In preparation for a recent doctor's appointment, I had to go online and complete a patient intake form. One of the questions asked for the patient's sex. In the past, I was given two choices — without necessary clarification. On this form, which is apparently standard these days, I saw this:
MALE
FEMALE
(Sex Assigned at Birth)
This kind of lunacy has been endorsed by the American Medical Association and the American Psychological Association, ostensibly in the name of something called "safetyism" (i.e., to err on the side of not hurting anyone's delicate feelings).
God’s plan for the world is self-evident, and it requires us to put on our work boots and be His hands and feet.
America’s founders, perhaps inadvertently, caught on to this whole idea of “that which is obvious” when composing the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident.” Back in their day, everyone was on board with certain statements — for example, “All men are created equal.”
Our founders were merely stating the facts, and they were asking men and women of good will to sign on — along with the 56 representatives of the 13 original colonies who put their “official” John Hancocks on the document. These men, along with every patriot living in America at the time, pledged their “lives, fortunes, and sacred honor,” putting their blood and treasure on the line in the unknown and dangerous fight ahead.
Yet nearly 250 years later, many Americans can’t even perceive these truths, let alone fight for them.
How did this change?
Could it be that failing to believe in nature and nature's God — another of these self-evident truths of yesteryear — has removed any common basis by which truth can be self-evident? If you no longer believe in objective truth — or the God who defines it — then you’re free to invent your own reality, your own “truth,” and your own “gods.”
This shift helps explain how a baby in the womb can be dismissed as a mere “blob of tissue” and terminated at any point in pregnancy — even after birth in some places. It’s how a grown man can claim to be a woman, compete against girls in sports, and expect the rest of us to cheer him on as if biology had nothing to say about it.
It might also explain why many will champion open borders and still say they are good citizens of America. Never mind that a nation without borders is no nation at all — another self-evident truth.
Christians have a unique responsibility in this cultural moment. Like Queen Esther, we were “born for such a time as this.” We are not meant to sit this one out.
Unfortunately, some Christians sit on the sidelines, arguing that getting involved culturally or politically will “spoil their witness,” that they have been put on this Earth just to “preach the gospel.”
RELATED: Embodied truth: God's timeless design silences woke gender delusion
And some among the “faithful” who have unashamedly joined the prevailing winds of an off-course culture are quick to point to passages like “judge not lest you be judged” to show that making waves in culture is un-Christian.
However, those who adopt this line of thinking are completely oblivious to what is happening out in the open and therefore act with political immaturity. The Bible, in both the Old and New Testaments, beckons believers to get involved in their world. They have to get their hands dirty and their hair messy in the righteous fight that encourages and supports building God’s kingdom on Earth.
God’s plan for the world is self-evident, and it requires us to put on our work boots and be His hands and feet.
This is the “mission” that we were “assigned at birth.”
Editor's note: A version of this article appeared originally at American Thinker.
The star of HBO’s “Last Week Tonight,” comedian John Oliver, has made his stance on men competing in women’s sports clear. That is, he loves it and would like to see more of it.
The comedian played a Fox News clip where the hosts were discussing a United Nations report that revealed the amount of medals women have lost to transgender athletes — 600 female athletes have lost close to 900 medals because of their transgender opponents.
“Yeah, 900 medals. That is a go-to statistic. It was even cited on the floor of the Senate during their debate over a trans sports ban and featured prominently in J.K. Rowling’s latest tome,” Oliver said to a laughing audience. “But we got curious about that number, so we looked at that report, and it turns out, first, it wasn’t produced by the U.N.”
“It was submitted to it by a special rapporteur, who herself said its findings do not necessarily represent those of the U.N. And if you go online to the footnote that it cites and click on it, you get sent to this website She Won, where anyone could submit an instance of a cis woman losing to a trans woman anywhere in the world, in any competition, big or small,” he added.
Oliver went on to claim that the content on the She Won website is published by random people on the internet and that there are women in sports, like disc golf, who are “happy” to see trans people join them on the field.
Stu Burguiere of “Stu Does America” isn’t as amused as Oliver’s audience, as he knows that what Oliver is saying isn’t funny, true, or helpful.
Burguiere points out that the organization She Won also saw Oliver’s monologue and wrote in a post on X, “First, John Oliver leads viewers to believe that the content on SheWon.org is directly published by random people on the internet. This is totally false. We encourage people to submit tips, and our team of volunteers reviews each entry before we publish anything.”
“We only publish what we can verify from primary and secondary sources. We state this methodology clearly on our website, so check one off for deliberately misleading viewers,” the post continued.
But that’s not all Oliver got wrong.
“Second, John Oliver also suggests that our data is stale, mentioning that it dates back to the year 2001. This is extraordinarily misleading. 97% of our data is dated no earlier than 2014. 86% is from 2019 and onward. Check another off,” the X post revealed.
“Third, John Oliver attacks our org to discredit the idea that a significant number of women are displaced by male athletes in women’s competitions. This is absurd because She Won does not purport to provide a comprehensive list of every woman denied a medal to male athletes,” they added.
“This is one of the typical go-to arguments of people saying that conservatives or sane people are wrong when it comes to this issue. ‘Come on, barely ever happens,’” Burguiere mocks. “Something they will never admit, but at the end of the day, I don’t know, you probably have one, maybe two daughters.”
“It’s happening to them. It kind of makes a big difference in your life, doesn’t it? It might not be as big of an issue as some nationwide pandemic, but it’s a pretty big issue, especially when it hits your family,” he adds.
To enjoy more of Stu's lethal wit, wisdom, and mockery, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
In my quest to learn the ins and outs of the orthodoxy of evolutionary theory (and therefore bring to light its deficiencies), I discovered geologist and lawyer Dr. Casey Luskin, associate director of the Center for Science and Culture at the Discovery Institute.
A proponent, researcher, and advocate for intelligent design, Dr. Luskin has been defending academic freedom for scientists who face discrimination because of their support for ID for nearly 20 years.
Life is very low entropy, meaning it’s very ordered, and yet it’s also very high energy. How exactly does life maintain this seemingly contradictory state?
I’ve written about it here before, but I shared with Dr. Luskin my personal skepticism concerning the religion of evolution. As a layman (relative to him), it seemed to me as if Evolution™ had an “invisible hand of God” problem that’s never been seriously addressed.
The mythology of Evolution™ seems to have a beginning (the Big Bang), an end (modern Homo sapiens), but no middle. And as I came to understand from my conversation with Dr. Luskin, much of the evidence for evolutionary theory amounts to flimsy, tenuously linked assumptions on the verge of being disproved in various fields.
We began by discussing one of the more popular arguments against intelligent design: the concept of “junk DNA."
The argument goes something like this: If everything is intelligently designed, then why does the vast majority of our DNA seem to serve no purpose?
As Dr. Luskin explained, the idea originated in the early 1960s, when scientists mapped out the molecular protein production process: DNA encodes RNA, which then carries that information to ribosomes, which in turn use it to assemble chains of amino acids into proteins.
Because so much of the DNA that had been studied up to that point did not seem tobe doing that, it was tossed in the proverbial junk bin, hence the name.
The idea really took off with the publications of Japanese geneticist Susumu Ohno’s “So Much Junk DNA in Our Genome” in 1972 and Richard Dawkins’ “The Selfish Gene" in 1976.
Ohno famously asserted that 90% of our DNA was total nonsense. Dawkins piggybacked off that and gave the junk DNA a “purpose,” saying that the only true function of the gene was to replicate itself. Whether or not the gene helps you is of non-substance.
Luskin was one of the first to push back against this idea. As an undergraduate at the University of California, San Diego, he experienced firsthand how the "junk DNA" theory was used to dismiss the burgeoning ID movement.
Luskin would argue with his professors and peers that it was still premature to conclude that most of our DNA could be classified as “junk,” citing the unfinished-at-the-time Human Genome Project as evidence for the lack of evidence.
Luskin seems to have been onto something. In the past few years, the “junk DNA” theory has slowly unraveled.
This is in large part thanks to a groundbreaking series of papers entitled the ENCODE Project, published by biologists studying “non-coding” DNA — the goal being to uncover the mysteries of the human genome.
Since the ENCODE Project began in 2010, it has found that at least 80% of the genome has shown evidence of biochemical functionality. In other words — contrary to junk DNA theory — this DNA is transcribing information into the RNA.
And as for the other 20%?
The lead researchers of the ENCODE Project say that many of these non-coding elements of DNA occur within very specific cell types or circumstances, so to catch them in action doing what they’re supposed to be doing is simply very difficult. But they predict that as they study more and more cell types, that that 80% figure will most certainly jump up to 100%.
All this is to say that applying a Darwinian paradigm to discoveries about gene function has led to erroneous conclusions about "junk DNA" — which then, in turn, has been used to justify the same Darwinian theory that spawned it.
Meanwhile, Intelligent Design's predictions that we would find function for that junk DNA have been borne out.
As Luskin pointed out, the origin of life is the origin of information. Life, on its face, is a very strange arrangement of matter.
It’s very easy to find things that are high entropy-high energy (think tornadoes or explosions) or low entropy-low energy (snowflakes, crystals). But life is different. Life is very low entropy, meaning it’s very ordered, and yet it’s also very high energy.
How exactly does life maintain this seemingly contradictory state?
Machinery.
Our cells are full of molecular machines that process and encode information to be used as applicable instructions. That is what our DNA, RNA, and ribosomes are all there for. They’re machines that process information.
Imagine you wanted to watch "Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith" on DVD. Would you be able to watch it without the DVD player? No.
Imagine if the instructions for building the world’s first ever DVD player were on a DVD. Could you build the DVD player just with the DVD? No.
The information and the information-processing machine are inseparable.
The question then becomes: How did these machines come into being?
Did they build themselves? No, we just showed how that can’t be the case.
The only plausible answer is — intelligence. There needed to be an intelligent designer to create both the machinery and the instructions.
Despite the initial mockery greeting Intelligent Design, the theory is gaining ground as a reliable model and explanation for the origin of life and genes. And that’s simply because the evidence is getting to be a bit undeniable.
Make sure to follow Dr. Casey Luskin’s work here.
The North Carolina state legislature overrode the Democrat governor’s veto of HB805, which seeks to “prevent the sexual exploitation of women and minors,” on Tuesday, passing it into law. Both the state House and the state Senate voted to override Gov. Josh Stein’s veto of the a Republican sponsored legislation that would officially “recognize two […]
A more relevant discussion about the advertisements might point out the fact that women are overly sexualized and porn is so intertwined with American marketing.
Christian camp IdRaHaJe in Colorado refuses to comply with progressive gender ideology policies and faces potential shutdown.
Trump isn't targeting trans-identifying Americans. Trans activists, on the other hand, are perfectly willing to target America's cultural fabric and replace it with their own distorted framework.
Americans agree on the sex binary by a bigger majority than any president has won in two centuries, which means most Americans are smarter than The Washington Post.
Though the trans- and DEI-focused amendments failed to pass, they demonstrated that the Trump administration intends to fight on all fronts.
ESPN has fired a host who recently voiced opposition to female-identifying men competing in women’s sports. On Thursday, The Athletic reported that ESPN has terminated the contract of “Sunday NFL Countdown” host Samantha Ponder, a longtime reporter for the network who previously covered college football. Former NFL quarterback Robert Griffin III was also fired by […]
www.theblaze.com
thefederalist.com