Learning the Lessons of Chile

Fr. Gerald E. Murray writes that the resignation of Chile’s bishops reminds us that removal of abusers from the priesthood is a necessary and unmistakable rebuke.

The surprise announcement by all the bishops of Chile of their submissions of resignations to Pope Francis is a stunning development. I did live television commentary for the Brooklyn Diocese’s NET TV of Pope Francis’ January apostolic voyage to Chile and Peru. At that time, we discussed, at length, the pope’s strong rebuke of people who accused Bishop Juan Barros of having enabled the sexual abuse of minors by his friend and mentor Fr. Fernando Karadima.

Five months later, the entire Chilean Bishops’ Conference, after a three-day meeting in Rome with Pope Francis, concluded that their collective departure would please him, and would allow him the greatest freedom to rebuild the confidence of Chilean Catholics by installing new bishops throughout the country. How did we arrive at this point?

At the press conference announcing the mass resignation, Bishop Fernando Reyes, the Secretary General of the Chilean Episcopal Conference, said:

In this context of dialogue and discernment, various suggestions were presented as to how to deal with this great crisis, and furthermore the idea developed that, in order to be more in tune with the will of the Holy Father, it was appropriate to declare our absolute readiness to place our pastoral charges in the hands of the pope. In this way, we were able to make a collegial gesture of solidarity to take responsibility – not without sorrow – for the grave things that occurred, and so that the Holy Father could freely decide how to proceed regarding all of us.

The Chilean bishops seem to have thought that the pope wanted their resignations. This turn of events was unthinkable back in January. What happened? Outrage by victims of sexual abuse and by ordinary Catholics exploded in Chile, combined with persistent media coverage of this conflict.

The pope took to heart the vehement reactions to his dismissive comments. He sent two outside investigators to Chile to gather evidence and report back. Then he called the Chilean hierarchy to Rome.

He then laid out the evidence gathered by his investigators in a letter (later leaked to the press) given to the Chilean bishops when they arrived in Rome. The manifest wrongdoing cited by the pope rings true, given similar experiences in other countries: destruction of evidence; transfer of accused priests without concern for the minors who would come under their influence; delaying tactics and superficial or non-existent investigations of complaints received, pressure put upon those carrying out the canonical investigation of alleged crimes; and the placement by bishops and religious superiors of priests suspected of being active homosexuals in seminaries and novitiates.

The investigators, it’s no surprise, discovered this familiar pattern in Chile. The self-reporting to Rome by the Chilean hierarchy in these matters was gravely deficient and even deceptive.

The lesson here is clear: if the Holy See wants to root out the sexual abuse of minors by clergy, and also put an end to the associated cover-ups by senior clergy and bishops, then it must use the same means in other places that it used here. Vatican designated investigators with no ties to the local church under investigation should be sent to gather evidence when complaints of sexual abuse and cover-ups are received.

The self-policing and self-reporting system has been shown to be completely inadequate in the Chilean case. The effectiveness of canonical provisions governing the handling of accusations of sexual abuse of minors by priests depends on the full and vigorous cooperation of the local hierarchy. Absent that co-operation justice is not done. Such co-operation is often absent.

The sad reality is that the exposure of the crime of sexual abuse of minors and the widespread efforts by bishops and religious order superiors to hide the facts from the public was not the result of actions initiated by the Church herself. That exposure came by way of the police, the courts, and the media in various countries.

In the case of Chile, victims of sexual abuse only got a fair hearing in Rome by insisting on the truth of their claims in the face of both episcopal and papal rejection. Pope Francis decided to have another look at the matter and what he discovered is that he had not been given the complete story.

He should also review the record of the various Roman curial departments that were involved in monitoring the situation in Chile for the past thirty years. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith found Fr. Karadima guilty in 2011 of the sexual abuse of minors. He was forbidden to exercise priestly ministry and commanded to lead a live of prayer and penance. He is reported to still claim his innocence. Was this enough?

By not removing him from the priesthood and returning him to the lay state, the gravity of his crimes was not sufficiently recognized. As in the case of Fr. Marcial Maciel, who also was not removed from priesthood despite his multiple and grave crimes, a life of prayer and penance becomes the functional equivalent of forced retirement and does not deprive the sexual predator of the state of life that allowed him to have easy access to his victims.

Removal from the priesthood unmistakably rebukes him for the grave offense he has given to Christ and to Christ’s little ones, and also clearly communicates to the whole world that the Church considers him to have completely forfeited his right to exercise the office of the priesthood that he so badly misused.

Roman action on Chile was necessary and purgative. The Church’s mission is to uphold the Gospel. That includes doing all that is possible to protect the innocent and punish the guilty. This is not vengeance. This is justice.

And now is the time to take a similar look at other countries where there remain similar questions about the proper handling of accusations of sexual abuse and cover-ups.

Fr. Gerald E. Murray

Fr. Gerald E. Murray

The Rev. Gerald E. Murray, J.C.D. is a canon lawyer and the pastor of Holy Family Church in New York City.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of Pope Francis with the Chilean bishops. © 2018 The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: info@frinstitute.orgThe Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.

Barack and Michelle Obama do Netflix

Former President Barack Obama and Michelle Obama will produce films and TV shows for Netflix as part of a multi-year agreement, the streaming giant announced Monday. The deal will potentially include scripted series, unscripted series, docu-series, documentaries and features under their Higher Ground Productions banner.

A search for Higher Ground Productions has led us on a wild goose chase, similar to when we tried to verify a Nigerian email about Abacha Tunde, the first African in space who flew to the secret Soviet military space station Salyut 8T in 1989, but was stranded there when the USSR was dissolved, and needed money to return home.

Nevertheless, since the Netflix-Obama deal has hit the news yesterday, the pre-orgasmic anticipation among media organs of the O-shaped eye candy is registering 11 on our state-approved radar. And while no one yet has a slightest clue about the content, let us be the first to announce the list of potential titles.

  • The Wire
    A team of Obama loyalists inside the DOJ and the FBI try to prevent a government takeover by wiretapping the presidential campaign of the Orange Monster.
  • Orange is the New Black
    The Orange Monster replaces the first black president in the Oval Office.
  • The Odd Couple
    Season 1: Obama transforms America with his phone and his pen. Season 2: The Orange Monster comes and erases Season 1.
  • One and a Half Men
    The life and times of Barack and Michelle Obama.
  • Better call Saul Alinsky
    Professional tips on community organizing from the masters of trade.
  • Air America Rides Again
    Barack and Michelle go on magical adventures, learning about the wonders of Global Warming, lowering the sea levels, and making up fun scientific facts across a variety of locations and time periods.
  • The Americans
    Barack and Michelle Obama are two KGB spies in an arranged marriage who are posing as Americans in Washington, D.C., shortly after he is elected president.
  • Tax and the City
    We’re better than you and you know it. So kick back, eat your kale, and watch us party like there’s no tomorrow. When we run out of food, we’ll blame the Republicans.

Other possible titles include:

  • My So-Called Wife
  • Freak and Geek
  • American Idle
  • House of Race Cards
  • Game of Drones
  • Fifty Shades of Government


Honor Your Father Barack Obama & Mother Michelle Obama!

Obama Nation the movie: who will play Barack and Michelle?

EDITORS NOTE: This political satire column by Red Square originally appeared on The Peoples Cube.

How many times does the word ‘sword’ appear in the Bible?

The word sword has a special place in the Holy Bible. Most members of the clergy don’t present sermons on this important symbol to their flocks.

Perhaps it is time to revisit the different uses of the sword in the Old (Hebrew) and New Testament.

Bible Gateway lists a total of 406 passages in the Bible that have the word sword. Of these 373 are in the Old (Hebrew) Testament and 33 in the New Testament. From Genesis to Revelations the sword is used as both a weapon and metaphorically to bring Christians to the truth about God’s grace and his promise of life everlasting. But why the sword?

According to Knights Edge:

The sword was called by many the “Queen of the weapons”. There is a lot of merit in this epithet as the sword, throughout the ages possessed beauty in its many forms and the art with which it has been adorned. It took a lot of skill and sophisticated knowledge to make a sword and also, it took a lot of skill and knowledge to know how to wield the sword efficiently.

For Christians it too takes a lot of skill and knowledge to know how to wield the sword of God efficiently.

Hebrews 4:12 reads:

For the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.

Swords are in the shape of a cross.

Many people link the use of the sword in Christianity to the crusades and the crusaders who wore a cross on their tunics.

Thomas F. Madden, professor of Medieval History and Renaissance Studies as Saint Louis University, is a recognized expert on the Crusades. Professor Madden in his book “The Crusades Controversy: Setting the Record Straight” notes,

“Prior to September 11, 2001, the world was a different place. Then, the Crusades were a faraway concept, an odd series of events in a distant and murky medieval past. Wars of religion seemed largely irrelevant to citizens of a modern secular civilization. That has changed.”

Professor Madden’s expertise in the Crusades brought him into the lime light and lead him to write how we got to this point in time. Professor Madden wrote that Osama Bin Laden,

“never failed to describe the American war against terrorism as a new Crusade against Islam, and the Americans themselves as crusaders…The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), for example, routinely refers to the United States, Israel, and European nations as ‘crusader states.’ Ironically this perspective is not an uncommon view in the Middle East.”

Are Christian nations “crusader states”?

Professor Madden notes that the Crusades were defensive acts to stop the spread of Islam. He writes, “Pope Urban II called the knights of Christendom to push back the conquests of Islam at the Council of Clermont in 1095. The response was tremendous. Many thousands of warriors took the vow of the cross and prepared for war.” Why did they do it? For two reasons:

  1. The first was to redeem [free from oppression] the Christians of the East.
  2. The second goal was the liberation of Jerusalem and the other places made holy by the life of Christ.

Professor Madden writes:

The word crusade is modern. Medieval crusaders saw themselves as pilgrims to the Holy Sepulcher.

[ … ]

The re-conquest of Jerusalem, therefore, was understood by Christians as an act of restoration and an open declaration of one’s love of God.

[ … ]

In Medieval Europe, Crusades to the East were universally seen as acts of tremendous good. And how could they not? A crusader was one who, at great expense and personal peril, sought to rescue the downtrodden, defend the defenseless, and restore to Christendom what had been violently taken away. A Crusade indulgence, then, was a formal recognition of the penitential component of these actions. Crusaders were sinners. They undertook the Crusade not only to defend their world, but to atone for their sins. By the nature of their profession, warriors put their souls at risk. The Crusade was a means for them to save their souls. And that was no small thing. I the medieval world, where death was always near at hand, the salvation of one’s soul meant everything. It was a matter of constant concern. [Emphasis added]

Of the eight Crusade expeditions that occurred between 1096 and 1291, only the First Crusade was a success.

Is it time for a Ninth Crusade?

In a column titled “PBS Broadcasts Crusade Myths & Falsehoods” Andrew E. Harrod writes:

The Crusades were a Christian reaction to centuries of Islamic jihadist aggression that directly targeted the Catholic Church and [Saint] Francis’ followers. Frank M. Rega, a Secular Franciscan and author of Francis of Assisi and the Conversion of the Muslimshas noted that an army of 11,000 Muslims sacked Rome itself in 846 and desecrated the tombs of saints Peter and Paul. Rega’s fellow Secular Franciscan Vail noted that Muslims later in 1240 attacked the Franciscan Poor Clare monastery in Assisi, which the order’s founder herself, St. Clare, successfully defended.

Professor Madden reports:

[I]n a speech delivered at Georgetown University a few weeks after 9/11, former President Bill Clinton stated:

“Those of us who come from various European lineages are not blameless. Indeed, in the First Crusade, when the Christian soldiers took Jerusalem, they first burned a synagogue with three hundred Jews in it, and proceeded to kill every woman and child who was Muslim on the Temple Mount. The contemporaneous descriptions of the event describe soldiers walking on the Temple Mount, a holy place to Christians, with blood running up to their knees. I can tell you that that story is still being told today in the Middle East, and we are still paying for it.”

Clinton is correct that the story is still told, but it is neither accurate nor is it a long-held memory of a traumatic event. Indeed, the simple and startling fact is that the Crusades were virtually unknown in the Muslim world even a century ago. The term for the Crusades, harb al-salib, was only introduced into the Arab language in the mid-nineteenth century.

Many people see what is happening with the Muslim migration (hijrah) in Europe as a warning that Western civilization is being invaded once again. This time, however, the invasion is at the behest of the United Nations and with the support of the European Union (EU). While some member of the EU like Poland and Hungary are resisting, the pressure is mounting to allow this new invasion. Unlike previous invasions by Muslim armies, the violence comes after the migrants arrive primarily targeting women and children.

The below video by Dr. William Finley provides in five minutes a timeline of the Islamic Jihad (holy wars) and Christian crusades:

Islamic jihad is evident today in places like Gaza, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia and Iran. Many see the turmoil in the Middle East and the migration to Western Europe as a new Jihad. A holy war by other means.

It is time for a Ninth Crusade? We report, you decide.

Revelation 19:21:

The rest were killed with the sword coming out of the mouth of the rider on the horse, and all the birds gorged themselves on their flesh.


There is an old axiom in poker which says, “When your opponent is sitting there holding all the aces, there is only one thing left to do, kick over the table.” In other words, if you know you cannot possibly win, it is time to change the rules of the game. Coincidentally, this is the philosophy of progressive Democrats as we approach the 2018 mid-term elections, particularly as it applies to voting.

There was a time when we respected the integrity of a citizen’s vote. Originally, only land owners were given the right to do so, based on the premise they would be responsible voters. This changed over the years to allow any citizen to vote, assuming they were registered. This included people of all races and socioeconomic conditions, women, and even youth (18 years of age).

To encourage people to vote, the political parties helped register voters, as well as provided transportation to get people to their voting precincts, all perfectly legitimate. This started to change though as people began to dig up names from the cemeteries and have the dead vote, or encouraged people to vote multiple times in different precincts, all of which, of course, is illegal. However, such shenanigans are reaching new absurdities as we approach the 2018 mid-term elections. For example:

Electoral Votes

The electoral college devised by our founding fathers is a brilliant way to balance voting between our rural and metropolitan communities. By doing so, candidates are forced to appeal to both groups, not just one. However, the Democrats do not appreciate this (or understand it) as they blame the college for electing Mr. Trump president, and not Mrs. Clinton who won the national popular vote.

To overcome this problem in the future, the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact was created to have a state award its electoral votes to the candidate winning the popular vote in the country, not their own state. Even if the popular vote in the state went to one candidate, they would have to award their electoral votes to possibly another candidate winning the national vote. In other words, you are allowing the country to make the decision for you, not the people of your state. If this sounds unconstitutional, it probably is and will likely be challenged in court.

To date, eleven states and the District of Columbia have passed legislation to participate in this program, including: California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington. Yes, these are all strongholds for the Democrats, certainly not Republicans.

Remarkably, these states also rate among the worst in terms of the Mercatus Center at George Mason University’s Ranking of States by Fiscal Condition, to wit:


I will find this all particularly amusing if Mr. Trump wins the popular vote in the 2020 presidential election, whereby they would be compelled to award their electoral votes to the president, and not the Democrat candidate they voted for.

Prisoner Votes

There is a movement afoot to give felons the right to vote. We have seen evidence of this in New York, Louisiana, and Virginia, but many other states are looking into this, including Florida. The premise is to allow convicted felons, who have been released and are still on parole, to vote. In other words, their sentence is not yet completed, yet Democrats want to give them the right to vote. It’s one thing for the criminal to regain his/her rights following completion of their sentence, quite another to be allowed to vote while under such term of sentence. The Democrats are pushing for this as they believe it will cause the criminals to vote for their candidates.

Identification Cards

Voter identification has long been a bone of contention between Democrats and Republicans. Whereas the GOP wants to assure the integrity of the vote, Democrats claim it is a racist attempt to prevent minorities from voting.

One new twist to this recently emerged in Chicago which has produced a new identity card available to anyone, including illegal immigrants, allegedly to allow residents to use public transportation. However, it has been confirmed the new card will be accepted as identification when voting. In other words, you do not need to prove your citizenship in order to vote in the City of Chicago. Watch for other cities controlled by the Democrats to follow suit.

Lowering the Voting Age

Back in 1970, the voting age was lowered from 21 to 18. The thinking at the time was that if a young person was old enough to serve in the military, he/she should be allowed to vote. At first, this was embraced by young people, but over the years, their voting record can be described as “spotty” at best.

However, a new movement is underfoot with the Democrats attempting to lower the voting age to 16. It is slow in taking root, but the Democrats became inspired following the recent march on Washington in support of gun control by young people.

The big question of course is whether 16 year olds are knowledgeable and mature enough to vote responsibly, or will they just be a pawn of the Democrats and news media. Frankly, I’m surprised they stopped at 16, and didn’t seek the vote of 12 year olds for the same purposes.

Again, this is all being staged to embrace the ideology of the Left and secure votes for Democrats.

Voter Fraud Commission

Shortly after assuming office, President Trump appointed the Voter Fraud Commission chaired by Vice President Mike Pence. The purpose was to investigate voter fraud. Unfortunately, states controlled by the Democrats resisted and refused to hand over data from the 2016 Election to the commission, thereby making it impossible to verify any wrong-doing. So strong was the opposition by the Democrats, one could only suspect something was indeed wrong. Nevertheless, because of their refusal, Mr. Trump cancelled the commission in January.


It appears to be rather obvious the progressive Democrats are desperate for a win in the Fall. As I have said repeatedly, their future is in peril should they lose in either chamber of the Congress this year, which is why they are pulling out the stops and going to any lengths to win. This is so flagrantly obvious, it makes you wonder why there isn’t a national uproar over this.

The left cannot possibly win playing fair, which explains why they have a full court press on to change the rules. As such, they will concoct any scheme to usurp the rule of law and sanctity of the ballot, to win, which is why I refer to this as “Fake Votes.”

They are not interested in winning fairly and squarely, but any way possible, legal or otherwise. In other words, they are willing to kick over the poker table instead of suffering through the embarrassment of another loss.

Let’s hope American voters wake up to this soon before we no longer recognize the American electoral system.

Keep the Faith!

RELATED VIDEO: Democrats’ Desperate Need for Black Slaves.

If Liberals Were Animals, it Would be an Improvement

If liberals were animals, if would be a marked improvement. For one thing, animals don’t lie.

Ever since President Trump characterized MS-13 gang members as “animals,” Democrats have been playing dumb (when they haven’t actually been dumb) for political gain. What started with some fake news outlets purposely misrepresenting Trump’s remarks and others sloppily parroting the deception, has degenerated into the comical: leftists trying to save face and gain votes by cynically claiming they’re offended that anyone would do violence to the principle of the dignity of all human persons. Why, Nancy Pelosi, a poo-bah of prenatal infanticide posing as a latter-day St. Thomas Aquinas, actually lectured us about how every person has a “divine spark.”


Does anyone really think Trump’s remarks were a theological statement about the nature of man or, even, about the worst among his number? Are we analyzing political comments or a seminary lecture?

Not to be outdone, CNN commentator Ana Navarro wasn’t deterred in her condemnation of the president by the fact that two years ago she herself had characterized Trump as an animal; she furthermore said that he “should drop out of the human race.” But, hey, children do tend to live in the here and now.

Speaking of which, a corollary of Democrats’ situational values is, obviously, situational interpretation: All of a sudden they’ve conveniently developed an inability to recognize, or to accept, figurative speech. Any conservative who doesn’t talk like Mr. Spock is to now be reviled.

We’ve seen this before. After the 2011 shooting of Rep. Gabby Giffords (D-Ariz.), Sarah Palin was condemned for using crosshairs imagery in a political ad. Yet nothing was said about how Barack Obama stated that he talked to certain people so he’d know “whose a** to kick”; he also advised in 2008, “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun.”

This is all figurative speech, of course. Yet Democrats, the first to condemn and mock fundamentalism, have done William Jennings Bryan one better: They insist on literalism when interpreting spoken words.

Ironic (and pathetic) here is that Democrats’ violent and vulgar tongues have led to actual crimes against traditionalists, such as the 2012 attack on the Family Research Council’s offices and the 2017 congressional baseball shooting.

The truth is that umbrage over the animals remark is posturing and delusion. Leftists will do anything to attain power, and this is another way to play the identity politics card. “Trump means all Hispanics!” is the narrative. (Now we just have to wait for the solidarity driven chant, “I am MS-13!”) Some liberals, though, have no doubt really convinced themselves that such talk is wrong; never forget that leftists live in the moment and in a world of rationalization.

In the former but not the latter, they are a bit like animals. But what beasts would they be? Would Ana Navarro be a weasel? Would Pelosi be a kookaburra (also known as a laughing jacka**)? Chris Cuomo a peacock? Hillary a Tasmanian devil and Bill a horny toad?

The final irony here is that liberals tend to embrace godless evolution and generally believe that people are nothing but animals. Yet as the brilliant G.K. Chesterton put it, “Man is an exception.” He “is always something worse or something better than an animal[.]” So true. And I think we know which free-will-abusing people are keeping MS-13 gangsters company in the worse category.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to SelwynDuke.com

BREAKING: Mueller to indict 62,984,828 Americans for colluding to elect Trump

Unnamed sources have leaked to the New York Times that Special Council Robert Mueller will be issuing 62,984,828 indictments on Monday, May 21st, 2018. According to the unnamed source in the Justice Department:

Special Council Mueller will be issuing over 62 million indictments for those who colluded with the Trump Campaign and then voted for Donald J. Trump for president.

The investigation has determined that, although none of those indicted are citizens of Russia, they “materially colluded” to elect an un-electable man to become President of the United States. The indictments will be released on Monday, May 21st, 2018, which is the date of the 1st Democratic National Convention in Baltimore, Maryland in 1832.

This is the largest indictment issued since the internment of Japanese Americans during WW II under Franklin D. Roosevelt, a Democrat.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), according to unnamed sources, is creating internment/re-education camps for those indicted, pending trial. The camps will be run by members of the Democratic National Committee. A FEMA spokesperson, a gender neutral term, warned:

We have a major task in front of us. We are consulting with the government of North Korea to help us set up internment camps for political dissidents. These internment camps will be located in those states that put Trump into the White House. These camps will be designated as “Kwalliso” (Korean for penal labor colonies).

Those interred will be barred from voting in the November 2016 midterm elections for the safety of the nation.

In order to make additional room for these Trump voters we have reached an agreement with the states of California and New York to release all illegal aliens and MS13 gang members to make additional cell space available immediately.

Former FBI director James Comey has been hired to oversee these penal labor colonies.

A spokesperson, a gender neutral term, for former President Obama’s Organizing for Action/Resist movement said:

We are pleased with the actions that will be taken by Mr. Mueller on Monday. It is time to stop the dismantling of Barack’s legacy. These indictments are long overdue. It is time to rid America of all the misogynistic, homophobic, God and gun loving voters.

This is a fist step in ethnic cleaning of those on the voting roles who were misguided enough to vote for Trump.

Hillary Clinton in a short statement noted:

I blame those who voted for Trump for my decline and falling, no pun intended.

Michelle Obama said she was, “happy that those women who voted for Trump will be purged. No woman is eligible to vote who doesn’t vote Democrat and for the blue wave in 2018! Better dead than red!”

Donald J. Trump Jr. tweeted:

Figures. LOL.

EDITORS NOTE: This political satire column by Anonymous first appeared on CNN and Saturday Night Live.

Feminism Is Winning; Destroying Boys, Gender, Family and Society

There is a dirty little secret that the information gatekeepers of the Left block from Americans: modern feminism is slicing a path of destruction through the lives of men, women, families and society.

This is not the equal pay for equal work feminism. That has long been resolved legally and culturally. This is the anti-patriarchy modern feminism. But there is essentially no patriarchy left in America. CEOs and most other leadership-count disparities are a function of women’s individual choices — countercultural choices, at that — and even then may be temporary as women are pressured by the increasingly feminized culture to battle against their innate natures that lead toward motherhood and child nurturing.

By most studies and polls, women living the lives of the major tenets of modern feminism are distinctively less happy and less fulfilled. And they live in more danger. But where we see the real destructive success of the modern, radical feminist movement — which has worked to tilt the field in favor of women while supporting the government replacing the father in the home — is in the increasingly dire plight of the American male.

Consider the following:

⇒ American men fail and drop out of school at much higher rates than American women;

⇒ American men are far more likely to die of a drug overdose than American women;

⇒ American men are far more likely to drop out of the workforce because of addiction;

⇒ American men commit suicide at a rate several times higher than American women;

⇒ American men live on average six years shorter than American women.

⇒ American men are incarcerated at far higher proportions and are more likely to commit a felony and go to prison (although this has always been the case)

⇒ American men have lost out on tens of thousands of college scholarships because the federal law called Title IX demanded equality of all sports in universities, which resulted in the elimination of many male-only sports and the accompanying scholarships.

None of this exactly paints a picture of a patriarchal society where women are oppressed and men are triumphant as the angry feminists on or recently out of college campuses keep telling us. Not at all. The only “oppression” is nature, for which oppression is the wrong word.

“There isn’t a shred of hard evidence to support that Western society is pathologically patriarchal; that the prime lesson of history is that men, rather than nature, were the primary source of oppression of women,” writes Jordan Peterson in his blockbuster book, 12 Rules for Life.

American women, particularly professionals with college degrees, are putting off marriage and finding fewer eligible men when they are ready to settle down and get married in their 30s. This is being written about frequently now as many of these women lament that lack of marriable men at that age.

American women are having fewer children (a feminist and leftist goal) and having them later in life. Sadly, many are finding that when they finally decide they want to start a family, they either cannot find any quality men of husband potential or their biological clock has run out.

But as horrible as that may be, it is hardly the end game. Let a feminist leader put it in her own words.

“Feminism means dismantling society’s toxic ideas about what fatherhood looks like,” Emma Roller recently wrote in Splinter. “Ultimately, it means dismantling gender completely.”

Exactly. Credit Roller with honesty, although with ongoing radicalization of feminism, the activists and leaders of the modern feminist movement are pretty open about their intent to destroy, or “dismantle,” as Roller puts it.

The no-commitment sexual revolution pushed by earlier feminism combined with the “rape culture” sham and gender fluidity poison from modern feminism has virtually killed romance and the potential for healthy, monogamous relationships between husbands and wives along a wide swath of America.

Destroying the joys of motherhood and loosing the restraints on men through marriage and fatherhood, has made no one happy or fulfilled. Actually, it has increased anger and depression in both sexes.

Dennis Prager recently wrote: “The left has made innumerable women unhappy, even depressed, with its decades of lying about how female sexual nature and male sexual nature are identical — leading to a “hookup” culture that leaves vast numbers of young women depressed — and its indoctrinating of generations of young women into believing they will be happier through career success than marital success.”

Interestingly, and in line with the actual natures of men and women — natures the left and modern feminists deny or blame on the largely non-existent patriarchy — multiple studies from the European Union Eurostat arm to Australia’s Cowan University to numerous American studies have found that women (and men) who have large families are the most happy.

Harry Wallop, recently wrote in the London Telegraph about the Eurostat report on happiness among European nations, but found one element of the research to be a surprise: “… one of the most intriguing details to emerge is that families with three or more children are far more likely to be very happy than families with just one or two children, than single parents and also spinsters and bachelors.”

Wallop, who has four children and in the U.K. that is considered scandalously big, went on: “My only serious theory as to why large families may be happier is because instances of selfishness should be lower. Me, me, me can not flourish in such a crowded environment. Sharing is a daily activity you just have to get used to.”

He’s right. Selfishness does not bring about happiness. It just breeds more selfishness. Sharing, giving and sacrificing for others does produce happiness. But modern feminism is the promotion of selfishness uber alles. It’s what the woman wants, when the woman wants it and all must bend to her will — including the convenience of unborn babies.

At bottom, feminism is determined to both prove men and women are the exact same and can do all the exact same things while at the same time insisting gender is just a patriarchal cultural construct that must be abolished. It is a movement that is as inconsistent as most of modern liberalism, but perhaps more destructive, because men and women are different. And no amount of feminist theory college degrees can change that.

Despite this growing disaster for men and society as a whole, feminists, the Left, Democrats and the media continue to play the hysterically false “war on women” card. For the ideologues, it’s their identity. For the politicians, it’s a power card. For America and the West, it’s a long-term funeral procession.


Social Justice Warrior Accuses Conservative Women of ‘Appropriating’ Feminism—but We’re Not Having It

U.S. birthrates drop in to danger zone! Have more babies or else!

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in The Revolutionary Act.

Trump’s New Regs Move Tax Dollars away from Abortion

It’s a big day in Washington where an injustice a quarter of a century in the making is finally being corrected. It was January 22, 1993 — the 20th anniversary of Roe v. Wade -when then President Bill Clinton suspended President Ronald Reagan’s regulation preventing federal Title X funds from going to family planning clinics where abortions are performed. Unbelievably, Clinton even went so far as to require every provider to refer for abortion, which disqualified pro-life and faith-based groups that have religious and moral objections to abortion from participating in the program. Since then, Planned Parenthood and other abortion centers have used these federal family planning programs as a slush fund to pay overhead expenses including staff salaries, facility rent, and even furniture. Sadly, no president over the past 25 years has stopped this co-mingling of taxpayer funds with the abortion industry — that is until today.

Under President Trump’s rule announced today, like Reagan’s, Planned Parenthood and other abortion centers will have to choose between dropping their abortion services from any location that gets family planning dollars and moving those abortion operations offsite. Either way, this will loosen Planned Parenthood’s grip on more than $60 million in taxpayer dollars. The new regulations will draw a bright line between abortion centers and family planning programs — just as the federal law requires and the Supreme Court upheld in a 1991 ruling.

Praise for the president is pouring in from pro-life leaders and Members of Congress. Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.) who serves as Co-Chair of the Congressional Pro-Life Caucus applauded the new rule noting that it “at long last reinstates principles first put forward under the Reagan administration, and upheld by the Supreme Court nearly three decades ago…Abortion is not family planning — in sharp contrast, the violence of abortion wounds families.” Rep. Robert Aderholt (R- Ala.) also offered praise and explained, “we only have to look to Planned Parenthood’s activities in our own state to see why they do not deserve federal funds. Just within the last few years, the clinic in Mobile performed two abortions in less than a year on a 14-year-old girl. She was clearly being sexually abused, but no one at Planned Parenthood notified authorities, as is required by law. For them, it was another routine abortion.”

And remember, it was David Daleiden and his undercover videos that uncovered Planned Parenthood’s horrific routine of selling baby body parts. Thanks to President Trump, their routine — at least when it comes to treating the taxpayers like an ATM machine — is beginning to change. President Trump has teed up Congress to take the step toward the ultimate goal of ending taxpayers’ forced partnership with the abortion industry. That includes an end to Planned Parenthood’s federal gravy train in multiple federal programs in which they get over $400 million each year. The House has already voted to redirect tax dollars away from the abortion giant and the Senate came within one vote last year of sending the measure to President Trump’s desk to be signed into law.

With hundreds of millions at stake, Planned Parenthood’s PAC announced last month that they will spend $ 30 million dollars on the midterm elections. Obviously, it’s illegal for Richards to use even a cent of federal funds on the group’s political activities. And while her accountants use every possible trick to keep the monies separate, it is hard to separate the fact that $30 million is available to influence elections because the outcome of those elections has produced nearly a half a billion dollars of government money to fund their Leftist mission. In the meantime, President Trump is following through on his campaign promise that his administration will advocate for mothers and their unborn children every day he occupies the White House and take important steps to ensure taxpayers are not subsidizing the abortion industry. Join me in thanking the president by sending him an email of appreciation via the White House comment page.

Tony Perkins’ Washington Update is written with the aid of FRC senior writers.


Supporting Indonesia’s Religious Freedom-Loving Muslims

Stand Up and Be Counted

New Trump Administration Move Deals Significant Blow to Planned Parenthood

Who Are America’s Friends?

Have you ever been out to a large family dinner at a restaurant? Typically someone picks up the check for the entire party, such as a rich uncle. During the meal, he is kidded and listened to, but he is always expected to pick up the bill, with tip. It gets interesting when, one day, the family sits down at the table and the waiter asks who will be taking care of the bill at the end of the meal. The family is aghast when the uncle speaks up and says, “Separate checks.” Suddenly, the uncle isn’t quite so funny anymore, nor do people listen to him during the meal; in fact, he is ostracized and accused of being cheap. This pretty much describes America’s relationship with other countries.

On May 8th, President Trump announced the United States was withdrawing from the Iran nuclear deal. This sent shock waves through our European allies as they had hoped we would stay in it, believing the Iranians would keep their end of the bargain and not develop nuclear weapons down the road. Mr. Trump didn’t read it the same way and saw it as producing long-term problems. It must be remembered this agreement was never ratified as a treaty by the Senate as the Obama administration didn’t want to see the Congress upset one of his landmark achievements.

Following America’s withdrawal, protests were formed in Iran, American flags were burned, and “Death to America,” was chanted by protesters and members of the Iranian parliament. Then again, this was also done when the agreement was first signed, so nothing has really changed; the Iranians never did like us, and probably never will.

This is another example of Mr. Trump’s “Big Stick” foreign policy where we no longer cajole countries into trying to see things our way. Whereas other presidents hoped to entice countries into working together, Mr. Trump is more results oriented, likely because of his business background. Time and again he has been using his “America First” mantra as an intricate part of his foreign policy.

We have used the “carrot and stick” approach for many years, but what did we get in return, loyalty? Hardly. For example, in December 2017, the United Nations held a resolution disapproving of America’s recent decision to move the U.S. Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, something many past presidents had promised to do, yet failed to deliver. The vote passed 128-9 with 35 countries abstaining. Among those countries voting against the United States included our “friends,” the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Japan, Belgium, Italy, Spain, Ireland, and the Netherlands.

Others also voted against the United States, including many receiving generous foreign aid from America, including:

(From FY2017) –

Afghanistan – $977M
Bangladesh – $179M
Brazil – $25M
Congo – $395M
Cuba – $7.3M
Egypt – $143M
Ethiopia – $939M
Ghana – $167M
Iraq – $529M
Jordan – $813M
Lebanon – $116M
Libya – $64M
Nepal – $181M
Nigeria – $684M
Pakistan – $485M
Somalia – $416M
South Africa – $360M
Sudan – $151M
Viet Nam – $81M
West Bank/Gaza (Palestine Auth) – $285M
Yemen – $573M
Zimbabwe – $154M


In all, $21B was spent on foreign aid last year, which is used for such things as disasters, poverty relief, technical cooperation on global issues, including the environment, U.S. bilateral interests, and socioeconomic development. However, this does not include military aid which would probably double the figures shown. Yet, all of these countries voted against the United States, thereby creating an embarrassing moment for us.

If you study the individual donations listed here, which is only a partial list, one can only wonder if there is a better way of spending this money, particularly in our own country instead of giving it to our “friends.” Don’t we still have a national debt?

In refuting the resolution, UN Ambassador Nikki Haley said,

“The United States will remember this day in which it was singled out for attack in the General Assembly for the very act of exercising our right as a sovereign nation. We will remember it when we are called upon to once again make the world’s largest contribution to the United Nations. And we will remember it when so many countries come calling on us, as they so often do, to pay even more and to use our influence for their benefit.”

The Palestinian Authority has declared it will not with work the Trump administration in peace talks because of the Jerusalem decision, and will negotiate with other parties instead. Fine. I’m sure they will not need the $285 million they are currently receiving from our country.

Countries ask their rich “Uncle Sam” for money for a variety of reasons, such as to cooperate with American military policy, payola, and because they desperately need it. Whatever the reason, they have to learn to play ball with the administration. A vote against the United States, such as what happened at the United Nations, should be felt in the pocket book.

We would like to believe the European countries are our friends, particularly the United Kingdom. The truth is, it is a myth. Even Australia, Canada, Mexico, and the Philippines, long considered friendly to the United States, opted to abstain as opposed to rejecting the UN resolution outright. We should know by now, the other countries only want deals favoring their countries, and not our own. This is what Mr. Trump has been warning us about since he began to run for president. There is nothing wrong in helping others in time of need, but it should come with the stipulation they will support us in return. Otherwise, it is a Win-Lose proposition and as our president can tell you, the only good business relationship is when both parties prosper.

Keep the Faith!

P.S., Be sure to see my video, “The PRIDE Renewal Tour,” on YouTube.

RELATED ARTICLE: Hamas Turmoil in Gaza is a Reflection of a Deeper Development in the Arab World

EDITORS NOTE: All trademarks both marked and unmarked belong to their respective companies. The featured image is of Iranians holding anti-Israel and anti-U.S. placards during a protest in Tehran. (AFP/Getty Images)

Religious Liberty: Believe Local, Act Global

The world’s worst actors got away with an awful lot when Barack Obama was president. When tyrants across Syria, Iraq, Nigeria, and other countries started sensing the White House’s indifference toward religious persecution, they exploited it. Little by little, they let their deep hatred for certain faiths turn violent. As time passed, and they grew more confident that the United States government wouldn’t intervene, their attacks became bolder, more ferocious. Innocent men, women, and children were gunned down, beheaded, raped, tortured, or chased from their homes simply because of who they were and what they believed. It was like a disease that America’s silence left to fester.

It’s going to take time for President Trump to undo the damage done by the Obama administration’s indifference. In the vacuum of American leadership, persecution exploded through some of the darkest corners on earth. Thousands of people paid for our indifference with their lives. Fortunately, this White House is in the process of making sure that never happens again.

Both Secretary Mike Pompeo and Ambassador at Large for Religious Freedom Sam Brownback hit the ground running, transforming the culture of the State Department almost overnight. Now, seemingly minor crises to the Obama administration are getting the U.S. government’s full attention. Just yesterday, State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert called China on the carpet for cracking down on a memorial service for earthquake victims from 2008. “The police took away dozens of people who arrived for the planned service on Saturday morning, and they used trucks to remove publications belonging to the church, indicating that a broader move was underway against the congregation,” the New York Times reported. Pastors were arrested; others were hauled in for questioning.

“We call on China to uphold its international commitments to promote respect for religious freedom for all persons,” Nauert said forcefully. Earlier in the week, Pompeo’s agency fired another warning shot — this time to Yemen, whose radicals have vowed, “We will butcher every Baha’i,” a cry echoed by a large number of the country’s armed extremists. In that case, too, the State Department let the world know it was watching. “We call on the Houthis to end their unacceptable treatment of Baha’is and call on them to allow the Baha’i community to practice their religion without fear of intimidation or reprisals.”

To the relief of so many persecuted people of different faiths around the globe, America is regaining its voice on international religious liberty. FRC couldn’t be happier to see the Trump administration place a greater priority on this issue than most administrations. And this week, we’re proud to announce that I’ll be taking an active role in that effort. On Monday, thanks to the president and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), I was officially appointed to the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF). The Commission, which came about as part of the 1998 International Religious Freedom Act, is tasked with tracking religious freedom violations and making policy recommendations to the president, secretary of state, and Congress. Most people are familiar with USCIRF because of the annual “watch list” it puts together on countries that pose a particular threat to people of faith.

For FRC, this appointment is a recognition of the significant work we’ve done on religious liberty nationally and internationally. From testifying before Congress to fighting for the release of Afghan Christian Abdul Rahman and Sudan’s Meriam Ibrahim, it has been our honor to bring worldwide attention to the plight of the persecuted. My term at USCIRF will last two years, and I’ll continue to serve as FRC’s president during that time.

In the meantime, I’m grateful to Majority Leader McConnell for appointing me to such a prestigious position, and I look forward to doing all I can to ensure that our government is the single biggest defender of religious freedom internationally. One immediate step we can take in this regard is to make sure that the Frank R. Wolf International Religious Freedom Act is fully and properly implemented.

I also look forward to working with willing partners among those nations on USCIRF’s list of “Countries of Particular Concern” to substantively address religious freedom concerns — even at the grassroots level — and assist them in taking the actions necessary to be removed from the list. It’s my hope that through the work of USCIRF, the world will become one step closer to recognizing the vital role religious freedom and the defense of religious minorities play in peace, security, and human flourishing.

For more on the announcement and what I’ll be doing, check out these stories in CBNthe Daily Caller, and Religion News Service.

Tony Perkins’ Washington Update is written with the aid of FRC Action senior writers.


The Primary-Go-Round

The Abortion Case That’s Really about the First Amendment…

This Student Was Ordered to Remove Bible Verses From Her Graduation Speech. Here’s What Happened.

Prenatal Marijuana Use Can Affect Infant Size, Behavior, Study Finds

We know that smoking cigarettes during pregnancy has negative effects on birth weights and is linked to health problems in childhood. Now, researchers have found that smoking marijuana can impact birth weights and lead to behavioral problems, and the effects are worsened when combined with tobacco use.

Nearly 30 percent of women who smoke during pregnancy report using marijuana as well. Researchers studied nearly 250 mothers and their infants; 173 of the babies had been exposed to tobacco and/or marijuana during their mothers’ pregnancies.

Compared to babies exposed to no drugs, those exposed to both drugs, especially in the third trimester, were:

  • smaller in length, weight, and head size,
  • more likely to be born earlier,
  • more irritable,
  • more easily frustrated, and
  • less likely to be able to calm themselves easily.

Women with symptoms of anger, hostility, and aggression reported more stress while pregnant and were more likely to continue tobacco and marijuana use throughout. This co-exposure increased the odds of giving birth to smaller babies who were more irritable and frustrated.

Finding ways to help women reduce stress and deal with negative emotions as well as to discourage both tobacco and marijuana use during pregnancy may lead to healthier babies.

This study was funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse.

Read Science Daily account of it here. Read the study itself in the March/April issue of Child Development here.

Cannabis Use Up among Parents with Children in the Home

Marijuana use has increased among both parents who smoke cigarettes and non-smoking parents, threatening the overall decline in children’s exposure to second-hand smoke, a new study from Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health and the City University of New York reveals.

Researchers analyzed data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health. They found that marijuana use increased among parents with children living in the home from 5 percent in 2002 to 7 percent in 2015, while cigarette smoking decreased from 28 percent to 20 percent during that time.

In contrast, marijuana use among cigarette-smoking parents rose from 11 percent in 2002 to 17 percent in 2015, compared to an increase of 2 percent to 4 percent among non-smoking parents, making cigarette-smokers’ marijuana use nearly four times greater (17 percent vs 4 percent). Their daily marijuana use is five times greater (5 percent vs 1 percent).

The researchers say the results of their study support the reduction in overall second-hand tobacco smoke exposure but add new public health concerns about children’s exposure to second-hand marijuana smoke.

The study was funded by the National Institutes for Health and the National Institute on Drug Abuse.

Read Science Daily account of this study here. Read the Pediatrics study itself, in which the illustration above appears, here.

Most Marijuana Dispensaries Give Inaccurate Advice on Pot in Pregnancy

Nearly 70 percent of employees at 400 Colorado marijuana dispensaries say they would recommend marijuana to pregnant mothers experiencing nausea, a new study finds.

Researchers at the University of Colorado School of Medicine and the Denver Health and Hospital Authority called dispensaries, pretending to be eight weeks pregnant and saying they felt “really nauseated.”

Of the 400 dispensaries contacted, employees at 277 recommended a marijuana product for morning sickness. Most based their recommendations on personal opinion. Some 36 percent said the drug is safe in pregnancy; about half (53 percent) said they weren’t sure of that.

One employee said that marijuana edibles wouldn’t be a risk to the baby, because “they would be going through the digestional [digestive] tract.”

“As cannabis legalization becomes more common, women should be cautioned that advice from dispensary employees might not necessarily be informed by medical evidence,” the researchers note.

Read Live Science account of the study here. Read the study itself in the June issue of Obstetrics and Gynecology here.

Mr. Trump versus the Democrats

I had a friend recently comment to me,

“The biggest threat to the Republicans maintaining control of the Congress is Donald Trump.”

Admittedly, he was never a fan of the president, nor did he vote for him in the 2016 election as he thought Mr. Trump was rather un-presidential and his rhetoric embarrassing. I countered that I found the president’s comments rather refreshing as compared to the stale gobbledygook typically coming out of Washington. I also find it interesting my friend doesn’t seem to have a problem with the disparaging comments made by the president’s opponents in the other party who frequently accuse him of corruption, racism, misconduct, and hate. Their unbridled distortion of the truth leads me to believe what is good for the goose is not good for the gander.

So far, Mr. Trump has delivered on a lot of his campaign promises and has reversed the socialistic direction spun by our last president. True, he possesses a super Type-A personality, which is typical of businessmen like him (e.g., Ted Turner), but he is the type of person who is more interested in results as opposed to facade. In other words, I’m less interested in his personality, and more interested in his ability to deliver on his promises.

Judging by his repartee in the media, the one thing Mr. Trump obviously understands, and others do not, including his fellow Republicans, is the country is embroiled in a war over the very essence of America. Since his election, the opposing party has worked overtime to thwart his every move. For example…

Because of urging from Democrats, the administration has been embroiled in an investigation regarding Russian collusion, which has yet to produce anything of substance. The special prosecutor is desperately trying to pin something on the president, anything, even to the point of violating attorney-client privilege.

Democrat members of the House want to impeach the president over fabricated charges.

Democrat Senators are still holding up presidential appointments.

Democrats are still buried in the administration who routinely leak information to the press and undermine the President.

Democrats control academia, the entertainment media, news media, and social media. Consequently fake news and spin is the norm today, all aimed at brainwashing the public.

Democrats want to abolish the 1st and 2nd amendments, if not the whole Constitution, claiming it is outdated.

Our young people are being engineered by the Democrats to be naive about government and ignorant of history, making them easy to manipulate.

Democrats support illegal immigration for the purpose of securing future voters.

Democrats support sanctuary cities and states to shield criminals as opposed to lawful citizens.

Democrats practice a “divide and conquer” strategy called Identity Politics, pitting citizens against each other.

Democrats are trying to remove God from our country.

Democrat Governors openly resist the president, such as Oregon, Montana, and Nevada refusing to send their National Guard troops to the southern border.

And it is now common practice for Democrats to tie up presidential orders in the courts.

This is more than just the Democrats resisting the president. It represents bureaucrats, the Washington establishment and the Media openly defying Mr. Trump, which is why he takes them to task every chance he gets, rightfully so I might add. In fact, in deference to my friend, I would like to see more GOP members of Congress sounding the alarm as well.

As I pointed out in an earlier column, this rebellion by the Democrats is caused by the radical Left who is currently in control of the party, the “Progressives.” Should they fail to take back at least one chamber of Congress in the mid-term elections, their grip on the party will likely slip defaulting control back to moderates, and maybe then we can start making progress.

So, it comes down to this…

If you believe in Socialism over Capitalism, you’ll vote Democrat.

If you believe the Constitution needs major surgery or completely revised, you’ll vote Democrat.

If you believe there is no room in our society for God, you’ll vote Democrat.

And if you sincerely believe the spin coming from the media, hook, line and sinker, you’ll definitely vote Democrat.

As for me, I am not so gullible as to believe this nonsense.

Keep the Faith!

Why Kanye Is Hated for Refusing to Hate

David Gornoski Like the Gerasenes, the Rap-Pop-Fashion-Fame Media Land reacted in terror and outrage when Kanye loved their untouchable demoniac in Trump.

by David Gornoski

“You don’t have to agree with trump but the mob can’t make me not love him.” – Kanye West

Forget petty politics for a moment. Kanye West’s recent statement on Twitter defending his love of Donald Trump is one of the most eloquent descriptions of a two-millennia-long struggle in humanity to self-actualize by remembering its origins while forgiving and building a future based on nonaggression and non-vengeance.

In the World of Rap-Pop-Fashion-Fame Media Land

In Kanye West’s world, let’s call it Rap-Pop-Fashion-Fame Media Land, celebrities must always walk a tightrope of crowd appeasement—they have to be different enough to stand out, but not so different that they trigger a mob frenzy based on envy and fear. Try as they might, celebrities realize that the avatar they become ends up consuming them: one cannot have a direct person-to-person connection with the consumers of their art but must always appease powerful gatekeeping groupthink forces manipulated by record companies, agencies, fashion cliques, radio and TV executives, and political ideologies.

In Rap-Pop-Fashion-Fame Media Land there are certain taboos stars, ever-teetering on the mob consuming them at any wrong move, should never cross.

In a recent interview with TMZ, Kanye once again alluded to this reality when he mentioned trying to do liposuction to make the media-mediated public perception of him acceptable. On the pharmaceutical ad-supported TV broadcast of TMZ Live, West even had the audacity to question the absurd all-too-common tragedy of his hospital experience loading him with even more pharmaceuticals to deal with a nascent opioid addiction.

Think of the world Kanye is trying to “break through” as a ruthless game of bloodsport entertainment of rising and dying stars on a worldwide stage: like pro-wrestling. Like wrestling, this game operates with certain characters being designated bad guys (called “heels”) and good guys (“babyfaces”).

In Rap-Pop-Fashion-Fame Media Land there are certain taboos stars, ever-teetering on the mob consuming them at any wrong (or media-massaged perception of wrong) move, should never cross. One sacred line never to be crossed is for a member of the babyfaces to show friendship to a member of the heels.

The Heels and the Babyfaces

The conservative right has been playing the heel faction for decades in Rap-Pop-Fashion-Fame Media Land. Their side tends to mirror the groupthink of the dominant hegemonic leftist faction, but they are relegated to the “off-brand” institutions like AM radio, Internet sites flagged by social media, and one gaudy cable news network. The hegemonic leftist faction has everything else, including the all-important curriculum and bureaucracies of education and college.

The conservative heels ultimately are doomed so long as they continue to mimic their rivals’ love for power and collective coercion to solve problems in society.

Politics is like a society-wide game of scapegoat ping-pong in which half the country gets a scapegoat-god-king role model to vicariously place their feelings and hopes on while the other half languishes all their daily fears, hates, and resentments onto the ruling faction’s backs. This ridiculously stupid game is repeated ad nauseum while government gets bigger, crony media and corporations protected by government get bigger, unnecessary wars and drone strikes continue unabated, and millions of people of all colors and creeds are thrown into human assault cages we call prisons for nonviolent behavior (no victim can be named in the police report).

Leftists promise that if they could just vanquish their stinky, old conservative heels, they could coddle their victim coalition with more state control over their health care, medicine, jobs, ideas, speech, and energy choices. Incidentally, the cities most tortured with perpetual incarceration, broken families, perpetual poverty, and hopelessness are the urban centers ruled monolithically by leftists for generations.

The conservative heels do a little better on some issues but ultimately are doomed to fail so long as they continue to mimic their dominant leftist rivals’ love for power and collective coercion to solve problems in society. In other words, as long as they cling to the state and, in so doing, legitimize its sacred right of initiating violence against nonviolent persons at home and abroad.

Cue the Ultimate Heel

Nevertheless, when Kanye offered love to the biggest conservative heel character Rap-Pop-Fashion-Fame-Media Land has ever constructed—Donald Trump—it was a massive tear in the veil of that world’s existence. As a black man role modeling cool and brilliance to millions of young adults, many of whom are black as well, the high priests of Rap-Pop-Fashion-Fame-Media Land are screaming in fear at Kanye’s declaration of love and friendship with Trump. The Rap-Pop-Fashion-Fame Media Land’s very existence is bound together by the fact that they are not him.

Trump was acceptable as long as he knew his place as a tabloid game show host caricature of rich white billionaires obsessed with materialism.

Many cannot bear to let others see them mentioning his name, preferring to call him 45 to obfuscate his humanity. Make no mistake, Trump was a babyface faction-tolerated friendly heel character that was acceptable as long as he knew his place as a tabloid game show host caricature of rich white billionaires obsessed with materialism. But the moment he took his act into the regal, sacred theater of politics and did not fold his mouth in line with the rules, the media and the third of the country that believes whatever it tells them lost their collective minds.

In a world where people must attain power and status by pretending that they are not interested in self-worship or glory, Trump ripped the veneer wide open. His vulgar rhetoric and scorched-earth style refuse to hide the knife of the heretofore victim-coddling, pious language of politics and state power.

His greatest sin for which there is an ongoing soft coup in Mueller’s sham investigation is that he failed to stay on script for the West’s biggest bogeyman left on the world stage. Trump dared to offer a vision of friendship with a semi-autonomous nuclear Russia. With a trillion-dollar annual foreign policy budget and security complex to maintain, even the whiff of non-compliance with the status quo of stupid saber-rattling for no reason could not be tolerated. What is the American state for, if not to go abroad in search of expensive monsters to destroy?

And so the crony capitalist-funded media outlets have spent the last few years inundating the population with 24/7 lying, fear-fueled, green-with-envy hatred for Trump. As someone who rejects statism completely, I am farther from his ideology than they, and yet I can see clearly how ridiculous and vapid the entire hate-fest is.

The Terrible Sin of Being the Other

Trump offered friendship with Putin and receives 24/7 partisan hack news attacks. Now Kanye receives a media assault of fear and hate for loving Trump. Just like feminist Cassie Jaye was attacked by her fellow feminists after she made the movie The Red Pill and tried to reach out and listen to her enemies in the men’s rights movement. Just like my friend Daryl Davis, a black blues musician who was attacked by fellow civil rights activists after he met with leaders of the KKK and was able to convert them out of their evil ideology through love and friendship.

He was hopelessly Other. And the city liked it that way.

This is the world-defining struggle between personhood and collectivism unleashed in Western civilization ever since we encountered and became infected by stories like Jesus’s confrontation of the Demon called Legion.

Mark and Luke report that Jesus traveled across the Sea of Galilee to the land of the Gerasenes. There he encountered a demon-possessed man who lived outside the city. The man screamed and howled every night and was so completely excluded by the collective of the town that they did not have to lift a stone against him: he continually bashed his naked body with stones as he haunted the tombs. They did not even bother to refashion his chains he had broken. He was hopelessly Other. And the city liked it that way.

But then Jesus loved the man. He asked him his name. The parasitical spirit of oppression answered from him, “Legion, for we are many.” The word “Legion” to the contemporary audience hearing the story did not mean “many” but had a specific reference to the Roman Empire’s military units. The word for “many” in the Greek is “polus” which means the masses. The text is showing that Jesus was casting out the Roman imperial mindset that infects the masses by loving this man into his right mind.

When the unclean is declared clean and brought inside the camp of normalcy, communities blinded by fear quake in chaos.

The healed man wants to come with Jesus as he leaves, but Jesus implores him to stay and share the same love shown to him. How does the land of the Gerasenes react? Not joy. Not thankfulness. Not relief. Instead, they are terrified and demand that Jesus leave their land immediately.

Welcome to the New World Order of Love

Like the Gerasenes, the Rap-Pop-Fashion-Fame Media Land reacted in terror and outrage when Kanye loved their untouchable demoniac in Trump. Their togetherness is defined by their distance from his persona. When the unclean is declared clean and brought inside the camp of normalcy, communities blinded by fear quake in chaos.

These nonviolent weapons, whenever we employ them in the world today, will overcome a world worn down by the old way of sacrifice.

Jesus stood with the land’s Other, loved the co-dependent collectivist spirit out of him, and sent it flying off a cliff in a herd of pigs. The performance is a declaration of war against the spirit of empire, domination, coercion, division, and violent scapegoating of Others to maintain our sense of community. The weapons Jesus used were love, self-respect, and self-sacrificial courage. These nonviolent weapons, whenever we employ them in the world today, will overcome a world worn down by the old way of sacrifice.

With Jesus, we imitate a spirit of self-sacrifice of fear of our neighbors rather than sacrificing and blaming our neighbors for our problems. We no longer use misfits and monsters as our collective measuring sticks for our collectivist cliques’ togetherness. We bind together based on mutual respect for our common personhood and refusal to ever cast another stone against a person, no matter who they are or how big our polis(political orders) may be. That includes our sacred voting rite and jury box.

We will not put another human being in a cage for a nonviolent behavior. We will not send our children to drone/stone foreign citizens who pose no serious threat to our empire of dirt. We will not found our cities on the spirit of Left or Right, for we are many persons, each with our own dignity as sons and daughters of God.

Welcome to the new world order of love. Jesus walks with us.

McCarthyism and Muellerism: Mockeries of American Justice

War makes strange bedfellows. The United States and Russia were allied against Nazi Germany in WWII until they weren’t. The alliance continued until it succeeded in defeating Nazi Germany and then the diametrically opposed economic and political ideologies of Russian communism and American capitalism reverted the countries to enmity again.

The convenient ideological “My enemy’s enemy is my friend” alliance collapsed and the Cold War between Russia and the United States began.

The Cold War lasted until the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. The Cold War was an ideological war between Marxist-Leninist Russia (collectivism) and the capitalist republic infrastructure of the United States. Today’s Culture War is also an ideological war – this time between the globalist (collectivist) initiative to internationalize the world under a New World Order and the capitalist republic infrastructure of a sovereign United States of America.

Joseph McCarthy was the US Senator from Wisconsin from 1947-1957 during the height of the Cold War when suspicions about the threat of Communism and its Marxist-Leninist goals were legitimate concerns. What began as an appropriate investigation of Communist infiltration into American government devolved into a lawless boundaryless witch hunt based on innuendo not facts.

McCarthy’s failure was that he stopped concerning himself with WHAT the person had actually done and began focusing on WHO that person was – his beliefs and associations. McCarthyism became synonymous with character assassination.

It was not illegal to be a Communist in America in the 1950s. It WAS illegal to foment the overthrow of the government. Communists who had infiltrated our government and actively sought to destroy our republic and replace American capitalism with Russian communism were enemies of the state.

Similarly, it is not illegal to be a globalist in America today but it IS illegal to foment the overthrow of the government. So, globalists who actively seek to destroy our republic and replace the US Constitution with internationalized one-world government are enemies of the state. Mueller’s investigation has yielded ZERO evidence of collusion with the Russians by President Donald Trump. It has, however, yielded shocking evidence of collusion with the Russians by Obama’s politicized FBI, CIA, and DOJ to illegally acquire FISA warrants to spy on President Trump.

Today’s Culture War has targeted President Donald J. Trump as the enemy of its globalist goal of internationalizing the world into a New World Order of one-world government ruled by its own elite. The leftist Democrat Party has entered into an alliance with globalists and Islamists whose shared goal is to destroy America from within.

Mueller’s “investigation” has abandoned all semblance of lawful propriety. It has devolved into the same sort of witch hunt lead by Joe McCarthy based on innuendo instead of facts that focuses on the WHO of behavior while ignoring the WHAT of behavior. The infrastructure of Muellerism is the same innuendo and character assassination McCarthyism utilized. Both bullying their prey with smear campaigns, unethical tactics, unfounded accusations repeated incessantly by the colluding mainstream media. This is how it works.

A definition of terms is essential:

  • NATIONALISM is not a dirty word no matter how hard the Left tries to associate nationalism with white supremacists and Nazism. American nationalism unapologetically seeks American sovereignty and independence. American nationalism like American citizenship is a source of pride and President Trump symbolizes the America-first movement of American nationalism.
  • GLOBALISM is not to be confused with global trade among sovereign nations. Globalism is the effort to internationalize the world under one-world government ruled by the globalist elite of course. Globalism is internationalized collectivism.
  • COLLECTIVISM is any system that values the group at the expense of the individuals who make up the group. Communism, socialism, and globalism are all collectivist structures that oppose the individualism intrinsic to the capitalist infrastructure of our Republic and its Constitution.

In the 1950s the Culture War was an ideological battle between American capitalism and Russian communism. Today’s Culture War is an ideological battle between American nationalism and international globalism. The traditional American two-party system of Republicans vs Democrats no longer describes two opposing American ideologies. The two-party system of today is more accurately described as Nationalism (American sovereignty) vs Globalism (internalized New World Order) regardless of party affiliation.

Joe McCarthy lived during a time of American nationalism that was threatened by external collectivism (communism) infiltrating the country. Robert Mueller lives in a time of American nationalism threatened by internal collectivism (globalism) existing within the country. The deliberate effort at character assassination of duly elected President Donald Trump by globalist Democrats and globalist Republicans to overthrow the country is a bipartisan ideological effort. Why?

War makes strange bedfellows. The strangest bedfellows in today’s Culture War is the alliance of the Left, the Globalists, and the Islamists. This threesome is in bed together with the shared short-term goal of destroying America but they have diametrically opposed long-term goals. So, just like the the collapse of the temporary alliance of the United States and Russia during WWII, the Leftist/Globalist/Islamist alliance will necessarily collapse if they are successful in their goal of overthrowing President Trump. What then?

The Leftists consider the Islamists useful idiots who will generate enough social chaos for the left to institute Martial Law and nationalize the police force and then socialize America. The Islamists consider the Leftists useful idiots in their campaign to infiltrate American politics and replace the Constitution with sharia law. The globalist elite consider both groups useful idiots who will together provide the social chaos necessary for citizens to willingly surrender their civil liberties for safety. That is the required tipping point for Globalist one-world government to become reality.

Here is the problem. The political will to power of the Leftists the Islamists and the globalist elite is a no holds barred contest. In McCarthy’s day when his goons threw shit against the wall to see what would stick it just smelled up the room and his victims were doomed. When Mueller’s goons threw shit against the wall there was DNA evidence in the fecal matter. The Mueller witch hunt left DNA traces of the CIA, FBI, Clapper, Brennan, Clinton, Comey, Rosenstein, Strzok, Paige, Lynch, Mueller himself, and of course the most foul of all – Barack Hussein Obama.

There has never been a more odious president in American history than Barack Hussein Obama who politicized and weaponized every government agency to use against his political enemies in the service of the Leftist/Islamist/Globalist alliance.


Why Liberals Attack America

How Democrats Fundamentally Changed from the Party of JFK to the Party of BHO

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the Goudsmit Pundicity.

Film ‘A Quiet Place’ is all about faith and family

I went to see Paramount Pictures’ film “A Quite Place.” The featured image is of, from left to right, Noah Jupe who plays Marcus Abbott, John Krasinski who plays Lee Abbott, Emily Blunt who plays Evelyn Abbott and Millicent Simmonds who plays Regan Abbott.

Here is the trailer:

The trailer portrays “A Quiet Place” as a horror film. While the film is suspense filled it is more about faith, family, sacrifice and the human will to survive and flourish.

When the Abbot family sits down to dinner they all join hands in silent prayer. It is a powerful moment because Lee and Evelyn Abbott just lost their youngest son and Marcus and Regan their little brother to one of the alien creatures that attack anything that makes a sound.

Most of all the film is about family, the traditional family.

The Bible quote Proverbs 6:20 is the core message of “A Quiet Place”:

My son, keep thy father’s commandment, and forsake not the law of thy mother.

The father Lee leads the family, protects the family and in the end sacrifices himself to save his children and family. Emily Blunt does a masterful job in portraying a strong, loving and devoted mother Evelyn Abbott. While Lee is the provider, Evelyn is the powerful mother who holds the family together in the greatest times of peril. Evelyn shows strength and courage in the face of evil.

Evelyn is pregnant. Evelyn and her husband prepare themselves for the birth of their fourth child. It is beautiful to watch as Evelyn gives natural birth alone, while being hunted by a monster who hears the new born baby’s cry.

In the end we see something else that we don’t normally see from a Hollywood film. In the end, Evelyn and her daughter Regan, who is deaf, discover how to defeat the monsters. Regan discovers the greatest weakness of these monsters is sound. The power of “A Quiet Place” and is in the characters. They are family examples to be emulated. They are frightened but fearless when defending one another.

Sound, not quiet, is what saves the family in the end. That along with a 12-gauge shotgun.

This is a must see film.

As you view it think about how the human spirit survives. Think about how the human race wins. Think about the strength of the faithful traditional family.

Lesson: The safest place is in the bosom of the traditional family.

AFTER THOUGHT: There are many people of the Christian faith who are afraid to speak out about their beliefs. They do not speak, are put in a quite place, for fear of being attacked, much like the monsters that the Abbott family fought. Perhaps the best way to defeat evil is to speak out.