosted a discussion on the far-reaching effects the Obergefell decision has had on our nation in just one year.

Our panelists were Fr. Paul Sullins, Associate Professor of Sociology at Catholic University of America, who addressed the decision’s effect on the family; Mark Tooley, President of the Institute on Religion and Democracy, who spoke on the impact within the church; and Travis Weber, FRC’s Director of the Center for Religious Liberty, who highlighted the legal ramifications of the decision.

Obergefell did indeed redefine marriage for our culture. However, while it may have redefined the way our nation views the institution, no court — no matter how supreme — can change biblical truth. Yet sadly, parts of the church have missed that message. While some denominations have turned their backs on the biblical definition of marriage by conforming to the culture, Mark Tooley says we can take heart knowing that — at least for now — the majority of protestant denominations have stood firm. He went on to point out some of the unexpected positives that have come out of this cultural shift: “In some cases, the court ruling arguably has strengthened Christian witness by amplifying the difference between secular civil society and the church’s unchanging transgenerational universal teaching. The contrast for some is motivating and evangelistically helpful.”

Although the decision has not affected the doctrine of the majority of churches, it unfortunately has dramatically affected believers who seek to live according to their sincerely held beliefs. According to Travis Weber, “The Supreme Court ruled that constitutionally, states cannot deny a license to two people of the same sex, and they must recognize such licenses from other states.” And yet, if a clerk defers this task to someone else, the Left makes it their mission to marginalize and penalize them. Even if they aren’t stopping the couple from receiving a license — even if they are allowing the legal implications of the Obergefell ruling to take place — the Left increasingly finds the need to intrude on the religious liberties of those with whom it disagrees. This trend continues to grow.

Over the past year, biblical marriage has undergone an unprecedented assault, causing a spiral in family dynamics. It has led to an endless list of stories in which people who stand up for their faith experience ridicule or worse, and yet, it is significant that the churches who have taken a stand for a biblical view of marriage have prospered.

There has indeed been an alarming shift in laws and family dynamics since the Obergefell ruling, but the light of truth and grace through the church — which emanates from the God of truth and grace — gives us hope. As we work together to bring a cultural revival for Christ; as we join in prayer and strive to live out our lives for His glory, we can make a difference. If you are looking for a practical way to effect change in our nation, visit the Call2Fall website and join us in falling on our knees together on July 3, 2016.

To watch [Friday’s] lecture in full, click below.

Originally published here.