![\"Ed.](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/186\/2016\/03\/Joseph_Smith_receiving_golden_plates.jpg\")
<\/a>(Wikimedia Commons public domain image)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
It being Thursday, the Interpreter Foundation has just published another item in its reprint series, which \u2014 please recall \u2014 is distinct from its series of new journal articles, which always appear on Friday: \u00a0Seek Ye Words of Wisdom: \u201c<\/em>The Lord Works from the Inside Out: \u201cCleanse the Inner Vessel,\u201d<\/a> written by Camille Fronk Olson<\/a>:<\/p>\n Part of our book chapter reprint series, this article originally appeared in Seek Ye Words of Wisdom: Studies of the Book of Mormon, Bible, and Temple in Honor of Stephen D. Ricks<\/em>, edited by Donald W. Parry, Gaye Strathearn, and Shon D. Hopkin. For more information, go to https:\/\/interpreterfoundation.org\/books\/seek-ye-words-of-wisdom\/<\/a>.<\/p>\n \u201cThe Book of Mormon contains meaningful patterns that are echoed by various authors in the book. One such pattern is the prerequisite to purify and strengthen the center, core, or heart of a matter rather than the visible exterior in order to receive the Lord\u2019s peace and victory. When the inner vessel is cleansed, according to the pattern, it will then take care of the concentric circles of challenges that surround the core. Its corollary is also true: if we place our focus on outward appearances and ignore the center, the whole will gradually erode and become toxic. In this paper I will examine several examples where this pattern is evident in the Book of Mormon and explore suggestions for how it may inform our priorities and concerns today.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Last night, I read a remarkable article in a place where I wouldn\u2019t have expected to find it. \u00a0Entitled \u201cThe Liberal Misinformation Bubble About Youth Gender Medicine: How the left ended up disbelieving the science,\u201d<\/a> it appeared on 29 June 2025 in The Atlantic<\/em>. \u00a0I don\u2019t how many of you, if any, will be able to access it \u2014 if nothing else, it\u2019s probably available in hardcopy in your local college or public library \u2014 but it\u2019s well worth reading if you have any interest in the topic and in the controversy surrounding it.<\/p>\n The author of the essay, Helen Lewis, is British, and a graduate of the University of Oxford. \u00a0She is also, pretty plainly, neither a \u201cright-wing hate monger\u201d nor a reflexive \u201chomophobe\u201d nor a dyed-in-the-wool opponent of concepts such as \u201cgender dysphoria\u201d: \u00a0Among her recent articles for The Atlantic<\/em> are such pieces as \u201cMAGA Influencers Don\u2019t Understand What Journalism Is: As the Jeffrey Epstein case shows, right-wing internet personalities prefer \u201cjust asking questions\u201d to getting answers\u201d<\/a> (18 July 2025) and \u201cThe Trump Administration\u2019s Nasty Campaign Against Trans People: The president wants to draw out a politically expedient fight, not broker compromises\u201d<\/a>\u00a0(9 June 2025) and \u201cWhen You\u2019re MAGA, They Let You Do It:\u00a0Why Trumpworld is just fine with Andrew Tate\u2019s violent misogyny\u201d<\/a> (1 March 2025).<\/p>\n But, of course, Ms. Lewis\u2019s apparent distance from MAGA-World only serves, if anything, to add to the power of what she has to say about puberty blockers and \u201cgender reassignment surgery\u201d and such things. \u00a0I hope eventually to read her 18 April 2025 Atlantic<\/em> essay \u201cBritain Rules on What a Woman Is:\u00a0The country\u2019s highest court has ruled that under the Equality Act, woman<\/em> means \u201cbiological female.\u201d<\/a> \u00a0In the meantime, though, I share the first five paragraphs from \u201cThe Liberal Misinformation Bubble About Youth Gender Medicine,\u201d the article that I read last night:<\/p>\n Allow children to<\/span> transition, or they will kill themselves.<\/em> For more than a decade, this has been the strongest argument in favor of youth gender medicine\u2014a scenario so awful that it stifled any doubts or questions about puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones.<\/p>\n \u201cWe often ask parents, \u2018Would you rather have a dead son than a live daughter?\u2019\u201d Johanna Olson-Kennedy of Children\u2019s Hospital Los Angeles once explained to ABC News<\/a>. Variations on the phrase crop up in innumerable<\/a>media<\/a> articles<\/a> and public statements by influencers<\/a>, activists, and LGBTQ groups. The same idea\u2014that the choice is transition or death\u2014appeared in the arguments<\/a> made by Elizabeth Prelogar, the Biden administration\u2019s solicitor general, before the Supreme Court last year. Tennessee\u2019s law prohibiting the use of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones to treat minors with gender dysphoria would, she said, \u201cincrease the risk of suicide.\u201d<\/p>\n But there is a huge problem with this emotive formulation: It isn\u2019t true. When Justice Samuel Alito challenged the ACLU lawyer Chase Strangio on such claims during oral arguments, Strangio made a startling admission. He conceded that there is no evidence to support the idea that medical transition reduces adolescent suicide rates.<\/p>\n At first, Strangio dodged the question, saying that research shows that blockers and hormones reduce \u201cdepression, anxiety, and suicidality\u201d\u2014that is, suicidal thoughts. (Even that is debatable<\/a>, according to reviews of the research <\/a>literature.) But when Alito referenced a systematic review conducted for the Cass report in England, Strangio conceded the point. \u201cThere is no evidence in some\u2014in the studies that this treatment reduces completed suicide,\u201d he said. \u201cAnd the reason for that is completed suicide, thankfully and admittedly, is rare, and we\u2019re talking about a very small population of individuals with studies that don\u2019t necessarily have completed suicides within them.\u201d<\/p>\n Here was the trans-rights movement\u2019s greatest legal brain, speaking in front of the nation\u2019s highest court. And what he was saying was that the strongest argument for a hotly debated treatment was, in fact, not supported by the evidence.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n It\u2019s a powerful article that merits serious reading.<\/p>\n This went up yesterday on the never-changing website of the Interpreter Foundation. \u00a0I thought that I had called attention to it yesterday, but apparently I did not: \u00a0Interpreter Foundation Come, Follow Me Podcast: July 28 \u2013 August 3: \u201cThe Power of Godliness\u201d: Doctrine & Covenants 84<\/a><\/p>\n For the 8 July 2025 Come, Follow Me<\/em> segment of the Interpreter Foundation Podcast, Martin Tanner, Brent Schmidt, and Hales Swift discussed the Come, Follow Me<\/em> Doctrine & Covenants lesson for July 28 \u2013 August 3 covering D&C 84. \u00a0The Discussion segment of the July 8th podcast can be accessed at https:\/\/interpreterfoundation.org\/interpreter-podcast-july-8-2025<\/a>.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/a><\/a>