When people stop believing in God, they don't believe in nothing — they believe in anything. C.K. Chesterton
The legislators in Germany’s Weimar Republic who passed gun registration of all firearms in 1931 may have had good intentions. Little did they know that within just two years the Nazis would take power and use those records to identify, disarm, and attack Jews and political opponents.
It’s tempting to take our freedoms in America for granted. We’ve been blessed with freedom and prosperity undreamed of in many parts of the world. We imagine that the American people could never have their freedoms taken away without their consent. Well, guess what, in many ways, it has already happened.
In 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that belief in natural marriage between one man and one woman was the expression of an irrational bias, and therefore unconstitutional. In that moment, those who believed in natural marriage, including tens of millions of committed Christians, were suddenly transformed into bigots in the eyes of the law. What was widely accepted and understood by most Americans just a few years earlier, was now a shameful sign of malicious prejudice.
If something as fundamental as marriage can suddenly be redefined by one Supreme Court vote, is there anything that cannot be thrown out with a “progressive” interpretation? The 1st Amendment? The 2nd Amendment? The 4th?
We have already seen calls for the repeal of the 2nd Amendment by a former Supreme Court justice and other public figures. We have seen leaders of one political party calling for gun bans and even confiscations.
In April 2018, one Chicago area suburb passed a ban on “assault weapons,” which included semiautomatic pistols and semiautomatic rifles like the AR-15. If the 18,000 residents of Deerfield, Illinois are found carrying or possessing one of these firearms, they can be fined up to $1,000 per day. One resident gun owner declared to the city council: “You are bureaucrats that Thomas Jefferson warned us about!”
We have seen many of the nation’s media organizations give a high profile to youth who accuse 2nd Amendment supporters of having children’s blood on their hands, even when it is evident in several cases that it was the government which repeatedly failed to prevent or halt mass shootings.
Due to this shifting of blame onto citizens who had nothing to do with these horrific acts, America is potentially one or two elections away from turning millions of law-abiding gun owners into criminals overnight.
We Are Watching What You Say
As discussed in chapter 5, daring to speak publicly about rapes and violence committed by immigrants in several European countries has led to “hate speech” convictions, not for those committing the criminal acts, but for the journalists or bloggers who honestly report about what is going on.
I witnessed first hand the limits placed on free speech in Europe when I attended an “Arms for Defense” conference last year in Lausanne, Switzerland. Several people with expertise on this topic declined to participate, explaining that they would be risking their careers to even speak about gun rights in a public forum.
Freedom of speech still exists in theory in the U.S., but increasingly not in practice. At the University of Michigan and other college campuses, speakers with conservative views have been shouted down and prevented from speaking by both threats and real acts of violence. Meanwhile, campus security and police were ordered to stand down and allow these protesters to destroy private property and prevent invited guests from giving their presentations. Campus Leftists have also acted to revoke the charters of conservative student groups, and to take legal action against conservatives for “thought crimes.”
Whether we want to admit it or not, the spirit of the self-righteous “brown shirts” is alive and well on many school campuses, with the same enabling moral cowardice from school administrators that allowed fascism to grow in Europe in the 1930’s.
The problem is not just cancelled speakers. Despite a host of well-funded “diversity” programs, most of America’s universities are not diverse at all in terms of the ideas and political affiliations of their professors. A 2016 study of faculty voter registration at 40 leading universities revealed that out of more than 7,000 professors, Democrats outnumbered Republicans 12 to 1, making it highly unlikely that students will be exposed to many, if any, conservative viewpoints.
Out of five departments analyzed, the least hostile field to conservative scholars was economics, where there were still 4.5 leftist professors to every conservative. History was by far the most conservative-hostile department, where leftists outnumbered conservatives by a 33:1 ratio.
Our understanding of the past shapes our perception of what is valuable to our nation and what direction to take in the future. Due to this imbalance of viewpoints in our colleges, the rising popularity of socialism among millennials is predictable. The truth is, many students have never learned about socialism’s problematic and even deadly history. Most have never heard about the enormous sacrifices needed to establish the freedoms they take for granted.
Ken Holmes, a distinguished fellow at the Heritage Foundation, expressed his concern that increasing intellectual homogeneity in academia does not bode well for the health of the American republic:
It’s no longer about trying to teach people to think critically but about trying to indoctrinate them to a certain point of view.
Students who have been taught to avoid ideas that make them feel uncomfortable could care less about protecting the right to free speech. But it is precisely this right which allows Americans to debate, compare and test ideas and find solutions. Without this right we are simply no longer a free country.
The problem is not just on college campuses. Youtube, Facebook and Twitter have aligned with leftwing groups, such as the Soros-funded Southern Poverty Law Center, to shut down broadcasts of conservative, Christian and pro- 2nd Amendment organizations as alleged “hate speech.” Our Church’s Youtube channels have had our live streaming capabilities stripped away for months—Youtube claiming our videos were “spam.”
Youtube is the venue for two thirds of videos watched online by millennials in the U.S. Its owner, Google, claims that it is an “open platform.” But over 40 Prager University videos been placed on Youtube’s “restricted” list making it difficult for many young people to access those videos or even be aware that they exist.
Check out the restricted videos, such as “Why Isn’t Communism as Hated as Nazism?” and “Immigrants! Don’t Vote for What you Fled” for yourself and see if there’s any reason to label them as dangerous. The answer is “no,” unless you think that anything that challenges the Left’s “multicultural” domination of speech is too harmful for young people to even consider.
The term “politically correct,” was coined in the late 1920’s by the Communist Party in the Soviet Union to describe how the views of party members needed to be aligned. Leftists on America’s college campuses demand similar suppression of views and speech that does not follow their “party line.”
As mentioned earlier, our own Newfoundland Sanctuary Church Youtube channel was shut down on February 28, 2018. This was the day of our Book of Life Registration Blessing. Many church members and others around the world were thus prevented from watching the live broadcast. We are developing alternative venues so that such ideologically-driven disruptions will not happen again, but the biggest harm is to those who are being prevented, by Youtube, from even knowing about the existence of our broadcasts.
Leftist attacks on free speech are real and alarming, but at least there is an alternative media where conservative and biblically-based views can be expressed. My father, who invested hundreds of millions to establish The Washington Times newspaper as an alternative voice in the nation’s capital, would be happy to see that the Leftist dominance of information distribution is being challenged.
It is disturbing to see Communist China praise western nations for following its practice of restricting free speech on the internet. China’s state-run Global Times declared gleefully in an editorial, “Reining in social media appears to be the trend of governments” which are suppressing alleged “fake news” and unauthorized opinions. This will only drive ideas underground, rather than allowing them to be tested and examined for their strengths and weaknesses. Of course, what authoritarian governments fear the most is a real competition of ideas.
We should let people from all ends of the political spectrum, not government or Youtube/Facebook/Twitter censors, figure out for themselves what is or is not, “fake news.”
The Problem with “Multiculturalism"
Immigrants to America have practiced and celebrated their home country culture and language, even as they aspired to acclimate themselves to the predominant American culture. In the case of my own family, while my parents spoke mostly Korean, I remember my father staying up late at night to learn as much English as he could. He was proud that my siblings and I were fluent English speakers but not happy with the liberal “progressive” influences that were taking over America.
The expectation that immigrants to the U.S. would assimilate began to change in the 1970’s and 1980’s with demands that government institutions actively work to affirm the unique identities of minorities. This approach is called “multiculturalism.” It has been defined as “the support for the presence of several distinct cultural or ethnic groups within a society.” It has also been defined as:
…the view that cultures, races, and ethnicities, particularly those of minority groups, deserve special acknowledgement of their differences within a dominant political culture. That acknowledgement can take the forms of recognition of contributions to the cultural life of the political community as a whole, a demand for special protection under the law for certain cultural groups, or autonomous rights of governance for certain cultures.
While seemingly good in theory, multiculturalism in practice stands as a challenge to the ideal of a constitutional republic, which is that all citizens should be treated equally under the law. The practice of multiculturalism by governments in many European countries has led to concentrations of large groups of unassimilated immigrants who feel alienated from the predominant culture. It has established areas where the values of freedom of speech and religion do not apply.
This approach has also led to governments criminalizing discussion and reporting about the problems arising from those policies. Those who express concerns about the risks of unassimilated immigrants are accused of being “hate-filled,” “racist” or “Islamophobic.” It takes courage to stand up against such accusations, but that has always been the case for those who dare to question the status quo.
To give another example, the Women’s March was organized in the wake of Donald Trump’s election, with the aim of “dismantling systems of oppression” and “building inclusive structures guided by self-determination, dignity, and respect.” Yet their commitment to “dignity and respect” for women was demonstrated in a bizarre way when they denounced the shutdown of the Backpage website. Backpage facilitates prostitution and the trafficking of women and girls, but Women’s March organizers say “sex workers rights are women’s rights.”
Leftists are quick to claim that they are the ones who truly care about women’s rights. If so, why do they support a venue that facilitates sex trafficking and prostitution? Why are they silent about Muslim men in many European countries who harass, rape, or assault women who wish to walk freely on the streets of their neighborhoods as they have done all of their lives?
These Leftists appear to be unaware or indifferent to the history of abolitionist Christians who led anti-slavery movements in the United Kingdom, other European countries, and the United States in the 19th century. They seem not to realize that they would be among the first to be attacked, imprisoned or eliminated in an Islamized Europe. The massacre of journalists in the offices of the Charlie Hebdo satirical magazine in Paris is just one glimpse of what is likely to come.
Since multicultural policies do nothing to challenge Islamist extremism and instead perpetuate an environment where it can grow, why do Leftists continue to promote them? Could it be that their goal to destroy the Judeo-Christian foundation of the West is stronger than their supposed desire to preserve a society where women can walk on city streets, with clothing of their choice, without being harassed or raped?
As I learned from my father, the Left has always opposed Peace through Strength. Had we followed their policies in the 1980’s instead of President Reagan’s, there might still be a Soviet Union exporting Communism throughout the world. My father always insisted that without the foundation of Biblically-based moral values, Western liberal democracies will not be able to stand against external and internal forces seeking their demise.
Which Choice Will We Make?
As I’ve repeatedly stated in this book, we are each responsible for our own self-defense. It is illusory to think that governments have the capacity to always protect us. When they try to do so, they often adopt tactics that only create more of a police state.
There is another approach that I believe will both protect freedom and provide safety, but it means taking responsibility instead of “outsourcing” all of our security needs to “professionals.” If families are armed, criminals and potential tyrants will hesitate before trying to take advantage of or oppress them. The fact that all Swiss men were armed was an important reason why Hitler feared to invade that country. Up until now, satanic kings have been the ones who monopolized force. It is time for God’s sons and daughters, who have no desire to oppress anyone, to defend their own families, communities and “kingdoms.”
As followers of Christ, we are commanded to love God and love our neighbors as ourselves. Jesus clarified what this means when he said: “Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s friends.” (John 15:13)
Aaron Feiss, the football coach at Stoneman Douglas high school demonstrated this kind of love when he shielded students with his own body. My question is this: Would you trust this kind of person to not just shield two students, but to have the means to save more lives? I would. Had Feiss been armed, he would have had the means to prevent many more lives from being taken.
The “professional” government-appointed deputy sheriff who had a weapon and was wearing body armor chose not to enter the school until the danger was gone. Jesus does not say “the greatest love is to call 911 and wait for someone else to do something.” When good people have the ability to defend themselves, people with evil intent must re-evaluate their desires and their way of life.
Evil preys on weakness. We should seek to master the Way of the Rod of Iron, not to oppress others, but rather to protect others. The Rod of Iron is the greatest equalizer and force multiplier against actual corporate evil and tyranny. For materialists, this may be hard to understand because for them, a gun is just a violent weapon.
But, from a spiritual perspective, the person (not the gun) is the issue. Is the person holding the Rod of Iron, responsible, honorable, chivalrous and sacrificial like Christ? Is the person willing to lay his life down for his friends and to love God and love his neighbor? Is the Kingdom that is ruled by the Rod of Iron, honoring and protecting the freedoms and liberty God has given all His children?
The age where government centralizes and dominates all aspects of life is over. Families should no longer delegate control over their health, education and survival to bureaucracies whose agendas do not align with, or tolerate Godly values. As Christ’s co-kings and queens, we must claim the sovereignty given to us by God, not to oppress others as satanic leaders do, but to empower and protect all of the peoples of this world.
God Bless, Godspeed and may His Kingdom come!
Please see that book for more about Pastor Sean.
BUY HERE : https://www.rodofironministries.com/shop#!/Rod-Of-Iron-Kingdom-Print-Version/p/107067126/category=40947853
Esau McCaulley wrote a July 18, 2021 opinion piece regarding Christians and
systemic racism. While I Agree with the author’s premise that Christians
should fight against systemic racism; however, I disagree with his
implication that true Christians have ignored systemic racism.
As a pastor, I do wholeheartedly agree that followers of Christ have an
obligation to push back against unfair, unjust, treatment for any people
group. Throughout the scriptures we see God’s wrath meted out against
unjust treatment of the most vulnerable of people.
My problem is with the term “systemic racism”. There is a tendency to use
the term generically to cover all negative outcomes as it pertains to black
America. In order for racism to be "systemic" it has to be codified in law
or expressed in policy. I do acknowledge that prejudice exists in America.
But we must keep in mind that bias and prejudice are internal
manifestations of the fallen nature of man. Laws cannot change personal
prejudices or individual biases no matter how many laws are passed.
For all intents and purposes, systemic racism was abolished with the
passage of the 1964 civil rights act. Anti-discrimination laws are the
remedy for systemic racism in America. These laws have also been modified
over time to address practices identified to be “systemically” biased
against people of color. For example, laws such as the 1968 Fair Housing
Act prohibits housing discrimination based on race and other factors.
It is laws that change systems; however, it is the message of the Gospel
that changes hearts. My assertion is that the influence of the Bible has
provoked men to fight for justice.
As a Christian I take great pride in the fact that it was John Newton, a
former slave ship captain and later an Anglican cleric who inspired William
Wilberforce. Wilberforce was a parliamentarian, a Christian, and a
forerunner to the American abolitionist movement. Wilberforce’s Christian
conviction caused him to fight against the inhumanity of slavery. He was
the driving force behind Great Britain abolishing slavery and helped to
frame the American abolitionist movement.
Let us not forget the white Quakers and Methodist, who felt a biblical
conviction to speak out against slavery at the risk of life and liberty.
They assisted the underground railroad in transporting escaped slaves from
the slave states. It was the scriptural truth that all men are made in the
image of God that provoked them to reject slavery and to fight for freedom
So yes, I do agree that Christians should stand against injustice, racism,
and mistreatment of any people group, and they have. I reject the premise
that systemic racism is a prominent part of American life in 2021. My
concern is that as long as we continue to misdiagnose the problem, we will
never be able to reach the real solution which is to allow the message of
the Gospel to change the hearts of men!
The last two years, 2020 and 2021 have been tumultuous years. Our country has entered into a crisis period beyond anything we can remember. Not only America, but the entire world is in crisis. The COVID 19 pandemic has been engineered utilizing a plethora of false theories. It has been powered and promoted by political power and unscrupulous greed.
Now after over 18 months of this “COVID 19 pandemic”, the facts are becoming clear. We can replace many false theories. In the end it is all about forced vaccination and government control in America and worldwide. Tragically the facts are showing this injection called a “vaccine” is actually a bio-weapon and not a vaccine
We need to truly address our health with a genuine and serious effort to
separate fact from conjured fiction.
Not only our medical freedoms have been under attack. Through this fear driven pandemic we as a nation have given up our freedom to have legal
elections, to educate our children, to protect our borders, to protect our homes. Now they are coming full on to take away our 2nd amendment freedoms.
What we have seen during the COVID-19 Pandemic is politics, power and money mixed together to provide a terrible result for people in America and
throughout the world. The reality is what we have experienced in this last year is just a concentration of a conflict which has gone on for the last century.
*Rod of Iron Freedom Festival is the place to learn how to work together to restore our liberty. *
At the Rod of Iron Freedom Festival we are going have fun, but also we have two days of high level seminars to learn from experts how to restore election integrity, protect our 2nd amendment rights, restore out financial freedom, work locally to restore education for our youth and how hold our political leaders accountable.
Make sure to register online today to reserve your seat!
Seating is limited and you can reserve your place online now.
There are 8 seminars on Saturday and 8 on Sunday to choose from
CLICK HERE and review the seminar content and reserve your place!
The Pennsylvania Department of State is stonewalling the Legislature's legitimate authority to investigate elections and threatening counties which comply with huge expenses to replace voting machines while GIVING A LEFTIST ORGANIZATION, ROCK THE VOTE, FRONT-END ACCESS TO PENNSYLVANIA'S ELECTRONIC POLL BOOKS DURING THE 2020 ELECTION!
The Pennsylvania Department of State, whose only power to manage elections comes through authority granted to it by the state legislature, is ordering local election officials to refuse cooperation with the state legislature. stating: “Such access by third parties undermines chain of custody requirements and strict access limitations…jeopardizing the security and integrity of the systems” came the official word.”
Such claims are particularly stunning for two reasons. First, the order violates a key requirement that elections must be transparent in order to be free and fair. Pennsylvania’s unelected secretary of state is denying the elected leaders of the state access to election information.
The Department entered into an unprecedented contract with the private nonprofit organization Rock the Vote, allowing the group front-end access to Pennsylvania’s electronic poll books during the 2020 election. Rock the Vote, in turn, licensed that access to more than 60 politically-left activist organizations who were able to electronically manipulate voter registration rolls before and during the election.
Taken together, the Pennsylvania Secretary of State is allowing private leftist organizations improper electronic access to sensitive personal data while denying access to the people’s representatives.
Let the PA Legislature know it MUST stand up to
the Governor’s COVER-UP of a fraudulent election!