Success Teaches Very Little, Failure Teaches Almost Everything

The latest from the safe spaces of American schools is the abandonment of the valedictorian. Why? Competition is bad --- or so they say.

One of Glenn's favorite movies lines comes from Dan Aykroyd in the original Ghostbusters: "You don't know what it's like out in the private sector: They expect results."

RELATED: High Schools Abandon Valedictorian Because Competition Is Bad

"This whole idea that I don't have any responsibility to be my best self, that I don't have any responsibility to compete in life . . . how do you think we got the lightbulb? That was a literal competition between people in France, people in the United States, Edison, Tesla. I mean, people were competing to be the first one to bring a lightbulb. What do you think Tesla is all about? Being the first to go to Mars. What do you think Apple is all about?"

If you want something bad enough --- like being the valedictorian or getting first place in the science project --- what does it take? What if you fail and don't succeed? Will that make you better? Will competition make you try harder to succeed?

"I've learned much more from my failings than I ever have from my successes. Because my successes don't make me question anything," Glenn said Monday on radio. "I don't know what actually caused my success here or there. I can speculate, but I haven't had to go like, 'Oh crap, honey, I don't know why we're successful. How did we succeed? Where did we go right?' I haven't done any of that. Every time I have a failure, I am going, 'Where did we go wrong?'

Success teaches very little.

"Failure teaches almost everything important --- if you choose to view it that way," Glenn said.

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

GLENN: Hello, America. According to the National Association of Secondary School Principals, nearly half of all high schools in the United States no longer report any class rank.

PAT: Wow.

GLENN: This is according to the Associated Press. The graduation tradition of naming a senior class valedictorian is slowly fading into history. In areas where the tradition continues, more students are being named at the head of the class. Helena, Montana.

PAT: Wait. Twenty-five. Twenty-five valedictorians.

GLENN: How many people are in the Helena, Montana --

PAT: Well, in the graduating class -- in my class, there was 460 or something. So it's probably fairly sizeable.

GLENN: So here's -- listen to this: The reason is because administrators are recently concerned about, quote, unhealthy competition.

PAT: This is so ridiculous.

GLENN: And students feeling pressure to perform better than their peers.

I know. Because in real life, that never happens.

PAT: Never happens. You don't have to compete with anybody for anything.

GLENN: No. Uh-uh. Everything is just handed -- you know one of my favorite lines from Ghostbusters, the original Ghostbusters -- do you know what -- Jeffy.

JEFFY: Yeah, the Bill Murray line, where he talks about they make you work out there, right?

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: No, it's Dan Aykroyd. Dan Aykroyd looks at him and says, "You don't know what this means. Yeah, you don't know what it's like out in the private sector: They expect results."

(laughter)

JEFFY: They expect results. Yeah.

PAT: Did you see this -- the Tennessee school, a magnate school in Tennessee awarded 48 valedictorians this year, 25 percent of the graduating class. (laughter)

GLENN: High school in Columbia, Maryland, ranked the students but kept the results private to each student. Of course, the students couldn't keep quiet where they landed. Two seniors from Hammond High School said that's what everybody talked about.

PAT: Man.

GLENN: It makes everything ten times more competitive. Some parents -- some parents don't like the competition, saying students place too much emphasis on rankings and it can lead to negative perceptions of themselves.

PAT: Oh, no. Oh, my gosh.

GLENN: Can I tell you something, you know what leads to negative perceptions of yourself? Living under a bridge. That one -- that, you will be like, I'm a homeless person.

No, no, no. You're not. No, you're not.

You are a person who has connected with the outdoors. Oh, I feel so much better now.

I'm a homeless person. Yes, because mommy and daddy never taught you about competition. Competition is good. Competition -- you know, this is why I really like cross country training, is competition is be the --

JEFFY: Wait.

GLENN: I know. That's why I'm so thin. Competition is about being better yourself. Can you better what you just did? Better your time?

That's -- that's -- I mean, yes, is there going to be a winner? Yes. But are you better?

Can you beat your own personal time? Can you be better? Yes.

This -- this whole idea that I don't have any responsibility to be my best self, that I don't have any responsibility to compete in life -- how do you think we got the lightbulb?

That was -- that was a literal competition between people in France, people in the United States, Edison, Tesla. I mean, people were competing to be the first one to bring a lightbulb. What do you think Tesla is all about? Being the first to go to Mars.

What do you think -- you know, what do you think Apple is all about?

PAT: Competing against Google and Microsoft and everybody else. Plus, the competition within the company itself, there's going to be a ton of competition.

GLENN: No, there's not.

PAT: Oh, they'll all get participation trophies. Right.

GLENN: Yes. Everybody lives in a very big house. Nobody drives -- in this particular case, it's true. Everybody drives a Prius. But everybody has exactly the same stuff. It's all equal outcomes. Steve Jobs, he didn't have more money than everybody else --

PAT: No. Yeah, I think you're going to find that's not the case.

GLENN: No, there was no competition there. No, no competition.

PAT: Not the case.

Even as liberal as Bill Gates is, he's got a 52,000-square-foot home. That's a little bit bigger than most of his employees.

STU: Really?

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: No, I don't think so. No.

STU: Are you for sure?

GLENN: No, here's the truth. Stop listening to him.

Here's the truth: He takes Leonardo da Vinci's Codex, and everybody gets it over their fireplace for a month. If you work at Microsoft, everyone gets to hang Leonardo da Vinci's Codex over their fireplace for a month.

STU: Oh!

JEFFY: Nice!

PAT: Whether you're the janitor, or?

JEFFY: It doesn't matter.

GLENN: And there's no competition for it. It's just alphabetically assigned --

PAT: Okay. Every employee is just guaranteed to receive it?

GLENN: Yes. Guaranteed to receive it.

You hang it over your -- no matter what the deal is. You can be the employee on your way out. It doesn't matter.

PAT: Huh. Wow.

GLENN: You could be the employee that's stealing from the company. It doesn't matter. You get it.

Now, again, it's alphabetically assigned, but just because that's showing preference, they shuffle the alphabet.

PAT: Oh, that's good.

GLENN: So...

STU: And it always lands on Gates or Jobs or whatever.

GLENN: It would be Gates. It would be Gates. Why the lies?

STU: Well, it's interesting because you are the one that was propagating this idea that stealing is something that's possible, indicating that you believe in ownership, private ownership of the material. There's no such thing.

GLENN: Yeah, that was -- I'm sorry. That was the old Glenn coming out.

STU: Thank you. I'm glad finally you say that -- it's funny. They don't see competition as helpful. I mean, how do you not? I mean, look at all the benefits that have come out of it.

GLENN: Well, here's what I think the average person doesn't look and see as helpful.

The competition the way we have it -- we used to believe in this country, that it is your personal responsibility to be your best. To make your own way. To not be a burden on others.

And that you had a -- you had a blessing of getting an education. Now, it's not that. Now, it is -- especially you go to places like New York, they -- the parents will shiv you for a spot in a pre-nursery school.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: Because that pre-nursery school will lead you to the right kindergarten, which will lead you to the first -- the primary school and the secondary school. And you'll be able to get into Harvard. But if you -- if you drool too much in the pre-nursery school, they will tell you, "This is a sign that they're not going to make it to Harvard, and they really need to stop drooling so much." They're five months old.

(chuckling)

GLENN: I mean, that's -- that's the unhealthy competition.

PAT: I think a lot of these parents though can't see beyond just their feelings right now, of feeling like, "Oh, gosh, I'm not -- I'm not number one in the class. So I'm worthless." Well, they're going to have deal with that. They're going to have to deal with that in life. And I don't know if they're looking forward -- they're so short-sighted.

GLENN: But it is, again, the parents. What happened when the school said, keep this to yourself? All the kids, they know they're competing.

PAT: Uh-huh.

STU: Right.

GLENN: It's natural. Who is better at this than -- you can't play sports unless it's always a tie. And even then, you're going to know, "When this guy gets up, he is going to slam this thing out of the park." We all have different skills.

STU: And sports, along with, you know, valedictorian races, it's a good, meaningless thing to teach that lesson on, right? Like, losing a sporting event in the grand scheme of your life is not that big of a deal, but it's a great way to learn the lesson of how to react after you lose. It's a great way to learn a lesson of how to work harder in the future.

PAT: Yes. And it's about the -- it's about the parents spinning that the right way for the child to help them understand and deal with that. Isn't that good parenting?

GLENN: And it's also important to understand this. And I think this is a great stat. Just read this one a couple weeks ago.

Valedictorians are not, generally speaking, the movers and the shakers of the next generation. They generally -- they'll get good jobs. But they're generally not the ones who are the big entrepreneurs. They're not the big moneymakers, et cetera, et cetera. Because of this: They are taught exactly what to think. They -- they -- they live in this box that is structured by college and high school.

And, really, honestly, what are you learning in high school? You're memorizing dates. You're taught to learn skills that you will never ever use again. Not the information.

The test-taking skills. The memorization of dates and names and places. When does that come in handy?

STU: So it makes -- I mean, it's not without value, right? Like these -- a lot of these people are making $100,000 a year at a good job.

GLENN: Discipline. Hard work and discipline.

STU: And they work well within the system, and there's a lot there.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: But I was listening to an interview with a guy who started Five Guys, you know, the burger place.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

STU: It was a financial services guy. Goes in -- he decides he wants to start a burger place in New Jersey. I think it was New Jersey.

And he -- or, no, Virginia. Virginia. And he starts it. And he lets his kids pick out all the ingredients. You pick the best-tasting mayonnaise. Won't tell them anything about food costs. Won't tell them which one is more expensive because he wants them to just pick the best one. They pick the best one. This is a ridiculous way to run a business. They go to name the business. He has four kids. He's like, I don't know. Let's just call it Five Guys. We'll change it later.

Now there's 1500 locations. Because he decided he wanted to go -- he believed in the quality of the product. He decided to work hard and do it in a different way. He wasn't --

GLENN: So here's -- here's an interesting phrase that I'd like to share, that kind of goes into that.

Everybody says think out of the box. You got to think out of the box. You got to think out of the box.

Yes. If that box is flawed and doesn't provide you anything, but the same rubber stamp. But you don't want to think out of the box -- if you're creating a business. You want to create a new box. You have to -- you have to have framework -- like, I can't go into Five Guys. I know what it looks like. And say, you know what we're going to do, we're going to put up some fake grapes on the side here. We'll attract those people who usually go to an Italian restaurant. And we're going to put some of those really cheesy Chinese lamps hanging from the ceiling too because we'll attract those.

No, they have a box. They have a box. We're Five Guys. It looks like this. This is what we serve. The secret is, forget the box. Design your own box. And stay within your own box. But nobody is teaching that.

Everybody teaches, "Get out of the box," which says, there are no rules. There are rules. But in today's date, you have to find the rules that are eternal, like theft shouldn't be part of our business model.

STU: Yes, no, it's true. It's true.

And every one of the interviews with one of these crazy CEOs that does something different, there are 500 stories of people who try these things and failed. But that's the difference. That part of it is important. Many of those failures came from the same people who wound up succeeding later.

GLENN: Yes. They learned from that.

STU: You have to be able to embrace that failure.

PAT: Did that hurt their self-esteem for a while?

STU: Maybe.

PAT: It might have. It might have.

GLENN: It should.

STU: It should.

PAT: But they overcame it.

STU: They overcame it. Did things different the next time.

PAT: Wow. You mean that's possible?

GLENN: There is -- I have learned much more --

PAT: It's ridiculous.

GLENN: I've learned much more from my failings than I ever have from my successes. Because my successes don't make me question anything. My successes go, dig me. Look at this. Huh? How great is that?

I don't know what actually caused my success here or there. I can speculate, but I haven't had to put like, oh, crap. Honey, I don't know why we're successful. How did we succeed? Where did we go right?

I haven't done any of that. Every time I have a failure, I am going, "Where did we go wrong?" Success teaches you very little. Failure teaches you almost everything important, if you choose to view it that way.

Why the White House restoration sent the left Into panic mode

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A restoration, not a renovation

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

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

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

The selective guardians of history

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

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

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

The real desecration

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

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

Julia Beverly / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Trump’s secret war in the Caribbean EXPOSED — It’s not about drugs

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.