Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
Shop
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

Bishop Jim Lowe: Charleston shooting an attack on all houses of worship

June 18, 2015
Wilson

Writer

As the news continued to unfold out of Charleston this morning, Glenn asked Bishop James Lowe to join the show and talk about the news through the lens of the larger movement of love they have championed together in recent weeks. Bishop Lowe described the shooting as not only an attack on the black community and the Christian community in Charleston, but on all houses of worship all over the world.

"We have to take it beyond black and white. We start to see this thing as human beings that God created," Bishop Lowe said.

Listen to the whole interview below:

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it may contain errors:

GLENN: So we should know more as the hours continue, and I'll be in South Carolina tomorrow. And I just feel like something good is going to happen there. Bishop Lowe, who is the bishop from the Guiding Light Church in Birmingham, Alabama, that so graciously invited us to be there on 8/28. And something really big is going to happen in Birmingham, Alabama. I'd invite you to join us. But if you're anywhere in the Charleston, South Carolina, region tomorrow, I hope my family is going to be joining me there. And we're going to do the show from there tomorrow. And then we'll get together and try to hold the arms up of the community and just have a prayer vigil. We'll give you details as we go along. But Bishop Lowe is with us now. Hello, bishop, how are you?

JIM: Hello, Glenn, how are you?

GLENN: Here is the oldest African-American church in America. Started in the 1760s. Martin Luther King preached there. And last night, this guy comes in and sits for an hour in Bible study and then shoots nine people. A 5-year-old escaped because she laid on the floor pretending she was dead.

How do you make sense of this, Bishop?

JIM: It's -- it's what's going on in the climate that we've created, that we've created around us. And we talk about what we're coming together about, all lives matter. It's so very important that we begin to proclaim that. We have to stop distinguishing between black lives, white lives, Christian lives, Muslims lives. We have to start recognizing that all lives matter, Glenn. We have to stop distinguishing between black lives, white lives, Christian lives, Muslims lives. We got to start recognizing that all lives matter.

And this was an attack -- what we need to look at, it's not just an attack on black people here. This was a house of worship. And being in a house of worship, this is an attack on all houses of worship. And if we sit silently by and we don't join together, then we create another climate that allows more of this. The greater thing that's before us is that this is an attack against worshiping people who believe in an Almighty God. That's what needs to be seen here. And if we don't -- if we don't start getting people to recognize we need to unify, then we're going down that way that I'm afraid it might be able to turn back.

GLENN: Yeah. I'm afraid that too many of us sit on the sidelines and we say, where are the good people? Well, the good people need to stand up. And really, quite honestly, I don't know if you remember this, bishop, but when the Amish had a guy come in and shoot the children -- Pat, stop. Thank you.

As people were shooting their children, the Amish children, this guy walked in, they had this beautiful moment of forgiving him and forgiving the family and standing together and teaching us what Christianity and what God's people really do and how they behave.

JIM: Uh-huh.

GLENN: And we have to learn that again. We have to teach that again. When this guy walks --

JIM: I'm sorry. We've had too many preachers that are encouraging these kinds of things. Encouraging the vision. Encouraging people to be mad with other folk. We going to get it right. We're going to take somebody down. We're going to do this. It's time for that rhetoric to stop. The words of Christ must be spoken more. That's what must be heard. What he said, love ye one another as I have loved you. And that's not being preached. That's not being said, and that's what has to be said for our nation and for our world.

GLENN: How do you -- how do you --

JIM: Sorry. I'm passionate about it.

GLENN: That's all right.

How do you speak up against people like Al Sharpton? Al Sharpton is already there. He's already holding a rally. How do you speak up about people like Al Sharpton, without speaking words of anger or divisiveness or hatred? How do you do that, Bishop?

JIM: I don't have anything to say about Al Sharpton. He can do whatever he thinks he wants to do. But I know one thing that must be done is that the people of God must speak up. The people who speak the love message that Christ said. That's what must be said. Love conquers. Love overcomes. No matter what others say. No matter how they are. I'm not concerned about their words. But what I'm talking about is what we must do. And if we preach the gospel, if we preach the Word of God, it will triumph all of the time. We don't have to worry about naysayers or people preaching politics. It's not about politics. This is about a warfare between light and darkness.

GLENN: When somebody goes into the church, like this guy did --

JIM: Yes.

GLENN: And he sat there for an hour and he was listening to the words of God. We have a pretty good idea he was a radical racist. But for him to choose church and then be able to go in there and sit there for an hour and then turn around and get his guns and come back, doesn't that say something about evil really truly working in him? Because if you're listening to the words of God for an hour, it should do the opposite to you. But he -- he was wound up after an hour. I think he went in there wanting to kill people, but not -- not necessarily ready to kill people. But he sat there for an hour. How does that work, bishop, where a guy will sit there and listen -- how is evil working in him?

JIM: Well, this is the hardness of what his heart was. You see, he's had perhaps a lifetime of this type of words that have been spoken into him. He has heard that. And if there's not another word that's preached, and we don't say to people that are sitting out there that are incubating these type of activities -- we must speak more about unity. We must speak more about togetherness and oneness than we do about divisiveness. I spoke to my congregation last night. I said, you have to stop seeing yourself by the surface. You have to see what God sees. The more you're like God, the more you see a person for what's inside than what's on his outside. And that's a problem with us blacks, whites, and everybody. We have to become more like God told us to be, to imitate the image of Christ who didn't see on the outside.

That man saw on the outside, but not realizing he's part of a greater scheme that's out to destroy worshiping individuals, people of God. He doesn't recognize that. He sees it as black and white. And, Glenn, we have to take it beyond black and white. We start to see this thing as human beings that God created. Please understand what I'm trying to say.

GLENN: Bishop, I love you, and I admire your stance and your bravery. And I pray for your strength and your humility. Because I think you have a lot of work ahead of you.

JIM: Glenn, when we get ready for 8/28, people that may be listening, I'm trying to get the mayor right now to get me a stadium. I want people to call him to ask to talk in Birmingham. We need to join together. Invite them to come. 8/28 and 8/29. Let's bring an explosion of love out of Birmingham. Let's get an explosion of people joining together. All types of people. All ages. All backgrounds. And let's show from Birmingham, Alabama. Let's start showing people love. Not division. Not divisiveness. Not political parties. Let's show the kingdom of God.

GLENN: You got it, bishop. I love you, and I'll see you tomorrow in Charleston.

JIM: Well, you make it happen, Glenn. I'll be there.

GLENN: You got it. Thank you very much, Bishop.

I'm going to be in Charleston, South Carolina, tomorrow. I'll be broadcasting from WSC. We may be on location. I don't know. I don't have all the details. But I would like you to join me. If you can join me and you and your family can join me, get in the car and come to Charleston tomorrow. And we will -- at some time in the afternoon, I don't know when, but we will gather together and be who we're supposed to be. And the bishop will be there. I will be there. Rabbi Kula from New York, he just called and he said he wants to be there. So I invite you to join me tomorrow in South Carolina. Then like the good bishop said in -- in Birmingham, we're going to be there on 8/28. And as he said, I mean, he's trying to get the stadium there. And he's trying to get some streets cordoned off. And I think there's going to be an explosion of light and love there as well. And I would invite you and your family and your church. I want you to gather your church and get into a bus. And come to Birmingham, Alabama. And join us on August 28th. Because all lives matter. And now is the time that we're going to stand together.

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.

Why do Americans feel so empty?

Mario Tama / Staff | Getty Images

Anxiety, anger, and chronic dissatisfaction signal a country searching for meaning. Without truth and purpose, politics becomes a dangerous substitute for identity.

We have built a world overflowing with noise, convenience, and endless choice, yet something essential has slipped out of reach. You can sense it in the restless mood of the country, the anxiety among young people who cannot explain why they feel empty, in the angry confusion that dominates our politics.

We have more wealth than any nation in history, but the heart of the culture feels strangely malnourished. Before we can debate debt or elections, we must confront the reality that we created a world of things, but not a world of purpose.

You cannot survive a crisis you refuse to name, and you cannot rebuild a world whose foundations you no longer understand.

What we are living through is not just economic or political dysfunction. It is the vacuum that appears when a civilization mistakes abundance for meaning.

Modern life is stuffed with everything except what the human soul actually needs. We built systems to make life faster, easier, and more efficient — and then wondered why those systems cannot teach our children who they are, why they matter, or what is worth living for.

We tell the next generation to chase success, influence, and wealth, turning childhood into branding. We ask kids what they want to do, not who they want to be. We build a world wired for dopamine rather than dignity, and then we wonder why so many people feel unmoored.

When everything is curated, optimized, and delivered at the push of a button, the question “what is my life for?” gets lost in the static.

The crisis beneath the headlines

It is not just the young who feel this crisis. Every part of our society is straining under the weight of meaninglessness.

Look at the debt cycle — the mathematical fate no civilization has ever escaped once it crosses a threshold that we seem to have already blown by. While ordinary families feel the pressure, our leaders respond with distraction, with denial, or by rewriting the very history that could have warned us.

You cannot survive a crisis you refuse to name, and you cannot rebuild a world whose foundations you no longer understand.

We have entered a cultural moment where the noise is so loud that it drowns out the simplest truths. We are living in a country that no longer knows how to hear itself think.

So people go searching. Some drift toward the false promise of socialism, some toward the empty thrill of rebellion. Some simply check out. When a culture forgets what gives life meaning, it becomes vulnerable to every ideology that offers a quick answer.

The quiet return of meaning

And yet, quietly, something else is happening. Beneath the frustration and cynicism, many Americans are recognizing that meaning does not come from what we own, but from what we honor. It does not rise from success, but from virtue. It does not emerge from noise, but from the small, sacred things that modern life has pushed to the margins — the home, the table, the duty you fulfill, the person you help when no one is watching.

The danger is assuming that this rediscovery happens on its own. It does not.

Reorientation requires intention. It requires rebuilding the habits and virtues that once held us together. It requires telling the truth about our history instead of rewriting it to fit today’s narratives. And it requires acknowledging what has been erased: that meaning is inseparable from God’s presence in a nation’s life.

Harold M. Lambert / Contributor | Getty Images

Where renewal begins

We have built a world without stillness, and then we wondered why no one can hear the questions that matter. Those questions remain, whether we acknowledge them or not. They do not disappear just because we drown them in entertainment or noise. They wait for us, and the longer we ignore them, the more disoriented we become.

Meaning is still available. It is found in rebuilding the smallest, most human spaces — the places that cannot be digitized, globalized, or automated. The home. The family. The community.

These are the daily virtues that do not trend on social media, but that hold a civilization upright. If we want to repair this country, we begin there, exactly where every durable civilization has always begun: one virtue at a time, one tradition at a time, one generation at a time.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.