Tag Archives: Fascism

Duke University bans Christian club for adhering to Christian principles

UVA students following their leftist masters
UVA students following their leftist masters

Duke University… I remember blogging about them before. The first time, they falsely accused members of their lacrosse team of rape. The second time, a gay Duke University employee was arrested for selling his adopted 5-year-old to other gay men for sex. So, not a very good university. And they’re going to be an even worse university after banning Christian clubs on campus.

Here’s the story from The College Fix:

The Christian student organization Young Life excludes two categories from leadership: “persons who engage in sexual misconduct or who practice a homosexual lifestyle.”

The latter is apparently a ban on practicing homosexuals, not Christians who identify as gay and believe their faith requires them to remain celibate.

The Duke Student Government Senate didn’t see a distinction, and used the organization’s orthodox Christian beliefs on sexuality to deny official recognition to a proposed Young Life chapter last week.

This isn’t the first time that something like this has happened to Christians on secular university campuses. Before Duke University, there was Tufts University and Vanderbilt University.

Tufts University:

Tufts University in Medford, Massachusetts, is the latest higher education facility to crack down on student-led religious groups. In a recent move, the school’s student government banned the Tufts Christian Fellowship (TCF), an evangelical organization. The decision was made because TCF, which is the campus’ chapter of InterVarsity Christian Fellowship/USA, requires that those serving in leadership positions must embrace “basic biblical truths of Christianity.”

The group’s demand that leaders be Bible-believing Christians was found to be in violation of Tuft’s non-discrimination policy. Last month, the Judiciary recommended that the belief requirement be moved from the constitution’s bylaws to its mission statement; while the bylaws are legally-binding, the mission statement is not. TCF didn’t comply and, now, the group is officially unrecognized by the university.

Vanderbilt University:

Vanderbilt University has decided that Christian student groups that hold traditional Christian religious views are not welcome on campus. They will no longer be recognized as valid student organizations. Vanderbilt’s reason is that such groups require that their leaders be Christian—that is, that their leaders embrace certain core principles of Christianity and try to live according to these principles. In Vanderbilt’s view, religious beliefs and standards “discriminate” against those students who do not subscribe to them. Therefore, student religious groups with religious beliefs and standards are banned.

The situation would be unbelievable—were it not true. The issue came to a head this year when a student group at Vanderbilt Law School, the Christian Legal Society, submitted its “constitution” to the university. The constitution provided that the group’s leaders should believe in the Bible and in Jesus Christ as their Lord and savior; that they should be willing to lead members in worship, prayer, and Bible study; and that they should “strive to exemplify Christ-like qualities.” Vanderbilt’s Director of Religious Life, Reverend Gretchen Person, replied that such views were forbidden. Vanderbilt’s policies “do not allow” religious groups to have such an “expectation/qualification of officers,” she wrote. Last week, the administration officially declared the policy that Vanderbilt will exclude student religious groups that “impose faith-based or belief-based requirements for membership or leadership.”

It’s probably a good idea for Christian parents to do a thorough evaluation of universities before sending your children there. Not every university beliefs in basic human rights like free speech or freedom of association or freedom of religion. But they all believe in separating you from your money, which is why you need to be careful. By the way, I don’t recommend joining Young Life, Intervarsity Christian Fellowship, Campus Crusade / CRU. The only good Christian club on campus is Ratio Christi. Make sure the university you pick has a chapter.

Facebook uses pro-abortion “fact checkers” to label pro-life pages “fake news”

Facebook banned Franklin Graham for "hate speech"
Facebook banned evangelist Franklin Graham for “hate speech”

Recently, this blog’s Facebook page reached 5000 likes. We were immediately hit with a fact-check by a secular leftist, who labeled an  satirical meme image as “fake news”. Facebook informed me that they would be lowering our distribution for not being secular leftists. In fact, Facebook is censoring anyone who disagrees with the Democrat party, because the 2020 election is almost here.

Here’s the story from the Daily Caller:

Live Action founder and President Lila Rose said Facebook allowed abortionists to fact check Live Action content and label it as misinformation.

Facebook cited a fact check from two third-party fact checkers, telling Rose and Live Action that their statement “abortion is never medically necessary” was both inaccurate and misleading.

The Aug. 30 fact check, published in Health Feedback, targeted an August 9 video that included the statement “abortion is never medically necessary.” Another video shared by Live Action featuring Dr. Kendra Kolb explaining why abortion is never medically necessary was also fact checked.

Live Action’s page was punished for posting “fake news”, according to Facebook’s pro-abortion “fact-checkers”. There is no way to appeal a fact-check.

Live Action decided to make their case known to the Republican party, and they have responded.

Fox News reports:

Four Republican senators blasted Facebook for ‘censorship’ over the tech giant’s recent fact check of pro-life organization Live Action.

In a letter today to CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Senators Josh Hawley of Missouri, Ted Cruz of Texas, Kevin Cramer of North Dakota and Mike Braun of Indiana condemn the company’s “pattern of censorship” and demand that it issue a correction, remove any restrictions placed on Live Action and its founder Lila Rose, as well as submit to a “meaningful” external audit.

Let’s look at two Facebook “fact checkers”, and an example of their “fact-checking” and see how objective and non-partisan they are.

Let’s look at the first far-left Facebook partner: Politifact. Politifact is just a group of journalists from the Tampa Bay Times newspaper.

Avik Roy, health care policy expert at Forbes magazine, writes about Politifact’s assessment of Obama’s promise to Americans about keeping their health plans after Obamacare.

2008 PolitiFact before the election: ‘We rate his statement True’

Roy writes: (links removed)

On October 9, 2008, Angie Drobnic Holan of PolitiFact published an article using the site’s “Truth-O-Meter” to evaluate this claim: “Under Barack Obama’s health care proposal, ‘if you’ve got a health care plan that you like, you can keep it.’” The article assures us in its headline that “Obama’s plan expands [the] existing system,” and continues that “Obama is accurately describing his health care plan here…It remains to be seen whether Obama’s plan will actually be able to achieve the cost savings it promises for the health care system. But people who want to keep their current insurance should be able to do that under Obama’s plan. His description of his plan is accurate, and we rate his statement True.”

[…]As per PolitiFact’s usual M.O., Holan didn’t seek out any skeptical health-policy experts to suss out the veracity of Senator Obama’s signature claim. Instead, its sources included Jonathan Cohn, a passionate Obamacare supporter at The New Republic, and various interviews and statements of Mr. Obama. Holan simply took the “keep your plan” promise at face value, dismissing as dishonest anyone who dared suggest that Obama’s claim would be impossible to keep. “His opponents have attacked his plan as ‘government-run’ health care,” she wrote, the scare-quotes around “government-run” being visible to all.

PolitiFact’s pronouncements about Obamacare were widely repeated by pro-Obama reporters and pundits, and had a meaningful impact on the outcome of the election. Indeed, in 2009, PolitiFact won the Pulitzer Prize for its coverage of the 2008 campaign.

Here’s the screen capture from 2008:

Politifact caught with its pants on fire
Politifact caught with its pants on fire

Before the election, it’s true! And Obama got re-elected, because people believed that. But what happened after the election?

2013 PolitiFact after the election: ‘We rate his statement Pants On Fire’

Roy writes: (links removed)

On December 12, [2013] the self-appointed guardians of truth and justice at PolitiFact named President Obama’s infamous promise—that “if you like your health care plan, you can keep it”—its 2013 “Lie of the Year.”

[…]On November 4, Jacobson rated as “Pants on Fire” the President’s new claim that “what we said was, you can keep [your plan] if it hasn’t changed since the law passed.” Both pieces were edited by Angie Drobnic Holan, who had initially granted PolitiFact’s seal of approval to Senator Obama’s 2008 promise. Holan delivered the coup de grâce, declaring as PolitiFact’s “Lie of the Year” the “keep your plan” promise.

“The promise was impossible to keep,” says Holan in her December piece. Now she tells us! But none of the key facts that made that promise “impossible” in 2008 had changed by 2013. The President’s plan had always required major disruption of the health insurance market; the Obamacare bill contained the key elements of that plan; the Obamacare law did as well. The only thing that had changed was the actual first-hand accounts of millions of Americans who were losing their plans now that Obamacare was live.

And the screen capture from 2013:

Politifact says: we were just kidding! Kidding!
Politifact says: we were just kidding! Kidding!

So when Politifact rates a statement by a Democrat as true, what they really mean is that it’s pants-on-fire-false, except when Politifact wants to collude with the Democrat party to influence elections.

What about Snopes?

The Daily Caller explains:

Snopes’ main political fact-checker is a writer named Kim Lacapria. Before writing for Snopes, Lacapria wrote for Inquisitr, a blog that — oddly enough — is known for publishing fake quotes and even downright hoaxes as much as anything else.

[…]She described herself as “openly left-leaning” and a liberal. She trashed the Tea Party as “teahadists.” She called Bill Clinton “one of our greatest” presidents. She claimed that conservatives only criticized Lena Dunham’s comparison of voting to sex because they “fear female agency.”

[…]Lacapria — in another “fact check” article — argued Hillary Clinton hadn’t included Benghazi at all in her infamous “we didn’t lose a single person in Libya” gaffe. Lacapria claimed Clinton only meant to refer to the 2011 invasion of Libya (but not the 2012 Benghazi attack) but offered little fact-based evidence to support her claim.

It’s groups like far-left groups like Politifact and Snopes who are spotting “fake news” for Facebook.

Federal appeals court rules that Christians can’t be forced to act like atheists

Gay activist vandalizes pro-marriage sign
Gay activist vandalizes pro-marriage sign

The state of Minnesota is one of the most progressive states in the union. A while back, they passed a law making it illegal for Christians to exercise free speech or religious liberty. For example, the atheists who run Minnesota wanted to force a Christian couple to operate their business as atheists. Or go to jail. So the Christian couple took them to court. They lost. Then they appealed.

The Daily Caller reports:

A federal appeals court has revived a legal challenge to the Minnesota Human Rights Act (MHRA), ruling for the first time that religious business owners can invoke free speech rights when refusing to service a same-sex wedding.

The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with Carl and Angel Larsen, a Christian couple who operate a video production company called Telescope Media Group. The Larsens want to expand their business to include weddings, but state officials say the MHRA requires the Larsens to accommodate both same-sex and opposite sex partners.

“Minnesota’s interpretation of the MHRA interferes with the Larsens’ speech in two overlapping ways,” Judge David Stras wrote for a divided three-judge panel. “First, it compels the Larsens to speak favorably about same-sex marriage if they choose to speak favorably about opposite-sex marriage. Second, it operates as a content-based regulation of their speech.”

[…]Elsewhere in the decision, Stras wrote that the MHRA regulates speech based on content, another violation. The majority said the safer course for the Larsens would be to avoid the wedding business altogether, a type of “compelled self-censorship” that violates free speech rights.

But the appeal decision was not unanimous. A radically-leftist Obama-appointed judge dissented:

“What they cannot do is operate a public accommodation that serves customers of one sexual orientation but not others. And make no mistake, that is what today’s decision affords them license to do.”

So, if you run a business in America, then the atheist judges who rule over you can compel you to run your business like an atheist.

I found a short 6-minute video of the couple on the ADF YouTube account:

I was thinking about this decision overnight, and wondering if atheists also can compel pro-life doctors or nurses to act like atheists against their consciences.

And the answer is yes – at least in states run by the Democrat party.

The Federalist explains:

The Office for Civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has put the University of Vermont Medical Center (UVMMC) on notice after employees reported being forced to help with abortions against their moral objections.

A Catholic nurse at UVMMC was allegedly forced to assist with an elective abortion, despite previously telling her employer that she objects to participating in abortions for reasons of conscience. According to HHS’s investigation, the nurse was told she would be treating a patient who had experienced a miscarriage. When she walked into the procedure room, the doctor allegedly said to her, “Don’t hate me.” The nurse asked for a replacement, but was allegedly told no. The abortion was not an emergency procedure, but an elective one. Fearing losing her job, the nurse relented.

“This should never happen in America. There is room for disagreement on these issues without having to coerce people to choose between a career dedicated to supporting life versus instances or circumstances where they are being forced to take a life,” Roger Severino, head of HHS’s Office of Civil Rights, told reporters on Wednesday.

The hospital began performing elective abortions in 2017, but did not inform all employees, “many of which had already informed” the hospital of their objections to assisting in abortions, Severino said.

[…]UVMMC recently created a new policy that allows punishing staffers who refuse to participate in abortions when the hospital is short-staffed.

Vermont is, of course, a state dominated from top to bottom by the Democrat party.

When the state engages in barbarism, they are made uncomfortable by the presence of conscientious objectors. The easiest way to make those dissenters go away is to threaten them with starvation by taking their jobs. And if that doesn’t work, you can always go full fascist and move on to imprisonment, or execution. It would not be the first time these things have happened in regimes run by the secular left. In an accidental universe, where humans evolved by accident, there are no human rights, and no objective standard for how humans ought to act. Secular leftists are very sure of themselves, and they feel warranted in forcing their views on others. This sort of thing has happened many, many times in places where the political leaders had kicked God out of their minds.

Twitter locks GOP senator’s account for posting the death threats he received from Democrats

Donations / Political contributions by employees of Big Technology companies
Political donations / contributions by employees of Big Tech companies

Twitter is concerned that their Democrat party allies will look bad if Republicans are allowed to post the death threats they receive from them. Twitter locked the account for Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell re-election campaign. Their goal is to prevent American voters from seeing the truth about the Democrat party, so that Trump loses in 2020.

Here’s the story from the Fox News:

A group of protesters supporting gun control gathered outside the home of Sen. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. where one expressed that someone should “stab the motherf—er in the heart.”

[…]Approximately 25 demonstrators stood on the sidewalk near McConnell’s Louisville home, shouting “No Trump, no KKK, no Fascist USA!” while others called him names like “Murder Turtle” and made loud noises by banging objects and dragging a shovel back and forth on the ground as a group of security personnel stood between the protestors and the home, WLKY reported.

“The b—- is home — we keep seeing the lights go on and off,” another protester can be heard shouting. “This h– really thought he was going to get ready to be at home after he hurt his little punk ass shoulder. B—-, don’t nobody give a f—! F–k your thoughts and prayers, Mitch. F— you, f— your wife, f— everything you stand for. ”

A video of the protesters threatening violence against McConnell went viral, until it was taken down by Twitter. The video made Democrats look like violent fascists, and Twitter felt that this was bad for their Democrat party allies in the 2020 election. Twitter did allow the hashtag #MassacreMitch to trend on their platform earlier in the week. Not a single leftist was locked out of their account for inciting violence on Twitter. Twitter didn’t care about Mitch McConnell’s safety at all.

I noticed that a journalist from the Daily Wire also tweeted the video, and his account was also locked by Twitter. Because that’s what fascists do with a free press – they censor them.

Twitter doesn’t censor tweets by violent Democrats

He had a long series of tweets telling the story of what happened to him. I’ve got them all in one place here. What I thought was interesting was how Twitter ignored a tweet from Democrat Reza Aslan, a former CNN contributor, who called for Republican Kellyanne Conway “a depraved evil” that needed to be “eradicated”. Aslan’s account is still unlocked, and he still has his blue check mark. Twitter also left up tweets by a Democrat activist named Louis Farrakhan, who compared Jews to “termites”. Another Democrat named Peter Fonda “called for women in the Trump administration to stripped naked and physically beaten” and for “Trump admin officials to have their kids taken from them and thrown in cages with pedophiles”. Twitter’s response? It was all fine with them – Fonda’s account remained unlocked, and his blue check mark remains. Because the censorship on Twitter only goes one way – against Republicans.

The Daily Wire journalist concludes:

By suspending McConnell’s re-election campaign for exposing the violent rhetoric directed at McConnell, which was allowed to foment on Twitter for days, Twitter is interfering in the 2020 elections in a manner to help Democrats and hurt Republicans
mentions.

By suspending me for telling the truth, Twitter is making it clear that they seek to control the news media and only allow content on their platform that does not expose the evil, projection, and hypocrisy of the political Left.

Do not be surprised if they permanently ban me.

If you’re looking for collusion designed to throw an election, you just found it.

Are there any non-violent Democrats?

We’re seeing a lot of violence from members of the Democrat party, aren’t we? Just last week we saw attacks by mainstream Democrats who were concerned about advancing socialism and stopping global warming. But electing Democrats was too slow for them, so they decided to take matters into their own hands – with guns. Just like so many Democrat shooters have before them.

There’s actually a nationwide movement of secular left fascists in America now called “antifa”. They are similar to armed militias in other socialist regimes, such as Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. And look – they have guns.

These secular left fascists are the allies of Big Technology
These secular left fascists are the brown shirts of the Democrat party

If you don’t like the idea of someone coming to your house in the night with guns and threatening your life, then you’d better start making a plan NOW to make persuasive arguments supported by evidence to the people around you. Make sure that they understand what progressives believe, and what progressives would do to dissenters from their Communist agenda, if they ever took power.

Democrat legislator doxes Republican donors and publishes their names and employers

Here's a bunch of violent fascist thugs
Here’s a bunch of violent fascist thugs

In the past, when the secular left has seized power, they intimidated people on the center-right from participating in politics. Not just tearing down their election signs, but death threats, vandalism, even murder. So when a Democrat legislator publishes the names and employers of Republican donors, it’s very disturbing. This is actual fascism. Let’s take a look at the news story.

The Daily Caller reports:

Democratic Texas Rep. Joaquin Castro on Monday tweeted the names and employers of 44 San Antonio residents who donated the federal maximum to President Donald Trump’s reelection campaign.

Castro, whose district includes much of San Antonio, claimed the donors “are fueling a campaign of hate that labels Hispanic immigrants as ‘invaders.’” Castro is the twin brother of Democratic presidential candidate Julian Castro and chairs his presidential campaign.

“Sad to see so many San Antonians as 2019 maximum donors to Donald Trump,” the congressman wrote, proceeding to name local businesses whose owners gave the maximum to Trump’s campaign. Eleven of the 44 donors shown in Rep. Castro’s post listed their employment as “retired.”

Steve Scalise, who was grievously wounded by gunshots fired by a socialist Bernie Sanders campaign worker, commented:

House Minority Whip Steve Scalise was harshly critical of Rep. Castro as well, warning the Democratic congressman: “This isn’t a game. It’s dangerous, and lives are at stake. I know this firsthand.”

Many, many different people have reported the tweet to Twitter, but the Tweet has stayed up all day. Twitter thought that intimidating non-Democrats so that they don’t participate in elections was a good use of their products and services.

What might Democrats do with information like this? Well, earlier this week, a socialist supporter of Elizabeth Warren instigated a mass shooting in Dayton, Ohio.

The Ohio gunman described himself on social media as a pro-Satan “leftist” who wanted Joe Biden’s generation to die off, hated President Trump and law enforcement, and hoped to vote for Sen. Elizabeth Warren for president.

In the early hours of Sunday morning, rifle-wielding Connor Betts rampaged through a Dayton entertainment district, killing his sister and eight other people and leaving dozens of others wounded before police killed him.

“I want socialism, and i’ll not wait for the idiots to finally come round to understanding,” he wrote in one tweet, according to Heavy.com.

Don’t forget how Obama incited violence against police officers, just before there was a mass shooting of Dallas police officers. This actually happens all the time. I posted four tweets on our Facebook page featuring members of the mainstream media inciting violence against Republicans, some of them by telling outright lies that they later had to retract. Even if it doesn’t come to murder, Democrats get Republicans fired for their views all the time. That’s why I have an alias.

Here is one:

MSNBC lies about Trump in order to incite violence
MSNBC lies about Trump in order to incite violence

Here’s another one:

More incitement of violence against Trump by MSNBC
More incitement of violence against Trump by MSNBC

So, what should we make of this?

Well, there’s an election coming along. You should definitely be paying attention to the news, and sharing articles that will help you to influence people around you. So many of my friends use social media to just about their own lives. And there is a place for that. But it’s also important to have an influence. Don’t share things that are insulting, just share material about policy or evidence, like a study on Canadian health care or a study on how law-abiding concealed carry permitholders are or a study on how unborn children feel pain. We can’t just concentrate on our lives and our families and our communities. We have to care about the laws that affect our ability to be who we are. Posting a peer-reviewed study isn’t very controversial, and it isn’t very hard to defend against people who don’t have studies of their own.

You could put out a yard sign for your local Republican candidate. You could contact your local Republican party office and volunteer to work the phones, go door-to-door, or participate in get-out-the-vote. No one will ever find out that you volunteered. You could donate to candidates who reflect your values. I really like Senator Ted Cruz, Senator Marsha Blackburn, Senator Josh Hawley, Senator Tom Cotton, Congressman Mark Green, and Congressman Dan Crenshaw, for example. There are lots of things you could do, and if you want to participate in elections without being intimidated by thugs, then the time is now.