Guest Column: Where Do Human Rights Come from, Senator?

Last week, democratic Senator Tim Kaine made this bold statement during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing:

The notion that rights don’t come from laws and don’t come from the government but come from the Creator—that’s what the Iranian government believes. It’s a theocratic regime that bases its rule on Sharia law and targets Sunnis, Bahá’ís, Jews, Christians and other religious minorities. And they do it because they believe that they understand what natural rights are from their Creator. So, the statement that our rights do not come from our laws or our governments is extremely troubling. 

It’s one thing when a progressive media figure says something like this. For example, back in 2024, Politico’s Heidi Przybyla warned that believing human rights “don’t come from Congress, they don’t come from the Supreme Court, they come from God,” makes one a Christian nationalist! Even so, it’s another thing altogether when a sitting U.S. Senator and former vice-presidential candidate claims that this fundamental Christian belief is indistinguishable from Islamic fundamentalists.  

Kaine’s comments were quickly condemned by fellow Senators and religious commentators for, among other things, rejecting the words of the Declaration of Independence. The Senator also failed to realize that his own belief, that rights come from government, is what every communist, fascist, and totalitarian regime in history believed. Still, the first part of the Senator’s claim is not fully wrong.  

The Mullahs in Iran, like all committed Muslims, believe that human rights come from God. So do Christians. But that is where the similarities end. As Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who has lived in cultures rooted in both Islamic and Christian notions of human rights, says in the new film Truth Rising“You don’t have to imagine how life would be under Islam. … All you have to do is go to any of these places that Western Civilization has barely touched, and the education you’ll get is much better than Harvard.” 

In fact, though Muslims and Christians agree that our rights come from God, they hold widely diverging views about what those rights are, how those rights should be understood, and how the government should recognize and enforce human rights. That’s because Muslims and Christians hold fundamentally different and conflicting ideas about who God is and who humans are. 

As Ayaan Hirsi Ali also points out in Truth Rising, the God of Islam reveals only his will and demands our submission to it. The true God has revealed Himself in Jesus Christ and offers freedom. The Christian God created humans in His own image. He “determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place, [so] that they should seek God, and perhaps feel their way toward him and find him.” Not only does God want to be known, He made humans in such a way as to know Him. Islam refers to God as love but then reveals him to be vindictive and cruel.  

According to Islam, humans have not fallen. According to Christianity, humans are sinful, having inherited a fallen nature from our first parents. If humans are inherently ordered toward sin and evil, then a government run by humans will be prone to abuse its citizens. Thus, it must be ordered toward preserving those rights which God has ordained. In an Islamic society, humans are not seen as bearing God’s image and need only be forced into submission by the state, which is inseparable from the religion.

And so, in practice, Islam looks far more like the totalitarian governments that think of human rights like Senator Kaine does. If humans do not have intrinsic dignity as individuals, individuals must be, at times, sacrificed on the altar of the state or the collective. In just the twentieth century alone, Josef Stalin oversaw the executions of 800,000 perceived political opponents in the Soviet Union, and many put the overall death toll of his policies at 20 million. In China under Mao Zedong, 15 to 45 million people were slaughtered. Cambodia under Pol Pot and Germany must also be put on this same list. Whenever and wherever human rights are attributed to the government, they are trampled. As Chuck Colson often said, “If government thinks they can grant rights, then they can also take them away.”  

The very idea that humans have rights that transcend class and sex, tribe and nation, to the very individual, has had a singular source in history. In his book, A Brief History of Thought, the atheist French philosopher Luc Ferry identified that source:  

“Christianity was to introduce the notion that humans were equal in dignity, an unprecedented idea at the time and one to which our world owes its entire democratic inheritance.”

Copyright 2025 by the Colson Center for Christian Worldview. Reprinted from BreakPoint.org with permission.

Remembering Dr. James Dobson

From left: Family Council President Jerry Cox and Dr. James Dobson. (File photo: 2007).

If there were a Mount Rushmore of God’s men in America, Dr. James Dobson’s face would be etched on it. His influence is without peer. Millions of families have learned from him God’s way of staying married, raising children, and standing boldly for truth in the public square.

I first saw Dr. Dobson in person in 1989 when he announced the formation of the nationwide network of state policy councils—of which Family Council remains a part to this day. After a long day of speeches from sharp men in dark suits, Dr. Dobson approached the podium. He wore a simple sweater, and when he began to speak, it felt less like a lecture and more like a conversation in his own living room. His quiet, humble words carried extraordinary power and inspiration.

I remember thinking, “Put me in, Coach. I’m ready to play.

Thirty-six years later, because of him—and by the grace of God—I’m still in the fight. I am convinced that I would not be here today, directing Family Council, if God had not spoken to me through Dr. James Dobson.

His legacy is not only measured in words spoken or books written, but in the countless lives he has touched and the generations that continue to be shaped by his faithfulness. His influence for good is truly beyond measure.

Abortion Pill 22 Times More Dangerous Than FDA Claims: New Study

A new study shows the RU-486 abortion pill regimen is at least 22 times more dangerous than U.S. Food and Drug Administration labeling indicates.

The study raises serious concerns about the harm that abortion drugs cause.

Researchers from the Ethics and Public Policy Center reviewed insurance claim data from 865,727 RU-486 prescriptions as part of the “largest-known study” on abortion pill complications.

Their data found that from 2017 to 2023, nearly 11% of women who used abortion drugs experienced sepsis, infection, hemorrhaging, or another serious adverse event within 45 days following a mifepristone abortion. That is significantly higher than the FDA’s figure claiming “less than 0.5 percent” experienced complications in clinical trials for the drug regimen.

The study concluded:

  • The FDA should immediately reinstate its earlier, stronger patient safety protocols to ensure physician responsibility for women who take mifepristone under their care, as well as mandate full reporting of its side effects.
  • The FDA should further investigate the harm mifepristone causes to women and, based on objective safety criteria, reconsider its approval altogether.

We have written repeatedly about the dangers of abortion drugs like RU-486.

Last year, Family Council joined a pro-life amicus brief by more than 30 other state and national groups as part of two lawsuits over the FDA’s decision to approve the abortion drug mifepristone, also known as RU-486, and to eliminate safety protocols and standards for the drug.

Among other things, the amicus brief noted:

  • The FDA also removed safety standards requiring a woman to be assessed in-person by a doctor before receiving RU-486.
  • The FDA knew about the significant negative health consequences of mifepristone — or RU-486 — before approving it in 2000.
  • Despite the danger, the FDA has removed safety requirements designed to protect women and weakened the reporting requirements for adverse events caused by RU-486.

Abortion-inducing drugs are dangerous. Official reports from the Arkansas Department of Health reveal that between 2020 and 2022 at least 1 in 50 women who took abortion drugs in Arkansas experienced complications.

Over the years, Arkansas’ state legislators have enacted various laws prohibiting abortion and preventing abortion drugs from being delivered by mail in Arkansas. But the FDA and the federal government have taken steps that threaten to undermine these good, pro-life laws.

This new data from the Ethics and Public Policy Center once again shows abortion drugs not only kill unborn children but also harm women. That’s simply one more reason why our state needs to protect people from these dangerous drugs.

Articles appearing on this website are written with the aid of Family Council’s researchers and writers.