Millennial Christians Are No Wiser Than Their Parents

Millennial Christians Are No Wiser Than Their Parents September 1, 2018
YouTube/The Block Church

This past week, The New Yorker ran an in-depth story on evangelical millennials. The story was a mildly interesting read, despite its headline: “Millennial Evangelicals Diverge from Their Parents’ Beliefs.” (Perhaps next week The New Yorker will give us an in-depth report on the fact that “Politicians Lie,” or “Hot Pockets Suck.”) Reporter Eliza Griswold mixes firsthand impressions of a young church plant in Philadelphia with commentary from people like Ed Stetzer, Ekemini Uwan and Jonathan Merritt. Taken together, it all conveys an impression of a generation tired of outdated “culture wars,” ready to hit reboot on the faith of their fathers. Unsurprisingly, The New Yorker approves.

Inter alia, the article includes a book plug for Merritt’s latest, Learning to Speak God From Scratch. Merritt gives us a taste of what readers can expect by opining on “the feminine aspect of God,” why Christians should stop using “brokenness” to describe same-sex orientation (Merritt himself came out as gay after being blackmailed by a blogger) and why he’s “personally pro-life” but wouldn’t “pull a lever and overturn Roe vs. Wade.”

Ekemini Uwan is even blunter, explicitly saying the 1973 travesty should not be overturned, as it is “the law of the land.” For this reason, she says she opposes Brett Kavanaugh, apparently worried that he might vote to overturn it (one could only hope). Ms. Uwan is described in the article as a “public theologian.” In a word, oy.

More interesting is Griswold’s conversation with a student church planter named Julio Colon-Laboy. Laboy is soft-spoken and winsome, a natural poster boy for millennial Christianity. He discusses his immigrant background, his personal testimony of finding Christianity after a suicide attempt, and his experience talking young women out of abortions. Griswold calls him away from a table where he has a sign-up sheet for a summer-long Bible study just on the book of James.

Sadly, despite Colon-Laboy’s warm-heartedness and private pro-life activism, he is desperately confused on the legal questions around abortion. He expresses a vague worry that repealing “the law of the land” might have “unintended consequences” for minority communities. Somebody should sit down with Colon-Laboy and break down the intended consequences of Planned Parenthood’s legalized operations in those very communities. The racist history of the organization is no secret. We are talking about an outfit that literally pays for billboards targeted to black women with the message “Abortion is self-care.” [Edit: It’s been pointed out that technically The Afiya Foundation is not an arm of Planned Parenthood, though Afiya “partners with” Planned Parenthood in Dallas. My apologies for carelessly saying Planned Parenthood directly pays for eugenic billboard campaigns when they merely partner with the kind of outfit that pays for eugenic billboard campaigns.] If justice specifically for minorities is Colon-Laboy’s passion, then there is only one decent place for him to stand here. Yet, confusingly, in a different part of the report Griswold says Colon-Laboy “opposes abortion rights.” Similarly, she writes that Merritt “opposes abortion.” Conservative readers should take note of this bit of inflation in our linguistic currency.

This paragraph is particularly revealing (emphasis added):

For young believers at Block and elsewhere, the ubiquity of Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and other social networks in their lives, among other factors, have made it more difficult to live in the kind of theological, cultural, and political isolation that previous generations once did. And, as their secular peers embrace more fluid identities in regard to sexuality and race, young evangelicals are also beginning to see such positions in shades of gray rather than in black and white. There are other factors, too, related to globalization: the exponential growth of fellow-believers in the Global South; the growing diversity of evangelicals in the U.S., driven in part by the influx of immigrants who arrive in American churches with their own dynamic faith. The result is that younger evangelicals are speaking out on issues like family separation at the border, climate change, police brutality, and immigration reform­­––causes not typically associated with the evangelical movement.

Indeed, on homosexuality in particular, the statistics don’t lie. As quoted in the piece, over half of all 18-29-year-old evangelicals support same-sex “marriage.” And I can attest from personal experience that even young people who would still check “No” here often lack a firm foundation for that “No.” If you ask them to give reasons, they might tell you God is against it, but they’re not exactly sure why. This points up a huge gap in the education of the evangelical mind, one which my co-blogger Gregory Shane Morris rightly argues we must fill with a solid grounding in natural law. Unfortunately, people like Jonathan Merritt are explicitly cutting off such arguments at the pass, by attacking the very notion of a disordered or unnatural sexual orientation.

Note also the issues that are being given new priority. “Climate change” is my favorite. At least one could have something approximating a reasonable conversation about issues like police brutality or immigration policy. On the matter of police overreach in particular, I am actually sympathetic to the idea that there needs to be a top-down reform of how police engage with citizens. Do I think the problem is easily reducible to racism? No, but at least there’s a conversation to be had. “Climate change,” on the other hand… forgive me, but to anyone who thinks this is something to agitate about on a par with abortion, please go home and rethink your agitating priorities. Also, clean your room. (Sorry. My inner Jordan Peterson tends to rise to the fore in such moments.)

Even on immigration reform, where there’s room for nuance and humility given the scope of the problem, millennial activists like Ekemini Uwan are using it to create a false dichotomy with pro-life activism. Immediately after her statement that Roe vs. Wade is the law of the land and we should move on and “stop fighting battles we’ve already lost,” she says “we should be focused on kids in cages right now.” Implication: instead of focusing on kids being dismembered and scorched in acid right now.

However, the Democratic Party’s pro-abortion rhetoric finally seems to be blatant enough that many Christian millennials do balk at pulling the blue lever. In the piece, youth pastor Samuel Rodriguez discusses how Hillary Clinton’s rhetoric has gone farther than Obama’s towards “putting up a wall” on abortion between the Democrat party and the evangelical voting bloc, including the younger generation. Obama, by contrast with Clinton, padded his statements on abortion with rhetoric saying it was a “complex moral issue” and that the question of when life begins is “above his pay grade.” Never mind, of course, that his administration hounded states which tried to withhold Medicaid from abortion clinics, then went about distributing pork to make sure Planned Parenthood wanted for nothing. But he had an “abortion reduction task force” (on which Rodriguez served), so that made it okay. Democrat politicians, take note: Millennials prefer bullshit, so try dialing back the honesty next time.

All this being said, I’m no stranger to political homelessness. And I’m not here to say that there is nothing to correct for in the political attitudes of the generation that came before me and my fellow millennials. As I wrote in my post-election piece “The Religious Right Is Dead, Long Live the Religious Right,” we do need to recognize that the Falwell generation revealed a serious blind spot when they threw their weight behind Trump. It was the tragic reductio of that generation’s tragically naive and false notion that our first priority is getting our foot in the right political door. Few sights of 2016 were sadder to me than James Dobson’s painful attempts to make himself feel better about his Trump endorsement by telling his followers that Trump was “a baby Christian,” and other such nonsense. Good people of my own acquaintance were similarly in denial.

But if the older generation could be foolish and naive, the next generation is no wiser, despite the impression The New Yorker would like to give. They have no fewer blind spots than their elders. They just have different blind spots. I already discussed young Julio’s staggeringly foolish comments about Roe vs. Wade, which make no sense from any social justice angle. (So tone-deaf is he to this contradiction that he even tells the reporter how “as a young person who cares about social justice,” it “breaks his heart” to be “lumped in” with the kinds of people who “picket outside abortion clinics.”)

Julio also manifests the shallow understanding of Scripture that typifies his generation, specifically the life and teachings of Christ. The piece makes much of the fact that whereas the older generation took verses “out of context” to be used as political weapons in the culture wars, the new generation takes their Bible study seriously and focuses on “the example of Jesus’s life.” Yet apparently, Julio’s main takeaway from Jesus’s life was that he mostly went about “breaking down gender roles” and “taking on racial issues,” and this was what really aroused hatred in the people around him. No examples are given to clarify what he even thinks this means. Ditto for any of the actual reasons why people hated Jesus.

If the lessons of this article could be summed up in a sentence, it’s that millennial evangelicals have no clear vision of what it means to be conservative without being Republican. They are not being taught about constitutional law or the separation of powers. They are not being taught about where money comes from. They are not being taught fundamental truths like Thomas Sowell’s dictum that “There are no solutions, only tradeoffs and compromises.” It is this kind of ignorance that leads young people to really, earnestly believe that it is just as meaningful to demonstrate “against climate change” as it is to demonstrate against abortion. It is this kind of naivete that leads them to accept Roe vs. Wade as “the law of the land” without even pausing to wonder if there isn’t something a bit odd about nine robed men passing a court decision and calling it “law.”

And who will teach them? Jonathan Merritt? Ekemini Uwan?

In my aforementioned reflection on the Religious Right, I propose that what we need in our current landscape (but desperately lack examples of) is a “third-way conservative evangelical.” Because I am shameless and lazy, and because this is apt, I quote my own description of what this kind of evangelical looks like:

The third-way conservative evangelical is a hard-nosed, card-carrying member of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy, to the bone. You can’t guilt-trip him by wagging your finger under his nose. You can’t wheedle him into modifying his “tone,” going out of his way to be “sensitive” to certain mascot groups, or making sure he talks just as much about x issue as he does about y issue. At the same time, you can’t pull the wool over his eyes with empty promises. You can’t fast-talk him into buying a bottle of snake oil with a ‘Murrca label slapped onto it. You can’t elicit a Pavlovian reaction from him with cliched soundbites like “When I’m President, we’re all gonna be saying Merry Christmas again!” He’s pessimistic enough to know better.

Sorry, I know that’s a downbeat note to end things on, but there it is. Our parents have made mistakes, it’s true. Let’s not make the same mistakes again. But let’s not make new mistakes either.

"I agree, it seems the religious divide is easier to bridge than the political one. ..."

Is There an Atheist Alt-Right Connection?
"Now you're just lying. I have not denied anything; in fact, as anybody can see, ..."

Sam Harris Asks Questions Jordan Peterson ..."
"Clearly we are not on the same page. I continue to state facts, like the ..."

Sam Harris Asks Questions Jordan Peterson ..."
"There are right wing atheists and left wing atheists.It is easier to have a conversation ..."

Is There an Atheist Alt-Right Connection?

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Evangelical
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • RustbeltRick

    Esther O’Reilly pisses on young evangelicals because they’re not sufficiently enthusiastic about fighting the same culture wars as their elders. Points for snark, though.

  • Alonzo

    I can just hear the Apostle Paul now saying, “The present generations I am teaching are no wiser than the previous generation. They are politically unstable and following the Apollos or Peter or Clement. I might as well just give up on them and go to Britain or somewhere else where factions are fewer. God simply won’t be able to do anything with this generation. They will continue to follow false teachings like their parents”

    This article sounds like this.

  • Paperboy_73

    I did enjoy how you managed to get snarky about ignorance of constitutional law, and then in the same paragraph disparage ‘nine robed men making – note the scare quotes – “laws”‘. It’s almost like they have the power to make important (supreme, even) judicial decisions based on the powers granted them by some foundational document whose name escapes me right at this point.

    A lot of this essay does seem to be the author angrily describing people who come across as fairly reasonable.

  • otrotierra

    There is no Rapture and the world is not coming to an end. But we are finally witnessing the end of U.S. White Evangelical hegemony. Or at least we’re in the first stage of its eventual demise. With Russian spies at their NRA gatherings and National Prayer Breakfasts, U.S. White Evangelicals have officially lost their self-declared Culture Wars.

    Once the Baby Boomer generation have passed on entirely, the remaining religious fundamentalists among Gen X will experience even greater isolation, and they likely won’t have access to the same amount of resources (money) to waste on the Family Research Council, the American Center for Law & Justice, Southern Baptist Convention, Focus on the Family, 700 Club, Liberty University, Gateway MegaChurch and other spiritually-bankrupt and predatory entities that gave us Trump. A world without White Evangelical corruption and hegemony can’t come fast enough.

  • Joshua Sonofnone

    Of course, once what you desire does happen, this is when the Rapture is most likely to occur!

  • otrotierra

    The Rapture didn’t happen for U.S. White Evangelicals still following TrumpPutin, but they certainly guaranteed the downfall of their own corrupt hegemony.

  • The Dove

    “For young believers at Block and elsewhere, the ubiquity of Facebook,
    Twitter, Instagram, and other social networks in their lives, among
    other factors, have made it more difficult to live in the kind of
    theological, cultural, and political isolation that previous generations
    once did.”

    Sorry, but that isn’t true at all. Bias confirmation is just as strong in 2018 as it was in 1418. Sure, people CAN sample different viewpoints on the web – but they don’t. This is where millennials are seriously delusional: they think that because they can sample just about anything on the web that people (including themselves) actually do so. You can spend your every waking hour on your computer and phone and never once interact with someone whose worldview differs from your own. In their own way they are just as isolated as the Amish. The difference, the Amish know they are isolated. These so-called “Christians” are puffed up with pride, thinking themselves wise and sophisticated.

    Given the huge membership losses in the liberal churches, we can safely assume that the same thing will occur among these young who (for the present) attend church and identify as Christian. When the church looks just like the secular culture, people drop out. That’s how it’s been since 1970s. They can continue to call themselves “Christians” and even “evangelicals,” just as the mainline churches still call themselves “Christian.” They will discover that the more “inclusive” a church professes itself to be, the fewer people want to be included.

  • @EstherOReilly

    SCOTUS does not make law. It interprets law. We used to understand this once upon a time.

  • @EstherOReilly

    By all means, point to the place where I say we should throw up our hands and give up on the next generation. Maybe it was the part where I said we need to teach them stuff?

  • Jansmt7

    She’s upset because really the laws should be made by two robed men (and a ghost).

  • Jan-Peter Schuring

    My thoughts exactly. Can’t happen fast enough.

    The American Christian experiment with its deluded, self absorbed, and insular orientation cannot sustain its naked hypocrisy any longer. The rot runs deep, wether on weird doctrines (dispensationalism), “blab it and grab it” word of faith, or any kind of meaningful commitment away from the great idol of “my own personal welfare.”

    This article that tries to still argue for the navel looking culture war agenda is laughable and tragic.

  • Joshua Sonofnone

    The Rapture (described in I Thessalonians 4:13-18) will occur in God’s timing and it will benefit Christians of all colors equally. The Rapture isn’t about race; it’s about God gathering His family. Revelation 6:9-14 deals with those who have been brought out of the great tribulation (instead of the rapture), but if you look at the composition of the crowd, you will note that the come from “…every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages….” There is no direct link from the Rapture to American politics.

  • otrotierra

    Rapture fan fiction *is* White American politics. Premillennial dispensational theology is a historically recent invention from First World, Western theologians traced to England and the U.S. in the 19th and 20th centuries.

  • Joshua Sonofnone

    I am well aware of the what pre-millennial dispensationalist theology is and its origins – you are making assumptions about my theology with very little basis for doing so. The Rapture will happen, but it won’t be as you seem to think it is. The term “Rapture” is not in the Bible, but the description of the event is and the description does not indicate whether the even will be pre-tribulation, mid-tribulation, or post-tribulation. The one thing that is certain is that the Rapture is not directly associated with American politics. Your association of the two shows a great lack of understanding of the Biblical text.

  • Alonzo

    Were you an Olympian? Your reply reads like it, because you jump to conclusions quite well. You have the gold.

  • Paperboy_73

    Hence “judicial decisions”. If people don’t like those decisions, maybe they should try following the constitution by which those decisions were made. Republicans love the idea of the constitution, not the constitution itself.

  • Widuran

    Believe the scriptures

  • Widuran

    Real Bible teaching on the Rapture from Gotquestions

    Question: “What is the difference between the Rapture and the Second Coming?”

    Answer: The rapture and the second coming of Christ are often confused. Sometimes it is difficult to determine whether a scripture verse is referring to the rapture or the second coming. However, in studying end-times Bible prophecy, it is very important to differentiate between the two.

    The rapture is when Jesus Christ returns to remove the church (all believers in Christ) from the earth. The rapture is described in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 and 1 Corinthians 15:50-54. Believers who have died will have their bodies resurrected and, along with believers who are still living, will meet the Lord in the air. This will all occur in a moment, in a twinkling of an eye. The second coming is when Jesus returns to defeat the Antichrist, destroy evil, and establish His millennial kingdom. The second coming is described in Revelation 19:11-16.

    The important differences between the rapture and second coming are as follows:

    1) At the rapture, believers meet the Lord in the air (1 Thessalonians 4:17). At the second coming, believers return with the Lord to the earth (Revelation 19:14).

    2) The second coming occurs after the great and terrible tribulation (Revelation chapters 6–19). The rapture occurs before the tribulation (1 Thessalonians 5:9; Revelation 3:10).

    3) The rapture is the removal of believers from the earth as an act of deliverance (1 Thessalonians 4:13-17, 5:9). The second coming includes the removal of unbelievers as an act of judgment (Matthew 24:40-41).

    4) The rapture will be secret and instant (1 Corinthians 15:50-54). The second coming will be visible to all (Revelation 1:7; Matthew 24:29-30).

    5) The second coming of Christ will not occur until after certain other end-times events take place (2 Thessalonians 2:4; Matthew 24:15-30; Revelation chapters 6–18). The rapture is imminent; it could take place at any moment (Titus 2:13; 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18; 1 Corinthians 15:50-54).

    Why is it important to keep the rapture and the second coming distinct?

    1) If the rapture and the second coming are the same event, believers will have to go through the tribulation (1 Thessalonians 5:9; Revelation 3:10).

    2) If the rapture and the second coming are the same event, the return of Christ is not imminent—there are many things which must occur before He can return (Matthew 24:4-30).

    3) In describing the tribulation period, Revelation chapters 6–19 nowhere mentions the church. During the tribulation—also called “the time of trouble for Jacob” (Jeremiah 30:7)—God will again turn His primary attention to Israel (Romans 11:17-31).

    The rapture and second coming are similar but separate events. Both involve Jesus returning. Both are end-times events. However, it is crucially important to recognize the differences. In summary, the rapture is the return of Christ in the clouds to remove all believers from the earth before the time of God’s wrath. The second coming is the return of Christ to the earth to bring the tribulation to an end and to defeat the Antichrist and his evil world empire.

  • Otrotierra Intersectionalizes

    We all know know the “rapture” you are talking about, and it ain’t holy!

    Too bad Handsome Evangelical men turn away from you when you come on to them.

  • @EstherOReilly

    Your initial comment ascribed the attitude “We might as well just give up on millennial Christians” to me. It would seem I should be content with silver.

  • Alonzo

    Let me go direct to your writing style, then. First you meander all over the place from one political idea to another without returning to your primary thesis, whatever that is. It is not well stated. You might want to settle on a single thought and dwell on that rather than tackling several issues. Going in a number of directions makes it harder for the reader to follow you. Your essay is like a scatter shot shot gun. It shoots at a number of issues without hitting the target. Exactly what is your message? Your ending does not wrap up the beginning or reign in the various examples you attempt to address. You never explain how your various examples support your main thesis. Then you conclude with what you refer as “downbeat.”

    While you write about generations not making the same mistakes, you never offer any solutions for escaping this cycle. It is truly downbeat because of the lack of solutions. Just telling people they should not make mistakes without informing them about the nature of the mistakes is nonplussed. Such a comment is really throwing up one’s hands and staring out into space while asking, “What mistakes? What is the mistake I should be avoiding?” A mistake assumes a standard for it. What is the standard? You never say.

    In critiquing the New Yorker, you fail to summarize the primary thesis of the New Yorker article. Consequently, you leave it up to the your readers to read the New Yorker article to attempt to understand your point. A good writer does not do that. A good writer never leads a reader away from his or her article to explore someone else’s writing first prior to engaging the article. A good writer never meanders as your article does. Furthermore, a good writer does not conclude with generalizations. Mistakes are generalizations.

    By focusing more specifically on a single issue and discussing it in depth, you would have been more clear with your point and could have clarified what you mean by mistakes. However, you failed to be more precise and engaged in scatter shot while concluding with a very broad application that fails to paint a picture for the reader. Making mistakes fails to draw the reader to act. In fact, who do you target with your article? For these reasons, the article makes very little impact and fails to fully engage me.

  • @EstherOReilly

    Okay.

  • Judith C. White

    There are many home-based jobs that already exist. And, in today’s entire world, there are way more work opportunities using the internet, and this craze is anticipated to continue nicely ahead. Who wouldn’t intend to work-from-home on a part-time basis and receive 1000s of dollars a month? It’s an offer the majority of people can’t or don’t avoid. So,today Let me tell you a brilliant work at home job opportunity from which you may gain between 5k dollars to 10k dollars each month. Let me show you what i do… ===> INCOME381.TUMBLR.COM

  • Widuran

    The rapture is real for all true believers

  • Widuran

    Amen! The only fiction comes from Ortrotierra believe who ignores Christ Jesus definition on many things including marriage.

  • Widuran

    Yes correct

  • swbarnes2

    This points up a huge gap in the education of the evangelical mind,

    Evangelicalism will be whatever its adherents want. Always has been, always will be. In 40 years, you will be doddering or dead, and what the young people want evangelicalism to be will be what it is. You aren’t going to be able to educate anyone into believing that their friends whom they know are evil and wrong. You aren’t going to be able to educate people into looking around and seeing happy gay couples and concluding that no, they are vile and miserable, and would be better off if their friends and family shunned them for their wickedness.

    You probably sing in church about how you want a new heart, and want Jesus to change the world. Well, these young people want to change things and you are furious. Women and non-white people are changing the world and you hate it.

  • EllenHar

    Jesus offers a new way, far beyond conservative or liberal, Republican or Democrat. Make no mistake, you cannot conflate his gospel with any ideology. As long as you’re encouraging people to be conservative, just for example, you’re not encouraging them to be Christian. That’s the problem.

  • EllenHar

    Except Tim Keller sees women as second class citizens. He needs to add sexism or misogyny to his list.

  • EllenHar

    Rapture theology has only been around since 1830. Rapture theology shows a great lack of understanding of the biblical text.

  • Joshua Sonofnone

    The theology you associate with the Rapture has only been around since 1830, but the Biblical description of what is known as the rapture (seen in I Thessalonians 4:13-18 has been around since the latter half of the first century A.D. Those of us who are familiar with the Biblical text know this.

  • Shirley Blake

    One can hope

  • Shirley Blake

    So many times the comments are so much better than the initial post. Well done sir

  • Matthew Kilburn

    Unless being Conservative – supporting life, hard work, personal responsibility, fidelity to the law, belief in the almighty, and accountability for your own life and actions – is far more in line with Christianity than liberalism.

    And it is. The left wants to take “pro-life” and apply it to anything and everything….except saving tens of millions of unborn children in the United States alone from being exterminated. They want wealth sharing without responsibility and without the demands of faith. That isn’t Christianity, its marxism.

  • cipher

    Everything you’ve said here is both typical and ridiculous.

  • Mr. James Parson

    Even Mormons?

  • Brianna LaPoint

    Ive learned not to care what others think of me. Most millenials are leaving christianity, and that gives me hope. If it is being implied that millenials that leave christianity are dunces, we shall see about that.

  • Brianna LaPoint

    yawn. The rapture was a made up concept by someone in the 1800s. Darby

  • Brianna LaPoint

    thats just your opinion. The belief that non christians are evil is a good reason why i shun christians. Because they refuse to accept that people that dont believe as they do are humans too. No thanks.

  • EllenHar

    Unless you believe that your definition of a conservative only applies to conservatives. Because your description is exactly what liberals believe and do. Surprise! And I don’t imagine that you want me to believe that to be conservative means being blind to the realities of the lives of those who are radically different from yours, and that we should just judge them as irresponsible (unlike those of us who are doing it all right), ignore them, versus serving them as Christ, and pouring ourselves out in cruciform, kenotic love. Did you know that the vast majority of abortions are due to financial reasons, and that given adequate supports, a women is highly likely to choose life? (I bet you’ve adopted hundreds of unwanted kids! ) Or have you just decided that these women are clearly beneath your superior way of being?
    Dividing us up like that reinforces mere ideologies, not the beautiful gospel. Your view of liberals applying pro-life to anything and everything except the unborn is highly uninformed. And again, I’m guessing that you are not trying to say that you don’t value the lives of all? You don’t think anyone but those who are able to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps is worthy of life, food, shelter, healthcare? The Christian way of dealing with wealth is to develop an “inner life of poverty,” in other words, to learn to hold what we have loosely, because it is not ours to begin with, it is God’s. Sharing it in helpful and healthy ways, (and listening to the over 2000 verses in the scriptures about the poor) comes from the heart of God. It’s not even close to Marxism. Seriously, LOL! Perhaps you get your information from sources that are a tad biased? (That’s a joke, of course you do.) But worse, you make conservatives sound like ignorant, self righteous, selfish people. Is that really what you meant to do? I am going to assume you realize that not all conservatives are so uniformed (unless they’re Fox News watchers, and listen to preachers of the ilk, LOL). It’s clear you are above listening to liberals at all.
    But thank you for proving my original point. Reinforcing your “side” only creates more ignorance and division.
    Jesus is a new way.

  • swbarnes2

    Yes, I am sure that you are utterly sincere in thinking that fidelity to laws mandating segregation was a true and noble virtue.

  • billwald

    I have a gut feeling that our grand kids’ generation will be smarter than our kid’s generation.

  • “Handsome”

  • I think that, if Jesus were to ever return, American evangelicals would be hesitant to accept him, being brown skinned and fuzzy-bearded.

  • Miles Norsworthy

    Pass.

  • Jim Bales

    Ms O’Reilly,

    It seems that an error has crept into your post. You describe Planned Parenthood as “an outfit that literally pays for billboards targeted to black women with the message “Abortion is self-care.” The link is to a tweet that shows a billboard with the text you quote, but the billboard was put up by an organization called “The Afiya Center”.

    A bit of Googling makes it clear that the Afiya Center paid for the billboards and is not part of Planned Parenthood. From the Ft. Worth Star-Telegram:

    The billboard was paid for by the advocacy group The Afiya Center, which focuses on black women’s reproductive rights and health. It went up about a month after another controversial billboard paid for by an anti-abortion group in the black community.

    Given that Planned Parenthood literally did not pay for the billboard, I’m confident that you’ll correct the error!

    Best
    Jim Bales

  • @EstherOReilly

    Apologies, you are right: It appears Planned Parenthood only PARTNERS with centers that fund eugenic billboard campaigns. Consider it corrected!

    https://www.updateamerica.com/look_at_this_black_women_urged_to_get_abortions_on_despicably_racist_tone_deaf_billboard

  • Widuran

    Read the scriptures and God will speak to you

  • Widuran

    No women and men have different roles. This is different from saying they are inferior like Muhammad would say

  • Did you know…. that republicans will never ban abortion because they will loose one of their most effective tools during the election cycle?