Get a free copy of Parental Rights & Education when you subscribe to our newsletter!
Whether the U.S. Supreme Court upholds or strikes down Tennessee’s law banning the use of medical procedures in gender-confused minors, the mission of Christians must remain the same: to defend the vulnerable, proclaim truth, and point a lost world to the only hope that never fails — Jesus Christ.
In late January, President Donald Trump issued Executive Order 14187, titled “Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation,” which prohibits gender-transition procedures for minors, cuts federal funding for institutions providing such care, and mandates a federal review of insurance coverage policies.
And yet, the law, which was signed into law in March 2023, has been in the court system for nearly two years, having been legally challenged by the Biden administration, the ACLU, and several plaintiffs. The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case, United States v. Skrmetti, in December, and even though the Trump Department of Justice has since dropped any support for the case, the justices are still expected to rule this spring on whether the state has an interest in banning the medical profession from performing experimental and harmful procedures on children.
One thing hasn’t changed: The clash between Tennessee’s protective legislation and Biden-era policies reveals a deeper ideological and moral struggle, one that forces America to answer a fundamental question: Who defines truth — God or man?
The implications of this moment stretch far beyond Tennessee. The previous administration consistently pushed for expanded access to gender-affirming care, framing it as an essential right, while conservatives have fought to uphold traditional values and biological reality.
EO 14187 and SB1 are a flashpoint in this broader cultural war, where science, faith, and law collide in the public square. As politicians and activists seek to shape the narrative, Christians must recognize that this is not merely a policy debate but a spiritual battle over truth, identity, and human dignity.
The Supreme Court’s ruling in United States v. Skrmetti will have far-reaching moral, ethical, and legal implications.
Supporters of SB1 argue that the law is a necessary safeguard against irreversible medical interventions on minors, pointing to the lack of comprehensive long-term studies on the effects of puberty blockers, hormone therapies, and surgeries. They emphasize the significant risks these treatments pose to both mental and physical health — and the fact that the physical impacts are largely irreversible, a major issue given that minors do not have the experience or cognitive ability to fully understand the consequences of long-term decisions based on short-term desires.
Opponents, however, contend that SB1 discriminates against transgender youth by denying them necessary healthcare, arguing that restricted access could contribute to increased rates of depression and suicide among transgender minors.
As the Supreme Court deliberates, the case will test the balance between parental rights, medical ethics, and governmental authority over children’s healthcare decisions. The ruling could set a precedent for more than 27 states with similar laws under consideration.
Meanwhile, 15 state attorneys-general have vowed to fight Executive Order 14187, seeking to preserve unfettered access to gender-affirming procedures for minors. These include California, which has some of the country’s most extreme laws, not only allowing transgender treatments in children but actively encouraging them. These blue state AGs argue that the order lacks scientific and legal merit, while the Biden administration had maintained that these interventions are essential healthcare.
The Supreme Court’s decision on SB1 will hopefully clarify the broader conflict between state-led restrictions and federal protections.
The debate surrounding SB1 and EO 14187 centers on the claim that restricting gender-affirming care harms transgender youth.
Activists assert that such interventions reduce depression and suicide rates. However, long-term research presents a more complex picture: A Swedish study, for example, found that individuals who underwent sex reassignment surgery experienced higher risks of suicide compared to the general population, while a 2024 study revealed a 12-fold increase in suicide attempts among those who had undergone gender surgeries compared to those who hadn’t.
Rather than gender-affirming treatments having the effect of consistently improving mental health, studies suggest the opposite is true. In addition, some experts suggest that a more effective approach would focus on addressing underlying psychological and emotional struggles through trauma-informed therapy, faith-based counseling, and family support systems.
By prioritizing holistic healing over irreversible medical procedures, children grappling with identity confusion can receive compassionate care that nurtures their well-being without causing lasting harm. Critics argue that, instead of addressing root causes — such as trauma, comorbidities including autism, family issues, identity confusion, and spiritual emptiness — the current secular, gold standard approach in the healthcare profession is to prescribe drastic, irreversible measures that do not necessarily lead to healing.
In fact, these treatments can cause long-term changes that remain long after drugs have been stopped, as attested by numerous detransitioners treated as young teens, who now suffer from chronic ailments and physical and systemic changes to their bodies that cannot be medically restored.
An example is Chloe Cole, who was put on puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones at 13, had both of her breasts surgically removed at 15, and then realized it was all a mistake at 16. She is one of many detransitioners who are speaking out in support of SB1 and other state bans. When discussing Skrmetti, she told Fox News:
“I have a leftover Adam’s apple and facial hair growth, but I also have issues with my urinary tract, with pelvic pain, [and] with things like sexual function…. I’m a woman. I aspire to be a mother one day, I want to be married, and this is something that is going to undoubtedly affect my marriage, my romantic life, and potentially my ability to have children.”
How many other children, manipulated by LGBTQ activists into believing that all of their problems will magically disappear if they just “change” genders, will suffer similar pain and loss as they reach adulthood and deal with the gravity of uninformed and rash decisions?
The debate over SB1 and Executive Order 14187 isn’t just about healthcare — it’s about a difference in worldview. The transgender movement represents the latest chapter in humanity’s age-old rebellion, where man seeks to redefine truth, morality, and identity apart from God.
Genesis 1:27 declares, “So God created mankind in His own image… male and female He created them.” SB1 aligns with this divine reality by protecting children from procedures that deny their God-given identity.
By contrast, the secular worldview embraces radical autonomy, arguing that identity is self-determined. But Scripture teaches that true human flourishing comes from living according to God’s design.
The transgender movement falsely equates gender identity with biological race. But unlike race, which is an immutable, God-given trait, gender confusion arises from internal struggles that cannot be solved through surgical intervention.
The fight over gender ideology is also not just a political battle — it is a call for parents, the Church, and government to fulfill their God-ordained roles. History has shown how these institutions can stand firm against cultural confusion.
EO 14187 represents a federal stand against the ideological push for gender-affirming care for minors. It aligns with state-led efforts like SB1, reinforcing the principle that children should be protected, not experimented on. The Supreme Court’s ruling will determine the future of these protections, and the stakes could not be higher.
Tennessee’s SB1 is more than legislation — it is a declaration that truth still matters, that children deserve protection, and that God’s design is not subject to cultural whims.
To actively support this cause, individuals can contact their state representatives to advocate for similar protective legislation, support organizations fighting for biblical truth in public policy, educate others on the risks of gender-affirming interventions, and engage in prayer and discipleship to help those struggling with identity confusion.
By taking these concrete steps, Christians can help ensure that children are safeguarded from harmful ideologies and that God’s truth is upheld in society.
As believers, we must reject passivity, resist deception, and boldly proclaim the Gospel as the ultimate solution to identity struggles. Whether the Supreme Court upholds or strikes down SB1, our mission remains the same: to defend the vulnerable, proclaim truth, and point a lost world to the only hope that never fails — Jesus Christ.
If you like this article and other content that helps you apply a biblical worldview to today’s politics and culture, consider making a donation here.
Notifications
