This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

ISRAEL – On Monday, March 25, 2024, the sun, earth, and moon will perfectly align, creating a penumbral lunar eclipse two weeks after a total solar eclipse transverses the continental U.S.

WND spoke with Pastor Mark Biltz of El Shaddai Ministries about the celestial events. Biltz deeply understands the connection between eclipses and biblical holidays.

The scientific explanation of a lunar eclipse is that it takes place when the earth passes between the sun and the moon, and the moon passes through the earth’s shadow. A penumbral eclipse occurs when the outer part of Earth’s shadow blankets the moon. About 35% of all eclipses are of the penumbral type, which can be difficult to detect even with a telescope. Another 30% are partial eclipses, which are easy to see with the unaided eye. The final 35% or so are total eclipses.

In the upcoming lunar eclipse, the Earth’s shadow will block out 97% of the moon’s surface. This eclipse will be a "blood moon," the result of atmospheric conditions that give the moon a reddish tint rather than black when it moves into the shadow. The red color comes from some of the sunlight passing through Earth’s atmosphere where it gets bent and colors like blue and green are filtered out, leaving behind longer wavelengths like the color red.

While the science is clear, Biltz emphasizes that the deeper significance of these phenomena is biblical.

"From a biblical point of view, an eclipse is meant to be a sign from God," said Biltz, citing Genesis 1:14: "And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs and seasons, and for days and years."

"The number one reason for an eclipse is to be a sign," he explained. "It is a sign that is beyond man’s control, something he cannot manipulate."

Pastor Biltz emphasized that the Hebrew calendar must be studied to understand the significance of these celestial signs.

"Our Gregorian calendar is based only on the sun. It's a great calendar, very scientific, but it's not the one God uses," he emphasized. "God said to let both the sun and the moon determine the times. And we can only have a total lunar eclipse or a solar eclipse on a full moon. What good are eclipses if you're not recognizing when they can occur? Passover and Sukkot are on a full moon, but the Hebrew calendar does have a solar element. It's adjusted so that the holidays occur in the same season every year. The month begins with a new moon, but the years are adjusted with a leap year. So, for example, Passover is always in the springtime and we adjusted through the use of a leap month."

"Ecclesiastes tells us that there is a time for everything, but by using a solar calendar, most of Christianity's plucking at planting time and planting at plucking time, because they don't know what time it is," Biltz said. "They don't know what the season is."

He explained that a leap month is added seven times over a 19-year cycle because the lunar and solar cycles come back together again every 19 years.

"This is also why, on the solar calendar, you have to add one day every four years," Biltz added.

While lunar eclipses occur on average one or two times a year, Pastor Biltz explained that when they fall on the biblical holidays, they are significant. This convergence is what Biltz refers to as a "blood moon tetrad," a phenomenon he first identified in 2008.

His blood moons prophecy is based on a series of four consecutive total lunar eclipses coinciding with Jewish holidays with six full moons in between that have no intervening partial lunar eclipses. This series is referred to as a tetrad.

The most recent tetrad began with a total lunar eclipse on April 15, 2014, the first night of Pesach (Passover). This marked the first of four consecutive eclipses. The second lunar eclipse took place on Oct. 8, 2014, marking the second night of Sukkot. The third lunar eclipse was on April 4, 2015, the second night of Pesach, and the fourth occurred on Sept. 28, 2015, the second night of Sukkot.

"NASA declares you can mathematically only have one total lunar eclipse in a year and a half," Pastor Biltz said. "But here, there were four total lunar eclipses in a year and a half. This is like hitting the lottery."

Indeed, in the past 2,000 years, a blood moon tetrad (four sequential lunar eclipses with no partial eclipses in between) has occurred on the Jewish holy days of Passover and Sukkot only eight times, most recently in 2014-2015.

However, the tetrad in 2014 was the second of eight tetrads to take place during the 21st century. This is remarkable, as in the past millennium, only four documented tetrads have occurred on or around the Jewish holidays of Passover and Sukkot, and each one was followed by a major event that shifted Jewish and global history. Those tetrads occurred in the years 1428-1429, 1493-1494, 1949-1950 and 1967-1968.

For instance, the Tetrad in 1428-1429 marked the end of a big wave of forced conversions for the Jews in Spain, and the Tetrad in 1493-1494 signaled the end of the Spanish Inquisition, which concluded with the expulsion of the Jews from Spain in 1492. Then there were the blood moon tetrads of 1949-1950 (corresponding with the creation of Israel as a nation in 1948) and 1967-1968 (with the unification of Jerusalem occurring in 1967).

The notable exception was the blood moon tetrad that occurred in 2014-2015. No major war or significant event happened that year.

"I was trying to figure out what it was, but it was October 7 that showed me what that Tetrad meant," Pastor Biltz said. "The 1967-1968 tetrad of blood moons was a seven-year warning of the Yom Kippur War in 1973. Yom Kippur in 1073 was the very first day of the Jubilee cycle. And then the 2014-2015 Protective Edge incursion into Gaza and the Blood Moon that accompanied it were a seven-year warning before the October 7 war which happened on Simchat Torah, the very last day of that same 50-year Jubilee cycle. So, the last Jubilee cycle was bookended with wars and blood moons."

Pastor Biltz emphasized that not only will a total solar eclipse traverse North America on Monday, April 8, 2024, but it will be followed by an "almost" blood moon tetrad.

"The first eclipse will be a partial lunar eclipse," Biltz noted, "But then there are three total lunar eclipses in a row. There are four lunar eclipses in a row, which is phenomenal, but only three are total."

"But they are all happening on the feasts, two years in a row," Biltz said. "That should be a wake-up call to Israel."

The first lunar eclipse on March 25 will coincide with the Jewish holiday of Purim. Biltz noted that it was fitting that the moon should be eclipsed on Purim, as Esther means "hidden."

"Purim is not in the Torah, but it is important for the Jews because the story of Esther is about the dangers of assimilation," Biltz said. "No one knew Esther was Jewish. The Jews wanted to assimilate, but God miraculously delivered them. The Jews have enemies, but they have to fight the assimilation as well."

Pastor Biltz referred to the Talmud in its discussion of eclipses (Sukkot 29a), which specifically described solar eclipses as being a bad omen for the nations who base their calendars on the solar cycle. He noted that since the United States became a nation in 1776, only eight total solar eclipses have completely crossed the continent.

"And when did they occur?" Biltz asked rhetorically. "The Revolutionary War, the Civil War, and the Vietnam War."

He remarked that the upcoming total solar eclipse will cross the border into Canada, passing over a city called Economy in the end.

"I think this is a warning we're going to see an economic tragedy coming to the whole world," Biltz said. "It will begin in the United States, but it will reverberate throughout the whole world."

Thankfully, the next blood moon tetrad that falls on the biblical feasts will not take place for another 500 years. It should be noted that a prophecy in the Book of Joel indicates that the coming of the Messiah will be preceded by a blood moon.

"Before the great and terrible day of God comes, I will set portents in the sky and on earth: Blood and fire and pillars of smoke; The sun shall turn into darkness And the moon into blood. But everyone who invokes the name of Hashem shall escape; for there shall be a remnant on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem, as God promised. Anyone who invokes God will be among the survivors." (Joel 3:3-5)

This is also stated in the New Testament in Acts 2:20 and Revelation 6:12.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A city "equity' officer being paid some $75,000 a year by College Park, Maryland, is being profiled online for desiring that the United States "burn to the ground" so that her ideology "can rise from the ashes."

And she wants it all to happen without any effort on her part, apparently, as she insists, "I don't want to work."

It is Fox News that has documented the ideas and agendas of Kayla Aliese Carter, who apparently is supposed to be eliminating systemic racism in her city.

The report reveals she said she is working with activists to orchestrate "how we will eat and live and grow after we burn it all down."

In her post as "racial equity officer" under Mayor Fazlul Kabir, she supervises a team pushing for "racial equity" in city departments, policies, practices, programs and budgets, the report said.

Her hire came after the city adopted an agenda in the wake of the death of George Floyd in 2020 that condemns "systemic racism" and supports "black lives."

Her social media posts cited in the report range from extreme to scary, including, "Why do Black people always have to rationalize our violence and anger?"

She reminded, in 2021, "Remember we are at war against colonialism. We can't forget," and "I can't wait for society to collapse so MY ideology can rise from the ashes!"

From 2020 came, "Today I cohosted and occupied space with dozens of people who have committed their lives, businesses, and money to Black liberation. On all days, every day, each day. Light workers. Already planning (BEEN PLANNING) for how we will eat and live and grow after we burn it all down."

From about the same time, "Do y'all understand why the oppressed are constantly shamed out of using violence?? BECAUSE THE OPPRESSOR WANTS TO BE THE SOLE PROFITEER OF VIOLENCE. THEY DON'T WANT TO DEAL WITH BACK TALK. 'DO AS I SAY NOT AS I DO' FACE A--. No."

She routinely calls white people "yT."

"I can't believe I forgot to tweet this earlier but I went in the office this morning a yT said, 'You cut your hair -- or took it out I guess...' I was so confused bc I haven't had braids in a month... but this distracted me from the fact that I need a new job," she wrote. And she said, another time, "This yT man in my meeting just said, 'I want to take a moment and give the floor to any Black... participants to... tell us what MLK Day this year meant to you.' I SWEAR I AM WHEEZING WHO HIRES THESE PEOPLE?"

In 2022 came, "This is why I cant (sic) trust yT people."

In 2021 was, "I hate when White children stare at me its literally terrifying so I just state (sic) back until they stop."

Police? They're "White supremacists," she charges, Fox documented.

She would rather not be holding her city post for $75,600 a year, she said, expressing a hope to be a "collage artist," or "lady of leisure."

"Tired of being so underpaid also tired of applying to new jobs. I don't wanna go back to s*lling dr*gs but this economy is getting desperate. … Engaging in important dialogues exploring the impact of capitalism on daily life its (sic) a Tuesday and I have to work."

"I need a new job but the problem is that I don't want to work I just wanna lay in my bed being a girl can anyone help me with this?" she noted in January.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Special Counsel Robert Hur, who earlier suggested not charging Joe Biden with federal crimes for keeping classified government documents as a "private" person, told Congress on Tuesday some of Biden's answers on the issue simply were "not credible."

The Daily Signal reported Hur testified before the House Judiciary Committee on his finding that Biden "willfully retained and disclosed classified materials” after his vice presidency.

But Hur recommended against charges because of Biden's "diminished faculties."

A Democrat asked Hur if there was reason to believe Biden lied during the investigation, to which Hur responded there were questions for which Biden's answers were "not credible."

Evidence shows Biden not only kept classified documents but read from them to a ghostwriter working on a book, meaning Biden had a financial incentive to keep the government secrets.

Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., pointed to a transcript of Biden's answers where he denied sharing classified information. And Hur confirmed Biden's claim was "inconsistent with the evidence."

Gaetz noted, "It’s a lie is what regular people would say, right?"

Hur also said Biden's claim that the documents were "in filing cabinets that were locked or able to be locked" was "inconsistent" with the evidence.

The Daily Caller News Foundation noted former federal prosecutor Andy McCarthy explained that Hur's report did not "exonerate" Biden.

"Prosecutors don’t exonerate people," McCarthy told "America Reports" co-host Sandra Smith. "The gig is that you look at the evidence that you have, and you decide whether you can prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt on all the elements of a criminal offense. The fact you draw a conclusion you don’t think you can get over the high-proof hurdle does not mean either that the crime did not happen or the suspect did not do it. It just means you don’t think you can prove the case."

Hur was forced to fire back repeatedly when Democrats claimed his work deliberately caused a "political firestorm" because of his assessment of Biden as "diminished."

He said politics played no part in his work.

Hur also corrected Rep. Jamila Jayapal when she claimed Biden was exonerated in the report.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A Wyoming atheist who sued the city of Gillette because city officials didn't let him deliver an invocation at a city meeting as often as he demanded wanted $24 million for the offense, but now has lost at the state Supreme Court.

It was Bruce Williams who sued Gillette Mayor Shay Lundvall demanding that he should be allowed to deliver invocations at meetings in the same proportion as there are atheists in Wyoming. Pew Research suggests some 3% of Wyoming residents say they are atheists, so Williams presumably was arguing to deliver invocations at 3% of the meetings, meaning about three every eight years if the meetings were monthly.

He had been permitted to deliver his speech at least once a year for the last nine years.

But a report at Cowboy State Daily explained he demanded more.

District Judge Stuart S. Healy III originally dismissed the case, explaining the city and mayor have immunity from lawsuits under these circumstances.

The state Supreme Court now has agreed, the report explained.

Williams also had complained he was required to cite the Pledge of Allegiance, to which he objected because it includes the words "under God."

The decision from the high court said, "We acknowledge Mr. Williams’s efforts to convince us to allow his complaint to proceed. However, '(the) decision of whether to waive immunity for a governmental entity – belongs to the Wyoming Legislature, not this court.'"

The decision was written by Justice Lynne Boomgaarden.

Under Wyoming's Constitution, the state and its political subdivisions are immune from lawsuits unless the lawmakers authorize them.

Their latest update on that issue came in 1979 when they adopted the Wyoming Governmental Immunity Act which provides permission for lawsuits for specific situations.

That law also, the court ruling said, while allowing some contract lawsuits, is not a tool for launching civil rights fights.

That would be, the ruling said, a federal law.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Government agents and agencies in the state of Louisiana are being sued for searching private property without the owner's permission.

While many assume that the U.S. Constitution protects property from "unreasonable searches and seizures," a Supreme Court decision from a century back says private land is not included.

It's called the "open fields" doctrine and agents use it to enter property whenever they want.

However, some states, including Louisiana, have a higher standard built into their state constitutions.

And that's the focal point of the new dispute being handled by the Institute for Justice.

"Tom Manuel owns land that he uses to grow timber commercially, as well as for recreation. In December, two separate times, game wardens with the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries (LDWF) entered Tom’s land without permission in search of possible hunting violations. Both times they left without giving a citation," the legal team explained.

"The warrantless, permissionless searches by state law enforcers struck Tom as a violation of his rights. The Louisiana Constitution says in stark terms that 'property' must be secured from 'unreasonable searches . . . or invasions of privacy.' There is no exception for any government official. Now, Tom is suing the LDWF with the Institute for Justice (IJ), which protects property rights nationwide and has several similar suits in other states."

James Knight, a lawyer for IJ, explained, "The Louisiana Constitution protects all 'property' from warrantless searches—and that includes land. That may seem obvious, but misguided U.S. Supreme Court precedent has convinced state officials that they can invade private land at will. This case seeks to put a stop to that and to restore the constitutional protections Louisiana landowners deserve."

In neighboring Mississippi, the state's highest court already has held state officials cannot invade private land without a warrant. Other states taking the same position include Montana, New York, Oregon, South Dakota, Washington, Vermont, and Tennessee.

The "open fields" ideology is used by not just game wardens but also police, inspectors, code enforcement officers, immigration officers, and others.

The lawsuit advocates for a common-sense view of property rights in Louisiana.

"I believe Louisiana’s constitution should mean what it says. While it’s important that state hunting laws be maintained, constitutional limits on government power should be upheld too. Protecting wildlife can be accomplished without trampling on our privacy and property rights. From my experience managing land in both Louisiana and Mississippi, I’ve seen that wildlife can thrive where the government must respect property lines," the landowner said.

Cases providing similar arguments also now are pending in Pennsylvania and Virginia.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A qualified couple denied the right to help foster children in the state of Massachusetts is challenging the state's discriminatory program in court.

The news of the case involving Mike and Kitty Burke comes from Becket.

The organization confirmed the fight was in court in Massachusetts recently, because of the state's decision to ban loving couples from welcoming children into their home.

The Burkes, faithful Catholics, wanted to foster, and adopt children.

"Even though Massachusetts has a foster care crisis, state officials refused to let the Burkes foster any children in the state because of their religious beliefs about marriage and sexuality. With the help of Becket, the Burkes are asking the court to ensure that qualified families are not punished for their religious beliefs and that vulnerable children are given a loving home," the legal team explained.

"Our state’s children deserve better than to be put in hospitals and office buildings rather than in safe, loving homes," the couple said in a statement released by their lawyers "“We pray the court stops Massachusetts’ campaign against vulnerable children and the many religious couples like us who wish to care for them."

Mike is an Iraq war veteran and Kitty is a former paraprofessional for special needs kids.

They run their own business and participate in the music program in their church.

"Children in foster care throughout Massachusetts are waiting for families like the Burkes. The Department of Children and Families (DCF) currently does not have enough foster homes or facilities to meet the needs of the children in its care, leaving some children without a family," Becket reported.

"The crisis has become so extreme that the state has resorted to housing children in hospitals for weeks on end. Now more than ever, Massachusetts needs the help of parents like Mike and Kitty to foster children in need."

The Burkes passed on required tests for foster couples but then were refused because they held religious beliefs about gender and human sexuality.

"Massachusetts should be doing everything it can to alleviate its foster care crisis, but instead, it’s excluding loving couples from helping children in need,” said Lori Windham, vice president at Becket.

WND reported when the case was filed the state's action violated the Constitution.

The Supreme Court already has ruled on a closely related question. WND reported when the high court, in a unanimous decision, said Philadelphia could not force Catholic Social Services to violate its biblical beliefs in order to comply with the city's "non-discrimination" requirement concerning unmarried and same-sex duos.

The court's decision demolished Philadelphia's attempt to "cancel" Christian foster care agencies that refused city demands to violate their biblical standards and refer children to unmarried or same-sex couples.

Becket also fought that battle.

A decision in the new fight is not expected for some weeks.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A COVID-19 shot activist, a journalist who insisted on concentration camps for those who wouldn't take the experimental injections, has died suddenly at age 33.

A report at Slay News confirms the death of Ian Vandaelle.

He was blunt in his demands: "Take the jab or resign." … "Require vaccination to do, uh, non-essential things. Wanna go to a bar to watch the game? Passport."

And, he said that unvaccinated members of the public should be taken away to concentration camps.

The report said Vandaelle, a Canadian business journalist who worked for the Financial Post, was hospitalized suddenly and was then "declared neurologically dead."

The report said, "Vandaelle advocated for vaccine passports and mandates and called for the firing of anyone who refused the injections. He also suggested that unvaccinated people should be arrested and taken away to concentration camps by their governments."

Stephanie Hughes, Vandaelle’s partner, said in the report he was taken off life support after being declared dead.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday unanimously blocked an attempt by an all-Democrat state Supreme Court in Colorado to boot President Donald Trump from the 2024 presidential election ballot.

It found that states do not have the constitutional authority to set requirements for candidates.

Colorado's Democrat court claimed Trump was guilty of "insurrection" and therefore ineligible in its failed attempt to interfere in the 2024 election. One state official in Maine and one judge in Illinois had attempted the same interference.

"A group of Colorado voters contends that Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution prohibits former President Donald J. Trump, who seeks the Presidential nomination of the Republican Party in this year’s election, from becoming President again. The Colorado Supreme Court agreed with that contention. It ordered the Colorado secretary of state to exclude the former President from the Republican primary ballot in the State and to disregard any write-in votes that Colorado voters might cast for him," the per curiam ruling said.

"Former President Trump challenges that decision on several grounds. Because the Constitution makes Congress, rather than the States, responsible for enforcing Section 3 against federal officeholders and candidates, we reverse."

The high court said, 'Last September, about six months before the March 5, 2024, Colorado primary election, four Republican and two unaffiliated Colorado voters filed a petition against former President Trump and Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold in Colorado state court. These voters—whom we refer to as the respondents—contend that after former President Trump’s defeat in the 2020 Presidential election, he disrupted the peaceful transfer of power by intentionally organizing and inciting the crowd that breached the Capitol as Congress met to certify the election results on January 6, 2021.

"One consequence of those actions, the respondents maintain, is that former President Trump is constitutionally ineligible to serve as President again. Their theory turns on Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment. Section 3 provides: 'No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof," the court found.

"But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.”

The "respondents" claimed Trump is guilty because of those who rioted at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

Their charge is he incited the violence.

"We conclude that States may disqualify persons holding or attempting to hold state office. But States have no power under the Constitution to enforce Section 3 with respect to federal offices, especially the Presidency," the court said.

The attacks on Trump's campaign are just part of the lawfare being used by Democrats against Trump this year. They also have orchestrated a series of civil and criminal cases against him, to try to make sure he cannot defeat their candidate, the aging Joe Biden, who already has been declared in a federal report to have "diminished capacities."

The most recent lower court ruling regarding Trump's candidacy came from Cook Country Judge Tracie Porter in Illinois.

And former deputy independent counsel Sol Wisenberg called the decision "appalling."

"The arrogance of this is appalling, and waiting until this late in the day to do it, giving the president, the former president just until Friday to file an appeal to the Supreme Court. It is already Wednesday, and then to say at the end of it, she issues an order that says my ruling will be further stayed if the U.S. Supreme Court enters an opinion inconsistent with this order,” Wisenberg told Fox News host Laura Ingraham. “Well, guess what? If they do what most people think they’re going to do, they’re going to enter an opinion that makes it impossible for Illinois to take him off the ballot. So, the arrogance of that is just, should not astonish me, but it does.”

Democratic Secretary of State Shenna Bellows of Maine declared Trump ineligible to appear on the ballot Dec. 28, but a court halted the removal pending the ruling by the Supreme Court.

In Colorado, the leftist state has an all-Democrat Supreme Court and even so, those attacking Trump could only collect signatures from four of seven members to pursue their agenda.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A journalist in Maine is suing a school and several officials after an article he posted about a new transgender policy in the school that cited the danger to girls when boys are in their restrooms was torpedoed.

Officials with the Center for American Liberty, working with the Randazza Legal Group, said the action targets the actions of the Brewer School Department, Supt. Gregg Palmer, Principal Brent Slowikowski, and Michelle MacDonald, a teacher.

They are accused of violating the rights of Shawn McBreairty, a journalist and educational advocate.

The defendants are accused of working together and violating the First Amendment when they forced McBreairty to take down an article citing a new, and controversial, bathroom policy.

The complaint that was filed in U.S. District Court in Maine seeks declaratory and injunctive relief and damages.

The problem was precipitated when Brewer school officials adopted "a new bathroom policy, which permits students to use the bathroom that corresponds to their gender identity, rather than their biological sex."

The same development has occurred in many other schools across the country as Joe Biden continues to push onto Americans his transgender ideologies and beliefs. There have been negative outcomes in a number of cases, including girls being sexually assaulted by males who portray themselves as female.

The complaint notes that students who are in support of full civil rights and liberties for individuals, whatever their "gender identity," nevertheless have concerns about safety and privacy when it comes to private spaces.

It charges, "some people take advantage of openness in the form of permissive bathroom policies to sexually assault girls."

They assembled a petition to seek a reversal of the school's politically correct scheme.

"We want to bring awareness to the fact that women's and men's public spaces should be biologically separated. It's about the privacy and restrictions that need to be upheld for both men and women, things such as bathrooms, locker rooms, sports, and types of changing areas or sanitary stations should all be based on whether you are a biological girl or boy. When these rights of privacy are taken away from anybody it is unfair. This is a petition to keep the basic human rights of privacy and comfort that have been around for hundreds of years, untouched and unchanged."

The complaint noted while the students were seeking equality, the school was seeking "transgender supremacy" in public schools.

The result was that school officials accused those supporting the petition of advocating "hate speech," and implied a threat of criminal prosecution, the filing states.

Subsequently, McBreairty wrote about the dispute, in an article: "Girls' bathrooms are not 'safe spaces' when males are present."

School officials responded to that by having a lawyer threaten McBreairty if he did not remove the article.

When McBreairty took the article, on a matter of public interest, down and published the threatening email from the school, the school threatened him all over again, the filing states.

The complaint charges the school with numerous First Amendment violations.

"Students and parents have a fundamental right to criticize school policies," Harmeet Dhillon, founder of the Center for American Liberty, said. "McBreairty’s article shed light on legitimate concerns about the Brewer School Department’s bathroom policy and the silencing of student free speech. The Department’s attempts to silence McBreairty for his reporting are both ironic and a flagrant violation of his First Amendment freedoms. We look forward to reaffirming McBrearity’s right to free speech and correcting this government overreach in court."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A key human rights lawyer is warning that the current agenda by leftists to attack and destroy any counseling that offers help for those with unwanted same-sex attractions and the like probably violates international human rights laws.

The comments from Jason Coppell, KC, come just as the United Kingdom's lawmakers are preparing to consider a bill that would outlaw "conversion therapy."

Such counseling is not a "conversion therapy" but mostly includes a series of discussions in which someone with those unwanted attractions or feelings is counseled on how to deal with them.

The LGBT community worldwide repeatedly has condemned and attacked such therapy, and the therapists who offer those patients help, because of their ideology that their LGBT identity is innate.

Recognizing the fact that such therapy helps some individuals destroys the claim that those feelings are unchangeable.

It is the Christian Institute commissioned the opinion from Coppell.

Coppell said of the private member's bill, "I consider that the Bill… if passed, would constitute a serious intrusion into the legitimate activities and practices of Christian churches and religious communities, which would be contrary to their rights protected by the ECHR, and so to the Human Rights Act 1998. They would also interfere with the legitimate expression of gender-critical views, again in a manner which would be likely to breach ECHR rights."

He continued, "The Bill [is] broad in scope. [It] would apply both to practices which seek to ‘change’ sexual orientation or transgender identity and practices which seek to ‘suppress’ sexual orientation or transgender identity i.e., to change conduct. [It] would apply to acts which cause no injury or distress; and, indeed, to acts to which the person in question consents. [It] would apply across a wide range of settings, including social and religious settings (although, the Bill … would exempt at least some conduct of parents vis-à-vis their children). Whilst some attempt has been made to craft exemptions or exceptions to ensure that the practice of religion is not prohibited, the central prohibition in the Bill …remains a wide one, applying to churches and other religious organizations, and those expressing certain views, including gender-critical views, outside those settings."

Such attacks on talk therapy have become common across the United States, with multiple jurisdictions adopting laws that ban counselors from talking to patients about leaving an LGBT lifestyle but allowing them to encourage those very choices.

Coppell said, "The Bill …would if enacted, interfere with a number of rights protected by the ECHR. [It] would (by way of example) restrict the ability of religious organizations to express their beliefs (both within their communities and to the wider world) and the ability of gender-critical persons to express their beliefs to persons who profess a gender identity that is inconsistent with those beliefs. Such restrictions are likely to interfere with (at least) the right to respect for private and family life (Article 8 ECHR); the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion (Article 9 ECHR); the right to freedom of expression (Article 10 ECHR); and the right to freedom of assembly and association (Article 11 ECHR)."

Coppell is known for his role in leading court cases dealing with Brexit and COVID.

He concluded, 'It is very difficult to see how the wide-ranging interference with fundamental rights contemplated by the Bill …could be justified. Put shortly, the Bill …would criminalize expressions of personal conviction even if they are made without expressions of hatred or intolerance, or improper purpose or coercion, or abuse of power. Restrictions of that nature run contrary to the consistent case law of the European Court of Human Rights."

Simon Calvert, of the institute, said, "If passed this would result in criminalizing Christians and gender-critical parents for conversations which most people would consider perfectly reasonable. This is not about protecting people from abuse. That is already illegal. … It is about punishing people for talking."

© 2024 - Patriot News Alerts