The thing that is so surprising about this is not the fact that the NYT found that the happiest wives in America are religious conservatives but that the New York Times actually reported on this at all. As far as their actual findings go, I say they make an awful lot of sense.
 
Researchers W. Bradford Wilcox, Jason S. Carroll and Laurie DeRose wrote that “Fully 73 percent of wives who hold conservative gender values and attend religious services regularly with their husbands have high-quality marriages.”
 
“When it comes to relationship quality, there is a J-curve in women’s marital happiness, with women on the left and the right enjoying higher quality marriages than those in the middle – but especially wives on the right,” read the report.
 
Yes, they found that following the 73% of religious conservative women who are happy with their marriages are their political counterparts: religious progressive wives. Basically, the categories are conservative women who are religious (Christian, Jewish, Muslim, etc.); conservative women who are not religious; progressive women who are religious (which is kind of an oxymoron); and progressive women who are utterly secular.
 
The report finds that married couples who are in the middle, both in terms of religion and political ideology, are less likely to experience a high-quality marriage:
 
“We suspect that part of their relative unhappiness, compared with religiously conservative women, is that they don’t enjoy the social, emotional and practical support for family life provided by a church, mosque or synagogue. We also suspect that these groups are less likely to have husbands who have made the transition to the ‘new father’ ideal that’s gained currency in modern America – and they’re not happy with their partners’ disengagement.”
 
While 73% of religious conservative women are happy in their marriages, they are followed by religious progressive wives (60%), secular liberal wives (55%) and then comes the considerable minority of secular, non-political wives (33%).
 
The report says that the central reason for religious conservative and progressive wives’ happiness was devoted husbands and fathers:
 
“In listening to the happiest secular progressive wives and their religiously conservative counterparts, we noticed something they share in common: devoted family men. Both feminism and faith give family men a clear code: They are supposed to play a big role in their kids’ lives. Devoted dads are de rigueur in these two communities. And it shows. Both culturally progressive and religiously conservative fathers report high levels of paternal engagement.”
 
This one, I find interesting, and I think it makes a lot of sense. Despite the differences in political ideology, both feminist men and religious men have their own reasons to spend time with their kids. For feminist men, the reason is their belief that they ought to be perfectly equal to their wives, and that includes raising their children equally. For religious men (I will largely be speaking for Christian men, as I am not all that certain about how Muslim or Jewish families would interact, more so Muslim ones), the reason is that Scripture tells us we ought to be a big part of our children’s lives.
 
There are many places in the Bible where we are taught to teach our children, both in the Old and the New Testaments. Proverbs 22:6 says: “Train up a child in the way he should go; even when he is old he will not depart from it.”
 
Ephesians 6:4 says: “Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord.”
 
One of the most memorable verses and moments for this type of situation comes in the Book of Deuteronomy, in the 6th Chapter. Shortly after Moses delivered the 10 Commandments to the Jewish people, he said in Deuteronomy 6:6-7: “And these words that I command you today shall be on your heart. You shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk away, and when you lie down, and when you rise.”
 
So God commands us to teach our children the ways of the Lord, the Word of God, and to raise them right. As a result, a good, Christian husband and father will spend time with his children, which in turn makes their wives very happy. And as they say, a happy wife is a happy life.
 
But returning to the actual report, I think the biggest reason for such happiness is not necessarily because of the work the husbands do in the marriage when it comes to raising the children (though that plays a big factor), but because both religious conservative and religious progressive women set some sort of path, or purpose, within the marriage.
 
Matt Walsh from The Daily Wire puts it this way: “The secular understanding of marriage is that it’s a union between two people who love each other…” and he poses fair questions surrounding that belief such as “what happens when that love is no longer there?” and more specifically “why do you need marriage for love?”
 
Back when the issue of gay marriage was at the forefront of the political world, one of the arguments often posed is that we should “let people who love each other get married to show that love”. But the problem here is that marriage is not about a union of two people who love each other (and I’m hard-pressed to believe people aren’t conflating lust with love in this scenario). Marriage is a holy union (why it’s called “holy matrimony”) in the eyes of the Lord. That is where marriage comes from, after all. A marriage certificate isn’t what tells someone they are married (legally, yes, but not necessarily in the eyes of the Lord). A union that is acceptable in the eyes of the Lord is a marriage.
 
For example, look at Genesis 24:67, after Rebekah was taken to Isaac by Abraham’s servant: “Then Isaac brought her into the tent of Sarah his mother and took Rebekah, and she became his wife, and he loved her…”
 
It mentions that Isaac loved Rebekah, and I have no doubt that he did, but they literally just met and she became his wife because the Lord found it to be not only an acceptable marriage but entirely ordained as well. She was supposed to be Isaac’s wife that she might give birth to Esau and Jacob. I can assure you they did not receive a marriage certificate to make it official and their marriage was not simply a union of two people who loved each other.
 
Returning to Matt Walsh’s point, he says that “Religion grants a higher purpose to marriage. Religious people know that their vows have been consecrated by God; that they are now taking part in something bigger that themselves.”
 
And it’s that last part where we can also find another similarity between a religious conservative married couple and a progressive one. Both couples believe they are taking part in something bigger than themselves. To the religious conservative couple, that is holy matrimony in the eyes of the Creator and sovereign King of the universe. To the progressive couple, that is the union of two like-minded people who wish to be part of a larger global community (supposedly for good).
 
But one can still notice the considerable gap between religious progressive wives and religious conservative wives. A 13-point difference is hard to ignore. And while this comes as no honest surprise to me, there were plenty of people on social media who refused to accept this.
 
For example, one Twitter user replied to the NYT’s tweet by saying: “I know Christians from having been in the evangelical church for 20 awful years of my life. Several different ones, different denominations. But all the same. Full of hate. Full of fear. Pretending everything is okay for fear that being ungrateful will make them lose everything.”
 
While I am not sure I would count myself as an “evangelical” (though I do like Billy and Franklin Graham), they are Christians all the same and this really tries to speak for Christians as a whole, but it only shows this man’s own hatred. It is unfortunate that after 20 years of going to church he did not receive the Holy Spirit at any point (granted, some churches do suck so it depends on the pastor and the congregation, but still), otherwise he would understand that there is nothing but love to be had with Jesus Christ and the only fear Christians have is the fear of the Lord. But unlike what many think, it is not an unhealthy fear, but rather, a healthy one.
 
Similar to how you respect and fear your parents (especially the punishments you would receive upon doing something bad), we Christians hold nothing but respect for our Father and fear His Wrath, but know we would not receive it, and be spared, by receiving His Son, Jesus Christ, as our Lord and Savior. His Wrath only falls on unrepentant sinners, not on the repentant ones. What fear Christians have is not the same type of fear people in Venezuela or North Korea or Russia have, where they feel like they are under constant threat by an evil dictator who will punish them for the most ridiculous of reasons. God is Just, Man is not.
 
This is something Christians understand and find happiness and joy as a result. If people pretend things are okay when they are not, it is not out of “fear that being ungrateful will make them lose everything.” What will make people lose everything would be turning away from God, as this man has done.
 
Another Twitter user said: “This is hilarious. They all asked their spouses if it was ok to answer the survey in the first place. Then they made it a dinner table conversation to make sure they answered the questions correctly. I know evangelicals. Women do not have separate lives.”
 
Someone is rather salty that they are not as happy as religious conservative wives are. First, that’s rather insulting to the wives, isn’t it? The idea that religious wives are essentially slaves to their husbands is ridiculous (well, outside of Islam, at least). And as far as “separate lives” goes, I take that to mean separate lives away from their husbands and family, to which I would say: does a career make a woman happy? Happier than a happy marriage and family?
 
I can assure you the women that say their careers make them happy largely do not have families of their own. And what’s more, 66% of divorced couples in the U.S. do not have children, according to Smart Marriages. So children also bring about some unique happiness to wives. So they might not have “separate lives”, but the lives they do have are far better than many others’.
 
When a wife has a devoted husband, has children of her own and they are engaged in a marriage that is centered around God, the wife will tend to be considerably happier than people who are not in such relationships. As you can see, many people hate that and consider that to be fake news, but it makes complete and total sense to me.
 
When your life is focused on God, you tend to be happier than someone who is not focused on God. That happiness is multiplied when that focus is shared with someone else.
 
Again, not surprising to me.
 
1 Corinthians 13:4-7
“Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth. Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

A little over a month ago, the Alabama House of Representatives voted in favor of passing the most pro-life bill in the country, sending it to the Alabama Senate for a vote. Recently, the Alabama Senate voted 25-6 in favor of passing the bill, sending it to Governor Kay Ivey to sign into law, which she did a day after the passing of the bill.
 
Before debate was opened prior to the vote-taking of the bill, Alabama Sen. Clyde Chambliss began by saying: “When is a person a person? When does a life become a life? I believe that if we terminate the life of an unborn child, we are putting ourselves in God’s place.”
 
A great and significant statement to make regarding the entire issue of abortion, where Leftists often insinuate that a child growing inside the womb is not a person, a rather illogical assertion to make considering no one says the same about an unborn giraffe or elephant, for example. It is nothing but an attempt to dehumanize people so that the vast majority of people would be indoctrinated to believe what they are eliminating is not life but what equates to a disease.
 
But at the end of the day, we are talking about a person. Those who understand that tend not to favor abortion (unless you are a heinous Alabama Democrat who is 100% okay with killing babies in the womb), so the idea is to dehumanize the unborn.
 
The bill is also a sort of challenge to the fact that multiple Democrat states have either passed extreme pro-abortion bills or have discussed passing extreme pro-abortion bills wherein an unborn child is allowed to be killed up to even labor (and some have voiced their desire to allow for post-birth abortions).
 
As a reminder, the bill makes it so that abortion is considered a felony largely equating it to murder (because that’s precisely what it is) but does not hold the mother criminally responsible if she were to have an abortion (which is what some Leftists will try and lie to people about, saying that women would be thrown in jail for getting an abortion when that’s far from the truth).
 
The bill specifically states that “a woman who receives an abortion will not be held criminally culpable or civilly liable for receiving the abortion.”
 
The bill also explains that the only exception would be in the extremely rare case in which the mother’s life or health is in danger:
 
“In reasonable medical judgment, the child’s mother has a condition that so complicates her medical condition that it necessitates the termination of her pregnancy to avert her death or to avert serious risk of substantial physical impairment of a major bodily function. This term does not include a condition based on a claim that the woman is suffering from an emotional condition or a mental illness which will cause her to engage in conduct that intends to result in her death or the death of her unborn child.”
 
“However, the condition may exist if a second physician who is licensed in Alabama as a psychiatrist, with a minimum of three years of clinical experience, examines the woman and documents that the woman has a diagnosed serious mental illness and because of it, there is reasonable medical judgment that she will engage in conduct that could result in her death or the death of her unborn child.”
 
In other words, a mother can’t simply claim to have some sort of mental disease and therefore receive an abortion, rather there needs to be legitimate proof and medical analysis done to determine that there is serious mental health issues that could result in the mother engaging in behavior in which she would die or cause the death of her own child.
 
Of course, there exists the problem of psychiatrists misdiagnosing someone (willingly or unwillingly), but I believe this goes a long way towards protecting the unborn, as most (hopefully) psychiatrists likely won’t put their own beliefs ahead of their careers, reputation, etc. to intentionally misdiagnose a pregnant woman to allow her to have a “legitimate” reason for her abortion.
 
The rather funny and interesting thing about the passing of this bill is that a senior staff attorney for the ACLU’s Reproductive Freedom Project (there is no freedom in bondage, as I always say) threatened the Governor if she signs it with a lawsuit, writing in an email to CBS News: “We will not stand by while politicians endanger the lives of women and doctors for political gain. Know this, Governor Ivey: If you sign this dangerous bill into law, we will see you in Court.”
 
I say that’s rather funny and interesting because that is largely the point of the bill. The bill is not simply to outlaw abortions in the state; that’s just the more immediate goal. The larger, overarching goal of the bill is to have this heavily challenged by these pro-abortion, pro-death Leftist lunatics that it might make its way up to the Supreme Court, forcing them to review the 1973 Court decision that declared abortion was constitutional (by the way, the entire court was filled with old, white men, but we don’t hear anything about how they are somehow unfairly making decisions about a woman’s body).
 
The mission here is to have the conservative (hopefully) Supreme Court review Roe v. Wade and overturn that horrible decision, leaving it up to the states to decide on their own abortion laws as the 10th Amendment allows.
 
As Rep. Terri Collins remarked (the woman who sponsored the bill) last week, “The heart of this bill is to confront a decision that was made by the courts in 1973 that said the baby in the womb is not a person. This bill addresses that one issue. Is that baby in the womb a person? I believe our law says it is.” And after the bill passed, she then went on to remark: “This bill is about challenging Roe v. Wade and protecting the lives of the unborn because an unborn baby is a person who deserves love and protection. I have prayed my way through this bill. This is the way we get where we want to get eventually.”
 
A very appropriate and wholesome response to the passing of the bill. The Left will go out of their way to mock prayer (as they often do after a tragic shooting takes place) but that only goes to show just who they are unashamed of siding with: Satan.
 
The redefining of humanity is evil. It’s what Hitler did to the Jews (and other classes of people) and what old Southern Democrats would do towards black people (and still do, considering the fact that black people are disproportionately targeted by Planned Parenthood). And while Leftists can (and often will) make the claim that the banning of abortion is somehow evil, I will never be convinced that giving a woman the “right” to kill her own child for whatever reason she comes up with (and she doesn’t even have to have a reason) is not evil in any way.
 
It is not women’s “healthcare” to kill a child. And despite what the Left says about PP clinics, they do not perform any sort of healthcare to women. They are very strictly a slaughterhouse for the children of women who are either so scared about their pregnancy that they fall prey to their claws or simply are entirely apathetic or ignorant to the life that is growing inside them. And for the fact that these people claim to be “pro-choice”, they sure make it their mission to discourage the mothers from simply giving their children up for adoption.
 
As I have said often in some of my latest articles surrounding this topic, there is nothing about abortion that is “healthcare” to women or “liberating” to them. It is no more a healthcare service than a demolition derby is a mechanic service for your vehicle. It is no more liberating than being enchained to your own sins.
 
And while I may sound like a broken record in saying this time after time, I believe it is a point that is seldom made. People will argue about what a woman’s rights are regarding this (so will I), what the definition of life is and a lot of aspects, but the topic of being enslaved to sin is one that, while attached to this, is hardly, if ever, covered.
 
A few days prior to the Alabama bill passing, Georgia Governor Brian Kemp signed into law a “heartbeat” bill, which prompted Leftist Alyssa Milano to insist that women go on a “sex strike” as a response. I did not necessarily cover it myself, but I did think it was deliciously ironic considering that is largely where the problem stems: sex outside of marriage.
 
If that issue were to be resolved, no one would ever even discuss abortion because there would likely be no abortions at all. But society has essentially made it so that those who wait for marriage (aka Christians) are mocked for such a decision. I, myself, was mocked for holding that belief on a Twitter debate recently surrounding the topic of the Alabama Senate passing this bill. But I did not feel ashamed or embarrassed. Why would I? I’m the one siding with the Lord and they are the ones siding with Satan.
 
But it is here where we often find Man’s true nature of evil. That which is of the Lord’s and those who follow Him are mercilessly mocked. In the natural, Man wants nothing to do with God because he does not wish to be told that he is doing something wrong.
 
When Adam and Eve ate of the forbidden fruit, what did they do? Avoid God as much as they could. When Cain killed Abel, what did Cain do upon being questioned of his brother’s whereabouts? He lied to the Lord to hide what he had done.
 
And yet, they knew that what they were doing was wrong. They could feel it deep down. Why do you think so many women who have an abortion feel so depressed and sad about it? You often have some sort of feeling of guilt when you are doing something wrong, but in the natural, you are drawn to do it anyway.
 
The gentleman with whom I was debating felt that I was judging him for his stance. I was doing no such thing, merely offering the reasons as to why he was wrong and hoping God would send His Spirit to him that he might see the Light. But nevertheless, he felt judged, not because I was judging him (far from it, as it is not my job to do so) but because he himself felt, at least to some extent, that he was in the wrong – that he was doing something wrong. He likely won’t come to face that reality from just a random debate on Twitter, but I honestly hope it did at least something to help him out.
 
Regardless, as far as this Alabama Senate vote and signing of this bill by the Governor go, I am very proud of my state and look forward to the court challenges that will send it to the Supreme Court (if they actually decide to take it up and not stonewall like they have been for some other important cases).
 
Psalm 139:14
“I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Wonderful are your works; my soul knows it very well.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

The biggest story of the weekend was the fact that on Easter Sunday, the day when Christians around the world celebrate the rising of the Lord Jesus Christ from the grave, signifying His defeat over death, multiple bombs, most of which were suicide bombings, targeted churches and luxury hotels, killing around 300 people (and expected to increase) and wounding 500 others in Sri Lanka.
 
The attack is believed to have been perpetrated by a radical Islamist terrorist group called National Thowfeek Jamaath, which might have ties to ISIS.
 
Included in the death toll are over 30 foreigners and 2 Americans.
 
Obviously, this is a very big deal. The death toll is very high and the attacks were numerous, with reportedly 7 locations being targeted: three churches and four hotels. According to the Wall Street Journal, six of the attacks were suicide bombings and the other one was a failed car bombing outside the St. Anthony Shrine. Another bomb was also found near Sri Lanka’s airport, but was found and defused before it went off.
 
The Wall Street Journal also reports that 85 other detonators were found abandoned in a bus station, indicating that the attacks carried out on Easter were supposed to only be the beginning of more chaos, death and destruction.
 
Considering this is major news, influential people took notice and wished to share their thoughts. However, one must recognize the sort of language used by people like former President Barack Obama and failure Hillary Clinton.
 
Obama tweeted: “The attacks on tourists and Easter worshippers in Sri Lanka are an attack on humanity. On a day devoted to love, redemption, and renewal, we pray for the victims and stand with the people of Sri Lanka.”
 
Clinton tweeted: “On this holy weekend for many faiths, we must stand united against hatred and violence. I’m praying for everyone affected by today’s horrific attacks on Easter worshippers and travelers in Sri Lanka.”
 
“Easter worshippers”?
 
And they’re not the only ones who used that odd term. Presidential candidate Julian Castro tweeted: “On a day of redemption and hope, the evil of these attacks on Easter worshippers and tourists in Sri Lanka is deeply saddening. My prayers today are with the dead and injured, and their families. May we find grace.”
 
Even ABC News tweeted: “Tourists, Easter worshippers lament the closure of Notre Dame.” Though that one was sent the day before the attacks, but still used that strange term.
 
Just what exactly is that supposed to mean? Because Christians are not “Easter worshippers”. I’ve seen many people tweeting at Obama, Hillary and others about how they can’t seemingly use the term “Christians” (maybe it burns them to mention Him) but they gloss over the fact that no Christian worships Easter. NO ONE worships Easter.
 
Do we celebrate Easter? You bet we do. But we do not worship it. We worship Jesus who rose again from the dead, which we celebrate on Easter Sunday.
 
It’s such a strange term to use in what is supposed to be a replacement for “Christians”.
 
But in any case, notice how they really can’t seem to be able to use that word. Why wouldn’t they note that Christians were targeted and killed on Sunday? Why would they use such a strange and erroneous term to replace the far-easier-to-type “Christians”?
 
These are really just rhetorical questions, of course. These people are themselves not Christians and absolutely hate Christians, so at any point where Christians are targeted, especially in such a grand and horrific way, they have to completely avoid mentioning it. To them, Christians are oppressors and vicious rulers, not victims and targets of persecution and execution.
 
Notice the sort of language they use to talk about multiple horrific acts of violence against Christians versus what they said about the Christchurch shooting in New Zealand.
 
Here’s what Obama said after the NZ shooting: “Michelle and I send our condolences to the people of New Zealand. We grieve with you and the Muslim community. All of us must stand against hatred in all its forms.”
 
And now Hillary: “My heart breaks for New Zealand & the global Muslim community. We must continue to fight the perpetuation and normalization of Islamophobia and racism in all its forms. White supremacist terrorists must be condemned by leaders everywhere. Their murderous hatred must be stopped.”
 
Rightly, they were outraged over the New Zealand shooting that killed 50 Muslims in a mosque. But they have no problem pointing out that Muslims were targeted in that attack while they perform verbal gymnastics to avoid pointing out that Christians were targeted in Sri Lanka.
 
The Left has no problem pointing out hatred and violence against Muslims when it happens (unless it’s Shiites being killed by Sunnis, as both are Muslims) but makes it their mission to try and diminish the effect of a far more destructive and deadly event. Not to minimize the horror of the New Zealand shooting, any destruction of life is tragic, but this attack led to more deaths and injuries, not to mention it was supposedly only the beginning of more planned terrorist attacks, likely targeting Christians.
 
50 dead Muslims is a major deal to the Left (as it should be) but 300 dead Christians and they can hardly pretend to give a damn.
 
Not that I expected anything less from these people, but it is a reminder of the sort of vile that they are. Especially looking over Hillary’s tweets. She wanted the NZ shooter’s head on a platter, denouncing Islamophobia (how come no one talks about Christophobia? Is that even a term?) and “racism in all its forms”. She says that “white supremacists terrorists must be condemned by leaders everywhere,” and insists that that sort of “murderous hatred must be stopped”.
 
But when Christians are the targets: they don’t get mentioned and are even lost in the crowd. “On this holy weekend for many faiths…” while not exactly wrong, as it is also Passover for Jews, this is an attack that specifically happened on Easter, a strictly Christian holiday, with Christians being the targets of the attacks.
 
They insist that we must stand in solidarity with the Muslim community around the world when they are targeted (which is rare, again, unless it is Muslim-on-Muslim violence which is frequent) and condemn Islamophobia, while not calling for any solidarity with the Christian community around the world when we are targeted and there are no calls for condemnation of Christophobia or the targeting of Christians at all.
 
And while Christophobia is technically a term, it is never outright used at any point. When someone targets gay people, that’s homophobia. Fine. When someone targets someone for their skin color, that’s racism. Fine. When someone targets women, that’s misogyny. Fine. When someone targets transgender people, that’s transphobia. Fine. When someone targets Muslims, that’s Islamophobia. Fine. But when someone targets Christians, the Left does not even recognize that they are Christians and certainly does not recognize any sort of trend of hatred towards Christians. Not fine.
 
But what makes this even worse is the actual term they use instead of Christians. If it had been “Easter observers” or “Easter celebrators” or something like that, it might’ve been marginally better. But “Easter worshippers” just rubs me the wrong way. It insinuates that what we worship is not Jesus Christ Himself, but the holiday. That we worship and have reverence towards a simple day on the week and not the Lord who made this day special with the unique and unprecedented feat of COMING BACK FROM THE DEAD. That we worship something that is not God.
 
THAT is what ticks me off more than anything else. Again, I fully expected this sort of behavior from the Left. I’m not at all surprised that they gave every damn they had about Muslims being killed in New Zealand but couldn’t be bothered to pretend about Christians. That is expected, but that term is outright insulting.
 
What Christian worships Easter? Point one out to me and I will tell you that he or she is not a Christian.
 
This is the definition of passive aggressive behavior. Implicit disdain of Christians.
 
Again, not exactly surprising behavior coming from the Left, whose heart is filled with hatred and evil, but we are yet again reminded of the sort of hatred and evil that they harbor.
 
John 15:18
“If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

I have largely avoided talking about the whole college scandal story going on with actresses Felicity Huffman and Lori Loughlin because I could not care less about the problems of Hollywood Leftists, but I felt it necessary to say a little something here because of some of the comments that Loughlin’s family has made about the entire fiasco.
 
To summarize the entire thing as best I can, Loughlin and Huffman face charges for bribing the University of Southern California (USC) into letting their kids attend the school. Obviously, it was wrong and the two are paying the price for their illegal actions, but I do not care all that much about that. College, for the most part, is a cesspool of Left-wing garbage, so I couldn’t care less about the incestuous relationships that are present between Leftist schools and Leftist Hollywood elites.
 
But the comments coming from Loughlin’s family are something that I think I should take note of, to some extent.
 
According to HotAir.com: “’Lori is used to getting what she wants,’ says the family source. ‘This is why she got in trouble in the first place. She got fixated on getting her girls into USC.’… ‘For her, there was no other way… They needed to be at USC. It was very important for her to be able to say that her girls were at USC.’ For Loughlin, 54, ‘it was absolutely a status thing’ for her daughters to attend the elite Los Angeles university, where the admission rate was 13 percent in March 2018, the family source says. ‘And the fact that she wanted the girls to have things that she never had growing up.’”
 
Well, I guess getting a bad reputation is something Lori did not have growing up, so I’m sure her daughters appreciate it.
 
Jokes aside, I really just want to focus on that whole “it was absolutely a status thing” comment. I, for one, am not really surprised at all about that sort of mindset. Of course it was a status thing! For the Hollywood elite, sending their kids to college is not so that they can get an education (God knows colleges don’t offer that anymore). It’s about prestige. It’s about being able to tell people “Mmm, yes, my son is studying at Hhhhhaaaaaarrrrvvvaaaaarrrrdddd.” (Just imagine saying that in the most obnoxious and snooty voice possible while holding a glass of wine or champagne). It’s about being able to tell people “my child is better than your child”. Basically, it’s the adult, yet still very childish version of “my dad can beat up your dad.”
 
These people are incestuous, as I’ve established. In this case, that means they are entirely codependent on one another and on one another’s approval and satisfaction. Why do you think people like Harvey Weinstein would so often champion women’s rights while simultaneously doing unspeakable things to them in private? It’s because they seek one another’s approval and sending kids off to prestigious colleges is part of acquiring some bragging rights, at least for the ones who are old enough to have children going to college.
 
To these people, it’s shameful if their kids don’t go to an elite school. It’s shameful if, as with the case of Lori Loughlin’s daughter, their child has a YouTube channel about make-up tutorials that draws in millions of people and can be a legitimate source of income. That’s not elite; that’s not special. Her parents need to be able to tell their friends that their daughter attends a highly exclusive and prestigious university, studying the various genders of a tree and getting barely passable grades.
 
If they can tell other people that sort of thing, they feel special and prestigious themselves. It is, as the family source says, a status thing.
 
But it’s petty. Even if Loughlin and Huffman had gotten their children legitimately enrolled into her school, the reasons behind it all are still insanely petty and sad. These are people that depend entirely on what others think about them. If there is someone out there who MIGHT make fun or gossip about their child not going to a prestigious school (which highlights Loughlin’s and Huffman's narcissism that she might think people think about them all the time), they can’t possibly take it and will go to any means, even illegal ones, to avoid being shamed about it.
 
Well, despite what prestige or status you get out of telling people your child goes to an elite school, there is no greater status or more prestige than in being able to call yourself a follower of Christ and a child of God.
 
All the Loughlins and Huffmans of the world get out of bragging about where their child is being indoctrinated is just that: bragging rights. In reality, no one honestly cares about that. Why would they? The people the Loughlins tell this stuff to are just as self-centered and narcissistic and incestuous as they are, so why would they be impressed by such a thing? If anything, they might get envious (which honestly might also be what the Loughlins and Huffmans sought, which makes it even more petty and sad), but certainly not impressed.
 
But that is all they can get out of that. If, however, you are a child of God and a follower of Christ, your rewards far exceed that of “bragging rights”.
 
Namely, what you get is access to the most prestigious and hard-to-access place in all of existence: Heaven. I might not be able to get into Hhhhaaaarrrvvvaaaarrrddd, but I know I can and will get into Heaven due to the only requirement for doing so is to receive Christ as your Lord and Savior. I’ve done that, and I continuously do my best to obey the Lord, so I know I’ll get into Heaven. But I can’t say the same for these people.
 
All that is required to enter the most coveted area in all of existence is the receiving of Christ Jesus into our hearts, that He would forgive our sins and redeem us in the Eyes of the Lord.
 
And yet, not everyone does it. Now, I won’t go much into that, since that’s a topic on its own and I know full-well why people don’t do it, but it should be pointed out that the most logical thing anyone can do is to follow Jesus Christ.
 
But in any case, the sort of reward you get out of being a Christian is eternal life at the side of God, the Creator of Heaven and Earth. There is no greater status than that of being a Christian. And I do not mean an earthly status. Of course, being a Christian will lead people into a life of persecution by wicked people, so it is not an earthly status where one can receive the benefits of it immediately. However, the status, the rewards, come in the form of a rejoicing Father who welcomes His lost sheep.
 
Personally, I’d much rather appease the Lord than brag to Man about what I can do or have done. I’d much rather follow Christ than receive any form of status from Leftist Hollywood.
 
Galatians 1:10
“For am I now seeking the approval of man, or of God? Or am I trying to please man? If I were still trying to please man, I would not be a servant of Christ.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

As was to be expected, the fallout from Ilhan Omar’s anti-Semitic comments and the Democrat Party refusing to admit that she is anti-Semitic has not yet subsided, but one particularly idiotic Leftist has the worst take I’ve seen so far about this whole thing: that Christians are the real anti-Semites.
 
Of course, the moron I’m talking about is Young Turks host Cenk Uygur, who tweeted: “You know what’s REAL anti-semitism? Right-wing Evangelical Christians supporting Israel because they think it will bring about the End Times where all of the Jews die. Worst anti-Semitism in the world!”
 
You know how I often read something someone says or tweets and I say how I am so ready to have my fun with them? Well, none of those instances compare with how much havoc I am about to rain down on this idiot.
 
But before I begin, allow me to show you some of the things other Twitter users have written in response to this guy:
 
“And there ya go… I was waiting to see who the first hateful moron was gonna be to make this argument,” wrote one Mr. Larry O’Connor.
 
“You named your show after the people that were responsible for the Armenian genocide. Shut your mouth, jackass,” said Arthur Schwartz (and a bit of a spoiler for later down this article: I will get back to that topic of the Armenian genocide momentarily).
 
“Many Christians are of Jewish ethnicity and ancestry. Jesus and ALL the apostles were Jewish. Nearly all of the early Christians were Jewish. Why would Christians wish death on brethren? This couldn’t be a more moronic tweet but I’m sure he will surprise me,” wrote Chris Loesch, husband of NRA spokeswoman Dana Loesch.
 
“As a Jew, I am grateful every day for my Evangelical Christian friends who support our shared history and *defend* the Jewish people and our right to our homeland. Without their support there would be no one else on Earth standing by us as genocidal masses relentlessly attack,” wrote Chad Felix Greene.
 
“Buffoonery. He’s going to tell us what the ‘worst anti-Semitism in the world’ is? I’ll tell you what the worst anti-Semitism is: the one that used anti-Semitic tropes to systematically murder six million Jews. THAT, Cenk Uygur is the WORST. Don’t dare speak again for Jews!” said a Mr. Dov Hikind.
 
Now, I promised you earlier just what exactly my take was regarding this whole thing and I promised you a scathing analysis and dissection of this idiotic rhetoric, so here it is.
 
Do you want to know what real anti-Semitism is? The kind that Dov just mentioned: the one where an aggressively anti-Semitic socialist captured, imprisoned and killed 6 million Jews.
 
Do you want to know what real anti-Semitism is? Iran constantly declaring and swearing they will wipe Israel off the map. It’s Hamas committing jihad against the Jews on a daily basis at Israel’s border in the Gaza strip.
 
It’s Syria and other nations constantly launching missiles at Israel in the hopes of killing as many Jews as possible and weaken the nation’s resolve. It’s Ilhan Omar accusing politicians of dual loyalties to Israel and only supporting Israel for the money. It’s people claiming, without proof or reason, that Israel is “occupying” the land on which they reside – the land that was PROMISED TO THEM BY GOD!
 
Not that I expect this idiot to recognize what anti-Semitism is when his entire show is named after a revolutionary group in the early 20th century that led to the slaughter of 1.5 million Christian Armenians.
 
In case you do not know what the Armenian genocide is because the education system is so corrupt that any historical event that victimizes Christians must not be covered so as to maintain the narrative that Christians are oppressors, allow me to give you a relatively short history lesson about the entire thing.
 
Armenia was an independent nation for a decent amount of time, even becoming the first nation in the world to make Christianity its official religion in the 4th century A.D. However, the Armenian people often were ruled by an entirely different nation, or empire, as was more commonly considered at the time. During the 15th century, Armenia became part of the Ottoman Empire.
 
To no one’s surprise, the Ottoman Empire was largely led by Muslims who would often treat the typically-Christian Armenians like less than second-class citizens. Christians had to pay higher taxes and were subjected to very restrictive and minimal political and overall legal rights.
 
Interestingly enough, despite their hardships, Armenians actually thrived anyway. They were typically better educated and were wealthier than the rest of the Empire, particularly their Turkish neighbors, who grew resentment of them because of their success.
 
So when the Ottoman Empire crumbled by the end of the 19th century when Turkish Sultan Abdul Hamid II was dethroned, a revolutionary group called the Young Turks sought to reform Turkey into a more modern constitutional monarchy. The Armenians saw this as a sign of better things to come, but in fact, the opposite occurred.
 
The Young Turks sought to “Turkify” the once mighty Empire, which meant that any non-Turks, including and especially counting Christian non-Turks, were seen as a threat to their vision.
 
The beginning of World War I didn’t help the Armenians at all either. Turkey entered the Great War on the side of the Germans and Austro-Hungarians (you know, the baddies?). Turkish military leaders, according to History.com, argued that “the Armenians were traitors: If they thought they could win independence if the Allies were victorious, this argument went, the Armenians would be eager to fight for the enemy.”
 
Which wasn’t inaccurate. The Armenians organized battalions that would help the Russians fighting the Turks. But then again, can you blame them for wanting to fight for Turkey’s enemies when Turkey and the Ottoman Empire both subjected the Armenians to horrible social justice laws (and the actual social justice, not the actual insanity of the Left today) and made the Armenians out to be scum of the earth and literal infidels?
 
But in any case, we move on to the day the genocide is widely known to have begun: April 24th, 1915. On that day, the Turkish government “arrested and executed several hundred Armenian intellectuals,” according to History.
 
“After that, ordinary Armenians were turned out of their homes and sent on death marches through the Mesopotamian desert without food or water. Frequently, the marchers were stripped naked and forced to walk under the scorching sun until they dropped dead. People who stopped to rest were shot. At the same time, the Young Turks created a ‘Special Organization,’ which in turn organized ‘killing squads’ or ‘butcher battalions’ to carry out, as one officer put it, ‘the liquidation of the Christian elements.’”
 
“These killing squads were often made up of murderers and other ex-convicts. They drowned people in rivers, threw them off cliffs, crucified them and burned them alive. In short order, the Turkish countryside was littered with Armenian corpses. Records show that during this ‘Turkification’ campaign, government squads also kidnapped children, converted them to Islam and gave them to Turkish families. In some places, they raped women and forced them to join Turkish ‘harems’ or serve as slaves. Muslim families moved into the homes of deported Armenians and seized their property.”
 
Reports say that there were about 2 million Armenians living in the Ottoman Empire at the time of the massacre, and in 1922, when the genocide was over, around 388,000 Armenians remained. That’s roughly north of 1.5 million Christian Armenians massacred by the Young Turks.
 
And what does Cenk name his show after? The very entity that was responsible for that genocide.
 
Imagine someone creating a show named after Nazi Germany. It’s about as bad as that.
 
So why am I not surprised at the sort of animosity Cenk shows with regard to Evangelical Christians? After all, he named his show after the group responsible for the massacre of over a million of us.
 
Do you want to know what is real bigotry? That. Precisely that. Trying to say that Christians are the real anti-Semites because our support of Israel is as strong as it is because of the prophecy of the End Times as detailed in the book of Revelations.
 
Yes, we Christians believe that Israel must solely belong to the Jewish people for the End Times prophecy to be fulfilled. But let me remind you of something about God: HE GETS TO DECIDE WHO GETS INTO HIS KINGDOM!
 
It’s not rare for a Jewish person to convert to Christianity. Those that do will be saved while those who do not will, unfortunately, perish. That’s applicable to LITERALLY EVERYONE WHO HAS EVER LIVED, CURRENTLY LIVES, AND WILL EVER LIVE IN THE FUTURE.
 
By saying that the “only” reason Christians support Israel is because of the End Times prophecy that will not include anyone who has not been saved by Christ, he is not only attacking Christians but GOD HIMSELF.
 
It’s no different from someone on Facebook whining at you that “if God really was as merciful or loving as you say He is, He would just let anyone into Heaven no matter what” which is a gross insult to the character of God and an incredibly asinine argument made by someone who truly has no idea what they are talking about (and I speak from experience having actually encountered someone like this on Facebook long ago).
 
The Jewish people are God’s chosen people. The land of Israel belongs squarely to them. But those who have converted and will convert to Christianity, recognizing the deity of Jesus Christ, who is Lord, to them belongs the Kingdom of God.
 
That, by no means, does it mean we Christians are in any shape manner or form at odds with Judaism. Matter of fact Jesus Himself was Jewish as He also worshipped the same exact God as the Jews. God the Son worshipped, in the flesh, God the Father, who is also the God of Abraham, of Isaac, of David and of all of Israel. And the twelve apostles were ALL Jewish themselves, including Paul, who did not become an apostle until after Christ’s death at the cross, when he would persecute and execute Christians.
 
There is a reason we call ours a “Judeo-Christian” culture because the two share similar tenets. Christians believe everything the Jews do up to the point where Christ is involved. We worship the same exact God, albeit under typically (but not always) different laws and rituals. Christians find their roots in Judaism. As such, we are allies for as long as the world is here. Jews gave us the law.
 
It’s absolutely ridiculous to insist that someone SUPPORTING Israel is anti-Semitic because of End Times prophecies where GOD GETS TO DECIDE WHAT’S WHAT!
 
REAL anti-Semitism, as I covered earlier, is what Hitler did, what Ilhan Omar continually does, what Iran continually does, what the Democrat Party is slowly coming to accept and everything that has to do with the systemic destruction or oppression of the Jewish people.
 
And a REAL bigot is someone who names their show after the radical Islamic group that was solely responsible for one of the worst genocides in world history.
 
Again, I’m not surprised at all at Cenk’s hatred of Christians. He essentially supports an act that sought to eradicate them from a nation entirely.
 
But let me tell you something else: God is not one to delight in His children’s suffering. To those whom He’ll have mercy, He’ll have mercy. To those whom He’ll execute justice, He will execute justice.
 
Genesis 12:3
“I will bless those who bless you and curse those who curse you; and all the families of the earth will be blessed through you.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

If you’ve read other articles talking about Christianity or Christian persecution in particular, or even if you have a full understanding of what it means to be a Christian, a title like that will seem painfully obvious.
 
Of course, Christians will always be persecuted! However, there is a particular reason I am talking about this right now.
 
Looking over topics to talk about, I came across an article on RealClearPolitics written by Penny Nance, President and CEO of Concerned Women for America.
 
Her article was titled: “When Will the Rising Tide of Bias Against Christians Stop?”
 
That title kind of surprised me, to be quite honest. “Rising tide”? Ma’am, Christians have been persecuted for almost two-thousand years. We’re not facing a “rising tide”, we’re already flooded by such persecution.
 
In her article, Ms. Nance points out the scrutiny the Vice President’s wife recently faced with regard to the fact she chose to teach at a Christian school. The media attacked her and the school for being anti-LGBT and really went quite far in their attacks against the Second Lady with someone in the media suggesting that she no longer be protected by Secret Service over this.
 
No doubt, this is Christian persecution, but it’s nothing new. Even Ms. Nance points out the many other times when people, particularly Democrats, have persecuted Christians such as Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) challenging a federal judicial nominee over his ties to the Knights of Columbus, a Catholic organization.
 
Other examples she pointed at were Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA) saying of Amy Coney Barrett that Catholic “dogma lives loudly within you.” Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) called into question Deputy Director of the Office of Management and Budget, Russel Vought’s Christian views as being “Islamophobic” and Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) asking Secretary of State Mike Pompeo during his confirmation hearing: “Is gay sex a perversion?”
 
But of course, this is hardly the tip of the ice berg of Christian persecution, even in America. In Colorado, a baker had to go through legal hell just because he refused to bake a gay wedding cake. And I don’t think we’ll forget the fact that a group of Catholic high school kids were hounded and harassed and vilified by the fake news media a couple of weekends ago (granted, for wearing MAGA hats, but still).
 
Most recently, the Left went a little bananas over the fact that Trump promoted “controversial” legislation in a number of states where the Bible would be taught in schools through the context of literature and history.
 
Over the decades, the Bible, crosses and overall prayer were banned in public schools, replaced with communist propaganda and flimsy theories of evolution which are heavily alluded to as being factual, if not actually being taught as fact in this day and age (I haven’t attended a science class that talked about it since high school back in the early to mid-2010s).
 
In the Middle East, Christians are regularly beaten, harassed and persecuted on a good day and outright killed and dismembered on a bad day. In China, Christians who refuse to include President Xi Jinping in their worship services are arrested and only God knows what happens to them.
 
But none of this is new. Like I said, Christians have been persecuted for two-thousand years.
 
Need I remind you that the Apostle Paul, before converting, actually hunted down Christians with Roman soldiers to have them executed? That Christians in Rome were considered atheists because they did not believe in the Roman gods? That it took Emperor Constantine in the 4th Century to legalize Christianity in Rome?
 
Jesus Christ, while He was still walking on this Earth, warned people that those who would follow Him, aka Christians, would face persecution and hostility from the world.
 
2 Timothy 3:12: “Indeed, all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted…”
 
John 15:18: “If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you.”
 
1 Peter 4:12-14: “Beloved, do not be surprised at the fiery trial when it comes upon you to test you, as though something strange were happening to you. But rejoice insofar as you share Christ’s sufferings, that you may also rejoice and be glad when his glory is revealed. If you are insulted for the name of Christ, you are blessed, because the Spirit of glory and of God rests upon you.”
 
Matthew 5:10: “Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.”
 
Time after time in the Bible, it is made known to us that we will be persecuted by this world for the simple “crime” of being a Christian.
 
This is why I’m so surprised that Ms. Nance thinks this persecution is so unprecedented. But perhaps, I should try to look at how others might see this.
 
What do I mean? Let me explain.
 
I’m from Argentina. And while Argentina is largely Catholic, its founding was not necessarily due to Christianity or out of a necessity to allow people to express their religious freedoms.
 
America was founded a Christian nation. Included in the Bill of Rights is the freedom of religion. Argentina has that too, but it was not one of its main points upon the founding.
 
The people that settled here sought freedom of religion and the country was founded following Christian views.
 
The people that settled in Argentina went there not to be free of religious persecution but to conquer the land for Spain.
 
America since before its founding has been a sanctuary for Christians, where freedom of religion was considered as important as freedom of speech, press and assembly. And Christianity has been a major part of politics for a very long time.
 
So when in a country where Christianity is so prominent, I suppose it is understandable if people are noticing an uncomfortable trend in increased Christian persecution. This is supposedly the land of the free, so why would anyone expect Christianity to be persecuted?
 
Like I said, there is no rising tide of Christian persecution because we are already flooded by it and have been for a very long time. The only thing that is significant about the way Christians are treated in America and the way Christians have been treated elsewhere in different times is that America has provided what can be considered a period of relief of that persecution.
 
True, Christians don’t tend to be persecuted in America precisely because of the First Amendment. However, there has been plenty of Christian persecution anyway. Granted, not to the point of execution, thank God, but persecution has been there anyway.
 
And this persecution will only get worse because we live in what can only be considered a post-Christian America.
 
In a Christian America, socialists like AOC, Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris and others would not get within 10 miles of holding a government office, as no true Christian would vote for them. In a Christian America, we wouldn’t be debating the morality of a border wall, we would be united in an effort to secure our borders, while still helping those who legitimately want to come here and legitimately seek better opportunities and to contribute in this country.
 
In a Christian America, we would not debate, much less celebrate, the enacting of legislation legalizing abortion up to any point in the pregnancy. We would not debate gay marriage or transgenderism.
 
We have all of these issues because we live in a post-Christian America and have been for some time now.
 
As a result, we see a “rising tide” of Christian persecution. And maybe so in comparison to earlier in the country’s history, but certainly nothing like what Christianity has had to face in its entire existence everywhere else.
 
We are expected to be persecuted by the world because we are not of this world. We do not belong to the world; we belong to Christ. We do not follow the world; we follow Christ.
 
The unfortunate reality is that Christians will always be persecuted for as long as Christianity exists. But the fortunate reality that comes along with it is that, in that persecution, we are fighting the Good Fight. If we are to be persecuted for any particular reason, it is best to be persecuted for being a Christian.
 
If the world turns its back to us, we rest assured that our faith will be rewarded in heaven.
 
I often say that, even if the Left gets absolutely everything it wants, it’s ultimately okay. Part of the reason why is because even if the Left takes away all our freedoms and property (because that’s the nature of socialism), whatever the world takes from us, God will multiply in His Kingdom.
 
Take away our riches, God will multiply those riches in heaven. Take away our families, God will multiple those families in heaven. Take away our lives, God will reward us with eternal life.
 
Yes, we will be persecuted in this life. This much is to be expected. But even if worse comes to worst, we need not worry because we know that Christ’s return is far closer than any of us think. Even if we are made to suffer in this life, God will take away all suffering, all pain, all sorrow, all tears in heaven.
 
Our God created the heavens and the earth. He is the master of it all. So what if we are persecuted? Sure, it’s not a good thing by any means and it certainly brings pain with it, but we ultimately need not worry.
 
If I am to die for the simple reason that I am a Christian, I will die with a smile on my face and a heart full of gratitude for God.
 
Why? Because Christ took away our fear of death. He defeated death at the cross. In Him, we also defeat death.
 
Of course, this does not mean that we should simply be content with these things happening. We should still try to course-correct, but even if that does not happen, we can rest assured that this is all part of God’s Plan.
 
And trust me, He does not need a plan B.
 
Luke 6:22
“Blessed are you when people hate you and when they exclude you and revile you and spurn your name as evil, on account of the Son of Man!”
​
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

This past Saturday, very many people from both sides of the aisle took aim and lambasted a group of kids from Covington Catholic High School.
 
In a short and edited video, kids from the school are seen wearing MAGA hats surrounding a group of Native American protesters and chanting things.
 
From that video, and one Native American protester named Nathan Phillips who was banging the drums in one of the kid’s faces (picture above), the situation looks as though the kids were the bad guys, were harassing minorities and overall being threatening because they are white and are wearing MAGA hats.
 
The Mainstream Media drove this story because they saw the perfect narrative: white, Christian, Trump supporters, albeit underage, were seemingly being threatening towards a group of minorities. There were claims that the children were also chanting “build that wall”.
 
And conservatives who are seemingly in a rush to appear to be the good guys in the Left’s eyes (why attempt to please man instead of pleasing God?) were rebuking the kids as not actually being conservatives or Christians, etc., making sure to distance themselves as far from the raging fire as humanly possible.
 
Threats were made against the kids and their families, with people on the media and celebrities like Kathy Griffin (oh, look, there is the soulless monster again), asking that the kids get doxed (their private information be made public) so that they can be even more threatening to the kids in retaliation.
 
Rep. John Yarmuth (D-KY) even “joked” that he is “calling for a total and complete shutdown of teenagers wearing MAGA hats until we can figure out what is going on. They seem to be poisoning young minds.” He said that in a thread where he went on to say that the incident represents a deeply-rooted problem of racism in our country, so I’m not buying that he was “joking” about this.
 
The media, because they had the perfect anti-Trump narrative - white kids appearing threatening to minorities while wearing MAGA hats - did not care to do further investigative journalism to discover the full story because there wasn’t any more that they wanted or needed to hear.
 
They had their story and they ran with it. “Who cares if the kids’ lives are destroyed by this blatant smear and outright libel? Getting Trump is our main goal regardless of the bodies we leave behind.”
 
That was basically the mindset of all of this.
 
Fast-forward 24 hours and we see more information made available. The kids were not surrounding minority groups. They were being called derogatory terms such as “f**gots” and other things by a black radical cult called Black Hebrew Israelites.
 
The Native American group was not surrounded by the kids – they made their way towards the kids. Their exits were not blocked by the kids. The kids weren’t chanting “build that wall” (which is not offensive even if they did chant it). They were chanting pep-rally cheers to drown out the hateful comments by the Black Hebrew Israelites.
 
The kid that was shown smiling at Nathan Phillips, the man banging the drum in his face, was not being cocky. He was trying to remain calm and diffuse the situation and, according to his own account on the events that unfolded, said a silent prayer that he would be able to diffuse the situation with inaction.
 
Eventually, the kids’ bus arrived and they left.
 
That is what happened, not what the media claimed happened and not what everyone from Hellywood to D.C. to MSM propagandists to supposedly conservative journalists believed happened.
 
And do you want to know what is one of the saddest things about this? Apart from the fact that these kids probably have been scarred to some extent by the level of hatred they received just because they are Christians, mostly white, and Trump supporters, this is the second time in 48 hours that a major news story broke by the MSM that turned out to be a complete hoax.
 
Earlier in the week, everyone on the Left and the Right was raving about a Buzzfeed story that said they had proof Trump instructed Cohen to lie to Congress. Buzzfeed, aka the site where you can take a quiz of what Harry Potter character you should marry and what your favorite snack says about your personality, broke this story.
 
Then, after a day of talking about it, it was discovered that that story, among the countless others that insisted this was finally the end of Trump, was yet another hoax and nothing but fake news.
 
Earlier last week, people had egg on their faces for talking about a hoax as though it was real and over the weekend, they did it again.
 
The difference between the Buzzfeed story and the MAGA Kid story is that the only threat that was made against Trump was impeachment (which has been made pretty much every day for the past 2 years). Not to mention that the target was Trump, who is the target of the fake news media every single day.
 
But the MAGA kid story included CHILDREN. Children who were not doing anything but were lied about as having been racist demons that harassed minorities. Children whose lives have likely been changed by this. Children whose futures were in jeopardy because the media was anxious about painting a story about white Trump supporters being racist, even if those supporters are kids.
 
No one is safe from the media, not even children. You can literally be a high school kid visiting the Lincoln Memorial, happen to be white, which is not something you have control over, and the fact that you are 1) a Christian and 2) a Trump supporter will set you up as a target of the Left.
 
The kids weren’t bothering anyone. The Black Hebrew Israelites were protesting something else entirely, according to Nick Sandmann (the smiling kid pictured above), when they noticed the group of white kids with MAGA hats and began to insult them.
 
Through the magic of editing and one Native American protester having a history of provoking and lying about white people, these innocent kids were made out to be demons of white supremacy and a symbol of Trump’s racism infecting young people’s minds.
 
The media, and many other people, wanted blood. They wanted universities not to accept these kids, their current school to expel them, and the kids to never be able to show their faces in public again.
 
And if any of them wound up committing suicide as a result of this, it would be seen not as a tragedy but as a great thing and that kid doing the right thing in some form of reparation for his own racism.
 
The narrative was the only important thing to them. And others, not wanting to appear racist in their silence, piled on and rebuked these kids as being racist when nothing could be further from the truth.
 
The fake news media has been trying to destroy Trump’s life for years now. But I have never seen them be this despicable.
 
It’s not like these Trump supporters were adults. They were kids with their whole futures jeopardized by an uncaring media that is more focused in driving a narrative than discovering the truth.
 
And this sort of thing happens ALL THE TIME. When a huge story breaks, that story gets a lot of attention. When that story is discovered to not have been true, the discovery garners less attention than the original fake story.
 
But again, these are kids we’re talking about. The media was more than glad to go after kids if the narrative demanded it.
 
And that’s exactly what happened.
 
Some people think that Donald Trump calling the media “the enemy of the people” is a bit excessive. Well, what else can we possibly call them at this point?
 
The enemy wishes to destroy you. The media wished to destroy these kids. The enemy uses any lie they can to hurt you. The media used any lie they could find to hurt these kids. The enemy will ignore the truth. The media ignores the truth. The enemy does not care who gets hurt if you ultimately fall. The media does not care who gets hurt if it can ultimately make Trump fall.
 
There is a very good reason I so often compare the Left to Germany’s Nazi Party. The Nazis sought the destruction of their enemies through any means necessary, regardless of who was hurt in the process.
 
The Left, given the chance, would undoubtedly do the same thing Hitler did to Jews, Gypsies, gay people, and anyone not considered optimal in their eyes. In other words, anyone that disagrees with them is made to suffer even if they did nothing wrong.
 
I find it sadly ironic that they seem to be going down the road of anti-Semitism, further emulating the Nazis.
 
But as it stands right now, the media is the enemy of truth. They did not care about the full story of the kids and the protesters. They only cared about the narrative the situation afforded them.
 
They were excited when the story broke out and undoubtedly were highly disappointed that it turned out to be fake news.
 
They were ready to shed some young, Christian, Trump-supporter blood, but were left with black protesters being hateful towards the white kids and the Native American protesters looking to escalate things.
 
Instead of the minorities being the victims, like the Left wants them to be, they were found to be the aggressors while the supposedly racist white kids who happen to support Trump and also be Catholics were found not to be the aggressors but the victims. The complete opposite of what the Left wanted.
 
The media, the Democrat Party, Hellywood, and overall Left are the enemy of the people. That much is clear.
 
1 Peter 5:8
“Be sober-minded; be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

As I see it, there is a dangerous secularization within the churches that is trying to secularize Christianity to make it fit the world’s standards, doing the opposite of what they should be trying to do.
 
And just to be clear, I’m not saying that every single individual church does this, or that every single individual Christian does this, but there are trends in many churches that are simply worrying to me at the very least.
 
Now, allow me to explain just what it is that I am talking about regarding the secularization of the church (as the bride of Christ) and of Christianity itself.
 
Recently, I read two articles from The Daily Wire. One was titled: “Pastor Loses Job After Church Sign Stating ‘Homosexuality Is Still A Sin’ Causes Uproar” and the other was an op-ed from Mike S. Adams titled: “Why I Have To Debate ‘Christian’ Serial Killers,” referencing pro-abortion people in the church who not simply ignore abortion, but straight up claim it is somehow morally right.
 
Adams writes that the silence from most Christians regarding abortion is “stunning”, reminding him of stories he had heard of German churches ignoring Jewish trains full of women and children crying out for help by singing hymns more loudly. Of course, these are simply stories that may or may not be true, but we are seeing the Left literally calling for people to “shout” their abortion. And it seems, at least when it comes to plenty of supposed “Christians” that abortion is not only an issue that is not discussed, but sometimes even advocated for. Plenty of times, either churches ignore the issue of abortion to instead focus on the sinfulness of Man (and just barely mentioning how we are already saved if we have received Christ into our hearts) or outright joining the Leftist thought-train of secularization and advocating for women’s “right” to have an abortion.
 
Similarly, it seems as though we have been less intent on pointing out and rebuking the sinfulness of homosexuality because it’s “cool” or “acceptable” now to be gay.
 
Which brings me to the other article, where Pastor Justin Hoke of Trinity Bible Presbyterian Church in Weed, California lost his job after his church sign read the following: “Bruce Jenner is still a man. Homosexuality is still a sin. The culture may change. The Bible does not.”
 
That seems like a perfectly reasonable and accurate church sign. But the sign still caused an uproar within the community.
 
Now, that in and of itself was not actually the reason for the pastor to lose his job. The community can say whatever it wants, but it ultimately can’t get rid of a pastor. However, the church can.
 
Pastor Hoke said that he was not exactly fired, but it was brought to his attention that just about everyone in the church with the exception of one couple said that they would leave the church if he continued preaching there.
 
And THAT is where we find a huge problem. 99% of the church members and all of the elders did not want Hoke, whose gravest sin was to preach against sin (which is HIS JOB), and threatened to leave the church if he continued doing exactly what he’s supposed to do.
 
Now, I get that this is California, particularly in a city called WEED. However, I looked into the church and what denomination it fell under. The Bible Presbyterian Church is a very conservative church. Unlike many other churches where it seems they teach literally the opposite of Christianity, the Bible Presbyterian Church follows the Westminster Standards of reformed doctrine. In other words, they’re as conservative as you can get.
 
And yet, despite its conservatism, the overwhelming majority of the body of the church was against what the pastor did, even though he was 100% right.
 
Bruce, or “Caitlyn” Jenner is still a man. It doesn’t matter what he looks like, or what parts he surgically added or removed, he is still a he because God made him that way.
 
Homosexuality is still 100% a sin. It doesn’t matter if the Left calls us homophobes for saying it, the Word of God makes this abundantly clear.
 
And that’s not to say any of us hate gay people, either. Quite the opposite in fact. If we hated gay people, we wouldn’t care to point out their sin and we wouldn’t try to save them. But we care for people’s souls – all people’s. So, we try to help them be saved.
 
And yet, even though the Bible is perfectly clear about homosexuality, almost every member of the church wanted the pastor gone because he was spreading the Truth.
 
When I look at where the church is headed, I worry. The Catholic Church has had multiple instances of highly immoral sexual misconduct with children. And yes, while that is also the case in many other places, particularly Leftist Hollywood, the Church is held to a higher standard than Hellywood (and yes, I’m thinking of calling it that from now on).
 
The fact that the people of a conservative church would threaten to leave a church if it retained a pastor who was SPREADING THE TRUTH OF THE GOSPEL is a massive red flag, even if it is in California.
 
Homosexuality is still a sin, regardless of what society might argue. Transgenderism is a mental issue, regardless of the Left’s attempts to normalize and encourage it. Abortion is death, regardless of what any man or woman might say.
 
These are all things that we should be tackling head on, not retreating on. We should tackle these things and rebuke these things because these things are immoral. And in challenging these things, we should not cower and apologize, and we should not be getting rid of pastors for challenging these things. We are Christians. We serve God, not Man. And as Christians, we should not worry about persecution; we should fully expect it. As Christians, we are hated for telling the Truth; the Truth of Christ, of God, of the Gospels, of the Bible.
 
Christianity cannot become secularized, lest we fall to sin forever. We cannot allow for it to fall to Man. We must pray to God that He may guide our steps so that we may continue to spread His Word, regardless of the physical consequences.
 
Why? Because it’s not just the most important thing – it’s the only important thing.
 
There is a reason people in China risk going to underground churches. They risk imprisonment because they’d rather be physically imprisoned than spiritually imprisoned.
 
There is a reason people in the Middle East so often come to Christ. Even though they risk not just imprisonment but outright death, they’d rather die the first death than the second.
 
And yet, I see so many self-professed “Christians” either ignoring the sins of Man or outright advocating for them, arguing that they are actually moral when the Bible proves otherwise.
 
I’ve often said that we need a Christian revival. When I say that, I don’t just mean more people coming to Christ who never said or thought they were Christians, but I also mean those who think they are Christians and argue they are doing God’s work but are not.
 
We need a Christian revival not just in America but around the world. We need to fully understand what it means to be a Christian. It means to follow the Lord Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, through trial and tribulation on this Earth, following His teachings as best as we can, regardless of what society might say or argue. It means not fearing persecution but outright expecting it, knowing that whatever Man can do cannot compare to what God can do.
 
For it is better to die the most horrendous death imaginable at the hands of Man than it would be to be on the receiving end of God’s Righteous and Just Wrath.
 
Shame on those “Christians” who threatened to leave a church whose pastor follows and teaches the Word of God. But beyond that, I sincerely hope they come to their senses, understanding the error of their ways, and return to Christ.
 
Similarly, I hope those “Christians” who advocate for abortion, or at least “choice”, eventually repent of their sins for they are doing the work not of God but of the Devil.
 
I hope and pray we can fight back against the secularization of the churches and of Christianity. It’s definitely not the first time the collective church has had such challenges, but here’s hoping we can overcome and defeat such challenges once again.
 
Romans 6:23
“For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

For years and years now, maybe even decades, we’ve had quite the war on Christmas on our hands. It is for this reason that Donald Trump makes it a point to say “we can say ‘Merry Christmas’ again”. Leftists will mock that, saying that we could always say it, but stories like the one I am about to share prove Trump right on this. There definitely is a war on Christmas.
 
You see, the principal at Manchester Elementary School in Nebraska is so against Christmas, she makes the Grinch look reasonable.
 
Jennifer Sinclair, the principal of this school, sent a list of guidelines of what is appropriate and what is not appropriate to have or wear inside the school during the Christmas season. Here’s the list of what is considered “not acceptable” to Sinclair:
 

• Santas or Christmas items on worksheets

 

• Christmas trees in classrooms

 

• Elf on the Shelf – that’s Christmas-related

 

• Singing Christmas Carols or playing Christmas music

 

• Sending a Scholastic book that is a Christmas book – that’s Christmas-related

 

• Making a Christmas ornament as a gift – This assumes that the family has a Christmas tree which assumes they celebrate Christmas. I challenge the thought of, ‘Well they can just hang it somewhere else.’ (By the way, those are Sinclair’s words in the list, not mine.)

 

• Candy Cane

 

• Red/Green items – traditional Christmas colors

 

• Reindeer

 

• Christmas videos/movies and/or characters from Christmas movies

 
 
So that is a pretty loony list, but just wait and see what Sinclair deems acceptable:
 

• Gifts to students

 

• Snowmen, snow women, snow people

 

• Snowflakes

  

• Gingerbread people

 

• Holidays Around the World (in other words, celebrating literally any other holiday)

 

• Sledding

 

• Hot chocolate

 

• Polar bears, penguins

 

• Scarves, boots, earmuffs, and hats

 
 So basically, just about anything that is not related to Christmas is fine.
 
Now, let’s look over these lists again. In the “unacceptable” list, we find things like Santa, whom I suppose could be considered a saint, even though he’s the secular symbol for Christmas. But what is perhaps most puzzling is finding candy cane on that list.
 
The reason Sinclair gives for banning that item is that it’s shaped like a J and she argues it’s supposed to represent Jesus. “Historically, the shape is a ‘J’ for Jesus. The red is for the blood of Christ, and the white is a symbol of his resurrection.” Now, that’d be a strange argument anyway, but she then follows that up by saying: “This [ban] would also include different colored candy canes.”
 
So then what’s the point of pointing out the supposed symbolism behind the colors of the candy cane as being the blood and resurrection of Christ if differently-colored candy canes are also banned?
 
Never mind the fact that it’s not exactly proven that candy canes have that shape because they represent Jesus. No one has pinpointed the historical roots of the reason for candy canes to be shaped the way they are.
 
But even if they do represent Jesus in any way, what’s this woman’s problem? She’s literally taking candy from kids at this point.
 
As far as the “acceptable” list goes, I would laugh at the fact she includes “snow people” and not just snowmen, or even snow women, but considering this woman is in the education business, she is in charge of educating kids. Of course, and to the surprise of no one, I doubt that’s what she’s doing, opting to indoctrinate kids rather than educate them. Academia may be mostly specific for college, but it does technically include all academic institutions aka schools at any level.
 
Between you and me, I don’t think snowmen have the mental capacity to question basic biology… not that snowmen are actually biologically male. The only thing that makes snowmen “men” is what the kids put on it, such as a top hat or other male clothes. Snow women might wear female clothes, but I doubt there are snow “people” in as far as if you put male clothes on a snowman, it’s a snowman; ditto for snow men with female clothes. Depending on the clothing choice, that’s the snow person’s gender, I guess is what I’m trying to say. Regardless, that’s just a dumb tangent that “educators” like Sinclair force us to go into because she is the one who included “snow people” as if snowmen could be transgender.
 
But in any case, the good news is that this lunacy was quickly put to a halt, as the Elkhorn School District placed the principal in administrative leave (no indications as to the time of her return).
 
The school district told Fox News: “The memo (sent by Sinclair) does not reflect the policy of Elkhorn Public Schools regarding holiday symbols in the school.” The district’s policy regarding holiday props says that “Christmas trees, Santa Claus and Easter eggs and bunnies are considered to be secular, seasonal symbols and may be displayed as teaching aids provided they do not disrupt the instructional program for students.”
 
And that is something that I wanted to talk about too. Santa Claus, Christmas trees, presents, all of these things are the secular part of Christmas. The original meaning of Christmas is the celebration of our Savior’s birth, who was conceived by a virgin, and who would go on to live a perfect life so that He would be an appropriate sacrifice at the Cross, where He would die for the sins of whosoever believeth in Him.
 
We are supposed to celebrate the birth of our Lord and Savior on the holiest of days. But the secular world was against that, and set up the same holiday to be about gift-giving and spending time with your family. Now, I’m not completely against that. As a kid, I would love getting gifts for Christmas. Spending time with your family is also a worthwhile deal. However, the problem I have with these things is that they come to replace the original, intended meaning of Christmas which is, as I said, the celebration of our Savior’s human, yet holy birth.
 
The reason Trump insists that we can say “Merry Christmas” again is that saying “Happy Holidays” (which even that is being attacked by the Left for including “holy” in it) takes the focus away from Christ. Yes, I am also happy about Hanukkah (or Chanukah) and the meaning behind it, being a Jewish holiday, but I believe the birth of our Lord and Savior is considerably more important than the rededication of the Holy Temple in Jerusalem after a pretty great Jewish victory against the Seleucids (Syrian-Greeks).
 
For whomever celebrates Hanukkah, I would happily wish them a Happy Hanukkah. But what’s more important is the birth of the Messiah, foretold to come throughout the Old Testament.
 
So the exchanging of gifts, the gathering of the families, the kissing under the mistletoe, and everything else while good in my eyes, should not take away the focus of the holiday.
 
Although, I do find some irony in the fact that a Leftist (yes, I can tell she’s Leftist. Read those lists again and tell me otherwise) is attacking the secular part of the holiday that was set up by Leftists of the past who wanted to shift the focus away from Christ. Still, it’s also pretty clear that she is no fan of Jesus, considering her reasoning behind some of these bans, particularly candy canes.
 
Thankfully, the school district actually did the right thing here and placed her on administrative leave over it. Of course, I don’t think she should lose her job over this, but let’s just say I am no fan of Principal Jennifer Sinclair at the moment.
 
Of course, the reason she was removed wasn’t simply because of her outrageous demands but because such demands were actually against district policy, so I won’t go around saying that the school district loves Jesus, but at least this gutting of Christmas was stopped this time.
 
Galatians 4:4-5
“But when the fullness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law, so that He might redeem those who were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption as sons.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

I have surprisingly mixed feelings about this entire thing. However, before I get into why that is, it is important to understand the context of the situation. Usually, if I see college professors slamming anything on the LEFT and not something on the Right, that comes as a massive surprise. However, you will soon understand why I am not 100% positive about this whole thing.
 
First, allow me to explain some context. This article comes from a different article written on Campus Reform titled: “Yale prof: Communism is a ‘religion’ with ‘sloppy theology’”. In this article, the writer explains that “panelists at Princeton University condemned communism on Tuesday (last week), likening it to a ‘religion’ with ‘extremely sloppy theology’ and honing in on its ‘inhuman’ nature.”
 
The article mentions the name of the panel: “Consequences of an Idea: Assessing 100 Years of Communism” and notes the name of the three panelists. First, there’s Carlos Eire, a Yale history and religious studies professor and an immigrant from Cuba. Then, there’s Sergiu Klainerman, a Princeton math professor and immigrant from Romania, a socialist country. Finally, there’s Skidmore College political science professor Flagg Taylor.
 
In this panel, Eire made the case that Communism is “damn close, if not exactly the same as a religion,” with “orthodoxy and heresy.”
 
Communism is “impervious to empirical evidence, scientific evidence, sociological evidence… It is also an extremely sloppy theology that does not base its observations on human behavior.”
 
He argued that “human beings are incapable of pure altruism, of sharing goods equally. There is never any true sharing. It is impossible.”
 
According to Campus Reform: “The religious studies professor noted that Christian monasticism also involved property sharing, but that monastic history is one ‘of failure, of corruption, and reform.’ He granted that it yielded some success, arguing that this was because sharing was voluntary.”
 
Then, Eire claims that “historically, it has been proven that communism can work, sometimes, to some extent, always with some reform. But it always requires an oligarchy of some sort.”
 
Campus Reform continues by writing: “The Yale professor also argued that it is only viable in small communities, noting several failed historical attempts by Christian monastics or other religious leaders to extend monastic sharing to wider communities.”
 
Eire insisted that “it is possible to speak of communism… as a religion” that is “governed by bad theology.”
 
Later in the panel, Taylor argues that it is not enough to label Communism as totalitarian, suggesting that it is better to label it as an “ideocracy” where “ideology is not just one of four or five important features” but that ideology is “the most important feature.” “In this account, a totalitarian regime becomes totalitarian precisely because it is ideological.”
 
Taylor argues that Communism is founded on “organized and systematic lying”, differing from “ordinary falsehood.” He argues that “ordinary falsehood” “stays in touch with the truth and knowingly distorts the truth” as opposed to an “ideological lie” which “seeks to impose a pseudo-reality upon reality. It does not depart from reality so much as [it] completely ignores reality and… it seeks to disrupt our normal access to reality.”
 
Taylor concludes the panel by pointing out some trends present in our daily lives that are reminiscent of communist ideocracies, such as the “hyper-bureaucratization of life”, the “persistence of perfectionism” and a “prevalent culture of activism”. He describes the latter two as a form of fanaticism that is “always certain that the enacting of a certain program will bring an end to societal dysfunction and injustice.”
 
This sort of fanaticism, Taylor says, “is not driven primarily by unbridled passion, but rather is the result of an intellectual error, which should recall ideologies like revolutionary socialism” and the disastrous results that they bring.
 
Now, this was a lot to cover, but I think it can be fairly obvious why I have some level of issue with all of this. While I do agree that Communism is basically like a religion at this point, as I have time and time again mocked the Left for their religious-like belief of climate change, it is important to understand just what kind of religion we are talking about here and why Christianity does not really belong in this sort of categorization that the professors use to define something as religious.
 
Carlos Eire, the Yale professor, made the argument that Communism is “impervious to empirical evidence, scientific evidence, sociological evidence”. And while that is true, this comes after comparing Communism with religion. Now, as a Christian, the first religion that comes to mind when someone talks about religion in general is Christianity. But this argument does not work for Christianity in and of itself.
 
Christianity is not “impervious to empirical evidence, scientific evidence, sociological evidence”. There is nothing in science today that goes as far as to disprove or really even challenge the existence of God. While there are people out there that use science as a weapon against Christianity and the notion of a living, eternal, self-existent God who is the Creator of the Universe, no scientific evidence really disproves God.
 
Even the theory of evolution does not disprove God. It basically suggests the universe started with a singular cell that evolved and got to where we are today. But it does not challenge the idea of a God because it does not answer the question “where did that cell come from?” If evolution is, indeed, how we got to this point (and I believe in some level of evolution, but within species. Meaning a species evolving to adapt better to its surroundings, not evolving into a different species altogether) then how did that first life cell come to be? What did it evolve from? Surely, not from something that was previously not alive. Not if it’s the first alive thing ever.
 
What I mean is this: I used to not be alive, but I was a sperm cell within my father that eventually made contact with my mother’s egg cells. There were living cells before I was alive (ironically, the Left will still somehow say that we are not alive inside the womb but are alive before we even get there as living cells). But with the first cell, what came before it? Nothing surely. But then, how did it get there in the first place?
 
Even if you believe the Universe was always here, as in it had no beginning (which is ludicrous), you cannot make the same argument for life on Earth. Earth was not always here. Life was not always here. So how did life get here? How did it develop from absolute nothingness? If there was ever a time when there was nothing, absent of an external force, what would there be today? Nothing!
 
So even the “best” tools for the Left in countering the existence of God do not actually counter the existence of God. There is no empirical, scientific, sociological evidence that points away from the Truth claims of the Bible. So in Eire’s comparison between Communism and religion, his argument does not actually work for Christianity. However, it does work magnificently well for Communism, which is meant to be the overall point. Not to mention he’s talking about religion in general and not Christianity in particular.
 
Now, he does also mention Christian Monasticism. For context, Monasticism is a religious way of life where one renounces worldly pursuits in order to devote oneself entirely to spiritual work. Basically, think of Catholic priests (just not the ones that molest kids or argue that there is climate change or that there should be gay priests or anything that adamantly goes against the Bible, as that basically stops being Monasticism altogether).
 
Eire critiques Christian Monasticism and history as being one “of failure, of corruption, and reform.”
 
Now, unfortunately, I am not a theologian, so I cannot necessarily argue against this completely. My understanding, at least of the Catholic Church, which tends to be Monastic, is that it has (and arguably is right now) corrupt and very different from what it should be. And I’m sorry to anyone who is Catholic here, but to say the Catholic Church is perfect is to be naïve.
 
The Catholic Church believes in the infallibility of the Pope. They believe the Pope is never wrong and incapable of being wrong. That, of course, is ridiculous. Of course the Pope can be wrong. He’s HUMAN! To say that the Pope cannot be wrong is to elevate the Pope to God’s level of omniscience. That is blasphemy and wholly unchristian.
 
The Catholic Church also believes in praying to saints, such as Saint Peter, and even to the Virgin Mary, that they may ask God to help the person praying to them. Praying to anyone but God is idolatry and there is no other way to label it. It’s not like asking someone else to pray for you. You don’t get down on your knees and bow your head to ask someone else to pray for you. Asking for the Virgin Mary to pray for you, while you yourself are in a praying position and are doing this to a statue of the Virgin Mary is to elevate the Virgin Mary to God’s level. Again, that’s blasphemy as well as idolatry.
 
I won’t spend too long criticizing what I don’t like about the Catholic Church, but it is important to note there are issues with it. Just as there are issues with every other denomination. There is no perfect denomination of Christianity. The church of Christ is, currently, being run by humans. Humans who make mistakes. Humans who are not omniscient. Humans who, by nature, are evil and can only be righteous by the good grace of the Lord.
 
So I won’t argue that there are no mistakes or issues within the denominations of Christianity or within Monasticism of Christianity. But there is a MASSIVE difference between calling Christian Monasticism a failure and corrupt and calling Christianity itself a failure and corrupt. I want to make it entirely clear, of course, that Eire is talking about Monasticism in particular. And I, not being a theologian and not having great understanding of this, will not necessarily argue against the particular claim. I just wanted to make the difference clear. He is criticizing Monasticism, not Christianity itself.
 
Now, I feel I should wrap this up so as to not make this article too long. In conclusion, I am glad there are college professors, particularly Ivy League college professors, who understand the horrors of Communism and its fundamental fanaticism that is devoid of knowledge and understanding.
 
And while Communism, and many things within Communism, can be considered to be like religion or an actual religion, where the government is God (I have mentioned multiple times that the Left wants to replace God with government. If that’s not basically making Communism a religion, I don’t know what would), I feel it particularly necessary to explain that the argument Eire used to describe religion or Communism as being like a religion does not exactly work with Christianity as science does not really suggest there is no God. In fact, it does the opposite.
 
Science has shown us to be extremely complex creatures living in an extremely complex reality. To say that everything that has happened up to now, including our very existence, is a matter of random chance is to reach for the bottom of the barrel in trying to deny God’s existence. The mathematical likelihood, or chance, of everything that has happened to be replicated is virtually impossible. Not only that, chance in and of itself doesn't have the power to do anything - it's just a mathematical concept to calculate probability. Chance is not a thing. When you toss a coin, you have 50/50 chance of it landing on tails - it'll depend on many factors: distance from the floor, force applied, objects it hits on its way down, etc. But chance is not a factor - it's a probability and it has no influence on the actual result. And yet, here we are. How? Well, I think we all know.
 
But aside from that, I want to acknowledge the fact that there are at least some college professors who still view Communism in a bad light. Of course, two of them actually had to experience communism (or at least socialism) to understand how bad it is, but still.
 
Matthew 6:13
“And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is an entirely free newsletter that contains the week’s articles compiled into a single e-mail. Unlike communists of today, I won’t lie to you and say that something is free when it really isn’t at the end of the day. When I say it’s free, that means it’s 100% free all the time. Today, tomorrow, next week, last Thursday. It’s always free to do this.
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.