Most Women Are On Crazy Pills, And It’s Bad For Everyone
An entire generation of women is lost amidst engineered anxiety, chasing hollow independence while forsaking the proven anchors of marriage, family, and selfless purpose.3 lies your therapist is telling you

We live in an era of mental health awareness. Therapy has exploded into a multi-billion-dollar industry, with the United States accounting for roughly half of global mental health spending. Nearly a quarter of the U.S. population, including children, has at least one mental health diagnosis.
One might think that more awareness and therapy = healthier, happier people.
But sadly, that’s not the case at all. We're actually in the throes of a mental health crisis that's getting worse, not better.
According to Dr. Greg Gifford — pastor, licensed biblical counselor, and author of “Lies My Therapist Told Me” — therapy culture has become an issue as big as the conditions it claims to treat.
The problem? The secular world doesn’t understand the human soul as God designed it.
In this fascinating interview with Allie Beth Stuckey, BlazeTV host of “Relatable,” Dr. Gifford lists three common lies secular therapists tell their clients.
Lie #1: Brain = Mind
In the world of secular therapy, the mind and brain are deeply interconnected. An ailing mind is indicative of an ailing brain. That’s why mental health issues are often linked to “chemical imbalances.”
But Dr. Gifford says the mind and brain are vastly different. Unlike the physical brain, the mind, which is synonymous with our spirit or soul, is “immaterial” and “will continue to exist after [the] brain has deceased.” In Romans 12:2, we are told God renews not the brain but the mind. For the Christian being sanctified, this happens even as the brain organ is deteriorating with age.
The brain, says Dr. Gifford, is “the control center of your outer man. ... It's not determining my thoughts. It is more like a filter ... of what is happening in my thinking.”
Unfortunately, the default perspective of the Western world is that “everything has a medical explanation,” which means we rarely question “what's happening in my inner person in my soul.” The result is that people with mind/soul issues leave the psychiatrist’s office with medication that treats the brain.
And even worse, these drugs are prescribed even though no actual medicine — brain scans, deficiency testing, or otherwise — was practiced.
Lie #2: Medicine is the answer
When we understand the distinction between the mind and the brain, it becomes clear that soul problems need soul answers — not the psychotropic medications the secular world leans on.
“Start to develop a worldview that the solutions are coming from the scripture, not from the secular therapeutic,” says Gifford.
Even if we are experiencing physical symptoms that point to physical issues, that doesn’t mean our minds aren’t a factor — or even a root cause — in our distress. As the Holy Spirit cultivates in us the fruits of the Spirit, our bodies are impacted as well. Peace can regulate a palpitating heart. Joy can boost serotonin levels in the brain.
Further, there is freedom in knowing our bodies cannot make us sin. The Spirit “can direct the mind no matter what's happening in our physiology,” says Allie.
Lie #3: Your struggles aren’t sin
Repentance is a cornerstone in the Christian walk. “What does repentance mean practically?” asks Gifford. “Change of mind, not change of brain.”
Secular therapy often frames anxiety, depression, or relational conflicts as innocent "disorders" or traumas — biological glitches or environmental bad luck — with no call to examine the heart. The lie? Your pain isn't tied to sin, rebellion, or a hardened mindset, so you don't need to repent and turn to God's word for real renewal.
But Gifford warns this skips the soul surgery only scripture can provide, leaving people stuck in symptom loops rather than being transformed.
For those who need support, he suggests “[finding] somebody who would use God's word as the source and authority to really help [you] with the root of what's going on.”
To hear more of the conversation, watch the full interview above.
Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?
To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
'Carrie' and the monster who raised me

The devil and his minions have haunted me all my life.
As far back as I can remember, I've been visited by the unquiet dead, the hungry ghosts, and even Old Scratch himself in my dreams. Perhaps these nighttime visitations were spiritual attacks, perhaps they were the predictable manifestation of the violence and instability of my upbringing.
Like Piper Laurie in 'Carrie,' my mother forced me to kneel while she stood above me bellowing. 'Humble yourself before me!' she shrieked. 'GodDAMN you, humble yourself!'
Maybe they were both; maybe the kind of moral derangement that afflicted my parents was a kind of demonic possession.
The devil I know
I'm not sure I believe in God, but I'm getting closer to believing in the devil. That's a confused position, admittedly, but that's what you get from a guy who believed as a child until it was punished out of him and then spent too many years as an obnoxious "new atheist" adult.
Whatever the answer may be, I've been terrified and fascinated by the supernatural, the uncanny, and the grotesque all my life. The kinds of spooky stories that gripped me were the type you find in Victorian English ghost story anthologies. Authors like E.F. Benson, M.R. James, and Elizabeth Gaskell.
If you like these too, no one reads them better than English podcaster Tony Walker. His "Classic Ghost Stories Podcast" is one of the few I find so good that I voluntarily pay for it. This is no amateur sideshow; Walker's narration is professional grade. Why he's not rich reading books for Audible, I'll never know.
Weeping and wailing women in veils who glide down hallways. Rain-bedraggled brides hitchhiking on the side of the road who disappear from their ride's passenger seat as he drives past Resurrection Cemetery. Fingerprints that appear on the windows of automobiles that cross the railroad tracks where a locomotive hit a school bus long ago killing the children on board. Their spirit fingers gently push your car along to make sure you don't meet their sad and untimely fate.
In search of ... belief
Like many kids of the 1970s and 1980s, I grew up watching shows like the cryptid/aliens/spook-filled "In Search Of," narrated by Leonard Nimoy. My library card was full many times over with every book on Bigfoot, extra-sensory perception, telekinesis, poltergeists, and the Bermuda Triangle.
Have you heard about the moving coffins of Barbados? That's top-quality spine tingles. As the story goes, a wealthy family living on the Caribbean island built a family vault in the cemetery. Every time a member died, the crypt was opened to accept a new coffin. And every time the crypt was opened, the coffins that were already there were tossed about helter-skelter.
Maybe it was flood waters. Except that there was no evidence of water incursion. Maybe pranksters did it. But the family sealed the stone door and sprinkled sand on the floor, and there was never a footprint betraying a (living) human presence.
For a proper classic haunting, you can't beat the Brown Lady of Raynham Hall. Nearly everyone with a passing familiarity with the spirit world of 20th-century popular culture has seen the photograph of this long dead woman, a translucent, begowned figure descending the grand staircase of the palatial home in Norfolk, England, built during the reign of James I in 1620.
According to two photographers who were documenting the inside of the estate in 1936, as they were setting up a shot, they looked up at the stairs in astonishment. A veiled specter was float-walking silently down the stair treads, and they had just enough time to open the shutter on their plate camera and capture the most famous ghost photograph of all time.
Was she the shade of Lady Dorothy Walpole? Lady Walpole was said to have been immured in a room in Raynham Hall for the rest of her life at the hands of her husband, Charles Townshend, 2nd Viscount Townshend, who was angered by her unfaithful dalliances.
Or was this just the first and best example of trick-ghost photography, a double-exposed photographic plate? In the early days of photography, the public was not wise to the trickery available to a skilled image-maker. Long before Photoshop and AI, the public believed the camera never lies.
I want to believe. There's something magnetic, romantic, and almost erotic about the possibility that a curtain separates us from the realm of the dead and that it thins at certain times, like now. As a child, I delighted in being scared so badly I didn't dare turn off the flashlight under the covers I used for my clandestine and very-much-not-allowed post-bedtime reading.
Joy interrupted
Yet the possibility of an ethereal realm where the dead who refuse to acknowledge their condition "live," a plane where real devil cavorts are not merely fun and games. If that plane exists, and if it's populated by any of the henchmen attributed to Satan, then the other side is very serious business indeed. I'm not so sure I want to believe, in that case, but I'm also not so sure that I don't.
When I was 8 years old, my family took a rare trip to a sit-down restaurant on Christmas Eve. We were poor, and a night out at Demicelli's Italian Restaurant was so special that Christmas would have been joyful even if we didn't get a single present. As we walked toward Placentia Boulevard in Fullerton, California, I looked at the night sky and saw the brightest star I'd ever seen.
"Mommy, look!" I said, tugging at my mother's sleeve. I pulled on her cigarette hand, which annoyed her. "It's the star of Jesus, Mommy. It's the star that guided the Wise Men to the baby Jesus!"
It was wondrous. It made me feel light-headed with a joy I'd never felt.
My mother made a derisive sniggering noise as she blew out smoke. "Oh, no it isn't, Josh," she mocked. "It's just a star. Probably Venus."
My face went red with embarrassment, and I stayed quiet the rest of the night. I felt stupid. Unsophisticated. Dumb. Childlike. Naive. And substandard. This was a problem that repeated itself over the years. My mother was the resentful "victim" type, and she was at war with God.
I convinced her to take us to the Presbyterian church where I'd been (to her reluctance, as she recalled it) baptized as an infant for Christmas Eve services in 1986. Mother spent the walk home railing about those "Goddamned hypocritical Christians! Where were they for this single mother when I needed a little help to put food on the table?"
I can't repeat the rest of what she said in a respectable publication.
Maternal monster
It wasn't until my 40s that I realized why I had been captivated to the point of obsession with certain dark characters in disturbing films like 1976's "Carrie." This was an adaptation of Stephen King's debut novel of the same name, a book that still ranks among his finest work. It's only nominally about a teen girl with telekinesis, the psychic ability to move objects with her mind. The story is really about a frightened girl who grew up with a maternal monster.
If you've seen the movie, you remember Piper Laurie's almost kabuki performance as Margaret White, a religious fanatic tormented by her own sense of failure and sin. Seeing herself as a fallen woman who fornicated with a man, she uses extreme interpretations of scripture to berate and subjugate the result of that union, her daughter, Carrie. Just as Margaret believes she can never be forgiven, she can never forgive her daughter for being born, for embodying her mother's sin in too-real flesh.
So she screams at Carrie, beats her, forces her to confess sins the girl has never committed (they were Margaret's sins), and worst of all, locks her in a "prayer closet." The scene that terrified me the most was the vignette in the dining room when Margaret forces Carrie to her knees as she intones about how God had loosed the raven on the world, and the raven was called sin.
"Say it, woman! Say it!" Margaret screams. "Eve was weak. Eve was weak!"
She drags Carrie to the prayer closet, a black cloak whirling about her like the wings of the raven, and babbles insanely while her daughter screams for mercy. Lighting a candle in the dark, Carrie looks up to a figure of St. Sebastian on the wall, a grotesque effigy with agonized eyes reflecting the pain of his arrow wounds.
Fascinated by fear
Margaret White obviously had a severe condition called Borderline Personality Disorder, which also afflicted my mother. While my mother was not a religious fanatic, she treated me the way Margaret White treats Carrie. Just as in the movie's dining room scene, my mother forced me to kneel while she stood above me bellowing. "Humble yourself before me!" she shrieked. "GodDAMN you, humble yourself!"
My mother did not want what she claimed she wanted: respect and filial piety. She wanted to be worshiped. My mother created herself God in her own image.
So I prayed to God to be delivered from my mother's prison, but I never got an answer, or one I recognized. I was more certain that the world was full of angry entities, though, and to say I felt haunted wouldn't go far enough.
That which terrorizes also fascinates. Over my life, I've tasted and re-tasted the fear through movies like "Carrie" and "Mommie Dearest." Fictional versions of my real-life horror were a poison candy; they hurt so good, like the compulsion to thrust the tongue repeatedly into a canker sore that won't heal.
I still don't know what I believe about God, the soul, heaven, or hell.
I knew what I saw
No Halloween story would be complete without a personal anecdote of an encounter with the unexplained. This is the first time I've told this story to anyone, let alone in print. Like I do myself, you may doubt me. I admit that I was halfway to drunk when it happened. But in the moment, I knew what I saw and heard, I knew I was only buzzed on three beers, not falling-down drunk. I wasn't hallucinating pink elephants or anything else.
It was 1992. I was 18 years old and sharing an apartment with my best friend, Lisa. It was movie night in the living room, and it was my turn to fetch fresh Molson Goldens from the refrigerator. I put the sweating bottles on a round cocktail tray with a rubber no-slip bottom I'd brought home from the restaurant I worked at.
I was a skilled waiter who could hold a tray with four entrees and several cocktails without spilling. And though I'd had a few beers, I was not drunk. In the hallway as I was about to enter the living room, one of the standing beer bottles on the tray violently flipped over to the horizontal with a thud. It wasn't the kind of soft thud that happens when something tips over. It was a THUD, as if someone had thrown the bottle into the tray.
Remember, it was a rubberized tray. It was actually difficult for a glass on such a tray to slide, let alone tip over. I had not tilted the tray; I was not weaving drunkenly as I walked. The other beer bottle didn't tip over. The two mugs on the same tray didn't move. More, the same thing happened a few minutes later in the living room. My (replaced) beer bottle on the side table, three feet from reach, loudly tipped over on a perfectly level table and made a loud rap.
I remember so clearly stopping still as the blood drained from my head. Did I really just see what I thought I saw? I did. And I felt it, too.
In that moment in the hall, I said this in my head: "What you just saw and heard really happened. You're not drunk, and you're not hallucinating. But no one will believe you, and over time, you will not believe you either. Your memory will soften, and you will convince yourself that you were drunk and that you somehow caused these bottles to tip over in apparent defiance of the laws of physics and friction."
That's exactly what happened. As I tell you this story, I doubt myself. At the same time, I remember the warning I spoke to myself in my head about doubt there, in the moment, and I know I wasn't crazy.
Happy Halloween.
Second chances kill innocents

Republicans might finally take me seriously after years of warning: America suffers not from mass incarceration, but from mass under-incarceration. The system needs tougher sentences, not softer ones.
The brutal murder of 23-year-old Ukrainian refugee Iryna Zarutska, allegedly at the hands of career criminal Decarlos Brown Jr. on a Charlotte commuter train, didn’t reveal anything new. It shocked the nation precisely because it put on camera what has become routine in our cities since the bipartisan “criminal justice reform” wave dismantled Reagan-era tough-on-crime policies.
Legislators will have a choice when they reconvene: Pass strong reforms like these or watch more innocent people die.
For every man like Brown who slipped through the cracks, at least 10 more walk free when they should be locked up for life.
Brown had been arrested 14 times since 2007. His record included assault, felony firearms possession, robbery, and larceny. He didn’t see the inside of a prison until 2014, when an armed robbery conviction earned him a mere four years. He racked up more arrests after his release in 2020, but neither prison nor psychiatric commitment followed. The justice system looked the other way.
The result was predictable. Brown’s obvious mental instability made him even more dangerous than an ordinary criminal. Yet over the last 15 years, Republicans and Democrats alike embraced “reform” that made second chances for the violent and insane a top priority. They weakened sentencing, gutted mandatory minimums, downgraded juvenile crimes, eased up on drugs and vagrancy, and abandoned broken-windows policing. Hard-won gains against crime and homelessness evaporated.
The final insult: Brown was last released on cashless bail by North Carolina Magistrate Judge Teresa Stokes, allegedly affiliated with a pro-criminal “second chances” group. But violent offenders don’t just get second chances. They get third, fourth, and 15th chances. Most criminals never even face charges. Prosecutors downgrade cases. Convicts skate on early release. The cycle spins on.

Look at the numbers. In 2024, the FBI’s incident-based reporting system logged over 12.2 million crimes. Strip away drug and gun cases, and the picture remains grim: 2.4 million violent crimes with no arrest. Another 1.25 million serious property crimes — arson, burglary, motor vehicle theft — with no arrest. Every year, more than a million offenders escape justice. Meanwhile, the nation’s prison and jail population sits at roughly 1.9 million.
Even when police make arrests, punishment rarely follows. In 2021, only 15,604 people went to prison for robbery despite 121,000 reported incidents. Just 4,894 went away for car theft out of 550,000 cases. Even homicide convictions lag far behind — just 6,081 murderers entered prison against more than 15,000 killings.
This isn’t a statistical fluke. It’s a system that fails to punish violent crime year after year.
RELATED: Iryna Zarutska’s name should shame the woke

So what needs to change? Here’s a checklist every state legislature should adopt in the next session:
- Ban public encampments on streets, sidewalks, and public property; allow lawsuits against localities that fail to enforce.
- Elevate porch piracy penalties, following Florida’s lead.
- Impose stiff punishments for organized retail theft and flash mobs.
- Tighten “truth-in-sentencing” laws to ensure violent offenders serve their full terms.
- Pass anti-gang statutes that cross county lines, fund prosecutions, and mandate enhanced sentences for gang-related crimes.
- Let prosecutors, not judges, decide whether to try violent juveniles as adults.
- Set mandatory minimums for carjackings, especially for repeat offenders.
- Impose harsh sentences on felons caught with firearms, and harsher still when they use them.
- Require parole violators to finish their sentences.
- Hold repeat offenders without bond; revoke pretrial release when new crimes are committed.
- Fund prosecutors’ offices to clear the backlog of violent felony cases.
- Strengthen “three strikes” laws to eliminate loopholes.
- Apply the death penalty to fentanyl traffickers.
- Mandate quarterly public reporting of judges’ sentencing records in a searchable database.
- Criminalize squatting and streamline removal.
Legislators will have a choice when they reconvene: Pass strong reforms like these or watch more innocent people die.
Social media outrage won’t fix this crisis. Neither will empty calls for “accountability.” As Iryna’s grieving family warned, “This could have been anyone riding the light rail that night.”
That’s the truth — and unless lawmakers act, it will be the truth again tomorrow.
If mental health experts can’t identify murderers, what’s the backup plan?

A profound mental health crisis lies at the heart of violence in America. Decarlos Brown Jr., the suspect in the brutal stabbing death of the Ukrainian woman Iryna Zarutska in Charlotte, North Carolina, was in a mental hospital earlier this year and was diagnosed with schizophrenia. But doctors wouldn’t have released him if they had viewed him as a danger to himself or others.
Similarly, the killers at Minneapolis’ Annunciation Catholic School and Nashville’s Covenant School both struggled with mental illness. Nearly all mass shooters also battled suicidal thoughts.
Our mental health system cannot serve as the last line of defense — too many mistakes slip through.
“We will never arrest our way out of issues such as homelessness and mental health,” Charlotte Mayor Vi Lyles warned after the stabbing death. “Mental health disease is just that — a disease. It needs to be treated with the same compassion.” After the Minneapolis attack, House Speaker Mike Johnson underscored the issue: “The problem is the human heart. It’s mental health. There are things that we can do.”
Yet despite the fact that more than half of mass public shooters over the past 25 years were already under the care of mental health professionals, not a single one was identified as a danger to themselves or others. An entire body of academic research now explores why mental health experts so often fail to predict these attacks.
What’s the plan?
When professionals cannot identify threats before atrocities are committed, society must ask: What is the backup plan?
The Minneapolis school murderer admitted: “I am severely depressed and have been suicidal for years.” After the Nashville school shooting, police concluded the killer was “highly depressed and highly suicidal throughout her life.” Yet even with regular psychiatric care, experts found no signs of homicidal or suicidal intent.
The 2022 Buffalo supermarket killer showed the same pattern. In June 2021, when asked about his future plans, he answered that he wanted to attend summer school, murder people there, and then commit suicide. Alarmed, his teacher sent him for evaluation by two mental health professionals. He told them it was a joke, and they let him go.
Later he admitted: “I got out of it because I stuck with the story that I was getting out of class, and I just stupidly wrote that down. It was not a joke; I wrote that down because that’s what I was planning to do.”
Many well-known mass killers saw psychiatrists before their attacks. U.S. Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, who murdered 13 people at Fort Hood in 2009, was himself an Army psychiatrist. Elliot Rodger, the UC Santa Barbara "incel" shooter, had received years of high-level counseling, but like the Buffalo killer, Rodger simply knew not to reveal his true intentions. The Army psychiatrist who last saw Ivan Lopez (the second Fort Hood shooter) concluded there was no “sign of likely violence, either to himself or to others.”
Aurora movie theater shooter James Holmes’ psychiatrist did warn University of Colorado officials about Holmes’ violent fantasies shortly before his attack, but even she dismissed the threat as insufficient for custody. And both a court-appointed psychologist and a hospital psychiatrist found Virginia Tech shooter Seung-Hui Cho posed no danger to himself or others.
Psychiatrists have every incentive to get these diagnoses right. Beyond professional pride and the desire to help, they face legal obligations to report threats. Families of victims have even sued psychiatrists for failing to recommend confinement. Despite this, psychiatrists consistently underestimate the danger.
The problem runs deep enough to generate a whole academic literature. Some experts suggest psychiatrists try to prove their fearlessness or become desensitized to risk. Additional training in unusual cases may help, but predicting such rare outcomes will always remain extremely difficult.
Hindsight makes the warning signs look obvious. Before the attack, even to experts, they rarely do. And while addressing mental illness, we should not stigmatize it. Mentally ill people are far more likely to become victims of violence than perpetrators. Only a tiny fraction ever commit murder.
Take schizophrenia: More than 3.5 million Americans live with the disorder, yet only one schizophrenic has committed a mass attack since 2019. That makes the odds of such a crime less than 1 in 3.5 million — extremely rare.
Victims left defenseless
No one wants dangerous individuals to access weapons. Are we going to disarm all mentally ill people, even though they themselves are at increased risk of violent crime? One woman we know saw her husband murdered in front of her by her stalker. She was very depressed but feared that in seeking mental help she would be denied the right to own a gun (which she needed to protect herself).
Another factor that makes these attacks difficult to stop is that they are planned long in advance, with six months being about the shortest. The Sandy Hook massacre was planned for over two and a half years, allowing the perpetrator plenty of time to obtain weapons.
RELATED: If ‘words are violence,’ why won’t the left own theirs?

These killers, like the recent attacker in Minneapolis, often state outright in their manifestos and diaries that they target “gun-free zones.” They may be crazy, but they aren’t stupid. They expect to die, but they want attention when they do. They know that the higher the body count, the more media coverage they’ll receive. That’s why they choose places where no one can fight back.
Weapons bans won’t work
The attack in Charlotte happened in a gun-free zone. The woman had no chance to defend herself when the attacker struck from behind, and no one on the train intervened. Bystanders may have hesitated out of fear — after all, the killer was a large man armed with a knife, even though knives are also banned on public transportation. Someone with a firearm possibly could have stopped the assault, just as a Marine veteran in July did in a Michigan Walmart, where at gunpoint he forced a knife-wielding attacker to drop his weapon. Others who tried to stop the attacker without a gun were stabbed.
Our mental health system cannot serve as the last line of defense — too many mistakes slip through. If mental health professionals can’t reliably stop these attackers before they strike, we must ask: What’s the backup plan? Leaving targets unprotected isn’t the best option.
Editor’s note: This article was originally published by RealClearPolitics and made available via RealClearWire.
Could passengers have SAVED Iryna Zarutska?

Surveillance footage of the murder of Ukrainian refugee Iryna Zarutska in Charlotte, NC, reveals that the other passengers on the train didn’t help her until some time had passed — and Blaze media co-founder Glenn Beck doesn’t believe it’s his place to judge.
“I’m torn about how I feel about the people on the train because my first instinct is, they did nothing. They did nothing,” Glenn says.
“What would I have done? What would I want my wife to do in that situation?” Glenn asks.
However, after Glenn and BlazeTV host Stu Burguiere imagine their wives in the same situation, they realize it’s not their place to judge.
“It’s tough to put yourself in that situation. It’s very easy to watch a video on the internet and talk about your heroism. Like, everybody can do that very easily on Twitter,” Stu says.
“When you’re in a vehicle that doesn’t have an exit with a guy who just murdered someone in front of you, has dripping blood off of a knife that’s standing 10 feet away from you, 15 feet away from you, there is probably a different standard there that we should all kind of consider,” he continues.
“When I’m thinking of my wife, my advice to my wife would not be to jump into the middle of that situation at all costs,” Stu says.
While Glenn agrees, he does hope he himself would have taken action.
“I would hope that I would have gotten up and at least tried to help her, you know, help her up off the floor, at least be there with her as she’s seeing her life, you know, spill out in under a minute,” Glenn says.
“And that’s the other thing we have to keep in mind. This all happened so rapidly,” he adds. “A minute will seem like a very long period of time in that situation, but it’s a very short period of time in real life.”
Iryna Zarutska’s name should shame the woke

The brutal murder of Iryna Zarutska on a Charlotte train shocked the city and the nation. Yet, the reaction from Mayor Vi Lyles revealed something deeper — and more troubling — about the worldview now shaping our institutions.
Instead of calling it what it was — a violent crime committed by “a mentally deranged lunatic” and “well-known career criminal,” as President Trump described the suspect — Lyles chose to label it a “tragic event.” The tragedy, she suggested, was not the victim’s death so much as society’s failure to provide resources for the killer.
We cannot blame 'the system.' We cannot blame God. Facing consequences for our actions is not oppression — it is humanizing.
That rhetorical move matters. It echoes the same radical philosophy that has taken over higher education and increasingly influences our politics. In this worldview, criminals are not moral agents. They are victims of circumstance.
The death of free will
As a humanities professor, I have heard this refrain for decades. Subjects meant to explore the human condition and the pursuit of wisdom have been hijacked by an ideology that insists “marginalized” individuals cannot be held responsible for their actions.
The logical problem should be obvious. If the “oppressed” are not responsible for their actions, then they lack free will. That is a dehumanizing philosophy. It strips away moral agency and reduces people to products of “the system.”
Yet, radical professors advance this philosophy because it props up political causes that would collapse under scrutiny. Their favorite tool is the fallacy of appealing to pity: “Don’t hold me accountable, I had a hard life.” But if failure is always the system’s fault, then so is success. The DEI professor will tell you that bad outcomes come from oppression — and good outcomes come from privilege. Individual responsibility vanishes.
Crime 'happens' to the criminal
In this view, crime happens to the criminal. The system, not the sinner, makes the choice. The remedy? Education and therapy. Punishment for evil is rejected outright.
Take two examples.
First, Chicago’s Mayor Brandon Johnson (D). Listen to him describe gun violence and you’d think guns sprout legs and walk into the city from other states. Who are the human beings pulling the triggers? That question is avoided, because the system supposedly forced them into crime.
Second, watch the recent Jubilee video featuring Patrick Bet-David. Anti-capitalist students invoked the plight of the single mother. To hear them tell it, single motherhood simply “happens.” No choices, no responsibility. Just victims of capitalism who have no choice but to work four jobs. The notion that having unprotected sex outside marriage is a choice is brushed aside.
This isn’t compassion, let alone justice. It’s a simple refusal to acknowledge reality.
Complaints against God
Charlotte’s racial equity policies rest on this same rejection of free will. And beneath that rejection lies something even deeper: complaints against God Himself.
Christianity teaches that God created men and women with real differences and that He governs the circumstances into which we are born. Radical critics call this unfair. Why can’t Bet-David be a single mother? Why should people be born rich or poor? Why does God still hold us accountable?
RELATED: Trump DOJ takes action against violent thug accused of savagely murdering Ukrainian refugee

The apostle Paul anticipated this very objection in Romans 9:19: “Then why does God still find fault? For who resists His will?” The ultimate complaint is against divine providence.
But denying free will is absurd. Many born into hard circumstances have learned to be wise and seek God. Many born into privilege have chosen evil. Our choices define us.
The humanizing truth
We cannot blame “the system.” We cannot blame God. Facing consequences for our actions is not oppression — it is humanizing. It reminds us that we have the dignity of free will and the responsibility to choose between good and evil.
And here is the one solution the radical professor will never offer: There is forgiveness for our sin, freely given in Christ. That is the antidote to a culture that excuses evil and denies accountability.
DOJ weighs firearm ban for transgenders after Minneapolis shooting

In the aftermath of the tragic Minneapolis shooting — where two young lives were lost to a violent gunman — Trump’s Department of Justice is considering taking action to stop guns from getting in the hands of transgenders.
The move is being celebrated by conservatives, as the shooter, Robin Westman, was a 23-year-old man who identified as a woman.
One potential avenue could see Trump formally declare that those who identify as transgender are mentally ill and no longer legally allowed to possess firearms.
“Under Attorney General Bondi’s leadership, this Department of Justice is actively considering a range of options to prevent mentally unstable individuals from committing acts of violence, especially at schools,” a spokesman for the DOJ said.
However, while many conservatives believe that transgenderism is a mental illness — they’re not sure that broadly banning guns for any group of people is the right move.
“I read that headline and my knee-jerk reaction is like, good, they shouldn’t have guns. And then I’m like, ah, I don’t know how you do that with the Second Amendment,” BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales says on “Sara Gonzales Unfiltered.”
“I think everyone would agree you don’t want violent, mentally ill people to have firearms,” BlazeTV contributor Grant Stinchfield chimes in. “So we can all agree on that. The problem becomes ‘Who is the decider?’”
“So who decides who’s violently and mentally ill? Because I promise you, Nancy Pelosi is going to say, ‘Well, Stinchfield’s mentally ill because he loves freedom and God and all those things.’ So it’s all in the decider,” he continues.
“Now, transgender certainly ... it’s a violent, violent section, mentally ill people, and it is a mental illness. If you think you’re a boy and you don’t have nuts hanging down below you, you’re mentally ill,” he adds.
Gonzales notes that while not all shooters are transgender, transgenders make up such a small percentage of the population and have committed several of the devastating mass shootings in recent years.
“It’s pretty skewed when you look at that,” she says, adding, “And so it’s just hard because you want to prevent this from happening.”
Want more from Sara Gonzales?
To enjoy more of Sara's no-holds-barred take to news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

