The Radicalization of America: Are We Losing Liberty?

As a liberal, as an American, and as a Jew, I far more fear the left than the right.
—Harvard Law School Professor Alan Dershowitz—

Key points: Just as a decisive response was needed to the unraveling of biblical truth at Azusa Pacific University, so is a decisive response needed to the abandonment of American ideals by radical leftists. In the November elections, the tactics of leftists must be repudiated. Yet, even if this happens, we as Christians and freedom-loving Americans have our work cut out for us! It takes a great deal of effort to right the courses of institutions and nations! The payoff, though, will be worth the effort.

An abbreviated version of this post is available here.

At the end of last week’s post we highlighted a decision made at Azusa Pacific University (APU) regarding university guidelines for student relationships. Although heterosexual marriage still was affirmed as the only appropriate place for sexual activity, APU guidelines had been changed to permit same-sex romances on campus. The article carrying this announcement is dated September 18, 2018. Since I published the post, a new development has occurred. Upholding biblical principles on sexuality, APU’s Board of Trustees reinstated the original wording of the student guidelines. Same-sex romances once again are prohibited. The board’s statement is dated September 28.

We are in the midst of a series on how Christians should respond to efforts to outlaw therapy designed to address same-sex attraction and homosexuality. We’ll continue with that series next time, but I believe it is important to pause and affirm the decision of APU’s trustees. We also need to consider the challenges the school now faces. As critically important as the board’s decision was, the school has difficult days ahead as it attempts to fully right its course.

Significantly, APU’s challenges parallel to some extent the daunting struggles we see occurring in our country. How might insights into the situation at APU help concerned citizens deal with the ever-widening divide in America? It’s an important question.

The Right Decision, but Only a First Step

The BreakPoint commentary for October 3, 2018 carries news about the action taken by APU’s Board of Trustees. The commentary states in part,

Good for the Azusa Pacific board for stepping in and restoring a complete understanding of human sexuality. They unambiguously did the right thing on a critical issue of enormous cultural importance, and I am sure they are taking shots because of it.…

The kind of conviction and clarity the Azusa Pacific board of trustees just showed will be a major qualification for Christian leadership in the years to come, especially when the pressure comes not just from without, but from within.

From within is a key phrase. The difficulties will only intensify. Reinstating the policy at APU has been an essential first step in what is certain to be a very difficult process. The school didn’t get to the point of allowing same-sex romantic relationships overnight.

This article explains a great deal. It includes a portion of an urgent letter by APU faculty member Dr. Barbara Harrington to the Board of Trustees. She sent the letter on September 24—after student guidelines had been altered to permit same-sex romances but before the board responded. Dr. Harrington had become concerned that the school had abandoned its intention to place “God First” in everything. She lists the perspective of students as a major concern, and rightly so.

Students are becoming radicalized, she says.

Many of us can testify to this tragedy [the radicalization of students] occurring at APU throughout the student body in the last several years. It is the most serious and alarming concern that we are observing of late. The pattern we see begins with students coming to APU from trusting Christian families. They have a beautiful, if nascent understanding of themselves as believers, but they are open, hopeful, and searching for their niche in the Kingdom. Then, through certain APU courses, particularly in the theology, Biblical studies, global studies and social justice arenas, the students are exposed to radical beliefs that deride and malign traditional Biblical Christianity. Before long, the students espouse errant ideological trends that leave them isolated from the community, embittered against Christian faith and values, and approaching the world with a raised fist and angry slogans instead of an open heart and saving truth. These students gradually become unteachable, and they leave APU in a much worse state then they were in when they arrived. I have had students confront me in class asserting that, “There is no such thing as masculine or feminine.” I had another lovely young student transform from loving Jesus and her Christian faith when she came to APU, to becoming a sneering, bitter self-declared “queer womynist” who now sees Christianity as the most divisive and pernicious influence in human history.

It is urgent that this radicalization of students be addressed, and that we turn back as an institution from everything we have done that is breeding it.
—Azusa Pacific University professor Dr. Barbara Harrington—

Obviously, that this might happen to even one student is a burden on the hearts and consciences of all of us who make APU work on every level. It is urgent that this radicalization of students be addressed, and that we turn back as an institution from everything we have done that is breeding it.

Returning to Bedrock Truth

Note that Dr. Harrington’s concern is broad—not focused solely on incorrect ideas about sexuality. Yet ideas about sexuality were and are an important part of the mix, especially in light of the new student policy.

Without question, addressing and correcting the radicalization of students will be a far more formidable task than reinstating the original policy. This HuffPost article showcases the heated pushback coming from from students over the trustee action.

APU must stand firm and without compromise, yet consistently demonstrate love, including tough love. It must teach the truth and not depart from it. As Paul wrote to Timothy in 2 Timothy 4:1-5,

4 ¹I charge you therefore before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who will judge the living and the dead at His appearing and His kingdom: ²Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching. ³For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires,becausethey have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; ⁴and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables. ⁵But you be watchful in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry.

If it is going to remain faithful to putting “God First,” APU has a challenging task ahead, indeed.

Abandoning Core Principles

Our country’s problems loom large as well.

America isn’t a Christian institution as is APU, but it has a Christian heritage (also go here). Many of the ideals that guide our legal and governmental systems have their roots in biblical teaching and principles of fairness long practiced in history.

If the Senate Confirmation hearings for Brett Kavanaugh to become a US Supreme Court Justice have demonstrated anything, they have shown that we are a divided nation.

The divide of which I speak cannot best be described as Republicans versus Democrats, or even conservatives versus liberals. It actually is between reasonable people and rabid leftist radicals who insist on having their own way.

We are witnessing the radicalization of America!

We are witnessing the radicalization of America! We’ve always had debates in our country, but only in the last few decades has one side become so driven to get its way that it will, without shame or guilt, do anything to achieve its goal—including running roughshod over a decent man and ruining his reputation!

Make no mistake. I am speaking of leftists, not liberals. You can reason with a liberal. A liberal will defend your right to have an opposing view and even will listen to you make the case for it. Disagree with a leftist, though, and you are a bad person. You might even be evil! Yet it is leftists who are jettisoning ideals that have that have been foundational in this country from its beginning.

Consider the willingness of leftists to abandon the bedrock principle of assuming an accused individual innocent until proven guilty. Listen to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Shumer. His position is breathtaking!

Schumer accused Republicans of “deviating” from “standard operating procedure,” falsely implying they didn’t want to get to the truth.

Actually, it was Democrats who didn’t want to get to the truth. They would not let go of accusations that Brett Kavanaugh was a sexual predator, even though there was absolutely no corroborating evidence from the additional FBI investigation they themselves demanded.

Meanwhile, on the Other Side of the Aisle

Thoughtful Republicans—not all of whom are conservative—weren’t willing to jettison fairness. Senator Bob Corker of Tennessee is no fan of President Trump. Still, he highlighted the importance of assuming the accused to be innocent until proven guilty in his statement of September 27 affirming support for Judge Kavanaugh.

I believe those who come forward with allegations of sexual assault deserve to be heard.

That is why I was one of the first members of the Senate to call on the judiciary committee to delay the original vote on the nomination so that both Dr. Ford and Judge Kavanaugh could provide additional information.

I know it took courage for Dr. Ford to appear before the committee today.

I also very strongly believe that Judge Kavanaugh, like all Americans, deserves the presumption of innocence and that it was equally as important for him to have the opportunity to address the charges and defend himself.

While both individuals provided compelling testimony, nothing that has been presented corroborates the allegation.

There is no question that Judge Kavanaugh is qualified to serve on the Supreme Court, and in a different political environment, he would be confirmed overwhelmingly.

I believe Judge Kavanaugh has conducted himself as well as anyone could expect throughout this process and plan to vote to confirm him.

A Well Reasoned Speech

Sen. Susan Collins, speaking on the Senate floor, October 5, 2018

Senator Susan Collins of Maine is not a conservative by any stretch of the imagination. I disagree with her about Obergefell and Roe vs. Wade. While I believe these Supreme Court decisions represent blatant judicial overreach, she apparently does not. One cannot help but applaud her careful analysis of the hearings, however, and her obviously fervent effort to be fair and balanced in her evaluation of Judge Kavanaugh for a position on the High Court. The following is from Senator Collins’s speech on the Senate floor on Friday, October 5.

In evaluating any given claim of misconduct, we will be ill served in the long run if we abandon the presumption of innocence and fairness, tempting though it may be. We must always remember that it is when passions are most inflamed that fairness is most in jeopardy.

The presumption of innocence is relevant to the advice and consent function when an accusation departs from a nominee’s otherwise exemplary record. I worry that departing from this presumption could lead to a lack of public faith in the judiciary and would be hugely damaging to the confirmation process moving forward.

Some of the allegations levied against Judge Kavanaugh illustrate why the presumption of innocence is so important. I am thinking in particular not of the allegations raised by Professor Ford, but of the allegation that, when he was a teenager, Judge Kavanaugh drugged multiple girls and used their weakened state to facilitate gang rape. This outlandish allegation was put forth without any credible supporting evidence and simply parroted public statements of others. That such an allegation can find its way into the Supreme Court confirmation process is a stark reminder about why the presumption of innocence is so ingrained in our American consciousness.

Mr. President, I listened carefully to Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony before the Judiciary Committee. I found her testimony to be sincere, painful, and compelling. I believe that she is a survivor of a sexual assault and that this trauma has upended her life. Nevertheless, the four witnesses she named could not corroborate any of the events of that evening gathering where she says the assault occurred; none of the individuals Professor Ford says were at the party has any recollection at all of that night.

Judge Kavanaugh forcefully denied the allegations under penalty of perjury. Mark Judge denied under penalty of felony that he had witnessed an assault. PJ Smyth, another person allegedly at the party, denied that he was there under penalty of felony. Professor Ford’s life-long friend Leland Keyser indicated that, under penalty of felony, she does not remember that party. And Ms. Keyser went further. She indicated that not only does she not remember a night like that, but also that she does not even know Brett Kavanaugh.

In addition to the lack of corroborating evidence, we also learned some facts that raised more questions. For instance, since these allegations have become public, Professor Ford testified that not a single person has contacted her to say, “I was at the party that night.”

Furthermore, the professor testified that although she does not remember how she got home that evening, she knew that, because of the distance, she would have needed a ride – yet not a single person has come forward to say that they were the one that drove her home or were in the car with her that night. And Professor Ford also indicated that even though she left that small gathering of six or so people abruptly and without saying goodbye and distraught, none of them called her the next day – or ever – to ask why she left – is she okay – not even her closest friend, Ms. Keyser.

Mr. President, the Constitution does not provide guidance as to how we are supposed to evaluate these competing claims. It leaves that decision up to each Senator. This is not a criminal trial, and I do not believe that claims such as these need to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. Nevertheless, fairness would dictate that the claims at least should meet a threshold of “more likely than not” as our standard.

The facts presented do not mean that Professor Ford was not sexually assaulted that night – or at some other time – but they do lead me to conclude that the allegations fail to meet the “more likely than not” standard. Therefore, I do not believe that these charges can fairly prevent Judge Kavanaugh from serving on the Court.

After Senator Collins concluded her speech and declared that she would vote to confirm Judge Kavanaugh, protests erupted. You can hear a portion of one of them here:

That was mild compared to other expressions of anger and hate. Senator Marco Rubio tweeted, “Most will never know the full extent of the efforts to intimidate & threaten @SenatorCollins on the #Kavanaugh vote. I am not talking about political pressure or people screaming at her in an elevator. I am talking about vicious, vile & dangerous actions. She is legit.

Most will never know the full extent of the efforts to intimidate & threaten @SenatorCollins on the #Kavanaugh vote.
—Senator Marco Rubio—

Rubio is right. Plenty of rabid Kavanaugh opponents took to Twitter to threaten and abuse Senator Collins, with many of them using the most profane and obscene language to do so.

“The vulgarity is unbelievable,” declared Demi Kouzounas, Maine GOP Chairwoman. Activists are saying “things like ‘I hope you’re raped. I hope that you’re stuck with an unborn baby from a rapist,’ … I mean who says these things? And where is the respect?” Protesters also sent Senator Collins 3,000 coat hangers and charged that by supporting Kavanaugh, she was condemning women to back alley abortions.

On October 7, Ariel Dumas, a writer for “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert,” tweeted, “Whatever happens, I’m just glad we ruined Brett Kavanaugh’s life.” Dumas later deleted the tweet, then took to Twitter once again to express a measured amount of regret, but also her continued frustration:

The last couple of weeks have been hard for the country and for me personally. The complexity of frustration, anger and sadness can’t be accurately conveyed on twitter, and I regret my tone-deaf attempt at sarcasm in the wake of it.

Was all this just fine with Stephen Colbert? Apparently. A few months ago he called the president a “racist, horny old burger-goblin who literally steals children from poor people.”

Will we recognize this country in ten or twenty years if these people regain power? It is difficult to imagine that we could.

The Right to Respond to One’s Accuser

Leftists showed us that nothing is more important to them than their agenda. On September 21, when Christine Blasey Ford was negotiating terms for testifying before the Judiciary Committee, one of her demands, through her lawyers, was that “Kavanaugh would testify first, then Ford would testify, and Kavanaugh would have no opportunity to respond or rebut.”

Substituting for Rush Limbaugh on his radio show on Friday, September 21, Mark Steyn quoted Acts 25:16 to show that for millennia accusers have been expected to testify first, so that the accused have a chance to respond: “It is not the manner of the Romans to deliver any man to die, before that he which is accused have the accusers face to face, and have license to answer for himself concerning the crime laid against him” (KJV).

The Party of the Radical, Rabid Left

I am going to speak my mind here. The Democrat Party has become the party of the unhinged, rabid left. Its agenda is un-American, and Democrats deserve to be soundly defeated in November. This is the strong statement ordinary citizens need to make in a first step to correct the radicalization of America. Do not fall for the rhetoric that “he or she is a Democrat who will work across the aisle and unite people from both parties.” A vote for a any Democrat is essentially a vote for Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Maxine Waters, Dianne Feinstein, and others who believe as they do and who will trash liberty to attain raw power and to get their way.

The Democrat Party has become the party of the unhinged, rabid left. Its agenda is un-American, and Democrats deserve to be soundly defeated in November.

Ephesians 5:11 comes to mind. Paul wrote, “have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them.” Nothing would serve to expose this treachery any more effectively than rejecting the radicals at the ballot box this November.

Tucker Carlson summarizes what we have seen and what we must do in response.

May God help us!

top photo credit: Zoltan Kovacs on Unsplash

photo credit: Mark Steyn

Share this article on Facebook or Twitter.