Richmond, Virginia – where it is a felony to commit animal cruelty, but where the Governor supports cruelty to babies through abortion.😡🙏🏻💔 Richmond is on fire right now! It’s time for revival!! Mourn and repent with us! (2 Chronicles 7:14!!) Visit DayOfMourning.org for your free tickets! #DayOfMourning
If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land. (2 Chronicles 7:14 KJV)
While Virginia approves of child murder after birth, they pass a law making animal cruelty a felony
Virginia to enact ‘Tommie’s Law,’ making animal cruelty a felony
As revealed by this 4 April 2019 Fox News article, the radical left has all sorts of compassion for beings (just as long as they are not newly-born humans).
Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam signed into law on Monday a bill that will make animal cruelty a felony in the commonwealth.
Dubbed “Tommie’s Bill,” the legislation is set to change current law — which, according to WWBT, states that those who abuse animals “can only be charged with a misdemeanor unless the animal dies.”
But after the Democratic governor signed the bill into law, animal cruelty will be considered a Class 6 felony, which is punishable by a fine of up to $2,500, and up to five years in prison.
The bill was named after Tommie, a male brindle pit bull who was found tied to a pole after being “covered in accelerant and intentionally lit on fire” in February.
How it is in women’s best interest to lower the not-very-high safety bar for the elective surgical procedure is anyone’s guess.
It’s also not clear how women will benefit from the elimination of a penal law that makes it a homicide to intentionally cause the death of an unborn child over 24 weeks gestation. The law now adds a felony criminal charge against the perpetrator of a violent attack on a pregnant woman that results in the death of her child. This works to protect women from domestic violence, which has been shown to increase when a woman is pregnant and the father resents the coming child.
New York law calls an unborn child killed by violent means in the third trimester a “person.” The governor’s budget bill amends as follows: “ ‘Person’ when referring to the victim of a homicide, means a human being who has been born and is alive.”
This designation of personhood will make no sense to a bereaved mother whose unborn child dies after a violent attack. It certainly didn’t to Michelle Wilkins, who was seven months pregnant when she was attacked with a butcher knife by a woman who lured Wilkins into her home by pretending to sell baby clothes. Though her baby died, her attacker wasn’t charged with murder thanks to Colorado’s laws.
Cuomo’s budget bill also eliminates legal protection for born children — those who have slipped through the abortionist’s fingers and inadvertently survived the procedure.
In second-trimester abortions, which are often performed after a fetus has reached the stage of viability, a fetus sometimes slips out intact through the birth canal before the abortionist has time to stop their heart with an injection. That baby then takes a breath, ready to fight for his or her life.
Instead, Cuomo wants to make the world a little less safe for women driven to abortion, and a lot less safe for babies, both born and unborn.
Something tells me that Democrats of the future will want to blame this on Republicans (just as they now want to push Jim Crow laws, their KKK, and Governor George Wallace away from the Democrat party).
As much as abortion (and, before it, slavery) stands central to the current Democrat ideology, why won’t they acknowledge that both of these Democrat-supporting concepts depend on designating a class of humans as non-human?
Both H 5127 and H 5125 would “eliminate any constitutional restrictions on late-term abortions” and “eliminate any constitutional restrictions on methods of abortion.”
It would also “undermine the authority of the State and the Department of Health from enacting and adopting constitutional restrictions on the performance of abortions at facilities where abortions are performed.” And, it would “require the State to pay for all abortions sought by Medicaid-eligible pregnant women and women covered by the “payer of last Resort” program.”
In addition, H 5127 would “repeal existing constitutional protection for a viable unborn child from criminal assaults on the child’s mother and H 5125 would substantially ‘water down’ the State’s parental consent statute by allowing consent to be obtained from persons who have no constitutional right to give consent (grandparents and adult siblings).”
“Neither H 5127 nor H 5125 could plausibly be regarded as merely ‘codifying’ the principles of Roe v. Wade,” states Rhode Island Right to Life.
Although Democrat Representative Joe Serodio pulled his support for Rhode Island’s third trimester abortion bill (that is, their abortion-up-to-birth bill), it passed. So his little protest had no effect when it came to the wholesale sell-out to Planned Parenthood’s abortion mill.
Vermont ‘right to abortion’ bill goes even further than New York’s
Keen to make New York and the racists and rapists in Virginia look good by comparison, the Vermont House just passed a sweeping and abominable abortion law which deems terminating a pregnancy at any stage and for any reason a “fundamental right.”
Unlike the Virginia proposal and New York’s recently passed law, Vermont makes no attempt to guild their law with a facade of women’s health or medical discretion. It’s a celebration of the positive good, not the necessary evil, of murdering a viable, sentient human being for the sheer ideological pleasure of it, or perhaps just the utility.
The New York law, unconditionally legalizing abortion through 24 weeks, past the early point of fetal viability and likely fetal pain, and authorizing physicians to sign off on an abortion up until the point of labor due to the mother’s “health,” may have seemed like a fluke. But between New York’s success in passing the law, allegedly “blue” Virginia seriously entertaining its own incarnation of the law, and now Vermont on the cusp of its own unrestrained abortion-on-demand law, one thing has become abundantly clear: The abortion lobby has abandoned its pursuit of public opinion. It is now putting all efforts into fortifying state laws against the overturn of Roe v. Wade.
The Democratic Party abandoned “safe, legal, and rare” long ago, but the average American has not and shows no signs of doing so. The overwhelming majority of Americans believe that first-trimester abortions should be legal in some capacity, especially for victims of rape or cases of deformity. But the statistics are clear: Americans absolutely do not view abortion as a positive good, but rather as a necessary evil, as a last resort they would happily restrict but would hesitate to make legally impossible early in a pregnancy.
The bill would require a health-care practitioner to “exercise the same degree of professional skill, care, and diligence to preserve the life and health of the child” as he or she would to “any other child born alive at the same gestational age.” The bill includes criminal penalties, a right of civil action for an affected mother and a mandatory reporting requirement for other health providers.
Opponents of the bill argued that it represented an unjustified attack on abortion rights, preventing doctors from exercising their best medical judgment and exposing them to possible lawsuits or prosecution.
Members of the Senate justified their vote with appeals to women’s health. However, I cannot understand how, once the child is born, the matter remains a matter of that woman’s health (unless one contends that allowing the baby to live would drive the woman insane).
If after-birth killing is permitted based on that person’s continued life will drive someone else insane and if we cannot discriminate on the basis of gender, then who will be safe from abortion?
Democrats lined up behind the Virginia abortion bill until the draconian measures in it were published
Virginia governor under fire for comments on late-term abortion bill that almost passed
As lightly covered by one 31 January 2019 CBS News article, it seems there was sufficient pushback from Governor Northam’s comments regarding the statements he made regarding the disposal of an infant.
A new bill proposed in the Virginia legislature would loosen restrictions on abortions during the third trimester of pregnancy, and allow abortions during the second trimester to take place outside hospitals. Virginia’s governor, Democrat Ralph Northam, stirred controversy on Wednesday when he suggested how such a late-term procedure could occur.
Under current Virginia law, abortions during the third trimester require a determination by a doctor and two consulting physicians that continuing the pregnancy would likely result in the woman’s death or “substantially and irremediably” impair her mental or physical health.
The bill, proposed in the Virginia House of Delegates by Democrat Kathy Tran, would require only one doctor to make the determination that the pregnancy threatens the woman’s life or health. The proposed legislation would also eliminate the requirement that abortions during the second trimester be performed in a state-licensed hospital.
Republicans narrowly control the House of Delegates, so the bill is unlikely to pass anytime soon. A subcommittee voted to table the bill in a 5-3 vote Monday.
Proponents of the Virginia legislation argue the bill, which is similar to a law recently passed in New York, is needed to protect women’s health. But opponents argue late-term abortions are rarely medically necessary, and the Virginia bill has provoked a swift backlash from conservatives. But that response was compounded by comments Northam made on WTOP radio Wednesday when asked about the bill.
“When we talk about third-trimester abortions, these are done with the consent of obviously the mother, with the consent of the physicians, more than one physician, by the way,” Northam said. “And it’s done in cases where there amy be severe deformities, there may be a fetus that’s non-viable. So in this particular example, if a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother. So I think this was really blown out of proportion.”
I fully believe that the revelations of Northam’s blackface indiscretions would never come to light had he never mentioned the tenets of this Virginia bill. To say it another way, the revelation of Northam having worn blackface was nothing but a smoke screen to deflect attention from the atrocious abortion bill.
Former Democrat top priority: doing it “for the children”
Surrounding herself with children, Nancy Pelosi tried to set a theme
In a 4 January 2007 New York Times article, Nancy’s focus on children became evident.
Most of the time, Congress looks as if it’s run by children.
But today, it actually was. Republicans brought at least 41 children and Democrats brought more than 75 little ones — children and grandchildren of the members — into the House chamber to witness Nancy Pelosi’s ascent to speaker. Mrs. Pelosi herself was buried under five grandchildren for most of the event, with Representative Rahm Emanuel’s three kids in seats nearby.
“For my grandchildren and all the children around the world,” Representative Carolyn McCarthy of New York said as she cast her vote for Mrs. Pelosi.
A few moments later, when Representative Jim McGovern of Massachusetts shouted out the new speaker’s name for his vote, his small children echoed: “Pelosi!”
Although this can be seen as little more a trope used in debates to sway the audience when other facts did not support your argument, at least it gave a nod to children and their importance to our future.
It looks like today’s Democrat has figured out that a child will not vote for the next 15 or so years; therefore, why not just kill the kid and let Planned Parenthood sell the parts?
Democrats decried the separation of illegal alien adults from the children with them
Since early May, 2,342 children have been separated from their parents after crossing the Southern U.S. border, according to the Department of Homeland Security, as part of a new immigration strategy by the Trump administration that has prompted widespread outcry.
On Wednesday, President Trump signed an executive order reversing his policy of separating families — and replacing it with a policy of detaining entire families together, including children, but ignoring legal time limits on the detention of minors.
Therefore, Democrats care if someone who criminally entered the nation is separated from the children who are with them; however, they do not care if a doctor kills a baby who has been born during a botched abortion.
Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen said at a June 18 press briefing: “The Obama administration, the Bush administration all separated families. … They did — their rate was less than ours, but they absolutely did do this. This is not new.”
Nielsen went on to explain that there is indeed something new, as we wrote in another article on this topic. Under a “zero tolerance policy” on illegal immigration announced by Attorney General Jeff Sessions in early April, the administration is now referring all illegal border crossings for criminal prosecution. By doing that, parents have been separated from their children, because children can’t be held in detention facilities for adults.
Accusations of racism swirled Wednesday during Michael Cohen’s congressional testimony, after a Democratic House freshman, Rashida Tlaib, appeared to accuse fellow lawmaker Mark Meadows of being racist.
Tlaib, D- Mich., was addressing the chamber when she turned her remarks to a Trump employee who’d been invited to the hearing by Meadows, R-N.C.
“Just because someone has a person of color, a black person working for them, does not mean they aren’t racist and it is insensitive that some would even say, the fact that someone would actually use a prop, a black woman in this chamber, in this committee, is alone racist in itself.”
An emotional Meadows fired back, saying Lynne Patton, a Trump aide and official at the Department of Housing and Urban Development, wanted to be present in support of President Trump. He asked that Tlaib’s remarks be stricken from the record.
“My nieces and nephews are people of color. Not many people know that. You know that, Mr. Chairman. And to indicate that I asked someone who is a personal friend of the Trump family, who has worked for him, who knows this particular individual (motioning to Cohen), that she’s coming in to be a prop — it’s racist to suggest that I asked her to come in here for that reason.”
Take in mind that Ms. Tlaib’s race and religion had everything to do with her election. Nobody should be surprised that Tlaib will view everything through a racial and religious prism and will not bother to do any homework (like researching the background of her “opponent” to find that he has people of color in his family. But those are just unimportant details to her when she is on the giving end of racial discrimination.
Freshman Democrat Rep. Ilhan Omar is once again facing criticism and charges of anti-Semitism from her own party’s leadership for comments about the political influence of Israel.
On Friday, the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Rep. Eliot Engel, D-N.Y., called on Omar to apologize for “a vile, anti-Semitic slur” she made at a town hall event in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday where she suggested Israel demands “allegiance” from American lawmakers.
“I want to talk about the political influence in this country that says it is OK for people to push for allegiance to a foreign country,” the congresswoman from Minnesota said in a video of the event shared on Facebook.
She was joined at the event by Reps. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich.; Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash.; and Mark Pocan, D-Wis.
Omar and Tlaib are the first Muslim women elected to Congress. Omar said she was concerned that because of their religion, “a lot of our Jewish colleagues, a lot of our constituents, a lot of our allies, (think) that everything we say about Israel (is) anti-Semitic because we are Muslim.”
She said the charge of anti-Semitism is “designed to end the debate” about Israel’s treatment of Palestinians.
Omar said she was “sensitive to” and “pained by” accusations of intolerance. But she added that “it’s almost as if every single time we say something, regardless of what it is we say,” she and Tlaib are “labeled.” And “that ends the discussion because we end up defending that and nobody ever gets to have the proper debate of what is happening with Palestine.”
Critics said Omar’s remarks played into old doubts about the loyalty of American Jews.
“The charge of dual loyalty not only raises the ominous specter of classic anti-Semitism, but it is also deeply insulting to the millions upon millions of patriotic Americans, Jewish and non-Jewish, who stand by our democratic ally, Israel,” the American Israel Public Affairs Committee said in a statement.
The charge of dual loyalty not only raises the ominous specter of classic anti-Semitism, but it is also deeply insu… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
Engel said it was “unacceptable and deeply offensive to question the loyalty of fellow American citizens because of their political views, including support for the Israel-U.S. relationship,” in a statement on Friday. “Worse, Representative Omar’s comments leveled that charge by invoking a vile anti-Semitic slur.
“This episode is especially disappointing following so closely on another instance of Ms. Omar seeming to invoke an anti-Semitic stereotype,” Engel said, referring to her controversial statement last month that money from AIPAC was used to buy support for Israel.
“Her comments were outrageous and deeply hurtful, and I ask that she retract them, apologize and commit to making her case on policy issues without resorting to attacks that have no place in the Foreign Affairs Committee or the House of Representatives,” he said.
Because Ms. Omar came from a district dominated by Somali immigrants, her view of Islam (and, therefore, of how Jews and Christians should be treated) probably falls in the mainstream of that district.
AOC fundraises to end U.S.-Israeli Relationship.
I am sad to say; they will raise monies for their agenda. It see… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
AOC re-enters the religious bigotry fray by lying about Jerry Falwell, Jr and Liberty University
As reported in one TownHall article, it seems that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortes felt that Falwell’s attendance at the CPAC was reason enough to lie about him by editing Dr. Falwell’s comments.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s latest falsehood was exposed on Monday when she tweeted several lies regarding previous statements given by Liberty University President Jerry Falwell.
AOC, as she is nicknamed, tweeted only part of a statement given in the past by President Falwell. AOC tweeted Falwell as saying, “I always thought that if more good people had concealed carry permits, then we could end those Muslims before they (unintelligible)…” What AOC left out was the part at the end of his sentence where Falwell said “before they walk in and kill us.” Falwell made the statement in the wake of the ISIS inspired 2015 terrorist attack in San Bernardino, CA and was urging his students to train to learn to how properly carry weapons so that Liberty students would not be a future target after yet another Radical Islamic terrorist attack inside the United States. As is said, half the truth is often a great lie but Cortez was not done.
AOC also said Falwell made those comments at CPAC this past weekend but, as noted above, Falwell made those comments at Liberty University and in the context of adult age students exercising their God-given Second Amendment rights.
What AOC could have reported on was that Liberty University served as satellite location for this year’s CPAC and it likely will not be the last. Speakers included Donald Trump, Jr., Charlie Kirk, Gary Sinise, Sean Spicer and many others. Thousands of students showed up during their time away from classes, and military veterans were given a place of recognition and honor.
There are no glory days for Democrats regarding bigotry — not then and not now
Prior to the Civil War, Democrats were the pro-slavery party that opposed Lincoln’s Republican Party. From the 1900’s through the 1960’s, Democrats were the party of Jim Crow laws in the South. It was Democrat Governor George Wallace that opposed the integration of schools in Alabama. Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia who not only served in the senate, but was also a grand dragon in the KKK.
Now, the Democrats will have to own anti-Semites like Ms. Omar, Ms. Tlaib, and Ms. Ocasio-Cortez.
Democrats return to their racist roots by refusing to sanction Rep Omar over multiple anti-Semitic comments
According to a Washington Post article, Democrats have refused to sanction Ms. Omar for her repeated anti-Semitic comments.
House Democrats argued acrimoniously Wednesday over whether to rebuke Rep. Ilhan Omar for alleged anti-Semitic remarks, forcing party leaders to confront a growing rift over race and religion that threatened to hamstring the newfound majority.
Omar (D-Minn.) suggested last week that Israel’s supporters have an “allegiance to a foreign country,” remarks that angered some Democrats who saw them as hateful tropes and pushed to condemn the freshman lawmaker. Her defenders argued that leadership was applying a double standard in singling out one of the two Muslim women in Congress.
In a closed-door Democratic caucus meeting Wednesday morning, lawmakers debated whether to vote on an anti-hate measure in response to Omar. The session quickly became rancorous, reflecting splinters over wider issues such as America’s long-standing support for Israel, the appropriate response to racial and religious grievances, and a new generation’s reliance on social media. Plans for a quick vote appeared to fade amid the uproar.
Democratic leaders openly fretted that the divisions would overshadow their legislative agenda, especially a planned Friday vote on a major campaign and ethics reform bill, just days after they launched a sweeping investigation focused on the president. Meanwhile, President Trump and Republicans sought to capitalize politically, eager to position their party as the more reliable ally of Israel — and the more appealing choice for Jewish voters who have long trended Democratic — ahead of the 2020 election.
Glenn Beck provides the most succinct summary of the confrontation surrounding the Covington Catholic High School kids
In a video posted at YouTube (https://youtu.be/da1Wy4O2shc), Glenn Beck of TheBlaze provided the most informative and least offensive summary of the event surrounding the Covington Catholic High School kids. Since he provided such a good summary, I felt that I should do my part to put the story in black-and-white media.
The following is a transcript of his video (as well as I could piece it together).
A group of boys from Covington Catholic High School in Kentucky, were finishing up after a long day. They attended the March for Life and they were given permission to do a little sightseeing before meeting up at the Lincoln Memorial to depart.
They arrived and they saw a pair of dueling demonstrations. There were two demonstrations when they arrived. A group of Native Americans had gathered as part of the Indigenous Peoples’ March (which the Indigenous Peoples’ March was about indigenous peoples, stolen land, and borders without any walls).
Then there was another group: the African-American street preachers. These guys — and I say this because I saw then daily for a long time in New York — they are truly violent, vile people. A very small group called the Black Hebrew Israelites.
So the boys stood there for a second and watch this show, really. They watched and they listened.
And the Black Hebrew Israelites screamed, not at the boys, but at the Native Americans — telling the Native Americans that they were evil for practicing their cultural beliefs.
It got so bad that some of the Native Americans walked up and pleaded with them to stop interrupting their gathering.
Here’s the videotape. Listen.
Black Hebrew Israelite (BHI) 1:
You are the children of Israel. Before you started worshiping totem poles, you were worshipping the true Living God.
Before you became an idol worshiper, you was worshipping the true and Living God. And this is the reason why this land was taken away from you, because you worship everything except the Most High. You worship everything in creation except the creator.
And that’s what we are here to tell you to do. We are here to tell you to wake up to the four corners of the earth. This is the truth of the Holy Bible. (Talking to a pair of Native Americans)
We don’t have a microphone, brother. This is a part of the freedom of speech and the freedom of religion.
These are two Native Americans who walk up peacefully and say, “Please stop.” They turn around and walk away.
… your religious philosophies and doctrines and start worshiping the True and Living Power, which His name is YaHaWa. That’s who’s the Most High God.
The Most High God. His name is YaHaWa. You’re not supposed to worship eagles, buffaloes, …
… rams, all types of animals …
That’s right. That’s right.
… the reason why the Lord took away your land.
Ok. Now, I want to make sure that you have that. If you don’t — if you’re not watching us on BlazeTV, let me describe the scene.
It’s very different than the scene you will see in just a few minutes later, because the Covington boys are not around. It’s very sparsely populated. You’re seeing a lot of the Native Americans there and they are trying to be kind, but it doesn’t get any less insulting than this. He calls them idol worshipers, totem pole, eagle, and buffalo worshipers until a Native American man was forced to come over and kindly plead with them to stop, which they didn’t.
The Black Hebrew Israelites then go on with their insults directed directly at the Native Americans.
Now, it is right about this time that the Israelites decided that they would then direct hostility over to another growing group. A group of boys who were from Covington that were standing close by, just watching and listening to these two groups.
Here it is.
We wouldn’t …
… you corny-assed Billy Bob. Yeah. Go talk to them with your Make America Great Again hats on. Unbelievable.
Tell them to come over here in the lion’s den instead of mocking over there. You lurid, dirty-ass crackers, your day coming. Your day coming. Your day coming. Cause your little dusty-asses wouldn’t walk down the street in a Black neighborhood and go walk up on nobody playin no games like that. Yeah. I will stick my foot in your little ass.
Ok. If you all saw the videos, which will all be available on BlazeTV and Blaze.com, you see the video. There’s only about (maybe it looks like 10), but in the first part of the video, you only see about four of them. Only one is wearing a Make America Great Again hat. Only one of them seems to be wearing it in the video that we are showing you. They’re still gathering, so there’s very few people there. But you’ll notice what the Black Israelites did. They were arguing with the Native Americans and then said, “Why are you arguing with us? You should be going after those little bastards over there wearing the Make America Great Again hats. Little corny-assed Billy Bob. Go talk to them dirty-ass crackers.
When the Black Israelites start to address them, you also see on the video — the boys do nothing.
They have their hands in their pockets. They are just watching from a distance. They all turn around and start to walk away.
Now, this is a fight between the attendees of an indigenous peoples’ march and their hecklers — the Black Hebrew Israelites.
Now it begins to get out of hand here, because the Native Americans have been kind. That’s where things really go awry. We’re not including this on air, because it is absolutely uneditable and unairable. It is full of profanity, so it would be just one giant bleep. But we will tweet this scene out to you.
This is when some of the Native Americans had had enough and they get into what looks like is going to become a street brawl between the two. And as it begins to get completely out of hand with several Native Americans returning shouts and profanity of their own, the Street Preachers result to saying, “Why are you attacking us?”
They redirect their racial insults and they point again to the Covington High School students to get them out of this jam with the Native Americans.
Here it is.
… always talking out they ass. Always talking out they ass. But you won’t say that to this peckerwood wearing the Make America Great Again hat.
That’s right. That’s right.
That’s right. That’s right.
Why don’t you practice …
That’s right. That’s right.
You don’t speak to him like that.
That’s right. That’s right.
Cause you’re an Uncle Tomahawk.
That’s right. That’s right.
I just want to make sure you understand what he was saying to the Native American. “Why aren’t you talking to the peckerwood wearing the Make America Great Again hat? You’re an Uncle Tomahawk. You’re all a bunch of Uncle Tomahawks. Why don’t you crack the head of that peckerwood with the Make America Great Again hat?
The media has completely dismissed this. Why, I wonder? This goes back and forth for over an hour with the Black Hebrew Israelites even resorting to calling other African Americans in the area the “n” word, because they don’t agree with them.
Now, it is about this time that the boys from Covington High School all began gathering in large numbers waiting for their ride home.
We’re going to play a small portion of what ensued next, because it leads directly to the incident that would immediately go viral, but keep it in mind for later (because I’m gonna come back to this clip — this specific line of insults toward the Covington again directly followed another instance where the Black Israelites were being confronted for their racism and bigotry.
… look all these dusty-ass crackers with that racist garbage on. Look at these dirty-ass crap. Can’t stand in the sun for five minutes.
Build that wall. Build that wall. Why don’t you build that dam wall? Ya’ll going to build that wall for Mexico!
Now, remember this clip — because I have to come back to it. By now, they boys from Covington were not only getting annoyed, but the entire area in a 300 meter radius was trying to get the Black Israelites to shut up. There was disunion and disharmony with everyone they touched.
The high school kids, in order to drown out the racism and bigotry decided that a pep rally would be louder than the hate coming from the Street Preachers. Now, this is something they do every year. They have done this for 10 years. Every year, they meet at the steps of the Lincoln Memorial and they shout their pep rally shouts.
This time, it worked also to help drown out the hate directed mainly towards Native Americans.
Here’s what happened.
[Applause and cheering.]
This is their prep. They had nothing to do with anything. They’ve done it for 10 years and it did drown out the hatred. Now, it’s a kid thing to do, but — honestly — if I were there, I would have said, “Thank God. Look at these kids.” It’s much better than listening to the bigotry coming from the mouths Black Israelite and some Native Americans who just lost their temper.
But right as this is going on, one of the Native American attendees of the indigenous peoples’ approaches the Covington group.
He walks away from the area that the Native American demonstration had gathered and walks right past the Black Israelites, directly into the middle of high schooler’s. Now he stops right in front of a 17-year-old, banging a drum a couple of inches from his face. This is the moment where it began.
Watch and listen.
Here comes Gad! Here comes Gad!
Look at their Make America Great Again hat. Look at they hat. Look at they hat. We not take it. That’s right Gad!
Beck: Notice the drum beats with the chants. The kids are doing their chants. They don’t know who this Native American is. They know that the Native Americans have been hassled by the Black Israelites. That they have watched and seen. So when the Native American comes over, they think that he’s on their side — trying to drown out the Black Israelites.
But did you notice what the Black Israelites were calling the Native American with a drum? They called him, “Gad.” They said, “Here comes Gad. Here comes Gad.”
“Gad?” Who the hell is “Gad?” You have to go to Isaiah, chapter 65. The Black Israelites still are continuing to insult the Native Americans. This is the name of a false god. When he says, “Oh, here comes Gad” he is mocking the Native Americans.
Again, the totem pole worshiper. Oh now here comes their false god with the drum.
Nobody in the media said anything about this. Nobody in the media had a problem with any of this. The Black Israelites continued to insult the Native Americans, but not a mention of any of it.
Now the Native American — his name is Nathan Phillips. He is a 30-year, left-wing activist and he marches right up to one of the students and gets right directly in his face.
Now the media left all of the priest’s stuff out. So you have no idea that these kids are actually helping the Native American.
How betrayed they must have felt.
So as Nathan Philips, the Native American, walks over with the drum, the Black Israelites are still calling them names. Calling Nathan Phillips “Gad,” the name of a false god. And they continue to insult them, but not a peep in the media.
Now, Nathan Philips initially told the Washington Post that the boys surrounded him as he was just preparing to leave.
There is zero evidence of this. In fact, our video shows the exact opposite.
He later contradicted this in an interview with the Detroit Free Press, admitting that it was he — no they — that initiated the contact.
He also stated that he did this because the Covington kids were attacking the Black Israelites.
This is clearly not what happened. Clearly, if you’ve watched the video, it is painfully obvious this is not what happened. The white boys stayed way away from the confrontation. It was a confrontation between the Black Israelites and the Native Americans. And it was the Black Israelites who are known by reporters in New York to be vile, despicable street thugs.
Now Phillip’s actions seem completely at odds with every other Native American present at the rally that day. There was only a handful that were nasty. The vast majority were either debating or getting confrontational with the Black Israelites. None of them were at odds with the high school kids.
Not a single Native American — not one.
One of the reasons for why some say Phillips decided to do what he did was due to the claim that the boys were saying, “Build that wall” and he felt insulted by that. Now remember Nathan Phillips is part of a group that is against the border wall, “No borders, no wall.” Ok.
That’s why he was protesting. He was protesting the border wall. So, of course, someone wearing a MAGA hat has to be for the border wall. That’s why he targeted that boy.
Now, in interview after interview, he said that they were chanting, “Build that wall.”
In zero instances that we have found on videotape (and we have watched it all) — zero times have the boys said, “Build that wall.” But we did find it and I played it for you earlier. The organizer of the indigenous peoples’ march claims I heard that. The New York Times was quick to point out “that was ‘Build that wall.’ It’s a rallying cry of supporters of Mr. Trump.” Which brings me back to the video I told you to remember. Listen to it, but this time, listen to the Black Israelite leader and what he’s saying in the background to the Native Americans.
… look all these dusty-ass crackers with that racist garbage on. Look at these dirty-ass crap. Can’t stand in the sun for five minutes.
Build that wall. Build that wall. Why don’t you build that dam wall? Ya’ll going to build that wall for Mexico!
He’s saying to the indigenous people, “Build that wall! Build that wall! Why don’t you build that wall? They’re so worried about the people from Mexico.”
So it was said, but it was said by the Black Israelites, not one of the Covington kids. Out of all of the video evidence — from the entire event — the only time “Build that wall” was ever heard was when it was said by the leader of the Black Israelites.
The media never did any of this work. They never looked at the entire body of evidence to find out what really happened. They saw young, white boys from a Christian school wearing a MAGA hat and they instantly handed out a verdict of guilty.
Did Nathan Phillips do this as an activist looking for exposure? Well, I will tell you about that old man who cried on TV. Here’s what he said in an interview. Now that you have the video and you’ve seen it with your own eyes — exactly what happened — now let me repeat what Nathan Phillips said happened. He told the Washington Post and then the Detroit Free Press:
Phillips words, read by Beck:
… They (the Covington boys) witnessed these individuals (the Black Hebrew Israelites group) on their soapbox about what they had to say. Well, they didn’t agree with it and they got offended. They were in were in the process of attacking these four black individuals. I was there. I witnessed all of this and it kept going on and on and escalating.
It just got to a point where you have to do something or you’ll walk away, you know? You see something that’s wrong and you’re faced with that choice of right or wrong and that is the moment that I knew I had to put myself between beasts and prey. These young men were beastly to these old Black individuals and that was their prey. I stood between them and so they needed their pound of flesh and they were looking at me for my pound of flesh.
It was ugly what these kids were involved in. It was racism. It was hatred. It was scary.
I mean, if you go back and look at the lynchings that were done in America, you’d see the faces on those people. The glee and the hatred on their faces. That’s what these faces looked like. The Black Israelites were saying some harsh things, but some of it was true.
These young, white American kids who were being taught in their Catholic school, their doctrine, their truth, and when they found out there’s more truth out there than what they’re being taught. They were offended, they were insulted, they were scared, and that’s how they responded. One thing that I was taught in my Marine Corp training is that a scared man will kill you. And that’s what these boys were. They were scared. I’m still scared. I’m still feeling vulnerable, but I will not back down.
Jesus performs his first miracle at a wedding in Cana — John 2:1-11
1On the third day there was a wedding in Cana of Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there; 2and both Jesus and His disciples were invited to the wedding. 3When the wine ran out, the mother of Jesus said to Him, “They have no wine.” 4And Jesus said to her, “Woman, what does that have to do with us? My hour has not yet come.”
Since this wedding was in Cana, Jesus had grown up just miles away. Now Jesus and his first five disciples found themselves at the wedding of family or a close friend. Sadly, whoever invited them now was about to suffer a great embarrassment.
Previous to the miracle described below, Jesus had performed no miracles. By performing this miracle, Jesus began to claim his role as Messiah. By fulfilling the request of his mother, He honored the family (the first institution God created for humans on Earth).
5His mother said to the servants, “Whatever He says to you, do it.” 6Now there were six stone waterpots set there for the Jewish custom of purification, containing twenty or thirty gallons each. 7Jesus said to them, “Fill the waterpots with water.” So they filled them up to the brim. 8And He said to them, “Draw some out now and take it to the headwaiter.” So they took it to him. 9When the headwaiter tasted the water which had become wine, and did not know where it came from (but the servants who had drawn the water knew), the headwaiter called the bridegroom, 10and said to him, “Every man serves the good wine first, and when the people have drunk freely, then he serves the poorer wine; but you have kept the good wine until now.”
Jesus performed this miracle not to quench his own thirst, but to satisfy the needs of others (like his anxious mother, the conquered Israelites of Cana, and two families who would have been embarrassed had the wine run out). And this wasn’t a watery wine. Not to repeat the words of the headwaiter too much, but this was the good stuff. In fact, it was probably the best wine this side of heaven.
By turning this water into wine, Jesus took his first steps toward the cross. When He lifted the cup of this wine, did He taste the blood flowing from His scourging?
11This beginning of His signs Jesus did in Cana of Galilee, and manifested His glory, and His disciples believed in Him.
His disciples believed — and hopefully you will also.
This is the tale of two lectures at Wheaton College, a Christian evangelical college in the suburbs of Chicago. One was given in September 2017 and the other in November 2018. Though only a year apart, the responses to the two presentations were universes apart. The reaction is very telling and tragic for those who believe that a Christian education is different than a secular one.
The first speech was given by Dr. George Yancy, a philosophy professor at Emory University (huge thanks to Jamie Dean at World Magazine for excellent article on this and uncovering actual audio recording). It was sponsored by Wheaton’s Philosophy department and held in the esteemed Billy Graham Center on campus. It was entitled: “A Post-Racial America? White Gazes and Black Bodies”. It can only be described as an expletive-laced, pornographic, racist, anti-biblical screed. His theme? “To be white is to be racist.” Listen to these shocking excerpts from that speech here.
There was no backlash from Wheaton’s leadership. There were no letters sent out by any staff or student government leaders denouncing him or raising concerns about the hostile, f-bomb-laden speech. There was only internal praise by the school’s own Wheaton Record.
Then there’s that second speech. Wheaton College Republicans courageously invited me to speak about abortion and race. Keep in mind, there’s never been anyone—ever—to address racism and the abortion industry at Wheaton. In fact, no one has addressed the issue of abortion at their thrice weekly chapels but once (briefly) in many years. Wheaton, founded by slavery abolitionists, doesn’t lead whatsoever on the abolition of abortion. One would think a school that (sort of) espouses a prolife worldview, at least in text on its website (“followers of Jesus Christ will uphold the dignity of human beings, from conception until death…”), would encourage students to put that into action by attending the March for Life Chicago or volunteering at a local pregnancy resource center.
Needless to say, I did not speak in the center named after the school’s most famous alum. But I did speak to a standing-room only audience in another Wheaton lecture hall. My multimedia talk was entitled “Black Lives Matter In and Out of the Womb”; it was an expletive-free, fact-based, statistics-driven, Biblically-rooted, deeply personal and grace-filled discussion on the systemic racism of the abortion industry and the hypocrisy of the pro-abortion#BlackLivesMatter movement. As an adoptee and adoptive father who was conceived in rape, I challenged students to see the most vulnerable, the most marginalized, and the most powerless among us as having equal intrinsic worth and God-given Purpose.
Six days later, I was severely denounced by a campus-wide email sent out by two Wheaton staff members and signed by three student government leaders. My entire message was branded as “offensive rhetoric” that made “many students, staff and faculty of color” feel “unsafe” on their campus. And now, the school has cancelled the College Republicans’ next event, because leadership claims their speaker approval process needs to change so Wheaton students aren’t exposed to such factivism (aka truth) again.
While this shows that at least one Christian college has gone full-bore liberal instead of full-bore Christian, this will not be the first time a faithful Christian and pro-lifer has been discriminated against. For examples, refer to my blog posts in
Since Wheaton College so flagrantly contradicted the examples of the Old Testament and the commands of the New Testament, maybe a review of how Christians must not discriminate racially and must not discriminate among Christians is in order.
Galatians 3:28 tells us that “(t)here is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” In other words, there are no divisions between Christians (no matter the gender, race, or financial status) due to the uniting properties of Jesus Christ. Let me be more clear: Christ makes all Christians into one body. We must not discriminate against the other parts of our own body any more than the mouth should denounce the nose.
In the Old Testament, we receive the example of a leader who did not consider skin tone and a God who stood by his prophet. In Numbers 12:1, we find …”Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses because of the Cushite woman he had married” … In verses 9 and 10, God shows his backing for Moses when we see …”the anger of the Lord burned against them and He departed. But when the cloud had withdrawn from over the tent, behold, Miriam was leprous, as white as snow.” From this, we see that God stood against Miriam’s bigoted disapproval of Moses’ black wife. Not only that — God punished Miriam for her bigotry.
Additionally, Christians are commanded to “(b)e devoted to one another in brotherly love; give preference to one another in honor.” We should love other Christians like brothers and put the needs of other Christians over our own. Similar commands can be found in 1 Thessalonians 5:11; John 13:34; Galatians 5:13; Ephesians 4:2 and 32; 1 Peter 4:8; and 1 John 4:7.
An Old Testament example of a man who was devoted to his fellow believers comes to us through Joseph, who — when presented with a chance to get back at people who sold him into slavery and thereby caused him to go to prison — said “you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good” (Genesis 50:20).
Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and that you are not your own? For you have been bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body.
Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and that yo… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
Now may the God who gives perseverance and encouragement grant you to be of the same mind with one another according to Christ Jesus, so that with one accord you may with one voice glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Romans 15:5-6 NASB
Now may the God who gives perseverance and encouragement grant you to be of the same mind with one another accordin… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
And He has said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for power is perfected in weakness.” Most gladly, therefore, I will rather boast about my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may dwell in me.
And He has said to me, "My grace is sufficient for you, for power is perfected in weakness." Most gladly, therefore… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
But I do not consider my life of any account as dear to myself, so that I may finish my course and the ministry which I received from the Lord Jesus, to testify solemnly of the gospel of the grace of God.
But I do not consider my life of any account as dear to myself, so that I may finish my course and the ministry whi… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…