A Win for Women and Women’s Sports: Guest Column

Earlier this month, the Court of Arbitration for Sport, an international court for sports governance, rejected a challenge from trans-identifying swimmer Lia Thomas to overturn policies that prevent men from competing in women-only “elite” swimming events.  

Thomas, a man claiming to be a woman, is the former University of Pennsylvania swimmer who won the national championship in women’s swimming. He was seeking to overturn the policy in hopes of competing in the 2024 Olympics. However, the policy issued by World Aquatics, the body that governs elite swimming competitions, protects women’s swimming competitions from trans-identifying men who have gone through male puberty. 

Women deserve the safety and opportunity that comes with competing on an even playing field—with other women. And the court’s decision to uphold this policy helps ensure that safety and opportunity for women will continue, even in our strange new world.  

The World Aquatics celebrated the court’s decision. As they said, “we believe [it] is a major step forward in our efforts to protect women’s sport.” Let’s hope the sanity continues. 

Copyright 2024 by the Colson Center for Christian Worldview. Reprinted from BreakPoint.org with permission.

Ohio ACLU Continues to Challenge Pro-Life Laws Under State’s Abortion Amendment

The ACLU in Ohio has continued to challenge pro-life laws under the state’s recently enacted abortion amendment.

Last month, the ACLU filed a motion in court challenging state laws that restrict “telemed” abortions and that prevent certain healthcare professionals — such as physician assistants, nurse practitioners, and certified nurse midwives — from administering abortion drugs.

The ACLU has also joined a lawsuit in Ohio challenging informed-consent laws that require abortionists to give women information about abortion and provide them with at least 24 hours to consider their options before proceeding with the abortion.

Since Ohio enshrined abortion in its state constitution last year, the lawsuits claim informed-consent requirements and medical licensing laws unconstitutionally restrict abortions in the state. Cases like these provide a glimpse of what could happen if the Arkansas Abortion Amendment of 2024 passes this year.

The proposed Arkansas Abortion Amendment would write abortion into the state constitution.

It says the state cannot “prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion” during the first five months of pregnancy — allowing thousands of elective abortions every year and paving the way for taxpayer-funded abortions in Arkansas.

The amendment does not contain any medical licensing requirements for abortionists.

The Arkansas Abortion Amendment also creates various exceptions permitting abortion throughout all nine months of pregnancy, and it nullifies all state abortion laws that conflict with the amendment — which jeopardizes basic health and safety standards for abortion.

These lawsuits in Ohio show just how easily abortion laws in Arkansas could be challenged in court if unrestricted abortion is written into the state constitution.

To date, multiple organizations have come out against the abortion amendment, including:

  • Arkansas Right to Life
  • Family Council Action Committee
  • Choose Life Arkansas
  • NWA Coalition for Life
  • The Arkansas Committee For Ethics Policy
  • The Catholic Diocese of Little Rock
  • Saline Decline to Sign
  • Stronger Arkansas
  • Stop Abortion On Demand
  • Students for Life of America

You can download a copy of the Arkansas Abortion Amendment here.

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