Do any of the presidential nominees stand a chance of leading America through the storms ahead?

Last night, Glenn sat down with economist, columnist, and TV personality Larry Kudlow. The interview covered a wide range of topics: the economy, foreign policy, and Kudlow’s personal demons. With all of the trouble facing the country, Glenn wanted to know if any of America’s leaders could step up and guide the country through the turmoil ahead, much like Winston Churchill in World War 2.

Scroll down for a transript of the interview:

Glenn:What we were just talking about before, you’re a classic liberal. I’m a classic liberal.

Larry: I’m a hierarchian, free market classic liberal. I would have been a Gladstonian liberal had I lived in the 19th century.

Glenn: Tell me what classic liberal means, because most people I don’t think understand. I think it’s important to put that chair back at the table.

Larry: Right. Well, classic liberals would never rely on government. They believe very strongly in individual rights, in free markets, in free trade, and freedom just in general. They were the freedom people, and it was sort of Gladstone versus Disraeli. Disraeli was the Tory who was sort of the Nixonian guy who used government and would concoct all these foreign policy things that got Britain into trouble.

Gladstonians, the classical liberals certainly didn’t believe in any imperialism, and in fact were defending Irish rights way before it was fashionable to do so, but you know, in economic terms, it’s free markets. It’s free markets and free trade and freedom…freedom, freedom, freedom. That’s what they stood for.

Glenn: Let me go to the measles. A classic liberal would say you have the right to not take the measles shots. I heard Rand Paul talk about this, and on CNBC, one of the anchors went crazy on him. Explain why a classic liberal believes you should have the right.

Larry: You believe in free choice. You believe in free choice.

Glenn: But what about all the poor people that you’re going to affect?

Larry: Well, you know, I’m not an expert on this, measles, autism, and so forth, but it seems to me there is a health role for either the government or at least experts to tell you, all right, here are the odds, here’s this, here’s that, but at the end of the day, you have to make your own choice, and it is your own kids. Both Rand Paul and Chris Christie, I know they’re all bobbing and weaving now about this issue, and my view is I’m not for mandates. I don’t see how the state can mandate anything regarding your kids or your family or should. All I can do is tell you what, you know, what the chances are and what your risks are, and it’s up to you. It’s real simple.

Glenn: Do you see anybody on the horizon that, you know, you talk Chris Christie and Rand Paul and Ted Cruz, Jeb Bush…do you see anybody in the field that has a chance of being Churchill?

Larry: Ooh, Churchill, no, frankly, not yet. Now, it’s early. We don’t know enough about their foreign policy opinions, and that’s going to be a bigger issue in this election than it has been in any recent elections, I think.

We were talking, and it’s worth repeating for the viewers and listeners, there’s a book out by a chap named Boris Johnson, who is the Mayor of London. He’s a Tory, but he’s a very free market Tory, and he wrote something called The Churchill Factor, and he basically argues two things very simple. One is the hinge of history is determined by great people, great people, not historical forces and so forth. Great individuals change history—for example, a Reagan, for example, a Thatcher.

In this case, he talks about Churchill and argues quite plainly and clearly that had Churchill not been there and had Churchill not been Churchill, he was a very courageous man who had actually fought in wars, unlike most leaders, totalitarianism would have won in Europe and quite possibly in America as well. Whether it was the Communists or the Nazis, it could have been either one. That one could have gone either way.

Glenn: And there was support in the United States for both of them.

Larry: Indeed, and in fact, yes, in England, even worse, here’s Churchill comes in, his forecast about the Nazis come true, so they finally elect him or push him into Prime Minister. So, he was an aristocrat, but the nobility, half the nobility in England were pro-Nazi, and they had this bizarre sense that Hitler would come in and bless them, pat their heads, and say you all, go ahead and go own your own your land. You can do whatever you want. I’m just going to have my guy here to look over you.

Churchill is trying to explain to them, you know, wrong, they’re going to come in and take everything away. It’s a State Socialism. You’re going to lose everything you have, and he will treat you just the way he’s treating them in Sudetenland and Poland and elsewhere. So, every other Tory in Churchill’s party was an appeaser, was a wuss basically, and here’s Churchill trying to say wait a minute. It’s 1940. It’s 1941. The USA wasn’t there. FDR couldn’t do it yet. Whatever he was thinking, it was way too early, and so Boris Johnson says this guy, Churchill, stopped totalitarianism.

So, for me, I’m no foreign policy expert, Glenn, but for me, when I look at radical Islam, all right, I see totalitarianism. I see Communism. I see Nazi-ism. I think people have to wake up. They have to understand the gravity of this, and we need a game plan. The only person I know in public life—you were asking about the candidates—the only person I’ve heard, and I’ve interviewed him several times is retired four-star general Keane, Jack Keane, who I think is a brilliant man.

He says this straight up. In fact, I had him on the radio show, I don’t know, two Saturdays ago, and he said this is like fighting Communism, and we’d better understand this. I don’t think we do. In terms of the crop of Republican candidates, I haven’t heard them yet on this subject.

Glenn: Have you seen anybody, anybody, not just running for president, do you see anybody out there that you think boy, they get it, they’re doing a good job?

Larry: Besides Keane? Besides Keane?

Glenn: Yeah.

Larry: And I interview everybody, Glenn, either on the TV show or the radio. I try to read. I’m like you, I try to keep up with everything. I don’t hear anybody stating it with that kind of clarity. I don’t hear anything coming out of the joint chiefs, which is so important. I don’t hear it from the civilian side of the Pentagon, and look, Obama, I mean, we could talk about Obama forever. It ain’t hardly worth the air time, but this guy won’t even acknowledge that it’s an Islamic problem. Actually, oddly enough, I don’t want to go too deep, but there is a wonderful speech by my friend Jindal, Bobby Jindal, Louisiana.

Glenn: The recent one he gave?

Larry: Yes, and I wrote a column about the speech because I hadn’t seen anyone, and he got it. Okay, so let me backtrack. He got it. That speech was heavily criticized in some quarters. My attitude is tough darts. I had him on the radio, but I wrote a column, got a million hits on it, and he seems to understand this.

Anyway, it was interesting to me, a week or two before Jindal spoke in London, el-Sisi in Egypt, all right, gives a speech—Egypt is the fourth or fifth largest Muslim country—to a bunch of imams somewheres in Egypt, and basically says you are to blame to the imams, he said, because if you don’t stop the radical jihadists, then they’re going to destroy this sacred holy religion and a lot more and just laid it right out to them.

[break]

Glenn: You’ve seen the rise of Fascism, Le Pen, PEGIDA, Golden Dawn. It’s on the rise in Russia with Putin’s people. It’s on the rise in Italy, in Spain. This is 1933 playing itself all out all over again. What frightens me is we haven’t really, except for Greece, we haven’t really hit the economic disturbance that’s coming.

We haven’t paid the piper at all, and when that happens, somehow or another because I think that both parties have lured us into this poppy field and said sleep, sleep, everything’s going to be okay. When we wake up to our horrible situation all around the world, I think people are going to be screaming for blood and screaming for a strong man to fix it as they are now in Greece.

Larry: In America?

Glenn: I hope not. I hope not. How bad are things going to get in America?

Larry: I’m a lot more optimistic about the economy, assuming we’re still a free country.

Glenn: But are we?

Larry: Well, yes, more than less, absolutely.

Glenn: We’re 14th now on economic freedom.

Larry: Well, I understand that, and we’ve made a lot of terrible mistakes in the last bunch of years, so I agree with that index. I mean, I’ve said this before, and I’ll say it again, you and I and like-minded people who believe in freedom, I can sit down with you and fix the economy. Give me a half hour. I can. I’ll list the…I mean, I’ve been doing it for close to 40 years. The principles don’t change.

Glenn: You know, you can fix the economy on paper, but what concerns me is the culture has changed, our desire to work, our desire to say I did build that, and he built that, and back off, that’s his, you know? Give it to me. I want it. I’m owed it. I mean, we were here in the 1960s, but in 1968, we were rolling in the mud, and we were looking to the moon. There was a split in the country. Where’s the moonshot? Where are the group of people that are saying we’re going to do something great? Is it Silicon Valley? Who is it? Where is it?

Larry: The culture of entrepreneurship, I think, is alive and well, Glenn, okay? Not in the White House but out in Main Street, and I think Americans are great, freedom-loving, business-oriented people who understand frankly that if you want to make a buck and take care of your family, you’ve got to work hard. I think people still believe that in their bones. I know I believe that, and maybe I’m being too optimistic, but that’s my nature. The trouble is our government down through the years under both Republicans and Democrats have created a whole series of incentives not to work. This is what I find very troubling. They’re going to pay you not to work.

Unemployment insurance is a perfect example. There was a very good Wall Street Journal editorial on this the other day. The Republicans finally did after 11 or something extensions of long-term unemployment insurance, with all these Keynesian economists in the White House and the Congressional Budget Office saying no, we must have it; otherwise, the economy is going down—wrong, as soon as we stopped it, people started going back to work. How about that, started going back to work? When you talk about food stamps and disability insurance, people are paying them not to work. When you talk about ObamaCare, ObamaCare is essentially premised on the fact that if you get a job and succeed, and your income goes up, they will take away the ObamaCare subsidies and tax credits. They’re basically paying you not to work. That’s got to stop.

Glenn: Okay, last question, you and I are both alcoholics.

Larry: Yes, Sir.

Glenn: I think alcoholics might save the country because it’s going to take that attitude of picking yourself back up and admitting that you have a problem and saying I’m powerless with this problem, but I’m going to pick myself up and help each other and get through it.

Larry: And trust God.

Glenn: Trust God.

Larry: And trust God. I didn’t, so I acted on myself on my own, and it got me into a heap of trouble. The bottom was a lot worse than I ever thought.

Glenn: What was the bottom for you?

Larry: Well, I lost some awfully good jobs along the way in the late 80s and early 90s. I lost a Wall Street career. I had a career in journalism. I lost that. I had been doing a lot of broadcasting. I lost that. It’s very hard to hold a job, Glenn, if you don’t ever show up for it. That’s one of the lessons I learned. In fact, showing up is part of my New World mantra. I’m with God’s grace coming up to 20 years, and I show up…everything, everything. Unless I’m really three-quarters dead, I’m just going to show up. I don’t care how bad I am, I’ll still show up.

So, I agree with you, there are a lot of lessons to be learned there, and I’m a devotee of Alcoholics Anonymous. I’m not breaking anonymity because I never had any anonymity, so I can talk about it. The local press here in New York took an unusual interest in my issues, shall we say, but that’s okay.

Glenn: Oh, I bet.

Larry: That’s okay. I never have blamed anybody. The good news is I learned how to change, and I won’t even say I regained my faith. I will say I gained faith in God. I’m not sure I ever had it when I was a kid. I wasn’t really brought up in that tradition. I became a Catholic convert. That came later. I had to get sober first. The crowd at Hazelden where I was for about six months told me a couple things. They said (a) don’t go back to New York, and I didn’t. I actually did what they told me. I had one job offer. I may have told this before.

I was a pretty successful guy, but I had one job offer when I left treatment, and that was from Art Laffer in San Diego. He and Tracy took me and Judy into their home in the office, and I had a job. I learned a lot from that, and I went to all my meetings and did what my sponsors told me to do and got better. That was 20 years ago, and I’m still doing it. I was at a meeting last night and loved it, loved it. As I told you before, my dad just passed away, World War II vet, good guy. I buried him…a little down over that, so I went to a safe place, a meeting, and talked to a whole bunch of friends about it. You know, they said hey, it’s natural for you to have your down moments. You’re okay. That’s right. They are right.

So, I learned a whole lot, and I’m not a proselytizer. I’m not John the Baptist. I’m Larry Kudlow. I’m grateful to be sober. I’m grateful to have work, you know, interviews. Every night for 12 years, I’m grateful for a TV show on CNBC that I just love. When I couldn’t do it anymore, they rewrote the contract and kept me on as a commentator. I have a radio show that’s high ranked. I’m just grateful for my whole life and my wife, who I tell you, a footnote to the story, at the end, the end of the end, the end, had signed me up for the long-term care program at Hazelden. It was a real lock-and-key operation, which is what I needed, and I’ve told this story many times.

You know, she gave me a one-way plane ticket to the St. Paul-Minneapolis airport, and she said, “If you go, they’ll pick you up. You’ll be there for six months.” She said, “Here’s 20 bucks for the cab.” I had no money. And she said, “If you don’t go, that’s up to you. I’m out of here.” So, somebody, some power greater than myself, pushed me in the right direction, and as I say, Judy and I are married 27 years. I love her to death. Literally, I would, you know, stop a bullet for her, and the Lord has been very good to me, very good to me.

Glenn: Thank you.

Larry: Thank you.

Glenn: Thank you…really great.

Why the White House restoration sent the left Into panic mode

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Presidents have altered the White House for decades, yet only Donald Trump is treated as a vandal for privately funding the East Wing’s restoration.

Every time a president so much as changes the color of the White House drapes, the press clutches its pearls. Unless the name on the stationery is Barack Obama’s, even routine restoration becomes a national outrage.

President Donald Trump’s decision to privately fund upgrades to the White House — including a new state ballroom — has been met with the usual chorus of gasps and sneers. You’d think he bulldozed Monticello.

If a Republican preserves beauty, it’s vandalism. If a Democrat does the same, it’s ‘visionary.’

The irony is that presidents have altered and expanded the White House for more than a century. President Franklin D. Roosevelt added the East and West Wings in the middle of the Great Depression. Newspapers accused him of building a palace while Americans stood in breadlines. History now calls it “vision.”

First lady Nancy Reagan faced the same hysteria. Headlines accused her of spending taxpayer money on new china “while Americans starved.” In truth, she raised private funds after learning that the White House didn’t have enough matching plates for state dinners. She took the ridicule and refused to pass blame.

“I’m a big girl,” she told her staff. “This comes with the job.” That was dignity — something the press no longer recognizes.

A restoration, not a renovation

Trump’s project is different in every way that should matter. It costs taxpayers nothing. Not a cent. The president and a few friends privately fund the work. There’s no private pool or tennis court, no personal perks. The additions won’t even be completed until after he leaves office.

What’s being built is not indulgence — it’s stewardship. A restoration of aging rooms, worn fixtures, and century-old bathrooms that no longer function properly in the people’s house. Trump has paid for cast brass doorknobs engraved with the presidential seal, restored the carpets and moldings, and ensured that the architecture remains faithful to history.

The media’s response was mockery and accusations of vanity. They call it “grotesque excess,” while celebrating billion-dollar “climate art” projects and funneling hundreds of millions into activist causes like the No Kings movement. They lecture America on restraint while living off the largesse of billionaires.

The selective guardians of history

Where was this sudden reverence for history when rioters torched St. John’s Church — the same church where every president since James Madison has worshipped? The press called it an “expression of grief.”

Where was that reverence when mobs toppled statues of Washington, Jefferson, and Grant? Or when first lady Melania Trump replaced the Rose Garden’s lawn with a patio but otherwise followed Jackie Kennedy’s original 1962 plans in the garden’s restoration? They called that “desecration.”

If a Republican preserves beauty, it’s vandalism. If a Democrat does the same, it’s “visionary.”

The real desecration

The people shrieking about “historic preservation” care nothing for history. They hate the idea that something lasting and beautiful might be built by hands they despise. They mock craftsmanship because it exposes their own cultural decay.

The White House ballroom is not a scandal — it’s a mirror. And what it reflects is the media’s own pettiness. The ruling class that ridicules restoration is the same class that cheered as America’s monuments fell. Its members sneer at permanence because permanence condemns them.

Julia Beverly / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump’s improvements are an act of faith — in the nation’s symbols, its endurance, and its worth. The outrage over a privately funded renovation says less about him than it does about the journalists who mistake destruction for progress.

The real desecration isn’t happening in the East Wing. It’s happening in the newsrooms that long ago tore up their own foundation — truth — and never bothered to rebuild it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

A new Monroe Doctrine? Trump quietly redraws the Western map

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The president’s moves in Venezuela, Guyana, and Colombia aren’t about drugs. They’re about re-establishing America’s sovereignty across the Western Hemisphere.

For decades, we’ve been told America’s wars are about drugs, democracy, or “defending freedom.” But look closer at what’s unfolding off the coast of Venezuela, and you’ll see something far more strategic taking shape. Donald Trump’s so-called drug war isn’t about fentanyl or cocaine. It’s about control — and a rebirth of American sovereignty.

The aim of Trump’s ‘drug war’ is to keep the hemisphere’s oil, minerals, and manufacturing within the Western family and out of Beijing’s hands.

The president understands something the foreign policy class forgot long ago: The world doesn’t respect apologies. It respects strength.

While the global elites in Davos tout the Great Reset, Trump is building something entirely different — a new architecture of power based on regional independence, not global dependence. His quiet campaign in the Western Hemisphere may one day be remembered as the second Monroe Doctrine.

Venezuela sits at the center of it all. It holds the world’s largest crude oil reserves — oil perfectly suited for America’s Gulf refineries. For years, China and Russia have treated Venezuela like a pawn on their chessboard, offering predatory loans in exchange for control of those resources. The result has been a corrupt, communist state sitting in our own back yard. For too long, Washington shrugged. Not any more.The naval exercises in the Caribbean, the sanctions, the patrols — they’re not about drug smugglers. They’re about evicting China from our hemisphere.

Trump is using the old “drug war” playbook to wage a new kind of war — an economic and strategic one — without firing a shot at our actual enemies. The goal is simple: Keep the hemisphere’s oil, minerals, and manufacturing within the Western family and out of Beijing’s hands.

Beyond Venezuela

Just east of Venezuela lies Guyana, a country most Americans couldn’t find on a map a year ago. Then ExxonMobil struck oil, and suddenly Guyana became the newest front in a quiet geopolitical contest. Washington is helping defend those offshore platforms, build radar systems, and secure undersea cables — not for charity, but for strategy. Control energy, data, and shipping lanes, and you control the future.

Moreover, Colombia — a country once defined by cartels — is now positioned as the hinge between two oceans and two continents. It guards the Panama Canal and sits atop rare-earth minerals every modern economy needs. Decades of American presence there weren’t just about cocaine interdiction; they were about maintaining leverage over the arteries of global trade. Trump sees that clearly.

PEDRO MATTEY / Contributor | Getty Images

All of these recent news items — from the military drills in the Caribbean to the trade negotiations — reflect a new vision of American power. Not global policing. Not endless nation-building. It’s about strategic sovereignty.

It’s the same philosophy driving Trump’s approach to NATO, the Middle East, and Asia. We’ll stand with you — but you’ll stand on your own two feet. The days of American taxpayers funding global security while our own borders collapse are over.

Trump’s Monroe Doctrine

Critics will call it “isolationism.” It isn’t. It’s realism. It’s recognizing that America’s strength comes not from fighting other people’s wars but from securing our own energy, our own supply lines, our own hemisphere. The first Monroe Doctrine warned foreign powers to stay out of the Americas. The second one — Trump’s — says we’ll defend them, but we’ll no longer be their bank or their babysitter.

Historians may one day mark this moment as the start of a new era — when America stopped apologizing for its own interests and started rebuilding its sovereignty, one barrel, one chip, and one border at a time.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Antifa isn’t “leaderless” — It’s an organized machine of violence

Jeff J Mitchell / Staff | Getty Images

The mob rises where men of courage fall silent. The lesson from Portland, Chicago, and other blue cities is simple: Appeasing radicals doesn’t buy peace — it only rents humiliation.

Parts of America, like Portland and Chicago, now resemble occupied territory. Progressive city governments have surrendered control to street militias, leaving citizens, journalists, and even federal officers to face violent anarchists without protection.

Take Portland, where Antifa has terrorized the city for more than 100 consecutive nights. Federal officers trying to keep order face nightly assaults while local officials do nothing. Independent journalists, such as Nick Sortor, have even been arrested for documenting the chaos. Sortor and Blaze News reporter Julio Rosas later testified at the White House about Antifa’s violence — testimony that corporate media outlets buried.

Antifa is organized, funded, and emboldened.

Chicago offers the same grim picture. Federal agents have been stalked, ambushed, and denied backup from local police while under siege from mobs. Calls for help went unanswered, putting lives in danger. This is more than disorder; it is open defiance of federal authority and a violation of the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause.

A history of violence

For years, the legacy media and left-wing think tanks have portrayed Antifa as “decentralized” and “leaderless.” The opposite is true. Antifa is organized, disciplined, and well-funded. Groups like Rose City Antifa in Oregon, the Elm Fork John Brown Gun Club in Texas, and Jane’s Revenge operate as coordinated street militias. Legal fronts such as the National Lawyers Guild provide protection, while crowdfunding networks and international supporters funnel money directly to the movement.

The claim that Antifa lacks structure is a convenient myth — one that’s cost Americans dearly.

History reminds us what happens when mobs go unchecked. The French Revolution, Weimar Germany, Mao’s Red Guards — every one began with chaos on the streets. But it wasn’t random. Today’s radicals follow the same playbook: Exploit disorder, intimidate opponents, and seize moral power while the state looks away.

Dismember the dragon

The Trump administration’s decision to designate Antifa a domestic terrorist organization was long overdue. The label finally acknowledged what citizens already knew: Antifa functions as a militant enterprise, recruiting and radicalizing youth for coordinated violence nationwide.

But naming the threat isn’t enough. The movement’s financiers, organizers, and enablers must also face justice. Every dollar that funds Antifa’s destruction should be traced, seized, and exposed.

AFP Contributor / Contributor | Getty Images

This fight transcends party lines. It’s not about left versus right; it’s about civilization versus anarchy. When politicians and judges excuse or ignore mob violence, they imperil the republic itself. Americans must reject silence and cowardice while street militias operate with impunity.

Antifa is organized, funded, and emboldened. The violence in Portland and Chicago is deliberate, not spontaneous. If America fails to confront it decisively, the price won’t just be broken cities — it will be the erosion of the republic itself.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

URGENT: Supreme Court case could redefine religious liberty

Drew Angerer / Staff | Getty Images

The state is effectively silencing professionals who dare speak truths about gender and sexuality, redefining faith-guided speech as illegal.

This week, free speech is once again on the line before the U.S. Supreme Court. At stake is whether Americans still have the right to talk about faith, morality, and truth in their private practice without the government’s permission.

The case comes out of Colorado, where lawmakers in 2019 passed a ban on what they call “conversion therapy.” The law prohibits licensed counselors from trying to change a minor’s gender identity or sexual orientation, including their behaviors or gender expression. The law specifically targets Christian counselors who serve clients attempting to overcome gender dysphoria and not fall prey to the transgender ideology.

The root of this case isn’t about therapy. It’s about erasing a worldview.

The law does include one convenient exception. Counselors are free to “assist” a person who wants to transition genders but not someone who wants to affirm their biological sex. In other words, you can help a child move in one direction — one that is in line with the state’s progressive ideology — but not the other.

Think about that for a moment. The state is saying that a counselor can’t even discuss changing behavior with a client. Isn’t that the whole point of counseling?

One‑sided freedom

Kaley Chiles, a licensed professional counselor in Colorado Springs, has been one of the victims of this blatant attack on the First Amendment. Chiles has dedicated her practice to helping clients dealing with addiction, trauma, sexuality struggles, and gender dysphoria. She’s also a Christian who serves patients seeking guidance rooted in biblical teaching.

Before 2019, she could counsel minors according to her faith. She could talk about biblical morality, identity, and the path to wholeness. When the state outlawed that speech, she stopped. She followed the law — and then she sued.

Her case, Chiles v. Salazar, is now before the Supreme Court. Justices heard oral arguments on Tuesday. The question: Is counseling a form of speech or merely a government‑regulated service?

If the court rules the wrong way, it won’t just silence therapists. It could muzzle pastors, teachers, parents — anyone who believes in truth grounded in something higher than the state.

Censored belief

I believe marriage between a man and a woman is ordained by God. I believe that family — mother, father, child — is central to His design for humanity.

I believe that men and women are created in God’s image, with divine purpose and eternal worth. Gender isn’t an accessory; it’s part of who we are.

I believe the command to “be fruitful and multiply” still stands, that the power to create life is sacred, and that it belongs within marriage between a man and a woman.

And I believe that when we abandon these principles — when we treat sex as recreation, when we dissolve families, when we forget our vows — society fractures.

Are those statements controversial now? Maybe. But if this case goes against Chiles, those statements and others could soon be illegal to say aloud in public.

Faith on trial

In Colorado today, a counselor cannot sit down with a 15‑year‑old who’s struggling with gender identity and say, “You were made in God’s image, and He does not make mistakes.” That is now considered hate speech.

That’s the “freedom” the modern left is offering — freedom to affirm, but never to question. Freedom to comply, but never to dissent. The same movement that claims to champion tolerance now demands silence from anyone who disagrees. The root of this case isn’t about therapy. It’s about erasing a worldview.

The real test

No matter what happens at the Supreme Court, we cannot stop speaking the truth. These beliefs aren’t political slogans. For me, they are the product of years of wrestling, searching, and learning through pain and grace what actually leads to peace. For us, they are the fundamental principles that lead to a flourishing life. We cannot balk at standing for truth.

Maybe that’s why God allows these moments — moments when believers are pushed to the wall. They force us to ask hard questions: What is true? What is worth standing for? What is worth dying for — and living for?

If we answer those questions honestly, we’ll find not just truth, but freedom.

The state doesn’t grant real freedom — and it certainly isn’t defined by Colorado legislators. Real freedom comes from God. And the day we forget that, the First Amendment will mean nothing at all.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.