Glenn shares painful family history of abuse in response to critics

Glenn opened this morning radio’s program with an emotional monologue that touched on his own family’s dark history and why he is no longer willing to sit idly and comply.

Last week, the Wonderful World of Stu aired a segment about the inflated sexual assault statistics pushed by the White House. In the clip, Stu makes it clear that sexual assault – no matter the statistic – is unacceptable, but he also asserted that overstating the number of sexual assaults belittles those who have been assaulted. You can watch the segment HERE.

Left wing outlets like Media Matters, Salon, Slate, and Jezebel to name a few have jumped on Stu’s segment, which appeared  the Wonderful World of Stu and a portion of which aired on the Glenn Beck Program. The articles on these sites claim Stu – and Glenn by extension – are “mocking” sexual assault and harassment in a “horrifying rape sketch.”

Over the years, Glenn has learned it often best to ignore such outrage, but this morning he was inspired by the dozens of stories he has covered recently in which individuals stood up for what was right even when it wasn’t the politically correct position to take. Glenn publicly stood by Stu and his report and proceeded to share his family’s painful history with abuse and sexual assault.

Below is an edited transcript of the monologue:

GLENN: I want to start with something rather personal. I was going to blow something off because the usual suspects are rallying around this bit that Stu did on the TV show… The producers of that segment are women, and it's about rape and how horrible, horrible the new stats are about rape in America. It's all a lie. They are now trying to tell the American people that rape in America [on college campuses], by American men is three times the rate of the Rwandan genocide – three times the rate of rape than was happening during the

Rwandan genocide. It's an outrage. They do it by doctoring the questions in this poll.

STU: Yeah, they asked a bunch of questions in there – things like: If you were to pressure someone to have sex by telling them lies – so you say, ‘Hey, I'm actually a basketball player.’ If you do something like that, it's rape. If you make promises about the future that you know are untrue --

PAT: If you say, ‘I love you. I will love you forever.’ Also, if you ask more than once?

STU: Yes. Repeatedly asking, persistence.

PAT: So you could say, ‘Please?’ ‘No.’

GLENN: This is how they are defining it. This is a war on men and on women.

STU: And the goal here – the reason why I thought it was important to take this stat on – you are talking about turning every college-age male into Genghis Khan. You can't lie.

GLENN: I just wanted to say that everybody needs to watch this particular episode, and we'll post it at GlennBeck.com. Watch the full thing, not what the media is trying to smear with. That's totally fine because I stand by it. I stand by it. I double down on it.

And here's why: Rape is not a laughing matter, nor is it a matter that you lie about. You don't cheapen the real horror of rape.

I've told you now for about 10 years, there were things going on in my life I would talk to you about when the time is right, and it is damn near right. I will share a little bit of something that my family and I have gone through over the course of our lifetime, generationally, because I've had enough, quite frankly. I have had enough. I'm tired of being accused of standing with abusers and rapists. I'm tired of being called a monster. I'm just tired of the lies. I'm tired of the lies of abusers. I have had my fill of it.

My family has experienced rape first-hand – multiple times, over multiple generations. I have worked hard in my personal life to stop the effects of this over the last 10 years. It has changed my life. It has changed the lives of my sisters.

You know that my father died two months ago. My father was my greatest teacher, and for many years, he was my best friend. But my father, for me, did not two years ago. My father died about six years ago.

My father had a very bad dad. My father was abused by my grandfather, and my father ran away from home. And when he ran away from home, he ran to Los Angeles and he stayed at the YMCA, where he was repeatedly raped.

When he was young, he was stealing golf balls at a country club in Seattle. My father didn't know anything at all about golf, but he knew he could sell the golf balls, and so he was hiding in the woods with his friends and they would steal the golf balls, turn them in, sell them for money. And he was caught. He was caught by a man who said, ‘Really? You're going to have to work this off. You're going to caddy for me for the rest of this summer.’ That's the story that I had always been told by my father. What I found out recently was that man also repeatedly raped my father.

My father found himself going to try to find God, and he went to a church. He believed in this preacher. Instead of putting his faith in God, he put his faith in a man. And things didn't work out well.

When my father passed away, my aunt had come to visit me. We're now beginning to explore the ramifications of abuse generationally in families. My family is a shipwreck. I'm figuring out now why I believe – or have always felt as if – I was a bad dad because I have the sickness of self-doubt. I have been passed generationally the sickness, the effects – even if they are removed directly from you – you still feel the effects of what happened. And abuse was happening in my family. I told my father 10 years ago that it would stop because it was now being passed to the grandchildren. He said it would. I said, ‘It will, Dad? Because if it doesn't, I will end it.’

It was physical abuse, but it was not sexual abuse at that time. My father never abused any of us sexually that I know of, but my family has felt the ramifications of his abuse and has felt the sexual abuse by others in our family.

Don't you ever preach to me about what I can say and cannot say about rape. Don't you ever try to be an authority to me on the effects of rape. Don't you ever try to tell me what victims should or should not feel, as I have tried to piece my family back together and to give my sisters the love that they deserve and have never had.

My family and I are standing because of the grace of God, and because we have each other, and we have the truth. And if you have the truth and the courage to pursue the truth, time will heal everything. The good news is that I, and now millions of others, are finally facing the truth, no matter where your fear or the lies are buried, and it goes far beyond sexual abuse. There are millions now willing to speak, even if it means losing everything.

I have been saying this for a while, that courage is contagious. And last night, when I saw what was being said about Stu's segment on my program, I started to [think] I'm not going to say anything about it. But I have been inspired by those who are now standing in PTA meetings and have stood to speak their mind but violated a stupid two-minute rule and went to jail for the first time in their lives. I have been inspired for the teachers who are beginning to stand, and the TV show hosts and the football players and the peaceful group of individuals, many of whom are radically different than I am – financially, ethnically, politically, sexually – but they are all standing now, peacefully and calmly. But mark my words: Fully submitted to the truth.

I will not comply. You do not own my thoughts. A few things are very clear to me, and no amount of speech giving or bumper stickers or EPA, NSA, IRS threats will ever change the facts that are true.

These are just a few of them: My child's fingers are not, nor will they ever be a gun. Those who survived the Holocaust did not do so because of white privilege. A Hollywood blacklist is exactly the same horror show, whether the names on that list are communists or conservatives. 2 plus 2 equals 4. Always has, always will. I don't give a flying crap how you got there, as long as you got there, to 4. Global warming is not the same as global cooling or global climate change, which is different than global climate crisis and none of them have to do with the shootings in Chicago or the idea of regulating the very vapor that we as humans breathe out, that we all learn trees breathe in to grow. That is just as ridiculous as your straight face plan to now regulate cow farts.

I'm sorry, but I respectfully, lovingly, yet full-throated declare that is nonsense. I also declare the self-evident truth that racism is not about having high expectations. Racism is not about standards. And rape certainly is not about someone asking for sex too many times and then being sad when you turn them down.

If you had the facts on how brutal rape is, it shows how awful your peer-reviewed study questions really are. Let's contrast and compare, shall we, America? Who is hurting women? Who is standing up for women? Who is defending them and who is using them, merely for political power?

Have you no shame? How many gay friends do we all have that are now embarrassed by the people who have use third reel fight for freedom to come out of the shadows and love who they want, just to bash, control, and destroy everything in its wake for power now?

I have quite a few gay friends, and, without exception, they all say the same thing. They are now embarrassed and horrified at what the power left has turned the real cause of each of us being treated with respect and judged for our character into a thinly veiled mechanism of threat and retribution for anybody who dares agree on everything in this ever-expanding agenda. We have begun to destroy those who were at their side the whole time, who have the audacity to say, ‘Maybe, maybe things have gone too far.’

After a break, Glenn continued:

Those from all walks of life, color, sexual orientation and political ideology that wish to force others to think and behave the way they deem is the right way will always use every tool of their trade.  Look at what they are now defining as rape.  They are saying that threatening to hurt, threatening to smear, threatening to make afraid, lying to get their way, or pretending to be hurt or sad if you don't get your way.  All of those things, they are now saying is rape. But look at those who are doing all of these things to our society. Look at the way they are behaving.  Are they not behaving as their own self-defined rapists?

Make no mistake, they are not rapists, at least on this program.  We will define rape and racist as it is commonly understood.  A rapist and a fascist, while both monsters, are different.  Even though fascists have throughout history used rape as a tool to gain hold over a person or a public, rape still holds a unique position in society. Yes, both rapists and fascists, left and right, both want to force someone to do as they wish, or they will humiliate, threaten, violate, beat, kill or destroy.  Similar tactics, because as all intellectual and intellectually honest people will admit, rape is not about sex. It is about power over another person, their choices, their body and their life.

Those currently in power in government, education, banking, even global business, should understand: your time of lies and deceit and corruption are over.  Even if the world takes this current crop of bums and throws them out, I want you to know the other side is going to use the same exact levers and tactics again.

But here's the good news. I really, truly believe, at least 10% of the people on this planet are wide awake now, from China to Colorado, and that is more than enough to defeat anyone who wears a red tie or a blue tie or any kind of military uniform.  There are enough of us now, willing to stand just as they did in Tiananmen Square.  Stand against oppression in any form, and that number is growing.

Martin Luther King said 300 years ago enough is enough, and he's right. Rape, racism, oppression of any kind isn't a color.  It's not a class. It's not a gender problem.  It is a human problem.  It didn't start in America.  It started with Cain and Abel and has been repeating itself for thousands of years. Contrary to what our public school teachers are now forced to teach to stave the wrath of the labor union, slave owners don't have to at live in plantation houses.  Chains don't have to be physical, and those who use power to silence others don't have to be white.  They just have to see others as the means and themselves as the ends.

Just as Moses and a handful of these on the lowest rung on the ladder of political power did in Egypt and Lincoln did in America and Bonhoeffer did in Germany, Gandhi in India, Lech Walesa in Poland, we will stand - no matter the personal cost - we'll stand with intellectual honesty, stand peacefully, we will stand as decent and caring, a mass majority of all walks of life, voting records and lifestyle choices.  And we refuse to leave the lunch counter because we actually do believe in something.

We actually do believe that we can all be different and yet we can all live side-by-side, we can all be friends, we can disagree on all kinds of thing, but we can still work together and play together and be responsible enough as humans to defend each other's right to be different.  We don't need a political action committee to stoke the flames of book burning, witch hunts or mob rule.  We don't need the political action committees to tell us about blacklists.  All we need is each other and the truth.

Our black present, neighbors and families did not get beaten, go to jail and many die to win the right as a black man to have full citizenship, only now to be told to shut up and sit down at the back of the bus, because you're not black enough.  Only now to be told sit down, shut up, sit in the back of the bus, because you're Christian or atheist or gay or straight, liberal or conservative.  We're humans first.  We will continue to shout the truth from the rooftops.  I am a man, and I demand to be treated as such.

Adam Corolla said this week, it's not a crazy right wing idea.  It's just the right idea. Raising your kids to be responsible and loving is a parent's job.  Working hard and being able to pursue your dreams and keep your gain, helping those who can't make it and not because of mind-set or attitude.  That's their problem, but because of physical or mental disadvantages, helping those people, refusing to look away when you hear the cries for help, and standing up at the school yard for any bully, no matter where they're found, or no matter what label the victim seems to be wearing.  It is our job, not as Americans, but as members of the human family.

We stand with our sisters and our mothers and our daughters, because we love them, but we also stand with our fathers and our brothers and our sons, who also have been raped as well, those who have been destroyed by the cruel and calculated accusation of rape or racist, like those who smeared the cops over Tawana Brawley or the Duke lacrosse team.  We will not cower and we will not conform.

This isn't about white privilege or black power.  This is about power to the people, where it rightfully belongs.  It is about our duty and our honor as fellow human beings to comfort those who mourn, to heal the sick, to care about the poor and the poor in spirit, to hold those who are afraid, to stand with the meek, the humble, the real victims of rape and racism and classism or any other kind of ism.  Unlike the so-called civil rights leaders who have shamed themselves decades ago. We are not preachers, we are not politicians an we are not community organizers.  We are just people, and we like it that way.

We don't want, we don't need, we don't desire any recognition for this.  We don't want any power from it.  We certainly don't want money, retribution or vengeance, because that makes us into the monster we're all trying to stop.  We really even don't want to win. We don't want to win, because logic teaches us that for us to win, it requires someone else to lose.  I don't need to win.  I only search for reconciliation.  Reconciliation to the truth, because we know the truth will set us free.

I have two dads, one who is far from perfect, and one who is, and the one who is perfect asked me to love the people that hate, not to excuse their actions and not to love them in a condescending way, but a real way.

The people who are perpetrating these lies are in pain. To stay alive, they have to control others, because their lives are completely out of control, and they are afraid that they are going to be found out.

It's reconciliation, loving one's enemies does not mean condoning their actions.  It actually means exactly the opposite.  True love means you have to speak the truth.  You're wrong.  This is a problem. You have done things that deserve punishment, but take my hand.  I offer it to you as a sign of peace.  Walk with me, talk with me.  You do have to pay a price for your actions, but I, too, am a sinner.  I, too, am struggling just to keep my head above water, so I will walk with you, I will hold your hand, in hopes that you will have the peace inside of me, and I will feel your pain, but if you deny my hand, that's okay.  I can't force you to do anything, but make a choice.

Love and forgiveness or hate and destruction.  We have to stop this madness, put down our labels, put down our desire to control, put down your desire to manipulate.

The answers are easy. Look for the divine.  There's power, peace, love, forgiveness and a chance to start all over again.  Let us humble ourselves to be even worthy to see the truth again.

[newsletter_inline bgcolor='#ebebeb' header_text='Get More Glenn!' sub_text='Sign up for the Glenn Beck daily email newsletter, and never miss out on our most popular stories.']

When 'Abolish America' stops being symbolic

Al Drago / Stringer | Getty Images

Prosecutors stopped a New Year’s Eve bombing plot rooted in ideology that treats the US as an enemy to be destroyed.

Federal prosecutors in Los Angeles announced that four members of an anti-capitalist extremist group were arrested on Friday for plotting coordinated bombings in California on New Year’s Eve.

According to the Department of Justice, the suspects planned to detonate explosives concealed in backpacks at various businesses while also targeting ICE agents and vehicles. The attacks were supposed to coincide with midnight celebrations.

Marxists, anarchists, and Islamist movements share a conviction that the United States, like Israel, is a colonial project that must be destroyed.

The plot was disrupted before any lives were lost. The group behind the plot calls itself the Turtle Island Liberation Front. That name matters more than you might think.

When ideology turns operational

For years, the media has told us that radical, violent rhetoric on the left is mostly symbolic. They explained away the angry slogans, destructive language, and calls for “liberation” as performance or hyperbole.

Bombs are not metaphors, however.

Once explosives enter the picture, framing the issue as harmless expression becomes much more difficult. What makes this case different is the ideological ecosystem behind it.

The Turtle Island Liberation Front was not a single-issue group. It was anti-American, anti-capitalist, and explicitly revolutionary. Its members viewed the United States as an illegitimate occupying force rather than a sovereign nation. America, in their view, is not a nation, not a country; it is a structure that must be dismantled at any cost.

What ‘Turtle Island’ really means

“Turtle Island” is not an innocent cultural reference. In modern activist usage, it is shorthand for the claim that the United States has no moral or legal right to exist. It reframes the country as stolen land, permanently occupied by an illegitimate society.

Once people accept that premise, the use of violence against their perceived enemies becomes not only permissible, but virtuous. That framing is not unique to one movement. It appears again and again across radical networks that otherwise disagree on nearly everything.

Marxists, anarchists, and Islamist movements do not share the same vision for the future. They do not even trust one another. But they share a conviction that the United States, like Israel, is a colonial project that must be destroyed. The alignment of radical, hostile ideologies is anything but a coincidence.

The red-green alliance

For decades, analysts have warned about what is often called the red-green alliance: the convergence of far-left revolutionary politics with Islamist movements. The alliance is not based on shared values, but on shared enemies. Capitalism, national sovereignty, Western culture, and constitutional government all fall into that category.

History has shown us how this process works. Revolutionary coalitions form to tear down an existing order, promising liberation and justice. Once power is seized, the alliance fractures, and the most ruthless faction takes control.

Iran’s 1979 revolution followed this exact pattern. Leftist revolutionaries helped topple the shah. Within a few years, tens of thousands of them were imprisoned, executed, or “disappeared” by the Islamist regime they helped install. Those who do not understand history, the saying goes, are doomed to repeat it.

ALEX WROBLEWSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

This moment is different

What happened in California was not a foreign conflict bleeding into the United States or a solitary extremist acting on impulse. It was an organized domestic group, steeped in ideological narratives long validated by universities, activist networks, and the media.

The language that once circulated on campuses and social media is now appearing in criminal indictments. “Liberation” has become a justification for explosives. “Resistance” has become a plan with a date and a time. When groups openly call for the destruction of the United States and then prepare bombs to make it happen, the country has entered a new phase. Pretending things have not gotten worse, that we have not crossed a line as a country, is reckless denial.

Every movement like this depends on confusion. Its supporters insist that calls for America’s destruction are symbolic, even as they stockpile weapons. They denounce violence while preparing for it. They cloak criminal intent in the language of justice and morality. That ambiguity is not accidental. It is deliberate.

The California plot should end the debate over whether these red-green alliances exist. They do. The only question left is whether the country will recognize the pattern before more plots advance farther — and succeed.

This is not about one group, one ideology, or one arrest. It is about a growing coalition that has moved past rhetoric and into action. History leaves no doubt where that path leads. The only uncertainty is whether Americans will step in and stop it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Trump v. Slaughter: The Deep State on trial

JIM WATSON / Contributor | Getty Images

The administrative state has long operated as an unelected super-government. Trump v. Slaughter may be the moment voters reclaim authority over their own institutions.

Washington is watching and worrying about a U.S. Supreme Court case that could very well define the future of American self-government. And I don’t say that lightly. At the center of Trump v. Slaughter is a deceptively simple question: Can the president — the one official chosen by the entire nation — remove the administrators and “experts” who wield enormous, unaccountable power inside the executive branch?

This isn’t a technical fight. It’s not a paperwork dispute. It’s a turning point. Because if the answer is no, then the American people no longer control their own government. Elections become ceremonial. The bureaucracy becomes permanent. And the Constitution becomes a suggestion rather than the law of the land.

A government run by experts instead of elected leaders is not a republic. It’s a bureaucracy with a voting booth bolted onto the front to make us feel better.

That simply cannot be. Justice Neil Gorsuch summed it up perfectly during oral arguments on Monday: “There is no such thing in our constitutional order as a fourth branch of government that’s quasi-judicial and quasi-legislative.”

Yet for more than a century, the administrative state has grown like kudzu — quietly, relentlessly, and always in one direction. Today we have a fourth branch of government: unelected, unaccountable, insulated from consequence. Congress hands off lawmaking to agencies. Presidents arrive with agendas, but the bureaucrats remain, and they decide what actually gets done.

If the Supreme Court decides that presidents cannot fire the very people who execute federal power, they are not just rearranging an org chart. The justices are rewriting the structure of the republic. They are confirming what we’ve long feared: Here, the experts rule, not the voters.

A government run by experts instead of elected leaders is not a republic. It’s a bureaucracy with a voting booth bolted onto the front to make us feel better.

The founders warned us

The men who wrote the Constitution saw this temptation coming. Alexander Hamilton and James Madison in the Federalist Papers hammered home the same principle again and again: Power must remain traceable to the people. They understood human nature far too well. They knew that once administrators are protected from accountability, they will accumulate power endlessly. It is what humans do.

That’s why the Constitution vests the executive power in a single president — someone the entire nation elects and can unelect. They did not want a managerial council. They did not want a permanent priesthood of experts. They wanted responsibility and authority to live in one place so the people could reward or replace it.

So this case will answer a simple question: Do the people still govern this country, or does a protected class of bureaucrats now run the show?

Not-so-expert advice

Look around. The experts insisted they could manage the economy — and produced historic debt and inflation.

The experts insisted they could run public health — and left millions of Americans sick, injured, and dead while avoiding accountability.

The experts insisted they could steer foreign policy — and delivered endless conflict with no measurable benefit to our citizens.

And through it all, they stayed. Untouched, unelected, and utterly unapologetic.

If a president cannot fire these people, then you — the voter — have no ability to change the direction of your own government. You can vote for reform, but you will get the same insiders making the same decisions in the same agencies.

That is not self-government. That is inertia disguised as expertise.

A republic no more?

A monarchy can survive a permanent bureaucracy. A dictatorship can survive a permanent bureaucracy. A constitutional republic cannot. Not for long anyway.

We are supposed to live in a system where the people set the course, Congress writes the laws, and the president carries them out. When agencies write their own rules, judges shield them from oversight, and presidents are forbidden from removing them, we no longer live in that system. We live in something else — something the founders warned us about.

And the people become spectators of their own government.

JIM WATSON / Contributor | Getty Images

The path forward

Restoring the separation of powers does not mean rejecting expertise. It means returning expertise to its proper role: advisory, not sovereign.

No expert should hold power that voters cannot revoke. No agency should drift beyond the reach of the executive. No bureaucracy should be allowed to grow branches the Constitution never gave it.

The Supreme Court now faces a choice that will shape American life for a generation. It can reinforce the Constitution, or it can allow the administrative state to wander even farther from democratic control.

This case isn’t about President Trump. It isn’t about Rebecca Slaughter, the former Federal Trade Commission official suing to get her job back. It’s about whether elections still mean anything — whether the American people still hold the reins of their own government.

That is what is at stake: not procedure, not technicalities, but the survival of a system built on the revolutionary idea that the citizens — not the experts — are the ones who rule.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

1 in 20 Canadians die by MAID—Is this 'compassion'?

Vaughn Ridley / Stringer | Getty Images

Medical assistance in dying isn’t health care. It’s the moment a Western democracy decided some lives aren’t worth saving, and it’s a warning sign we can’t ignore.

Canada loves to lecture America about compassion. Every time a shooting makes the headlines, Canadian commentators cannot wait to discuss how the United States has a “culture of death” because we refuse to regulate guns the way enlightened nations supposedly do.

But north of our border, a very different crisis is unfolding — one that is harder to moralize because it exposes a deeper cultural failure.

A society that no longer recognizes the value of life will not long defend freedom, dignity, or moral order.

The Canadian government is not only permitting death, but it’s also administering, expanding, and redefining it as “medical care.” Medical assistance in dying is no longer a rare, tragic exception. It has become one of the country’s leading causes of death, offered to people whose problems are treatable, whose conditions are survivable, and whose value should never have been in question.

In Canada, MAID is now responsible for nearly 5% of all deaths — 1 out of every 20 citizens. And this is happening in a country that claims the moral high ground over American gun violence. Canada now records more deaths per capita from doctors administering lethal drugs than America records from firearms. Their number is 37.9 deaths per 100,000 people. Ours is 13.7. Yet we are the country supposedly drowning in a “culture of death.”

No lecture from abroad can paper over this fact: Canada has built a system where eliminating suffering increasingly means eliminating the sufferer.

Choosing death over care

One example of what Canada now calls “compassion” is the case of Jolene Bond, a woman suffering from a painful but treatable thyroid condition that causes dangerously high calcium levels, bone deterioration, soft-tissue damage, nausea, and unrelenting pain. Her condition is severe, but it is not terminal. Surgery could help her. And in a functioning medical system, she would have it.

But Jolene lives under socialized medicine. The specialists she needs are either unavailable, overrun with patients, or blocked behind bureaucratic requirements she cannot meet. She cannot get a referral. She cannot get an appointment. She cannot reach the doctor in another province who is qualified to perform the operation. Every pathway to treatment is jammed by paperwork, shortages, and waitlists that stretch into the horizon and beyond.

Yet the Canadian government had something else ready for her — something immediate.

They offered her MAID.

Not help, not relief, not a doctor willing to drive across a provincial line and simply examine her. Instead, Canada offered Jolene a state-approved death. A lethal injection is easier to obtain than a medical referral. Killing her would be easier than treating her. And the system calls that compassion.

Bureaucracy replaces medicine

Jolene’s story is not an outlier. It is the logical outcome of a system that cannot keep its promises. When the machinery of socialized medicine breaks down, the state simply replaces care with a final, irreversible “solution.” A bureaucratic checkbox becomes the last decision of a person’s life.

Canada insists its process is rigorous, humane, and safeguarded. Yet the bureaucracy now reviewing Jolene’s case is not asking how she can receive treatment; it is asking whether she has enough signatures to qualify for a lethal injection. And the debate among Canadian officials is not how to preserve life, but whether she has met the paperwork threshold to end it.

This is the dark inversion that always emerges when the state claims the power to decide when life is no longer worth living. Bureaucracy replaces conscience. Eligibility criteria replace compassion. A panel of physicians replaces the family gathered at a bedside. And eventually, the “right” to die becomes an expectation — especially for those who are poor, elderly, or alone.

Joe Raedle / Staff | Getty Images

The logical end of a broken system

We ignore this lesson at our own peril. Canada’s health care system is collapsing under demographic pressure, uncontrolled migration, and the unavoidable math of government-run medicine.

When the system breaks, someone must bear the cost. MAID has become the release valve.

The ideology behind this system is already drifting south. In American medical journals and bioethics conferences, you will hear this same rhetoric. The argument is always dressed in compassion. But underneath, it reduces the value of human life to a calculation: Are you useful? Are you affordable? Are you too much of a burden?

The West was built on a conviction that every human life has inherent value. That truth gave us hospitals before it gave us universities. It gave us charity before it gave us science. It is written into the Declaration of Independence.

Canada’s MAID program reveals what happens when a country lets that foundation erode. Life becomes negotiable, and suffering becomes a justification for elimination.

A society that no longer recognizes the value of life will not long defend freedom, dignity, or moral order. If compassion becomes indistinguishable from convenience, and if medicine becomes indistinguishable from euthanasia, the West will have abandoned the very principles that built it. That is the lesson from our northern neighbor — a warning, not a blueprint.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

A Sharia enclave is quietly taking root in America. It's time to wake up.

NOVA SAFO / Staff | Getty Images

Sharia-based projects like the Meadow in Texas show how political Islam grows quietly, counting on Americans to stay silent while an incompatible legal system takes root.

Apolitical system completely incompatible with the Constitution is gaining ground in the United States, and we are pretending it is not happening.

Sharia — the legal and political framework of Islam — is being woven into developments, institutions, and neighborhoods, including a massive project in Texas. And the consequences will be enormous if we continue to look the other way.

This is the contradiction at the heart of political Islam: It claims universal authority while insisting its harshest rules will never be enforced here. That promise does not stand up to scrutiny. It never has.

Before we can have an honest debate, we’d better understand what Sharia represents. Sharia is not simply a set of religious rules about prayer or diet. It is a comprehensive legal and political structure that governs marriage, finance, criminal penalties, and civic life. It is a parallel system that claims supremacy wherever it takes hold.

This is where the distinction matters. Many Muslims in America want nothing to do with Sharia governance. They came here precisely because they lived under it. But political Islam — the movement that seeks to implement Sharia as law — is not the same as personal religious belief.

It is a political ideology with global ambitions, much like communism. Secretary of State Marco Rubio recently warned that Islamist movements do not seek peaceful coexistence with the West. They seek dominance. History backs him up.

How Sharia arrives

Political Islam does not begin with dramatic declarations. It starts quietly, through enclaves that operate by their own rules. That is why the development once called EPIC City — now rebranded as the Meadow — is so concerning. Early plans framed it as a Muslim-only community built around a mega-mosque and governed by Sharia-compliant financing. After state investigations were conducted, the branding changed, but the underlying intent remained the same.

Developers have openly described practices designed to keep non-Muslims out, using fees and ownership structures to create de facto religious exclusivity. This is not assimilation. It is the construction of a parallel society within a constitutional republic.

The warning from those who have lived under it

Years ago, local imams in Texas told me, without hesitation, that certain Sharia punishments “just work.” They spoke about cutting off hands for theft, stoning adulterers, and maintaining separate standards of testimony for men and women. They insisted it was logical and effective while insisting they would never attempt to implement it in Texas.

But when pressed, they could not explain why a system they consider divinely mandated would suddenly stop applying once someone crossed a border.

This is the contradiction at the heart of political Islam: It claims universal authority while insisting its harshest rules will never be enforced here. That promise does not stand up to scrutiny. It never has.

AASHISH KIPHAYET / Contributor | Getty Images

America is vulnerable

Europe is already showing us where this road leads. No-go zones, parallel courts, political intimidation, and clerics preaching supremacy have taken root across major cities.

America’s strength has always come from its melting pot, but assimilation requires boundaries. It requires insisting that the Constitution, not religious law, is the supreme authority on this soil.

Yet we are becoming complacent, even fearful, about saying so. We mistake silence for tolerance. We mistake avoidance for fairness. Meanwhile, political Islam views this hesitation as weakness.

Religious freedom is one of America’s greatest gifts. Muslims may worship freely here, as they should. But political Islam must not be permitted to plant a flag on American soil. The Constitution cannot coexist with a system that denies equal rights, restricts speech, subordinates women, and places clerical authority above civil law.

Wake up before it is too late

Projects like the Meadow are not isolated. They are test runs, footholds, proofs of concept. Political Islam operates with patience. It advances through demographic growth, legal ambiguity, and cultural hesitation — and it counts on Americans being too polite, too distracted, or too afraid to confront it.

We cannot afford that luxury. If we fail to defend the principles that make this country free, we will one day find ourselves asking how a parallel system gained power right in front of us. The answer will be simple: We looked away.

The time to draw boundaries and to speak honestly is now. The time to defend the Constitution as the supreme law of the land is now. Act while there is still time.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.