Rabbi Daniel Lapin discusses Christianity and Christmas

Glenn's friend Rabbi Daniel Lapin joined the radio program to talk about Christianity from the perspective of an Orthodox Jew.

At one point in the conversation, Glenn pointed out many Christians don't really know about Judaism, and many people --- both Christian and Jewish --- don't know much about the Reformation. Lapin agreed and shared some of his own insight on the subject.

"Jews do not know that there has never been an instance of Protestants committing a pogrom against Jews. Never happened in history," Lapin said. "There have been fights between Protestants and Catholics, but most Jews are totally unaware that there's that enormous difference historically."

Later, Glenn brought up the apparently mistranslated verse from the Bible often quoted during the Christmas season.

"Most times at this holiday, people say, peace on earth and good will towards men. That's a mistranslation," Glenn said. "The actual phrase is peace on earth, to men of good will."

Lapin said, "that's very interesting," before sharing what he considers the most misunderstood scripture in the Torah.

Listen to the dialogue or read the transcript below.

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors.

Rabbi Daniel Lapin is with us. He's with the American Alliance of Jews and Christians. He is really, truly an amazing man. And I've learned from Rabbi Lapin than really -- well, more than Jeffy. Let's just leave it at that.

STU: Certainly more than Jeffy.

GLENN: You have to turn on -- push that red button up.

STU: There we go.

DANIEL: That good? We're on? Okay. Great. I was just going to say -- disclaim slightly. If I was wise, I wouldn't be able to feel particularly good about it because that would just mean that I won the ovarian lottery. That's all it is.

GLENN: Right. Right.

DANIEL: But, no, what I do have, I'm appropriately humble about it is that I have been taught a great deal of ancient Jewish wisdom.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

DANIEL: And I do my best to be an accurate retransmitter of everything I was taught.

GLENN: You know what I love about you, Rabbi Lapin, is because you're so -- you're a rabbi. So you buy into the Judaism thing.

DANIEL: I do actually.

STU: Wow, that's great.

GLENN: Isn't that great? You know what --

DANIEL: I buy into it.

GLENN: What I hate to say is that there are a lot of Jews that don't.

STU: And a lot of Christians that don't.

GLENN: That don't. Yeah, and they go every Sunday. They go every Saturday. But, eh, I don't really buy into it.

STU: By the way, there's no Muslims who don't. We should point that out now. All Muslims are perfect and peaceful --

GLENN: Of course. Of course.

STU: We should just make that point.

GLENN: But what I love about you is you're so dedicated to your faith. But we were just joking off air. You said thanks for wishing me Merry Christmas. And I said, "Oh, my gosh, did I do that?" He's the like, "No, I didn't do that, but like it's an offensive thing." What I first want to start off with is Merry Christmas?

DANIEL: Thank you.

GLENN: We do a prayer at the end of the television show. And you were on with us, what, last week or so? And I asked you to say the prayer.

DANIEL: Yes.

GLENN: And what's amazing to me, if I have a preacher on or if I'm praying, I pray in Jesus' name. That's my culture, that's my religion.

DANIEL: Right.

GLENN: If you're on, I don't ask you to pray in Jesus' name. By the way, rabbi, a bunch of Christians in here. You have to pray in Jesus' name. But Christians -- I mean, Jews won't. Christians will write to me and say, "Glenn, you have a lot of Jewish friends and a lot of Jewish fans, you're offending them." I don't understand that, rabbi.

DANIEL: First of all, nice of you to say that. But I myself have been in several situations where Jews have exploded in fury because the person saying the prayer finished off in Jesus' name. So it's something that bothers many Jews.

GLENN: But it also bothers Christians when you don't pray --

DANIEL: Only because they're fearful of offending Jews -- oh, the other way around, yes, yeah.

GLENN: No, no -- I'm saying --

For instance, if I go to a Jewish organization and they haven't, but if they ask me to pray, I might say in the name of Jesus Christ, but I might say in your holy name. We're not throwing rocks at each other for the love of Pete. And God knows who I'm talking to.

DANIEL: Yeah.

GLENN: But there are some Christians that would bash and say, "How dare you not say Jesus Christ."

DANIEL: Yes. Oh, I'm sure. It's vitally important to them. And I totally understand that.

But what's interesting is that, as you know, the Jewish community is hardly monolithic. I mean, there are one or two Jews in the country that don't agree with me on every point.

GLENN: Get out of here.

STU: Is that legal?

DANIEL: It shouldn't be. And when I'm in charge, it won't be.

GLENN: He is Orthodox Jew. And I'm telling you, he lives it and he's great. He's just moved to New York City. Which if we have time, I got to find out how that's working out for you.

DANIEL: Yeah.

GLENN: Because an orthodox Jewish person --

DANIEL: Well, as a matter of fact, so happens in New York City, the most recent Jewish study and survey showed something that most Jews in the country found profoundly disturbing, which is that the majority of Jews in New York City at the moment are, in fact, orthodox. Never happened before in the history of America.

GLENN: Wow.

DANIEL: That is really extraordinary. Our side is winning. I mean, as it is, by the way, elsewhere as well. The seriously committed evangelical community is growing by leaps and bounds. The old mainstream denominations that lean left are shrinking. Their churches are empty.

GLENN: Because they don't stand for anything.

DANIEL: Precisely.

GLENN: For instance, I have no problem -- somebody -- somebody says Happy Hanukkah to me. Thank you.

DANIEL: Happy Hanukkah, Glenn.

GLENN: Thank you. That's great.

DANIEL: I think of Hanukkah as the let's use more fossil fuels holiday. Yes.

STU: Really?

GLENN: This is what makes you more popular in New York.

DANIEL: There you go. I'm looking forward. But let's talk about the praying in the name of Jesus for a moment.

GLENN: All right.

DANIEL: You have a very large proportion of American Jews -- a majority of American Jews that have -- I mean, let's be frank, have forsaken and abandoned the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. And they have adopted something else. I call it the sacred sacrament of secular fundamentalism. It's a religion. And I can explain why.

But for the moment, the point is that, it's just fascinating but I often pose this question to non-observant Jews who are very remote from their faith.

If an invisible private detective followed you around 24/7, how long would it take him to discover that you are Jewish, as opposed to a loyal member of the Democratic Party?

It's a tough question to answer. Because if you don't live and do Jewish, then what is it exactly?

And almost every Jew will tell you, I'm proud to be Jewish. Well, about what?

Like, you're proud of a racial accident? A genetic accident? What does that mean? And so what they'll usually answer is, "Well, I am Jewish. I don't believe in Jesus." And that's become now the moral and theological slogan.

GLENN: Well, there's a lot of people that don't believe in Jesus. It doesn't make them Jewish.

STU: Penn Jillette doesn't believe in Jesus.

DANIEL: Precisely.

GLENN: The Dalai Lama doesn't believe in Jesus.

DANIEL: He should be Jewish though. He should be Jewish.

STU: Oh, he should? Okay. We'll tell him know next time he's around.

DANIEL: By the way, I mean, you will remember what a stunning display of intellectual integrity Penn Jillette did when we were together on the show.

GLENN: I love him.

DANIEL: It was extraordinary.

GLENN: If you don't remember, yeah, Penn Jillette was on, along with Rabbi Lapin in. And it was an experiment. And I said to the rabbi and I said to Penn, let's get on. I'm Christian. He's Jewish. You're an atheist. Let's model for the American people that three people who have wildly different points of view on theology, that they can actually have a conversation. And at one point, the rabbi said --

DANIEL: I said if a billion -- what was happening was Penn was saying there's no difference between facts. Islam, Christianity, they're all the same. And suggesting that they're all equally bad. And I said if a billion Muslims converted became evangelical Christians tomorrow would the world be a better place or a worst place? He paused. And on television, that pause felt like a week.

GLENN: Yeah, it was amazing. And what went through my mind was, oh, my gosh. This guy might answer this question.

DANIEL: And you know what went through my mind. My mind -- I said to myself. You know, I straight away I can think of three ways to put me down, get a lot, and move on to the next topic. And if I can think of three ways to sort of put me away, Penn probably thought of five.

GLENN: What would have you have said to that, if you were him?

DANIEL: Well, I would like to think I would have said what he would have said, but I'm not sure. I know most people would have come back with something like, "Oh, yeah, right, a million Muslims are going to turn into evangelical Christians. They may as well turn into Jews --

GLENN: Right. Right. He would have said, "I don't deal in hypotheticals. That's ridiculous."

DANIEL: Yeah, he would blow it away.

STU: What did he say?

DANIEL: He thought about it. And he came back and he said, "All things being equal, I would have to say, yes, it would be a better place." That's extraordinary.

GLENN: That's amazing.

DANIEL: And he paid a price for that because many of his atheist followers were terribly upset. Anyway, I just recalled that.

So Jews who don't believe in Jesus, at that point, their entire identity is I'm Jewish because I believe this. I'm Jewish because I don't believe in Jesus. And, therefore, Jesus becomes this -- this cross to the vampire. This frightening thing which has to be kept out of my sight. Because if I allowed it in my sight, it is violating my last lingering remnant of connection to the Jewish faith.

STU: You see this in politics too. It's always a danger when you belong in something because you don't believe in something.

DANIEL: Yes, that's right.

STU: You know, I think that's happened a lot in politics and so many other things.

GLENN: Can I tell you, when I was sitting in the great synagogue in Jerusalem, sitting in the great synagogue in Jerusalem. I've gone to a couple of synagogues, but I've never been -- they had the choir and everything. It was really amazing.

DANIEL: We call that high church. Yes.

GLENN: Okay. And it was beautiful. Absolutely beautiful. And my wife was sitting upstairs, and I was sitting downstairs. And I'm just observing. And I don't understand anything -- I don't understand they're saying. And I had just been over in Europe, so I had just been over at the Vatican. And I hear the music start. And I'm thinking to myself, "This is Gregorian chant."

DANIEL: All that music is derived indirectly from the music we have on tradition that was played by the Levites in the temple.

GLENN: So let me just speak as someone who is observant. I love and going and observing other religions. And I love -- because I'm not -- a celebrate other religions. I really love it.

And I love people who are really, deeply into their traditions. And you can learn so much. And you can also -- my father taught me, he said, "Glenn, you look -- you search everything and you look for the intersection points. There's a line of theology and a line of theology and a line of theology, but where they intersect, that's where you know there's truth. There's something there that's truth."

And so I love that. And I'm sitting there in the great synagogue. And I'm hearing this music. Now I'm hearing Gregorian chant. I'm hearing the essence of Gregorian chant. And I'm looking at the way they're dressed. That's a kassik (phonetic). The Catholics have taken the kassik. And now I'm starting to think, if I'm a Jew, and I put myself back in time, you know, you know, declare your support for Jesus Christ or you're dead and I would think to myself, my gosh, they have taken all of our rituals. They have taken all of our most sacred stuff. And I don't mean it this way. Back in the time, maybe they were doing it. But then they perverted it and declared it them and theirs and said, "If you don't accept it now," so it becomes more of a mockery if you hold on to that anger, it becomes almost a mockery.

And I thought to myself, "If I was Jewish, I would have a very hard time -- if I knew my culture, I loved my culture, and I loved my faith, I would have a very hard time letting go of the past because most Christians don't know. Most Christians don't look at the history of what Christians did to Jews." And I don't -- past is past. We can't correct that. But we can recognize the strife that has been there and open our hearts to one another and go, "Wow, I see -- and maybe you don't even see -- where that rub comes from now." You know?

DANIEL: Yes. You know, it's dangerous to drive with your eyes only on the rearview mirror. And it's equally dangerous to run affairs, whether it's a family or a society or a culture or a faith with an eye only on the past and what happened back then.

The sad truth is that -- and we had at our Sabbath table a couple years ago, a judge sitting on the bench in New York, a very sophisticated and educated woman. And she said to me, these were her words. She said, I -- and she spat these words out with fury after eating my food, if you don't mind, as she said, "How can you be friends with Pat Robinson? If he has his way, the pope will be in charge of America."

GLENN: Pat Robinson. But he's not a Catholic.

DANIEL: So I said to her -- no. I said to her, "What does the words 'Protestant reformation' mean to you?" And she had no idea. Little by little, it became apparent that this was a woman who grew up as a child and a young girl and then went to college. All in New York. In New York, there are only two kinds of people: Jews and Catholics. You go to Brooklyn, you got Italians and Jews. And she never knew. To this day, she never knew anything else.

GLENN: Here's the amazing thing. And I didn't know this. So many -- just like Christians don't know about Judaism. So many Christians -- so many Jews really don't know about the reformation. They really don't -- they don't understand.

DANIEL: Jews do not know that there has never been an instance of Protestants committing a pogrom against Jews. Never happened in history. Now, Martin Luther King certainly wrote some unpleasant things about Jews. Nobody ever acted on that. There are no record anywhere of Protestants killing Jews. There have been fights between Protestants and Catholics, but most Jews are totally unaware that there's that enormous difference historically. And one of the reasons -- one of the things that brought about the reformation, of course, was the popularization of the Bible that came about because finally translating it became acceptable. Johannes Gutenberg invented the printing press in 1415. Fifty years later, you have a Protestant Reformation. People are saying, you know what, we need to go back to the roots. We need to go back to the Bible.

GLENN: Can we -- let me just jump off here in a bit. Because as I'm listening to you saying, you know, mistranslation. We have to go back to the Bible. People were kept away from things. As I'm looking at you, I see just behind you is a chalkboard with a wreath on it. It says, peace on earth to men of good will. Most times at this holiday, people say, peace on earth and good will towards men. That's a mistranslation. The actual phrase is peace on earth, to men of good will.

DANIEL: Oh, that's very interesting.

GLENN: That's totally different. Totally different.

DANIEL: Yeah, yeah.

GLENN: What do you think the most mistranslated or misunderstood phrase in the Scriptures or the in Torah that jumps out to you. If people just understood -- maybe it's not just mistranslated. It's just misunderstood.

STU: What's the most misunderstood Scripture. We have one minute. Go ahead.

GLENN: Go.

DANIEL: You know, just put on the spot. I mean, I wish we did more rehearsal or something for these --

GLENN: Let me tell you --

DANIEL: The answer is very simple. It's something called Tikkun Olam. I don't know if you've heard that phrase. Tikkun Olam is improving the world. I wish people wouldn't improve the world. Just don't wreck it at all. Stop improving it. That's all.

And it's interesting that that is the spirit of the socialist revolutionary. We're improving it. Just stop improving it. That phrase Tikkun Olam doesn't appear in that way. The correct Hebrew phrase is to improve the world in accordance with God's blueprint.

GLENN: I want to pick it up there and talk about the actual word "Torah" when we come back. Something I learned from a friend the other day that I never heard before. Back with Rabbi Lapin in just a second.

GLENN: Nobody does Christmas like Rabbi Daniel Lapin.

DANIEL: What are you trying to do? Wreck me?

(laughter)

STU: Quick question for you, rabbi. Before we get more in-depth.

GLENN: I have a serious question in a second.

STU: Well, this is a very serious question. It's just not as in-depth. As a rabbi, can you sense the evil emanating from Jeffy from across the room? Is that something that's built in, like when you finish up and you become an official rabbi, can you sense people like Jeffy as they're near and they're pure evil?

DANIEL: Not only that, I can even read your thoughts at this very moment.

STU: Wow. What am I thinking?

DANIEL: Well, I wouldn't want to turn this into a carnival.

GLENN: Yeah. And do cheap parlor tricks.

DANIEL: I don't want to do that.

GLENN: He's a serious rabbi. He only mind reads for serious things.

The double standard behind the White House outrage

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.