WATCH: Man's Law vs. Nature's Law

January 14, 2014

Writer

All right, what is liberty? Ask anybody, what is liberty? Well, it’s freedom. Freedom from what? What does it mean? I want to show you what liberty is. I want to show you what is worth fighting, and I want to show you what common sense is. I want to show you the solution to all of your problems.

Man’s laws, nature’s law. What is nature’s law? Nature’s law is anything that happens in nature. I have a right to defend myself. Why? Bears do, you know? Nobody feels bad – I feel bad for somebody who, you know, thinks they have a right to go up to a baby seal and take a club and beat them to death just for sport, just for fun. You don’t have a right to do that because nature, it doesn’t happen that way. No other animal just beats something to death and just like ha ha. That’s not nature’s law. That evil.

However, do you feel bad for the person that goes, and they’re going to try to like, I’m just going to go, and they’re fully aware, they have their senses, and they go, I want to go and just cuddle the kitty cat, and it’s a lion, and the lion eats them? Nope, lion has a right to defend itself. The lion feels there’s a threat, he’s going to eat you. That is nature’s law.

Man’s law is different. Man’s law has never been what America is about. Man’s law is you must – these are the new ones now – you must raise your child the way the state says not even towards common sense. They can come into your house now, if you have had your child draw a picture of you with a gun, the state sees that and says wait a minute, wait a minute, and they knock on your door. What are you going to say to them?

Yeah, so what, my kid drew a picture of me with a gun? We go hunting. That’s not what the state does. The state says we have to now see what’s going on in your house. They have a right to come into your house. Man does not have a right to raise his children as he sees fit unless the state says it’s okay.

You only have insurance if the state approves. When the president said if you have insurance you like, you can keep it, no, what he meant was if you have insurance he likes, the system likes, the state likes, then you can keep it.

You don’t have a right to use the light bulbs or anything else. You don’t have a right to drive an old car if they don’t say it’s not safe. It’s not safe, not for other people, for you. It’s blowing too much blue smoke. It has too much miles per gallon, whatever. They have a right to say you’re not going to do it – hmm, okay.

You can’t fish without a license. You can’t hunt without a license. You can’t plant food on your own property unless the state says you can do it. There is no natural law that says that. If you have a plot of land, you can plant food there. In fact, I would say nature’s law goes a step further. I can plant food wherever I want, Jack.

I mean, why did the Indians sell us stuff? Do you know the Indians, don’t feel bad for the Indians. They sold us Manhattan for beads. Really? Really? Don’t feel bad for them. They were mocking us. They made fun of us. They were going back to their tribes, and they were like these guys think we own this land. We don’t own this land. That’s nature’s law. Nobody owns the land. We are stewards of the land. But you can’t fish, you can’t plant foot unless the state says so.

You can’t feed somebody who is hungry unless the state says and gives you a permit. That’s man’s law. That’s insanity. That is the end of civilization time and time again, okay? That’s where we are. Here is where we used to be, somewhat. We were never perfect, but this is what we were based on, and the idea was to get closer to this. We’ve lost all of this.

Natures law, again, you have a right to defend yourself because so does the lion. If the lion is afraid, he has a right to kill you. So do you. You have a right to raise your child. Your child is born to you. That’s blood of my blood, flesh of my flesh, not people in Washington. I have a right to raise my child as I see fit. Now, we have a responsibility if something is…I mean, if I’m beating my child in public or whatever, my kid shows up with black eyes all the time, yeah, we probably should as neighbors look in and say hey, dude, what’s going on?

I have a right to eat all the trans fats I can get into a 32-ounce cup, a 64, a 154 million-ounce cup. I can eat whatever I want. Do you understand why people who have cancer and have been given two months to live are not allowed to have experimental therapies? I don’t, because you can’t explain that one to me. It’s my body. I’m dying. I choose, I know it, I choose to put this in my body. If I am of sound mind, get the hell out of my way. Nature’s law tells me I can do that. Nope.

I have a right to live free. See, what liberty means, you have a right to have choices. I love this, the people who are pro-choice, they’re not pro-choice. They will fight for the right to kill an unborn baby, but they will fight against your right to have a 32-ounce soda. They will fight against your right to have a cigarette. They will fight against your right to be able to raise your child as you see fit, to homeschool them. That’s insane. That’s Fascism. That’s not liberty.

Nature’s rights, I have a right to live free. I have a right to create. I don’t need a permit. I want to build something. I’m going to create. And I have a right to keep the fruit of my labor. Abraham Lincoln said there is nothing more immoral, this is against slavery, but think of this with the IRS and what we’re doing now, there is nothing more immoral than taking the bread that has been baked by the sweat of another man’s brow.

In other words, how is it this man is going to go out and cut everything, and then I’m just going to go out and take all of the work that he has done, and I’m just going to take it because it’s mine. That was the case against slavery. Abraham Lincoln, I think you’re making the case against big government and Progressivism. Why? Because he was making a case on nature’s law.

See, man’s law can change. Man’s law tells you in China you can have slaves. Nature’s law says you can never have slaves. Man’s law changes, goes with the wind. This one comes from wisdom. This one comes from arrogance, pride, and greed.

'Rage against the dying of the light': Charlie Kirk lived that mandate

PHILL MAGAKOE / Contributor | Getty Images

Kirk’s tragic death challenges us to rise above fear and anger, to rebuild bridges where others build walls, and to fight for the America he believed in.

I’ve only felt this weight once before. It was 2001, just as my radio show was about to begin. The World Trade Center fell, and I was called to speak immediately. I spent the day and night by my bedside, praying for words that could meet the moment.

Yesterday, I found myself in the same position. September 11, 2025. The assassination of Charlie Kirk. A friend. A warrior for truth.

Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins.

Moments like this make words feel inadequate. Yet sometimes, words from another time speak directly to our own. In 1947, Dylan Thomas, watching his father slip toward death, penned lines that now resonate far beyond his own grief:

Do not go gentle into that good night. / Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Thomas was pleading for his father to resist the impending darkness of death. But those words have become a mandate for all of us: Do not surrender. Do not bow to shadows. Even when the battle feels unwinnable.

Charlie Kirk lived that mandate. He knew the cost of speaking unpopular truths. He knew the fury of those who sought to silence him. And yet he pressed on. In his life, he embodied a defiance rooted not in anger, but in principle.

Picking up his torch

Washington, Jefferson, Adams — our history was started by men who raged against an empire, knowing the gallows might await. Lincoln raged against slavery. Martin Luther King Jr. raged against segregation. Every generation faces a call to resist surrender.

It is our turn. Charlie’s violent death feels like a knockout punch. Yet if his life meant anything, it means this: Silence in the face of darkness is not an option.

He did not go gently. He spoke. He challenged. He stood. And now, the mantle falls to us. To me. To you. To every American.

We cannot drift into the shadows. We cannot sit quietly while freedom fades. This is our moment to rage — not with hatred, not with vengeance, but with courage. Rage against lies, against apathy, against the despair that tells us to do nothing. Because there is always something you can do.

Even small acts — defiance, faith, kindness — are light in the darkness. Reaching out to those who mourn. Speaking truth in a world drowning in deceit. These are the flames that hold back the night. Charlie carried that torch. He laid it down yesterday. It is ours to pick up.

The light may dim, but it always does before dawn. Commit today: I will not sleep as freedom fades. I will not retreat as darkness encroaches. I will not be silent as evil forces claim dominion. I have no king but Christ. And I know whom I serve, as did Charlie.

Two turning points, decades apart

On Wednesday, the world changed again. Two tragedies, separated by decades, bound by the same question: Who are we? Is this worth saving? What kind of people will we choose to be?

Imagine a world where more of us choose to be peacemakers. Not passive, not silent, but builders of bridges where others erect walls. Respect and listening transform even the bitterest of foes. Charlie Kirk embodied this principle.

He did not strike the weak; he challenged the powerful. He reached across divides of politics, culture, and faith. He changed hearts. He sparked healing. And healing is what our nation needs.

At the center of all this is one truth: Every person is a child of God, deserving of dignity. Change will not happen in Washington or on social media. It begins at home, where loneliness and isolation threaten our souls. Family is the antidote. Imperfect, yes — but still the strongest source of stability and meaning.

Mark Wilson / Staff | Getty Images

Forgiveness, fidelity, faithfulness, and honor are not dusty words. They are the foundation of civilization. Strong families produce strong citizens. And today, Charlie’s family mourns. They must become our family too. We must stand as guardians of his legacy, shining examples of the courage he lived by.

A time for courage

I knew Charlie. I know how he would want us to respond: Multiply his courage. Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins. Out of darkness, great and glorious things will sprout — but we must be worthy of them.

Charlie Kirk lived defiantly. He stood in truth. He changed the world. And now, his torch is in our hands. Rage, not in violence, but in unwavering pursuit of truth and goodness. Rage against the dying of the light.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck resurrects the 9-12 Project to support Charlie Kirk's family

Glenn Beck is once again calling on his loyal listeners and viewers to come together and channel the same unity and purpose that defined the historic 9-12 Project. That movement, born in the wake of national challenges, brought millions together to revive core values of faith, hope, and charity.

Glenn created the original 9-12 Project in early 2009 to bring Americans back to where they were in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. In those moments, we weren't Democrats and Republicans, conservative or liberal, Red States or Blue States, we were united as one, as America. The original 9-12 Project aimed to root America back in the founding principles of this country that united us during those darkest of days.

This new initiative draws directly from that legacy, focusing on supporting the family of Charlie Kirk in these dark days following his tragic murder.

The revival of the 9-12 Project aims to secure the long-term well-being of Charlie Kirk's wife and children. All donations will go straight to meeting their immediate and future needs. If the family deems the funds surplus to their requirements, Charlie's wife has the option to redirect them toward the vital work of Turning Point USA.

This campaign is more than just financial support—it's a profound gesture of appreciation for Kirk's tireless dedication to the cause of liberty. It embodies the unbreakable bond of our community, proving that when we stand united, we can make a real difference.
Glenn Beck invites you to join this effort. Show your solidarity by donating today and honoring Charlie Kirk and his family in this meaningful way.

You can learn more about the 9-12 Project and donate HERE

The critical difference: Rights from the Creator, not the state

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

When politicians claim that rights flow from the state, they pave the way for tyranny.

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) recently delivered a lecture that should alarm every American. During a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, he argued that believing rights come from a Creator rather than government is the same belief held by Iran’s theocratic regime.

Kaine claimed that the principles underpinning Iran’s dictatorship — the same regime that persecutes Sunnis, Jews, Christians, and other minorities — are also the principles enshrined in our Declaration of Independence.

In America, rights belong to the individual. In Iran, rights serve the state.

That claim exposes either a profound misunderstanding or a reckless indifference to America’s founding. Rights do not come from government. They never did. They come from the Creator, as the Declaration of Independence proclaims without qualification. Jefferson didn’t hedge. Rights are unalienable — built into every human being.

This foundation stands worlds apart from Iran. Its leaders invoke God but grant rights only through clerical interpretation. Freedom of speech, property, religion, and even life itself depend on obedience to the ruling clerics. Step outside their dictates, and those so-called rights vanish.

This is not a trivial difference. It is the essence of liberty versus tyranny. In America, rights belong to the individual. The government’s role is to secure them, not define them. In Iran, rights serve the state. They empower rulers, not the people.

From Muhammad to Marx

The same confusion applies to Marxist regimes. The Soviet Union’s constitutions promised citizens rights — work, health care, education, freedom of speech — but always with fine print. If you spoke out against the party, those rights evaporated. If you practiced religion openly, you were charged with treason. Property and voting were allowed as long as they were filtered and controlled by the state — and could be revoked at any moment. Rights were conditional, granted through obedience.

Kaine seems to be advocating a similar approach — whether consciously or not. By claiming that natural rights are somehow comparable to sharia law, he ignores the critical distinction between inherent rights and conditional privileges. He dismisses the very principle that made America a beacon of freedom.

Jefferson and the founders understood this clearly. “We are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights,” they wrote. No government, no cleric, no king can revoke them. They exist by virtue of humanity itself. The government exists to protect them, not ration them.

This is not a theological quibble. It is the entire basis of our government. Confuse the source of rights, and tyranny hides behind piety or ideology. The people are disempowered. Clerics, bureaucrats, or politicians become arbiters of what rights citizens may enjoy.

John Greim / Contributor | Getty Images

Gifts from God, not the state

Kaine’s statement reflects either a profound ignorance of this principle or an ideological bias that favors state power over individual liberty. Either way, Americans must recognize the danger. Understanding the origin of rights is not academic — it is the difference between freedom and submission, between the American experiment and theocratic or totalitarian rule.

Rights are not gifts from the state. They are gifts from God, secured by reason, protected by law, and defended by the people. Every American must understand this. Because when rights come from government instead of the Creator, freedom disappears.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

POLL: Is Gen Z’s anger over housing driving them toward socialism?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

A recent poll conducted by Justin Haskins, a long-time friend of the show, has uncovered alarming trends among young Americans aged 18-39, revealing a generation grappling with deep frustrations over economic hardships, housing affordability, and a perceived rigged system that favors the wealthy, corporations, and older generations. While nearly half of these likely voters approve of President Trump, seeing him as an anti-establishment figure, over 70% support nationalizing major industries, such as healthcare, energy, and big tech, to promote "equity." Shockingly, 53% want a democratic socialist to win the 2028 presidential election, including a third of Trump voters and conservatives in this age group. Many cite skyrocketing housing costs, unfair taxation on the middle class, and a sense of being "stuck" or in crisis as driving forces, with 62% believing the economy is tilted against them and 55% backing laws to confiscate "excess wealth" like second homes or luxury items to help first-time buyers.

This blend of Trump support and socialist leanings suggests a volatile mix: admiration for disruptors who challenge the status quo, coupled with a desire for radical redistribution to address personal struggles. Yet, it raises profound questions about the roots of this discontent—Is it a failure of education on history's lessons about socialism's failures? Media indoctrination? Or genuine systemic barriers? And what does it portend for the nation’s trajectory—greater division, a shift toward authoritarian policies, or an opportunity for renewal through timeless values like hard work and individual responsibility?

Glenn wants to know what YOU think: Where do Gen Z's socialist sympathies come from? What does it mean for the future of America? Make your voice heard in the poll below:

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism comes from perceived economic frustrations like unaffordable housing and a rigged system favoring the wealthy and corporations?

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism, including many Trump supporters, is due to a lack of education about the historical failures of socialist systems?

Do you think that these poll results indicate a growing generational divide that could lead to more political instability and authoritarian tendencies in America's future?

Do you think that this poll implies that America's long-term stability relies on older generations teaching Gen Z and younger to prioritize self-reliance, free-market ideals, and personal accountability?

Glenn's Show Prep