Forced to Choose: Colorado’s Gender Mandate vs. the Catholic Faith

Campe IdRaHaJe is in Bailey, CO. IdRaHaJe means, “I’d Rather Have Jesus.”

Christians of Colorado, we have a problem. The State is attempting to force Christians to ignore the Catholic belief that God made people either male or female. 8 CCR 1402-1 is a Colorado state regulation that attempts to condition child care licensure on compliance with federal civil rights laws (Title VI and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973). But these laws, as written by Congress, say nothing about “gender identity.” It talks about discrimination according to sex. Gender identity is an opinion of federal courts and unelected agencies. The cited case used for opinions, Bostock v. Clayton County (2020), was not a new law—it was a judicial opinion interpreting “sex” to mean “gender identity.” Only Congress can create and codify laws (U.S. Const. Art. I, §1). Courts are limited to interpreting those laws—they do not and cannot legislate. Federal authorities enforce federal law, state authorities enforce state laws. But at Camp IdRaHaJe in Bailey, CO, the Colorado Department of Early Childhood (CDEC) is attempting to enforce those interpretations through its own regulations. The CDEC is attempting to enforce federal statutes—something they cannot do—on an interpreted level. Under the Supremacy Clause (U.S. Const. Art. VI, Cl. 2), federal law is binding only when enforced by federally authorized agencies, such as the U.S. Department of Justice (28 C.F.R. § 42.101 et seq.), the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (29 C.F.R. § 1601.1), and the Department of Health and Human Services (45 C.F.R. Parts 80, 84, and 91). States have no authority to unilaterally interpret or enforce these federal regulations. In doing so, Colorado is not upholding federal law—it is selectively co-opting interpretations (at best) or ideology (at worst) to threaten Christian ministries with closure unless they comply. This does not appear to be legal consistency. Consider that Colorado openly defies federal law by legalizing marijuana (still banned under 21 U.S.C. § 801). Yet in this issue it claims it must enforce federal legislation involving discriminatory acts in this particular issue. With this in mind, the state appears to be upholding an agenda rather than being consistent with the issues it pursues.

Here is a direct quotation from pp. 163-164 of Colorado Code of Regulations 8 CCR 1402-1:

BUILDING AND FACILITIES

2.423 TOILET AND BATHING FACILITIES

A. In a resident camp there must be a minimum of (1) toilet for every twenty (20) or fewer campers for which the resident camp is licensed.

B. Campers must be allowed the use of gender-segregated toilet facilities that are consistent with

their gender identity with toilets separated by partitions to provide privacy or private toilet facilities.

C. Hand washing facilities must be available throughout the resident camp and in the shower or

bathing areas. There must be one (1) sink for every twenty (20) or fewer campers for which the

resident camp is licensed.

1. If a resident camp has any of the following, it must provide hand washing facilities located adjacent to where the camp serves meals:

a. Any new construction completed after April 1, 2018;

b. A change of governing body; or

c. Extensive remodeling the camp, the resident camp.

D. Showers or bathtubs must be located within buildings used for sleeping, such as cabins or

dormitories, or in a centrally located shower or bathing structure.

1. There must be at least one (1) shower per every twenty (20) or fewer campers for which the resident camp is licensed.

2. Campers must be allowed the use of gender-segregated showers that are consistent with their gender identity with showers or bathtubs separated by partitions to provide privacy or private showering or bathtub facilities.

This same regulation, 8 CCR 1402-1, on p. 12, says the following:

CIVIL RIGHTS

2.119 CIVIL RIGHTS

All facilities licensed under the Child Care Licensing Act are subject to the following federal laws and regulations: the non-discrimination provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. section 2000d et seq. (2022), and its implementing regulation, 45 C.F.R. Part 80 (2022); Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. section 2000e et seq. (2022), and its implementing regulation, 29 C.F.R. Part 1606 (2022); the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, 42 U.S.C. sections 6101-6017 (2022) and its implementing regulation, 45 C.F.R. Part 91 (2022); Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. section 794 (2022), and its implementing regulation, 45 C.F.R. Part 84 (2022), all of which are hereby incorporated by reference. No later editions or amendments are incorporated. These regulations

are available for public inspection and copying at the Colorado Department of Early Childhood at 710 S. Ash St., Bldg. C, Denver, CO 80246, during regular business hours. These regulations are also available at no cost at http://www.ecfr.gov.

What this is saying is that Colorado requires all licensed child care facilities to comply with federal civil rights laws—particularly Title VII, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex. However, the mandates in §2.423 are not based on the original, legislated meaning of “sex,” but on a later, contested interpretation that redefines it to include “gender identity,” as articulated in the U.S. Supreme Court’s Bostock v. Clayton County decision. This interpretation, while influential, has not been codified by Congress. Yet Colorado treats it as if it were binding federal law. But here is where Americans need to further understand how our Republic works.

In our American republic, laws come from two distinct sources: the U.S. Constitution, which establishes universal rights for all citizens, and federal statutes, which are laws passed by Congress and only apply in specific ways—often tied to federal funding. The civil rights rules referenced in Colorado’s 8 CCR 1402-1—such as Title VI and Title VII—are not constitutional rights, but federal statutes. That means they are not automatically binding on every state in every context, and states are not required to enforce them unless they voluntarily tie themselves to those rules, often by seeking federal money or adopting them into state licensing systems. Put another way, if the states want federal aid, they must abide by federal laws.

This distinction is critical: a statute is not the Constitution, and no state is obligated to adopt the federal government’s evolving interpretations of it—especially when those interpretations, like redefining “sex” to mean “gender identity,” were never voted on by Congress or written into law.

Why This Matters for St. Mary’s

This matters for St. Mary’s because the State of Colorado is pressuring churches to conform not to the Constitution, but to federal statutes that have been reinterpreted by unelected agencies and courts—without ever being passed by Congress or enshrined in constitutional law. These rules, like Title VII, were never intended to include “gender identity,” and that change has never been voted on by the American people or their representatives. We are a republic, not a democracy. And in a republic, states are not required to enforce federal statutes as if they were constitutional mandates. All states are required to obey the Constitution, but each state retains the freedom to create its own laws—so long as they do not violate the Constitution. This is what “united” means in the United States of America. Yet Colorado has voluntarily adopted these interpretations into its child care licensing rules, threatening to deny Christian ministries the right to operate unless they conform.

For St. Mary’s, this is a major issue. Our parish is rapidly growing with those who are exclusively in their 20s and 30s—many of whom are young families with toddlers. We are now shepherding a generation of young children who will soon be of age to attend summer camps and youth programs. The State’s regulations do not merely threaten a future idea—they threaten the present and ongoing work of our local church. This is about our people, our children, and our mission. It’s not just about camps or paperwork. It’s about whether we will be allowed to minister to our children faithfully—or be forced to choose between the Catholic faith and post-modern ideology.

Next Steps

As we enter Trinitytide—a season focused on the growth of the Church and the making of disciples—we must remember that greatest weapon is not political outrage, but prayer and putting our hand to the plow. This is why I constantly harp on making disciples. The early Church did not change the Roman Empire by seizing power, but by forming holy people who worshiped the Yahweh, discipled their children, and loved their neighbors without compromise. If we commit ourselves to that same vision—forming disciples who reproduce disciples—we will, by God’s grace, change the city, state and nation from the ground up.

This is already beginning at St. Mary’s. The Lord is entrusting us with a growing number of young families who are eager to raise their children in the faith. Trinitytide is not abstract for us—it is now. We must prepare to disciple the next generation not only in liturgy and theology, but in courage and truth. This moment is not only a legal or moral crisis; it is a discipleship crisis. So let us begin with our own homes, our own parish, and our own children. If we are faithful in little, Christ will multiply it. Trinitytide calls us to exactly this kind of fruitful endurance.