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

Anti-abortion activist Lila Rose tells Glenn how to fight Planned Parenthood

August 05, 2015
Staff

WRITER

Glenn will be the first to admit that wants to just be a lazy slug, so the fact that he's planning to get active in the fight for the lives of the unborn shows a unique level of passion. After all, this isn't just talking about high taxes and bad healthcare policy - these are human lives being destroyed by Planned Parenthood. But where does one get started? Glenn invited pro-life activist Lila Rose onto the show to explain how people can start taking a stand today.

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

GLENN: Let me go to Lila Rose. She's from liveaction.org. This is a topic that all of us have been on radio for a very long time. None of us have ever really talked about abortion on the air because that's just -- there's no -- there's no faster way to drive listeners to drink or to another station than to talk about abortion. And we've never talked about it up until the last few years. Now it is -- to me, with what's happening with Planned Parenthood, this is such a clear sign of, you're on the book of life or you're on the book of death, that I can't not talk about it. I have to -- I met with my family last night and said, we have to become activists. But I don't even know what that means. And so I wanted to get Lila Rose on. She's with liveaction.org. And she is -- if you don't know who she is, she's one of the more incredible activists. How old are you, Lila?

LILA: I just turned 27. I'm getting up there, Glenn.

GLENN: I know. You're an old lady.

When you were in college, your face, and I think it still is, is put in every Planned Parenthood location as watch for this girl. Because you were making recordings of them. You would go in as an underage girl and show that they were doing illegal things. Right?

LILA: Right. I mean, some of my first investigations of Planned Parenthood exposed their rampant sexual abuse cover-ups of minor girls. So I posed and then later on we trained investigative teams to pose as underage girls or as the abusers of underage girls, including the pimps and the sex traffickers of minor girls. And Planned Parenthood clinics across-the-board in dozens of situations agreed to cover up the sexual abuse of minors or aid and abet sex traffickers. And we also documented many cases where there is actual ongoing lawsuits where young girls were settled out of court -- young girls sued Planned Parenthood for the sexual abuse cover-up that they endured because the best friend of a pedophile or the best friend of a statutory rapist is a reproductive health clinic, quote, unquote, an abortion facility that will deal with the evidence of their crime, that helpless unborn child. And so it's in their best interest to get that little girl a secret abortion so that no one ever knows about the attack against her.

GLENN: That's phenomenal. And you were doing this when you were, you know, a relative kid. Now you're 27. And you have taken the fight against abortion to new levels. I want to ask you as someone who has never been involved in this stuff before. How can I get involved? What do we do as people?

LILA: Thanks, Glenn. I think there's absolutely work for people to do. And there's a few steps. There's some immediate more simple steps. And then there's the more day-to-day grind steps, which takes patience and persistence.

First of all, immediately, we're dealing with the defunding fight on Capitol Hill. We have two Democrats in the Senate, ten more votes that we had in 2007, in the Senate to defund Planned Parenthood. We're five votes away -- five votes away from success. So this is a fight that we have now. We have petitions going.

I know people are like, well, what does a petition do? Your name does count. Our goal is to get to a million signees by the end of August. We're working with other groups, even potentially some other campaigns behind the scenes to get petition signees all together in a database so that we can rally troops.

And right now we're at -- Live Action's petition alone is at 160,000. That should be -- there's no reason that shouldn't be in the hundreds of thousands. We're trying to get up the numbers of people who can get behind defunding Planned Parenthood to show that the country is not only ready for this to happen, but the country demands that we stop funding the abortion industry.

GLENN: So how do we sign that?

LILA: So that's at PlannedParenthoodExposed.com or .org. PlannedParenthoodExposed.org. It has a petition on there. It has information on there that you can share about Planned Parenthood's atrocities. Facts you can share with friends, family, people that may not know the facts. That's the first thing. The second thing is to be bold about speaking about this. Posting about this. Talking about this with friends, family, neighbors. Not shying away from the issue. Because it's too late to shy away from the issue. This is prepped up in our own communities. They're butchering children. They're selling their body parts in an industry making millions of dollars across the country.

The government is funding this on both sides. The government funds Planned Parenthood a half of a billion dollars a year, 1.4 million a day. And then they're funding the National Institute of Health over $60 million for fetal tissue research. So on both ends of the spectrum, the government is paying for this. So talk about it in our communities.

And the last one. This is where the persistence and the day-to-day grind happens. Is get involved. There's work to be done on the pro-life movement. It needs people from all walks of life, all political backgrounds. Every kind of -- every kind of person can be involved in one way or another. There's the compassion side of the movement, making sure that you have the highest and the best technology in your local pregnancy care center. You're caring for women in tough pregnancy situations. You're marketing to them in your communities to make sure that they hear from pro-lifers and those that will help them before walking into an abortion clinic. Praying and counseling outside of abortion clinics. Working with your local community to make sure that the zoning laws or the -- or the regulations for your community or city don't allow Planned Parenthood and abortion clinics to set up shop. Getting Planned Parenthood out of your local schools.

It's amazing to me how many parents are unaware of the way that Planned Parenthood is active to our nation's kids in our own communities at our own schools. And sometimes even contracts with private schools. So working to find out -- get to the bottom of it. Is Planned Parenthood allowed in any way, shape, or form in my school? Making sure that they're not. And then, of course, getting involved politically in our states and then at the federal level. Making sure that we have 110 percent politicians. That we won't stand for anyone who will even be halfway.

Keep in mind, under George Bush -- and I love, you know, President George Bush. I think he had a lot of good things -- I think he had a good heart. But under his administration, four and a half years of a Republican-controlled Senate and House, they still funded Planned Parenthood in the '90s. I was in high school. I wasn't on Capitol Hill the way I'm able to be now. But they were funding Planned Parenthood. So don't think that just because there's an R next to the name of the politician, our answers are going to be -- we're going to have our solution. We need to be active in pressuring and pushing for folks in office to do their job and getting the right people in office. Those are just a few thoughts.

GLENN: I think I have asked that question from people on this show over and over again, and it's always bullcrap answers. That's probably the most complete answer I've ever received from anybody.

LILA: Well, let's do it. Let's do it.

GLENN: Lila, how do you feel -- I mean, you are optimistic. I looked at this do-nothing Congress couldn't even stop the funding of a slaughterhouse. And I look at that as a horrible sign. You actually -- you actually have hope.

LILA: I'm a realist, Glenn. I like you. What I'm seeing though is change. And that's what gives me the hope. I see real change.

Again, in 2011, 42 votes in the Senate, no Democrats to defund Planned Parenthood. Two Democrats now. Fifty-two. It would have been 54 if McConnell and Lindsey Graham had shown up to the vote. That's a whole other story. But McConnell only didn't vote because he wanted to retain the ability to bring the vote up again. So we basically had 54 votes. There's a lot of work, and then there's an independent we need to move and then five more Democrats. There are pro-life Democrats though who voted to protect Planned Parenthood funding.

There's work that can be done behind the scenes here. People's voices do matter right now. I think the worst that the killer of the pro-life movement -- the killer of this country is the idea that people don't change, and things can't change. And that's why our rallying call from the beginning, when we first started doing investigations, before 2011, in 2011 -- yes, we know a Republican-held government funded Planned Parenthood in the '90s. Yes, we know that we've always funded Planned Parenthood for over two dozen years, and it was actually Republicans and Democrats for the architects from the Title X funding that now goes to the abortion industry. Yes, we know those things. But that can change.

The Republican -- not the Republican -- the establishment. The Washington machine, as Ted Cruz calls it, the control, the cartel in D.C. they do not have all the power we think that they have. They are sensitive to the outcry of the American people because they don't want to lose their positions. So don't lose hope and realize that we can make a change. I think that needs to be our message. And we're seeing its success already.

GLENN: Can you address -- because I think most people who are in this audience, they haven't watched the videos. And they don't want to watch the videos. Because they already know it's going to be horrible. And they don't want to -- they don't want to be the person that's posting those videos. They don't even want to think about it. But they support you.

Can you explain why these videos are important? To be shared and to be seen by everybody.

LILA: Yes. And I'll use -- I'll sometimes use this analogy. Every era has its own injustice. And you've talked about this before, Glenn. Every era has its own injustice. And we look back at the atrocities of history and we wonder, how could that have happened amongst good people who were surrounding it?

Nazi Germany. There were some good Germans who were just kind of allowing it to happen. And the trains would roll by with the Jewish prisoners off to their death. And there would be silence in the community, or there would just be inaction from the community. They didn't agree with the regime of the Nazis. But they allowed it.

In our country, slavery, we knew that it was happening in the South. We knew that it was sometimes happening in our own communities. We were uncomfortable. But what did we do to stop the incredible injustices perpetrated against our own brothers and sisters?

Today is no different, except I would argue today is the worst that our country and I believe in many ways human history has ever seen. Because the largest number of the most weakest members of our society are being destroyed by the thousands each day. Over 50 million children since this became legal in 1973 in Roe v. Wade. This is of incredible -- this is of epic proportions, and the crisis intensifies every day it continues, as more people are wounded in the wake of the killing.

So if that's not enough to give people courage -- and I think it is enough to give people courage. If you need a little more courage. Give yourself the encounter to inspire you. To touch your heart with the humanity of a child and the inhumanity of an abortion. By having the courage to watch one of the videos of what Planned Parenthood is doing in our own communities, near to our churches and schools.

I mean, I think that is just a simple plea. I think millions of people have responded to that plea. These videos have been viewed millions of times now. Videos of Planned Parenthood and their abuses have been viewed tens of millions of times, and these ones are making incredible progress, showing Planned Parenthood covering up, Planned Parenthood negotiating -- bartering the sale of baby body parts.

Give yourself that opportunity to be cut to the heart so that you can feel as well as you may know the passion or the -- the realization of what's happening so that you can feel inspired to do something more. We are human beings. We're mind and heart. We're emotions and intellect. We need to be connected to this because it's so sanitized. It's so hidden. It's so full of false rhetoric. It's so politicized. We need to get in touch with what's really happening. And these videos are a door, a window into the facilities that are doing the killings to give us that opportunity.

GLENN: Lila, thank you very much. Appreciate it. And we pray for you.

LILA: Thank you.

GLENN: You are really truly a warrior. God bless you. Lila Rose. She is with liveaction.org. And follow her advice. Follow her advice.

When 'Abolish America' stops being symbolic

Al Drago / Stringer | Getty Images

Prosecutors stopped a New Year’s Eve bombing plot rooted in ideology that treats the US as an enemy to be destroyed.

Federal prosecutors in Los Angeles announced that four members of an anti-capitalist extremist group were arrested on Friday for plotting coordinated bombings in California on New Year’s Eve.

According to the Department of Justice, the suspects planned to detonate explosives concealed in backpacks at various businesses while also targeting ICE agents and vehicles. The attacks were supposed to coincide with midnight celebrations.

Marxists, anarchists, and Islamist movements share a conviction that the United States, like Israel, is a colonial project that must be destroyed.

The plot was disrupted before any lives were lost. The group behind the plot calls itself the Turtle Island Liberation Front. That name matters more than you might think.

When ideology turns operational

For years, the media has told us that radical, violent rhetoric on the left is mostly symbolic. They explained away the angry slogans, destructive language, and calls for “liberation” as performance or hyperbole.

Bombs are not metaphors, however.

Once explosives enter the picture, framing the issue as harmless expression becomes much more difficult. What makes this case different is the ideological ecosystem behind it.

The Turtle Island Liberation Front was not a single-issue group. It was anti-American, anti-capitalist, and explicitly revolutionary. Its members viewed the United States as an illegitimate occupying force rather than a sovereign nation. America, in their view, is not a nation, not a country; it is a structure that must be dismantled at any cost.

What ‘Turtle Island’ really means

“Turtle Island” is not an innocent cultural reference. In modern activist usage, it is shorthand for the claim that the United States has no moral or legal right to exist. It reframes the country as stolen land, permanently occupied by an illegitimate society.

Once people accept that premise, the use of violence against their perceived enemies becomes not only permissible, but virtuous. That framing is not unique to one movement. It appears again and again across radical networks that otherwise disagree on nearly everything.

Marxists, anarchists, and Islamist movements do not share the same vision for the future. They do not even trust one another. But they share a conviction that the United States, like Israel, is a colonial project that must be destroyed. The alignment of radical, hostile ideologies is anything but a coincidence.

The red-green alliance

For decades, analysts have warned about what is often called the red-green alliance: the convergence of far-left revolutionary politics with Islamist movements. The alliance is not based on shared values, but on shared enemies. Capitalism, national sovereignty, Western culture, and constitutional government all fall into that category.

History has shown us how this process works. Revolutionary coalitions form to tear down an existing order, promising liberation and justice. Once power is seized, the alliance fractures, and the most ruthless faction takes control.

Iran’s 1979 revolution followed this exact pattern. Leftist revolutionaries helped topple the shah. Within a few years, tens of thousands of them were imprisoned, executed, or “disappeared” by the Islamist regime they helped install. Those who do not understand history, the saying goes, are doomed to repeat it.

ALEX WROBLEWSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

This moment is different

What happened in California was not a foreign conflict bleeding into the United States or a solitary extremist acting on impulse. It was an organized domestic group, steeped in ideological narratives long validated by universities, activist networks, and the media.

The language that once circulated on campuses and social media is now appearing in criminal indictments. “Liberation” has become a justification for explosives. “Resistance” has become a plan with a date and a time. When groups openly call for the destruction of the United States and then prepare bombs to make it happen, the country has entered a new phase. Pretending things have not gotten worse, that we have not crossed a line as a country, is reckless denial.

Every movement like this depends on confusion. Its supporters insist that calls for America’s destruction are symbolic, even as they stockpile weapons. They denounce violence while preparing for it. They cloak criminal intent in the language of justice and morality. That ambiguity is not accidental. It is deliberate.

The California plot should end the debate over whether these red-green alliances exist. They do. The only question left is whether the country will recognize the pattern before more plots advance farther — and succeed.

This is not about one group, one ideology, or one arrest. It is about a growing coalition that has moved past rhetoric and into action. History leaves no doubt where that path leads. The only uncertainty is whether Americans will step in and stop it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

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.