THE SPIRITUAL SICKNESS OF FEAR: 3,000 YEARS OF LGBTQIA+ PERSECUTION AND THE RIGHT TO BELONG
How a children's book, a Facebook post, and a mother's objection reveal centuries of religious control, criminalization, and the struggle for human dignity
By Paula Josephine Sadler Founding Minister, Universal Rainbow Faith Activating the Rainbow Light of Love November 14, 2026
A Children's Book That Opened a Door to History
It began with a Facebook post.
A mother named Becky Hatton described visiting a library with her four-year-old daughter. While browsing the children's section, her daughter selected a brightly illustrated picture book titled Marley's Pride, written by Joëlle Retener and illustrated by Deann Wiley.
The book follows Marley, a nonbinary child who experiences anxiety in crowded spaces and attends a Pride celebration to support their grandparent, Zaza. Through the story, Marley explores friendship, courage, community, belonging, and the contributions of transgender historical figures.
Published in 2024 by Barefoot Books and intended for children approximately ages three through nine, Marley's Pride became a 2025 American Library Association Stonewall Children's Honor Book.
Yet what appeared to be an innocent encounter between a child and a library book prompted a concerned reaction from the mother.
The Original Facebook Post
The following is transcribed from the Facebook post shared with me, attributed to Becky Hatton:
I was at the library browsing books for my 4 yr old when she grabbed this one off the shelf.. I started browsing through it, only to discover what was actually inside😳Im sorry but i do not think this SHOULD NOT be a book marketed toward young children. The book is called Marley's Pride and it's centered around a Pride festival, introducing young children to pronouns, gender identity, and topics that I personally believe are far beyond what a young child needs to be learning about in picture books. Listen, teaching children to be kind, loving, and respectful toward EVERYONE is one thing. I will never argue against that. But there is a BIG difference between teaching kindness and introducing complex topics surrounding sexuality and gender identity to children who are barely old enough to tie their shoes. Why have we become so comfortable with pushing adult conversations into childhood? Why are these topics being packaged in colorful illustrations and cute little picture books specifically designed to attract the attention of toddlers and preschoolers? Our children deserve to have a childhood. They deserve books about friendship, imagination, animals, adventures, kindness, and just being little kids.
Reading this post, I found myself deeply troubled—not because the mother wanted to make decisions about what her own child reads, but because of the larger assumption beneath her objections.
Why should a story about an LGBTQIA+ child, family, or community automatically be considered an adult subject?
Why is a story about a mother and father considered perfectly appropriate for a four-year-old, while a story about two mothers, two fathers, or a transgender family member is characterized as exposing children to adult sexuality?
And perhaps most importantly, how can a parent know that the child standing beside them in the library will not someday discover that they themselves are LGBTQIA+?
The mother sees her four-year-old daughter as she is today. She cannot know every aspect of the person her daughter will become.
What if that child eventually discovers she is lesbian, bisexual, transgender, nonbinary, or otherwise part of the LGBTQIA+ community?
What if she grows up with an LGBTQIA+ friend, sibling, teacher, or family member?
Would it not be better for her to have encountered positive stories of belonging rather than silence, fear, and shame?
These questions led me to begin researching the history of the criminalization and vilification of LGBTQIA+ people.
What I discovered was a history stretching back thousands of years.
And what disturbed me most was not only the legal persecution. It was the spiritual and religious justification repeatedly used to sustain it.
My Response: Every LGBTQIA+ Adult Was Once a Child
My immediate reaction was this:
What concerns me far more than the availability of this book is why any parent would not want their child to see that people of every sexual orientation and gender identity deserve representation, dignity, and belonging.
For every parent who feels this book is inappropriate, there are other parents who want these materials available.
And there are millions of LGBTQIA+ adults who were once children themselves.
They attended schools. They read picture books. They imagined their futures. They dreamed of falling in love, building families, finding meaningful work, and being accepted by the people around them.
Some experienced loving homes where they were affirmed.
Others were taught that their very existence was sinful, shameful, unnatural, or dangerous.
Many grew up without ever encountering a positive reflection of themselves in the books they read, the history they studied, or the religious teachings they received.
That absence of representation matters.
For generations, LGBTQIA+ people were present in every community while being largely invisible in the stories society chose to tell about itself.
And for far too long, religious authority was used to justify that invisibility.
The Ancient Roots of Criminalization
Our historical investigation begins in ancient Mesopotamia.
The Middle Assyrian Laws, dating to the second millennium BCE, contain some of the earliest surviving legal provisions concerning sexual acts between men.
One provision prescribed severe bodily punishment, including castration, for particular male same-sex conduct.
The precise meaning and circumstances of these ancient provisions remain subjects of scholarly interpretation. Ancient Assyrians did not organize human sexuality according to the modern identities of gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender.
Nevertheless, these writings demonstrate that governments were attempting to regulate and punish certain forms of same-sex intimacy more than 3,000 years ago.
This is an extraordinary realization.
Thousands of years before the United States existed, political authorities were already imposing punishments concerning the intimate lives of human beings.
But an equally important historical qualification must be acknowledged: this was not one continuous legal system extending unchanged from Assyria to modern America.
Different societies developed different rules, religious beliefs, and attitudes. Some were considerably more accepting of same-sex relationships and gender diversity than others.
The recurring pattern, however, is unmistakable.
Human authorities repeatedly claimed the power to determine which forms of intimacy were permissible and which deserved punishment.
Sodom and Gomorrah: How a Story Became a Weapon
One of the most consequential religious narratives associated with homosexuality is the biblical story of Sodom and Gomorrah.
The account appears in Genesis chapters 18 and 19.
God hears an outcry concerning the wickedness of Sodom. Abraham questions whether innocent people should perish alongside the guilty.
Two angelic visitors enter Sodom, where Lot welcomes them into his home.
A hostile crowd subsequently surrounds the house and demands access to the visitors for what is commonly understood as sexual assault.
The narrative is one of threatened violence, domination, and the abuse of strangers.
It does not describe a loving, consensual same-sex relationship.
Yet over centuries, interpreters increasingly associated Sodom's destruction with sexual acts between men.
The word sodomy eventually entered religious and legal language as a category of prohibited sexual behavior.
But the Bible itself offers another revealing interpretation.
In Ezekiel 16:49, the prophet identifies Sodom's wrongdoing as pride, abundance, idleness, and failure to care for the poor and needy.
Jesus also invokes Sodom when discussing communities that reject and mistreat messengers and visitors.
Other biblical passages, including Jude 1:7, connect Sodom with sexual immorality, and religious traditions have long disagreed about the implications.
We must distinguish these interpretations rather than pretending that every biblical author or religious tradition understood the story identically.
From the perspective of Universal Rainbow Faith, the spiritual lesson is profound.
A story involving violence, injustice, and the failure to protect vulnerable strangers should never be used to justify violence, injustice, and the persecution of vulnerable people.
Yet that is precisely the contradiction I see in so much of this history.
When Religious Authority Became Criminal Law
In medieval Europe, religious and secular authorities increasingly intertwined.
Sexual behavior was often judged according to narrow expectations concerning marriage, reproduction, gender roles, and religious morality.
Conduct considered sinful by particular religious authorities could become punishable under civil law.
In 1533, under King Henry VIII, England enacted the Buggery Act.
The statute made certain sexual acts punishable by death.
Its language and subsequent interpretation encompassed conduct involving men and women as well as men with men. These historical laws frequently targeted acts rather than identities as we understand them today.
Nevertheless, their enforcement and the fear they generated contributed to centuries of persecution.
When English settlers established colonies in North America, they brought these legal and religious traditions with them.
In 1610, colonial Virginia adopted a law against sodomy carrying the death penalty.
By 2026, 416 years have passed since that early colonial prohibition.
It is difficult to comprehend the generations of human beings who lived under laws that could criminalize their private intimacy.
These laws operated alongside additional forms of persecution against people who failed to conform to accepted gender and sexual expectations.
What concerns me spiritually is the transformation of perceived moral superiority into state power.
Once a government claims that one religious interpretation gives it the authority to punish harmless private behavior, individual conscience and personal liberty become vulnerable.
A religious belief may be sincerely held.
But sincerity alone does not establish that a government has the moral right to imprison, humiliate, or execute someone who does not share that belief.
Four Centuries of Criminalization in America
The American Revolution brought declarations of liberty and human equality.
Yet the newly independent nation inherited criminal prohibitions that had originated under colonial government.
Throughout the nineteenth and much of the twentieth centuries, sodomy laws remained in place across the United States.
These laws were often accompanied by policing, social stigma, and employment discrimination.
By the 1950s, all 50 states still criminalized particular forms of consensual sodomy.
During the Lavender Scare, thousands of gay and lesbian Americans were investigated or dismissed from government employment.
Teachers, civil servants, military personnel, and other workers could lose their careers because of actual or suspected homosexuality.
During this period, homosexuality was also classified within psychiatric diagnostic systems.
In 1952, Christine Jorgensen became internationally famous following news of her gender transition.
Her story appeared in newspapers and magazines across America, making gender transition a subject of widespread public discussion.
Yet educational institutions continued to reinforce conventional expectations of masculinity and femininity.
In our research, we examined a 1961 health education guide produced through the National Education Association and American Medical Association.
That publication recommended instruction concerning adolescent sexuality, traditional gender roles, emotional development, and relationships between boys and girls.
The educational establishment was not avoiding sexuality or gender.
It was actively shaping how young people were expected to understand both.
What was largely missing was positive recognition of LGBTQIA+ people.
In 1962, Illinois became the first state to eliminate its criminal prohibition on private consensual adult sodomy.
In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality itself from its diagnostic classification of mental disorders.
Nevada decriminalized private consensual adult same-sex sexual activity in 1993.
And finally, on June 26, 2003, the United States Supreme Court decided Lawrence v. Texas, establishing constitutional protection against laws criminalizing private consensual sexual intimacy between adults.
It was not until 2015 that nationwide marriage equality was established.
And it was not until June 15, 2020, that the Supreme Court ruled in Bostock v. Clayton County that Title VII's prohibition on sex discrimination includes discrimination against employees for being gay or transgender.
Consider that timeline.
People alive today remember when their private relationships could be criminalized, when marriage equality was unavailable, and when they lacked nationwide federal employment protections.
These are not merely distant historical injustices.
They are part of living memory.
The Global Crisis Is Not Over
The most disturbing realization is that criminalization has not disappeared.
In 2026, dozens of countries continue to criminalize consensual same-sex sexual activity.
In some jurisdictions, the death penalty remains legally prescribed or possible.
Uganda provides a particularly serious example.
Its Anti-Homosexuality Act of 2023 provides life imprisonment for consensual same-sex sexual acts and the death penalty for certain offenses legally classified as aggravated homosexuality, including repeat offenses.
This does not mean every LGBTQIA+ person faces an automatic death sentence. But the law creates extraordinary risks for those prosecuted under its provisions.
Human Rights Watch has documented how the legislation has contributed to arrests, evictions, intimidation, and violence.
In March 2026, the organization reported that two women had been arrested in Uganda after allegedly kissing in public.
Imagine living under a legal system where expressing affection could lead to arrest.
Imagine what such laws communicate to a young person who is beginning to understand their identity.
What spiritual message does a government send when it threatens people with punishment for loving someone of the same sex?
From the perspective of Universal Rainbow Faith, laws that criminalize consensual intimacy cannot be reconciled with the sacred dignity of every human being.
Russia: When Transgender People Are Denied the Right to Family
Russia illustrates another form of persecution: the restriction of transgender people's family and parental rights.
In 2023, Russia enacted legislation banning legal gender recognition and most gender-transition medical interventions. The legislation also barred transgender people from becoming adoptive or foster parents.
In November 2024, Russia enacted additional restrictions concerning adoption and guardianship by citizens of countries that permit legal gender transition.
These are separate measures, but together they reveal a broader governmental effort to enforce a particular vision of sex, gender, and family.
Consider the spiritual contradiction.
A transgender adult may have the ability, financial stability, emotional maturity, and love necessary to provide a safe home for a child.
Yet that individual's gender identity becomes grounds for exclusion.
What does this accomplish for the child?
Does it create more loving homes?
Does it reduce the number of children in need of care?
Or does it elevate a government's prescribed gender ideology above the actual welfare of children and families?
A person's capacity to love, nurture, and protect a child cannot be determined simply by whether that person is heterosexual, gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender.
America in 2026: Religious Freedom or Religious Dominion?
The United States now faces renewed arguments about religion, gender identity, education, and governmental authority.
The Make America Great Again movement has included influential Christian nationalist constituencies, particularly among white evangelical Protestants.
Christian nationalism is not identical to Christianity.
It is a political and religious outlook that seeks a privileged relationship between Christian identity, national identity, and governmental authority.
In 2025, President Donald Trump issued executive orders affecting federal recognition of gender identity and the interpretation of sex in government policy.
The administration also created a federal task force concerning alleged anti-Christian discrimination and established a Religious Liberty Commission.
Supporters describe these measures as protections for biological sex distinctions, parental rights, conscience, and religious liberty.
Critics argue that some of these measures restrict transgender people's recognition and rights and privilege particular religious perspectives in federal policy.
The underlying tension deserves careful examination.
Where does protecting the religious freedom of one group end and imposing that group's religious views upon everyone else begin?
Religious freedom is essential.
Christians must be free to practice Christianity. Muslims must be free to practice Islam. Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, and members of other religious communities must be free to practice their traditions.
People who follow no religion must likewise remain free from governmental religious coercion.
And LGBTQIA+ people must remain free to live with dignity, regardless of whether their identities or relationships are approved by another person's religious tradition.
The Constitution does not establish a national religion.
A government that serves a religiously diverse population must protect that diversity rather than require every citizen to live according to one interpretation of spiritual truth.
The United States Is Not Religiously Uniform
According to Pew Research Center's Religious Landscape Study, approximately 62% of American adults identify as Christian.
About 29% are religiously unaffiliated, and approximately 7% belong to non-Christian religious traditions.
Even among Christians, interpretations of sexuality, gender, marriage, and religious freedom vary considerably.
Christianity is not a single political ideology.
There are affirming churches, LGBTQIA+ Christian ministers, and religious communities whose interpretation of the Gospel emphasizes inclusion and equality.
Universal Rainbow Faith stands within the wider spiritual movement affirming the sacred worth of LGBTQIA+ people.
The political question is not whether Christians should have a voice in American society.
Of course they should.
The question is whether any particular religious movement should possess the authority to dictate the rights, identities, and family relationships of everyone else.
Millions of Americans Have a Personal Stake
It is essential that we remember the scale of the human population affected by these discussions.
Gallup's findings published in February 2026 estimate that 9% of U.S. adults identify as LGBTQ+.
This represents tens of millions of adults, depending on the population estimate and survey methodology used.
The Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law estimates that approximately 2.57 million LGBTQ+ adults are parenting children under the age of 18.
That is approximately 18% of LGBTQ+ adults.
Even more significantly, approximately 5 million children in the United States are being raised by an LGBTQ+ parent.
Five million children.
These are not abstract statistics.
They are children who need love, stability, opportunity, education, and protection.
They live in every kind of neighborhood, attend schools, participate in religious communities, and contribute to the fabric of American life.
Some have lesbian mothers. Some have gay fathers. Some have bisexual or transgender parents. Some live in single-parent households. Others live with married couples or blended families.
For these children, LGBTQIA+ people are not an unfamiliar subject.
They are family.
So when someone asks why a children's book should include LGBTQIA+ representation, I would ask another question.
Why should these five million children be denied the opportunity to see their own families reflected in books?
What Does the Research Say About LGBTQIA+ Parenting?
The scientific literature provides an important response to claims that LGBTQIA+ parents are somehow less capable of raising healthy children.
A systematic review and meta-analysis published in BMJ Global Health in 2023 examined 34 studies comparing outcomes in sexual-minority and heterosexual-parent families.
The researchers found that most family outcomes were similar.
In some measured areas, including children's psychological adjustment and parent-child relationships, sexual-minority-parent families demonstrated modestly better outcomes.
These findings do not mean every LGBTQIA+ family performs better than every heterosexual family.
Nor do they establish universal academic advantages for children of LGBTQIA+ parents.
What they demonstrate is that the evidence does not support treating a parent's sexual orientation as an inherent disadvantage to children.
The quality of parenting, family relationships, economic stability, social support, and exposure to discrimination all matter.
Indeed, the study identified stigma and discrimination among the social factors associated with poorer outcomes.
This raises a deeply important question.
If society stigmatizes a family, restricts its rights, or teaches its children that their parents are somehow inferior, who is responsible for the resulting harm?
Is it the family?
Or is it the prejudice surrounding that family?
Returning to Marley's Pride
After exploring thousands of years of legal, religious, and cultural history, we return to the little girl standing in the library.
She selects a colorful picture book.
Inside, children are introduced to a character who feels anxious about fitting in.
They encounter a loving grandparent, supportive friends, Pride celebrations, and historical figures who stood up for their communities.
The book also explains pronouns and gender identity in language intended for younger readers.
One of the pages shared from the book speaks about Marley's difficulty fitting into conventional boys' and girls' groups and being the only child using they/them pronouns.
Another introduces Marsha P. Johnson and Sylvia Rivera as historical figures associated with transgender communities and activism.
These are recognizable subjects of identity, history, family, and belonging.
They are not, simply by virtue of featuring LGBTQIA+ people, equivalent to sexually explicit instruction.
A parent may reasonably decide that a particular book is not the right choice for their own child at a particular moment.
But that parental preference should not automatically determine what every other family may read.
A public library exists to serve a diverse community.
It should be possible for a parent to select another book without demanding that an LGBTQIA+-inclusive book disappear from the shelves.
And perhaps that is the most revealing part of this discussion.
A child saw a book.
An adult saw a threat.
What might our society look like if we taught people to see the humanity of others before teaching them to fear their differences?
The Spiritual Sickness of Fear
At the heart of this entire history, I see something much deeper than disagreements over books, language, or politics.
I see fear.
Fear of human difference.
Fear of losing established gender roles.
Fear of unfamiliar relationships and identities.
Fear that accepting another person's freedom somehow diminishes one's own.
And throughout history, fear has repeatedly been transformed into religious certainty.
When an institution convinces people that it alone possesses the authority to determine who is acceptable to God, it can exercise extraordinary influence over their lives.
It may tell them whom to love, whom to marry, how to dress, what to believe, and which identities are legitimate.
That becomes especially dangerous when religious authority is combined with governmental power.
From a Universal Rainbow Faith perspective, I would call this a spiritual sickness—not a medical diagnosis, but a spiritual pattern in which fear replaces compassion and the desire for control overcomes reverence for life.
It is the confusion of spiritual authority with domination.
It is the belief that another person's freedom must be restricted in order for one's own righteousness to remain intact.
It is the willingness to inflict suffering while claiming to act in the name of love.
And it is the failure to recognize that the person being condemned is also a sacred expression of life.
I do not believe that every religious person who disagrees with LGBTQIA+ inclusion is motivated by hatred.
Nor should the wrongdoing of religious institutions erase the contributions of countless religious people who have defended human dignity.
Many Christians and people of other faiths have been courageous advocates for LGBTQIA+ equality.
But history shows what can happen when religious beliefs are converted into mechanisms of legal punishment and social exclusion.
The spiritual danger lies not in having convictions, but in claiming the authority to deny another human being dignity, freedom, or life because of them.
The Sacredness of Human Diversity
Universal Rainbow Faith was founded upon a simple but transformative spiritual understanding:
Every human being is sacred.
We do not become sacred by conforming to someone else's expectations of gender.
We do not become sacred through heterosexuality.
We do not become sacred by belonging to a particular religious institution.
We are sacred because our existence is part of the great unfolding mystery of life.
Throughout human history, people have experienced diverse forms of sexuality, gender identity, and gender expression.
Our modern terminology is relatively recent, but human diversity is not.
LGBTQIA+ people have been healers, artists, scientists, educators, parents, spiritual leaders, warriors, philosophers, and builders of civilization.
They have served their communities, raised children, created beauty, defended nations, cared for the sick, and advanced human understanding.
Their lives are not an interruption of human history.
They are part of human history.
And when we erase their stories, we impoverish our understanding of humanity itself.
A Spiritual Call to End the Cycle
More than 3,000 years after the ancient Assyrian laws, more than four centuries after colonial America's early criminal prohibitions, and more than two decades after Lawrence v. Texas, humanity still struggles with the question of whether people should be free to love and live according to their authentic identities.
From my spiritual perspective, the answer is not complicated.
Love is not a crime. Identity is not a crime. Gender diversity is not a crime.
A peaceful, consensual relationship between adults is not a threat to society merely because both individuals are of the same sex.
A transgender person living authentically is not a threat to the sacredness of creation.
An LGBTQIA+ family raising children with love and care is not a threat to childhood.
And a children's book that teaches belonging does not become dangerous simply because the people represented have historically been marginalized.
I believe the true spiritual challenge facing humanity is whether we can transcend the fear that has justified so much persecution.
Can we recognize the sacredness of people whose lives are different from our own?
Can we honor religious freedom without imposing religious conformity?
Can we allow children to encounter the diversity of humanity without teaching them that difference is something to fear?
Can we acknowledge the wrongs of the past without repeating them in new forms?
And can we finally recognize that protecting another person's freedom does not diminish our own?
Conclusion: Every Child Deserves to Belong
I return once more to that Facebook post.
A mother stood in a library with her four-year-old daughter.
Her daughter selected a book about a child finding courage, community, and belonging.
The mother saw something she believed did not belong in childhood.
I saw something different.
I saw a reminder of millions of children who have grown up without positive representation.
I saw generations of LGBTQIA+ people whose stories were suppressed, whose relationships were criminalized, and whose humanity was questioned.
I saw the long shadow of religious persecution reaching into a modern library.
But I also saw hope.
Because the book exists.
Because children can now encounter stories that previous generations were denied.
Because parents and educators have access to material that acknowledges the diversity of human families.
And because society can choose to tell a different story from the one told for centuries.
Every LGBTQIA+ adult was once a child.
Every one of them deserved love.
Every one deserved dignity.
Every one deserved protection.
And every one deserved to know that they belonged in the human family.
The same is true of the children growing up today.
No child should have to wait until adulthood to discover that their existence was never something to be ashamed of.
No family should have to remain invisible in order to satisfy another person's religious convictions.
And no government should possess the authority to turn peaceful human diversity into a crime.
For Universal Rainbow Faith, our spiritual calling is not to create a world where everyone must believe the same thing.
It is to create a world where human dignity is not conditional upon agreement.
A world where faith inspires compassion rather than fear.
Where religious freedom protects everyone.
Where love is celebrated rather than criminalized.
And where every child, every family, and every person can recognize their own sacred place within the great diversity of creation.
The spiritual sickness is not human diversity.
It is the fear that convinces us human diversity must be controlled, condemned, or erased.
May we have the courage to move beyond that fear.
May we learn from the suffering of generations before us.
And may we finally recognize the Rainbow Light of Love shining through every human life.
We are sacred still. We have always been sacred. And we belong.
Universal Rainbow Faith — Activating the Rainbow Light of Love
Universal Rainbow Faith affirms the sacred worth of every person, regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, religious background, or personal belief.
Learn more: https://universalrainbowfaith.org
Research and references
Middle Assyrian Laws, provisions A19–20; ancient Mesopotamian legal scholarship.
The Holy Bible, Genesis 18–19; Ezekiel 16:49–50; Matthew 10:14–15; Jude 1:6–7.
Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003), U.S. Supreme Court.
Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. 644 (2015), U.S. Supreme Court.
Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. 644 (2020), U.S. Supreme Court.
National Education Association and American Medical Association, Health Education: A Guide for Teachers and a Text for Teacher Education, fifth edition, 1961.
Human Rights Watch, They're Putting Our Lives at Risk: How Uganda's Anti-LGBT Climate Unleashes Abuse, 2025.
Human Dignity Trust, Uganda country profile, updated October 2026.
U.S. Department of State, 2023 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Russia.
Pew Research Center, 2023–24 Religious Landscape Study, published February 2025.
Gallup, LGBTQ+ Identification Holds at 9% in U.S., February 2026.
Williams Institute, UCLA School of Law, LGBTQ Parenting in the US, July 2024.
BMJ Global Health, Family outcome disparities between sexual minority and heterosexual families: a systematic review and meta-analysis, 2023.
Public Religion Research Institute, Mapping Christian Nationalism Across the 50 States, February 2026.
The White House, Executive Orders 14168 and 14202, January–February 2025.
Joëlle Retener, illustrated by Deann Wiley, Marley's Pride, Barefoot Books, 2024.
Glisten, 2025 National School Climate Survey.
Editorial note: The Facebook quotation is reproduced from the screenshots provided for this article. The historical, legal, demographic, and scientific findings reflect the referenced sources. The theological conclusions are the perspective of Universal Rainbow Faith.
Comments