Who Is Rebekah Randall?

             My VIP for this week is Rebekah Randall, who is one of many parents who have acted against indoctrination of children in schools. According to Jonathan Butcher, Randall lives in Texas and has two children. She became incensed when her son’s teacher implied that school was the only place where children could be taught correctly about racial identity. 

            Butcher quotes Randall as saying that the teachers at the school had “twisted valuable lessons” about the way the people should be treated. She said that the teachers had been “putting race as the most important part of someone’s identity.” This concept is one of the main ideas of critical race theory. She told the teachers, “You are racializing children to identify one another.”

Randall later explained, “They have moved away from the academic rigor that they had.” She said that the teachers want to focus on “political correctness,” but she wants her children “to be learning academics” and “not to be protesting” for critical race theory. This mother took her children out of their school and found another one where teachers said that they did not teach critical race theory.

Supporters of critical race theory declare that critical race theory is necessary for correct understanding of race. The theory’s ideas are not as simple and harmless as they say. Butcher asked some good questions, such as why would parents remove their children from schools teaching critical race theory? If the ideas are so simple and harmless, why are teachers trying to hide them from parents? Butcher made some excellent comments.

Children should not have to spend their days considering how racial bias can be found in every lesson….

No one should be forced to participate in such blatant forms of discrimination….

Critical race theory’s “endgame” is conflict, as Zinn and other theorists describe. The protesters wondering why lawmakers are looking once more for ways to prevent discrimination need only to read their own brochures.

Or, sadly and altogether too often, their child’s homework.

How Should We Honor Our Fallen Heroes?

            The topic of discussion for this Constitution Monday has to do with Memorial Day. As you most likely know, Memorial Day is a day set apart by the federal government to honor all men and women who died fighting for America. It is not a holiday on which we celebrate, but it is one where we commemorate those who died in the uniform of their country, having made the ultimate sacrifice. More than 1.3 million men and women have died in America’s wars.

            Memorial Day is the day that we remember all those who sacrificed for the good of America. It is only fitting that we show gratitude for their sacrifices. President Ronald Reagan made the following statement: “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.”

            One way that we can show gratitude for our fallen heroes is protect and preserve our Constitution and our American way of life. Socialists have been planning, plotting, and preparing to destroy capitalism and to install socialism. When we fight against socialism, we show gratitude for those who made the ultimate sacrifice for America.

One way that we can fight socialism is to keep critical race theory out of our school systems. This theory looks at everything through the lens of race and is met to divide Americans along racial lines. Marxist teachings say that there must be oppressors and oppressed. Critical race theory teaches that whites are the oppressors, and people of color are the oppressed. They teach that Americans should have equity – equal outcome – instead of equality – equal opportunities. They teach children and teens to hate each other and to hate America.

We can show gratitude for the fallen heroes by teaching the goodness of America. Yes, there are things in our history – such as slavery – that should be taught. We should teach all the things that were evil about slavery. Heavenly Father never intended that any of His children should be slaves to others. We are all His children, and we should all have equal opportunities. We should honor our fallen heroes by strengthening, protecting, and preserving America – not trying to destroy it.

Why Should I Keep the Sabbath Day Holy?

            My Come, Follow Me studies this week took me to Doctrine and Covenants 59. This revelation was received on Sunday, August 7, 1831, in Jackson County, Missouri. This revelation contained the Lord’s instructions for His expectations for the Saints, including proper Sabbath day observance. The Lord also confirmed that the people who obey His commandments will be blessed both temporally and spiritually. The Doctrine and Covenants student manual contains the following information.

During the summer of 1831, as Church members settled in Jackson County, Missouri, they encountered a frontier community whose conduct sharply contrasted with the laws and standards of the gospel. Gambling, drinking, and violence were prevalent among the residents, some of whom had come to the Missouri frontier to avoid the justice of the law. These residents also had a blatant disregard for the Sabbath day that was noticed not only by the Saints but by other travelers who came to Missouri. One Protestant missionary observed: “Christian Sabbath observance here appears to be unknown. It is a day for merchandising, jollity, drinking, gambling, and general anti-Christian conduct” (in T. Edgar Lyon, “Independence, Missouri, and the Mormons, 1827-1833,” BYU Studies, vol. 13, no. 1 [1972], 16). A traveler passing through western Missouri in 1833 observed that “the only indications of its being Sunday [were] the unusual Gambling & noise & assemblies around taverns” (Edward Ellsworth, in John Tret Irving Jr., Indian Sketches: Taken during an Expedition to the Pawnee Tribes (1833), ed. John Francis McDermott, new ed. [1955], xxii). In this environment the Lord outlined standards of conduct for those Saints gathering to Zion.

            When the Savior prayed for His disciples during His final hours of mortality, He prayed that the Father would not take them “out of the world” but “keep them from the evil” (John 17:15). The Savior taught the same idea nearly two thousand years later to His Saints when they moved to Missouri sought to live among lawless and profane people. These were the circumstances when the Lord revealed what later became Doctrine and Covenants 59:9-13.

9 And that thou mayest more fully keep thyself unspotted from the world, thou shalt go to the house of prayer and offer up thy sacraments upon my holy day;

10 For verily this is a day appointed unto you to rest from your labors, and to pay thy devotions unto the Most High;

11 Nevertheless thy vows shall be offered up in righteousness on all days and at all times;

12 But remember that on this, the Lord’s day, thou shalt offer thine oblations and thy sacraments unto the Most High, confessing thy sins unto thy brethren, and before the Lord.

13 And on this day thou shalt do none other thing, only let thy food be prepared with singleness of heart that thy fasting may be perfect, or, in other words, that thy joy may be full.

            There are several topics for discussion found in those five verses. Referencing verse 9, Elder Quentin L. Cook of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles explained how honoring the Sabbath day helps keep us unspotted from the world: “Honoring the Sabbath is a form of righteousness that will bless and strengthen families, connect us with our Creator, and increase happiness. The Sabbath can help separate us from that which is frivolous, inappropriate, or immoral. It allows us to be in the world but not of the world” (“Shipshape and Bristol Fashion: Be Temple Worthy – in Good Times and Bad Times,” Ensign, Nov. 2015, 41-42).

            Also referencing verse 9, Elder Jeffrey R Holland of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles explained the importance of the statement “Offer up thy sacraments upon my holy day” (verse 9). He explained that “a sacrament could be any one of a number of gestures or acts or ordinances that unite us with God and his limitless powers” (“Of Souls, Symbols, and Sacraments,” in Jeffrey R. Holland and Patricia T. Holland, On Earth As It Is in Heaven [1989], 193). Some acts that unite us with God or bring us closer to Him and bring us His power include praying, singing hymns, giving and receiving priesthood blessings, sharing testimonies, studying the scriptures, giving service, and renewing covenants through the partaking of the sacrament.

            In verse 10, the Lord commands His Saints to “rest from your labors.” This means that the Lord wants us to rest from the rigors of our daily labors, the work that consumes our time during the week – such as farming, gardening, school assignments, and office or retail work. It is a day to rest our physical bodies and to renew our spirits.

            President James E. Faust (1920-2007) of the First Presidency highlighted some of the blessings that come from resting from our labors on the Sabbath day:

Over a lifetime of observation, it is clear to me that the farmer who observes the Sabbath day seems to get more done on his farm that he would if he worked seven days. The mechanic will be able to turn out more and better products in six days than in seven. The doctor, the lawyer, the dentist, the scientist will accomplish more by trying to rest on the Sabbath than if he tries to utilize every day of the week for his professional work. I would counsel all students, if they can, to arrange their schedules so that they do not study on the Sabbath. If students and other seekers after truth will do this, their minds will be quickened and the infinite Spirit will lead them to the verities they wish to learn. This is because God has hallowed his day and blessed it as a perpetual covenant of faithfulness. (See Ex. 31:16.) (“The Lord’s Day,” Ensign, Nov. 1991, 34).

            What does it mean to “pay thy devotions unto the Most High” (verse 10)? This means that we will remember, worship, and serve the Lord with all our heart, mind, might, and strength. Our devotions to God reflect our feelings for Him. President Russell M. Nelson of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles taught:

How do we hallow the Sabbath Day? In my much younger years, I studied the work of others who had compiled lists of things to do and things not to do on the Sabbath. It wasn’t until later that I learned from the scriptures that my conduct and my attitude on the Sabbath constituted a sign between me and my Heavenly Father. With that understanding, I no longer needed lists of dos and don’ts. When I had to make a decision whether or not an activity was appropriate for the Sabbath, I simply asked myself, “What sign do I want to give to God? That question made my choices about the Sabbath day crystal clear….

How can you ensure that your behavior on the Sabbath will lead to joy and rejoicing? In addition to your going to church, partaking of the sacrament, and being diligent in your specific call to serve, what other activities would help to make the Sabbath a delight for you? What sign will you give to the Lord to show your love for Him? (“The Sabbath Is a Delight,” Ensign, May 2015, 130).

            Even though the Sabbath day is hallowed as a day to rest from our labors, it is not an invitation for us to be lazy. The Lord explained that the Saints were to “offer thine oblations and thy sacraments unto the Most High, confessing thy sins” (verse 12). He also explained that the Saints should prepare simple meals rather than extravagant feasts. President Spencer W. Kimball (1895-1985) taught: “The Sabbath is a holy day in which to do worthy and holy things. Abstinence from work and recreation is important, but insufficient. The Sabbath calls for constructive thoughts and acts, and if one merely lounges about doing nothing on the Sabbath, he is breaking it” (Teaching of Presidents of the Church: Spencer W. Kimball [2006], 170).

 

Why Do We Commemorate Memorial Day?

            Families, communities, and America are stronger when parents teach the reason for and the history of Memorial Day. For many families, Memorial Day marks the first week for camping each summer. For others, it is a day for barbecues and get-togethers. For still others, it is a day to attend commemorations for the men and women who made the ultimate sacrifice in behalf of their nation.

            Stephen W. Stathis published an interesting article titled “How Memorial Day became an American tradition.” He indicated that the commemoration of Memorial Day arose in the years following the Civil War. I can understand why such a war would bring about such an idea. Stathis estimated that 620,000 men lost their lives during the Civil War. Those numbers indicate that there were just as many families mourning the loss of a loved one, plus friends and neighbors of the families.

According to the Department of Veteran Affairs, more than two dozen towns both north and south of the Mason-Dixon line claim to be the first to celebrate Memorial Day, including Columbus, Mississippi; Macon and Columbus, Georgia; Boalsburg, Pennsylvania; Richmond, Virginia; and Carbondale, Illinois. Congress officially designated Waterloo, New York, as the “birthplace” of Memorial Day without either a hearing nor any historical documentation. Other contenders, however, haven’t been dissuaded.

One of the very first Memorial Day celebrations was on May 1, 1865, when Black workmen gathered at the Washington Race Course and Jockey Club in Charleston, South Carolina, which the Confederates had converted into an outdoor prison. Yale University historian David W. Blight tells us these men reinterred the bodies of Union prisoners of war buried there, decorated their graves, built a high fence around the cemetery, “whitewashed the fence and built an archway over an entrance.” Later that day, they “staged a parade of 10,000 on the track. … The procession was led by 3,000 Black schoolchildren carrying armloads of roses. … Several hundred Black women followed with baskets of flowers, wreaths and crosses.”

            The article has much more interesting information, and I encourage you to link to it here. Memorial Day was known as Decoration Day when I was a child because it was a day when people put flowers, wreaths, and flags on graves. I remember that my parents took flowers to the graves of their loved ones. Stathis indicated that the “name ‘Memorial Day’ goes back to 1882, but the older name didn’t disappear until after World War II. It wasn’t until 1967 that federal law declared ‘Memorial Day’ the official name.” 

            Whether you call the day “Decoration Day” or “Memorial Day,” it is a good day to teach children and grandchildren the reason why we commemorate the day. This site has the following numbers for the men and women who died in America’s wars. 

Civil War (1861-1865)                                   620,000

World War II (1939-1945)                             405,399

World War I (1917-1918)                               116,516

Vietnam War (1965-1973)                                58,209

Korean War (1950-1953)                                  36,516

Revolutionary War (1775-1783)                       25,000

War of 1812 (1812-1815)                                 20,000

Mexican-American War (1846-1848)              13,283

War on Terror (2001-Present)                             7,057

Spanish-American War (1898)                           2,446

Gulf War (1990-1991)                                           258

                                                                                 1,304,684

 

            We can clearly see that the most people were killed in the Civil War and the two World Wars, but the total is staggering. At least, 1,304,684 people paid the ultimate price because they stood between America and those who would destroy our nation. Wise parents will teach their children about the sacrifices made by all these people and the importance of remembering those sacrifices. Such parents will strengthen their families, communities, and America.

What Is Critical Race Theory, and How Can We Fight It?

            The liberty principle for this Freedom Friday is how knowing the enemy is critical for defending against them. The topic for tonight is critical race theory, which is becoming embedded in most of the institutions in America. However, Americans are becoming aware of it and looking for directions.

            Christopher F. Rufo knows much about critical race theory and spoke about it at Hillsdale College on March 30, 2021. He began his talk by explaining the origin of it. 

In explaining critical race theory, it helps to begin with a brief history of Marxism. Originally, the Marxist Left built it political program on the theory of class conflict. Marx believed that the primary characteristic of industrial societies was the imbalance of power between capitalists and workers. The solution to that imbalance, according to Marx, was revolution: the workers would eventually gain consciousness of their plight, seize the means of production, overthrow the capitalist class, and usher in a new socialist society.

            Rufo explained that there were several regimes that “underwent Marxist-style revolutions [in the 20^th century], and each ended in disaster.” These regimes included the “socialist governments in the Soviet Union, China, Cambodia, Cuba, and elsewhere racked up a body count of nearly 100 million of their own people….” The “Marxist intellectuals in the West” recognized the failures in the mid-1960s, so they changed their tactics.

But rather than abandon their Leftist political project, Marxist scholars in the West simply adapted their revolutionary theory to the social and racial unrest of the 1960s. Abandoning Marx’s economic dialectic of capitalists and workers, they substituted race for class and sought to create a revolutionary coalition of the dispossessed based on racial and ethnic categories.

            The Marxists were thwarted in their efforts in the 1960s by the civil rights movement. Instead of overthrowing America, proponents of the civil rights movement “sought instead the fulfillment of the American promise of freedom and equality under the law. The radical Left did not give up and started to introduce critical race theory into institutions. Rufo gave a good description of critical race theory.

Critical race theory is an academic discipline, formulated in the 1990s, built on the intellectual framework of identity-based Marxism. Relegated for many years to universities and obscure academic journals, over the past decade it has increasingly become the default ideology in our public institutions. It has been injected into government agencies, public school systems, teacher training programs, and corporate human resources departments in the form of diversity training programs, human resources modules, public policy frameworks, and school curricula.

            Rufo explained that proponents of critical race theory use euphemisms to describe it, words like “equity,” “social justice,” “diversity and inclusion,” and “culturally responsive teaching.” They are “masters of language construction” who realized that Americans would not buy “neo-Marxism.” So, they use equity. This word “sounds non-threatening and is easily confused with the American principle of equality. But the distinction is vast and important.”

Indeed, equality – the principle proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence, defended in the Civil War, and codified into law with the 14^th and 15^th Amendments, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 – is explicitly rejected by critical race theorists. To them, equality represents “mere nondiscrimination” and provides “camouflage” for white supremacy, patriarchy, and oppression.

In contrast to equality, equity as defined and promoted by critical race theorists is little more than reformulated Marxism. In the name of equity, UCLA Law Professor and critical race theorist Cheryl Harris has proposed suspending private property rights, seizing land and wealth, and redistributing them along racial lines. Critical race guru Ibram X. Kendi … has proposed the creation of a federal Department of Antiracism. This department would be independent of (i.e., unaccountable to) the elected branches of government, and would have the power to nullify, veto, or abolish any law at any level of government and curtail the speech of political leaders and others who are deemed insufficiently “antiracist.”

One practical result of the creation of such a department would be the overthrow of capitalism, since according to Kendi, “In order to truly be antiracist, you also have to truly be anti-capitalist.” In other words, identity is the means, and Marxism is the end.

An equity-based form of government would mean the end not only of private property, but also of individual rights, equality under the law, federalism, and freedom of speech. These would be replaced by race-based redistribution of wealth, group-based rights, active discrimination, and omnipotent bureaucratic authority. Historically, the accusation of “anti-Americanism” has been overused. But in this case, it’s not a matter of interpretation – critical race theory prescribes a revolutionary program that would overturn the principles of the Declaration and destroy the remaining structure of the Constitution.

            Rufo said, “Critical race theorists must be confronted with and forced to speak to the facts.” He suggested numerous questions to ask.

Do they support public schools separating first-graders into groups of “oppressors” and “oppressed”? Do they support mandatory curricula teaching that “all white people play a part in perpetuating systemic racism”? Do they support public schools instructing white parents to become “white traitors” and advocate for “white abolition”? Do they want those who work in government to be required to undergo this kind of reeducation? How about managers and workers in corporate America? How about the men and women in our military? How about every one of us?

            Rufo said that there are “three parts to a successful strategy to defeat the forces of critical race theory: governmental action, grassroots mobilization, and an appeal to principle.” We see states stepping up and passing laws to keep critical race theory out of their schools. Former President Donald Trump signed an executive order that banned training programs for critical race theory in the federal government, but President Joe Biden rescinded this order on his first day in office.

According to Rufo, “a multiracial and bipartisan coalition is emerging to do battle against critical race theory” with parents “mobilizing against racially divisive curricula in public schools. Employees are speaking out against it in their workplaces. In the third matter of principles, “we need to employ our own moral language rather than allow ourselves to be confined by the categories of critical race theory.” Rufo concluded his talk, “Truth and justice are on our side. If we can muster the courage, we will win.”

Why Are There So Many Investigations into the 2020 Election?

            The results of the 2020 election were certified more than four months ago. Yet, investigations about those results continue to increase. An audit known as “America’s Audit” has been happening in Maricopa County, Arizona. A federal judge in Georgia has unsealed ballots for an audit there.

            According to M.D. Kittle at the Daily Signal, a complaint was filed by an election watchdog on behalf of five residents of Milwaukee. The complaint was filed by the Amistad Project, and Milwaukee became the fourth of the Wisconsin-5 “cities to be accused of election law violations under state law and the U.S. Constitution.” The complaint says that “liberal, third-party groups funded by Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg” were allowed to “set the rules and help administer” the presidential election in November 2020. 

            Kittle wrote that there are complaints about election procedures in Green Bay, Kenosha, Racine, and Milwaukee filed with the Wisconsin Elections Commission. The Commission added another twist to the situation when it “sought outside counsel because its administrator is accused of a conflict of interest.”

The Chicago-based Center for Tech and Civic Life handed out more than $8 million in “election safety and security” grants to Wisconsin’s five largest and most heavily Democratic cities, which also include Madison. The bulk of that total -- $6.3 million – was distributed as part of a controversial contract between the center and the five cities.

The Center for Tech and Civic Life received more than $300 million from Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla Chan, ostensibly to help local elections offices administer safe and secure elections.

As a Wisconsin Spotlight investigation uncovered, CTCL required the “Wisconsin 5” cities to sign contracts that included funding “clawback” provisions if they failed to meet the organization’s demands. Local elections officials had to work with the center’s partner organizations, including the National Vote at Home Institute.

In final official results in Wisconsin, Democrat nominee Joe Biden defeated Donald Trump by 49.6% of the vote to 48.9%, flipping a state with 10 electoral votes that Trump won in 2016.

            It sounds like rural Wisconsin went with Trump, while Democrats and the CTCL rigged the big cities to go with Biden. The complaint said that “more than a dozen such left-wing partners of the Center for Tech and Civic Life” were operating in Milwaukee. Kittle stated that election law complaints have been filed against Milwaukee, Green Bay, Racine, and Kenosha by the Amistad Project.

The Wisconsin Assembly’s Campaigns and Elections Committee is investigating the involvement of third-party groups in the state’s 2020 elections. Reid Magney, spokesman for the Wisconsin Election Commission, said the agency had received the Milwaukee complaint and posted it on its website.

“The respondents have been notified of the complaint and have been given 10 business days to file a sworn response,” Magney said, adding that the complaint would be “handled the same way as the other complaints involving Green Bay, Racine, and Kenosha.”

Outside counsel will be brought in to review the complaint.

Will the 1776 Commission Continue to Oppose the 1619 Project?

            Former President Donald Trump saw the damage being done by the 1619 Project and appointed 18 members to his newly created President’s Advisory 1776 Commission. President Joe Biden abolished the commission on his first day in office. However, the 1776 Commission did not die but merely worked without federal appointment. The commission submitted its report to the White House, but the Biden administration has removed it from the WhiteHouse.gov site.

            According to Fred Lucas at The Daily Signal, the appointed members of the 1776 Commission met yesterday at the Hillsdale College campus in Washington, D.C. They expressed a united opposition to a federal regulation that promotes the teaching of critical race theory in school. They called for states and other localities to establish groups in their areas to promote the true and accurate history of America. At the end of a one-page statement, the commission stated the following. 

Lastly, recalling the long history of citizen participation in our civic life, we call on states, counties, and local communities to form their own 1776 commissions to advance this great work of American renewal as we prepare for the 250^th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence in July 2026.

            In their published statement, the commission made clear that they oppose the proposed regulation by the Biden Department of Education to make it a priority to federally fund the teaching of critical race theory in K-12 school systems.

We are concerned that the U.S. Department of Education’s proposed rule defining priorities for the American history and civics education programs, whether as critical race theory or under the misleading name of “antiracism,” actually encourages and seeks to direct federal funds to the teaching of racial discrimination in America’s elementary and secondary school systems.

This proposed rule should be withdrawn, and individual states should oppose any such race-based pedagogy as part of their curricula, especially if that curricula is imposed by the federal government.

The Constitution leaves education to the states and localities and denies the federal government any authority to impose national curriculum standards. The federal government should not circumvent this obstacle by using federal funding to entice states and localities to adopt what it wants taught in the nation’s schools. We learned from the failed Common Core experiment that one-size-fits-all national models are a blueprint for trivializing and mechanizing learning.

Instead, we encourage a genuine civics education that will rebuild our common bonds, our mutual friendship, and our civic devotion and eagerly look forward to the forthcoming release of curricula designed in the true spirit of 1776.

            Critical race theory seeks to teach everything about America through the lens of race.

Thus, they teach that America began in 1619 when the first black slave came to America. The 1619 Project seeks to teach school children to hate each other and to hate their country, while the 1776 Commission seeks to create “consensus on historical facts of America’s founding, the Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution.” Its report in January 2021 focused on the “bleaker parts of U.S. history such as slavery and restriction of voting rights to white males.” Nevertheless, activists and commentators on the left were critical of it. This is the reason why it no longer exists at WhiteHouse.gov.

Who Is George Papadopoulos?

             My VIP for this week is George Papadopoulos. He worked on the Donald Trump 2016 presidential team and is a former member of the Foreign Policy Advisory Panel. He was framed by the Deep State who were trying to take out Trump, and he was featured heavily in Mueller’s report on the Russian Collusion Delusion. He was sentenced to 14 days in prison after pleading guilty to lying to the FBI.

            Papadopoulos is also an author and has a new book out, which is titled Deep State Target. He and his wife Simona Maniante were recently interviewed by Jordan Conradson at The Gateway Pundit.

            Conradson, Papadopoulos, and Maniante attended the “Revival Revolution Faith, Freedom and the Fight” rally that was held last Saturday in Glendale, Arizona. The interview took place after the rally.

            Conradson asked about the Deep State target on the back of Papadopoulos as well as the Italian connection to the whole investigation. Since Simona is Italian and worked in government in Europe, Papadopoulos asked her to speak on the Italian connection. Before she did, he elaborated on why there are questions about the investigation by John Durham.

Durham traveled to Italy where he learned a lot about this famous professor who was targeting me for a reason that has yet to be understood clearly, and that the ex-Italian foreign minister was the one that introduced this infamous professor to me, and it’s in Italy where John Durham’s probe became criminal.

            Simona explained that “all the roads lead to Rome and in this case, it’s true. I used to work for European Parliament and I happened to meet Joseph Mifsud many years before he even set George up with this bomb. She continued by explaining that she knew Joseph Mifsud “because of his connection with the Italian government and in particular, with the former head of a socialist group, who Mifsud was campaigning for … It’s clearly an intentional cover-up by the Italian government.

            Conradson asked “who blocked the info on his case from being released?” Papadopoulos said that it is “a complicated story” and suggested that people get his book if they want all the “details … in a chronological manner.” He continued with his explanation without the details.

Sydney Powell about two years ago had filed some sort of request and we learned that Mifsud’s phone is in the hands of the DOJ… We just don’t know where this person went, why he’s being hidden and who’s hiding him… They know exactly who this is. I think they’re waiting for it and they’re going to expose it. And, it’s going to come at the right time after some of this stuff with the audit comes out. That’s what I predict of course.

            Conradson asked if Durham is “real, or is he just another big lie?” Papadopoulos answered that “Durham is very real” in “my opinion.” He continued with his explanation.

I know who he has interviewed in October 2019. Specific guys with the U.S. intelligence community that should not have been meeting with me, this infamous Australian diplomat, we know he’s spoken to the Italians, to various governments. He has been working non-stop since 2019 where I think he got all the juicy info back then. Then Barr appoints some special council a month before Biden goes to the White House, and now Durham is simply, in my opinion like I said I don’t talk to Durham, he’s waiting for the right moment to expose what he has learned and I think it is going to be tantamount to conspiracy in the Obama Administration. I truly believe that. I think he is incredibly real and I would actually put my entire reputation on the line saying this… It’s going to be very interesting to see when and how that information comes out, how the media tries to deflect or cover it up.

            When Conradson asked if him if he had “an estimate of when that information might come out,” Papadopoulos replied, “I think by this summer we’re going to have a final conclusion on Durham.” He continued, “This thing can’t last forever but I just think he’s giving Biden over 100 days to start really dropping what he has. And if he has nothing, I’m on the record of saying I put my reputation on the line regarding Durham.”

            Conradson concluded that Papadopoulos and Maniante “are extremely confident about what we will find out and when we will find it.” However, they are “not so confident about what the fake news will say to cover up for crooked Obama and Biden.

            The bold and colored type was in the original. You can listen to the interview at this site.

“I think by This Summer We’re Going to Have a Final Conclusion on Durham” - Papadopoulos DROPS BOMB on the release of Durham report (VIDEO) (thegatewaypundit.com)

Would You Want Your Daughter Rooming with a Transgender Woman?

             The topic of discussion for this Constitution Monday is the problem caused to women by biological men who identify as women. Women are fighting to have a level playing field in sports to ensure that women are competing against women and not losing to men who identify as women. The latest situation with this problem is college women living and showering with men who think they are women.

            Virginia Allen at The Daily Signal reported on a court case brought by the College of the Ozarks. The college sought an exemption “from a Biden administration directive that allows biological men who ‘identify’ as female to live in women’s dormitories.” Federal Judge Roseann Ketchmark ruled against the Missouri college “because there was no specific injury.” In other words, the judge could not rule in favor of the college until a woman had been molested or raped by the want-a-be female. 

The college was seeking relief from a Department of Housing and Urban Development directive that prohibits all entities under the Fair Housing Act, including colleges, from discriminating against an individual “because of sexual orientation and gender identity.”

The HUD directive was announced shortly after President Joe Biden’s January “Executive Order on Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation.”

The college filed the lawsuit because the HUD directive threatens the school’s “long-standing religious beliefs,” said Valorie Coleman, chief communications officer for the College of the Ozarks, in a statement on behalf of the college’s president after the hearing.

HUD’s “rule change forces religious schools, like ours, to open our dormitories, including dorm rooms and showers, to members of the opposite sex. The Biden administration touts this change as freedom from discrimination, but this does not feel or look like freedom,” the spokeswoman said.

Failing to abide by the Biden administration directive puts the College of the Ozarks at risk of being hit with up to six-figure fines, Coleman said.

            The College of the Ozarks are exploring their right to appeal the ruling. They hope that the federal appeals court will “recognize that this is a meaningful rule change, and it imposes real obligations and creates real harm for females at College of the Ozarks, as well as at Christian schools across the nation.”

            Could this problem be caused by schools accepting federal money to operate? Could this also be the reason why four universities owned by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and operated through its Church Education System have turned down a total of $333,408,468 in stimulus funds over the past year? According to Tad Walch at The Deseret News, the four schools were allocated that amount but turned it down – the “total allocated to the four Latter-day Saint schools during the three rounds of stimulus.” 

All four schools, as well as others, reported that they did not need the federal funds despite losses caused by COVID-19. Are the schools simply being self-reliant, or are they avoiding federal “chains” that would bind them down to situations like the College of the Ozarks is facing?

What Is the Law of Consecration?

            My Come, Follow Me studies for this week took me to Doctrine and Covenants 51-57. As background, the Colesville (New York) Saints arrived in Ohio in May 1831, and they went to Bishop Edward Partridge for help in finding a place to live. The Prophet Joseph Smith received a revelation from the Lord to guide Bishop Partridge in arranging their settlement.  The revelation, now Section 51, contained the Lord’s instructions on how to organize stewardships of property and money among the Saints.

            Members of the Church of Jesus Christ were invited to live the law of consecration. Members living this law would sign over their property to the Church of Jesus Christ with the Bishop. The Bishop would then return property to you to manage. The property returned was usually what had been donated, in most cases, and sometimes with a little surplus. The difference is that the property became a stewardship rather than just a possession.

            Bishop Partridge was told by the Lord in Section 51 to “appoint unto this people their portions, every man equal according to his family, according to his circumstances and his wants and needs” (verse 3). Bishop Partridge was further instructed:

4 … when he shall appoint a man his portion, give unto him a writing that shall secure unto him his portion, that he shall hold it, even this right and this inheritance in the church, until he transgresses and is not accounted worthy by the voice of the church, according to the laws and covenants of the church, to belong to the church.

5 And if he shall transgress and is not accounted worthy to belong to the church, he shall not have power to claim that portion which he has consecrated unto the bishop for the poor and needy of my church; therefore, he shall not retain the gift, but shall only have claim on that portion that is deeded unto him.

6 And thus all things shall be made sure, according to the laws of the land.

            The principles of consecration and stewardship remain vital to the Lord’s work, but the procedures are different in now. Elder Quentin L. Cook explained as follows:

We live in perilous times when many believe we are not accountable to God and that we do not have personal responsibility or stewardship for ourselves or others. Many in the world are focused on self-gratification … [and] do not believe they are their brother’s keeper. In the Church, however, we believe that these stewardships are a sacred trust (“Stewardship – a Sacred Trust,” Ensign, Nov. 2009, 91).

            Elder Cook explained that members of the Church of Jesus Christ are under a sacred trust to watch over other members. President Spencer W. Kimball gave further explanation:

In the Church a stewardship is a sacred spiritual or temporal trust for which there is accountability. Because all things belong to the Lord, we are stewards over our bodies, minds, families, and properties. (See Doctrine and Covenants 104:11-15.) A faithful steward is one who exercises righteous dominion, cares for his own, and looks to the poor and needy (“Welfare Services: The Gospel in Action,” Ensign, Nov. 1977, 78).

            Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have a stewardship to take care of themselves, their families, and their properties. In addition, they are responsible to look after the poor and needy. The principles of consecration are alive and well in our day. This video explains the Law of Consecration. 

Why Are Correct Parenting Principles and Practices Critical for Children?

            Families, communities, and nations are strengthened by parents who follow appropriate parenting principles and practices. The family is the core unit of society and central to Heavenly Father’s plan for our happiness. Satan knows that the family is vital to salvation, so he does everything possible to destroy families. Heavenly Father put us in families to help us reach our full potential. He also gave us the remedy for the attacks of Satan: “I have commanded you to bring up your children in light and truth” (D&C 93:40).

            Society has several attitudes about parenting that are not appropriate or good for children. Some people believe that children are innately evil because of the Fall of Adam and Eve. Some parents with this belief think that they must “beat the devil” out of their children.

Some people believe that children are innately good and well-motivated, but they are corrupted by adult society. Parents with this belief allow their children to learn from experience and to follow their own inclinations. This or similar beliefs were held by French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau as well as humanistic psychologists Carl Rogers, and Abraham Maslow.

Some people believe that children are like a blank slate and neither bad nor good. John Locke believed that children are shaped by their experiences. John B. Watson and B.F. Skinner agreed with Locke, and they asserted that children can be conditioned or molded by controlling and altering their environment.

Some people believe that children are more than a blank state at birth and that early differences between individuals can be explained to a degree by biological factors. This idea diminishes the role of individual agency.

Some people believe that individuals have the ability to interpret – or even to construct – their environment. This belief recognizes agency and suggests that individuals can modify the effect of biological and environmental influences.

            Most or all of the listed attitudes contain some truth. It is true that children are born pure and innocent into a fallen world. It is also true that we are all affected by our environment, biology, and personal agency. However, none of these perspectives offers stable guidelines for moral behavior, but the gospel of Jesus Christ does. The scriptures tell us that children are pure and innocent because of the Atonement of Christ, and prophets teach us about the age of accountability and about our dual nature – spiritual and natural.

            We know that each child is individual and unique in both genetic composition and individual interests, talents, personality, desires, and abilities. We know that parents, siblings, and other people influence the development of each child. We also know that scientific research suggests biological characteristics affect the dispositions and temperaments of children.

            Social scientists have discovered that parenting techniques fall into four general approaches: authoritarian, permissive, authoritative, and uninvolved/neglectful. Authoritarian parents try to control and shape the behavior of their children. They show firm control but little warmth. Snowplow parents, helicopter parents, drill sergeant parents, tiger mothers, and stage mothers may all fall within the authoritarian approach.

Permissive parents usually show warmth and love toward their children but offer little guidance or direction. They allow their children to regulate their own activities, avoid the exercise of control, and do not insist on obedience to external standards. This approach has little or no control as well as little guidance and teaching. Free-range parents may fit into this approach.

      Authoritative parents, like authoritarian parents, expect much from their children. However, authoritative parents show a high degree of warmth and responsiveness. They are loving and supportive, but they guide their children and exert firm control as needed. Authoritative parenting is most consistent with the scriptures and gospel teachings.

Uninvolved/Neglectful: Uninvolved or neglectful parenting is characterized by few demands, low responsiveness, and little communication.

      In 1995, the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints published a document titled “The Family – A Proclamation to the World.” They stated the following in their proclamation: “Successful marriages and families are established and maintained on principles of faith, prayer, repentance, forgiveness, respect, love, compassion, work, and wholesome recreational activities.” The authoritative parenting approach encourages parents to adopt and live these principles.

      Parenting is difficult, but the rewards of good parenting are worthwhile. Parents do not need to be perfect, but they should be good-enough parents. Prophetic counsel tells parents “to do the best they can in their own family circumstances,” (James E. Faust) and “you fail only if you fail to keep trying” (Spencer W. Kimball).

      Parenting is the most important work that we can do, and God will hold us accountable for how we parent our children. However, He will look at all aspects of the situation. When parents do their best to rear their children in love and righteousness, they can strengthen their family, community, and nation.

      Ideas for this post come from the manual for a parenting class, Strengthening the Family, published by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.      

 

Will We Lose the Benefits of the Electoral College?

             The liberty principle for this Freedom Friday is the importance of the Electoral College. The Framers of the United States Constitution tried to organize a government where power would be spread among different positions. The power was divided between the federal government and the states, and between three branches of government – executive, legislative, and judicial.

The Electoral College was another way to divide the power. Each state has two senators and the 435 representatives are spread among the fifty states according to population. The electors for each state are the same numbers as the state’s representatives in Congress. This means that national elections will not be decided by residents of New York City and Los Angeles County. It also means that presidential candidates must consider the needs of states like Wyoming and Alaska with their small populations as well as California, Florida, Texas, and New York with their large populations.

The presidential election is won or lost on the number of electors that vote for them. Some Democrats won the popular vote but lost the electoral vote, the latest being Hillary Clinton. This is the reason why Democrats want to get rid of the Electoral College. They want the election of the president to depend solely on the popular vote – rewarding the populous states at the expense of the less populous states.

The Electoral College has been in danger for numerous years. Jarrett Stepman at The Daily Signal said that it could now be in greater danger than previously. He reported on an event held recently at The Heritage Foundation to discuss the Electoral College. He quoted the following statement from Heritage Foundation President Kay C. James made to introduce the topic. 

For over 200 years America has elected its presidents through the Electoral College….

While it’s a unique method for choosing a president, our country’s framers intentionally designed it this way. They wanted to strike a critical balance between people being able to choose their leader and states having proper representation in the process.

            James claimed that the Framers “took care in crafting a system that they hoped would prevent a tyranny of either the majority or the minority.” She used the success of “stable and fair elections throughout its history” as evidence that the Framers created a successful project.

            Despite the stability and fairness provided by the Electoral College, Democrats are plotting to get rid of it with their National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. James described this “movement is a threat that should concern all Americans because it would fundamentally change the way we elect our president and destroy the safeguards that the Electoral College provides.”

            According to Stepman, the movement is gaining supporters because “15 states and the District of Columbia have signed on to the pact.” The compact will “go into effect with a few more states whose Electoral College votes total 75.”

            The host of the event at The Heritage Foundation was Hans von Spakovsky, and he explained how the National Popular Vote Compact would work.

Basically, in the compact each state says, “We will award our Electoral College votes not to the presidential candidate who the majority of our voters voted for, but to whoever wins the national popular vote.

            Senator Jim Inhofe (R-Oklahoma) explained the intent of the Framers who sought to “ensure that the diverse interests of states would be heard and represented in selecting a president. The Framers were concerned about the smaller states and that their interests would not be “neglected or sacrificed” (James Madison).

            Inhofe stated that “60% of Democratic voters” want “to abolish the Electoral college.” The national popular vote movement is targeting specific states, including Arkansas, Arizona, Maine, Michigan, North Carolina, Nevada, Oklahoma, and Virginia. These particular states have representatives who have voted to get rid of the Electoral College.

            Even though the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact must be approved by Congress before it would go into effect, Democrats currently hold a slim majority in the House and control the Senate with a 50-50 split. The Electoral College, as well as the Supreme Court, stand in great danger due to the power held by Democrats.

 

What Will the 1776 Commission Do to Save Real American History?

            Before he left office, former President Donald Trump formed the President’s Advisory 1776 Commission with 18 members. On his first day in office, President Joe Biden disbanded the commission. Even though it is “no longer a presidential advisory commission or associated with the federal government,” the group will gather in Washington, D.C., on May 24 for a four-hour, working-lunch meeting. 

            Matthew Spalding, executive director of the commission as well as vice president of Washington operations for Hillsdale College, said that “It will continue in some form.” The appointees to the commission are all patriots who are familiar with United States history and the Constitution. They are all opposed to the 1619 Project.

            The public comment period ends soon for an Education Department regulation that would fund critical race theory in schools as well as promote the teaching of the 1619 Project. Critical race theory teaches that Americans are either an oppressor or the oppressed – depending on the color of their skin. The 1619 Project teaches that America began in 1619 when the first slave arrived in the colonies and that the Revolutionary War was fought to maintain slavery.

            The 1776 Commission may have been de-commissioned, but the patriots on it have not disbanded. Spalding sent a letter on Monday to the Department of Education outlining his thoughts on the proposed regulation.

The Department of Education’s proposed rule defining priorities for the American history and civics education programs, under the misleading name “anti-racism,” actually encourages and seeks to direct federal funds to the teaching of racial discrimination in America’s elementary and secondary school systems.

The proposed rule should be withdrawn, just as individual states, which actually have the authority over the nation’s K-12 educational system, should oppose race-based pedagogy as part of their curricula and even if attempted to be imposed lby the federal government.

            Hillsdale College President Larry Arnn and Carol Swain, a retired political science professor at Vanderbilt University were appointed to be the chairman and vice-chairman, respectively, for the commission. On behalf of Arnn, Spalding sent a message to members of the commission on Monday.

The work of the 1776 Commission was and is a noble effort. The 1776 Report calls for a return to the unifying ideals stated in the Declaration of Independence…. As we said in our statement on January 20, “the Commission may be abolished, but these principles and our history cannot be. We will all continue to work together to teach and to defend them.”

            You can find more information about the commission at this site. In January, the commission published its report with the goal of creating consensus on historical facts in the founding of America and the Declaration of Independence. While the report details the Constitution, it “focuses on bleaker parts of American history, such as slavery and restricting voting rights to white males for more than 125 years of the country’s history.” Spalding described the document as “a return to the unifying ideas stated in the Declaration of Independence” and added the following in January. 

It quotes the greatest Americans, black and white, men and women, in devotion to these ideas…. The commission may be abolished, but these principles cannot be. We will all continue to work together to teach and to defend them.

            Once published on the White House website, WhiteHouse.gov., the report has now been removed. However, I feel certain that it has been preserved somewhere by patriots.