Freedom of Speech

Freedom of Speech

Reading Time: 9 minutes

Above image by Christopher Ross from Pixabay

Can You Speak Out?

Many universities and college classes foster ideological clubs, students who are quick and eager to devour any that oppose their views. Unfortunately, this has become the norm as opposed to a free exchange of ideas and opinions that cultivate thoughtful dialogues and debates. Moreover, many students, especially the minority conservative students, fear voicing their opinion because of the cancel-culture prevalent in today’s liberal universities. 

This problem goes well beyond our universities. Elon Musk has been very critical of the mega social platforms and their censorship. Musk has almost 8 million followers on Twitter, and he asked them if a new social platform was needed. “Given that Twitter serves as the de facto public town square, failing to adhere to free speech principles fundamentally undermines democracy. What should be done?”((Khaled, Fatma. “Elon Musk Asks if ‘New Platform’ Needed as Twitter Slammed on Free Speech.” Newsweek, 26 March 2022. 1 April 2022))

Google, Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube (owned by Google) yield massive power over American citizens and their freedom of expression.

The recent controversy over the transgender Penn State University swimmer Lea Thomas((Johnson, Greg. “Thomas concludes spectacular season with national title.” Penn Today, March 20th 2022. March 23rd 2022)) is a perfect example I addressed in a previous post. School officials told the girls on the team if they spoke negatively about the controversy, they would be removed from the swim team and never get a job offer. 

“Those who call for censorship in the name of the oppressed ought to recognize it is never the oppressed who determine the bounds of censorship.” – Human rights activist Aryeh Neier

The Penn State officials displayed cancel culture at its best. It took former Olympic medalist Nancy Hogshead-Makar to speak out for the young women on the Penn State swim team. The girls told her that if the media reached out, they were warned by school officials not to talk to them. Through the Olympian, the girls said, “We support Lia’s mental health, and we ask Penn and the Ivy League to support ours as well.”1 

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.” – George Orwell

Yes, this is a complex issue. However, it should be evident to all that have given this any consideration; men should compete against men, and women should compete against women in sports. Sounds logical and straightforward; yet, universities and our government create policies that do not consider the consequences of transgenders competing. Who is paying the price? The athletes who are not transgender, in particular women. 

Open your mouth for the mute, for the rights of all who are destitute. Open your mouth, judge righteously, defend the rights of the poor and needy. – Proverbs 31:8-9

But imagine for a moment if you had a good friend or family member who is transgender; most of us would approach the issue differently because it is not an issue anymore but a person. When faced with that person, it should change your heart, but not your theology. 

Let your speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how you ought to answer each person. – Colossians 4:6

Simple Science

What is the solution for this complicated topic? It is not to allow women carte blanche to compete against women; the transgenders who are in the process of hormone therapy and taking testosterone will have a significant advantage in competitive sports. 

The Mayo Clinic reports women to expect the following when taking masculinizing hormone therapy. 

  • Stopping your period. 
  • Voice deepening. 
  • Facial and body hair growth.
  • Body fat redistribution. 
  • Clitoral enlargement and vaginal atrophy. 
  • Increased muscle mass and strength. 

“You’ll begin masculinizing hormone therapy by taking testosterone. Typically, your doctor will prescribe a low dose and slowly increase the dosage over a period of months. Testosterone is given either by injection or a gel applied to the skin.”2

I am not sure what the solution is concerning transgenders in sports, but I know it is not to shut down the opinions and thoughts of anyone who disagrees with you. 

Have I then become your enemy by telling you the truth? – Galatians 4:16

“This is slavery, not to speak one’s thought.” – Euripides

The system of inclusion and tolerance espoused by the left threatens women to remain silent, which should tell you something is dreadfully wrong, and most Americans know it. Progressives know they dare not define what a woman is for fear of retribution, but also, since they define gender as shifting, fluid, adaptable to the individual, they can’t explain the label of a woman

“The basic tool for the manipulation of reality is the manipulation of words. If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.” – Philip K. Dick

This became glaringly obvious when Senator Marsha Blackburn asked Supreme Court nominee Judge Ketanji Brown to define what a woman is; Judge Brown couldn’t. Senator Blackburn responded, “The fact that you can’t give me a straight answer about something as fundamental as what a woman is underscores the dangers of the kind of progressive education that we are hearing about,” she said. “Just last week, an entire generation of young girls watched as our taxpayer-funded institutions permitted a biological man to compete and be a biological woman in the N.C.A.A. swimming championships. What message do you think this sends to girls who aspire to compete and win in sports at the highest levels?”3 

For some, the answer is as unmistakable as a penis caught in a zipper (granted, only 1/2 of my readers will truly appreciate that example), but Judge Brown couldn’t answer the question. Why? Because you can’t pin gender on anyone, it is fluid and is entirely up to the individual, according to liberal progressives. I would then ask, how can we create laws to protect women’s rights if we can’t even define what a woman is? Yet this fundamental truth is a severe dilemma for the progressives, but they will not even acknowledge it. Furthermore, if you quote the science of XX chromosomes in the gender debate, you will be silenced for hate speech and then shamed into submission. 

“I may not agree with you, but I will defend to the death your right to make an ass of yourself.”– Oscar Wilde

Diminishing Freedoms

A new poll by the New York Times and Siena College found cancel culture, or more specifically, the diminishing freedoms of our First Amendments rights, conscious in the minds of Americans. For example, only 34% of Americans feel all Americans fully enjoy the freedom of speech.((The Editorial Board. “America Has a Free Speech Problem.” New York Times, New York, 18 March 2022, 24 March 2022)) Furthermore, 84% said the lack of free speech has become a ‘very serious’ or ‘somewhat serious’ problem. “Americans do not speak freely in everyday situations because of fear of retaliation or harsh criticism.”4

PragerU  has certainly experienced that on Youtube, now owned by Google. Here is the list of videos that Youtube has removed.  PragerU is not alone in this; Youtube has removed many conservative videos because they don’t fall in step with the party line. 

Just before the elections of 2020, both Twitter and Facebook censored the New York Post on the story of Hunter Biden’s laptop and financial dealing in Ukraine and China. Now, two years later, the censored story we find had teeth. 

George Washington University Law Professor Jonathan Turley said there is a “view that an indictment against Hunter Biden is likely.”5He was reacting to The New York Times story confirming the legitimacy of the Hunter Biden Laptop. Did you hear any of this on CNN, NBC, USAToday? 

The New York Times reported, “…prosecutors had investigated payments and gifts Mr. Biden or his associates had received from foreign interests, including a vehicle paid for using funds from a company associated with a Kazakh oligarch and a diamond from a Chinese energy tycoon. Prosecutors also sought documents related to corporate entities through which Mr. Biden and his associates conducted business with interests around the world.”6 The Times also reported, “Those emails were obtained by The New York Times from a cache of files that appears to have come from a laptop abandoned by Mr. Biden in a Delaware repair shop.”6

As the social media powerhouses Facebook, Youtube, and Twitter continue to filter to fit their view, ensuring political correctness, our freedom of speech slowly evaporates. 

“Political correctness is tyranny; just tyranny with manners.” – Charlton Heston

The New York Times reported when Russia blocked Facebook and Twitter last month, it startled Chinese Internet users. Many did not realize that Russia allowed that kind of Western influence in their country. “When Russia blocked Facebook and limited Twitter this month, many Chinese internet users were surprised. Wait a moment, they said: The Russians could use Facebook and Twitter? Both social media platforms have been banned in China since 2009.”7

“Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down the path of increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear.” – Harry S. Truman.

Just a few years ago, Russia began to learn from the best (China) on how to control its country’s population and suppress undesired thoughts or words that some of the more independent thinkers might consider. Unfortunately, the invasion of Ukraine has only hastened the desire and implementation among the Russian Olgargy and government authorities. 

In 2015 China’s censorship czars spoke to leaders in Russia on how to control social media and the flow of information. Lu Wei told his audience at the forum, “Unlimited freedom can lead to terrorism,” and Fang Binxing known in China as the father of the Great Firewall said, “If borders exist, they exist in cyberspace too.”7

Under Xi and Lu, China has advanced the “doctrine of cyberspace sovereignty,” which would see the Internet turned into national Internets, in other words, country-specific, each with its own controls and boundaries. In large part, many countries have already experienced that, and our own country is making inroads toward that model. Lu Wei has since fallen out of favor. Found guilty of corruption in China, he took millions in bribes, but his ideas continue to influence China’s policies.((Griffiths, James. Jiang, Steven. “Former Chinese internet czar Lu Wei sentenced to 14 years in prison for bribery.” CNN. 26 March 2019, 26 March 2022))

Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect. Romans 2:12

The editorial Board of the New York Times and the Pew Research Center reports that America is experiencing a “…a crisis of confidence around one of America’s most basic values. Freedom of speech and expression is vital to human beings’ search for truth and knowledge about our world. A society that values freedom of speech can benefit from the full diversity of its people and their ideas. At the individual level, human beings cannot flourish without the confidence to take risks, pursue ideas and express thoughts that others might reject.”8

“The only thing that should be upheld at all costs and without qualification is the right of free expression, because if that goes, then so do all other claims of right as well.” – Atheist Christopher Hitchens

I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speakMatthew 12:26

Have you experienced this yet? If not, your time will come. Here in America you are losing our fundamental right to speak out against what is considered mainstream thought. If your opinion does not fall in step with what is deemed tolerant, politically correct, inclusive, and gender-free, you will be silenced, shamed, and shunned.

We can’t debate bad ideas with good ones without freedom of speech. Abolishing the freedom of speech is the tool of dictators, oppressors, and tyrants. You should be concerned with our country’s direction concerning freedom of speech. If not, the time will come when you are concerned it will be too late, and your voice will be silenced. After that, your vote. 

Creative Commons License
Freedom of Speech by James W Glazier is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

  1. Boas, Phil. “If Lia Thomas’ teammates can’t raise concerns about transgender athletes, we all lose.” Arizona Republic, March 21st 2022, March 23rd 2022 []
  2. Mayo Clinic Staff, “Masculinizing hormone therapy,” Mayo Clinic, 21 July 2021 []
  3. Weisman, Jonathan. “A demand to define ‘woman’ injects gender politics into Jackson’s confirmation hearings.” New York Times, New York, 23 March 2022, 25 March 2022 []
  4. The Editorial Board. “America Has a Free Speech Problem.” New York Times, New York, 18 March 2022, 24 March 2022 []
  5. Fox News Staff, “Jonathan Turley on why NY Times finally acknowledged Hunter Biden’s laptop was authentic.” Fox News, 22 March 2022, 26 March 2022 []
  6. Benner, Katie. Vogel, Kenneth. Schmidt, Michael. “Hunter Biden Paid Tax Bill, but Broad Federal Investigation Continues.” New York Times, New York, 16 March 2022, 26 March 2022 [] []
  7. Yuan, Li. “China’s Information Dark Age Could Be Russia’s Future.” New York Times, New York, 18 March 2022, 25 March 2022 [] []
  8. The Editorial Board, “America Has a Free Speech Problem.” New York Times, 18 March 2022. 26 March 2022 []
Christianity and Circumstantial Evidence

Christianity and Circumstantial Evidence

Reading Time: 7 minutes

Above Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay

What Teens Notice

Over the years, as I taught Jr. High, I have taken the opportunity to ask my students questions that would encourage them to think. One of the questions I have asked repeatedly over the years was, “If you could ask God any one thing, what would you ask him?” One of the more common replies has been, “How long will the human race last?” Notice it was not IF they will last, but how long. This reply gives us some insight into how teens view the world. Despite their obsession with how they dress in the morning, or how well their favorite sports team did in the playoffs, some do have an insightful understanding of the plight of our civilization. 

This reply has not come from students attending Christian schools but Jr. High students in public schools. It has become evident to them that something is broken, and despite adults’ efforts to fix it, there is not any light at the end of the tunnel. It has been a few years since I have taught Jr. High, but the broken world has become even more evident to anyone who pays attention to the world around them. 

It is true, many teens may not know who the current vice president is. However, as they read their history books, hear, and watch about our current world state of affairs, it has become apparent that humans, on the whole, are in a downward spiral that will only have one possible outcome. That much should be evident for anyone who looks at the world around them. 

Yet, over the years, in some Christian circles, there seems to be the belief humanity is getting better. Some believe that Christians will usher in heaven, and without our efforts to create some utopia or heaven on earth, Christ will not return. This view is called Postmillennialism and is an in-house debate among Christians, but it is fair to say that theologians and those who study Eschatology don’t agree. 

Most teens and young adults probably don’t think about it in these terms, but they are simply making a prediction to determine an outcome using evidence they have seen or experienced.

Types of Evidence

When you find yourself on a jury, the judge may take a few moments and explain the difference between the two types of evidence you might encounter. Direct and circumstantial evidence are types of evidence you have probably heard of. People often think that circumstantial evidence is weak or somehow less valid than direct evidence, but many successful criminal cases have been prosecuted with circumstantial evidence alone. 

The metaphor “smoking gun” refers to circumstantial evidence and is more powerful than many give credit. An example of circumstantial evidence would be if you walked into a room and saw a man holding a bloody knife, standing over another man who happened to be dead on the floor due to stab wounds. Of course, you did not see him murder the man on the floor, but the placement of the standing man and his knife suggests it. 

On the other hand, direct evidence would be if you walked into the room and actually saw the man with the knife stab the man on the floor. Obviously, the direct evidence is more powerful, but cumulative circumstantial evidence can, in some ways, be just as compelling. 

Say the two men had a history of violence, and the man with the knife had threatened the dead man the day before, which was witnessed by others; now you have significant circumstantial evidence. 

You may remember two well-known cases which were successfully prosecuted with circumstantial evidence. Timothy McVeigh, who was found guilty of bombing the federal building in Oklahoma City, and Scott Peterson, convicted of murdering his wife and unborn son in Modesto, California, in 2002. 

Circumstantial evidence can include fingerprints, tape recordings, video recordings, photos, letters, documents, and many other types of physical evidence. In some ways, circumstantial evidence can have an advantage over direct evidence since it can come from multiple sources, which fortify each other. If the case relies on a single piece of direct evidence that is discredited, the case is lost.

Evidence for the Resurrection

The evidence for the resurrection is circumstantial but powerful. So powerful that millions have dedicated their lives to Christ, and some have even given up their life for Him. 

Nevertheless, I don’t think that being a martyr is evidence for the truth of a religion. Martyrdom is just evidence that the individual believes wholeheartedly in their cause. Indeed, the Muslims who flew into the twin towers believed in Islam and believed they were on their way to paradise, but that does not make it true.

Some brief evidence that points to the truth of the resurrection would include:

  • The first witnesses of the risen Christ were women. That in itself is amazing since women were 2nd class citizens; a women’s testimony was not even considered admissible in court in ancient Jerusalem.
  • For centuries, following the resurrection, tens of thousands gave their lives to Christ and were willing to die for their belief. As I said above, this is not evidence for the truth, but what is significant is that the disciples were eyewitnesses. They were the eyewitness to the truth of the resurrection and were willing to die for what they had witnessed with their own eyes. That cannot be emphasized enough; the disciples were willing to die for what they saw, not just what they believed to be true.
  • We have testimony from multiple independent eyewitness sources. The New Testament is compiled from 27 different documents and nine different authors.
  • The testimony contains events or details that are embarrassing to the authors. If the resurrection event were a story that some made up, then most often, those telling the story would include false information that would put the authors in a positive light. The opposite is true, as the authors document events that show how they acted stupidly, selfishly, and cowardly.
  • Do we have any enemy accounts? Yes: Josephus’, Tacitus, Pliny the Younger, and several other offer historical reports.
  • New Testament writers include divergent details. For example, Matthew says one angel was at the tomb while John says there were two. How would this strengthen an eyewitness account? Like any event with multiple eyewitness accounts, they do not necessarily agree on the details. Had the authors of the New Testament collaborated to match their accounts, it would have been obvious and damaged their testimony.

The list above is far from complete, but it should give you an idea that the evidence for the resurrection is quite powerful. 

Evidence from Real Life Stories

We use evidence every day, every hour, every moment of our lives, and how we weigh the evidence presented determines our actions, from opening the fridge to get the cold milk for our cereal or opening the freezer to thaw the ground beef. Some of you may have experienced opening a refrigerator that was not working; the stench can be overpowering and hang in the air for hours, something not soon forgotten. However, if we did not have the consistent, day-to-day experience of successfully using the fridge to keep things cold, we would not use it. 

Sometimes the evidence we have is a singular life-changing event. So impactful, nothing is the same after the experience. Unbroken, by Laura Hillenbrand, is an extraordinary story of a World War II bombardier Louis Zamperini, shot down and captured by the Japanese. His distinct, permanent, transformative event occurred after his horrific experiences as a Japanese prisoner during World War II. 

It is truly amazing what humans can endure by willpower alone, but what is even more awe-inspiring is the healing power and saving grace of our Lord. Zamperini suffered greatly at the hands of the Japanese, but one particular Japanese prison guard, nicknamed “The Bird,” was the worst of all. The Bird’s beatings, whippings, and inhuman abuse to Zamperini lasted till the end of the war.

When Louis returned home, his life began to fall apart as he drank himself into oblivion, suffering from horrible flashbacks and nightmares. Louis was on a mission to hunt down and kill the Bird when his wife talked him into attending a Billy Graham crusade. It was there that Louis Zamperini gave his life to Christ and experienced nothing short of a miraculous healing; he never suffered from another flashback or nightmare, he stopped drinking, and God healed his marriage.

Louis had no prior experience to base his miraculous healing. When he gave his life to Christ that night in a hot sweltering tent, it was not like opening the fridge for the umpteenth time with an expectation of pulling out a cold soda. He had no expectations at all, only a compelling notion that he had to walk forward and accept Christ in his life. Unlike the old T.V. show, Let’s Make a Deal, where constants had to choose what was behind door number 1, 2, or 3, knowing something was behind those doors, Louis had no such anticipation. He only knew he had to walk through that door but was oblivious to the instantaneous, miraculous healing behind it.

Louis’s experience is direct evidence, unmistakable because of his transformed life, and his is not the only story of an altered life. The 2017 movie The Case for Christ is just one more example. The evidence is there; you don’t need blind faith or to take a leap of faith. All you need to do is follow where the evidence leads you. 

While we are often willing to spend time reading the Bible, praying, or participating in church programs and services, few of us recognize the importance of becoming good Christian case makers.― J. Warner Wallace, A Homicide Detective and author of Cold-Case Christianity.

…there are highly intelligent, eminent scientists, such as Professor William Phillips (Physics Nobel Prizewinner 1998), Professor John Polkinghorne FRS (Quantum Physicist, Cambridge), and the current Director of the National Institute of Health and former Director of the Human Genome Project, Dr. Francis Collins (to name just three) who,…without either embarrassment or any sense of irrationality or absurdity, affirm their belief in the supernatural, and in particular in the resurrection of Christ, which they regard as the supreme evidence for the truth of the Christian worldview. – John Lennox, Professor of Mathematics at Oxford University.

Creative Commons License
Circumstantial Evidence by James W Glazier is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Men vs. Women and the Transgender Issue

Men vs. Women and the Transgender Issue

Reading Time: 4 minutes

Transgenders in Competitive Sports

Pennsylvania State reported on March 20th for the first time, a Quaker won an individual national championship, Senior Lia Thomas.((Johnson, Greg. “Thomas concludes the spectacular season with national title.” Penn Today, March 20th 2022. March 23rd 2022)) Is the name familiar? It should be, Lea Thomas has been all over the news, not because she is a Quaker who won a national championship, but because Lea Thomas, a transgender, is a biological male competing against females.

In the Penn State article Greg Johnson wrote, “At the Ivy League Championships, where she was named High point Swimmer of the Meet, Thomas won the 100 free, 200 free, and 500 free, and was part of the 400-relay team that won gold in a pool and school record time of 3:17.80.”1

It does not make sense to have men competing in what is supposed to be a women’s competition because of obvious physiological advantages. The stats may vary several percentage points depending on your source, but in general, women have 40% less upper body strength and 35% less lower body strength. In addition, women have smaller hearts and smaller lungs than men; consequently, they have a lower capacity to produce oxygen when competing. Women’s legs are shorter and have more estrogen and less testosterone.

Lia Thomas is not the first transgender to compete and cause a stir. Mack Beggs, a transgender wrestler won the Texas girls title, two years in a row just a few years ago. It was reported Beggs was in the process of transitioning from female to male (which is impossible) and was taking testosterone while competing against other female wrestlers. The AP in Cypress Texas reported, “It was his steroid therapy treatments while wrestling girls that stirred a fierce debate about competitive fairness and transgender rights last season. His march to a state championship was dogged by a last-minute lawsuit that tried to stop him.”2

More recently, the BBC reported Laurel Hubbard became the first transgender to compete in the Olympics. “The 43-year-old became eligible to compete at the Olympics when the International Olympic Committee (IOC) in 2015 changed its rules allowing transgender athletes to compete as a woman if their testosterone levels are below a certain threshold. Testosterone is a hormone that increases muscle mass.”3

What About Hormone Treatments?

Granted, athletes’ testosterone levels may be below the required thresholds to participate in certain competitions, but it is obvious those born male have an unfair advantage over those born females due to increased bone and muscle density after puberty. Furthermore, those transitioning from female to male and taking testosterone as part of the process also have chemically enhanced advantages. The British Journal of Medicine reported transwomen were still 12% quicker than their female competitors even after 2 years of hormone treatment.((Roberts TA, Smalley J, Ahrendt D
Effect of gender affirming hormones on athletic performance in transwomen and transmen: implications for sporting organisations and legislators
British Journal of Sports Medicine 2021;55:577-583.))

Finally, the International Olympic Committee in 2021 updated its guidelines concerning testosterone threshold requirements. “The IOC is therefore not in a position to issue regulations that define eligibility criteria for every sport, discipline, or event across the very different national jurisdictions and sports systems.”4 In other words, the International Olympic Committee is washing its hands of the transgender debate and will not attempt to regulate the chemistry behind trans-athletes.

Transgenders competing has become a complex issue due to the confusion in our current inclusionary culture. Indeed, those adults who have decided to adopt the sex opposite to their birth have painful and destressing emotional consequences. Suicide rates among transgenders and those in the LGBTQ community are significantly higher. “The 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey (USTS), which is the largest survey of transgender people in the U.S. to date, found that 81.7 percent of respondents reported ever seriously thinking about suicide in their lifetimes, while 48.3 percent had done so in the past year.”5

Can You Speakout?

Having compassion for those who struggle with their sexual identity should be a given to Christians. Yet, compassion and empathy does not mean accepting or celebrating that kind of choice. For those who see the confusion clearly within our current culture, the inclusion attempts have entered a realm of absurdity.

Alternative views should be welcome, but many athletes are silenced in our current cancel culture for fear of retribution. Those who are not transgender often bear an unrecognized burden by social and legacy media.

Lea Thomas’ teammates were threatened if they ever voiced concerns about Lia Thomas. Nancy Hogshead-Makar, a four-time Olympic medalist, sent a letter on behalf of the UPenn swim team. In the letter she shared what the girls told her, “we would be removed from the team or that we would never get a job offer” if they openly expressed their concerns about Lia Thomas. “When media have tried to reach out to us, these journalists have been told that the coaches and athletes were prohibited from talking to them. We support Lia’s mental health, and we ask Penn and the Ivy League to support ours as well.”((Boas, Phil. “If Lia Thomas’ teammates can’t raise concerns about transgender athlets, we all lose.” Arizona Republic, 21 March 2022, 23 March 2022))

To say our culture is confused and divided on the issue of transgenders in sports is an understatement, but looming behind this fog of disorientation is a massive tsunami that threatens our freedom of speech. Once that freedom is lost, human rights will be washed away as well.

Creative Commons License
Men vs. Women and the Transgender Issue by James W Glazier is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

  1. Johnson, Greg. “Thomas concludes spectacular season with national title.” Penn Today, March 20th 2022. March 23rd 2022 []
  2. Associated Press, “Transgender wrestler Mack Beggs wins Texas girls title again.” The Guardian, 25 February 2018. 23 March 2022 []
  3. BBC News, Laurel Hubbard: First transgender athlete to compete at Olympics.” 21 June 2021, 23 March 2022 []
  4. Spence, Katie. “The Numbers Don’t Lie in the Transgender Sports Debate.” CNSNews, 16 December 2021, 23 March 2022 []
  5. Herman, Jody. Brown, Taylor. Haas, Ann. “Suicide Thoughts and Attempts Among Transgender Adults.” Williams Institute, UCLA School of Law Williams Institute, September 2019, []
NPR finally gets it Right

NPR finally gets it Right

Reading Time: 4 minutes


National Public Radio (NPR) is a left-leaning news source covering news stories that interest liberals. White, college-educated, and upper-middle-class listeners make up the bulk of their audience.((Clark, Harry. “By The Numbers: Who Is Actually Listening to Public Radio.” Market Enginunity. N.D.

Right-of-center figures have periodically called to eliminate government funding for NPR almost since its founding. Proponents of the cuts argue that the government should not be funding a media outlet and that NPR tends to have a political bias towards the left.((National Public Radio (NPR), In recent years NPR has greatly reduced its dependence on federal and state funds (under 10% now), but they have other supporters that donate to NPR; for example, in 2010, NPR received $1.2 million from George Soros’.

I will admit I listen to NPR on occasion. I like to know what the enemy is thinking, but aside from that, they have reporting that interests me in content and quality. 

Another example of NPR’s left-leaning reporting is the continual bias against the nation of Israel. NPR has been repeatedly accused of demonstrating bias against Israel but reports favorably toward Palestine. “The pro-Israel Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA) considers NPR to be the most anti-Israel mainstream news outlet in the United States.”((National Public Radio (NPR),

So what did NPR get right? In the AP photo that has come to symbolize the attack in Mariupol, a wounded pregnant woman lies on a stretcher, holding her lower belly and splattered with blood, being rushed out of the hospital by emergency workers seeking care for her elsewhere. Neither she nor her baby survived.((Treisman, Rachel. “The pregnant woman from the iconic Mariupol photo has died. Many more are at risk.” NPR,, 14 March 2022

I am sure most who read the NPR article did not even notice their reference to the unborn being a baby. I myself had not read the story until Albert Mohler’s The Briefing mentioned how the media is reporting on the death of a pregnant woman and her baby. I can promise you NPR almost never refers to the unborn as a baby. Let us take a brief look at any articles or news reports by NPR that mention abortion in March.  

  • Out-of-state abortions. (March 17)
  • Out of state abortions and gender-affirming treatments. (March 15)
  • Abortions after 15 weeks in Florida (March 4)
  • New Texas abortion law (March 2)

If you read or listen to these stories by NPR, not one will refer to the fetus as a baby. As I pointed out, these are just the stories in March 2022 as of the 17th. Not that many since Russia and Ukraine have been headline news in March. Prior to the Ukraine invasion, the abortion issue was headline news because of the new Texas law and Mississippi abortion case the Supreme Court looked at. 

If we back up to February, NPR had 12 reports, most before Russia invaded Ukraine on February 24. Here are some brief observations from the stories in March. 

  • An abortion clinic is always referred to as a clinic.
  • Reporters always point out the difficulties women have when seeking an abortion. 
  • Proposed laws that make it illegal to perform an abortion and apply financial penalties are referred to as bounty hunter bills.
  • Gender surgery or procedures are called gender-confirming care.
  • Quoting liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor, writing for the court’s three liberals in dissent, called the case “a disaster for the rule of law and a grave disservice to women in Texas, who have a right to control their own bodies.”
  • Doctors in Texas have been warning that the state’s abortion law known as S.B. 8 would make it harder for them to treat medical crises and endanger their patients. 
  • Examples of rape and incest are offered for reasons to have an abortion.
  • Abortions are to be legal, safe, and accessible for all women, but if they are not, they can place women in dangerous circumstances.  

It is pathetically obvious that NPR has a substantial left-leaning view of abortion, but they got it right this time. Because of the Russian attacks, a woman and her unborn baby were killed.

What is your view on abortion? Should it be legal, accessible to all women regardless of age or reason for the termination of a human life? If that is what you believe, you can continue to listen to NPR, CNN, USA Today, and other biased media that will confirm your beliefs. Or, you can consider other sources and rethink the abortion issue, a human life and death issue. 

Creative Commons License
NPR finally gets it Right by James W Glazier is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

The War In Ukraine

The War In Ukraine

Reading Time: 5 minutes

The above title is outlawed in Russia. Putin forbids my very use of the word “war.” Using that word could place a Russian reporter in the Gulag Archipelago for 15 years. They are not allowed to use “war,” “invasion,” or “assault” when describing their invasion of Ukraine.1

The New York Times reported last Friday, “Russia clamped down harder Friday on news and free speech than at any time in President Vladimir V. Putin’s 22 years in power, blocking access to Facebook and major foreign news outlets, and enacting a law to punish anyone spreading ‘false information’ about its Ukraine invasion with up to 15 years in prison.”((Troianovski, Anton. “Russia Takes Censorship to New Extremes, Stifling War Coverage.” New York Times, March 4, 2022, March 8, 2022))

For Putin, it is all about controlling the narrative within his authority. Those critical of his actions will quickly be labeled criminals and face severe consequences. 

Instead, the Kremlin says their invasion of Ukraine is a “special military operation.” The Kremlin has also blocked access from within their country to major western news sources or popular social networks such as Facebook. Consequently, the general population within Russia will only hear the state-managed media.((Troianovski, Anton. “Russia Takes Censorship to New Extremes, Stifling War Coverage.” New York Times, March 4, 2022, March 8, 2022))

This war will not end quickly, and those who have orchestrated the invasion and war in Ukraine will be suffering economically. But what does that mean exactly? First off, you need to understand that Russia is an oligarchy. What is that exactly? It is a government-run by a few very powerful and very wealthy people. Just a handful of individuals manage and own all the property, businesses, trade, and energy. To give you an idea, Putin is worth about 100 billion. Yes, I wrote billion, not million.((Mohler, Albert. “Thursday, March 3, 2022.” Audio blog post. The Briefing., March 3, 2022. Web. March 8, 2022)) Give that some thought. One hundred billion. For example, if Putin lost 99% of his entire wealth, he would still have 1 billion left. Can you picture a billion dollars? For those who are math-challenged, think of it this way, 1 billion dollars is a thousand million dollars. Could you live on that? Could a millionaire be comfortable with that? How about someone with a hundred million? You see my point. 

These sanctions will undoubtedly hurt the oligarchy, but what is a 90% loss of their billions? It is a nuisance, maybe an aggravation, but I would not even go so far as to say a discomfort. These men and women in power will not suffer one iota from our sanctions. Who suffers? The people of Russia. Many of them may disagree with the invasion of Ukraine but, out of fear, will say nothing against it. Why? Because the Kremlin passed a law making criminals out of those who speak out against their military or government. Vyacheslav Volodin, a Kremlin official, said with the new law, “those who lied and made declarations discrediting our armed forces will be forced to suffer very harsh punishment.”2

The sanctions may place such a general stress on the populace they could rise up and overthrow the government, but they are already cowed by laws, restrictions, and threats of harsh punishments. Constraints on free speech are in full swing and will only get worse. Those who don’t toe the line will quickly disappear and be examples to those who might consider speaking out against the invasion of Ukraine. 

World view matters, and I can’t say this strongly enough. Countries like Russia and China don’t care about the people; those in power only care about gaining more power and influence even if it costs their people or innocents, including women and children. Culture is downstream of religion, and politics is downstream of culture, always. So what Russia is doing and what China is planning on doing has everything to do with politics, culture, and undoubtedly a religion, or lack thereof. Those in charge are answerable to no one, and they will do whatever they can to keep it that way. 

Ukraine will fall. Those who fought to keep their country independent will either be killed or whisked away to prisons in Siberia, never to be heard from again. If you think Russia will be satisfied with Ukraine, you are sadly mistaken. It may not happen in my lifetime, but the Russian oligarch will continue to make moves westward. 

And I predict within my lifetime, China will take Taiwan. And like Ukraine, we will not want to go to war for another country’s freedom. So like it or not, it is simply a delay of the inevitable. Ideas have consequences, and the ideas coming from Russia and China have world-impacting consequences. 

Does injustice diminish depending on the distance? For example, what would you do if you were to walk out your front door and see a man abusing a woman or child just a few feet away? I think most men and women would immediately step in and put a halt to it if they could. What if it was across the street? Does your responsibility for the abuse that you have knowledge of lessen because of the increased distance?

David French, a conservative Christian and political commentator wrote, 

“The true battle for our country isn’t political, it’s cultural and spiritual…Our nation can survive lost elections, but over the long term it cannot survive a decayed culture.”3

As Christians, we should recognize secular ideas regarding ethics. Secular moralities such as the ones we find from the Kremlin and China are established on the belief that their own ideas and moral codes (what is right and wrong) are merely based on their views. Nothing more than that. No higher universal standard or judge that we may call God. They recognize this and act on it. “If there is no absolute beyond man’s ideas, then there is not a final appeal to judge between individuals and groups whose moral judgments conflict. We are merely left with conflicting opinions.”((Schaeffer, Francis. How Should We Then Live? Old Tappan NJ: Fleming H. Revell, 1976 p. 154))

You are mistaken if you think theology doesn’t matter. Theological arguments matter because they arrived in the form of jetliners on September 11. You are also mistaken if you believe Godless leaders are a better option. If you have heard and believed the party line that religion has been the cause of more deaths and wars than anything else, you’re deceived. Mao, Stalin, and Hitler, atheist dictators, were responsible for over 100 million deaths in the 20th century. 

The world war for worldviews is just beginning. What side are you on?

Creative Commons License
The War In Ukraine by James W Glazier is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

  1. AFP, “Russia Bans Media Outlets from Using Words’ War,’ ‘Invasion.’ The Moscow Times, February 26, 2022, March 8, 2022 []
  2. Troianovski, Anton. “Russia Takes Censorship to New Extremes, Stifling War Coverage.” New York Times, March 4, 2022, March 8, 2022 []
  3. Friedersdorf, Conor. “How Breitbart Destroyed Andrew Breitbart’sLegacy.” The Atlantic, 14, Nov. 2017, 9 March 2022 []

Pin It on Pinterest