When a man asks a woman to marry him, he asks her to share his name. When he joins a club, a team, or a church, he links his own identity to the group he is joining. Understandably, he wants the name to stand for something clear and meaningful.

For some time, many within our organization have been concerned that our name, Alliance Defense Fund, does not sufficiently, accurately convey who we are and what we do. It was the name chosen by our Founders, for good reasons at the time. Back then, we were not engaged in any direct litigation ourselves – we provided legal and financial resources for other Christian attorneys. So, the term “fund” was very appropriate.

Nowadays, though, we do our own litigating. We actively defend clients and engage the opposition. We are moving beyond our country’s borders, seeking out means and opportunities to protect the freedom of people of faith all over the world.

“Alliance Defense Fund” did not really capture any of this very well. So, after thorough research, careful planning, and intense preparation, we are making a transition. Beginning this month, the new name of Alliance Defense Fund is “Alliance Defending Freedom.”

We want this new name to communicate two crucial themes: stewardship and reputation.

Our old name caused confusion for almost everyone – allies, Allied Ministry Friends, clients, the media. This is poor stewardship. The nature of the work we do requires us to secure resources and assure clients and allies by conveying quickly and clearly who we are, what we do, and why it matters. Anything that impedes this understanding is a hindrance to our ministry. It damages the efficiency, and ultimately, the impact of what we do, thereby, making it unworthy of the God who has given us our mission.

Our new name changes this. Alliance Defending Freedom tells people what is important to us: building alliances. It tells people what we do: we defend. It tells people what our goal is: freedom. It’s simple. It’s straightforward. It resonates. This is good stewardship.

Our reputation is what people think of when they hear our name. We do not want them thinking of us as a “fund.” We want them to associate us with freedom. We want them to know that we are passionate about defending freedom…that defending it is the mission of our lives…that we defend it “for faith” and “for justice.” This is why we have built our new logo around these two phrases – to affirm our purpose of opening doors for the Gospel, and to ensure equality before the law for people of faith.

We hope this new name will resonate with you because we value deeply all of those who stand with us, work with us, and fight with us in the cause of religious freedom.

After all, this is what our ministry has always been: an alliance defending freedom. With this rebranding, we are just making it official.

Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys have appealed to the New Mexico Supreme Court a May 31 decision by a lower court finding a photography company guilty of discrimination for declining to photograph a same-sex commitment ceremony. Furthermore, the court ordered the company to pay almost $6700 in attorneys’ fees to the lesbian who filed the complaint. The ominous implications of this case could affect churches and other religious groups who believe marriage is defined as one man and one woman.

In 2006, Elane Huguenin, the photographer for Elane Photography Inc., and co-owner of the company with her husband Jon Huguenin, declined a request to help “celebrate” a same-sex commitment ceremony for a woman who inquired via email to the company’s website. The Huguenins are Christians who believe that God designed marriage as one man and one woman, and that defining marriage is the best way for societies to help children and adults. They could not in good conscience allow their company’s photography services to be used to promote the message of the ceremony – that it is a good thing to redefine marriage to include same-sex couples.

Jon and Elaine thought this was the end of the matter until they received papers from the state of New Mexico explaining that a complaint of “sexual orientation” discrimination had been filed against their company.  A few months later, after a one day trial, the New Mexico Human Rights Commission found Elane Photography, Inc., guilty of “sexual orientation” discrimination and ordered the company to pay the attorney’s fees of the woman who filed the complaint.  Elane Photography has appealed the ruling, and both courts that have heard the case have rejected the defense that the U.S. and state constitution’s protections for freedom of speech and free exercise of religion protect Elane Photography from this legal action. Alliance Defending Freedom lawyers have argued that the First Amendment protects business owners from being forced by a customer to endorse a message the company owners do not support.  We have appealed to the New Mexico Supreme Court and will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary.

The use of nondiscrimination laws in this manner to punish business owners and those with professional licenses who dissent from the drive to redefine marriage violates their constitutional right to freedom of conscience in the marketplace.  Alliance Defending Freedom has also seen this ominous trend spread to religious groups.  New Jersey officials have allowed a lawsuit to go forward against a Methodist group that owns a beach pavilion for religious meetings in Ocean Grove, New Jersey.  The Methodist group declined to rent its facility to a lesbian couple that wanted to use it for a civil union ceremony.  The Methodist group is currently fighting accusations of discrimination filed with state officials.

What kind of threat does this represent for churches that hold to a Biblical definition of marriage?  Can a church be sued for discrimination like Elane Photography if it declines to allow a same-sex couple to attend the church’s married couples’ retreat? At this time, such a lawsuit might be difficult to sustain against a church because the church is not a business.  However, government officials might take aim at a church’s tax-exempt status in such a situation.

This troubling possibility happened in the Ocean Grove case where New Jersey officials revoked a specific property tax-exemption for the pavilion that they had earlier granted to the nonprofit Methodist group if it used the facility for recreational purposes.  Although this is a different kind of property tax than the one most governmental entities grant to religious groups for their houses of worship, it shows the way officials can punish religious groups that advocate marriage defined as one man and one woman.

Also, if pastors or church personnel are licensed counselors or social workers, there might be discrimination complaints filed with state licensing boards urging them to discipline the licensed professionals for holding the “wrong” views on marriage.  Alliance Defending Freedom has been involved in cases like this involving Julea Ward in Michigan and Don Mendell in Maine.

It is important to persevere and protect the right of conscience.  A Massachusetts veterans’ group that sponsors Boston’s annual St. Patrick’s Day parade lost at every court level when it was sued for declining to include a homosexual activist group in its parade. Victory only happened when it reached the U.S. Supreme Court.  In one of the first cases Alliance Defending Freedom ever helped with in 1995, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously reversed the lower court’s decision and ruled in favor of the veterans’ group’s First Amendment rights not to be forced to advocate a message it disagrees with. We can and do win when we stand and fight for religious freedom.

Churches must be aware of the conflict between religious freedom and the homosexual legal agenda.  If you or any of your church members find themselves the target of a complaint like that experienced by Elane Huguenin, contact Alliance Defending Freedom immediately.

Now that the dust has somewhat settled after the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision upholding the Affordable Care Act (also known as Obamacare), it is important to consider what effect the Supreme Court’s decision has on churches.

The main impact for churches is that, in upholding Obamacare, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) mandate that employers provide contraceptive and abortifacient coverage for their employees is still in effect.  The HHS mandate is one part of Obamacare but it is the most direct threat to religious freedom posed by the law.  Under this mandate, employers must provide coverage in their health insurance plans for contraceptives, including abortion-inducing drugs such as “Plan B,” also called the “morning-after pill,” as well as a new drug named “ella” which is commonly called the “week-after pill.”  This mandate is imposed on employers regardless of their religious beliefs against such drugs.

Unless Congress repeals Obamacare, the law and the HHS mandate are here to stay.  Here are some important take-aways for churches.

Not just a Catholic issue

Churches must understand that the HHS mandate is not just a Catholic issue.  While the Catholic Church is particularly in the crosshairs because of its religious beliefs against contraception, the HHS mandate specifically requires coverage of more than just contraceptive drugs.  It also requires coverage of abortion-inducing drugs that every evangelical Christian should oppose.

Churches are exempt

Churches are exempt from the HHS mandate.  An exception in the law protects churches from having to provide healthcare coverage for their employees that include contraceptives or abortion-inducing drugs.  The exemption, though, is rather narrow and basically only applies to churches or integrated auxiliaries of churches.

Many religious organizations are not exempt

The exception in the law that exempts churches does not exempt many religious organizations, including those reaching out to the poor and needy.  Church, parachurch, and other religious ministries that have more than 50 employees are in danger of being subjected to the HHS mandate, regardless of their religious beliefs.  Christian businesses are not exempt from the HHS mandate.

Alliance Defending Freedom lawsuits against the HHS mandate will continue

Alliance Defending Freedom is currently involved in three separate lawsuits challenging the HHS mandate.  The lawsuits are on behalf of two Christian colleges, Louisiana College and Geneva College, and a Christian business, Hercules Industries.

There are several more lawsuits pending on the same issue in different courts.  These lawsuits will continue and, after the Supreme Court’s decision, are even more important.

What Must Churches Do?

There are several things that churches must do in light of the Supreme Court’s decision upholding Obamacare.

1.  Be informed and aware of the direct threat posed to religious freedom by Obamacare.  Alliance Defending Freedom has put together a great two-minute video that exposes this threat. Share this video with your congregation.  We also have a resource page on our website that explains Obamacare and the HHS mandate.

2.  If your church has a ministry with more than 50 employees or you are part of a religious organization with more than 50 employees, be aware that the HHS mandate that is part of Obamacare may apply.  If you are concerned about the application of the HHS mandate, contact Alliance Defending Freedom to evaluate your situation.

3.  Provide support to Christian business owners in your congregation that are subject to the HHS mandate and help them  know how best to stand against this direct assault on religious freedom.

4.  If you are a pastor, preach a sermon that helps your congregation know and understand the HHS mandate and its application to people of faith.  Help them understand that this HHS mandate is not just a Catholic issue but is a direct threat to the religious freedom of all people of faith.

5.  Support Alliance Defending Freedom and our efforts to have the HHS mandate declared unconstitutional.  Put bluntly, these lawsuits are very expensive and we need your financial support and your prayers.  You can give online at this link.

The church must be engaged on this issue.  As Alan Sears, president and CEO of Alliance Defending Freedom, succinctly put it, “If the federal government can succeed in forcing people to violate their faith, it will have the power to force anyone to do anything.”  That’s how stark the battle lines are.  The voice of the church must be heard on this issue.  It’s time to speak up.

Article by Nathan A. Cherry

“I just spent several days with Pastor Jim Garlow of the Skyline Wesleyan Church at a conference we both attended in Naples, Florida. It takes mere minutes to figure out that Pastor Garlow is a passionate preacher of God’s Word, boldly sharing the message of Jesus with anyone that will listen. It takes just another minute to conclude that Pastor Garlow loves America and refuses to see it fundamentally altered into an oppressive tyranny akin to other nations around the world. And to this end Pastor Garlow plans to preach a message that is typically viewed as “off limits” by the IRS. Further, Garlow will record it and send it to the IRS.

It’s all part of Pulpit Freedom Sunday, a day of speaking up to defy unconstitutional speech limitations the IRS and government try to bully pastor’s with in order to keep them silent (ironic for a group that wants to pass “anti-bullying” legislation). Come Sunday, Oct 7 Pastor Garlow an hundreds, perhaps thousands of other pastor’s will say “enough is enough” and preach biblically based messages on social issues like marriage, family, abortion, and religious freedom.”

Since the adoption of the “Johnson Amendment” in 1954 churches…..Read the rest at http://engagefamilyminute.com/2012/07/wanted-bold-pastors-to-preach-without-fear/

Check out www.PulpitFreedom.org for more information on Pulpit Freedom Sunday.

Actor Alec Baldwin of the television show 30 Rock and the movie Hunt for Red October, is seriously considering a run for Mayor of New York City, according to his brother Billy Baldwin.  During an interview with CNN’s Piers Morgan last Tuesday night, Billy Baldwin said Alec’s possible candidacy is “very real,” and that Alec is ”very committed and extremely  bright and knowledgeable and I think he could do it and he could run.”

The race for Mayor in New York City could affect religious liberty there because the Mayor directs the NYC Department of Education, which has a policy banning religious groups from conducting worship services during non-school hours. The Mayor has the authority to order an immediate repeal of the Department of Education policy.   The current mayor, Michael Bloomberg has refused repeated requests by City Council members and local pastors to reverse the anti-worship service policy.

ADF is challenging the policy in court in the Bronx Household of Faith case, and won a permanent injunction against the policy last week.  We expect the NYC DOE to appeal the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.  The question of whether the next Mayor of NYC can alter the policy may be moot if we successfully defeat the policy in court.

We would welcome a victorious resolution of this case by the Mayor ordering the repeal of the policy.  Although the election for the new mayor of NYC is not until November 2013, it is important to ask the candidates for their position on ending the ban on worship services.  If Alec Baldwin does run for Mayor, we hope he shows true support for religious liberty and the right of all people to worship the true Rock of Ages.