Is ASU going to fire a Christian professor for being too Christian?



I believe Arizona State University has taken the first step toward terminating me, a tenured Christian professor, for being too Christian.

You might think tenure would protect a professor from religious discrimination by state university administrators. You would be mistaken. What I am experiencing at ASU demonstrates how university administrators can use the annual review process to punish professors for their beliefs and potentially build a case for terminating them.

This is harassment, and I believe it amounts to religious discrimination. It also sends a warning to every Christian professor at a public university.

Here is what is happening.

I am currently engaged in a lawsuit against ASU over its DEI training requirements. After more than two years of litigation, my attorneys argued before the Arizona Supreme Court on September 1. We are awaiting the court's decision.

This week, ASU’s provost has officially upheld a decision penalizing me for allegedly being too Christian in my classes.

In May, the dean of my college deducted points from my annual performance review and reduced merit pay because he claimed my teaching in 2025 was too Christian. What evidence did he offer for this remarkable accusation? Five quiz questions out of more than 80, along with two negative student evaluations.

That's it.

This is no longer merely one dean's judgment. ASU's senior administration has now endorsed the decision to penalize me for allegedly teaching classes that are too Christian. I have no further avenue of appeal within that process.

I have spent my career teaching students how to think. My administrators now seem determined to teach me what not to think. One wonders which of us has misunderstood the purpose of a university.

And the evidence? Let's examine it.

One question asks, "Why is knowing God the highest good?"

Is that uniquely Christian? Plato and Aristotle, neither of whom were Christians last I checked, explored the relationship between the divine, knowledge, and the highest good. Eastern philosophers have done the same. These questions have occupied philosophers for thousands of years.

Another asks, "What is the relationship between God and morality?"

Again, this is a foundational question in the history of philosophy. Plato raised it in the "Euthyphro." Aristotle connected ethics with his account of the highest good and the divine. Are we now supposed to eliminate questions about God and morality from philosophy courses?

RELATED: A Christian guide to trolling without sinning

Al Drago/Bloomberg/Getty Images

A third question states, "True or False: Death should not make us think about the meaning of life." This is a question from my class on the philosophical aspects of death and dying. It is a course I developed with ASU’s online specialists as part of master teacher training. ASU signed off on the class and then penalized me for teaching it!

The relationship between death and life's meaning is central to existential philosophy, including the writings of Viktor Frankl (not a Christian). Surely students studying philosophy should be allowed to consider how death relates to meaning in life.

These are philosophical questions, not evidence that I am improperly promoting Christianity.

One student wrote: "If I were a Hindu or Buddhist, and truly believed in reincarnation, I would be offended if I were asked to denounce it."

But I never asked that student, or anyone else, to denounce reincarnation, and the student gave no evidence that I did. Notice the hypothetical nature of the complaint: If I were a Hindu or Buddhist, and if I were asked to denounce my beliefs, I would be offended.

The student did not report that this actually happened.

The second student wrote: "Although I agree with what Owen Anderson teaches, I completely understand if people feel offended after taking his class."

Read that again. The student agrees with what I teach but imagines that someone else might be offended.

Apparently, at ASU, hypothetical offense by hypothetical students is sufficient grounds to penalize an actual professor. And this brings us to the larger problem.

Annual performance reviews are recurring evaluations. Once administrators officially determine that a professor's teaching is deficient because it is too Christian, what happens at the next review? I will be asked what steps I took to stop being so Christian? If administrators decide I have not adequately corrected the alleged problem, they can penalize me again. Repeated negative evaluations could then become the foundation for escalating disciplinary action.

That is how ASU could build a case for terminating a tenured professor.

RELATED: Campus free speech is alive — barely

Robyn Beck/AFP/Getty Images

And consider the burden this imposes. Rather than spending my time exclusively on teaching, research, and serving students, I must defend myself against accusations supported by a handful of philosophical questions and speculative complaints. Are the non-Christian professors put through this same scrutiny and additional burden?

This is harassment, and I believe it amounts to religious discrimination. It also sends a warning to every Christian professor at a public university.

If you discuss God, morality, eternity, or the meaning of life, administrators can apparently decide your teaching is too Christian. Can they then deduct points from your annual review? Deny you merit pay? Can they begin documenting supposed deficiencies that might eventually threaten your employment?

The chilling effect is obvious. Christian professors may decide that silence is safer than risking administrative punishment.

I have spent more than two decades teaching philosophy at ASU. I believe students deserve to encounter the great questions of philosophy, including the questions about God that philosophers have discussed since antiquity.

A public university should encourage those questions, not punish professors for asking them. ASU receives public funding, including federal money. It should not be permitted to use its administrative power to discriminate against Christian faculty.

Today, the accusation is that my classes are too Christian. Tomorrow, the question may be whether I am allowed to remain a professor at all. And if ASU can do this to me, what prevents other public universities from doing the same to Christian professors across America?

The champagne communists who sold Millennials a bill of goods



A generation was promised a simple path to the American dream: Earn a four-year degree, get a good job, buy a house, start a family. For many Millennials, the diploma arrived. The rest of the bargain did not.

Now student loan payments compete with rent, mortgages, and the cost of raising children. Graduates work in jobs that never required the credentials they borrowed money to obtain. Meanwhile, socialism has reached its highest positive rating since Gallup began tracking it in 2010. Who sold Millennials the original promise?

You were lied to by leftist universities that gladly took your money and left you in ruin.

Gallup’s September report found that 43% of Americans viewed socialism positively, up from 39% in 2025. Among adults ages 18 to 34, the figure was 57%. It is an extraordinary development. If government-backed higher education helped saddle a generation with debt, why would more government look like the solution?

The financial burden is real. The Federal Reserve Bank of New York reported $1.65 trillion in outstanding student loans in the second quarter of 2026. In a separate Federal Reserve survey, 23% of adults with student loans reported recent difficulty making payments. Even a manageable loan bill is money a borrower cannot put toward a down payment or a family.

But why did so many people borrow so much for credentials whose value varies so widely? Because Americans were repeatedly told a four-year degree was the necessary ticket to adulthood.

Parents heard it. Guidance counselors repeated it. Politicians promised greater access. Universities gladly collected the tuition, helped along by a federal lending system that made borrowing easier today and paying the bill a problem for tomorrow.

And some of the professors who taught students to distrust capitalism were only too happy to work within this arrangement. Universities expanded administrative operations while students took on mounting obligations. The people selling degrees should have been the first to explain what those degrees could actually buy.

The gamble persists for younger graduates. Federal Reserve research using 2023 data on graduates ages 22 to 27 found an underemployment rate of 9.7% for nursing majors, compared with 56.5% for liberal arts and 67.2% for criminal justice. Underemployment here means holding a job that typically does not require a college degree. These graduates are working, but many are not using the expensive credential they were told they needed.

RELATED:CS Lewis knew how clever people teach themselves to be fools

John Chillingworth/Picture Post/Hulton Archive/Getty Images

What did the colleges tell their applicants about those odds? If an 18-year-old is asked to borrow tens of thousands of dollars, the institution ought to disclose the likely costs, earnings, and risks. A degree is an investment only if the buyer has a realistic picture of the return. Universities should face the same scrutiny over misleading promises that we expect of any business.

Students also deserved a serious account of the alternatives: trade schools, apprenticeships, community colleges, military service, and employment without a four-year degree. These are legitimate paths to adulthood, not consolation prizes for people supposedly unfit for college.

There is a cultural problem, too. On too many campuses, students are trained to interpret society through oppression, power, and inequality. Let them study those arguments. But also make them confront the best defenses of markets, private property, entrepreneurship, and the limits of government. A university should teach students to examine competing ideas, not recruit them to a fashionable orthodoxy.

RELATED:Warning: This college course may be bad for your brain

Andi Purnomo/Getty Images

Professors who preach against capitalist exploitation might begin by examining the financial incentives of their own institutions. Some feed students a steady diet of anti-market rhetoric while they borrow heavily for degrees with uncertain returns. That is champagne communism for the faculty and a monthly payment for the graduate.

The irony is hard to miss. A generation taught to question capitalism and burdened by debt from a government-supported lending system may now look to government for relief. But another subsidy does not require universities to tell the truth about what they sell. Nor does it hold anyone accountable for promises that proved empty.

Accountability begins with honest disclosures in university advertising and recruitment. I am working on that problem through the Intellectual Nutrition Label project. If a school makes demonstrably deceptive promises, lawyers and class-action lawsuits may have a role. Institutions that charge families so much should not be exempt from answering for what they represent.

The lesson for Millennials is all too clear. You were lied to by leftist universities that gladly took your money and left you in ruin. It isn’t too late to see the leftist worldview for what it is: the road to serfdom. It’s time to hold the universities that pushed these lies accountable.

Shocking number of undergrads say the US deserved 9/11: Poll



Young Americans might be trending straighter these days, but recent polling indicates that some of their minds are still twisted.

According to the Yale University-based Buckley Institute's 2026 National Undergraduate Study, undergraduate students — self-identified liberals in particular — are increasingly a censorious, thin-skinned bunch who not only entertain anti-American views but are warming up to socialism.

'The 14-point spread in favor of socialism is the largest in the five years the question has been asked.'

Pollsters with Inquire LLC found in their survey of over 800 students that while 87% of respondents agreed that the First Amendment is important and needs to be followed and respected in today's society, a record high 49% of undergraduate students overall said that they favor their college or university "having speech codes to regulate speech for students and faculty." A majority of liberal students — 53% — were on board with speech regulation on college campuses.

When asked whether they would avoid taking a class with a professor who publicly shared opinions they disagreed with, 55% of liberal students, 33% of moderates, and 33% of conservatives confirmed that they would steer clear.

Whereas 27% of conservative students said that they could not bring themselves to be "close friends with someone who affiliates with a different political party," 65% of liberal students said that they keep their friend groups politically homogeneous.

A plurality of liberal students (47%) said that offensive speech should be subject to criminal prosecution. Only 24% of conservatives and 34% of moderates agreed with the proposition.

RELATED: 'Reign of terror': One-third of Democrats give thumbs-up to Trump assassination

MELISSA MAJCHRZAK/AFP via Getty Images

As for the use of physical violence to prevent someone from uttering so-called hate speech or making "racially charged comments," 45% of all respondents said it was justifiable.

When broken down by ideological affiliation, a majority of liberals were once again in the extreme camp, with 54% agreeing that violence is sometimes warranted. Only 30% of conservatives and 36% of moderates agreed.

Perhaps more troubling, when asked about the Turning Point USA founder's assassination last year at Utah Valley University in Orem, Utah, 38% of liberal respondents agreed with the statement, "Charlie Kirk's rhetoric was harmful and threatening to many people. It should not be a surprise that his words had consequences."

Seven percent of conservative students similarly agreed with the statement, which effectively justifies Kirk's murder.

Only 13% of all respondents overall said that Kirk's rhetoric "was neither harmful nor threatening and that his assassination is a bad sign for public discourse on college campuses."

Unsurprisingly, a majority (58%) of the liberal cohort that appeared receptive to both censorship and political violence said that they prefer to live under a socialist regime. Fifty-seven percent of liberals also said that socialist countries like Cuba and the former Soviet Union "offer a better economic model than capitalist countries like the United States."

Nineteen percent of conservatives and 28% of moderates also chose socialism over capitalism, according to the survey. On the question of whether countries like the failed Soviet Union and failing Republic of Cuba offer preferable economic models to the U.S., 32% of moderates and 53% of conservatives said they disagreed.

"The 14-point spread in favor of socialism is the largest in the five years the question has been asked and only the third time socialism has led capitalism," the Buckley Institute said. "The only major demographic groups that favored capitalism over socialism were conservatives and Asian students."

Not only have liberal undergraduate students idealized failed states where food scarcity is the norm, they have adopted cynical views about the promise of equality in America.

Fifty percent of all respondents — and 66% of liberal respondents — agreed with the statement that "America is inextricably linked to white supremacy and in general most minorities remain excluded from the American promise of equality."

When asked whether America "deserved September 11th" — an Islamic terrorist attack that claimed the lives of nearly 3,000 people, including children, and injured thousands more — a staggering 22% overall somewhat or strongly agreed, including 28% of liberals, 16% of moderates, and 17% of conservatives.

A vast majority — 72% — disagreed, 63% strongly so. Another 6% said they weren't sure.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

School bus ride from hell: Students, parent climb through bus windows; parent breaks glass on door, gets arrested



You might call it a school bus ride from hell.

"Everybody was screaming and stuff because they were excited to get off the bus," a 12-year-old student told KCRA-TV after his ride Monday aboard a homebound Calaveras (California) Unified School District bus.

'Parents are now sending their children to school to be parented instead of parenting their children at home, and that is a concern.'

The student told KCRA the bus stopped when another student climbed out of the bus through a window.

"That's when the bus driver was like, 'Sit down, roll up the windows,'" the student noted to the station.

The student also noted to KCRA that the driver told those aboard the bus they would have to wait for law enforcement before getting off it.

Parents who spoke with the station said students remained on the stopped bus for about an hour as more parents began arriving.

Nichole Wellington told KCRA her son called her from the bus and was scared — and she drove to the bus and asked the driver to release her son.

"I went right to the door, and I was like, 'Dude, open the door. Let me have my kid.' And he's like, 'I'm not doing that,'" Wellington noted to the station.

Wellington added to KCRA that she soon gave her son permission to climb out of the bus through a window while she waited outside.

"If he would have handled that situation and gave the parents their kids that were there, I think it probably would have went a little bit differently than it did," Wellington noted to the station.

KCRA said video provided by a student aboard the bus shows a student climbing out of the bus through a window and a parent later climbing into the bus through a window — and confronting the driver.

RELATED: Mom and her 17-year-old daughter board middle school bus, start slugging 8th-grade boy: Report

The Calaveras County Sheriff's Office noted to the station that deputies responded to a disturbance involving a parent and the bus driver: "During the incident, the parent struck the bus door, breaking the glass. The parent was ultimately taken into custody at the School District's request for vandalism."

The sheriff's office added to KCRA that some passengers also were reported to have exited the bus through open windows, and that students should only use a bus window as an exit during an emergency.

Another parent, Rebecca Glover, whose two children also were aboard the bus, told the station she instructed her kids to remain seated and wait — and that she believes the driver was trying to keep students safe.

"There was not just one child they had to think of," Glover told KCRA. "They had to think of every single child on that bus at that time."

The school district told the station that the incident began with concerns over student behavior but declined to provide additional details.

"Yesterday, student behavior concerns on a district bus escalated and ultimately required law enforcement involvement," Superintendent Kassie Meeks said in a statement, according to KCRA. "As a result of the incident, one bus route has been impacted today, Tuesday, August 25, 2026."

The station added that the incident also raised questions among parents regarding how similar situations should be handled in the future.

Wellington told KCRA she believes another adult aboard buses to manage student behavior could help drivers better focus on the roads.

"I do feel that maybe that bus driver, especially when he's driving, should not have to deal with all those kids by himself," Wellington also noted to the station.

But Glover told KCRA she believes more responsibility should fall on students and their families: "Parents are now sending their children to school to be parented instead of parenting their children at home, and that is a concern."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

‘Take them at their word’: Islam infiltrating public schools with MOSQUE trips for kids



America’s public schools are increasingly opening their doors to Islamic indoctrination, and BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales is sounding the alarm.

"Islam has come to conquer," she says.

“There is a big shift happening lately where they seem to be targeting children now. Now, even here in the state of Texas,” she continues, pointing out that in Texas a high school was handing out Qurans and candy to children.

“But now, they’re actively shuttling children to mosques to indoctrinate them. Now, thankfully, this was not in Texas. It was in California,” she explains, reading a headline from the New York Post.


“California high school students were given Qurans and encouraged to wear hijabs during class trip to mosque,” the headline reads.

“Now, these kids were taken to the mosque. They were taught that Islam in particular promotes social justice. I wonder if that extends to women ... does that extend to women who get publicly lashed if they don’t wear their hijab properly?” Gonzales asks.

“Something tells me no. How about, does that extend to homosexuals?” she asks again. “Cause I don’t know. To me, the idea of promoting social justice doesn’t mean throwing someone off a rooftop. But maybe that’s just me.”

Female students were encouraged to wear hijabs, and some of the students in attendance were Jewish.

“The parents are now suing the school and the district. This shouldn’t come as a shock to anyone who’s been paying attention. I’m like shouting from the rooftops about it because there is going to come a point where we’ve reached the breaking point and you can’t put the genie back in the bottle,” Gonzales says.

“We need to take them at their word. They have been preaching about their plans to take over,” she adds.

Want more from Sara Gonzales?

To enjoy more of Sara's no-holds-barred takes on news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

High school seniors can't read. Jason Whitlock calls it ‘a funeral for the mind.’



In a viral social media video, teacher Darius Williams described breaking down in class after discovering that some of his high school seniors could not complete an exercise requiring them to fill in just four missing words.

“These kids are leaving high school and going to college, hopefully, and they couldn’t fill in four words. Four words. I literally broke down in the middle of class. This is only day two, and I have seniors who simply cannot read and seniors who cannot write,” the teacher, Darius Williams, said in a reel on Instagram.

“They can reason. They have the ability to defend their reasoning if it’s talking to their homeboy, but applying that to a written text, two paragraphs, and they couldn’t do it,” he added.

BlazeTV host Jason Whitlock is disturbed, but not surprised.



“High school seniors could not fill in four words,” Whitlock says. “Not calculus, not philosophy, four words. A grown man wept on camera because the next generation cannot read. That is not a school story. That is a funeral for the mind.”

Whitlock points out that "enslaved black men and women once risked the whip, the auction block, and death for the ability to read.”

“Literacy was contraband. Freedom. A free mind started with a page you were not supposed to touch,” he says.

What slaves understood back then is something “this generation pretends not to know.”

“The man who controls your access to words controls your access to God, to law, to contracts, to your own name on a document,” Whitlock says.

“Now, too many black Americans treat reading like optional equipment. Something you outsource to a phone, a caption, a clip, or a machine that summarizes so you never sweat through a hard paragraph,” he says. “That is not progress. That is a people walking backward into dependence and calling it culture.”

“We used to bleed for the page. Now we scroll past it and get offended when a teacher cries about the wreckage,” he adds.

Want more from Jason Whitlock?

To enjoy more fearless conversations at the crossroads of culture, faith, sports, and comedy with Jason Whitlock, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Here’s How Dark Money Uses Children In Deep Red States To Spread LGBT Agenda

How does LGBT propaganda infiltrate conservative states and areas, turning them into sensual celebration grounds? The answer: through children backed by big billionaires.

TikTok video exposes America’s reading crisis: Why parents and schools are failing kids



A video has gone viral on TikTok for revealing a literacy crisis in America — showing high school students failing to read a very simple sentence: “She wore a silhouette of clothes that were extraordinary but somewhat gauche.”

And BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey believes that one of the reasons for this crisis is not only the method for teaching literacy in schools, but that the amount of parents reading to their children daily has dropped. And according to a study conducted by HarperCollins Publishers, the drop is significant.

“I saw this statistic that says only 41% of children aged 0 to 4 are read to daily as of 2025. That is a nine-point drop only since 2019. Only 55%, a little over half of children aged 0 to 5, are read to at least five days a week,” she continues.


“There are a lot of parents who are overstimulated. They’re tired. They’re distracted. It’s really not about these kids having their own lack of discipline. It starts with a lack of discipline and bad priorities for parents honestly,” she adds.

Stuckey believes that the difficulty parents face finding the time or energy to read to their kids is manifesting in "difficulty for them for the rest of their lives.”

And the reason this is creating so much difficulty for children is because “the comprehension of words is necessary for understanding the world.”

“It is very difficult to be a diligent student, an informed voter, a productive citizen, a helpful neighbor if you do not understand words,” Stuckey says.

But it’s not just the ability to participate in modern society that’s being threatened by the literacy crisis.

“Unlike Buddhism, Christianity does not place a premium on silence or the emptying of the mind. Christianity is a word-based faith. You go all the way back to the beginning. God spoke the universe into existence,” Stuckey explains.

“He dictated all of creation, including the creation of man and woman who were made in his image. He spoke to Noah. He spoke to and through Moses,” she continues.

This is why, Stuckey explains, Christians have historically been “the best communicators in the world.”

“Christians dominated academia in this country before giving it over to the liberals and the secularists over time. And now, I think we have the opportunity to take the lead again. We have to. I mean, look at where we are,” she says.

“We have schools that are not teaching kids to read. We have people going to college and becoming lawyers and doctors with barely a high school-reading level. We’re scared of objective standards here in the U.S., standards of excellence because of whom they might exclude,” she continues, adding, "And all of us are going to suffer for that.”

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.

Some Students Have Never Read A Full-Length Book. This Bill Would Fix That

To deprive students of whole books is to deprive them of an education.

At Annual Meeting, Largest Teachers Union Admits It’s An Activist Front

At the National Education Association's annual conference, leaders are doubling down on activism, not educating, in public schools.