Texas Governor Protects Pastors Sermons from Subpoenas
Pastors in Texas will no longer have to fear government officials showing up at their church doors. Gov. Greg Abbott signed Senate
Bill 24 Monday, protecting pastors from subpoenas demanding they turn over their messages.
“Texas law now will be your strength and your sword and your shield," Abbott said, invoking Bible verse as he addressed the 11 a.m.
service at Grace Church. "You will be shielded by any effort by any other government official in any other part of the state of Texas
from having subpoenas to try to pry into what you’re doing here in your churches."
The law, which Abbott signed Friday, will go into effect immediately and mandate that a government cannot "compel the
production or disclosure of a written copy or audio or video recording of a sermon delivered by a religious leader during religious
worship, or compel the religious leader to testify regarding the sermon."
Here’s a reminder why the Governor’s action was necessary:
The legislation became necessary after five Houston pastors were ordered to surrender their sermons in 2014, at the demands of
liberal Houston Mayor Annise Parker. I spoke with one of her targets, Pastor Khanh Huynh, earlier this year at a press conference for
the introduction of the Free Speech Fairness Act. Parker, Huynh said, demanded his sermons because he and his fellow pastors were
opposed to her transgender bathroom ordinance.
"We're not going to back down, because we did nothing wrong," Huynh said at the time.
"We just speak the word of God on moral issues and we fight for the safety of women and girls."
President Trump defended the actions of preacher in the pulpit to address political issues and candidates:
President Trump has also sought to defend religious leaders’ right to speak their mind on politics and policies in his quest to
overturn the Johnson Amendment. The law, introduced by Lyndon B. Johnson in 1954 when he was still a senator, forbids religious
leaders from wading into politics in front of their congregations.
Trump did sign an executive order on religious freedom earlier this month, but it left most of the Johnson Amendment in place.
Our country’s forefathers would be “in arms” over a government in this country attempting to control or sensor a pulpit.
Republican Vermont Gov. Phil Scott Vetoes Legalization of Marijuana Bill
Vermont Gov. Phil Scott (R) has vetoed a bill that would legalize marijuana for adults over the age of 21 in the Green Mountain
State. Scott said that he was concerned that people would be driving stoned and that children would have increased access to the
drug. Vermont was aiming to be the first state to legalize the recreational use of marijuana via the legislature as opposed to a
Scott, who was elected last November, has consistently said that he is not a fan of marijuana legalization.
However, all hope is not lost on the issue. Scott offered suggestions to the legislature on how to improve the bill to one he would
eventually sign. Scott was mainly concerned about penalties for selling the drug to minors.
The trend in New England is favoring the legalization of marijuana, and this Republican governor may favor it too - if the conditions are
Scott said he would send the bill back to the Legislature with suggestions to strengthen the bill to his liking. His specific concerns
include what he considered weak penalties for sale of marijuana to minors and more time for a commission studying a regulated
If the Legislature agrees to make the changes I am seeking, we can move forward with this discussion in a way that ensures the
public health and safety of our communities and our children continue to come first," Scott said as he announced his veto
It's possible, albeit unlikely, that a new law that Gov. Scott would sign will be passed and ready to go by June.
If Vermont does legalize marijuana, it will become the third New England state and ninth state overall with legal recreational
This is one of those issues where there seems to be a constant dwindling of common sense. Marijuana is a drug that should always be
illegal, and any “loosening of the belt” on this issue should not be considered.
Chinese Student at University of Maryland Blasted by Fellow Students for Praising Free Speech
A Chinese University of Maryland student was ridiculed by her peers for praising the United States in a commencement address she
was selected to deliver.
During her address, student Shuping Yang recalled her first experiences of the “fresh air” in America, comparing it to the air quality
back home that often required her to wear “one of [her] five face masks.”
“The moment I inhaled and exhaled outside the airport, I felt free,” she explained. “No more fog on my glasses; no more difficulty
breathing; no more suppression.”
She went on to extend the analogy to the climate of intellectual freedom that she found on campus, saying at the University of
Maryland she breathed “the fresh air of free speech.”
“I have learned that the right to freely express oneself is sacred in America,” she continued, reminding her peers that “democracy
and free speech should not be taken for granted” and calling both the “fresh air worth fighting for.”
Fellow Chinese students immediately went to the defense of red China and, like loyal Communist “comrades”, attacked Yang for being
critical of China:
Upset at her insinuation that China does not respect individual freedoms, some of Yang’s Chinese classmates published a video
response in which they accuse her of lying and slandering her country.
“Although we know that the United States is a very free-speaking country, 80 percent of what Shuping Yang said today were
deceptions and lies,” one student commented, followed by several other Chinese students and alumni challenging Yang’s
characterization of their country and calling for an “apology from the school.”
Yang faced even harsher backlash from Chinese social media users, some of whom even suggested that she wouldn’t be welcome
to return to China.
“As a Chinese if you don’t like and respect to [sic] your own country then get out of our country please. We don’t need any trash in
China,” wrote Marcus Ren. “Shuping Yang you’re full of lies and you have made our Chinese students ashamed.”
Yang responded to her critics:
Yang has since responded to her critics, apologizing if her “speech was at any point misleading” and asserting that she had no
intention of disparaging China.
“The speech was just sharing a part of my experience studying in the United States,” she explained. “There was no intention to
belittle my country and my hometown.”
The University of Maryland also responded:
The university itself responded to the public outcry Monday, issuing a statement defending Yang’s right “to share her views and her
unique perspectives” while offering a subtle rebuke of those who took issue with her speech.
“The university believes that to be an informed global citizen it is critical to hear different viewpoints, to embrace diversity, and
demonstrate tolerance when faced with views with which we may disagree,” the statement continued. “Listening to and
respectfully engaging with those whom we disagree are essential skills, both within university walls and beyond.”
In their defense of China, the Chinese exchange students overlooked one important point. They should get down on their knees and thank
God they survived the “one child policy” of China.
Many of their unborn compatriots never saw the light of day because of China’s forced abortions.
Liberal Mayor of Manchester in Denial about Islamic Terrorism
The Labour mayor of Greater Manchester has claimed the suicide bomber who killed 22 was not a Muslim, insisting the “worst
thing that can happen” is people blaming Muslims.
Andy Burnham, a former Labour frontbencher who was elected mayor this month, insisted the attack, claimed by Islamic State, had
nothing to do with Islam.
“The message that I would want to get over - and this is how the vast majority of people feel - this man was a terrorist, not a
Muslim,” he said, speaking to LBC Radio.
“He does not represent the Muslim community. We’ve got to keep that distinction in mind all the time. This was an unspeakable
act. The worst thing that can happen is that people use this to blame an entire community, the Muslim community.
“In my view, the man who committed this atrocity no more represents the Muslim community than the individual who murdered
my friend Jo Cox represents the white, Christian community.”
Similarly, following the Westminster knife and car attack, Prime Minister Theresa May said the “Islamist” attack on Parliament was
A British representative of an anti-terrorist group spoke the truth:
Haras Rafiq, the CEO of the anti-extremism Quilliam Foundation, which has advised the Government, accused Mr. Burnham of
“basically doing what ISIS is doing”.
He said by declaring the terrorist a non-Muslim, he had “excommunicate[ed] Salman Abedi”, which is known as takfiri in Islam and
is widely practised by extremists.
Mr. Rafiq said the Manchester attack has “something to do with some interpretation of Islam”, speaking on Sky News, adding:
“What we must not do anymore… is turn around and say ‘this person was not a Muslim’ - because he was, he was practising a form
of Islamist, Salafi, jihadist Islam and that’s something we need to tackle head on.”
He also said “there is no such thing as a lone wolf”, predicting the terrorist was part of a “network”. He claimed “every single
jihadist terrorist has been part of the globally inspired Islamist ideology”.
This is an important point to remember. Every Muslim terrorist became a radical terrorist because of an Islamic network somewhere.
Liberal politicians are so pathetically blind to real problems that they can’t see through the fog of their own deception.