Senate Bill 1 bans diversity, equity, and inclusion programs at Ohio’s public universities, reshaping how controversial topics are taught in the classroom. But what does this mean for students — and where did these ideas come from? 

 By Shaelyn Clark

In 2023, Amazon Prime released Shiny Happy People, a documentary series directed by Julia Willoughby Nason and Olivia Crist, which examined the Duggar family of TLC’s 19 Kids and Counting. The series revealed how the family’s practices were shaped by a rigid strand of Evangelical Christianity, raising questions about the broader cultural and political influence of such movements.

The documentary was renewed for a second season, released in late summer 2025. Unlike the first installment, which focused on the Duggar family’s personal story, the new season turned its lens toward larger religious networks and ideologies — including Teen Mania Ministries, a Texas-based program critics have described as a “youth army” for Evangelical causes.

Its release coincided with a significant change at Ohio University. Just as students returned to campus, Senate Bill 1 (SB 1) took effect, eliminating diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs across Ohio’s public universities and restricting how controversial topics could be taught in classrooms. For some, the timing highlighted a deeper connection: the same Evangelical movements examined in the documentary are influencing laws shaping higher education in Ohio today.

The second season of Amazon’s Shiny Happy People explored the history of Teen Mania Ministries, a religious organization accused of operating like a “youth army.” Mica Ringo, a former Teen Mania participant and whistleblower featured in the documentary, said their experience revealed how religious rhetoric often masks political motives.

“When powerful white men are quoting God or are saying that their decisions are motivated by God, generally, that God has the same concerns that they do,” Ringo said.

That type of rhetoric, Ringo explained, provides cover for advancing political agendas rooted in one interpretation of Christianity. The same mobilization strategies once used to recruit young people into faith-based movements are now visible in legislative pushes across the country — including SB 1 in Ohio.

Becca Malzer, a historian studying European political history and international affairs, says the connection between religion and politics often becomes clearest in the policymaking process itself.

“Tracing religious influence on politics is mainly just looking at the policies themselves and seeing who’s endorsing them,” Malzer said. “With the Christian nationalist movement in the U.S., look at the different groups that are lobbying in Congress or even state legislators for different bills and different parts of bills.”

She explained that the targeting of universities and young voters is not accidental. “If you can win the youth vote, you could probably win the election,” Malzer said. “Statistically, the demographic between 18 and 25 generally votes the least. And if you can win them over, encourage them to get into politics and get into voting, you are more likely to win.”

For students at Ohio University, these political battles translate into daily realities. Anne Scarberry, a senior majoring in literature and practicing Catholic, said the role of media — especially social media — is just as important as the policies themselves.

“Social media influences what students think more than anything that they would ever see in the news or in the classroom,” Scarberry said. “A lot of [creators] profit off spreading news, misinformation, propaganda, fear mongering — it’s very, very rampant on social media.”

Scarberry said that while her Catholic background gave her a sense of tradition, she has noticed the rise of a more politicized form of modern Christianity, one that seems designed to influence not just beliefs but votes.

The passage of SB 1 marks a turning point for higher education in Ohio. While framed by lawmakers as a push for “intellectual diversity,” critics argue that it mirrors national faith-based campaigns that seek to reshape public institutions in line with religious ideology.

For students in Athens, that means fewer DEI resources and more restrictions on how professors approach controversial topics. For observers like Ringo, Malzer, and Scarberry, it is also a reminder that political influence often begins far beyond the statehouse — in churches, classrooms, media feeds, and movements that tie faith to power.

As students navigate the new academic year under SB 1, the question remains: how much should personal faith shape public education and democratic policy?