Click Link: November Issue 2020
By Thadyn Du Pont
It is easy to recognize when a political view or ideology is different from our own. And it is easy to recognize that these views are brought about by some level of indoctrination. Upon thinking about this topic, however, I want to first of all be very careful, and recognize that there is a difference between differing opinions and freedom of thought as allowed by our Constitution, and biblical falsehoods and strange doctrines when it comes to Christianity and God’s Word. What God has mandated in His Word as true is undebatable, and therefore non-negotiable. Regardless of what the rest of the world decides to believe, practice, and teach, wrong is still wrong in the eyes of God.
It is true: the freedom of thought and the freedom of the expression of opinion is what makes the United States what she is. Because this freedom appeals to the heart of man in its desire to be unbridled, this country is a melting pot of cultures, races, and ethnicities. This consequently also makes her a melting pot of political and ideological baggage. One side is convinced they are right and that their opinion is superior, while the other tries to carry out the opposite.
As a pre-med biology major, the first things that come to mind in relationship to this idea are enzymes. Fundamentally, an enzyme functions as a catalyst in the human body, speeding up a reaction that would ordinarily take twice, three, maybe even ten times as long. However, as the body does not always need that reaction to run continuously, inhibitors bind to the enzyme to reduce the rate of the reaction. Of the many different inhibitors present in the body, they can all be grouped into four main categories: one of which is called Competitive Inhibition. In Competitive Inhibition, the enzyme speeds up the reaction by binding to substrates or particles within the reaction; but when inhibitors are present, they compete with the substrates for that single binding site. Because the inhibitors almost always share the same structure as the substrates in this type of inhibition, all it takes is for the inhibitor to bind to the enzyme, and the enzyme can no longer fulfill its purpose. The only way to prevent an inhibitor from out-competing the substrate is if the concentration of the substrate is significantly higher. Now, don’t tell my biochemistry professor of my explanation, as I have left many important details out for simplicity’s sake; but what do enzymes, reactions, and inhibitors all have to do with political ideologies, difference of opinion, and ultimately indoctrination? When things are placed in an environment for two opposing forces to thrive, there is inevitably chaos. There is only victory when one is greater than the other.
Indoctrination can simply be defined as the repetition of an idea or belief so that the listener accepts the idea as true without question and without opposition, regardless of how true the idea actually is. We know that this idea of repetitive teaching and, quite frankly, brainwashing is prevalent primarily in our education systems: our daycares; our child-focused television programs; our elementary, middle, and high schools; our colleges and universities; and yes, even some churches that claim to preach the name of Christ. As a recent transfer student to the University of Oklahoma, I am required to take webinars in diversity and microagression, sexual assault and awareness, and responsible alcohol use. Even our workplaces serve as sources of indoctrination. My part-time job as a bank teller requires me to sit through Human Resource initiated training on diversity, inclusion, empathy…the list can just keep going. Not to say that all training in these categories are fundamentally and morally wrong: in fact, some could recognize that the intentions of training are good. But where do these required webinars and training lead to? Indoctrination.
Indoctrination of ideologies that may initially align with morally and spiritually acceptable behaviors, but then deceive the indoctrinated into allowing the education systems, the workplaces, and ultimately the government into determining what to believe, how to believe, when to believe, but with no explanation why. Through the forced teaching of a single, corrupted worldview, we are being fed lies to shape our minds into distorting what God has called right and wrong. Our children are being taught by drag-queens and sexually promiscuous individuals in the name of inclusion and acceptance, yet are being raped, molested, and assaulted behind closed doors in our school bathrooms, offices, and even online. Yes, racism is wrong. But it is more wrong to funnel people into one single politically-influenced-and-nominally-anti-racist propaganda, and then label those as racist who oppose, not the statement, but the corrupt organization. Yes, rape is wrong. But advocating for the destruction of human life when that human life had no choice in their existence is more wrong. Yes, birth defects and genetic mutations that cause cancer, Down’s syndrome, Turner’s syndrome, and countless other diseases are not what we consider to be an ideal life. But to deny any chance at a life at all is to deny the humanity of one’s self.
The conservative political party has not gotten in right every time, and there cannot be an expectation for it to be right every time. However, we are what is necessary in this country to stop the spread of evil that is prevalent. Perhaps in days gone by, the moral compass of the nation was such that the spread of wickedness was easier contained. Perhaps in days gone by, we functioned as an inhibitor in an enzyme-catalyzed reaction, where our influence in the minds of the American people overpowered the influence of what is now radical, leftist ideology. In these modern times, the concentration of evil and sin-nature has not necessarily increased, but has been encouraged by a lack of inhibition, to the point where we as the inhibitors are being overpowered by the way-ward minds of a catalyst pushing towards complete and utter destruction. Speak out. Step up. Not for influence. Not for power. Not for fame, and not for glory. But for the hearts of the American people, the spiritual state of our world, and ultimately for the glory of our Almighty God.
By Kimberly Hagen
“Her very existence repudiates the left’s binary thinking about womanhood, that women have to deny what makes women different from men to achieve professionally. And that’s why they hate her.” – Joy Pullman
Justice Amy Coney Barrett is debunking all the leftist well spun narratives. She goes against everything the anti women coalition and what they stand for with her husband, 7 kids, and her unfaltering faith and her quickly advanced career. ABC poked holes into their well manicured doctrine as the lefts finely crafted web of lies began to unravel.
During their anti-women’s marches, some stand with signs saying, “I want to break glass ceilings!” Yet, when a woman is being considered for the highest court in the land, we begin to see the irony drip from their playbook. They can’t wrap their “open minds” about how Christianity isn’t something one can simply define. With all of its ambiguity and “rules” they would have to follow.
The hearings continued on about how a Justice Barrett would force us back to a time where women will be fearful of strong work force discrimination and the rights of women would be rolled back. Conclusions were drawn from a woman, who has four daughters, will somehow take the power out of the lawmakers hands into her own. Democrat leaders poked and prodded at ACB to see if she would crack under their hypotheticals and tiresome questioning over the Second Amendment, Affordable Care Act, and Roe v. Wade. Under the Code of Conduct for US Judges are included the ethical canons that apply to federal judges and provides guidance on their performance of official duties and engagement in a variety of activities. Barrett stated, “Judges can’t just wake up one day and say ‘I have an agenda. I like guns. I hate guns. I like abortion. I hate abortion.’ and walk in like a royal queen and impose their will on the world.” She said she’d “keep an open mind” on any case coming before the court.
As a self described originalist, like her mentor Justice Antonin Scalia, Senator Chris Coons claimed that she will follow suit to how he has ruled. “I hope that you aren’t suggesting that I don’t have my own mind,” Barrett said, “or that I couldn’t think independently or that I would just decide like, ‘Let me see what Justice Scalia has said about this in the past.’ ” I assure you I have my own mind.”
In a recent Vogue article, Michelle Ruiz writes, “white women voters are establishing themselves as maddeningly, confusingly . . . unsisterly.”
“It’s tempting, in light of all this, to want to give up on white women. But even if we see history for what it is and adjust our expectations accordingly, the fact remains that white women make up a voting bloc that is too massive to ignore or simply write off.”
The goal post of equality has moved from rights over our own body and equal pay to abortions on demand and free birth control. Without them, they will divert to some perverted idea of the Handmaids Tale and must stay submissive. They assume white Christian women go aimlessly into a voting booth, checking the red box like our patriarchal husbands who command over us (sarcasm insertion complete).
Since the beginning Satan has tried to drive a wedge between God and His creatures. Genesis 3:5 “For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” Satan deceived Eve by causing her to make her decision based on what she could see and not what her emotions and reason told her to be right, even when it was contrary to what God had already told her. Eve thought that if she and Adam ate the fruit they would gain infinite wisdom and live forever.
1 Corinthians 10:13 No temptation has seized you except what is common to man. And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, he will also provide you a way out so that you can stand up under it.”
For Christ to accomplish God’s will, he had to face Satan and prevail. In Matthew 4, Christ is presented as one who served faithfully regardless of opposition. Showing temptation doesn’t mean to succumb to failure. It should be an encouragement to all that find themselves as pawns in Satans clever underhanded plans.
Just like the wedge of the enemy the unsuccessful attempts to make ACB one of their own was a devastating blow to feminists everywhere. It should be no surprise to the left that in fact not only do Christian women have their own minds but they can also choose to be mothers and doctors; teachers and scientist; lawyers and even a Supreme Court Justice. That we can choose to show our large families love and stand firm in a boardroom. It is a loud cry for Christian woman to stand true to who you are. Do not let anyone create a narrative other than the one God has written for you and your life.
By: Brandon Galbreath
In today’s crazy postmodern society Christians cannot really define themselves with words such as orthodoxy or heterodoxy (heresy). Indeed, both words by definition are clearly direct opposites, such as right vs. left. However, the “doxy” of ortho vs. hetero is really just a paradox. What I mean by that is heresy can easily be orthodoxy because, the side of truth sometimes loses against a more powerful force of heretics. As Alister McGrath characterizes it, “heresy is the orthodoxy of history’s losers”(McGrath 2009, Heresy: A History of Defending Truth). We have not seen this much tension and uncertainty since the brink of the Civil War. Sadly, most media outlets work for the radical left and are not concerned in the interest of truth. So, we must take a “heresy” in today’s context as a social and political approach, where heresy is seen as an ideology used in world views struggling solely for power. We see this today in the political and social clash that has divided America once again. Truth has simply been destabilized for the absorption of power.
Ironically, the title of the Communist Party’s source of news for the people of the Soviet Union was called Pravda, which means truth. Pravda emerged as a leading newspaper of the Soviet Union after the October Revolution in 1917. One of the most controversial events that the Soviet Union with Pravda lied and falsified the truth was the Katyn Forest Massacre.
Katyn Forest Massacre
In the spring of 1940 the NKVD or “Soviet Secret Police” executed an estimated 22,000 Polish nationals at several locations including the Katyn Forrest. The Soviets kept this mass killing secret until it was discovered by the Nazi Germans in 1943. The Soviets blamed the Germans for the mass killings, claiming that the Nazis committed the killings in 1941. The Soviets organized a cover-up to prove their false claim and formed a special commission called the Burdenko Commission.
It was not until 2010 the Russian Parliament voted a declaration blaming Stalin and other Soviet officials for having personally ordered and approved the Katyn massacre.
Background: Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact
On August 23rd of 1939 Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union singed a non-aggression pact. Then on September 1st, less than 10 days later, World War II officially started when Germany invaded Poland. Soviet leader Joseph Stalin ordered the invasion of Poland shortly after on September 17th “The roots of the Katyn massacre lie in the Nazi-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact of 23, August 1939, which led to the German-Soviet partition of Poland” (Materski 2007, Katyn : A Crime Without Punishment).
This is important politically in two aspects. This was a strategic act of deception by Hitler, because, the pact would be broken in 1941 when Germany invaded Russia during Operation Barbarossa. In my own personal view this is significant because of the fact that both the Nazis and the Soviets invaded Poland, but only war was declared on Germany. Why did major powers such as England and France not also declare war on the Soviet Union?
Beria Memo to Stalin
“The orders for the mass murder had been given by Lavrenty Beria, the head of NKVD, and had been signed and approved by the Soviet Politburo, including its leader, Joseph Stalin.” (Sterio 2012, Katyn Forest Massacre: Of Genocide, State Lies, and Secrecy. Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law). This memo was written in 1940 and was not declassified until 1990. Furthermore, the Russian government held classified volumes of documents related to the massacre which were released in 2010.
In 1918, Pravda became an official publication, or “organ”, of the Soviet Communist Party. Pravda became the conduit for announcing official policy and policy changes and would remain so until 1991. Subscription to Pravda was mandatory for state run companies, the armed services and other organizations until 1989.
This organization was a great source of fake news and actually still exists in Russia today. Currently, the Pravda paper is today run by the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, whereas the online Pravda.ru is privately owned and has international editions published in Russian, English, French and Portuguese.
Here and now in the United States, we face a bigger threat of false information and censorship. Take your pick from big tech such as Google, Facebook, and Twitter and radical left news such as CNN, NBC, ABC, and etc. We cannot let this country continue down the dark path of socialist revolution. The Marxist idea of a utopian society is enticing too many, especially the poor and broken masses. However, history has proven any country developed on the ideologies of Karl Marx will only provide more suffering to most of the people and allow a handful of evil tyrants free reign.
McGrath, Alister. 2009. Heresy: A History of Defending Truth
Materski, W., Lebedeva, N. S., & Cienciala, A. M. (2007). Katyn : A Crime Without Punishment. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Sterio, M. (2012). Katyn Forest Massacre: Of Genocide, State Lies, and Secrecy. Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law, 619.
Foreign Relations of the United States: Diplomatic Papers, 1944, The British Commonwealth and Europe, Volume III Document 1155. https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/citing-frus