Who will stand with those who lose their jobs because of what they believe?

Who will stand with those who lose their jobs because of what they believe? On Monday's episode of The Glenn Beck Program, Glenn said that he would stand, as would TheBlaze, for anyone being  bullied because they speak up about their religious beliefs or have a point of view that isn't popular with outraged liberals. To illustrate his point, he welcomed the Benham brothers, who had been fired for anti-gay comments from HGTV, onto the show.

Below is a transcript of Glenn's opening monologue:

Hello, America, and welcome to TheBlaze.  This is the network that you are building, and this is The Glenn Beck Program.  Last week, I was reminded about how deceptive the media can be.  I read a story about two brothers who were taping a new show on HGTV, they were canned before it even aired because of alleged anti-gay and anti-Muslim comments that were uncovered.

And the quotes that the media used sounded really offensive.  I mean, I read them, and I thought, and I think I said on the radio if these are true, I mean, they might as well be members of the Westboro Baptist Church.  They weren’t true.  In fact, it didn’t take much investigation to find out that the quotes were either completely wrong or taken wildly out of context.

We invited the two brothers on the radio show on Friday.  I didn’t know what to expect.  Turns out lo and behold they’re good, decent people.  They’re incredibly gracious.  They won’t even lash out at HGTV.  I mean, I don’t know if I would be that kind.  We looked into their story, and before HGTV even green lit this show, they knew what their background was.  HGTV decided to go ahead anyway with the show.

But then the bullies showed up with the pitchforks and the torches, and then HGTV caved.  And the bullies caused everyone around who didn’t have a spine to just stop and go away and abandon freedom of speech, freedom of thought.

They don’t deserve to be treated like this.  Nobody does.  They’re not hateful people, and they’re being marked now as haters.  They, yes, are pro-life.  They believe babies have the right to be born.  They believe in traditional marriage, but those aren’t controversial or even new ideas anymore.  Or are they?  I guess you’re not allowed to say those things.

This is flat-out bullying, which I thought we were supposed to be against, not supposed to tolerate bullying.  We at this network stand with anyone who is being bullied, anybody who is being bullied for their views, whether they are atheist, gay, Muslim, liberal, Christian, doesn’t matter.  I may not agree with their worldview.  You may not.  We can disagree, but we have the civil right to be who we are and to believe what we believe and not be persecuted for it, period.

Yes, and I did say civil rights.  This may sound a little crazy, but the civil rights movement did not begin, nor did it end in the 1960s.  Any attack on freedom anywhere, anytime is a civil rights issue.  Martin Luther King said injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.  So as Christians now continue to be targeted for their views, as parents are intimidated and arrested for opposing Common Core, as farmers are harassed and punished by the EPA, as conservatives are being audited by the IRS, as reporters are being threatened by the White House and the DOJ, in a sea of self-serving and self-preserving cowards hoping against hope that time itself will cure all injustice, who will stand?

Who will stand with the terrified 14-year-old girl confronting a school board that just arrested her dad?  Who will stand with those who lose their jobs because of what they believe?  Who will stand when it is uncomfortable to do so or unpopular?  I will stand.  This network will stand.  I believe you will stand.

Whether we like it or not, we are the new civil rights leaders, mostly because no one else appears willing to shake loose from the chains of conformity and fight injustice with peaceful resistance.  That’s what happened to my two guests. Tonight, you will see a matter of injustice.  Just for sharing their own personal beliefs, they have been smeared and run out of business.

Watch the interview with the Benham brothers below:

COVID is back! Or that is what we’re being told anyway...

A recent spike in COVID cases has triggered the left's alarm bells, and the following institutions have begun to reinstate COVID-era mandates. You might want to avoid them if you enjoy breathing freely...

Do YOU think institutions should bring back COVID-era mandates if cases increase? Let us know your thoughts HERE.

Morris Brown College

Both of Upstate Medical's hospitals in Syracuse, New York

Corey Henry / Senior Staff Photographer | The Daily Orange

Auburn Community Hospital, New York

Kevin Rivoli / The Citizen | Auburn Pub

Lionsgate Studio

AaronP/Bauer-Griffin / Contributor | GETTY IMAGES

United Health Services in New York

Kaiser Permanente in California

Justin Sullivan / Staff | GETTY IMAGES

There was a time when both the Left and the Right agreed that parents have the final say in raising their children... Not anymore.

In the People's Republic of California, the STATE, not parents, will determine whether children should undergo transgender treatments. The California state legislature just passed a law that will require judges in child custody cases to consider whether parents support a child’s gender transition. According to the law, the state now thinks total affirmation is an integral part of a child’s “health, safety, and welfare.”

We are inching closer to a dystopia where the state, not the parents, have ultimate rights over their children, a history that people from former Soviet nations would feign repeating.

Glenn dove into the law AND MORE in this episode titled, "Parental Advisory: The EXPLICIT plot to control YOUR kids." To get all the research that went into this episode AND information on how YOU can fight back, enter your email address below:

If you didn't catch Wednesday night's Glenn TV special, be sure to check it out HERE!

The Biden admin has let in MORE illegal aliens than the populations of THESE 15 states

GUILLERMO ARIAS / Contributor | Getty Images

There are currently an estimated 16.8 MILLION illegal aliens residing in the United States as of June 2023, according to the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR). This number is already 1.3 million higher than FAIR's January 2022 estimate of 15.5 million and a 2.3 million increase from its end-of-2020 estimate. Even Democrats like New York City's Mayor Adams Mayor Adams are waking up to what Conservatives have been warning for years: we are in a border CRISIS.

However, this isn't the same border crisis that Republicans were warning about back in 2010. In the first two years of the Biden administration alone, the illegal alien population increased by 16 PERCENT nationwide, imposing a whopping net cost of $150.6 BILLION PER YEAR on American taxpayers. That is nearly DOUBLE the total amount that the Biden administration has sent to Ukraine.

This isn't the same border crisis that Republicans were warning about back in 2010.

These large numbers often make it difficult to conceptualize the sheer impact of illegal immigration on the United States. To put it in perspective, we have listed ALL 15 states and the District of Colombia that have smaller populations than the 2.3 MILLION illegal immigrants, who have entered the U.S. under the Biden administration. That is more than the entire populations of Wyoming, Vermont, and South Dakota COMBINED—and the American taxpayers have to pay the price.

Here are all 16 states/districts that have FEWER people than the illegal immigrants who have entered the U.S. under the Biden administration.

1. New Mexico

Population: 2,110,011

2. Idaho

Population: 1,973,752

3. Nebraska

Population: 1,972,292

4. West Virginia

Population: 1,764,786

5. Hawaii

Population: 1,433,238

6. New Hampshire

Population: 1,402,957

7. Maine

Population: 1,393,442

8. Montana

Population: 1,139,507

9. Rhode Island

Population: 1,090,483

10. Delaware

Population: 1,031,985

11. South Dakota

Population: 923,484

12. North Dakota

Population: 780,588

13. Alaska

Population: 732,984

14. Washington DC

Population: 674,815

15. Vermont

Population: 647,156

16. Wyoming

Population: 583,279

POLL: Should the Government control the future of AI?

The Washington Post / Contributor | Getty Images

Earlier this week, tech titans, lawmakers, and union leaders met on Capitol Hill to discuss the future of AI regulation. The three-hour meeting boasted an impressive roster of tech leaders including, Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, Bill Gates, Google CEO Sundar Pichai, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, and others, along with more than 60 US Senators.

Tech Titans and Senators gathered in the Kennedy Caucus Room.The Washington Post / Contributor | Getty Images

The meeting was closed to the public, so what was exactly discussed is unknown. However, what we do know is that a majority of the CEOs support AI regulation, the most vocal of which is Elon Musk. During the meeting, Musk called AI "a double-edged sword" and strongly pushed for regulation in the interest of public safety.

A majority of the CEOs support AI regulation.

Many other related issues were discussed, including the disruption AI has caused to the job market. As Glenn has discussed on his program, the potential for AI to alter or destroy jobs is very real, and many have already felt the effects. From taxi drivers to Hollywood actors and writers, AI's presence can be felt everywhere and lawmakers are unsure how to respond.

The potential for AI to alter or destroy jobs is very real.

Ultimately, the meeting's conclusion was less than decisive, with several Senators making comments to the tune of "we need more time before we act." The White House is expected to release an executive order regarding AI regulation by the end of the year. But now it's YOUR turn to tell us what YOU think needs to be done!

Should A.I. be regulated?

Can the government be trusted with the power to regulate A.I.? 

Can Silicon Valley be trusted to regulate AI? 

Should AI development be slowed for safety, despite its potential advantages?

If a job can be done cheaper and better by AI, should it be taken away from a human?

Do you feel that your job is threatened by AI?