Asa Miller

Former 🔱 @tpusafaith

[Asa Miller @AsaMill47]

“The future of this republic is in the hands of the American voter.”

- Dwight D. Eisenhower

Check your status today at https://t.co/Nw4Mialnb8

[Planet Of Memes @PlanetOfMemes]

The stark difference between Makers and Takers.

[TheBlaze @theblaze]

Sad but true….

[Frontierism @frontierism]

“Your honor, this is only his first murder”

[Asa Miller @AsaMill47]

A desire to partake in these elements should be a prerequisite for anyone considering immigration.

[Josh Chavis @JoshChavis65]

All of America watching Euros rave about Waffle House, Chilis apps, buying Combos at a rural gas station, floating the Chattahoochee, and ranch dressing on the internet:

[Jared Hudson @JaredHudson_AL]

Look what God can do!

Y’all, I’m a nobody from Gardendale, Alabama. I’m the most unlikely candidate to run for U.S. Senate but God has paved an unbelievable path.

There’s still work to do! This week is all about the voters of Alabama who are sick and tired of the career politicians.

The only poll that matters in this race is next Tuesday, June 16th.

Go ahead and make a plan to vote, tag someone below that you’re taking to the polls and get ready.

[End Wokeness @EndWokeness]

Karmelo Anthony supporter: "What do I tell my 5 boys? What do we do now!?"

Uh… don't murder?

[Timothy Johnson @MiamiCanes1971]

The British being unprepared to perform on American soil has been a tradition since 1776

[Josh McPherson @McPherson_Josh1]

I had a pastor tell me a few weeks ago that religion has no place in politics.

I replied, “I realize you may not respect me or agree with me. No problem. Do you respect Charles Spurgeon?”

He responded, “Oh yes. I quote him in my sermons all the time!”

I sent him this Spurgeon quote for his next sermon:

“I often hear it said, ‘Do not bring religion into politics.’ This is precisely where it ought to be brought, and set there in the face of all men as on a candlestick.”

[Katy Faust @Katy_Faust]

I’m often asked: When we overturn gay marriage, is interracial marriage next?

Nope. Here’s why.

Interracial marriage and same-sex marriage are not the same.

In Loving v. Virginia, the Supreme Court struck down racist marriage bans, reinforcing the basis of husband-wife marriage, not redefining it. The Court removed an illicit barrier that had nothing to do with the meaning or purpose of procreative marriage.

Obergefell v. Hodges did something very different. It created a new “fundamental right” to a same-sex marriage license, something absent from the Constitution’s text, history, and tradition. Because it departed from our legal tradition rather than conforming to it, Obergefell remains open to challenge.

But the differences are not just legal. The outcomes for children are opposite as well.

In an interracial marriage, children remain connected to both of the adults to whom they have a natural right. They are raised by the mother and father responsible for their existence and identity. Nothing about interracial marriage requires a child to lose a parent.

Same-sex marriage does.

Children raised by same-sex couples are necessarily separated from at least one biological parent. They are denied a relationship with half, and sometimes all, of their genetic heritage. They lose either a mother or a father.

Reversing Obergefell would have no impact on Loving. Interracial marriage remains legally secure because Loving upheld the historic understanding of marriage while removing a racist barrier.

Restoring the man-woman meaning of marriage protects what matters most to children: their mother and father.

[Asa Miller @AsaMill47]

More of this please

[Senator Rand Paul @SenRandPaul]

Thank you, @POTUS. Always good working with you to put America First.

Looking forward to our next round of golf😉

[Alex Clark @yoalexrapz]

I bet if that guy and his wife would have known they would have gone to prison for aborting their child with down syndrome they wouldn’t have done it.

[Matt Walsh @MattWalshBlog]

You cannot claim that you’re aborting your Down syndrome child because you don’t want him to “suffer.” First of all, killing a child so they don’t suffer is psychopath serial killer logic. You’re on the same moral plane as Andrea Yates. Second, children with Down syndrome are famously some of the happiest people you’ll ever meet in your life. They are not in fact living in a state of perpetual torment. So what’s really happening is that you’re killing your child so that YOU won’t suffer the inconvenience of caring for him. This is about freeing yourself of your own perceived suffering. If you’re going to be a child killing sociopath, at least be honest about it.

[Matt Walsh @MattWalshBlog]

They are psychopaths who, in a just society, would be rotting in prison for the rest of their lives

[Will Chamberlain @willchamberlain]

Why does every young white male Democrat look like they were literally made of soy?

[Theo Wold @RealTheoWold]

Zach Lahn's big victory, much like Ken Paxton's, is yet another reminder that establishment arguments about "electability" have always just been ways to scare voters into voting for their preferred candidate. Mobilizing the coalition that it takes to win competitive races starts by having a candidate that the conservative grassroots is excited to vote for; not somebody who's just going to be another useless cog. Thankfully, Red State primary voters are waking up.

[Katy Faust @Katy_Faust]

Pride is out.

Child protection is in.

Happy June.

[Brandon Gill @realBrandonGill]

Low T