Just 1 MLB team opts out of Pride Night as league shifts toward LGBT 'package'



Gay pride is still the norm for Major League Baseball, but the way teams are going about it is slowly changing.

Throughout June, pro baseball teams will once again put their marketing budgets toward recognizing lesser-held sexual orientations, with 97% of teams participating in the festivities.

'46% of MLB fans claim "Pride Nights make them ‘less likely’ to attend MLB games."'

At the same time, though, these promotions have become increasingly unpopular among sports fans. Several recent studies have pointed to a near-even split between supporters and detractors; for example, Forbes noted a study that found "48-55% rated the Pride promotions negatively or neutral."

Civic Science's own research found that 46% of MLB fans claim "Pride Nights make them ‘less likely’ to attend MLB games."

Furthermore, a Morning Consult study stated that "almost half of U.S. adults (47%) said they support leagues hosting Pride Nights."

To that end, the only MLB team that has refrained from hosting Pride Night is the Texas Rangers, which have never hosted such an event. They do sell Pride-themed merchandise online, however.

Blaze News reached out to other MLB teams to find out whether they have changed their approach to Pride Nights for 2026 given the growing division it has sown among fans.

RELATED: Here are all the NFL teams that haven't virtue-signaled for Pride Month

Jeremy Chen/Getty Images

Teams that responded mostly followed a new Pride Night trend being adopted by many MLB franchises: Instead of having a grand celebration and handing out gay-themed merchandise to all ticket-holders, fans have the option to purchase a special Pride package that includes tickets and memorabilia.

The St. Louis Cardinals organization is focused on making sure all fans "feel welcome at the ballpark, are respectful towards others, and can freely share in the commonality of our love for the Cardinals and the game of baseball," a Cardinals spokesperson told Blaze News.

The Cards are offering a Pride-themed team cap for fans who buy a "theme ticket."

The Cincinnati Reds commented that they have partnered with "Cincinnati Pride" and honored a recipient with a Pride Community Advocate Award. As part of their special ticket package, the Reds have included a cross-body bag that features the transgender flag on the strap.

A representative of the Detroit Tigers asked Blaze News for further context about the Pride-related questions but did not provide a response to any of the queries. Among many other promotions like "Juneteenth" jerseys, the Tigers are offering a Pride package that includes a rainbow-strapped belt bag.

RELATED: 5 pro athletes who boldly take a knee — for Jesus Christ

Phebe Grosser/MLB Photos/Getty Images

The New York Yankees told Blaze News that they would continue to work with organizations to celebrate the Legacy of Pride, which has included donations to the Yankees-Stonewall Scholarship Initiative. "Stonewall" refers to a riot at a gay bar in New York City that was raided by police in 1969.

The Yankees organization noted that they have partnered with groups like Jewish Queer Youth, an organization that allegedly "empowers Jewish queer teens."

The Yankees will also offer limited-edition Yankees Pride caps that are sold with specific tickets.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Split appeals court says military transgender ban is unconstitutional



A split panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit found that War Secretary Pete Hegseth had acted unconstitutionally when he ordered a ban on transgender-identifying members of the military.

Two of the three judges said a preliminary injunction could stay in force against the Pentagon keeping transgender-identifying plaintiffs out of the military.

'We have direct evidence in this case that animus motivated the classifications in the Hegseth Policy.'

The two judges said the order was likely a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution.

"The government's stated reason for issuing the Hegseth Policy as based solely upon gender dysphoria was pretextual, and that instead, the Hegseth Policy was premised, at least in part, on a non-legitimate state interest to harm the politically unpopular group of transgender persons," Judge Robert Wilkins wrote in the ruling.

Judge Judith Rogers agreed with Wilkins about the constitutionality of the order.

However, Wilkins and Judge Justin Walker agreed separately that the Trump administration would be allowed to block transgender-identifying plaintiffs who wanted to join the military as the case progressed through the courts.

In the first days of President Donald Trump's second term, he issued an executive order declaring that the military's "high standards for troop readiness, lethality, cohesion, honesty, humility, uniformity, and integrity" were not compatible with the "medical, surgical, and mental health constraints on individuals with gender dysphoria."

In Feb. 2025, the Defense Department issued the new restrictions on transgender-identifying military members.

Wilkins pointed out in his ruling that the plaintiffs in the lawsuit had collectively garnered more than 80 commendations in the military and served a combined 130 years.

"This is not a case where we are left to speculate why the government drafted such broad, undifferentiated classifications," he said. "Unless we are going to fall for the old Groucho Marx line — 'Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?' — we have direct evidence in this case that animus motivated the classifications in the Hegseth Policy."

RELATED: Transgender military members sue Trump, Hegseth over trans ban

Wilkins also argued that the Trump administration had "conceded" that there was "no evidence to establish that persons with gender dysphoria are not honest, humble, and full of integrity."

A defense official said that about 4,200 troops had been diagnosed with gender dysphoria by Dec. 2024.

Walker was nominated to the bench by President Donald Trump in 2020, Wilkins was nominated by former President Barack Obama, and Rogers was nominated by former President Bill Clinton.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Avalon’s 'Testify to Love' rebranded as LGBTQ anthem



BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey grew up listening to the Christian music group Avalon, whose song “Testify to Love” had become an anthem for Christians all over the country.

However, not even religious music is safe from the LGBTQ community.

“Here’s some bad news. Now, we are being told retroactively that ‘Testify to Love’ by the CCM band Avalon is actually an anthem of queer love,” Stuckey explains.

“I am not joking that this is now an LGBTQ-affirming anthem,” she says.


Former member Melissa Greene wrote in a substack post on the topic: “'Testify to Love' drops today, originally recorded by Avalon, re-recorded by Michael Passons, Ty Herndon, and me. On Wednesday, we shot the music video. At the end of it, the three of us looked at each other, proud, and ultimately saying LOVE is for everyone.”

“She went on to talk about, in her Substack, her collaborator on the track, Passons, another former Avalon member who was removed from the group after he identified as gay many years ago,” Stuckey explains.

“In 2020, Passons appeared on an episode of a podcast and said that his bandmates visited his home and told him he was no longer allowed to be in the group because he was homosexual,” she continues.

While Greene now regrets viewing “some love as acceptable” and others as not acceptable, Stuckey explains that actually, some love is unacceptable.

“If you are talking about a grown-up loving a child in a way that is inappropriate, that kind of love is unacceptable. I’m not even making the comparison of pedophilia to LGBTQ right now. That’s not the point. I’m just saying that in principle, like you understand, the logic that some love isn’t acceptable actually does hold water,” she says.

Greene also wrote that Passons “never needed to be redeemed.”

“Uh-oh,” Stuckey comments.

“This phenomenon of believing that we are actually nicer than God, that we’re wiser than God, that we’re more compassionate than Him, that Romans 1 is too mean, that Genesis 1:27 is too cruel, that 1 Corinthians 6 is just too harsh, that passages that positively affirm the holiness of marriage between one man and one woman and the exclusive holiness of sexual activity within that marriage between one man and one woman,” she says, “it’s just too much to bear.”

“The truth is that we are not nicer than God. We don’t know better than Him. We’re not more compassionate than Him. And if something to us seems wrong or seems cruel or seems confusing when we go to the word of God, the problem is not with God,” she continues.

“It’s not with His word. It’s with us,” she adds.

Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?

To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Pride president outraged at California city officials for abruptly canceling festival — then officials fire back



Members of the LGBTQ+ community were outraged after one of the largest Pride festivals in Southern California was canceled just hours before it was scheduled to begin.

Long Beach city officials shut down the festival on Friday and accused the organizers of failing to provide them critical safety and operational documentation required for the event.

'This decision comes at a moment when LGBTQ+ people are facing escalating attacks from the current federal administration and from political forces across the country.'

The city's attorney sent a cease and desist order to the organizers right before the start time.

"The City notified the organizer that it had failed to timely submit the required application materials and supporting documentation necessary for permit review and issuance. As a result, no special event permit has been approved or issued for the events," Dawn McIntosh said in the letter.

Long Beach Pride President Tonya Martin lashed out at the city in a statement Friday demanding that it "protect and uplift" the LGBTQ community, but she did not say whether the group had provided the proper documentation.

"Long Beach Pride is deeply disappointed by the City's decision to cancel the Long Beach Pride Festival, a long-standing community institution built by volunteers, sustained by love, and rooted in the belief that every person deserves to live openly, safely, and with dignity," the lesbian wrote.

"This decision comes at a moment when LGBTQ+ people are facing escalating attacks from the current federal administration and from political forces across the country," she added.

On Saturday, the city responded with a rebuttal described as "aggressive" by the Advocate, an LGBTQ+ news outlet.

According to the city, organizers still had not submitted approved structural plans for the stages and trusses, approved electrical plans, detailed security plans, or sufficiently detailed site plans that identify critical infrastructure locations.

The city said most festivals of that size completed the documents 65 days in advance and that they had worked with the organizers all the way until the day of the event to try to get it to work out.

RELATED: LGBTQ activists are FURIOUS that California county shut down Pride Month display at public library — over a bookmark

The city also pointed out that it had to step in three years ago to keep the event going but had intended to do so as a one-time commitment. It has since continued funding and managing the parade.

Despite the cancellation of the festival, the Pride parade went on as scheduled.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Foreign aid should offer resources, not liberal ideology



When news breaks that foreign aid programs are being paused or restructured, many Christians understandably fear the world’s most vulnerable will be left behind.

It is a fair concern. But it also raises a harder question: What if some of what we have called “help” was not helping in the way we thought?

The recent restructuring of foreign aid creates an opportunity. It allows the United States to reconsider not only how much it gives, but how it gives.

Imposed values

For decades, American foreign assistance has done real good in many places. But too often it has also come with expectations that placed struggling nations in an impossible position. Funding was tied to adopting policies on family life, sexuality, and bioethics that did not reflect the values of the communities receiving that aid. Governments that resisted those conditions risked losing support their people depended on.

From a Christian perspective, that should give us pause. Care for the poor is a moral calling. But care that requires communities to compromise their deepest convictions is not compassion. It is pressure, even if it is delivered in the language of progress.

Scripture calls us to love our neighbor, not to remake our neighbor in our own image.

Pursuing the good

That is why the Geneva Consensus Declaration matters. Today, 41 nations representing more than 2.5 billion people have joined this coalition, affirming that international law does not establish a universal right to abortion and that each country has the authority to determine its own laws on life and family.

These nations were not forced into agreement. Many joined because they were weary of outside institutions attempting to impose agenda-driven frameworks through funding conditions and international pressure. What they were seeking was not isolation, but partnership. They wanted to be treated not as projects to be managed, but as nations capable of shaping their own future.

This reflects a principle Christians should recognize. Human dignity includes moral agency. It includes the freedom of communities to pursue the good, before God, without coercion from more powerful actors.

RELATED: New book from Eric Metaxas shares the American Revolution's forgotten Christian roots

ericmetaxas.com

The Protego framework

There is also a practical reality the United States cannot ignore. Countries like China are expanding their influence across Africa and Latin America by offering infrastructure and investment with fewer visible conditions. America's advantage lies in offering something China cannot: genuine partnership that respects the nations it serves.

In practice, that means moving from a model of control to a model of partnership.

At the Institute for Women’s Health, we have sought to do this through what we call the Protego framework. Instead of arriving with predesigned solutions, we work alongside national leaders, faith communities, and local institutions to build programs that reflect the values and needs of each country.

In one African nation, this has meant developing a national framework for health and life-skills education with input from across society, including interfaith leaders. It is designed to reach tens of thousands of educators and health workers. The program belongs to that nation. The values behind it are its own. And when the partnership ends, the capacity to sustain it will remain.

This kind of work is slower. It requires listening, humility, and trust. But it reflects something essential to a Christian understanding of service.

Human flourishing

We are not called simply to deliver outcomes. We are called to serve people as people, not as instruments of our own priorities.

Faithful foreign engagement takes seriously the dignity of every nation and every community. It refuses to make care for the vulnerable conditional on ideological agreement. It invests in what supports human flourishing, strong families, healthy communities, and the well-being of women and children, while ensuring that these efforts are shaped locally rather than imposed from outside.

The recent restructuring of foreign aid creates an opportunity. It allows the United States to reconsider not only how much it gives, but how it gives.

For Christians, the goal should not be to defend every existing program. It should be to ensure that our engagement reflects the character of the One we serve. We are called to help the vulnerable. But faithful service cannot be separated from humility, respect, and truth about the human person.

Former Florida pastor who apologized to gays for conversion therapy caught in child sex sting, police say



A former pastor known for leading a gay conversion therapy ministry was caught trying to meet what he thought was an underage boy for sex, according to Florida police.

Alan Chambers, 54, allegedly sent lewd messages including sexual photographs to an undercover police officer he believed to be a 14-year-old child.

He apologized to the gay community for 'years of undue suffering and judgment at the hands of the organization and the church as a whole.'

Prosecutors say Chambers sent the sexually explicit messages via Telegram and Snapchat between February and May while trying to arrange a meetup with the fake underage child.

Chambers allegedly talked about "forbidden love" and sent a photograph that showed a "white [male's] torso laying in bed where the end of their penis was visible."

The detective pretending to be a boy said that on April 10, Chambers asked him to take an Uber and meet with him. He also allegedly deleted many of the messages out of fear of getting in trouble.

Chambers made headlines in 2013 when he turned against conversion therapy after admitting that he was attracted to men despite being married to a woman. He also shut down the conversion ministry and said he was going to work to build bridges between Christians and gay people.

He apologized to the gay community for "years of undue suffering and judgment at the hands of the organization and the church as a whole" and said his new ministry would have "peace to be at the forefront of anything we do in the future."

RELATED: Memphis pastor charged with trafficking and sexual exploitation of a minor — after different pastor at same church convicted

Chambers was arrested on Tuesday during a traffic stop at Aloma Avenue and Strathy Lane.

The man was booked on charges of solicitation of a minor, transmission of harmful material to a minor, and unlawful use of a two-way communication device.

His bond was set at $15,000, and he was ordered to not have any communication with anyone under the age of 18 years old.

"Today our detectives stopped a predator before he had the chance to harm a child. ... Parents, please monitor your children's internet and social media activity — you are the first line of defense," reads a statement from the Orange County Sheriff's office.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Influential gay Democrat Barney Frank dies at age 86



Barney Frank, the powerful former Massachusetts congressman who left his imposing stamp on the nation's financial system, has died at age 86, according to family.

Frank was the first member of Congress to be openly gay, and he used his platform to push the Democratic Party to the left on LGBTQ+ issues before the term "LGBTQ+" even existed.

'Most Democrats agree with me,' said Frank. 'But they’ve been intimidated out of saying so.'

After the great global financial meltdown in 2008, Frank was the architect of new regulations on the banking industry to limit its financial risk and prevent future implosions. The Dodd-Frank financial reform bill bears his name as well as the name of former Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.).

That bill also created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which was pushed by Elizabeth Warren before she ran for the U.S. Senate. The agency purports to protect consumers but has been criticized by Republicans for supporting liberal policies.

Frank was an icon in LGBTQ+ circles for coming out as gay in 1987 at a time when the homosexual community was being besieged by the AIDS epidemic. He said he regretted not coming out earlier.

In 2012, he also became the first sitting member of Congress to be in a same-sex marriage.

In his later years, he used his prominent influence to push the Democratic Party against extremist positions into more centrist policies. His final book, "The Hard Path to Unity: Why We Must Reform the Left to Rescue Democracy," opposes the current Democratic "vote-repelling platform" that includes open borders, defunding the police, and the "rule of the pronoun police," surprisingly.

"I know most Democrats agree with me," Frank said in a recent interview via Zoom with the Atlantic. "But they’ve been intimidated out of saying so."

The book is scheduled to be released in September.

Frank was an outspoken and cunning thorn in the side of his Republican political opponents.

Many Democratic figures are paying their respects to Frank after his passing.

"Barney Frank was an exceptional legislator, whose name is synonymous with the strongest consumer financial protections in history and whose advocacy helped forge a fairer future for all of our children," said former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. "Working families in Massachusetts and beyond lost an iconic champion today."

RELATED: Barney Frank, creator of Dodd-Frank Act, refutes Dems blaming Trump for bank collapses

"In the aftermath of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, Barney Frank was the gravelly-voiced, smart-as-a-whip congressman who fought hard to get the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau over the finish line," wrote Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.).

"His one-liners were wicked and wickedly funny. Barney delivered for working people, and the world is a poorer place without him," she added.

Frank's sister confirmed to CNN that he died.

"He was a wonderful brother. I was lucky to be his sister. I will miss him," she said.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

How to fix the woke teacher problem



It’s time to dismantle one of the most degraded sectors in American higher education: schools of education. The colleges responsible for training and certifying the majority of our nation’s teachers have become factories for mediocrity and indoctrination.

States have both the authority and obligation to replace these monolithic institutions by promoting better teacher-prep pathways that are already proving their worth across the nation.

As recent graduates of Stanford University’s Graduate School of Education, we believe that teachers must be more than competent technicians — they must deliberately form American citizens.

The declining value of schools of education is an opportunity for states to look elsewhere for teacher preparation.

Today, however, schools of education are the chief culprits in the growing disquiet among pundits and everyday Americans about the value of the traditional four-year college experience. Graduates with bachelor’s degrees in education are among the lowest earners of any college major. Even more alarmingly, recent research shows their degrees aren’t worth what they paid and are often financed with loans.

These schools are also failing to live up to their own promises. The National Council on Teacher Quality found in its most recent study that only one in eight teacher-prep programs dedicate “sufficient time” to covering fundamental math content; 28% of elementary programs “adequately address” all core components of reading instruction; and 3% require candidates to take courses in necessary science and social studies content.

Other research has further exposed education schools’ century-old dismissal of, and contempt for, rigorous academic content.

What are these institutions of higher learning teaching instead? American schools of education have long been infiltrated by the left’s “long march through the institutions” and serve as havens for neo-Marxist ideas.

At Stanford, we weren’t taught about the science of reading or what knowledge children should learn. Rather, we read Paulo Freire’s "Pedagogy of the Oppressed," a radical polemic that rejects the teaching of received knowledge as oppressive and envisions schools as drivers of political activism.

This intellectual lineage explains why critical theory and its offshoots such as the 1619 Project, which is riddled with historical inaccuracies yet was taught in 4,500 classrooms in a single year, have become so dominant in American public education.

At our alma mater, the influential education professor Jo Boaler has led efforts, backed by debunked research, to remove algebra from California middle schools while simultaneously building a consulting enterprise that charges schools thousands of dollars to implement these same “reforms.”

RELATED: College professors want your child's soul. Here's how you can stop them.

Angela Lewis/Bloomberg/Getty Images

All of this points to a simple conclusion: Education schools will not be reformed from within. A machine built on a flawed foundation cannot be repaired by replacing a few parts. We should not expect universities to solve the problem. They are the problem. The declining value of schools of education is an opportunity for states to look elsewhere for teacher preparation.

States can improve the quality of teacher preparation and boost teacher effectiveness by promoting alternative teacher training programs that are already proving their worth. Prospective teachers should first earn a bachelor’s degree in the subject they will teach — history, biology, math, or literature — then enter a focused, apprenticeship-style training under veteran classroom teachers.

Across the country, a growing ecosystem of alternative programs is allowing individuals without education degrees to enter the teaching profession. To be most effective, such programs should emphasize clinical practice, a proven predictor of teacher effectiveness that is often missing from university teacher preparation. This approach also enables new educators to earn their credentials while working and earning a good wage.

Clinical practice means educators are trained not in the ideological vacuum of schools of education, but inside real classrooms, learning from real teachers, and working with real students. In this way, teachers are grounded in the practical knowledge and skills that impact students’ academic outcomes, not ideology.

Studies show that in the first few years of teaching, demonstrated effectiveness is a far better predictor of long-term quality than the pathway through which a teacher was certified — and that greater differences exist among teachers who trained in the same program than those who bypassed such programs entirely.

Teach for America corps members, who are generally young, non-education majors, on average produce stronger gains for students than their traditional counterparts. At worst, they are no less effective than those who spent four years in a typical teacher prep program. Even earning a master’s degree in education does not reliably produce better educators.

Florida, for example, has developed a teacher certification program for professionals with non-education bachelor’s degrees and an apprenticeship program for those with associate’s degrees. These programs feature high-quality, self-paced curriculum modules for participants.

Tennessee offers the Job-Embedded Practitioner Licensure Program, enabling new educators to bypass the traditional credentialing bureaucracy entirely and earn their license while serving as teachers of record.

Arizona provides an Alternate Teaching certificate that similarly emphasizes real-world preparation, including a requirement that candidates demonstrate proficiency in both the U.S. Constitution and the Arizona Constitution, ensuring that even non-traditional entrants receive a grounding in civics free from ideological overlay.

Any replacement for the failed ed-school model must form educators capable of passing along the blessings of liberty to future generations. It’s time to recover the true purpose of public education: pursuing truth, cultivating virtue, and forming citizens who are morally capable of sustaining a free republic.

Editor’s note: This article was originally published at the American Mind.

College professors want your child's soul. Here's how you can stop them.



As this school year comes to an end, I hear parents talking about what university their children got into and how excited the family is about this next phase of life. As a university professor, I relate to this wholeheartedly. Raising your children to finish high school and go on to university is one of the biggest duties Christian parents will accomplish.

But there is a question Christian parents almost never ask: Why do we send our children into institutions that will work against the very faith we spent 18 years trying to instill?

You will routinely find professors lambasting Christianity in their classes as an oppressive colonizer religion that must be deconstructed.

No one says it that way, of course. Instead, the conversation sounds something like this: “We’ve found a good campus. There’s even a strong Christian student group.”

Now, let me say plainly: Those groups can be wonderful. I thank God for them. But pause for a moment and consider what that assumption reveals. You are already expecting that Christian community will exist outside the mission of the university. You are hoping your child will find a refuge within an otherwise hostile environment.

In other words, you are not sending your child into a place that reinforces truth, but into a storm, and praying they find a bunker. And you are probably paying tens of thousands of dollars to do it.

That should trouble us more than it does, because it wasn’t always this way. Institutions like Princeton, Harvard, and Yale were not founded as neutral arenas of inquiry. They were explicitly Christian. Their purpose was to cultivate piety, train ministers, and teach the knowledge of God to all students.

Universities have always had a vision of truth. The only difference now is that the vision has changed.

RELATED: The pipeline from university radical to would-be assassin

Celal Gunes/Anadolu/Getty Images

Today’s university is not neutral. It is structured around a set of ideas that systematically undermine Christianity while presenting themselves as morally superior. Take the influence of Michel Foucault. Students are taught, often implicitly, that truth is not something discovered but constructed. Knowledge is tied to power. What earlier generations called “truth,” we are told, is really just the perspective of those who happened to win.

Then there is Paulo Freire, whose approach to education has become foundational in teacher training and pedagogy. Education, in this view, is not about learning what is true but about liberating the oppressed. The world is divided into oppressors and oppressed, and students are trained to dismantle the oppressors.

Guess which category Christianity lands in?

Add to this the ever-present language of “diversity, equity, and inclusion,” along with intersectionality. These frameworks redefine truth itself as something tied to identity. Moral authority is assigned based on lived experience, and disagreement is often recast as harm.

The Bible, under this lens, is no longer read as the word of God. It is treated as a cultural artifact, one that has historically supported systems of oppression.

None of this is presented as an attack on Christianity. That would be too obvious. Or at least, you would have thought so even 10 years ago. But now you will routinely find professors lambasting Christianity in their classes as an oppressive colonizer religion that must be deconstructed.

And all of this is framed to the students as compassion and empathy. It is justice. It is only fair. And “that’s not fair!” is a very powerful argument for university students.

Young people have a strong instinct for fairness. When they hear, “That’s not fair,” they lean in. But what they are rarely told is that the definition of fairness itself has been quietly replaced.

Disagreement is recast as harm, hierarchy becomes injustice, and truth becomes a tool of whoever is in power. The Bible is a social construct invented by the patriarchy to retain power.

First comes disorientation: “Everything I learned growing up is being questioned.”

Then pressure: “If you don’t agree, you’re part of the problem.”

Then isolation: fewer Christian friends, fewer edifying conversations. More immoral filth where “love is love” is used to justify the basest forms of lust.

Then internal shift: Doubt feels like intellectual maturity.

And finally, exit or compromise. Some abandon the faith outright. Others keep the label but redefine it until it fits comfortably within the system that once challenged it.

Parents are often blindsided by this. They assume education is neutral. Sure, they had atheist professors and the standard left-wing nut, but those professors were just that: nuts.

Now, the crazy is normalized and the sane, holy, and faithful are institutionalized. Don’t assume that if your child finds a good group, everything will be fine.

This is not a neutral environment occasionally disrupted by bad ideas. It is an environment structured in a particular direction, with occasional pockets of resistance. Those Christian groups we celebrate are the bastions, not the foundation.

So what should parents do?

RELATED: Christian students are pushing back — and universities are cracking

WOJTEK RADWANSKI/AFP/Getty Images

First, don’t just ask whether your children will succeed academically or professionally. Ask whether they will remain faithful to Christ. Help them equip themselves with the armor of God described in Ephesians chapter 6.

Second, prepare them intellectually. They need to understand not only what they believe, but why, and how it contrasts with the frameworks they will encounter. Teach them the Bible and the historic Christian faith.

Third, help your children make faith in Christ their own. This is not merely an intellectual enterprise. Teach your children to love Christ and put their trust in salvation by Christ alone. When they know Him as their savior and trust His promises, they will stand firmly in that day of spiritual battle.

Third, expose hostile frameworks early. Teach them about Foucault, Freire, and the assumptions behind DEI before they hear those ideas in a classroom. If they have already heard the anti-Christian, anti-Bible arguments because you covered them together as preparation, they will be ready to dismantle them.

Fourth, stay engaged. Ask what their professors are teaching. You can look up their professors on the university webpages. Their bios probably won’t say “DEI anti-Christian radical,” but you will get a good sense of what they think by looking at their published works and conference presentations.

Above all, stop assuming neutrality where none exists. This is a spiritual battle of good vs. evil.

The real question is not whether universities shape your children’s beliefs. They will. The question is whether you will prepare your child to recognize that shaping and to stand firm in the truth.

Because if Christ is Lord of all truth, then no institution gets to undermine Him under the guise of “social justice advocacy.”

All parents should prepare their children for this spiritual reality. These university professors want your child’s soul.