Because the strategy of secularists is “rewrite the past to control the future.”
“How do we keep Christianity and Christians from influencing the legislated morality of the country and continue its hurl toward more evil?
By deceiving people the US never was largely influenced by Christianity in the past, so it never should be in the future.”
@AndrewKolvet Also, he’s just giving “murder” a different name and saying “Jesus never talked about this new title for murder I’m using”
Yes, Jesus very much talked about murder
@LeeFouler I wouldn't say I'm "optimistic," but anything can happen in March. Case in point - 1987. UNC was 16-0 in conference play and had crushed us twice, but for that one game, everything changed. Who knows? Maybe we write a new story today.
Dick Vitale on February 14, 2026: "Herb Sendek never should have been fired by NC State."
The lie that Sendek was fired has been proclaimed so loudly for so long, everyone just assumes it's true.
You're going to see Jesus selectively-edited for political purposes like this a lot in the coming days. Few things to remember...
1. Jesus never broke immigration laws
2. Jesus did not “immigrate”: He left Nazareth (in the Roman Empire) to go to Egypt (also in the Roman Empire)
3. When they traveled, his family *legally registered* themselves (Luke 2:1-5)
4. Jesus commanded obedience to laws (Rom 13:1), and commanded governments to enforce their laws (Romans 13:3-4)
5. People like to selectively-edit Jesus to turn him into a mascot for their cause. You can equally say things like...
- “Jesus was a part of the majority culture in his region"
- "Jesus came from a patriarchal traditional family"
- "Jesus was unvaccinated"
- "Jesus fed the poor without raising taxes"
- "Jesus told people to buy weapons", etc
Jesus is a Lord, not a mascot.
6. Yes, individual Christians ARE commanded to love all people, including immigrants, and that cannot be disregarded. No, the Biblical command to "love the foreigner among you" does not mean it is wrong for a nation to enforce its immigration laws.
'He has a point, but he's too blunt.'
From the start, a key tactic of the gender identitarians has been linguistic prescription, and it's proved shockingly successful. Trans activists' shibboleths and euphemisms have been allowed to penetrate the upper echelons of our culture with devastating consequences to freedom of speech and belief. Huge swathes of liberal media, the arts, academia and publishing have thrown themselves with gusto into the defence of a quasi-religious belief causing provable real world harm, and in their arrogance they've been outraged when people they assumed were part of their In Group have refused to march meekly along in lock step.
Time and again, I've seen and heard well-educated people who consider themselves critical thinkers and bold truth-tellers squirm when put on the spot. 'Well, yes, maybe there's something in what you're saying, but it's hateful/provocative/rude not to use the approved language/pretend people can literally change sex/keep drawing attention to medical malpractice or opportunistic sexual predators. Why can't you be nice? Why won't you pretend? We thought you were one of us! Don't you realise we have sophisticated new words and phrases these days that obviate the necessity of thinking any of this through?'
As the vibe shifts, and a lot of people in the elite professions start trying to reposition themselves, the obvious place to start is, 'it's not that I couldn't see your point, but did you have to say it that way?' We dissenters were supposed to find a way of questioning the chemical castration of children while calling it 'gender affirming care.' We were meant to defend the rights of vulnerable women while also using female pronouns for male rapists. We should have found a way to discuss fairness for women and girls in sport, while pretending that the ineradicable physical advantage men have over women doesn't exist.
Either a man can be a woman, or he can't. Either women deserve rights, or they don't. Either there's a provable medical benefit to transitioning children, or there isn't. Either you're on the side of a totalitarian ideology that seeks to impose falsehoods on society through the threat of ostracisation, shaming and violence, or you're not. The alternative to being 'blunt' - using accurate, factual language to describe what was going on - was to surrender freedom of speech and espouse ideological jargon that obfuscated the issues and the harms caused. We've always needed blunt people, but we need them most of all when being asked to bow down to a naked emperor.
Christians applying their faith to politics is good.
The whole Word to the issues of the whole World.
... but politics cannot fix what politics did not break.
Any system that is broken is downstream of the fact that *we* are broken.
What to do when your kids aren't walking with Jesus:
1. Pray without ceasing.
2. Remember that God loves them even more than you do.
3. Don't compromise your faith, but also don't argue about it.
4. Don't burn a bridge, so they have a path back.
5. Point to Jesus when possible.
Standing by as this happens is not an option.
It’s not how I was raised, and it is not indicative of America.
I’m proud to stand with @POTUS and @RepRileyMoore to draw awareness to the situation in Nigeria and condemn the actions of Boko Haram.
Standing by as this happens is not an option.
It’s not how I was raised, and it is not indicative of America.
I’m proud to stand with @POTUS and @RepRileyMoore to draw awareness to the situation in Nigeria and condemn the actions of Boko Haram.
@TheJayBaller@jwckauman@LeeFouler A. Don't believe anything written in Personal Fouls.
B. Don't believe anything written in Personal Fouls.
C. If you do, I can't help you.
D. Don't believe anything written in Personal Fouls.