New Book

A Unique and Revealing Look at America!
The Miracle and Magnificence of America.
If you enjoy this site, please consider purchasing my recent book (as low as $9.99).
Click here to get it at Amazon. See here for more information.

Book Banner

Book Facebook

If you "Like" this page, please visit our Facebook page for
The Miracle and Magnificence of America and "Like" it. Thank you!!!

Latest News/Commentary

Latest News/Commentary:

News/Commentary Archives:

News/Commentary Archives:

Friday, April 20, 2018

Chicken Fried Hate

As has been well documented lately, the left is hating on Chick-fil-A…again. No one should be surprised by this hate, least of all, Chick-fil-A. Back in 2012, Chick-fil-A became a prime target of the left when its then President and Chief Operating Officer Dan Cathy—son of founder Truett Cathy, and now the Chairman and CEO of Chick-fil-A—gave a benign interview to Baptist Press (the Cathys are long-time members of New Hope Baptist Church in Fayetteville, GA).

The following exchange between Mr. Cathy and Baptist Press is what first drew the ire of the left.
The company [Chick-fil-A] invests in Christian growth and ministry through its WinShape Foundation (WinShape.com). The name comes from the idea of shaping people to be winners.

It began as a college scholarship and expanded to a foster care program, an international ministry, and a conference and retreat center modeled after the Billy Graham Training Center at the Cove.

“That morphed into a marriage program in conjunction with national marriage ministries,” Cathy added.

Some have opposed the company's support of the traditional family. “Well, guilty as charged,” said Cathy when asked about the company's position.

“We are very much supportive of the family -- the biblical definition of the family unit. We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that.

“We operate as a family business ... our restaurants are typically led by families; some are single. We want to do anything we possibly can to strengthen families. We are very much committed to that,” Cathy emphasized.
[Emphasis mine.]

“We intend to stay the course,” he said. “We know that it might not be popular with everyone, but thank the Lord, we live in a country where we can share our values and operate on biblical principles.”
Note that Mr. Cathy didn’t mention politics, political parties, legislation, the courts, or anything that could be deemed political. He didn’t make reference to any organizations other than his own business and charity. Neither did he say anything about homosexuality or same-sex “marriage.” Nevertheless, and predictably, the left still decided to make an example out of the fast-food icon.

Apologists for the LGBT agenda attempted to organize a nationwide homosexual “kiss-in” to take place at Chick-fil-A restaurants. LGBT enforcers within the Democrat Party took notice of Cathy’s modest attempt to spread the truth on marriage and family. They were not about to let even the least amount of light shine into their darkness. As CNN noted,
Philadelphia City Councilman James Kenney sent a letter to Cathy this week, telling the CEO in blunt terms to “take a hike and take your intolerance with you,” and vowing to introduce a resolution at the next council meeting condemning the company.

“There is no place for this type of hate in our great City of Brotherly and Sisterly Affection,” Kenney wrote.

San Francisco Mayor Edwin M. Lee tweeted: “Closest #ChickFilA to San Francisco is 40 miles away & I strongly recommend that they not try to come any closer.”

In Chicago, Alderman Joe Moreno has been working for months to block construction of a Chick-fil-A in his district, citing traffic congestion and worry about the company's “business practices.”

Mayor Emanuel, a Democrat, said this week that “Chick-fil-A's values are not Chicago values. They're not respectful of our residents, our neighbors and our family members.”

And in Boston, where Chick-fil-A is considering opening a location, Mayor Thomas Menino, also a Democrat, made it clear the chain would not be welcome.

“I don't want an individual who will continue to advocate against people's rights. That's who I am and that's what Boston's all about,” he said.
After this heat from the left, Mr. Cathy did what some considered a bit of a retreat—or even a “sell out”—in his efforts to spread the truth on marriage and the family. The left-media took notice and wrote headlines like “Chick-fil-A promises to stop giving money to anti-gay groups.” Homosexual activists claimed to have been shown tax records that indicated “Chick-fil-A had pulled its support of groups opposing gay marriage - including the Family Research Council, the Eagle Forum and Exodus International — as early as 2011.”

This information was reportedly circulated among gay advocacy groups “to show the chain’s willingness to change.” Mr. Cathy denied charges that Chick-fil-A had capitulated to the homosexual agenda, declaring, “Chick-fil-A made no such concessions, and we remain true to who we are and who we have been.”

However, Chick-fil-A also released a statement saying that “our sincere intent has been to remain out of this political and social debate…” If only leftist corporations and organizations were so accommodating.

In the six years since this initial dust-up between Chick-fil-A and the LGBT tyrants, and in spite of the relative silence from the chicken sandwich giant on the highly important matters of marriage and family, the left’s hatred for the Christian-owned business has not abated. Whether it’s in the pages of The New Yorker, on the Huffington Post, on the campuses of a growing list of leftist-dominated colleges or universities (and even high schools), or out of the mouths of totalitarian-minded liberals, the hate-filled, intolerant left continues to attack Chick-fil-A.

In other words, it makes little difference whether Christians (or those like-minded)—in fast food (chicken or pizza), photography, baking, floral design, sports, bathrooms, schools, hospitals, or even homes or churches—are vocal about the truth on marriage, family, sex, gender, and so on, the left is already bent on vengeance.

What’s more, those corporations, small businesses, schools, “churches,” and the like, who’ve aligned themselves with the perverse LGBT agenda are rarely hesitant to let it be known loudly and proudly where they stand on sex, marriage, and the family. Virtually all of corporate America and the government schools have, in one way or another, sold their soul on these grave matters.

And like it or not, part of this fight is political. In spite of losing the electoral battle on marriage—in a landslide—the left fought on and eventually—as is so often the case in such things—got the court victory they lusted after. Because they have made a god of government, the principle instrument for the left to spread its corrupt worldview is politics; thus, we must fight in the political realm.

We are far past the moral crossroads Al Mohler referenced several years ago. There is no room for compromise, and there is little to no opportunity for silence. If high-profile Christian business owners, athletes, entertainers, politicians, pundits, pastors, and so on won’t boldly and loudly stand for the truth on something as fundamental as marriage and the family, what can they be trusted to stand for? To whom much is given, much is required.

Again, marriage is the oldest institution in the history of humanity—older than God’s covenant with the nation of Israel, older than The Law, older than the church. Marriage is one of the earliest truths revealed by God. If anything is true, marriage as the union of one man and one woman is true. On this, there can never be compromise, and there should never be silence.

Copyright 2018, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
www.trevorgrantthomas.com
Trevor is the author of the The Miracle and Magnificence of America
tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com

Monday, April 9, 2018

What—and When—Will Be the Next Chappaquiddick?

I was born 11 days after Ted Kennedy left Mary Jo Kopechne to drown (or suffocate) in Poucha Pond on Chappaquiddick Island. Though I’m more familiar than most with the infamous events of July 18, 1969, throughout my life I, like most others, have heard surprisingly little about the details of what should have been one of the most told—albeit tragic—stories of American political figures.

After Miss Kopechne’s death, instead of facing a jury, resigning in shame, or losing in a landslide, Ted Kennedy—aided and abetted by a sympathetic liberal American media—continued his career in politics and went on to become (to those on the left) the “Lion of the Senate.” Kennedy served an obscene 46-plus years in the U.S. Senate and, by 1980, even had the hubris to seek the U.S. Presidency.

While in office, Kennedy was an unapologetic champion of modern American liberalism, which, of course, is why the liberals in the media protected him. It took death to remove Kennedy from office in 2009—an all-too frequent occurrence among our entitled political elite.

Nearly a decade after his death, and in spite of the efforts of some powerful people on the left, along with inaction by the mainstream media, an independent film studio has finally gotten around to telling the ugly story about Kennedy’s lust, drinking, neglect, selfishness, and cowardice, which led to Miss Kopechne’s death. With the film Chappaquiddick, it’s only taken about 50 years for the mainstream media to give us, from many indications (I’ve yet to see the film), a truthful re-telling of the events that should’ve at least ended the political career of—but more justly sent to jail—the last of the infamous brood that was born to Joe Kennedy.

While the world finally gets to witness the unvarnished truth of the events of Chappaquiddick, in the name of lust, greed, or political power, the modern left continues to deceive. Whether the personal failings of democrats such as Bill and Hillary Clinton, the illicit past of democrats like Barack Obama and Elizabeth Warren, or the kooky—yet dangerous—causes of democrats such as Al Gore and Bernie Sanders, an inevitable reckoning with the truth awaits each of these individuals, those who’ve conducted themselves similarly, and their enablers.

Far more dangerous than the deceptions that enable the political rise (or line the pockets) of individuals are the ideological lies that form the foundation of, and thoroughly permeate, modern liberalism. In fact, it is for the perverse cause of liberalism that corrupt individuals are protected, promoted, and even revered. Though their personal lives might embody a liberal worldview, if one is seen as a threat to liberalism—i.e. Donald Trump—then any and all skeletons are quickly tossed out of the closet and loudly and exhaustively waved around for all to see.

Perhaps in another 50 years Americans can watch The Great Russian Collusion Delusion. In this future blockbuster, my children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren can watch the story of how nefarious elements within the Democrat Party, the Obama administration, the establishment media, the FBI, the DOJ, and the “Never-Trump” crowd relentlessly pushed a fake Trump-Russia-collusion conspiracy. People a half century from now would learn that, instead of finding (or manufacturing) any real illicit election collusion, the Trump haters themselves conspired to steal, and later overturn, the 2016 U.S. Presidential election—a 304-227 electoral victory by Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton.

After a few more decades of failed predictions by the climate-change doomsayers, one of Mark Steyn’s children can write and direct the documentary film The Inconvenient Climate, or, alternatively, The Day After Global Warming Died. In what will surely become the greatest documentary film of all time, viewers will learn of what has been called “The Greatest Scientific Fraud of All Time.”

Now that we’re 45 years since the infamous Roe v. Wade ruling, and probably taking issue with what is “The Greatest Scientific Fraud of All Time,” a future champion of the pro-life community is likely to document the undisputed science of life in the womb and tell the horrific story of The Abortion Holocaust. Since 1973, over 60 million of the most innocent and helpless Americans have been killed in what should be one of the safest places in the universe—their mother’s womb.

Among many other riveting things, the bold truth-teller who artfully paints the real picture of this tragedy can reveal how abortion apologists—even well into the 21st century—regularly employed the same tactics of the Nazis and murderous communists and imperialists of the 20th century. Like today’s abortionists, these genocidal fools often dehumanized their targets so that it was easier to justify their slaughter.

The Abortion Holocaust can also show how indifference toward human life led to men like Kermit Gosnell. If you don’t know of Gosnell, it’s unsurprising. As was the case with Ted Kennedy (more than once), when Gosnell’s abortion “house of horrors”—where newborn children targeted for abortion were slaughtered even after they escaped their mother’s womb—came to light, the media ignored or attempted to cover for him. In spite of some strong efforts, Gosnell’s story has yet to be told.

As soon as real women get tired of losing athletic competitions to fake women—sometimes known as “trans-women”—the sports-themed film The Natural (Born Woman), or, alternatively, White Men Can Jump (Higher than Women), can be made. In this story the audience will learn how those corrupted by a liberal worldview, as in the case of a child in the womb, again ignored or denied science in the name of the perverse cause of sexual “tolerance” and allowed men to take trophies from women.

Likewise, as soon as enough children who suffered from being forced to grow up without a mother or a father—along with all of the other disadvantages that come from being exposed to the homosexual lifestyle—grow into adulthood, we can watch A Crying Shame.

In this film people will learn that—in spite of the electoral will of the American people—again mirroring the abortion debate, five unelected justices forced a legal re-definition of marriage upon the American people. Along with the suffering of helpless children, the audience will also learn how Christians were targeted by the vengeful LGBT left.

Because modern liberalism is littered with lies—because, as Fay Voshell (and others) have noted, the cornerstone of liberalism is The Lie that we get to determine truth for ourselves—future filmmakers should be busy. Hopefully the success of Chappaquiddick will encourage them.

Copyright 2018, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
www.trevorgrantthomas.com
Trevor is the author of the The Miracle and Magnificence of America
tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com

Saturday, March 31, 2018

On Liberals and the 2nd Amendment: Why Repeal What You Already Ignore?

Make no mistake about it, in the hands of the American left, the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is not safe. For that matter, virtually nothing wise or precious or sacred or holy or otherwise good is safe with those corrupted by a liberal worldview. Whether marriage, the family, the church, life in the womb, education, small businesses, fossil fuels, law enforcement, the military, the Constitution, and so on, time and again liberals have proven themselves to be on the wrong side of the truth.

What’s more, in the hands of today’s leftists, the Second Amendment—and anything else in the U.S. Constitution with which modern liberals are unhappy—is in jeopardy whether or not it is “repealed.” As most now well know, John Paul Stevens—a retired associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court—recently gave his direct endorsement to the shockingly foolish—but increasingly popular among democrats—idea that the Second Amendment should be repealed.

Few should be should be surprised by Stevens’ position in this matter. With the way-too-close Heller decision a decade ago, he almost then got his wish. In 2008, liberals were a mere one vote short of effectively killing the Second Amendment. In a republic that properly respected and understood its Constitution, Heller wouldn’t have been necessary, and under the absurd circumstances that such a case should make it to the highest court in the land, the vote to uphold the Second Amendment wouldn’t be close.

As Charles Cooke put it,
Heller recognized what was obvious to the amendment’s drafters, to the people who debated it, and to the jurists of their era and beyond: That “right of the people” means “right of the people,” as it does everywhere else in both the Bill of Rights and in the common law that preceded it. A Second Amendment without the supposedly pernicious Heller “interpretation” wouldn’t be any impediment to regulation at all. It would be a dead letter. It would be an effective repeal. It would be the end of the right itself.
In their efforts to remake America into their image of a leftist utopia, rarely have liberals let the Constitution stand in their way. For decades now—whether as public executives, legislators, or judges—liberals have conveniently ignored the Constitution, or “interpreted” it beyond recognition.

For two centuries the “right” to healthcare, housing, a “living wage,” marriage, education, and the like, escaped the vast majority of Americans—including our politicians and jurists. In the late 19th century, President Grover Cleveland explained well the prevailing thought on government and a citizen’s “right” to public funds. While taking a stand against government aid involving a very deserving orphanage in New York City during a severe economic crisis, Cleveland—a Democrat—said,
I will not be a party to stealing money from one group of citizens to give to another group of citizens. No matter what the need or apparent justification, once the coffers of the federal government are opened to the public, there will be no shutting them again…
In 1887, after vetoing a bill that appropriated $10,000 to buy grain for several drought-stricken Texas counties, Cleveland declared,
Federal aid in such cases encourages the expectation of paternal care on the part of the government and weakens the sturdiness of our national character, while it prevents the indulgence among our people of that kindly sentiment and conduct which strengthens the bonds of a common brotherhood.
Nevertheless, in recent decades, as they increasingly made a god of government and sought to build a massive welfare state (through which votes could be purchased), democrats and those like-minded have fully embraced the notion of “paternal care on the part of the government.”

Today’s liberalism stands upon two duplicitous notions that both require a modern “interpretation” of our Constitution: 1.) the godless pagan principle of “Do What Thou Wilt,” and 2.) the presence of an “omnicompetent” Government that is all too eager to mother us. And as C.S. Lewis put it, “If we are to be mothered, mother must know best.”

Of course, and in spite of the claims of modern liberals, such a political philosophy does not bring justice, and it certainly does not promote liberty. On the contrary, as Lewis also noted, such a modern State exists “not to protect our rights but to do us good or make us good—anyway, to do something to us or to make us something.” Something indeed. Lewis depressingly concludes that under such a regime, “There is nothing left of which we can say to them, ‘Mind your own business.’ Our whole lives are their business.”

One of the primary functions of the U.S. Constitution, as the Preamble expressly declares, is to “secure the Blessings of Liberty.” One of the chief means through which such Blessings are “secured” is by ensuring the right of the people to arm themselves. Of course, a government that increasingly makes our “whole lives…their business” is in direct conflict with the idea of securing “the Blessings of Liberty.” Thus, we get “interpretation” of a “living Constitution”—especially when it comes to things like guns.

To repeal a Constitutional Amendment is an arduous effort that would require serious legislative lifting. Thanks to Barack Obama, democrats today are in no shape to pursue repeal of anything, but thanks in large part to men and women like John Paul Stevens, they don’t have to.

(See this column at American Thinker.)

Copyright 2018, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
www.trevorgrantthomas.com
Trevor is the author of the The Miracle and Magnificence of America
tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com

Monday, March 26, 2018

Yes—and Of Course—Children Prefer Liberalism

Conservatism is, in a sense, an acknowledgement of and a surrender to the truth. We conserve “what works,” those traditions, practices, and ideas that have long held the test of time—such as marriage being the union of one man and one woman, the idea that if a man doesn’t work, he shouldn’t eat, all men are created equal, life in the womb is real and precious—because they are rooted in the Truth.

The most significant principle of conservatism is that our rights come, not from man or from government, but from God. All laws of men, all governments instituted by men, should be rooted in the Laws of the Law Giver. Any law, any government that does not do such is folly, and should be treated as such. As Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. taught us,
A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquinas: An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law.
Because what is tried and true can sometimes be viewed as stale and boring, and because being moral is often difficult, conservatism is frequently presented with challenges that liberalism is not. Because the moral demands of liberalism are light and few, life in this world is often much easier for a liberal. This is especially true in politics. For liberals—usually, but not always, democrats—governing becomes a matter of seeking what is popular and pleasing, not what is right.

Much of our childhood is spent doing the same. We are by our nature selfish (many of us say “sinful”), self-centered creatures. We want what we want, when we want it. As children, we want the toys, food, entertainment, and so on, that make us feel good, or at least what we think will make us feel good, because others have told us, or sold us, on such an idea.

At one time or another—especially when we were kids—we were all lured by one or more of the tenets of modern liberalism. Almost certainly, to some extent, each of us bought what liberalism was selling. Those of us who grew out of childhood learned many good and necessary lessons about not always getting what we want. We learned that the shiny, flashy, tasty, fun-looking things that so often lured us were frequently foolish, wasteful, unhealthy, and sometimes even deadly.

As I implied, we are born into our selfish way of thinking—one might say we are all born little liberals—and good, faithful parenting helps train us out of it. Tragically, far too many of us these days are getting no such training, and tens of millions of Americans are stuck in perpetual childhood. Thus, liberalism endures.

Liberals knew well what they were doing as they worked for decades at destroying the family. As generations of Americans have been raised in broken homes—often by broken people—it makes it easier to make them wards of the state. After all, if you don’t have parents who care much or provide much for you, why not look to Uncle Sam and his trillions?

One of the great lies of modern liberalism—perhaps THE great lie—is that the world owes us something, and it’s up to us to do whatever it takes to get it. If one has the “right” to do whatever one wishes in the sexual realm, why take responsibility for an unplanned pregnancy? And if we don’t have to worry about sex leading to children, why get married at all? And if we want to get married, why can’t we define what is marriage?

If one has the “right” to healthcare, why shouldn’t the government—or someone else—provide it? Along that line of thinking, why shouldn’t food, housing, clothing, education, transportation, and so on, be viewed as “rights,” and thus as things someone else owes me? Or, if one has the “right” to a “liveable wage,” why not force businesses and corporations to pay it so that all of these things can be afforded? And if students have a right to be safe in schools, why not take away everyone’s guns?

Because such a mindset is so familiar to them, it’s pretty easy to convince children—or those who think and reason like a child—that this is how the world should be. Thus, we shouldn’t be surprised that so many students—whether elementary, middle, high school, or college—are eager to take up liberal causes. And with most of the country being educated from a liberal worldview, the real surprise should be that any students at all—at least those in government schools—shun the causes of liberalism.

It’s not enough for conservatives to guard our own children against—and train them out of—such thinking. Because so many of today’s American children are exposed to nothing but a liberal worldview, we must instruct them to the contrary. More importantly, we must faithfully live out the truth and be an example to all of the world that, though the truth is often hard and unpopular, it is always worth it.

(See this column at American Thinker.)

Copyright 2018, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
www.trevorgrantthomas.com
Trevor is the author of the The Miracle and Magnificence of America
tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com

Sunday, March 18, 2018

To My—and All Other—Students: A Lesson on the Modern Left

As a teacher of public school (17 years), private school (7.5 years), and homeschool (11 years), I have a truly unique perspective on education. I’ve experienced k-12 education from just about every angle imaginable. I’ve taught at day schools and evening schools, and I’ve privately tutored many students. I’ve taught on sprawling 200+ acre campuses in buildings costing hundreds of millions of dollars, and I’ve taught in trailers that would barely keep out a strong gust of wind.

Likewise, I’ve experienced students from almost every background imaginable. I’ve taught students who were homeless and those whose parents who could afford $25,000+ tuition for a year of high school. I’ve taught students who’ve never traveled more than 100 miles from their northeast Georgia homes and those who traveled hundreds and even thousands of miles—from Mexico, Guatemala, China, Korea, Russia, Ukraine, Vietnam, Nigeria, Egypt, and so on—to sit in my classroom. Safe to say, I’ve just about seen it all in k-12 education.

In my quarter-century of teaching mathematics, there’s almost nothing in education that I can say all teachers, students, administrators, parents, and politicians agree upon, save this: we want our schools to be safe. One of the great tragedies of our time has been the wanton slaughter of helpless students, faculty, and staff in what could—and should—be one of the safest places in the world. Sadly, as we are in the shadows of another horrific school slaughter, most of what we are hearing would do virtually nothing to make our schools safer.

As about 100 of the 1700+ students at my high school walked out in protest on March 14 (for a moment I thought it was merely an over-zealous Pi-Day party), I mentioned to a colleague that the whole episode was little more than a ploy to elect more democrats. I found out a short while later that others thought exactly the same.

As most of us watching well knew, several reports have revealed that the student walkouts across the U.S. last Wednesday were far from “organic.” Sadly, liberal organizations across the U.S. have seized on the wicked act that took place at Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL in order to push the agenda of the modern left. Note that what we are currently witnessing with the left’s co-opting of American k-12 students is about much more than mere “gun control.”

As they push, prod, propagandize, and otherwise take advantage of youthful students across the U.S., taking guns out of the hands of law abiding Americans is only part of the end game for the American left. Make no mistake about it, young folks, though you are often hailed as our nation’s “greatest resource,” your safety is far from the primary concern when it comes to the American left.

If the left is so concerned with your safety, why for decades have they ignored or lied about science and sound morality and refused to stand up for the most innocent and defenseless among us? For all of your lives you have been deceived about the humanity of the unborn. Can you recall in your science classes where the humanity of the unborn has been a point of emphasis? If you took any form of sex education in a government school, did they tell you that once sperm fertilizes egg, the life of a human being is at stake?

When it comes to violence in our culture, abortion is something that must be honestly discussed. No one should be surprised that a nation which has killed over 50 million of its children in the womb is a violent nation in other ways as well. As Mother Teresa taught us,
I feel that the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a war against the child—a direct killing of the innocent child—murder by the mother herself. And if we accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another?
If today’s left is so concerned with your safety, why have they waged a decades-long war on the oldest, most foundational institution in the history of humanity? As is the case with life in the womb, all of your lives you have been lied to about family and marriage. Tragically, many—if not most—of you are daily experiencing the dismal consequences of these lies. Because of divorce and out-of-wedlock births, through no fault of their own, tens of millions of American school children today are growing up in a home without a mother or a father. It was not supposed to be this way! You deserve better!

As has been pointed out ad-nauseam, children who grow up in broken homes are much more likely to suffer a whole host of negative outcomes. One of the most common traits of the worst murderers in the history of the United States is a broken home. What’s more, American students are FAR more likely to suffer—even to the point of death—from violence and abuse in a broken home than they are from gun violence anywhere. Again, one of the most dangerous places for a child in America is at home with his mother and her live-in boyfriend. Many of you know this all too well.

If modern liberals are so concerned with your safety, why do they continue to lie about the dangers of a hedonistic, promiscuous sexual lifestyle? One of the most shocking statistics of the modern era is that 110 million Americans—over one-third of our population—are now saddled with a sexually transmitted disease. Tragically, many of you know this first hand.

Sexual promiscuity is killing far more Americans than are guns, but you almost never hear such from those who operate from a liberal worldview. What’s more, recent studies have shown—as if we needed more studies to reveal what sound morality has always taught—that teenagers who engage in risky sexual behaviors—especially homosexuality—are much more likely to put their health and lives in danger (along with the health and lives of others) than are those who are choosing to follow the moral precepts of their Creator.

Finally, if liberals are so concerned for your safety, why do they continue to lie about the presence of guns and the frequency of gun violence? The data on guns and violence is clear: some of the safest places in America are littered with guns, while some of the most dangerous places in America have the lowest rates of gun ownership and our strictest gun-control laws.

In addition to these dangerous lies, in order to push their godless, big-government agenda, today’s left—led by Hollywood, the establishment media, the Democrat Party, and yes, most of modern academia—has misled you about the role of good government, the value and purpose of education, the importance of hard work, the state of the earth’s climate, and even what it means to be a male and a female. Thus, for the sake of your spiritual, mental, and physical health, for the rest of your life I encourage you to “walk out” on the modern left. Don’t cast your vote for them, don’t purchase their entertainment, don’t engage their news and information, don’t heed their teaching, and most of all, don’t live out their lies.

(See this piece at American Thinker.)

Copyright 2018, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
www.trevorgrantthomas.com
Trevor is the author of the The Miracle and Magnificence of America
tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com