Losing our freedom of conscience in America at a blinding speed

Unless you’ve been living under a rock, you’ve probably seen that America is being torn apart. Fundamental principles and common sense are being destroyed. Up is down, down is up, and two plus two suddenly equals five. People are losing their jobs because they stand up for religious principles. Politicians espouse whatever stance on is popular at the moment. Gun rights and freedom of speech are attacked at every opportunity. When will it stop?

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

GLENN: So you remember the song from Lee Greenwood. I mean, it's Fourth of July week so we'll hear it this weekend in every city across America, God Bless the USA. The chorus goes, and I'll gladly stand up next to you. And I'll -- and defend her still today. You know that part?

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: I've always thought that that part referred to standing side by side on a battlefield. I'll always stand up next to you and defend her still today. But I don't think that's the case now.

I'm sure that's not what he intended when he wrote it. You know, to see our situation. Maybe he did. But I see us standing up defending her here at home without any weapons. I see us standing for the right of conscience.

If anybody has been paying attention, and you haven't been playing politics, just paying attention, America is being torn apart. We're just being ripped apart at the seams. All of our most fundamental principles are being bludgeoned to death. And I say that with full confidence. Hillary Clinton said that traditional marriage was a fundamental, bedrock principle.

Now she doesn't. That was like eight years ago she said that. A fundamental, bedrock principle. Well, I agree with her. And now it's gone. But I think our speech is going away quickly as well. You can say anything you want if you don't mind being hungry for the rest of your life. You can't support your family. If you love unemployment, speak your mind all you want, baby. The CEO of Firefox, fired. Because six years prior he had donated money to a cause in which he believed. Donald Trump this week, fired because he said something I don't agree with, but I don't want him fired for it.

People working at ESPN, right chink in the armor, fired. Freedom of speech? Nope. Nope. Fundamental, bedrock principle, gone. Freedom of religion, religious institutions in some cases have been forced against their doctrine to provide birth control, contraception, and even abortion. Have you heard the latest on Steve Green's place? Hobby Lobby. Hobby Lobby may have to close.

Because the government is going after them again. And they just came out and said, we may not be able to stay open this time. Hobby Lobby!

So don't tell me we have freedom of religion. People are being forced to provide services for ceremonies in which they conscientiously object. It's called a conscientious objector. We've always had that, that carve-out in the Constitution. If your God tells you I can't do that, you don't do it, and no one can force you to do it.

But now, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, two ministers who operate church threatened with arrest for not performing a gay wedding ceremony. Arrest, jail time!

The Supreme Court ruling that came out last week, is that going to help or hurt? Listen to what our first openly gay senator Tammy Baldwin said about religious liberty this week.

TAMMY: Certainly the First Amendment says that in institutions of faith, that there is absolute power to, you know, to observe religious deeply held religious beliefs. But I don't think it extends far beyond that.

GLENN: Okay. It doesn't extend very far beyond that.

Say whatever you like in your church -- this is James Madison -- say -- yap all you want. Got this. Got that, whatever. But as soon as you step out on the sidewalk, your ass is mine.

I don't think so.

By the way, so you know how that works, Tammy, if I may call you that, Tammy, a guy who has been in the service forever, forever -- I'm sorry. No. A guy who is -- I was thinking of another religious case.

This guy is a fire chief in Atlanta. A fire chief.

He said something inside the walls of his church. He was fired from his job because he said at his church from the pulpit, I don't believe in gay marriage. He was fired. So tell me how that one works, Tammy.

By the way, the First Amendment doesn't say anything about institutions of faith. What it does say is Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. I'm exercising my faith right now by telling you what I believe.

The right to keep and bear arms every single time some psycho senselessly takes an innocent life, they roll out the tired, old argument that guns have no place in our society, despite what the Constitution says. The right to be secure in your home, papers, documents, unmolested by authorities, unless there is a probable cause to search or seize your property. Three letters for you: NSA. Here's three more: IRS.

Those are all gone, gang. Or they're on the ropes. Power is not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, reserved for the states.

Yeah. Right.

(laughter)

No, that doesn't happen. There's no marriage. There's no straight marriage in the Constitution.

That is a power reserved for the states. Not the Constitution. It says it in the Constitution. So the Tenth Amendment is gone. The only thing we have to not really worry about is probably the quartering of soldiers in our homes. Knock on wood. Well, don't knock on wood because that might be a little confusing to some because there might actually be a knock on your wooden door and I don't know it might be the Third Mechanized Infantry Division that is just wanting to stay.

PAT: Looking for a place.

GLENN: Can we crash here? Our public schools and universities are turning out kids and they're turning them into entitlement addicts. It doesn't begin at school. Because even at our sporting events and other extracurricular activities prepare them to expect everything without earning anything. Participation trophies. Telling them that they're special for no apparent reason. Heaping undue praise on them. Even, when just maybe, constructive criticism would keep a few losers off of American Idol. We told you about UC Berkeley, where Janet Napolitano and her staff are banning certain phrases. These are not words. These are now ideas.

This week, last week it was UC Berkeley. This week it was University of Wisconsin joining the list of racist microaggressions. Microaggressions. Take your microaggression and...

America used to be a place where based on your hard work, dedication, and talent, you could have a legitimate chance to get ahead in life. You could actually possibly become successful. Thanks to the University of Wisconsin and UC Berkeley, we discovered now that's just not true. Gaining reward based on your efforts apparently cannot happen. It's referred to as the myth of meritocracy. Saying things like the most qualified person should get the job just accentuates the microaggression that is seething inside of you. Desperately trying to get out.

What you really mean by that phrase is that people are -- of color are given extra unfair benefits because of their race. Why are you such a racist?

And for the holy love of heaven, will you please don't give me the old, everybody can succeed in this society, if they don't work hard -- if they work hard enough. Please don't give that to me. I -- you know that's a lie. Go ahead, say it. Say it to your microaggressive, hateful self. Go ahead say it. Colored people are just lazy. Yeah, that's what you say. Colored people. Hello, Mr. 1956. You're saying they're incompetent and need to work harder. I know exactly what you're saying.

Yep. Can't hide from the University of Wisconsin or UC Berkeley. This is what's being taught to your kids. Take your kids out of school. Don't. Send them to a local community college before this crap.

This is what's happening in the United States of America today. The family, the fundamental building block of civilization is being transformed. Marriage transformed. Speech transformed. Rights rewritten. Invented. Suppressed. It's all happening at the same time by design by the progressives.

And the result will be that America's cream will no longer rise to the top. Cream, we can't have cream. That implies a cow. Who are you to put your hand on the utter of an animal without asking for permission?

Merit is going to just be a parts of in Connecticut. That's it. We'll have generations of Americans who wait to be given what they believe they have coming to them because they're entitled. It won't come, but government benefits will, while they last. More and more fundamental rights will be created.

There is no fundamental right to marriage. Not in the Constitution. For straight people, either. There is no such thing as a fundamental right for health care. Those are things we like. But that's not something government is doing. Marriage was an institution that was started by the religious. And government cannot interfere with the religious inside the walls of the church. So how is it that they say they can -- no, we understand the First Amendment. We got it. You can do whatever you want in the church. And we'll leave you alone. It just doesn't expand past the church. By the way, open up the door of the church because we have to tell you what you're doing on the altar there with those two people. Can't have it both ways, dude.

Health care is the same way. Now they're talking about a guaranteed minimum wage. There is no fundamental right to a minimum wage. A job. There's no fundamental right to food. Now, these rights did exist in that glorious place called the Soviet Union. They still exist in that wonderful utopia of China. But not here in the United States of America. Why?

Well, because our fathers had a different idea. And I'll tell you about that coming up in a second.

[BREAK]

GLENN: So do you remember when the president said this about the Constitution?

OBAMA: That generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can't do to you. Says what the federal government can't do to you. But it doesn't say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf.

GLENN: Right. Right. He is a constitutional scholar. He has that wrapped up tightly in a nice little box. That is exactly what it says because that's exactly what the founders designed it to do and be. Why? Because they studied all previous governments. They studied it from ancient Greece and Mesopotamia. They went out and they really searched what worked, what didn't, why did it fail, when did it fail. And then they tried to design something that took all of that into account.

They knew that the government shouldn't do certain things to the citizenry, the way Britain did. They wanted government out of the way. They believed that we can do it. We can do it on our own, and we can do it better. Except for a few things like military. Now, who doesn't think -- does Apple think the government can do computers better than Apple? Does Google think they can run the internet better than Google (sic)? Do you think you can run your life and your family, or the government would be better at that? Based on merit, we're given the right to pursue our happiness. Not the guarantee that the government would provide for us.

You got to grab your kids because they are being reprogrammed. We are being reprogrammed to accept that the most qualified person should not get the job. That the special person should. The first person, the first black, Hispanic, woman, gay, lesbian, transgendered man that's still questioning and a little bit transabled or maybe the first transracial. First dwarf. First something should get that job. But not the person who is actually qualified. No. Look, if Ted Cruz were gay, he had exactly the same policies, I would absolutely vote for him. If he would just for the love of Pete, man, put on a skirt, then he would be the first transgendered woman president. Then he's -- he's more than qualified.

We're being directed down that path. And if we continue down that path, America will cease to be great. We've already slid way past good. We're now in, kind of mediocre. It's okay. Kind of like Canada is looking pretty good right now.

Perhaps one day even less.

I started this with that Lee Greenwood quote. I think it's the first time in my career that I've quoted Lee Greenwood. But I'll stand up next to you and defend her still today.

It's time to stand. It's not time to stand against something. It's time to stand for something. Stand for the Constitution. Stand for people's rights. Not even your rights. Don't even worry about your rights. Somebody else's right. We're going to talk about Ted Cruz and he's talking about his solution to gay marriage. But I think in a way, what he's saying is, we got to stand up against gay marriage and get this thing overturned.

I think we need to get it overturned, but not because of gay marriage. We got to get the government out of gay marriage. Rand Paul has the right position on this. Get the government out of marriage entirely. They have no place in our marriage. Right of conscience.

They have no place in our marriage. If you want to get married, you get married. I may disagree with it, but how does it pick my pocket or break my leg? It doesn't.

You want to get married. Get married. If you're two consenting adults, how does this hurt me?

If you want to force my church to marry you, if I go to a gay church and they're like, we won't marry any straight people, so be it. Why would I want them to do it? I'm not going to force them to do it. I'm not going to force your church or whatever to do whatever. You don't force me to do whatever. Why can't we all just kind of be cool with each other? My evil plan, slowly, quietly take over the world, and then leave everybody alone.

'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 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?

Do you think the Gen Z support for Trump is an opportunity for conservatives to win them over with anti-establishment reforms that preserve liberty?