A federal appeals court has ordered revived a series of lessons for Minnesota state prison inmates on “manhood” that are derived from the morals established by the Bible and accepted by society over millennia.
Social activists in the state prison system had canceled the lessons because they did not comply with the leftists’ ideologies of DEI, diversity, equity and inclusion.
The ruling from the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ordered the lower courts to return to the case and provide a preliminary injunction for Anthony Schmitt to teach the course.
The program, called “The Quest for Authentic Manhood” had been taught for years at a Minnesota prison, but was discontinued during COVID. When such programs were restored after the pandemic, Anthony Schmitt wanted to resume teaching the “Authentic Manhood” series of videos narrated by Robert Lewis.
The program was up-front in its description: “Authentic Manhood is all about setting men up to live lives of truth, passion and purpose. Our resources offer clear and practical Biblical insights on God’s design for manhood that are both refreshing and inspiring. We point men to a gospel-centered vision of life that sets them up to enjoy God’s grace as they pursue the promises of His Word.”
But a prison “supervisor” complained that “discrimination based on sexual orientation is illegal in Minnesota” as the state human rights law makes it a “protected class.”
Eventually, as the request to restart the program was processed, Jolene Rebertus, an assistant commissioner of “health, recovery & programming” became alarmed because in her opinion, the program “directly conflicts with the diversity, equity and inclusivity values of the department by defining manhood, or the study of masculinity, through a biblical lens of what a ‘real man looks like.’”
She was unhappy that the sessions portray men as heterosexual, seeking ideal relationships and marriage with women, even though those biblical standards have been acknowledged and accepted by society for millennia.
Her conclusion was that such beliefs “can be hurtful and downright dangerous … .”
Schmitt eventually sued over the discriminatory beliefs on which the program was then canceled, and a district court denied his motion for a preliminary injunction to reopen the program while the court case proceeds. Schmitt charged that the decision violated his First Amendment rights to free speech and free exercise and established a denominational preference in violation of the Establishment Clause.
The appeals court panel agreed, reversing the lower court and ordering the Quest program reinstated pending “A full adjudication.”
The ruling found the state discriminated against the program because of its biblical connections.
“Rebertus’s letter plainly states that the MDOC did not oppose Schmitt teaching generally about ‘manhood, or the study of masculinity’; instead, it objected to Schmitt discussing the topic ‘through a biblical lens of what a ‘real man looks like’ or through what the MDOC perceived as ‘through a lens of discrimination, exclusivity, gender biases and stereotypes,’” the opinion said.
The ruling said, “In short, the MDOC objected to Schmitt’s religious viewpoint on masculinity. This is viewpoint discrimination.”
It quoted from various Supreme Court rulings, including that, “[T]he government, if it is to respect the Constitution’s guarantee of free exercise, cannot impose regulations that are hostile to the religious beliefs of affected citizens and cannot act in a manner that passes judgment upon or presupposes the illegitimacy of religious beliefs and practices.”
Further, “The ‘[g]overnment fails to act neutrally when it proceeds in a manner intolerant of religious beliefs or restricts practices because of their religious nature.’”
The ruling found even, “subtle departures from neutrality on matters of religion” are prohibited by the Free Exercise Clause.
The panel ruled Schmitt likely was to succeed on the merits of his First Amendment claim.
Click this link for the original source of this article.
Author: Bob Unruh
This content is courtesy of, and owned and copyrighted by, https://www.wnd.com and its author. This content is made available by use of the public RSS feed offered by the host site and is used for educational purposes only. If you are the author or represent the host site and would like this content removed now and in the future, please contact USSANews.com using the email address in the Contact page found in the website menu.
