Project 2025 on LGBTQ+ Issues

The authors of Project 2025 have a particular animosity towards anyone who does not conform to their notions of what constitutes “normal” sexual behavior or families that do not fit their notions of a “traditional” family structure.  The Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transexual, Queer and others (LGBTQ+) communities are will suffer particular harassment under a Trump second term.  It is another example of how they plan to govern a nation through a divisive, hate-inducing agenda rather than trying to embrace justice for all.

People Magazine writer Kyler Alford states: “The Project 2025 mandate — which diminishes LGBTQ+ labels as a “bullying” product of “woke” politics — calls to allow discrimination on the basis of “sexual orientation, gender identity, transgender status, sex characteristics, etc.,” by “refocusing” enforcement of sex discrimination laws so that they only apply to the “biological binary” of sex.

The document takes specific aim at the transgender community. Aside from using a variety of dehumanizing terms, the mandate signals an intent to attack trans women in sports, end gender-affirming care for minors, decrease accessibility for gender-confirmation surgeries and reinstate Trump’s trans military ban. Trump has already incorporated those views into his 2024 platform.

The following related terms would be blacklisted in legislation and on every federal document: sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI), gender, gender equality, gender equity, gender awareness, and gender-sensitive.” (Ref. 1)

 

Reference:

  1. People Magazine article “What is Project 2025?  Inside The Far-Right Plan Threatening Everything From the Word ‘Gender’ to Public Education” by Kyler Alvord, July 11, 2024.

https://people.com/what-is-project-2025-inside-far-right-plan-trump-presidency-8622964

 

Read More Below

 

Project 2025 Statements on LGBTQ+ Issues

In the Forward of the Project 2025 document, Kevin Roberts, President of the Heritage Foundation, states:

“Look at America under the ruling and cultural elite today: Inflation is ravaging family budgets, drug overdose deaths continue to escalate, and children suffer the toxic normalization of transgenderism with drag queens and pornography invading their The noxious tenets of “critical race theory” and “gender ideology” should be excised from curricula in every public school in the country. These theories poison our children, who are being taught on the one hand to affirm that the color of their skin fundamentally determines their identity and even their moral status while on the other they are taught to deny the very creatureliness that inheres in being human and consists in accepting the givenness of our nature as men or women. Allowing parents or physicians to “reassign” the sex of a minor is child abuse and must end.school libraries.” (Ref. 1, page 1)

“The next conservative President must make the institutions of American civil society hard targets for woke culture warriors. This starts with deleting the terms sexual orientation and gender identity (“SOGI”), diversity, equity, and inclusion (“DEI”), gender, gender equality, gender equity, gender awareness, gender-sensitive, abortion, reproductive health, reproductive rights, and any other term used to deprive Americans of their First Amendment rights out of every federal rule, agency regulation, contract, grant, regulation, and piece of legislation that exists.

Pornography, manifested today in the omnipresent propagation of transgender ideology and sexualization of children, for instance, is not a political Gordian knot inextricably binding up disparate claims about free speech, property rights, sexual liberation, and child welfare. It has no claim to First Amendment protection. Its purveyors are child predators and misogynistic exploiters of women. Their product is as addictive as any illicit drug and as psychologically destructive as any crime. Pornography should be outlawed. The people who produce and distribute it should be imprisoned. Educators and public librarians who purvey it should be classed as registered sex offenders. And telecommunications and technology firms that facilitate its spread should be shuttered.

…The noxious tenets of “critical race theory” and “gender ideology” should be excised from curricula in every public school in the country. These theories poison our children, who are being taught on the one hand to affirm that the color of their skin fundamentally determines their identity and even their moral status while on the other they are taught to deny the very creatureliness that inheres in being human and consists in accepting the givenness of our nature as men or women.

Allowing parents or physicians to “reassign” the sex of a minor is child abuse and must end.”  (Ref. 1, pages 4 – 5)

“GENDER POLICY COUNCIL (GPC) 

The President should immediately revoke Executive Order 1402041 and every policy, including subregulatory guidance documents, produced on behalf of or related to the establishment or promotion of the Gender Policy Council and its subsidiary issues. Abolishing the Gender Policy Council would eliminate central promotion of abortion (“health services”); comprehensive sexuality education (“education”); and the new woke gender ideology, which has as a principal tenet “gender affirming care” and “sex-change” surgeries on minors. In addition to eliminating the council, developing new structures and positions will have the dual effect of demonstrating that promoting life and strengthening the family is a priority while also facilitating more seamless coordination and consistency across the U.S. government.

Specifically, the President should appoint a position/point of contact with the rank of Special Assistant to the President or higher to coordinate and lead the President’s domestic priorities on issues related to life and family in cooperation with the Domestic Policy Council. This position would be responsible for facilitating meetings, discussions, and agreements among personnel; coordinating Administration policy; and ensuring agency support for implementation of policies related to the promotion of life and family in the United States.”  (Ref. 1, page 62)

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (DOD)

“Restore standards of lethality and excellence. Entrance criteria for military service and specific occupational career fields should be based on the needs of those positions. Exceptions for individuals who are already predisposed to require medical treatment (for example, HIV positive or suffering from gender dysphoria) should be removed, and those with gender dysphoria should be expelled from military service.” (Ref. 1, page 103)

“Reverse policies that allow transgender individuals to serve in the military. Gender dysphoria is incompatible with the demands of military service, and the use of public monies for transgender surgeries or to facilitate abortion for servicemembers should be ended.”  (Ref. 1, page 104)

UNITED STATES AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT (USAID)

“The next conservative Administration should rename the USAID Office of Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment (GEWE) as the USAID Office of Women, Children, and Families; refocus and realign resources that currently support programs in GEWE to the Office of Women, Children, and Families; redesignate the Senior Gender Coordinator as an unapologetically pro-life politically appointed Senior Coordinator of the Office of Women, Children, and Families; and eliminate the “more than 180 gender advisors and points of contact…embedded in Missions and Operating Units throughout the Agency.”

In addition, the next conservative Administration should rescind President Biden’s 2022 Gender Policy and refocus it on Women, Children, and Families and revise the agency’s regulation on “Integrating Gender Equality and Female Empowerment in USAID’s Program Cycle.” It should remove all references, examples, definitions, photos, and language on USAID websites, in agency publications and policies, and in all agency contracts and grants that include the following terms: “gender,” “gender equality,” “gender equity,” “gender diverse individuals,” “gender aware,” “gender sensitive,” etc. It should also remove references to “abortion,” “reproductive health,” and “sexual and reproductive rights” and controversial sexual education materials.

In the past, the word “gender” was a polite alternative to the word “sex” or term “biological sex.” The Left has commandeered the term “gender,” which used to mean either “male” or “female,” to include a spectrum of others who are seeking to alter biological and societal sexual norms. The promotion of gender radicalism is anathema to the traditional norms of many societies where USAID works, causes resentment by tying lifesaving assistance to rejecting the aid recipient’s own firmly held fundamental values regarding sexuality, and produces unnecessary consternation and confusion among and even outright bias against men.”  (Ref. 1, page 259)

 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

“As the next Administration executes its work, it should be guided by a few core principles, including:

…Safeguarding civil rights. Enforcement of civil rights should be based on a proper understanding of those laws, rejecting gender ideology and critical race theory.”  (Ref. 1, page 322)

 

“Civil Rights Data Collection

On December 13, 2021, OCR published a notice concerning proposed revisions to OCR’s Mandatory Civil Rights Data Collection (CRDC) in which it proposed to create and collect data on a new “nonbinary” sex category (in addition to the current “male” or “female” sex categories) and to retire data collection that indicates the number of (1) high school–level interscholastic athletics sports in which only male and female students participate, (2) high school–level athletics teams in which only male or female students participate, and (3) participants on high school–level interscholastic athletics sports teams in which only male or only female students participate. These poorly conceived changes are contrary to law, fail to take account of student privacy interests and statutory protections favoring parental rights under the Protection of Pupils Rights Amendment, and jettison longstanding data collections that assist in the enforcement of Title IX.

  • The new Administration must quickly move to rescind these changes, which add a new “nonbinary” sex category to OCR’S data collection and issue a new CRDC that will collect data directly relevant to OCR’s statutory enforcement authority.”

(Ref. 1, pages 331 – 332)

 

Note:  OCR is the Office of Civil Rights.

 

“Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Sex in Education Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance (Title IX)

With its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking published on July 12, 2022, the Biden Education Department seeks to gut the hard-earned rights of women with its changes to the department’s regulations implementing Title IX, which prohibitsdiscrimination on the basis of sex in educational programs and activities. Instead, the Biden Administration has sought to trample women’s and girls’ athletic opportunities and due process on campus, threaten free speech and religious liberty, and erode parental rights in elementary and secondary education regarding sensitive issues of sex. The new Administration should take the following steps:

  • Work with Congress to use the earliest available legislative vehicle to prohibit the department from using any appropriations or from otherwise enforcing any final regulations under Title IX promulgated by the department during the prior Administration.
  • Commence a new agency rulemaking process to rescind the current Administration’s Title IX regulations; restore the Title IX regulations promulgated by then-Secretary Betsy DeVos on May 19, 2020; and define “sex” under Title IX to mean only biological sex recognized at birth.
  • Work with Congress to amend Title IX to include due process requirements; define “sex” under Title IX to mean only biological sex recognized at birth; and strengthen protections for faith-based educational institutions, programs, and activities.

 

The Trump Administration’s 2020 Title IX regulation protected the foundational right to due process for those who are accused of sexual misconduct. The Biden Administration’s proposed change to the interpretation of Title IX disposes of these rights.

  • The next Administration should move quickly to restore the rights of women and girls and restore due process protections for accused individuals.

 

At the same time, there is no scientific or legal basis for redefining “sex” to “sexual orientation and gender identity” in Title IX. Such a change misrepresents the U.S. Supreme Court’s opinion in Bostock, threatens the American system of federalism, removes important due process protections for students in higher education, and puts girls and women in danger of physical harm. Facilitating social gender transition without parental consent increases the likelihood that children will seek hormone treatments, such as puberty blockers, which are experimental medical interventions. Research has not demonstrated positive effects and long term outcomes of these treatments, and the unintended side effects are still not fully understood.

  • The next Administration should abandon this change redefining “sex” to mean “sexual orientation and gender identity” in Title IX immediately across all departments.
  • On its first day in office, the next Administration should signal its intent to enter the rulemaking process to restore the Trump Administration’s Title IX regulation, with the additional insistence that “sex” is properly understood as a fixed biological fact. Official notice-and-comment should be posted immediately.
  • At the same time, the political appointees in the Office for Civil Rights should begin a full review of all Title IX investigations that were conducted on the understanding that “sex” referred to gender identity and/or sexual orientation.
  • All ongoing investigations should be dropped, and all school districts affected should be given notice that they are free to drop any policy changes pursued under pressure from the Biden Administration.
  • The OCR Assistant Secretary should prepare a report of OCR’s actions for the new Secretary of Education, who should—by speech or letter— publicize the nature of the overreach engaged in by his predecessor.
  • The Secretary should make it clear that FERPA allows parents full access to their children’s educational records, so any practice of paperwork obfuscation on this front violates federal law.”  (Ref. 1, pages 332 – 334)

 

“Provide School Meals to Children in Need; Do Not Use Federal Meals to Support Radical Ideology

…the USDA is threatening to withhold federal taxpayer spending for these meals from schools that do not implement Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 so that the term “sex” is replaced with “sexual orientation and gender identity” (SOGI).

  • The next Administration should prohibit the USDA or any other federal agency from withholding services from federal or state agencies—including but not limited to K–12 schools—that choose not to replace “sex” with “SOGI” in that agency’s administration of Title IX.”  (Ref. 1, page 337)

 

Note:  USDA is the United States Department of Agriculture.

 

“Reform Federal Education Data Collection

The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) and other data collections currently release data by race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, English language proficiency, disability, and sex. However, one of the most important—if not the most important—factor influencing student educational achievement and attainment is family structure. As education scholar Ian Rowe has noted, NAEP already collects data on students’ family structure; it just does not make those data publicly available.

  • The Department of Education (or whichever agency collects such data long term) should make student data available by family structure to the public, including as part of its Data Explorer tool.”  (Ref. 1, page 338)

 

“Advancing Legal Protections for Parental Rights in Education

…some courts treat parental rights as a “second-tier” right and do not properly safeguard these rights against government infringement. The courts vary greatly over which species of constitutional review (rational basis, intermediate scrutiny, and strict scrutiny) to apply to parental rights cases.

 

This uncertainty has emboldened federal agencies to promote rules and policies that infringe parental rights. For example, under the Biden Administration’s proposed Title IX regulations, schools could be required to assist a child with a social or medical gender transition without parental consent or to withhold information from parents about a child’s social transition (e.g., changing their names or pronouns). The federal government could demand that schools include curriculum or lessons regarding critical race or gender theory in a way that violates parental rights, especially if it requires minors to disclose information about their religious beliefs, or beliefs about race or gender in violation of the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment (20 USC Sec. 1232h).

 

To remedy the lack of clear and robust protection for parental rights, the next Administration should:

  • Work to pass a federal Parents’ Bill of Rights that restores parental rights to a “top-tier” right. Such legislation would give families a fair hearing in court when the federal government enforces any policy against parents in a way that undermines their right and responsibility to raise, educate, and care for their children. The law would require the government to satisfy “strict scrutiny”—the highest standard of judicial review—when the government infringes parental rights.
  • Further ensure that any regulations that could impact parental rights contain similar protections and require federal agencies to demonstrate that their action meets strict scrutiny before a final rule is promulgated.” (Ref. 1, pages 343 – 344)

 

“Protect Parental Rights in Policy

…As documented by writers such as Abigail Shrier and others, the American Society of Plastic Surgeons documented a four-fold increase in the number of biological girls seeking gender surgery between 2016 and 2017. Larger increases were found in the U.K. from 2009 to 2019 and 2017 to 2018. These statistics and others point to a social contagion in which minor children, especially girls, are attempting to make life-altering decisions using puberty blockers and other hormone treatments and even surgeries to remove or alter vital body parts. Heritage Foundation research finds that providing easier access to such treatments and surgeries without parental involvement does not reduce the suicidality of these young people and may even increase suicide rates.

  • The next Administration should take particular note of how radical gender ideology is having a devastating effect on school-aged children today—especially young girls.

 

School officials in some states are requiring teachers and other school employees to accept a minor child’s decision to assume a different “gender” while at school—without notifying parents. In California, New Jersey, and certain districts in Kansas and elsewhere, educators are prohibited from informing parents about children’s confusion over their sex if the children do not want their parents to know. Such policies allow schools to drive a wedge between parents and children. The next Administration should work with Congress to provide an example to state lawmakers by requiring K–12 districts under federal jurisdiction, including Washington, D.C., public schools, Bureau of Indian Education schools, and Department of Defense schools, with legislation stating that:

  • No public education employee or contractor shall use a name to address a student other than the name listed on a student’s birth certificate, without the written permission of a student’s parents or guardians.
  • No public education employee or contractor shall use a pronoun in addressing a student that is different from that student’s biological sex without the written permission of a student’s parents or guardians.
  • No public institution may require an education employee or contractor to use a pronoun that does not match a person’s biological sex if contrary to the employee’s or contractor’s religious or moral convictions.

 

State lawmakers should use this model and adopt similar provisions for public schools within their borders. Federal lawmakers should not allow public school employees to keep secrets about a child from that child’s parents.”  (Ref. 1, pages 345 – 346)

 

“Transparency Around Program Performance and DEI Influence

The next President should issue a series of executive orders requiring:

  • An accounting of how federal programs/grants spread DEI/CRT/ gender ideology,…
  • An update of the Coleman report to show the impact of family structure on student achievement,…” (Ref. 1, page 358)

 

Note:  DEI is Diversity, Equity and Inclusion.

 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (HHS)

Goal #1: Protecting Life, Conscience, and Bodily Integrity. The Secretary should pursue a robust agenda to protect the fundamental right to life, protect conscience rights, and uphold bodily integrity rooted in biological realities, not ideology…Radical actors inside and outside government are promoting harmful identity politics that replaces biological sex with subjective notions of “gender identity” and bases a person’s worth on his or her race, sex, or other identities. This destructive dogma, under the guise of “equity,” threatens American’s fundamental liberties as well as the health and well-being of children and adults alike. The next Secretary must ensure that HHS programs protect children’s minds and bodies and that HHS programs respect parents’ basic right to direct the upbringing, education, and care of their children….

 

Goal #3: Promoting Stable and Flourishing Married Families. Families comprised of a married mother, father, and their children are the foundation of a well-ordered nation and healthy society. Unfortunately, family policies and programs under President Biden’s HHS are fraught with agenda items focusing on “LGBTQ+ equity,” subsidizing single-motherhood, disincentivizing work, and penalizing marriage. These policies should be repealed and replaced by policies that support the formation of stable, married, nuclear families.”  (Ref. 1, pages 450 – 451)

 

“Woke Policies…NIH has been at the forefront in pushing junk gender science. Instead, it should fund studies into the short-term and long-term negative effects of cross sex interventions, including “affirmation,” puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and surgeries, and the likelihood of desistence if young people are given counseling that does not include medical or social interventions.”  (Ref. 1, page 462)

 

Note: NIH is the National Institutes of Health.

 

Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS)

  • “Reissue a stronger transgender national coverage determination. CMS should repromulgate its 2016 decision that CMS could not issue a National Coverage Determination (NCD) regarding “gender reassignment surgery” for Medicare beneficiaries. In doing so, CMS should acknowledge the growing body of evidence that such interventions are dangerous and acknowledge that there is insufficient scientific evidence to support such coverage in state plans.”  Ref. 1, page 474)

 

“Radical Redefinition of Sex. On August 4, 2022, HHS published a proposed rule entitled “Nondiscrimination in Health Programs and Activities.” This rule addresses nondiscrimination provisions of the Affordable Care Act, known as Section 1557, which is enforced by the Office for Civil Rights and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Section 1557 prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and sex in covered health programs or activities.

 

Under the proposed rule, sex is redefined: “Discrimination on the basis of sex includes, but is not limited to, discrimination on the basis of sex stereotypes; sex characteristics, including intersex traits; pregnancy or related conditions; sexual orientation; and gender identity.” In other words, the department proposes to interpret Section 1557 as if it created special privileges for new classes of people, defined in ways that are highly ideological and unscientific. The redefinition of sex to cover gender identity and sexual orientation and pregnancy to cover abortion should be reversed in all HHS and CMS programs as was done under the Trump Administration. This includes the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP). Low-income families who rely on CHIP should not be coerced, pressured, or otherwise encouraged to embrace this ideologically motivated sexualization of their children.”  (Ref. 1, page 475)

 

“Protect faith-based grant recipients from religious liberty violations that maintain a biblically based, social science–reinforced definition of marriage and family. Social science reports that assess the objective outcomes for children raised in homes aside from a heterosexual, intact marriage are clear: All other family forms involve higher levels of instability (the average length of same-sex marriages is half that of heterosexual marriages); financial stress or poverty; or poorer behavioral, psychological, or educational outcomes.

 

For the sake of child well-being, programs should affirm that children require and deserve both the love and nurturing of a mother and the play and protection of a father. Despite recent congressional bills like the Respect for Marriage Act that redefine marriage to be the union between any two individuals, HMRE program grants should be available to faith based recipients who affirm that marriage is between not just any two adults, but one man and one unrelated woman.”  (Ref. 1, page 481)

 

Note: HMRE is the Healthy Marriage and Relationship Education Program.

 

“Readdress the National Strategy to Support Family Caregivers. While in theory the strategy aims to support family members with duties to care for older family members, the plan is overly focused on racial and “LGBTQ+ equity.” The strategy should be examined to establish an efficient plan to support caregivers and their families. There should also be a review of its COVID-19 policies.”  (Ref. 1, page 483)

 

“Withdraw Ryan White guidance allowing funds to pay for cross-sex transition support. HRSA should withdraw all guidance encouraging Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program service providers to provide controversial “gender transition” procedures or “gender-affirming care,” which cause irreversible physical and mental harm to those who receive them.”  (Ref. 1, page 485)

 

Note:  HRSA is the Health Resources and Services Administration.

 

“The Family Agenda. The Secretary’s antidiscrimination policy statements should never conflate sex with gender identity or sexual orientation. Rather, the Secretary should proudly state that men and women are biological realities that are crucial to the advancement of life sciences and medical care and that married men and women are the ideal, natural family structure because all children have a right to be raised by the men and women who conceived them.”  (Ref. 1, page 489)

 

“Promoting Life and Family….Strong leadership is needed in the Office of Science and Medicine to drive investigative review of literature for a variety of issues including the effect of abortion on prematurity and breast cancer; lack of evidence for so-called gender-affirming care; and physical and emotional damage following cross-sex treatments, especially on children. The OASH should withdraw all recommendations of and support for cross-sex medical interventions and “gender-affirming care.”  (Ref. 1, pages 490 – 491)

 

Note:  OASH is the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health.

 

Office For Civil Rights (OCR)

“OCR should return its enforcement of sex discrimination to the statutory framework of Section 1557 and Title IX. Specifically, it should:

  1. Remove all guidance issued under the Biden Administration concerning sexual orientation and gender identity under Section 1557, particularly the May 2021 announcement of enforcement82 and March 2022 statement threatening states that protect minors from genital mutilation
  2. Issue a general statement of policy specifying that it will not enforce any prohibition on sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination in the Section 1557 regulation and that it will prioritize compliance with the First Amendment, RFRA, and federal conscience laws in any case implicating those claims. DOJ should commit to defending these actions aggressively against inevitable court challenges, including under cases such as Heckler v. Chaney.
  3. Issue a proposed rule to restore the Trump regulations under Section 1557, explicitly interpreting the law not to include sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination based on the textual approach to male and female biology taken by Congress in the ACA, the need to recognize biological distinctions as part of the sound practice of health care, and the need to ensure protections of medical judgment and conscience. DOJ should agree to defend this rule to the Supreme Court if necessary.”  (Ref. 1, pages 495 – 496)

 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (DOJ)

“In the next conservative Administration, the DOJ, acting primarily through its U.S. Attorneys, should therefore:…

Where warranted and proper under federal law, initiate legal action against local officials—including District Attorneys—who deny American citizens the “equal protection of the laws” by refusing to prosecute criminal offenses in their jurisdictions. This holds true particularly for jurisdictions that refuse to enforce the law against criminals based on the Left’s favored defining characteristics of the would-be offender (race, so-called gender identity, sexual orientation, etc.) or other political considerations (e.g., immigration status).”  (Ref. 1, page 553)

 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR (DOL)

“Sex Discrimination. The Biden Administration, LGBT advocates, and some federal courts have attempted to expand the scope and definition of sex discrimination, based in part on the Supreme Court’s decision in Bostock v. Clayton County. Bostock held that “an employer who fires someone simply for being homosexual or transgender” violates Title VII’s prohibition against sex discrimination. The Court explicitly limited its holding to the hiring/firing context in Title VII and did not purport to address other Title VII issues, such as bathrooms, locker rooms, and dress codes, or other laws prohibiting sex discrimination. Notably, the Court focused on the status of the employees and used the term “transgender status” rather than the broader and amorphous term “gender identity.”

  • Restrict the application of Bostock. The new Administration should restrict Bostock’s application of sex discrimination protections to sexual orientation and transgender status in the context of hiring and firing.
  • Withdraw unlawful “notices” and “guidances.” The President should direct agencies to withdraw unlawful “notices” and “guidances” purporting to apply Bostock’s reasoning broadly outside hiring and firing.
  • Rescind regulations prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, transgender status, and sex characteristics. The President should direct agencies to rescind regulations interpreting sex discrimination provisions as prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, transgender status, sex characteristics, etc.
  • Direct agencies to refocus enforcement of sex discrimination laws. The President should direct agencies to focus their enforcement of sex discrimination laws on the biological binary meaning of “sex.”  (Ref. 1, pages 584 – 585)

 

“RELIGION

  • Provide robust protections for religious employers. America’s religious diversity means that workplaces include people of many faiths and that many employers are faith-based. Nevertheless, the Biden Administration has been hostile to people of faith, especially those with traditional beliefs about marriage, gender, and sexuality. The new Administration should enact policies with robust respect for religious exercise in the workplace, including under the First Amendment, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA),8 Title VII, and federal conscience protection laws.
  • Issue an executive order protecting religious employers and employees. The President should make clear via executive order that religious employers are free to run their businesses according to their religious beliefs, general nondiscrimination laws notwithstanding, and support participation of religious employees and employers as federal contractors and in federal activities and programs.
  • Clarify Title VII’s religious organization exemptions. Congress should clarify Title VII’s religious organization exemptions to make it more explicit that those employers may make employment decisions based on religion regardless of nondiscrimination laws.
  • Provide Robust Accommodations for Religious Employees. Title VII requires reasonable accommodations for an employee’s sincerely held religious beliefs, observances, or practices unless it poses an undue hardship on the employer’s business. These accommodation protections also apply to issues related to marriage, gender, and sexuality.”  (Ref. 1, pages 585 – 586)

 

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

“VETERANS HEALTH ADMINISTRATION (VHA) 

Needed Reforms

  • Rescind all departmental clinical policy directives that are contrary to principles of conservative governance starting with abortion services and gender reassignment surgery. Neither aligns with service-connected conditions that would warrant VA’s providing this type of clinical care, and both follow the Left’s pernicious trend of abusing the role of government to further its own agenda.”  (Ref. 1, page 644)

 

References:

  1. Mandate for Leadership, The Conservative Promise, Project 2025, Presidential Transition Project; https://static.project2025.org/2025_MandateForLeadership_FULL.pdf