When Religion Becomes the Shield: What Is Really Going On in Southwest Washington?

 There comes a point when you have to stop looking at individual pieces of a puzzle and start asking why the hell they fit together so well. A Christian church. A Christian dance studio serving more than 200 children. A pastor involved in political activism. A worship leader who owns that dance studio. Local elected officials appearing at a church-hosted program about Christian participation in government. A Kelso councilmember attending Battle Ground City Council meetings while that community is increasingly being scrutinized for growing Christian political influence.

Then there is Fresh Attitude Dance Studio's own contract, sitting there in black and white, stating that its gender-specific costume policies are based on a "traditional biblical worldview, including a biblical definition of male and female." Students are expected to dress according to their birth sex when costumes are gender-specific, and the studio says students will be addressed using their birth pronouns or first name.

At what point do we stop calling all of this "just religion" and start asking whether we're looking at something much bigger?

This isn't an attack on Christianity. It isn't an attack on people who attend church. It isn't an attack on people who believe the Bible. It is an examination of what happens when religion, political organizing, civic power, business interests and cultural ideology begin operating within the same network. That deserves scrutiny regardless of whether the people involved call it ministry, civic engagement, traditional values or religious freedom.

The Sandens and Father's House

Sharnessa Sanden founded Fresh Attitude Dance Studio in 2001 after returning to Longview with her husband, Sam. The couple met in 1998 at the International Bible Institute of London. Sam was from Sweden, while Sharnessa was from Longview. After graduation, Sam became an interim pastor in London while Sharnessa toured internationally with the Christian pop group V*ENNA. Sam eventually joined her on the road as the band's manager. After returning to Longview, the couple became involved in youth ministry.

Today, Sam serves as Associate Pastor at Father's House Church and Sharnessa serves as its Worship Leader. Fresh Attitude has grown to more than 200 students and openly identifies itself as a Christian organization.

Father's House itself has deep roots in Longview. It was formed in 1996 through the merger of New Covenant Church, Church of the Risen Savior and Grace Fellowship. The congregation eventually outgrew its original building and purchased the former Triangle Theater in 2017. According to the church, its members contributed approximately $2 million toward the project over four years. The church held its first service in the renovated building on June 6, 2021.

This isn't some insignificant congregation operating in isolation. It is a substantial institution with decades of history and a significant presence in the community. The connection between the church and the Sandens isn't speculation. It is public.

When Christianity Becomes Political Activism

Here's where the story gets considerably more interesting. Sam Sanden's Salt & Light program openly discusses Christian engagement in politics and culture, including his involvement with TPUSA Faith. Father's House has also hosted a "Biblical Citizenship in Modern America" series specifically addressing government and how Christians can participate in the political process.

One of those events featured former Longview Mayor Spencer Boudreau, Kelso City Councilmember Keenan Harvey and Longview City Councilmember Keith Young. That is a documented connection between Father's House and local elected officials.

It has also been said that many people holding local political office are affiliated with Father's House Church. I would not present that as established fact for every individual without documentation, but the broader claim deserves examination, particularly given the church's documented political programming and the participation of elected officials. There is nothing wrong with Christians participating in government. There is nothing wrong with elected officials attending church or appearing at a church event. The issue is what happens when church leadership, political activism and local government begin operating within the same network.

There Is More Evidence of That Political Network

A November 2025 report by journalist Andre Stepankowsky adds another interesting piece to this puzzle. Writing about Chris Bryant's victory over Oliver Black for a seat on the Longview City Council, Stepankowsky reported that Bryant's victory was a surprise because he had barely campaigned and because two other GOP-backed council candidates lost decisively, including then-mayor Spencer Boudreau. Stepankowsky wrote that Boudreau's defeat appeared to reflect voter dissatisfaction with the conservative majority. 

More importantly, the article reported that insiders attributed Bryant's victory to his membership in Father's House Church, while noting that the congregation had held workshops sponsored by the right-wing Patriot Prayer organization encouraging worshippers to become involved in politics. Stepankowsky appropriately cautioned that whether church affiliation actually played a decisive role in the election was "guesswork."

That distinction matters. We don't need to claim that Father's House secretly controls Longview politics. The evidence doesn't establish that. What it does establish is that Father's House has been identified by local political observers as part of the political landscape, and that its connection to conservative political organizing has been publicly reported.

The same article reported that Bryant's win maintained a 4-3 conservative majority on the Longview City Council and quoted Oliver Black saying he hoped the election would be a repudiation of the divisiveness of the council's tenure and that the majority would focus on the issues that matter to the city.

That gives us another reason to examine the intersection between the church and local politics rather than pretending it doesn't exist.

So Why Is Keenan Harvey Watching Battle Ground?

This is where I think the questions get particularly interesting. Keenan Harvey has been attending Battle Ground City Council meetings. There is nothing improper about an elected official observing another city's government. Battle Ground isn't just another city right now, though.

The community has increasingly attracted attention because of the growing influence of Christian political and cultural activism there. Recent reporting has drawn comparisons between developments in Battle Ground and what happened in Moscow, Idaho, where Christ Church and its pastor Doug Wilson have pursued an expansive strategy involving religion, politics, businesses, property, education and civic influence.

That doesn't mean Battle Ground is Moscow. It doesn't mean every Christian in Battle Ground is a Christian nationalist. It does mean people are paying attention to what is happening there.

So I think it is fair to ask: Why is a Kelso councilmember so interested in what is happening in Battle Ground? What is he watching? What is he learning? Is he simply studying municipal government, or is he interested in how religious and political influence is being built within that community?

I don't know. That's precisely why I'm asking.

Then We Have Fresh Attitude's Contract

This is where the conversation moves from speculation about political strategy to something we can actually read for ourselves. Fresh Attitude's contract doesn't simply establish ordinary dance-studio requirements. It explicitly says the owners hold to a "traditional biblical worldview, including a biblical definition of male and female."

It then requires students to dress according to their birth sex when costumes are gender-specific and says students will be addressed using their birth pronouns or first name.

That is not a rumor. It's not somebody's interpretation of a sermon. It's not political gossip.

It's the written policy.

This Is Where the LGBTQ+ Issue Becomes Impossible to Ignore

Let's stop dancing around it. That policy has a direct impact on LGBTQ+ children, particularly transgender and gender-nonconforming students.

A transgender child can participate, but only under rules dictated by the studio's religious definition of sex and gender. That's where I have a problem.

The studio isn't claiming that these requirements are necessary because of choreography or safety. It explicitly connects the policy to its biblical definition of male and female. That means a religious belief has been turned into a rule governing how some children are treated.

Religion Doesn't Make Discrimination Disappear

Let's be very clear. People have the right to believe whatever their religion teaches. They have the right to worship. They have the right to operate Christian businesses. They have the right to teach their children their religious beliefs. They have the right to participate in politics.

None of that gives those beliefs immunity from criticism when they become policies governing other people's children.

There is a difference between saying, "My faith teaches me this," and saying, "Because my faith teaches me this, your child must dress this way and we will address your child this way."

The first is religious belief. The second is the exercise of power.

That distinction matters.

Bigotry Doesn't Become Holy Because You Call It Biblical

I'm not saying every Christian who holds a traditional view of gender is a bigot. I'm not saying every conservative is a Christian nationalist. I'm not saying everyone involved with Father's House has some sinister agenda.

I am saying that religion can be used to provide moral cover for prejudice.

History has given us plenty of examples of people using religious arguments to justify segregation, oppose interracial marriage, restrict women's rights and discriminate against LGBTQ+ people.

People can be sincere and still be wrong. They can believe they are acting according to God's will and still cause harm. Calling something "biblical" doesn't automatically make it compassionate, fair or immune from scrutiny.

The Bigger Question

This is why I don't think the Fresh Attitude contract can be examined completely separately from everything else.

We have a church with an explicit interest in Christian civic engagement. We have a pastor involved in political activism and TPUSA Faith. We have former Longview Mayor Spencer Boudreau, Kelso City Councilmember Keenan Harvey and Longview City Councilmember Keith Young participating in a Father's House program about Christian involvement in government.

We have local reporting connecting a Father's House member to a Longview City Council victory while noting the church's history of hosting political workshops. We have reports of broader political affiliations with the church. We have Keenan Harvey attending Battle Ground City Council meetings while Battle Ground is increasingly being examined as a community where Christian political influence is growing.

We also have a Christian business connected directly to that church leadership serving hundreds of children, and we have that business explicitly imposing a religious definition of sex and gender through its policies.

Maybe every one of these things is completely unrelated. Maybe there is no larger strategy. Maybe Harvey is simply interested in municipal government. Maybe Father's House simply wants Christians to be more civically engaged. Maybe Fresh Attitude's policy is simply the sincere expression of the Sandens' religious beliefs.

Those things are possible.

Sincere motives don't eliminate the need to examine outcomes, though. The question isn't whether Christians are allowed to participate in democracy. The question is what they intend to do with the political power they are building.

Are they simply participating, or are they trying to reshape their communities around a particular religious worldview? Who gets included? Who gets excluded? What happens to people who don't share their beliefs? Why does that worldview now appear in written policies governing children?

Parents Deserve to Know

If Fresh Attitude is a Christian dance studio, parents deserve to know. If its policies are based on a traditional biblical definition of sex and gender, parents deserve to know. If the owners are leaders at Father's House, parents deserve to know.

If the church is actively involved in political and civic engagement, people deserve to know. If local elected officials are participating in those church-sponsored political programs, the public deserves to know. If there are broader relationships between local political figures and the church, those relationships should be documented rather than hidden behind rumor.

If elected officials are studying communities where Christian political influence is rapidly expanding, we have every right to ask what they're studying and why.

That's not religious persecution.

That's transparency.

So What Is Really Going On?

That's the question I keep coming back to.

Not whether Christians should be allowed to vote. Not whether churches should be allowed to have political opinions. Not whether a Christian can own a business. Of course they can.

The question is what happens when religion, political organizing, civic power and business interests begin overlapping.

Once religious belief becomes political strategy and then becomes policy affecting other people's children, we're no longer talking about private faith.

We're talking about power.

When the people affected are LGBTQ+ children who are being told, in writing, that their birth sex determines how they dress and that their birth pronouns will be used because of someone else's religious worldview, I think we're entitled to call that what it looks like.

Exclusion.

Maybe I'm wrong about the bigger picture. If so, transparency will prove it.

I'm not going to stop asking questions simply because the people involved have wrapped their answers in religion.

Bigotry doesn't become holy because you call it biblical.

Religious freedom should never become a shield that prevents the rest of us from examining what happens when someone's beliefs become someone else's rules.