Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse, founder of the Ruth Institute, joins Father Jack to discuss the Institute’s recent involvement in a major Supreme Court case on counseling freedom. She explains the arguments behind their amicus brief challenging Colorado’s ban on “conversion therapy” and highlights the broader implications for free speech, religious liberty, and therapeutic choice.

Dr. Morse also takes a critical look at the Trevor Project, a well-funded LGBTQ youth organization, raising concerns about its influence, federal funding, and online platforms. Tune in for a compelling conversation about the intersection of law, culture, and the future of family advocacy.

Resources Mentioned:

• Ruth Institute: www.ruthinstitute.org

• Ruth Institute YouTube Channel

Key Points: 1. Supreme Court Case and Amicus Brief:

• Dr. Morse and the Ruth Institute filed an amicus brief in a Supreme Court case challenging a Colorado law banning so-called "conversion therapy."

• The brief was submitted under the title “Brief of Sexual Orientation Scholars in Support of Petitioners.”

• The case involves a Christian therapist claiming the law restricts her religious and professional freedom.

• The Ruth Institute argues that bans on such therapy suppress alternative therapeutic approaches and violate rights of both therapists and clients.

• Father Paul Sullins provided statistical critiques in the brief, and Morse contributed case studies and analysis questioning assumptions about sexuality, including the claim that people are “born gay.”

2. Critique of the Trevor Project:

• Morse criticizes the Trevor Project, a suicide prevention group for LGBTQ youth, claiming it is ideologically biased and heavily funded.

• She notes that YouTube links the Trevor Project to content critical of LGBTQ identities, labeling alternatives like conversion therapy as harmful.

• Morse supports the Trump administration’s decision to withdraw federal funding from the Trevor Project, redirecting it to general suicide prevention efforts.

• Concerns were raised about the Trevor Project’s online community features, which critics have described as vulnerable to abuse. Morse references critiques from “Gays Against Groomers” and the California Family Council.

3. Underlying Themes:

• The conversation strongly critiques mainstream LGBTQ support structures and what Morse and the Ruth Institute view as coercive or ideologically driven policies.

• Emphasis is placed on the rights of therapists and clients to explore identity and trauma without mandated affirming approaches.