Enter Joe Biden, Stage Left

/in , , , , , , /by

David Carlin: The former Veep is a liberal Catholic. It will be interesting to see how many bishops will offer corrections to his non-Catholic positions.

Joe Biden, a Democrat who happens to be a Catholic, is now officially running for President of the United States.  And he’s doing so in an effort to save what he calls the “soul” of America.

His assumption seems to be that there are two (more or less Platonic) Ideas of America currently struggling for dominance, the true Idea and the false Idea.  I suppose he sees himself and his views as symbolizing the true America, while he sees Donald Trump and his views as symbolizing the false America.

If Biden is to be the Democratic candidate, he will, of course, have to embrace and endorse the beliefs and values that currently prevail in the Democratic Party, and these beliefs and values include the following:

1. Abortion is a fundamental human right.

2. Homosexual behavior is a fine thing for people who are born that way; and anybody who disagrees is a homophobic bigot.

3. Same-sex marriage is a fundamental human right.

4. The U.S. Constitution, thanks to the theory of substantive due process, protects all human rights; and it’s up to any five members of the U.S. Supreme Court to decide what is, or what is not, a human right.

5. Non-liberal whites are almost always racists.

6. It is a great duty of the U.S. government to protect those among us who are most oppressed; namely, blacks, other persons of color, women, undocumented migrants, Muslims, homosexuals, transgender persons, and criminals (including drug dealers) who have committed no violent crimes.

7. When the rights of churches or religious individuals collide with the rights of the above-listed victim groups, the former must give way to the latter.

8. When the rights of parents collide with the rights of their transgender children, the former must give way to the latter.

9. Almost all our social ills can be cured, or at least significantly mitigated, by actions of the federal government.

Lest anybody think that the above is an invidious description of the Democratic belief system given by a person who is a lifelong Democrat-hater, let me assure the reader that I once possessed very strong Democratic credentials.  I think I first thought of myself as a Democrat on that day when I was about eight-years-old and my father explained to me, “The Republicans are the party of rich people.  The Democrats are the party of poor people, like us.”

Later in life I became a politician in my home state of Rhode Island.  I served twelve years (1981-93) as a Democrat in the R.I. Senate, two of those as majority leader.  In 1992, I was the (losing) Democratic candidate in my district for the U.S. House of Representatives.

By that date, it was clear that my party had become a pro-abortion party.  Yet I, a pro-life Democrat, still hoped that the party’s anti-Christian momentum could be reversed.  That, as it turned out, was quite foolish.

Increasingly, cultural enemies of Christianity have gained ideological dominance in the party.  From abortion they moved on to homosexuality and same-sex marriage; more recently they have advanced to transgenderism; and, in the future, they will almost certainly move on to assisted suicide: first to voluntary euthanasia, later to involuntary.It is with regret that I say it, but my old and dearly loved party has become a party of atheistic anti-Christianity.  This is Biden’s party, and if he doesn’t embrace its values he won’t get its nomination.

Some people may object to what I’ve said. They may point out that today’s Democratic Party still contains many Christians and is far from being a party made up solely of atheists.  True . . . and beside the point.

Many persons who identify as both Christians and Democrats are simple souls who imagine that their party, because it has the same name it had in the good old days of FDR and JFK, is the same party it has always been. They don’t understand, or they won’t allow themselves to understand, how radically their party has changed.

But those people are followers, not leaders. The ideological leadership of the party is in the hands of persons who may be called Secular Progressives.  These people are atheists and near-atheists. By “near-atheists” I mean agnostics, religiously indifferent people, and liberal Protestants (in contrast to Evangelical Protestants).

If liberal Protestants are Christians, it is in a Pickwickian sense of that word only.  For more than a century now, liberal Protestantism, in an attempt to “save” Christianity for persons with a modern mentality, has been shedding one element after another of Christian belief.

Having shed almost all Nicene doctrines, they have more recently, under the impact of the sexual revolution, dropped all traditional Christian sexual morality plus the ancient Christian taboo against abortion.  Nowadays liberal Protestantism, while not quite full-fledged atheism, is far closer to atheism than it is to traditional Christianity.

Liberal Catholicism, while drifting in the same direction, got its start later than liberal Protestantism, and so has not yet traveled quite so far down the road to atheism as has its elder brother.  Its main project at the moment is to persuade the Church to remove its age-old condemnation of homosexuality.  To all appearances, it has had considerable success with this project, not just among tolerant laypersons, but even among many priests and some bishops.

When Joe Biden tries to exploit the “fact” that he’s a Catholic, it will be interesting to see how many Catholic bishops will denounce his spurious appropriation of the faith.  If the denunciation is nearly universal, it will be a sign that the Church in America is recovering its health.  If not, it will be sign that we are still sliding downhill.

As for myself, I’m not optimistic.

COLUMN BY

David Carlin

David Carlin is a professor of sociology and philosophy at the Community College of Rhode Island, and the author of The Decline and Fall of the Catholic Church in America.

RELATED ARTICLE: Obama-Era Spying Is Now a Political Risk for Biden

EDITORS NOTE: This Catholic Thing column is republished with permission. © 2019 The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: info@frinstitute.org. The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.

VIDEO: Antisemitism and the Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) Event in Orlando, FL

/in , , , , /by

On April 15th, the Heritage Florida Jewish News requested a ‘Press Pass’ by email, to attend the April 20th Emgage Action Gala at the Crowne Plaza Hotel where controversial Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib was the keynote speaker.  Our email request for the press pass went unanswered so a ticket was purchased and confirmed on April 17th.

At the check in table, my name and Heritage press credentials were presented and admittance to the event was denied, without cause or reason.   The only excuse given was, “No media allowed” rudely given by one of the organizers who refused to give her name.  However, nothing on the ticket receipt or advertising flyers said “No Media Allowed.”

My assignment was to report on Rep. Rashida Tlaib’s speech, but now we will explore possible reasons why Emgage Action would behave in such a antisemitic way towards the Heritage Florida Jewish News and its readership.

Front Page Magazine journalist Joe Kaufman reported in a March 19, 2019 article about Emgage founder Khurrum Wahid,

“ Khurrum Basir Wahid is a Pakistani-born South Florida attorney, who has built his name on representing high profile terrorists.

His past clients include: Rafiq Sabir, who received a 25-year prison sentence for conspiring to provide material support to al-Qaeda; al-Qaeda operative Ahmed Omar Abu Ali, who received a life sentence for plotting to assassinate President George W. Bush; Sami al-Arian, who sought to create a Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) infrastructure within the Tampa, Florida-area; and Miami imam Hafiz Khan, who was convicted of sending $50,000 to the Pakistani Taliban with the intent to murder American troops overseas.”

“The Miami New Times reports, Wahid himself was placed on a federal terrorist watch list in 2011. The publication states, “[S]ometimes, a clash between his work and personal life is inescapable. Last year, he landed on a federal ‘selectee’ list – a terrorist watch list. Now he gets a pat down at the airport before flying and can’t print boarding passes at home.”                                  

Besides his controversial law practice, Wahid is the Co-Chairman of Emgage Action (formerly Emerge USA), an Islamist group he founded, in 2006, that attempts to pass its extremist agenda off as political advocacy. The group is part of the South Florida Muslim Federation, a consortium of South Florida’s radical Islamic organizations and terror-related mosques. Ammar Ahmed, the South Florida Director of Emgage, in February 2010, following a debate he participated in at a school, wrote on Facebook, “I hate white people” and joked that he “should have threatened to blow up the school.

The mosque Wahid attends is the Islamic Foundation of South Florida (IFSF). Wahid, as well, is the Registered Agent for IFSF’s corporation. On IFSF Youth Group leader Abdur Rahman al-Ghani’s Facebook page, al-Ghani labels Jews “demonic,” calls the US the “World’s Number One Terrorist Organization,” and says Muslims “will overtake the World.”

Perhaps the examples listed above provide a clue into the corporate culture of Emgage Action and their supporters.  Rep. Tlaib’s positions on BDS, Israel, and the Jewish people have made her a controversial figure among our freshman congressman and women and the nation.

An April 11,2019 Clarion Project article reports,

“Tlaib is known for being a supporter of the Boycott, Divest and Sanction (BDS) Movement against Israel, which according to the definition of anti-Semitism adopted by the State Department, is an anti-Semitic movement.”

The Times of Israel in a February 20, 2019 article reports, “

“In a video published on the Facebook page of the Israel Advocacy Movement, founder Joseph Cohen displayed a screen capture of the code used for Tlaib’s website which showed it was created using Wix.com.

“That’s right, the Palestinian queen of BDS has a website that was built and bought from Israel,” Cohen says.   Many of the haters of Israel have no idea that Israeli technology is present in just about every cell phone and computer on the market.

“Tlaib, whose parents are from the West Bank village of Beit Ur al-Fauqa, where much of her family lives, is one of the first-ever US lawmakers to support the anti-Israel boycott movement. She also says she supports a one-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and has called for cutting US aid to the country.”

“Tlaib has gained notoriety for putting a ‘post it’ note labeled “Palestine” over the State of Israel.  This political theater signals Rep. Tlaib likely believes Israel does not have the right to exist.  The policy making implications of such a radical view from a sitting United States Congresswoman is chilling.   In this picture, on the far left, is radical Palestinian activist Rasha Mubarak of Orlando, FL.  Keep your eye on Rasha Mubarak, it is rumored she has her sights on running for public office in Orlando.

Most disturbing is Rashida Tlaib’s social media posts where she says of her most radical supporters, “Every single one of you inspire me to stay true to my roots and who I am.” FB post March 31, 2018.

Two of Rep. Tlaib’s more radicalized supporters are Ahlam Jbara and  Mwafaq Jbara.

Ahlam Jbara is an avid supporter of Rasmeeh Odeh, who was arrested for orchestrating a bombing in an Israeli supermarket where two people were killed.  Another social media post show Ahlam Jbara baked Rasmeeh the murderer a birthday cake.  Ahlam also glorified  another Palestinian terrorist Muhammad Ali who stabbed three IDF soldiers in Jerusalem.

Mwafaq Jbara is a Palestinian terrorist who speaks fondly of meeting the co-founder of Hamas while being incarcerated at Megiddo prison in Israel.  Meggiddo prison is known for housing the most dangerous of Palestinian terrorists.  Jbara’s social media posts are a who’s who of high level terrorists.  Most disturbing is in one post he says, “If you see the roof of an Israeli bus flying in the air you will know it’s Yahya.”  Yahya is on of the chief bomb makers for Hamas.  Mwafaq Jbara is also seen posing with terrorist Rasmeeh Odeh.  Mwafaq Jbara and Rep. Tlaib are also Facebook friends.

We wanted to ask Rep. Tlaib about her friends support of terrorists and the killing of Jews but never got the chance.

The Israel Advocacy Movement made an excellent video exposing Rashida Tlaib’s close associates troubling past.

These associations present a pattern of behavior that should concern all American’s concerned with the State of Israel and our countries Middle East foreign policy.

In law enforcement circles, all the facts and evidence uncovered by the Israel Advocacy Movement is an indicator that Rep. Tlaib has troubling associations she should answer for.   Any individual with such connections would likely be denied even low level security clearances.

Conclusion

Once the the fiery rhetoric of antisemitism becomes accepted in the public square it only grows.  The facts and evidence presented in this article paint a disturbing picture of Rep. Rashida Tlaib,  her politics and nefarious associates.

The Zionist organization of America is calling on pro-Israel organizations and “decent Americans” to urge the removal of Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) from the Democratic party and Congressional committees.

In an insightful statement (this link is not working) ZOA National President Morton A. Klein and Chairman Mark Levenson declared,

“Someone who knowingly and enthusiastically consorts with the most virulent anti-semites, blood-soaked terrorists and conspiracy theorists is clearly beyond the pale, or no one is beyond the pale.”

Pope Francis Accused of Heresy by Clergy and Theologians

/in , , , , , /by

VATICAN CITY (ChurchMilitant.com) – An international group of notable clergy and prominent academics is urging the world’s bishops to investigate Pope Francis for the canonical crime of heresy in an open letter released Monday.

The group, comprised of specialists in theology and philosophy, opens their letter — which was dated “Easter Week, 2019” but published on the feast of St. Catherine of Siena, a saint who influenced several popes with her counsels and admonitions — by stating their two-fold purpose to the bishops. First, they accuse Pope Francis of the canonical delict of heresy; second, they request that the bishops take the steps necessary to deal with the grave situation of a heretical pope.

In a summary of the letter, the clerics and scholars place this open letter to bishops within the context of two previous attempts to correct Pope Francis on matters of faith and morals.

The first attempt was a private letter to “the cardinals and Eastern Catholic patriarchs” in 2016 “pointing out heresies and other serious errors that appeared to be contained in or favored by Pope Francis’ Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia.”

The group notes the second attempt was the widely reported filial correction addressed directly to the Holy Father in 2017 because, as they say, “Pope Francis had continued by word, deed, and omission to propagate many of these same heresies.”

The authors of the filial correction stopped short of judging at that time “whether Pope Francis was aware that he was causing heresy to spread.”

In the present open letter, this group goes a step further by making the claim that the Pope “is guilty of the crime of heresy.” The academics and clerics clarify that such a crime is committed “when a Catholic knowingly and persistently denies something which he knows that the Church teaches to be revealed by God.”

One of the most prominent members of the clergy to sign the letter is English academic and Dominican priest Fr. Aidan Nichols. Nichols served as the first John Paul II memorial visiting lecturer at the University of Oxford from 2006 to 2008.

Nichols is a notable English-speaking theologian and well-published author of numerable books related to theology. Other well-known clerics signing the letter are Fr. John Hunwicke, former senior research fellow at Pusey House, Oxford, and Deacon Nick Donnelly, clerics who are popular on social media.

The group says it’s comprised of “not only specialists in theology and philosophy, but also academics and scholars from other fields.” The list of prominent lay scholars signing the letter includes Professor John Rist, a specialist in classical philosophy and the history of theology. Rist has held chairs and professorships at the University of Toronto, the Augustinianum in Rome, the Catholic University of America, the University of Aberdeen and the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

Other lay Catholic scholars signing the letter include Georges Buscemi, president of Campagne Québec-Vie and member of the John-Paul II Academy for Human Life and Family. Another signatory is Maria Guarini, S.T.B., from the Pontificia Università Seraphicum in Rome and editor of Chiesa e postconcilio.

Dr. Claudio Pierantoni was another cosigner. Pierantoni is a professor of medieval philosophy at the University of Chile and former professor of Church history and patrology at the Pontifical Catholic University of Chile.

Organizers of this open letter invite other clergy and academics to sign this open letter as well. They may request to do so by emailing their name and credentials to the following email address: openlettertobishops@gmail.com. Organizers note each request will be thoroughly vetted.

After taking all things into account, the group says the words, deeds, appointments and omissions of Pope Francis “amount to a comprehensive rejection of Catholic teaching on marriage and sexual activity, on the moral law, and on grace and the forgiveness of sins.”

In their 20-page open letter, they list seven heresies that Pope Francis has fostered but make it clear, however, that these heresies do not touch his teaching office as pope.

“It is agreed that no pope can uphold heresy when teaching in a way that satisfies the conditions for an infallible magisterial statement,” they affirmed.

They also are clear that no one has the authority to remove a sitting pope.

“It is agreed,” states the clerics and scholars, “that the Church does not have jurisdiction over the pope, and hence that the Church cannot remove a pope from office by an exercise of superior authority, even for the crime of heresy.” They go on to cite many other canonical opinions that include the opinion that a pope who commits heresy separates himself from the Catholic Church.

They are united in asking the bishops to look into the deliberate lack of clarity from the Pope on matters of faith and morals, statements which seem to contradict faith and morals by the Pope and the appointments of dubious men to key positions within the Church that propagate heretical views.

Despite the evidence that we have put forward in this letter, we recognize that it does not belong to us to declare the pope guilty of the delict of heresy in a way that would have canonical consequences for Catholics. We therefore appeal to you as our spiritual fathers, vicars of Christ within your own jurisdictions and not vicars of the Roman pontiff, publicly to admonish Pope Francis to abjure the heresies that he has professed.

They want the bishops to confront Pope Francis, and if he does not recant his errors, then they ask that he be charged by them with him the canonical crime of heresy.

Since Pope Francis has manifested heresy by his actions as well as by his words, any abjuration must involve repudiating and reversing these actions, including his nomination of bishops and cardinals who have supported these heresies by their words or actions. Such an admonition is a duty of fraternal charity to the Pope, as well as a duty to the Church. If — which God forbid! — Pope Francis does not bear the fruit of true repentance in response to these admonitions, we request that you carry out your duty of office to declare that he has committed the canonical delict of heresy and that he must suffer the canonical consequences of this crime.

COLUMN BY

BRADLEY ELI, M.DIV., MA.TH.

Raised in the great outdoors of Montana, Brad’s at home with horses, camping and farm life.

While putting a Petroleum Engineering degree to work in Alaska’s oil field, he studied Engineering Management and enjoyed Alaska’s rugged outdoors. Catholic from birth, Brad began devoting more time to reading the Bible, prayer and volunteering at Covenant House Alaska, an organization that cares for runaway kids.

At 26, Brad left his occupation to follow a religious vocation with a start-up Franciscan third order community in Connecticut. After completing his seminary studies, Brad taught high school math, science and religion in addition to helping run Catholic summer camps.

After 22 years the religious community ended, so Brad began working as a writer and associate producer for ChurchMilitant.com. Three years later he married a devout Catholic, and God has blessed the couple with a son.

EDITORS NOTE: This Church Militant column is republished with permission.

VIDEO: Sri Lanka Bombings Revenge for ISIS Caliphate, Not New Zealand

/in , , , , , , /by

After remaining quiet for five years, often reported dead, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, leader of the Islamic State, appears on a 17 minute video, rallying what remains of his forces to launch further attacks on the “Christian Crusaders”, making excuses for their loses at Baghuz, listing a long list of dead amongst a long list of other subjects covered.

Special thanks to VladTepesBlog for the translation and subtitles.

Jihadists don’t need a reason to kill anyone. Their revenge and retaliation claims are a psychological game to make us feel as if we are responsible for their violence against us.

After a mass shooting at a mosque in New Zealand, some people worried that revenge attacks would follow. And indeed, the Sri Lanka bombings of churches seemed to follow that pattern. Soon the media was full of claims that ISIS had murdered hundreds of Christians as revenge for the New Zealand shootings.

COLOMBO, Sri Lanka — Sri Lanka’s defense minister said Tuesday that the coordinated Easter Sunday attacks that killed at least 321 people were in retaliation for the recent Christchurch mosque massacre in New Zealand.

“Extremist group named National Thowheed Jamaath carried out Sunday’s terror attacks in response to terror attacks in Christchurch,” Defense Minister Ruwan Wijewardene said.

Like everything coming out of the Sri Lankan government, this should have been taken with a grain of salt. It’s not just the Jihadists who want to shift responsibility for the violence on to us. The Sri Lankan government ignored warnings about the attack. It’s convenient for them to shift the blame. Reports from ISIS and the terrorists have been mixed. But now the Caliph of ISIS has released a video.

“And as for your brothers in Sri Lanka,” he is heard saying while footage of the attackers and attacks rolls, “they have put joy in the hearts of the monotheists with their immersing operations that struck the homes of the Crusaders on their Easter, in vengeance for their brothers in Baghuz.”

This appeal to Baghuz (also spelled Baghouz), the last vestige of ISIS’ caliphate in Syria, reclaimed by coalition and Syria Democratic Forces in late March, is the most critical element of Baghdadi’s statements. The loss was a major blow to the so-called caliphate and a staple of some leaders’ narratives of the group’s “defeat.”

Why would ISIS care, let alone launch a major operation in Sri Lanka over mass shootings in New Zealand?

That never made any sense.

Baghdadi plausibly positions the attacks in relation to the defeat of ISIS in Baghuz.

ISIS badly needs credibility after its losses and the Sri Lanka bombings provided them. The media however has less interest in reporting this statement by Baghdadi because it finds the New Zealand meme far more politically useful for its purposes.

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column with video is republished with permission.

Yemeni Man gets Prison Time for Extortion Plot Involving a Child Bride

/in , , , , , , /by

This story has been in my queue for a couple of weeks and am finally getting to it.

What is so galling about the news is that our law enforcement has spent time and (our) money to investigate a crime and now incarcerate a man for something that has nothing to do with us.

We apparently ‘welcomed’ a Yemeni family to live in the Buffalo, NY area who brought all of their cultural/religious baggage to America (and even went ‘home’ for awhile) and we get to straighten out the mess the ‘new Americans’ created.

By the way, Yemen is one of the countries now on Trump’s so-called Muslim ban list!

I first saw this short press announcement at the U.S. Justice Department website and then looked for more news.

BUFFALO, N.Y. – U.S. Attorney James P. Kennedy, Jr. announced today that Yousef Goba, 45, of Yemen, who was convicted of making extortionate threats to harm and kidnap a minor, was sentenced to serve 41 months in prison by U.S. District Judge Lawrence J. Vilardo.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Timothy C. Lynch, who handled the case, stated that between February 2015 and April 2015, Goba contacted an individual who resided in Western New York (the victim) through both telephone and text messages. During those communications, Goba threatened to kidnap and injure the victim’s minor child. The minor child went to Yemen with her mother in September 2013. While in Yemen, the minor child, her mother, and siblings lived with Goba for a period of time. When the mother wanted to move from Goba’s residence, the defendant refused to let the minor child leave and threatened that he would have the minor child marry a Yemeni man, if money was not paid to him. On April 8, 2015, during a call recorded by the FBI, Goba demanded that the victim pay him $11,000 as well as money for other expenses for the release of the minor child.

I checked around and found this story from Buffalo News that includes additional information….

….including the fact that Goba is the brother of a Yemeni man convicted on terrorism charges right after 9/11.

Child extortion plot stretching from Lackawanna to Yemen sends man to prison

The girl’s mother, who has since divorced her husband and remarried, took the children to Yemen in September 2013 to live temporarily so the father could save money while working here. [And, we are expected to believe that?—ed]

The following summer, after spending time with the father’s family in Yemen, the mother and children moved in with Goba. When they tried to leave, the defendant allowed the mother and other children to depart, but not the girl, the prosecution maintains. [So this woman moves in with a man not her relative, but the brother of a convicted Islamic terrorist?—ed]

The government also claims Goba threatened to marry off the girl to a Yemeni national willing to pay for her, and that Goba sent the father a photo of the girl pointing to a wedding cake and a second picture of her with a ring on her finger.

In pleading to extortion, Goba said he was just trying to get the father to reimburse him for the money he spent providing for the family while they lived with him in Yemen. He was arrested in New York City in 2015 as he returned to the United States.

Goba is the brother of Lackawanna Six member Yahya Goba, but sources said there appears to be no connection between Goba’s case and his brother’s involvement with the Lackawanna Six.

More here.

Again, why not just leave Yemenis in Yemen?

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Massachusetts Doctor Charged with Paying Teen for Sex

ICE Cracking Down on “Fake Families”

Minnesota: Mohamed Noor Found Guilty in Death of Australian Woman

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission.

VIDEO: It All Depends on How You Interpret Islam – NOT!

/in , , , , /by

Some people think that the answer to a reformed Islam is as simple as interpretation. Good luck

EDITORS NOTE: This Political Islam video is republished with permission.

Transgenderism as a Tool of Humiliation

/in , , , , , /by

Matthew Hanley: Transgender activists are unafraid to make menacing displays of power, to which appeals to basic reason count for nothing.

What if I were to tell you that defining gender by objective reference to genetics, anatomy, and genitalia “has no basis in science”? Would you consider that persuasive – or unhinged?

That, alas, is the viewpoint expressed in the journal Nature, long reputed to be an authoritative scientific publication. They now banish the classification of male and female as “a terrible idea that should be killed off” since it threatens to “undo decades of progress” in reclassifying sex and gender as a “social construct.” You might think Nature would be concerned about cultivating a credibility problem. But what do they have to worry about when colossal lies are the order of the day?

Regarding the “mismatch between gender and the sex on a person’s birth certificate,” Nature applauds the American Academy of Pediatrics for advising physicians to “treat people according to their preferred gender, regardless of appearance or genetics.” Pediatricians doubling as transgender apologists: this surely is the mark of a culture that has made peace with its disdain for children, science, and human nature.

Meanwhile, the American Psychological Association (APA) has issued guidelines warning about the dangers of espousing “traditional masculinity.” But if we are to take the APA at its word, why on earth should medical authorities encourage a female to become a male?  It seems the reigning approach is that troubled females should be entitled to undergo reassignment surgery – an act of mutilation – in order to acquire an unconvincing external appearance, but should also, thenceforth, be encouraged to disdain all the “harmful” traits associated with masculinity.

A related inconsistency is also routinely ignored: if transitioning from one sexual identity to another is so enthusiastically embraced as a good to be facilitated because of our enlightened appreciation of gender “fluidity,” why are there legal obstacles to legitimate approaches to help people transition away from homosexuality?

Though still quite rare, there has been a spike in the incidence of transgender identification in recent years – sometimes in bunches and rather out of the blue.  Going transgender does not necessarily invite derision but, believe it or not, is sometimes pursued as a way to boost popularity among one’s peers. To point that out is not to dismiss the genuine distress some adolescents acutely feel, but largely overcome with the passage of time.

Common sense suggests the transgender surge has been prompted by the Zeitgeist, against which the medical profession, in particular, should be on guard. Yet they have become complicit in its emergence.

We tell ourselves this is a free country.  No one is “forcing” them to peddle the falsehood that a man can become a woman, or vice versa. But just because this is not Mao’s China does not mean that a form of its Cultural Revolution has not made its way here.

So says Anastasia Lin, who left China at age 13 and now resides in Canada.  Writing recently in the Wall Street Journal, she pinpoints the ultimate objective of our politically correct mobs:

The goal is not to persuade or debate; it is to humiliate the target and intimidate everyone else. The ultimate objective is to destroy independent thought.

One can only hope that the extremism exploding all around us may help more people perceive that the target in this case, as with the sexual revolution more broadly, is Christianity itself, along with its social and moral order.  By definition, this means that man himself is in the crosshairs, a point to which many who have adopted the post-Christian quasi-religion of “humanitarianism” are apparently oblivious.

Lin describes how her parent’s generation in China “learned to keep their heads down and to watch what they said, even to their closest friends, for fear of being accused of thought crimes,” in order to lament what is taking hold here as well. Too many of us in any number of professions know how true those words ring.

Coercion in one form or another is mandatory anytime a lie is purveyed to the masses. Examples of this are multiplying before our eyes. A professor at Arizona State University contends, in the American Journal of Bioethics, that parents should not be permitted to prevent their children from acquiring puberty-blocking treatment.

In the inverted thinking so typical of our time, it is the withholding of this “treatment” that constitutes child abuse, rather than the abetting of delusions and the sanctioning of aggressive measures that are often harmful, and in a real sense experimental, since evidence justifying their use is utterly lacking.

For now, that remains a proposal in our country. But the Supreme Court of British Colombia decreed last month that the father of a fourteen-year-old girl may not thwart her quixotic attempt to transition into a boy. She is entitled to puberty blockers that are hers by unnatural right.  Furthermore, the father was put on notice that he also better watch his mouth: calling his own daughter a girl or using female pronouns when referring to her would be considered “family violence,” the truth now being a punishable offense.

And as the night follows the day, he has since been declared “guilty” of that “crime.”

In light of this menacing display of power, basic appeals to reason count for nothing. This is ultimately a matter of competing wills. But taking a strong stance against irrational gender tyrants can work, as Muslims in the UK proved by getting the LGBT-oriented curriculum pulled from their kids’ schools.

That the militant LGBT crowd, having pushed over everyone else, backed down in this context suggests that they are driven primarily by the desire to dismantle Christian sensibility rather than an unwavering belief in gender ideology. Note here the winner in this battle of wills.

If only faith and the art of persuasion were in vogue, more might see that abandoning Christianity and our inbuilt human nature does no favor to man; doing so tends toward ruin, as all too many discover after wading into the transgender abyss.

COLUMN BY

Matthew Hanley

Matthew Hanley is senior fellow with the National Catholic Bioethics Center. With Jokin de Irala, M.D., he is the author of Affirming Love, Avoiding AIDS: What Africa Can Teach the West, which recently won a best-book award from the Catholic Press Association. The opinions expressed here are Mr. Hanley’s and not those of the NCBC.

EDITORS NOTE: This Catholic Thing column is republished with permission. © 2019 The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: info@frinstitute.org. The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.

Trump Set to Declare Muslim Brotherhood to be a Terror Organization

/in , , , , /by

Al-Jazeera has reported that U.S. President Donald Trump has asked his agency heads to make preparations for declaring the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood to be a terrorist organization.  This news comes in the wake of Egyptian President al-Sisi’s recent visit to Washington.  Al-Jazeera is also reporting that this request by Trump has raised a firestorm within the Trump administration, with NSC head Bolton and Sec. State Pompeo supporting the move, but nearly everyone else–including the CIA against it.

While this move by Trump, in my view, is way too little, way too late, it is also disturbing for other reasons.  First off, is the probability that it will be limited to declaring only the Egyptian branch of the MB to be a terrorist organization, while giving the rest of this international organization a free pass–including its front entities here in the United States that are doing so much to curtail free speech while all the time imposing creeping shari’a.

I also find it most disturbing that anyone in the Trump administration, CIA, or Department of Defense would be opposed to the idea of declaring the entire Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization, much less be opposed to restricting that designation to just the Egyptian branch (as some of them still are).  This illustrates the need for all of these people to be given some sort of briefing, seminar, or short course on the MB–including a required reading of their manifesto for North America.

Equally disturbing was that Trump did not seem to be able to come up with the idea of declaring even the Egyptian MB a terrorist organization until the Egyptian president briefed him on it.  That tells me that none of Trump’s advisors, including the head honchos at the CIA, thought it worth while to brief the president about the MB.  This reminds me of an incident early in the Trump presidency when he was on the verge of declaring the MB to be a terrorist organization, based on advice from Ted Cruz and other conservatives up on the hill.  But then the king of Jordan came to visit and told him not to do it, because Jordan has 15 MB members sitting in its parliament, and this would make things very difficult for the king.

Trump may well have been getting pressured from other sources as well as the king of Jordan, such as then head of the National Security Council H.R. McMasters, a suspected MB sympathizer and other elements of the administration.

The argument in favor of giving the MB a pass due to its membership in the Jordanian parliament, and that doing so would disrupt U.S. relations with Jordan, was incredibly flimsy and ill-informed.  Four other Arab countries (Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and the UAE) have all declared the MB to be a terrorist organization, yet all four have continued to maintain solid relations with Jordan and king Abdalla.  Israel and Russia have also declared the MB to be a terrorist organization, and yet they too maintain relations with Jordan.

And now we see the same argument being presented here as Trump is once again considering the idea of declaring the MB to be a terrorist organization.  Only now, it is not only Jordan that has MB members in its parliament, but Tunisia also.  And, this, dear folks, is why Trump felt compelled to scale down his request to declaring only the Egyptian chapter of the MB to be a terrorist organization.  Far too many “experts” in the pentagon, and the intelligence apparatus, are ignorant of what the MB is and what its goals are.  They are also ignorant of the multiple tentacles that the Jihad utilizes.

Just because a MB chapter in say, Tunisia, has publicly eschewed the use of violence to achieve their aims does not mean that the MB international as a whole has eschewed the idea of replacing the U.S. Constitution with shari’a law–including that so-called peaceful MB franchise in Tunisia.

Case in point:  The Egyptian branch of the MB vowed to give up violence when most of them were in prison and incapable of doing anything violent.  This taqiyya innocence helped pave the way for Egyptian Anwar as-Sadat to let the MB out of prison.  They then repaid his act of kindness by spinning off a militant group to assassinate him.   The MB itself has continued to form its own “military wings” where youths are trained in hand-to-hand combat, and the use of other forms of violence.  These actions have taken place on the grounds of the supposedly moderate al-Azhar university (according to Egyptian sources).

This so very peaceful branch of the MB hasn’t hesitated to use violence when other means have failed to attain their goals and/or whenever it appears to them that the use of violence will succeed.

In the meantime, thousands of those “peace-loving” MB members had fled Nasser’s crack down, and ended up teaching in Saudi schools and colleges.  One of the products of this MB educational influence was one Usama bin Laden, a true lover of non-violence he.

All MB groups, and their affiliates and front entities across the globe ascribe to the same founding motto have the same goal in mind, and this is to replace existing non-Islamic governing systems with Shari’a law.  All methods to achieve that goal are on the table:  Violence, emigration, settlement, propaganda, infiltration of political, legal, military, and intelligence organs of the host nation, and up to and including violence whenever possible.  All of these techniques and methods are considered to be a part of the overall jihad, a part of “religious warfare.”

One only has to read their founding motto to understand how they feel about conducting violent jihad when they can get away with it:  “Jihad (religious warfare) is our way, and death on behalf of Allah is the loftiest of our wishes.”

If that is not enough, then these “experts” in our decision-making bodies should look at the Brotherhood’s emblem which features the word w-a’adou underneath two crossed swords.  The word w-a’adou means “and, prepare . . .” and it is the first word of verse 60 in the 8th sura (chapter) of the Qur’an, a verse that goes on to promote the idea of “preparing whatever weapons one can get a hold of so you can terrorize Allah’s enemies and your enemies, and others whom you do not know, but Allah knoweth them.”

What this means for America, is that the MB front entities like CAIR, ISNA, and MSA can continue to harass, demonize, and shut down truth tellers, so that their civilizational jihad may proceed a pace without any interruptions.

The only way to stop this creeping jihad in our own backyard (“aimed at eliminating and uprooting our civil society, civilization, and constitution, and replace it with shari’a”) is to declare the entire international MB to be a terrorist organization.  Then, and only then, can we roll up the MB’s front entities here in the U.S.  Anything less than that is criminal and tantamount to treason.  Because, unless we take this step, we are cooperating with and aiding and abetting a declared enemy who wants to destroy our way of life and replace it with sanctified Jew-hate, wife beating, FGM, child brides and the like.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Should the Muslim Brotherhood Be Labeled Terrorists?

Turkey’s Islamic Tyranny Warns Trump Not To Ban Muslim Brotherhood

Tunisia: “Islamic sharia law” invoked to shut down LGBTQ rights

CLICK HERE: To read other columns about the Muslim Brotherhood

PODCAST: Why Are Democrats Abandoning Religion?

/in , , , , , , /by

Gallup recently released an interesting report discussing the erosion of attendance and membership in organized religion. They claim membership in churches, synagogues, and mosques has reached a new low, 50%. From 1938 to 1999, membership averaged 70%, but since then it has steadily declined to its current level. This helps explain why so many institutions are suffering financially and being forced to make dramatic changes, such as selling their building, terminating leaders and staff, mergers and consolidations, etc. Interestingly, the same can be said for other nonprofits, such as fraternal, civic, trade groups, and amateur sports institutions. Most, if not all, are experiencing a decline.

The downsizing of membership in organized religion is interesting as there are political ramifications in play. According to the Gallup report, Republicans show a modest decline in terms of membership, dropping from 77% to 69%. However, Democrats showed a more dramatic decline, going from 71% to 48%.

Why the significant drop in membership? Some people theorize religion has become synonymous with the Republican party and, as such, do not want to be associated with such values. I believe it goes well beyond this though. As the Democrats have become more radically liberal, thereby embracing Socialism, there is a natural inclination to avoid religion and abandon God. This explains why moderate Democrats are leaving the party and are either voting independently or switching over to the Republican party as they do not want to see their religion ridiculed by the far Left. Let us not forget, there have been efforts in the last few Democrat conventions to eliminate “God” from the wording of the party platform.

In particular, Christianity has been in the cross-hairs of radical Democrats for a long time, and still is to this day. To illustrate, the San Antonio City Council, controlled by Democrats, recently banned the popular Chick-fil-A restaurant from opening a new store in the city’s airport. Although the company was originally included in the plans, they were forced out apparently for their charitable donations to Christian groups who allegedly are anti-LGBTQ. According to a USA Today report, San Antonio Councilman Manny Pelaez (D) even went so far as to “lambaste, denigrate, and openly mock the otherwise upstanding corporate citizen of Chick-fil-A.” Further, “He described Chick-fil-A as a ‘symbol of hate’ because it has donated to religious charities that he considered to oppose LGBTQ rights.” All of this has resulted in a request for an investigation into the City Council’s decision based on religious discrimination.

As another instance, former President Barack Obama and Sec. Hillary Clinton, recently commented on the bomb attacks in Sri Lanka on Easter Sunday, by referring to the victims as “Easter worshippers” and not “Christians.” The snub was subtle, but significant in that it reflects the attitude by the Democrats to disrespect Christianity.

In a related story, it was recently announced the New York Yankees and Philadelphia Flyers will no longer play Kate Smith’s rendition of the Irving Berlin classic, “God Bless America,” a time-honored patriotic song, claiming Smith was a racist. Please remember Kate Smith was the woman President Franklin Delano Roosevelt (a Democrat) introduced to Winston Churchill years ago as “Mrs. America.” Smith was also the recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom for her singing during World War II. In other words, something smells fishy here; is it the singer or the song on trial here? I suspect the latter.

It is perfectly obvious the Democrats are rebelling against the 4-C’s of Republicanism:

  1. Christianity – Not only are they abandoning church, they are working to subvert it because of the moral values involved. The truth is, they are jealous of Christians in terms of what they have accomplished through their work ethic and benevolence.
  2. Capitalism – They are trying to replace it with Socialism in order to expand government control and create dependencies (aka, “Master/Slave” relationship). Democrats have abandoned the concept of “earning a living,” preferring entitlements instead.
  3. Constitution – They have made numerous attempts to undermine our governing document as it is perceived as an antiquated encumbrance against the Democrat agenda. This is why they wish to eliminate the Electoral College, change the makeup of the Supreme Court, implement gun control, and other changes to our Bill of Rights.
  4. Conservative values – These are values developed over the country’s history and includes such things as love of country (patriotism), citizenship, reverence for family, belief in deity, being a good neighbor, lending a helping hand, etc. Instead, the Democrats have developed a set of moral values diametrically opposed to conservatives in an attempt to redefine history, government, freedoms and rights. According to Gallop polls in 2017 and 2018, liberal positions have led to a sharp decline in morality in the country as we know it today. This is greatly assisted by the entertainment and news media who no longer feel restrained from promoting liberal values and demeaning those of conservatives.

So, in terms of organized religion, the Democrats are rapidly becoming the anti-God party as it doesn’t fit in with their political agenda. Whereas the United States used to be considered one of the most religious countries in the world, it’s ranking has slipped due to the departure of the Democrats. Again, this will likely cause our sense of morality to continue to stumble and fall.

The refutation of the 4-C’s represents a rejection of the traditional values of the country. It ultimately represents a radical re-definition and implementation of America, one where liberty is steadfastly controlled by government. Yes, it is all about “control.”

Keep the Faith!

RELATED ARTICLES:

Antisemites Target Jews Because They Hate Freedom

Lies Are Fueling the Rise of Anti-Semitism

EDITORS NOTE: This Bryce is Right podcast and column is republished with permission. All trademarks both marked and unmarked belong to their respective companies.

Islamist Terrorism Remains the World’s Greatest Threat to Peace

/in , , , , , /by

After the horrific mass murder of 50 Muslim worshippers in Christchurch, New Zealand, there was widespread coverage and a torrent of mainstream news networks contemplating the threat of white supremacy.

These conversations, completely reasonable and necessary in the face of violent attacks from a racist gunman, soon began deteriorating into politically motivated and specious claims contending that “white supremacy” had become the predominate terror threat in the world.

Well, the coordinated bomb blasts aimed at Christian worshippers on Easter Sunday, which killed at least 290 people and injured hundreds more, demonstrates the kind of meticulous planning, funding, resources, and support that is still exclusively the domain of radical Islamic terrorism.

It’s not merely that the act was planned to maximize the death toll, but that it is a continuation of long-standing efforts by Islamists to destroy the Christian communities left in Asia.

Those who kill in the name of Islam are part of a worldwide, historic, ideological, and political movement that includes, to various degrees and various reasons, radicalized men and women from both great factions of the faith.

Then again, terrorist groups—as well as their recruitment and propaganda outfits—are often functioning in Islamic regimes, which either actively sustain terror, tolerate these groups, or pay them off to engage in terrorism elsewhere.

The Christians who remain in the Islamic world are often oppressed in other ways. In a number of these nations, publicly praying in any faith but Islam is forbidden and, in many, converting to Christianity is still punishable by death.

“Islamic extremism remains the global, dominant driver of persecution, responsible for initiating oppression and conflict in 35 of the 50 countries on the list,” according to Open Doors, a worldwide Christian group.

The idea that a similar threat exists in the West is risible. There’s not a single Western country that doesn’t afford Muslim citizens the same rights it does as all other citizens. No government on Earth supports white supremacy.

There is no funding infrastructure for those who support white power. There is no Christian or Jewish denomination, or any notable political factions, in those nations that imbue white supremacy with any theological or ideological legitimacy. There is no white supremacist government trying to obtain nuclear weapons, and none sending its terrorists to other countries. In the world’s free nations, where any political party can participate in the process, the power of racist groups is minimal.

Yet the American left continues to downplay the danger, first by arguing that Islam has nothing to do with Islamic terrorism, and then by lumping every white-skinned person who commits a terrorist act into one imaginary coherent political movement to contrast against it.

It’s true that Americans have been spared much Islamic terror since 2002—a year that, curiously, nearly every graph media uses to measure domestic terrorism starts—but only because we’ve spent billions of dollars each year and immense resources, both in lives and treasure, keeping it out of the country and fighting it abroad.

Another reason the majority of Americans might not comprehend Islamic radicalism’s reach is the skewed intensity of the media coverage. Political correctness and a chilling fear of being labeled “Islamophobic” makes it difficult to honestly report on terrorism around the world.

In addition to the massacre this Easter in Sri Lanka, at least 200 Christian civilians have been murdered in Africa by Islamic militants thus far in 2019—many of them killed by machete, some by bombings. Many more Christians have been murdered during the past calendar year.

In November 2018, for example, 42 people were slaughtered in an attack on a Catholic mission in the Central African Republic. In October, 55 Christians were murdered by a group of Islamists in Nigeria. Another 29 were killed when 10 churches were burned down in Ethiopia last summer. Another seven Coptic Christians were gunned down in Egypt—and others spared only because of the good work of police.

There are pockets of racists in the world, and individuals who engage in terrible acts of violence against innocent people. These are dangerous men, capable of doing tremendous damage. But no group threatens global peace the same way that political Islam does. None has its reach or material and theological support. None has created more mayhem and death in the world since the end of the Cold War. The Sri Lankan massacre is just another harrowing reminder.

COPYRIGHT 2019 CREATORS.COM

COMMENTARY BY

David Harsanyi

David Harsanyi is a senior editor at The Federalist and the author of “First Freedom: A Ride through America’s Enduring History With the Gun, From the Revolution to Today.” Twitter: .

RELATED ARTICLE: Should the Muslim Brotherhood Be Labeled Terrorists?

Dear Readers:

With the recent conservative victories related to tax cuts, the Supreme Court, and other major issues, it is easy to become complacent.

However, the liberal Left is not backing down. They are rallying supporters to advance their agenda, moving this nation further from the vision of our founding fathers.

If we are to continue to bring this nation back to our founding principles of limited government and fiscal conservatism, we need to come together as a group of likeminded conservatives.

This is the mission of The Heritage Foundation. We want to continue to develop and present conservative solutions to the nation’s toughest problems. And we cannot do this alone.

We are looking for a select few conservatives to become a Heritage Foundation member. With your membership, you’ll qualify for all associated benefits and you’ll help keep our nation great for future generations.

ACTIVATE YOUR MEMBERSHIP TODAY

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission.

The Vortex — The Gates of Hell

/in , , /by

TRANSCRIPT

I’m Michael Voris coming to you from Caesarea Philippi about an hour north of the Sea of Galilee, where Our Lord made Simon Peter the visible head of the Church, as recorded for us by St. Matthew, who was an eyewitness.

When you travel the countryside, you get an appreciation for the time and effort travel on foot must have taken back in the day, and getting here would have been no different.

Even the geography tells you something of the importance of Our Lord’s purpose. It would have been an arduous trip here and back to Capernaum, yet the Son of God brought His Apostles to this spot specifically.

He could have changed Simon’s name to Peter and made him head of the Church sitting in Peter’s house in Capernaum.

In fact, in some ways that might have made more sense, humanly speaking. But, unlike what people such as Fr. James Martin suggest, Jesus Christ was not just a human with access to the Divinity or some divine knowledge from time to time. He was God Incarnate, and He knew it.

So God brings the band of Apostles up here, to the base of Mount Hermon, for a specific reason: to directly challenge the established world order and make clear the mission of His Church.

First, this was, at the time, an area with a long history of pagan worship of many, many gods. That worship frequently included human sacrifice. Victims would be tossed alive into a pool in this giant cave, the waters of which are one of the main supplies of the River Jordan.

Caesarea Philippi was, in fact, a kind of microcosm of the existing understanding of theology — that there were many gods worth worshipping and all worship to whatever god was pretty much fine.

Call it the ancient version of “all paths pretty much lead to God” — or in this case, gods, plural.

This is intolerable to the one true God that man be deprived of knowledge of Him because of a flawed ethos foisted on the world. So He came here, to this plot of earth, to overturn that apple cart. There was only one God and the world order needs to be changed.

He also made clear to His Apostles that the mission of His Church — to which He would give His own power and authority — would be to storm the gates of Hell and defeat Satan.

For the moment, it was Satan who ruled the world, through men’s hearts, and that status quo could not be allowed to stand.

So the Church would go on the offensive against the demonic. Its mission laid out in stark militaristic terms. Take no prisoners. Tear down the gates of the diabolical kingdom and overrun it; the Church Militant — aptly named.

Man He had created for Himself, made even in His own divine image, and God wanted man back. And for this, He established His Church — the Catholic Church — not any other, because, in truth, there is no other Church. There can’t be. What was established here was the reality of Christ’s bride, for whom He would travel to Jerusalem in short order and give His life for.

God, the author of marriage, does not have multiple brides. He has one: the Catholic Church and She alone. So He comes here to this region, establishes His Church right on the very spot representing all in the world He came to conquer.

Then He issues the orders to His followers and tells their leader that he will be given the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, the keys to forever lock and seal the gates of Hell.

Nothing the Son of God did or said was ever without meaning and significance to our salvation. And making the arduous journey to this spot was meant to convey a message and a mission.

It isn’t politically correct today to talk about one religion being superior to all others. It isn’t kosher to insist on the objective rightness of Catholic teaching compared to any and all other religions.

But Catholics do not answer to the world on matters of morality or theology or things divine. There is nothing that the world can teach the Church in these areas.

The Church was established by the Son of God to extend Him and His sacrifice throughout out all time and space for the sanctification of men’s souls so that they might be saved.

The mission of the Church is to announce that God loves unconditionally, but He does not save unconditionally. As the normal routine, as He Himself said, “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life within you.”

Church Militant is here in Israel on production for what we hope will be a very instructive and meditative documentary on the heart of the Faith, the Holy Eucharist, produced in the land where it all began.

If you’d like to preorder your copy of Church Militant’s The Eucharist, you can do so by clicking on the provided link.

Please keep our travel and work here in the Holy Land in your prayers.

EDITORS NOTE: This Church Militant video is republished with permission.

New York Times Publishes Cartoon Worthy of Nazi Propaganda

/in , , , , , /by

The New York Times has sunk to the level of anti-Semitic Nazi propaganda which served to incite the Germany during the years of the Third Reich.

A political cartoon run by the “venerable” newspaper’s International Edition, which hit the newsstands on April 25, depicted a dog with the head of Israel’s newly-reelected Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu leading a blind President Trump wearing a Jewish skullcap. Dangling from the dog’s leash is a Star of David.

More classic anti-Semitic tropes couldn’t have been drawn by Joseph Goebbels himself and his crew of German propagandists, who systematically prepped an entire continent not only to accept, but abet the mass extermination of the Jews of Europe.

This propaganda, which culminated in the Holocaust, served to turn an entire group of people into subhuman vermin, despised by the masses and deserving of extinction. In the Times’ current version, the meaning is clear (and complete with the classic Nazi-era used of the Star of David): Netanyahu (i.e. Israel, i.e. all Jews) calls the shots of the leader of the most powerful nation in the world.

Putting aside all the outrage of publishing such a cartoon, one thing we can say is that the paper has finally shown its true colors. Instead of hiding behind news stories that are deliberately inaccurate and present a skewed depiction of the “facts” when it comes to reporting about Israel, as well as about Orthodox Jews, this cartoon (which certainly went through a number of editors for approval) says it all.

This we can tell by the “apology” run by the paper when called out for running the cartoon. Pulling the item from further publication, the paper admitted the cartoon “included anti-Semitic tropes” and stated, “The image was offensive, and it was an error of judgment to publish it.” View image on Twitter.

Far from an apology, this should be considered, at best, an explanation. Notice in the statement there is no acknowledgement of the fact that publishing the cartoon was morally wrong (not to mention factually wrong, as there is nothing politically to suggest that Israel has any such power over the U.S.).

Rather, the reason The New York Times, by its own admission, pulled the cartoon was because “the image was offensive.”

Yet plenty of political commentary is offensive, especially in today’s “safe space” era. Discourse deemed offensive is usually because it doesn’t conform to the accepted dogma, or it presents facts that are true but inconvenient (i.e., politically incorrect).

Yet, offensive is not the same as immoral. Offensive is not the same as inaccurate.

More likely, the Times realized post facto that the “offense” caused by the cartoon might be so great as to have long-standing negative financial effects on the paper and was thus deemed not worth it.

For years, particularly since 1992, watchdog organizations have called out The Gary Lady for its systematic and deliberate publishing of misinformation about the Jewish state and its inhabitants. However, this cartoon goes beyond the pale, even in today‘s post-Trump era of self-avowed advocacy journalism by the mainstream media.

(We will forget the irony at the moment of that self-same media which accuses Trump of being anti-Semitic.)

As we have seen from those jumping on the bandwagon to deflect criticism of Representative Ilhan Omar’s blatant and offensive anti-Semitism (“Islamophobia!’ cried Senator Cory Booker and most of the new Democrat party), this type of propaganda serves to create one more step in cementing the normalization of anti-Jewish sentiment among the chattering classes.

The last time that happened, those classes managed to convince the masses. For the Jews, not to mention the entirety of Europe, Russia and America, which all suffered terribly from Hitler and World War II, it didn’t end well.

RELATED STORIES: 

German Intelligence Issues Taboo-Breaking Report on Muslim Antisemitism

New York Times Prints Another Anti-Israel Cartoon Amid Antisemitism Scandal Rocking Newspaper

CAIR: Defending the Right to Be Anti–Semitic

Rep. Tlaib Requests Taxpayers Fund Her Anti–Semitism

Linda Sarsour Uses Latest Women’s March to Spew Anti–Semitism

Ilhan Omar Rages Anti–Semitism; Pelosi Whimpers ‘Apologize’

America Is Still Highly Religious. So Why Do We Keep Liberalizing?

/in , , , , /by

German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche once declared that “God is dead … and we have killed him.”

That famous statement rocked Europe nearly 150 years ago. His point was not that God actually died, but that people in the Western world no longer believed in God, and that this loss of faith would only spread.

Nietzsche’s prediction largely has panned out in Western Europe, where only 15% say they believe in God with absolute certainty. But America has been an exception to this trend, and remains so today.

A whopping 63% of Americans say they believe in God with absolute certainty, according to Pew Research. And although only 11% of Western Europeans say religion is very important in their lives, 53% of Americans say it is for them.

What’s more, new data shows that Americans actually want religion to play a larger role in society than it currently does. According to a new Pew study released Monday, roughly half of Americans say they favor a greater role for religion in society, compared to only 18% who say they oppose that.

That’s a surprising number, particularly when compared with countries in Western Europe, which are not so hot on religion.

But before we start cheering for American exceptionalism, we need to recognize something is deeply awry.

Yes, America is much more religious than Western Europe, but that doesn’t seem to be making much difference on the big-ticket cultural issues of the day. Despite our religiosity, we continue drifting in Europe’s direction on issue after issue.

Despite our religiosity, we continue drifting in Europe’s direction on issue after issue.Consider marriage. Same-sex marriage took hold in 13 European countries before it reached the United States. The U.S. lagged, but not for long. Public opinion in the U.S. has flipped in the last 20 years, from 60% opposing same-sex marriage in 1998 to 67% now supporting it, according to Gallup.

Or consider gender. Americans are becoming more accepting of transgenderism as pop culture, media, and schools promote the idea that gender is based on feelings, rather than an objective standard tied to biology. The result: 46% of millennials now say gender identity is a matter of choice.

Most Americans also are fine using transgender pronouns. An Ipsos survey from 2017 found that only 1 in 5 Americans would use the pronoun of a transgender person’s biological (real) sex, and even fewer would do so in Canada and the United Kingdom.

This cultural change has come at a dizzying pace, and it raises the obvious question: If America is so religious, why does it keep liberalizing on all the hot-button cultural issues? To put it crassly, what good is our religion?

The answer, it would seem, is not much good at all.

Bad Religion Is Almost Like No Religion

This is the argument that columnist Ross Douthat has made in pointing out the rise of “bad religion” in America. He notes that while we aren’t secularizing like Europe, we also aren’t strictly adhering to traditional forms of religion. Instead, we are “a nation of heretics.”

Americans increasingly view religion as a subjective thing with no bearing on the actual world. A recent study by Ligonier Ministries and Lifeway Research found that 6 out of 10 Americans say they think religious belief is a matter of personal opinion, not objective truth. Perhaps most shockingly, one-third of those identified as evangelical Christians also take this view.

This is the core problem, and it explains the paradox of America as a country with both vibrant religion and a liberalizing culture.

What we have in America is a radical separation of God from “reality”—the real world that we claim to live in. It’s not that we reject “God” per se, but we reject a God who comes with a certified worldview package—a God who orders the universe, sets moral norms, defines our being, and binds our consciences to a moral code in this world—today.

It’s not that we reject “God” per se, but we reject a God who comes with a certified worldview package.

We’ve kept God, but jettisoned the traditional package.

The problem is, this is almost the same as rejecting God completely. If believing in God has no impact on the way we view realities in this world—whether they be gender, marriage, or who counts as a person worthy of dignity and respect—then what God are we even worshipping?

Could it be that the atheists are right when they accuse us of worshipping a God of our own making?

The Tremors to Come

Nietzsche predicted that the spread of atheism in Europe would shake Western civilization to its core. He understood quite well that his culture had been shaped at every turn by Christian belief, and that pulling the rug from under that belief would send society tumbling like a Jenga set.

Nietzsche illustrated this in his “Parable of the Madman,” in which a prophetic figure—the Madman—hails the death of God. But the Madman goes further. He warns that tumult and chaos will emerge when people finally realize the consequences of their unbelief. Almost in pain, he says:

“What did we do when we unchained this earth from its sun? Whither is it moving now? Whither are we moving? Away from all suns? Are we not plunging continually? Backward, sideward, forward, in all directions? Is there still any up or down? Are we not straying, as through an infinite nothing?”

But then, realizing his listeners have no idea what he’s talking about, the Madman takes a step back.

“I have come too early,” he said them; “my time is not yet. This tremendous event is still on its way, still wandering; it has not yet reached the ears of men. Lightning and thunder require time; the light of the stars requires time; deeds, though done, still require time to be seen and heard. This deed is still more distant from them than most distant stars—and yet they have done it themselves.”

It took more than a century, but the West is now feeling the tremors of unbelief. The lightning and thunder are raging as realities once known and cherished are lost—dissolved by the acids of secularism.

This secularism is more pronounced in Europe, no doubt. Yet it wields extraordinary power in America because so many of us—even religious believers—have conceded vital ground, saying that divine truth has little or nothing to do with this world. In relegating “belief” to the realm of private opinion, we have made our bed and are now living in it.

There will be many more tremors yet to come. The unborn, gender, and marriage are just the first to come under attack. In so many more ways than we realize, we continue to live off the remnants of a Judeo-Christian worldview that has set sail.

In relegating “belief” to the realm of private opinion, we have made our bed and are now living in it.

We would do well to remember Europe before the coming of Christianity. In Plato’s Greece, pederasty was widely practiced and accepted. Dignity was not recognized to be universal. Slavery was accepted. Might, very often, made right.

Nietzsche knew that the “death of God” meant such things would be back on the table in the West. And so they are.

Consider these questions: Without God-given dignity for each individual, what happens to consent as the basis for modern sexual ethics? The right of the strong over the weak already is granted as the basis for abortion—why not to the stronger party in bed?

What about the human-animal distinction? Without real value differences between the species (we’re all the same stuff, anyway), why not blur the lines between species? Why not create hybrid human species in the lab?

A Way Back?

The questions we face are more serious than we can fathom. America’s high levels of religiosity are cause for great hope, but also caution.

Many of our religious communities have not yet compromised with the cultural left on the major issues of the day. These communities offer a vital connection to the past and the resources for cultural recovery and renewal, should our culture become disillusioned with its current direction.

The surprising fact is that Americans actually want a greater role for religion in society, per the Pew study. Perhaps this may signal the beginnings of cultural regret—or at the very least, a yearning for something that’s been lost.

But if Americans return to traditional religion out of disillusionment, they will have to accept the strings that come attached—the package deal. This will mean allowing the divine to speak directly to our daily, real-world affairs, to matters of gender, marriage, the nature of the person, and more—to live as a nation, really and truly, under God.

Is that a bargain America will soon make? One can hope and pray.

COMMENTARY BY

Daniel Davis

Daniel Davis is the commentary editor of The Daily Signal and co-host of The Daily Signal podcast. Send an email to Daniel. Twitter: .

RELATED ARTICLE: I’m a College Student. Here’s Why I Oppose Socialism.

Dear Readers:

With the recent conservative victories related to tax cuts, the Supreme Court, and other major issues, it is easy to become complacent.

However, the liberal Left is not backing down. They are rallying supporters to advance their agenda, moving this nation further from the vision of our founding fathers.

If we are to continue to bring this nation back to our founding principles of limited government and fiscal conservatism, we need to come together as a group of likeminded conservatives.

This is the mission of The Heritage Foundation. We want to continue to develop and present conservative solutions to the nation’s toughest problems. And we cannot do this alone.

We are looking for a select few conservatives to become a Heritage Foundation member. With your membership, you’ll qualify for all associated benefits and you’ll help keep our nation great for future generations.

ACTIVATE YOUR MEMBERSHIP TODAY

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission.

On the Targeting of Churches and Christians

/in , , , , /by

The Easter bombings of churches and hotels in Sri Lanka remind us that it is dangerous to be a practicing Christian today in many parts of the world.

The Wall Street Journal reports, “There were at least eight explosions, most blamed on suicide bombers. Six of the attacks were coordinated and were carried out by seven suicide bombers, according to a preliminary examination of scattered body parts by the country’s official experts.”

The bombs, of course, went off on the high Christian holiday of Easter, killing almost 300 people.

And the Journal adds, “Authorities took 24 people into custody in connection with the bombings, making arrests in several locations in and near the capital, Colombo, where the bombings were focused….The government has ordered round-the-clock security at all churches.”

Wendy Wright, the president of Christian Freedom International, told me: “This coordinated mass bombing by Islamists against Christians in Sri Lanka packed into churches to celebrate Easter should drive us all to pray for vulnerable Christians. And for God to transform hearts.”

Wright noted, “Easter celebrates Jesus Christ’s resurrection from the dead—proving His power over death and the certainty of His promise of eternal life. As Jesus said, ‘I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live, and everyone who lives and believes in Me shall never die.’”

She also added that some Muslims are sickened by this kind of Jihadist violence: “On the day of the Sri Lanka massacres, Christian Freedom International’s director in a restricted country said a young Muslim man in his country showed up to learn about Jesus. ‘He has lost all his faith and honor in Islam because of seeing the brutal, inhumane acts of Islam in this world. He is seeking a better God to serve. Please pray for him.’”

Some in Sri Lanka have asked, “Where is God?” But the attack on Christians and churches have gone on from the beginning of the Christian church to the present. Jesus told us it would be dangerous to follow Him. But, as the Apostle Paul noted, if only for this life we follow Christ, then we should be the most pitied of all men. Because Jesus was raised from the dead, so one day, those who believe in Him will one day inherit a resurrected body like His. And when Jesus returns, He will judge the world in perfect justice—including those who perpetrate attacks like this.

You can’t go and find some church building (that I’m aware of) that predates AD 313. Why? What happened then? The Roman emperor Constantine, professing to be a Christian, issued the Edict of Milan, making Christianity legal for the first time. Only after 313 could they start building official church buildings.

Some of the most beautiful buildings ever built are Christian cathedrals, like Notre Dame, a forerunner to other cathedrals. Construction on Notre Dame began in 1163.

The investigation into what caused Notre Dame’s fire last week has not been completed. We are told it was not deliberate arson, but in the meantime, there have been consistent attacks on churches in France. 875 churches were reportedly vandalized in France alone in the last year.

Open Doors, which exists to aid the persecuted church, notes: “Today, just like in the book of Acts, Christians are persecuted all over the world for following Jesus.”

Open Doors notes that “1 in 9 Christians experience high levels of persecution worldwide.”

They write: “Every day we receive new reports of Christians who face threats, unjust imprisonment, harassment, beatings and even loss of family because of their faith in Jesus.”

They add, “Every month, on average:

  • 345 Christians are killed for faith-related reasons
  • 105 Churches and Christian buildings are burned or attacked
  • 219 Christians are detained without trial, arrested, sentenced and imprisoned.”

Many years ago, I interviewed Brother Andrew, the founder of Open Doors. Perhaps he’s best known for the book he wrote called, God’s Smuggler. Brother Andrew, from the Netherlands, would smuggle copies of the Bible into all sorts of places where the holy book was forbidden—such as in the Soviet Union or the Eastern bloc nations.

He said, “Today there is probably more persecution than ever before….We at Open Doors work hard to publish that fact.”

Yet despite the increase in attacks, he told me, “It’s strange that people think it’s dangerous to be a Christian. It’s dangerous not to be a Christian in the world today because in physical danger or mental danger or other kinds of danger, God protects those that belong to Him, that love Jesus. So being outside of the scope of that love, that is dangerous.”

What happened in Sri Lanka is a reminder to continually pray for the persecuted church.

NASA Chief Criticized for Mentioning Christianity in Speech

/in , , , , /by

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand the First Amendment. Or maybe, after the spat over a speech by NASA’s Jim Bridenstine, it does.

Thanks to the double standards of secularism, public officials can’t even talk about faith without making headlines. It’s no wonder, then, that when the head of America’s space program gave remarks at a Christian ministry, even he had trouble finding signs of intelligence in the criticism that followed.

Capitol Ministries, the organization that Bridenstine has supported for years, is hardly controversial. Nine of the president’s 15 Cabinet officials are sponsors of the ministry—whose aim is simple: influencing government with biblical teachings.

During his talk, Bridenstine even talked about the importance of that goal and what it means in the context of these times. “I love what Ralph said earlier: We’re not trying to Christianize the U.S. government. We believe in an institutional separation, but we also believe in influence. And that’s a big distinction and an important distinction, and that’s why I love this ministry.”

Bridenstine couldn’t have been more clear: No one in the Trump administration is trying to create a theocracy. They just want the same freedom to bring their personal views to bear on public policy that liberals have.

Still, secularists like Business Insider’s Dave Mosher seem intent on dragging Bridenstine through the mud for daring to talk about actual NASA history—like Buzz Aldrin’s communion on the moon and the Apollo 8 astronauts’ Bible reading in orbit.

In a 2,000-word rant about the faith of President Donald Trump’s team, Mosher insists that “Some ethics and legal experts outside NASA have expressed concern over Bridenstine’s speech. They believe it ran afoul of the establishment clause of the First Amendment, which outlines a separation of church and state, and might have also violated ethics rules for federal executives.”

Quoting people like Virginia Canter of Citizens for Responsible Ethics, Mosher tries to paint Bridenstine as a typical Establishment Clause abuser. “One’s personal beliefs must be respected, but when appearing in an official capacity, you have to adhere to certain ethical standards,” Canter explained. “One is not to give the impression that you are officially endorsing any products or service or enterprise.”

Funny, where was Mosher when former President Barack Obama was headlining political fundraisers for Planned Parenthood? Or worse, invoking God’s blessing on the abortion giant?

Everyone from Hillary Clinton to Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., have not only endorsed the group’s “service”—but funneled hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars to it. No one seemed to care when they appeared in their official capacities to preach the gospel of abortion. But put a Christian on the stage from the Trump administration—encouraging something as innocent as prayer—and they’re a walking ethics violation. This is NASA, for crying out loud. What are they worried about? Bridenstine sending astronauts to evangelize the galaxy?

If secularists are upset about Bridenstine’s speech, then they should have been shaking the White House gates over the last administration’s agenda for the space agency.

How quickly we forget those shocking comments in 2010 when Obama told NASA Administrator Charles Bolden that his new mission should be “to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations … .”

If you’re looking for a textbook abuse of public office, I’d say start with the Obama administration. After that, giving a few remarks at a charity function seems like small potatoes.

But hypocrisy is the name of the Democratic game. Like Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and countless other Trump officials before him, Bridenstine is just the latest target of an intolerant left whose only goal is purging faith from public life and history.

If activists can’t get Christians to stay quiet, then they’ll try to drive them out of government altogether. That will be tough to do in this administration, thanks to the fearless leadership of Trump. If his team has learned anything, it’s how to stand up to bullies. That shouldn’t be hard for a man like Bridenstine. He was already light-years ahead of the opposition.

EDITORS NOTE: This Family Research Council column is republished with permission.

Copyright © 2024 DrRichSwier.com LLC. A Florida Cooperation. All rights reserved. The DrRichSwier.com is a not-for-profit news forum for intelligent Conservative commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own. Republishing of columns on this website requires the permission of both the author and editor. For more information contact: drswier@gmail.com.