As this election cycle continues, voters on both sides of the political aisle will hear the common refrain that “this is the most important election of our lifetimes.” This phrase has become commonplace every four years, and while one cannot presume to know whether this election is the most important of one’s lifetime, it certainly does not lack importance, especially for Christians seeking to exercise their right to civic participation. Taking into consideration the great disparity between the two main parties on issues of social importance, and the speed with which the modern world has been seemingly handed over to various ideologies that clearly conflict with God’s Word, this election is certainly of greater importance and consequence than those of the mid-twentieth century when the parties were ideologically closer.
Given the fact that the Christian faith is in one sense a moral faith whose adherents hold to a particular set of ethical standards built upon essential theological truths contained in Scripture, the moral commitments and social implications of particular candidates bear tremendous weight on the voting decisions of Christians. Of particular consequence over the last decade has been those moral commitments concerning gender ideology—commitments that relate directly to one’s understanding of what it means to be human, and what the ultimate purpose of an image-bearer truly is. For Christians, gender is inseparable from biological sex, one’s biology is immutable, there are clear distinctions both in physical attributes and social disposition between male and female, and the only proper place for sexual expression is between a married man and woman. On these essential matters, Kamala Harris and Tim Walz, could not be further from historic Christian teaching.
The permanence of biological sex was established at the very creation of humanity in Genesis, but especially over the last few years has been under tremendous assault—with much of that assault coming from Harris and Walz in their respective roles of Vice President and Governor of Minnesota. For her part, Harris has been a leader within an administration that has tried to write transgenderism into anti-discrimination legislation (Title IX) that was never intended to speak on the subject. Not only does such an ideology threaten the safety and opportunities of women of all ages but attempting this move also represents a major threat to religious liberty.
It places Christians that hold to the Scripture-proclaimed and scientifically grounded understanding of gender in the crosshairs of a powerful and uncompromising administrative and police state. Walz, as Governor of Minnesota, signed legislation that would allow the state to gain custody of one’s children if they did not support that child’s supposed desire to pursue transgender medical treatments and interventions. Rather than support parents in their responsibility to guide and correct their children as they grow, learn, and struggle, Harris and Walz deny parents those opportunities.
On the related issue of biological differences between male and female, Harris and Walz support allowing males to compete in female sports. Minnesota has allowed biological males who identify as female to participate in women’s sports for quite some time, and neither candidate has shown any sign of opposing such measures in states or at the national level. In fact, the organization Advocates for Trans Equality has endorsed the Harris ticket, stating that “a Harris Administration would not only uphold but also expand upon the protections for transgender Americans established by the Biden Administration.” With a potential case before the Supreme Court seeking to remove protections for biologically female athletes, the Harris-Walz ticket would be disastrous for girls at every level of athletic competition.
It is also worth stating that Harris and Walz have a strong commitment to DEI programs, which implicitly deny the equal value of image-bearers regardless of physical characteristics. Great damage has been done to once-prestigious institutions and also to the modern conscience because of these affirmative-action type programs. Their commitment to supposed “inclusion” could result in dangerous outcomes for some depending on the industry in which the programs are implemented, and it must be remembered that the “diversity” that they supposedly champion does not extend to diversity of thought.
Finally, on the issue of abortion, the Harris-Walz ticket supports no limits on abortion, taxpayer-funded abortion, and federal legislation to permit abortion at any point in pregnancy. Minnesota has served as a prototype in this regard, where as governor, Walz even signed legislation repealing protections for babies born alive after an attempted abortion. Especially following the Democratic National Convention, which included a prime-time speaking slot for Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear to attack pro-life policies and champion radical proabortion views, it is clear the Democratic party seeks to make abortion access key to their campaign and legislative agenda. For his part, Donald Trump has made recent concerning statements that bring into question his previous record of pro-life actions. However, the Harris-Walz pro-abortion position is more clear and, no doubt, far more dangerous for preborn babies and their mothers.
All of these policy commitments from Harris and Walz, combined with their belief in expanding the power of the federal government, represent a grave threat to the independence of the Commonwealth to make our own laws as we seek to protect children, respect the role and authority of parents, and champion the dignity of every person, both born and preborn, in a way that recognizes their God-given worth.
Kentuckians know what is best for our own families, our communities, and our state. Policy positions that would harm children, disregard parental authority, and attack human dignity represent a significant departure from common sense and Kentucky values.
Click here to view and download the PDF of the print version of the Citizen paper.
