The Normalization of Delusion

Recently, I wrote of the affirmation of Coach Joe Kennedy’s right to pray at mid-field after contests. I said this eight-year battle for this simple, Constitutionally protected right is not a harbinger that confirms your worst fears of Christians. Like many commenting on my posts, this person’s distaste for religious views seems prejudicial and unhealthy:

If that isn’t opening the flood gates, I don’t know what is. With a religious rightwing SCOTUS our de-facto state religion is now pretty much free to run rampant in the streets, trampling anyone with different beliefs, or none at all. 

It was an extended conversation and I asked repeatedly: what has the coach done wrong and how has he abused his position of authority? I would also object if the coach had miss used his position as a leader, but I received nothing more of substance. Further, where is the burgeoning trend of prayer in our streets, ball fields, and other public venues? Was this decision a catalyst of some sort? In the month since, there is nothing to see.

Even if there were a sudden flurry of prayer in our streets, how is that threatening? Do you worry others may pray for your soul? If you don’t believe in prayer, why should it matter? Let them make fools of themselves; they will prove your point for you. Will the new prayer movement so overwhelm weak minded folks (excluding, of course, those on high alert like my debating partner)? Some may not be able to resist doing something he doesn’t like? I wish there were an actual religious revival in this country, but I don’t see one of those either.

In America today, do Christians have power to trample religious rights? Exactly which rights of non-Christians are being “trampled” ? If you believe in such trampling, but, like my critic, can’t explain why then maybe you should examine your views again.

Do Christians even seek to compel everyone else to conform? Not in my parish. Not in my neighborhood. In fact, Christians today are the ones who are continually mocked as prudes, stuck-in-the-past, and religious nuts; they are under attack and not likely to be the ones suddenly exerting themselves in a nefarious way. It all sounds scary and I will help you prevent it, but please explain further so I can understand the problem.

It is clear we cannot force another to adopt our religion. It has never worked effectively, and what’s more, it isn’t being attempted. Our founders, from an era where citizens were overwhelmingly Christian, recognized no religion could unite us. Today, there are hundreds of Christian denominations; the different faiths can’t agree on one unifying Christian doctrine, yet they are going to overwhelm the rest of society and all other religions– and while religion is waning (see the numbers below) and millions of ever-vigilant ghostbusters like my debating partner are on the watch? Please.

There seems little connection between the fear expressed and reality, but fear is a great motivator. My critic is well-spoken and (mostly) rational, but this one response seems an irrational, almost delusional, fear. His views are not uncommon, however. I keep encountering normal folks with such views. The narrative has great appeal and influence.

What IS Going on Then?

This Supreme Court decision could actually be a catalyst for positive change, but I am not sure such a trend is emerging. What the Supreme Court promoted in this instance was not the values of any particular religion, but instead American values: the Constitution and fundamental liberties (for more on why, see: US residents can maintain their identity, their faith, customs and traditions, but still unite behind American principles and values.  Otherwise why do we have a nation at all? Doesn’t the current president talk about unity? What exactly does he believe will unite us? His political ideas? He derides the notion of “Make America Great Again” (MAGA), but American principles, principles like the freedom to practice any religion we choose, have united the country for nearly 250 years. Leaders like President Biden do not unite us anymore. They have forgotten how.

American principles have not been manifested perfectly throughout our history, but given a chance they win in the long run, and they won again in this instance. Can we sustain that win? I am doubtful but still hopeful. This lack of common values is the major problem in our country.  This failing will be our nation’s undoing.   We have two totally different cultures, one advocating for Constitutional and Judeo-Christian values and one which is progressing beyond these values. How long can we continue in this manner?

What are We Worshiping?

Why is this so hard to unite behind common values? Maybe it actually is because of our religion.


Gallup has been polling Americans on their religious preferences since the 1940s. According to their records, belief in God was most widespread between 1953 and 1967, at which time 98% of respondents said that they believed. In the following 50 years belief in God decreased to 81% (2021). The data shows a decrease since 2011, when 92% of respondents answered in the affirmative. 

Americans belief in God has declined from 98% in 1967 to 92% in 2011 to 81% today. The decline started 50 years ago, but is increasing the last ten.

Dig deeper and we see who is driving this decline. 94% of conservatives and 86% of moderates believe in God as opposed to 62% of liberals. Liberals are the lowest of these all-time low numbers, six times more likely than conservatives to be a non-believer. Fewer liberals believe in God than do fickle young adults (68%), the unmarried (77%) and college graduates (78%).

A sizeable chunk of the liberal coalition are people of color, but their number is 88%, far closer to conservatives than liberals. Maybe this is why Hispanics and blacks are moving away from the Left. Gallup doesn’t list the white liberal number, but I would peg it as close to 50%. Every other white liberal you meet is likely not to believe in God. Does this tell you something?

Columnist George Will used the term “religious zeal” most accurately below when describing those coming after Coach Kennedy.

Cue the alarms from those secularists who bring religious zeal to their crusade against the incipient theocracy they detect in every religious observance allowed in the public square.

If we don’t worship God Himself, we will worship something else.   It is how we were made. Political correctness, “wokeness”, identity politics, critical theory, climate change, transgenderism, and abortion form the basis of a progressive orthodoxy which has become a competing religion, a jealous and proprietary religion for white liberals especially.

In other words, liberals, who constantly proclaim diversity and tolerance themselves, are intolerant of Christianity. Christian orthodoxy conflicts with their progressive orthodoxy. This explains the crazy rambling notions regarding wild-eyed Christians trampling other religions as prompted by SCOTUS. HIs beliefs are threatened by Christianity. He is describing the behavior of his own kind while attributing it to Christians.

Another who engaged in a vigorous debate in my comment section wants to contribute to the new religion. He insists on the fact that all living things have spirits.

And I do believe ALL LIVING BEINGS HAVE SPIRITS. I just don’t believe non-living fantasies have spirits. All spirits are equal, none are greater or lesser.

The Left would say he is just expressing himself. I might label this disinformation instead. How does he know the trees and insects have spirits? How does he know about spirits at all? Was this passed down or did he discern it himself? I asked and was told to F— myself. However he arrived at this notion, it must be taken on faith; these truths he defines are not discernable to mortal beings.

I suppose it is a nice thought about spirits. The world may seem a better place and it might be good material for a fictional book, but is it true? He derides my faith, calls it a fairy tale at every opportunity, but my faith in God is far more defensible and far more developed than this belief. In fact, we can say that Christians belief in God are discernable (as well as being revealed by God Himself). St. Thomas Aquinas developed five proofs for the existence of God. My critic doesn’t care. He doesn’t want to know. What exactly is he worshiping? What has he found for purpose in life?

Do you want to follow the religion that was developed the last 50 years and is still evolving or the one that has a pedigree extending thousands of years? Furthermore, despite what progressives often say, the good book is not outdated today. The world has not changed because you arrived on the scene. You may have more freedom than ever to express yourself and access to more information than others ever did in the past, but have those served us well? Loving your enemy and turning the other cheek are just as relevant (and as difficult) today as they were in Ancient Israel.

Give Over Your Kids to the New Sexuality

Macy Gray, Martina Navratilova, J.K. Rowling, Bill Maher, and a few other bold liberals have spoken out against the liberal transgender orthodoxy. If you are not fully in agreement with all the progressive commandments, you will be mercilessly attacked. Macy Gray underwent what Ben Shapiro called a “Maoist struggle session” to recant, but the others have held firm–at least for now.

MLB asked its players to wear a pride flag for June. A few players objected. This seems an actual attempt to run over the religious beliefs, but it is instigated by the progressives not by Christians. MSN (and many others) claims this refusal is a problem:

The decision that five Tampa Bay Rays pitchers made in refusing to support Pride Night indicates that true LGBTQ+ support in the MLB has a long way to go.

“We have a long way to go” meaning everyone must accept (or at least pay lip service to) the new beliefs. Having a different opinion is a problem from their perspective. Progressives don’t like debate. Does this notion “we have a long way to go” sound anything like the words quoted above, that we have those “trampling anyone with different beliefs”?

If you are not yet up-to-speed on the new transgender ideology, JP Sears effectively explains how it works by describing how to transition a rooster.

John Macarthur, a more traditional preacher, says: “the fear of the truth proves the extent of the lie”

The Ultimate Act of Faith: Abortion

The ultimate sacred cow for the progressive religion is abortion. You cannot join their club without being avidly pro-choice. They continually push the abortion envelope further and further. It seems like a competition. Even life-long pro-choice advocates should balk at these outrageous claims (if you are, in fact, pro-choice, ask yourself why they are going to such lengths to convince others of its legitimacy).

Forty years ago, when more Americans still believed in God, abortion was sold as a necessary evil (safe, legal, and RARE), but today an abortion doctor promotes it as “self-love” during Congressional testimony.  Yes, it is “self-love” but hatred of the other.

I know firsthand that abortion saves lives. For the thousands of people I’ve cared for, abortion is a blessing, abortion is an act of love, abortion is freedom.

Three other “experts” testifying refused to condemn infanticide.  They wanted to reword the question instead:

“I assume you agree with infanticide, the killing of a child, a perfectly healthy child at birth?” Rep. Ralph Norman (R-SC) asked.


“I assume you agree with infanticide, the killing of a child, a perfectly healthy child at birth?” Rep. Ralph Norman (R-SC) asked.

“I don’t accept the basis of that question, but I do believe abortion is health care,” Lopez replied.

“I’m talking about, do you agree — I know, I get that, but do you agree — I mean, are you in — do you support infanticide, killing the child after he’s born?” he asked.

“I do not agree with the basis of that question,” she responded.

Are these folks unique? Apparently not.

On Tuesday, a letter was sent to Mayor Bowser from both the House of Representatives and the Senate demanding a full investigation into the recent deaths of the five children, all committed at a local abortion facility, Washington Surgi-Clinic. Although abortion is legal through all nine months of pregnancy in D.C., medical experts who reviewed photos of the children believe that federal crimes may have been committed in violation of the Partial-Birth Abortion Act as well as the Born Alive Infants Protection Act

Yet, Mayor Bowser — who leads all of the District bureaucracy including the D.C. Medical Examiner’s Office — indicated to the media that they’ve chosen not to conduct autopsies or further investigate the circumstances of the deaths. 

Lena Dunham wished she had had an abortion so she could join this club.  Abortion has become a rite of passage. At least, this liberal journalist had a problem with her, but most liberals do not criticize her opinion.

Representative Ocasio-Cortez was arrested protesting the recent abortion decision. She pretends to be handcuffed when she clearly is not. If your cause is so righteous, why is deception needed to further it?

Defining a Woman

The promotion of abortion is sick.    The refusal to admit that only biological women can get pregnant is bizarre. One Berkley professor labeled Senator Josh Hawley “transphobic” after he pursued a line of questioning about who could have babies.

“I want to recognize that your line of questioning is transphobic and it opens up trans people to violence by not recognizing them,” Bridges said, to which the senator responded incredulously.

The senator then asked how his line of questioning was responsible for transgender violence. I am also labeled hateful and bigoted because I say transgenderism is not a good thing. I don’t say folks should be attacked or stopped from expressing themselves, only that I will not acknowledge this behavior is good. Criticism has become the threat as defined by this new religion. In the case of Senator Hawley simply asking a question, a fundamental biological question, is a problem.

The professor next defined the term “people with the capacity to get pregnant”. 

“You refer to ‘people with a capacity for pregnancy.’ Would that be women?” Hawley asked Khiara Bridges, a law professor at UC Berkeley School of Law, during the sharp exchange at the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing.

“Many women, cis women, have the capacity for pregnancy, many cis women do not have the capacity for pregnancy,” Bridges replied. “There are also trans men who are capable of pregnancy, as well as non-binary people who are capable of pregnancy.”

I was still growing accustomed to the term “birthing person” and it is outdated already as well.

The president of the “WOMEN’S Law Center” also wouldn’t define the term “woman” for senators. She doesn’t like the question either.

Are these folks below women?

One of these two was a football player in high school. The other is a non-binary who talks publicly about puppy play (leading gay men, pretending to be dogs, on leashes before having sex with them). How wonderful they have learned to expressed themselves. Today, such beliefs are qualification enough for important positions in our government. We are in trouble when Russians are lecturing us about our moral failures. Russia’s United Nations diplomat Dmitry Polyanskiy said this about this picture:

“Keep going that way, our dear American ex-partners! I don’t think we even need any long-term strategies to counter your malicious role in the world – you are doing the right thing yourselves! And let the whole world see WhoYouAre!”

I wrote about Justice Jackson-Brown refusing to define women as well.

I will allow the judge a bit of leeway and recognize her caucus does not permit its members to admit there are clear definitions for the terms “man” and “woman”. To provide a straightforward answer would acknowledge the simple concerns of her Republican questioners have some merit. It would mean admitting that those who believe men are actually men and women are actually women, may actually have a point. 

Thankfully, Town Hall defines the term for us.

In simplified terms, a “woman” is a human being capable of giving birth to another human being. If that definition is still too confusing or not thorough enough, here are four scientific ways to know if a person is a woman:

  • They have XX chromosomes
  • They were born with a uterus and ovaries
  • They have menstrual / ovarian cycles
  • They can give birth to another human being

See, defining “woman” and identifying one isn’t so hard after all.

Senator Warren You’ve Lost It

Senator Elizabeth Warren takes the cake among all the crazies this week. She said that crisis pregnancy centers which attempt to counsel women and offer other choices to women, are problems.  They need to be shut down, according to Warren.

They “torture” women apparently.  Women are tricked out of abortions by nefarious people posing as counselors pretending to help.  Maybe Senator Warren believes women are too stupid to know the difference between an abortion center and one offering other “choices”.  Her religion calls it “choice”, but why is she so focused on promoting only one choice?  

Adoption is another choice which has already been limited greatly in the US because it conflicts with the religious principle of abortion.

Crisis pregnancy centers, like adoption centers, have too many Christians. Perhaps that is the real problem for Senator Warren?

Allie Stuckey captures the Senator perfectly in this parody, a parody which strikes very close the bone.

It is true most Americans are not in favor a full ban on abortion, but most Americans are also not for unfettered abortions.  Most accept the need for limits and restrictions.  Our public figures do not represent their views very well.  Those who might otherwise be in agreement with this tenet of the progressive religion, are turned off by the extreme positions and religious zealotry regarding abortion.


Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by God. It was a society that had degenerated into total depravity, including various forms of sexuality. Abraham negotiated with God for their redemption, but not one righteous person could be found. Does America deserve a similar fate? Why should any of us sinners be treated any better? There is only one solution.

One thought on “The Normalization of Delusion

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: