Welcome to Breakpoint, a daily look at an ever-changing culture through the lens of unchanging truth.

For the Colson Center, I'm John Stone Street.

Yesterday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Charles v. Salazar, case with profound

implications for free speech rights, as well as for those with gender dysphoria.

Haley Chiles is a licensed counselor in Colorado,

represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom,

she sued the state of Colorado over its counseling censorship law,

which prohibits counselors from helping clients, especially children,

reconcile their identity with their sex through talk therapy.

As the law now stands, counselors like

Childs face fines up to $5,000 for every violation. Child's claims that she has patients who

want to discuss issues that, as she put it, quote, implicate Christian values about human sexuality

and the treatment of their own body, while avoiding things like harmful

drugs and questionable medical procedures. Though Charles does not guarantee her clients that the

issues relating to gender identity, gender roles, or sexual attraction will be fully resolved,

she, quote, believes clients can accept the bodies that God has given them and find peace.

Charles contends that Colorado's law amounts to censorship and violates her First Amendment rights,

muscling her right to speak from her deeply held beliefs.

It restricts her from having conversations that her clients want to have about their struggles with sexuality and identity.

Colorado claims that the ban on so-called conversion therapy is based on, quote, overwhelming

evidence that efforts to change a child sexual orientation or gender identity are unsafe and

ineffective. In making that claim, the state relies on studies that have little follow-up on

...