People Now Say ‘Unsafe’ When They Really Feel ‘Uncomfortable’

Glenn shared some words of wisdom in an audio clip from Justice Clarence Thomas on today’s show. Thomas remembered how his grandparents lived, with a “calmness and a contentment about life.” They emphasized context, priorities, education, respect for others and wisdom for picking your battles.

The justice pointed out that people now live with a one-size-fits-all approach to life where people are expected to think the same and not say anything that makes others feel uncomfortable.

People have exchanged “uncomfortable” for the word “unsafe,” wanting a world where they are never confronted with ideas they disagree with. Glenn noted the distinction between truly feeling unsafe and simply being uncomfortable. Not being properly secured on an amusement park ride would be an unsafe feeling.

“What we used to call ‘uncomfortable’ we now call ‘unsafe,’” Glenn said. “I feel uncomfortable when somebody is challenging me.”

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: Tonight at 5 o'clock, I'm going to go deeper into this. I started yesterday on the TV show, on what do we have in common? What is our unum? And showed you the problems that we're experiencing right now because we don't have an unum. E pluribus unum. From many, one. That was our national motto. We're now e pluribus pluribus. From many, many. It doesn't work. And now we're adding arrogance to it, on it's my way or the highway. I can kill you, if I don't agree with you.

Clarence Thomas said this recently. I want you to listen to this.

VOICE: When you think of people like my grandparents, these were people who had been through quite a bit and had a calmness and a contentment about life and they understood putting things in context, what was important, priorities, what battles are you going to fight today, what decisions are you going to make? What decisions you're going to make today will result in you being able to eat, those sorts of things. And the long-term. That these two boys, they were raising will be educate. And that they will have good manners and go to school and be polite to the neighbors, et cetera.

I think that today, we seem to think that everything has to be one-size-fits-all. And people can't have opinions that make us uncomfortable or ideas that make us uncomfortable or that we don't agree with.

GLENN: I want you to -- I want you to think of that. See, we've -- we have -- we're changing language. What we used to call uncomfortable, we now call unsafe.

I feel unsafe. No. You feel uncomfortable. Unsafe is when somebody comes into the office with a gun. That's when I feel unsafe. I feel unsafe when I go to a theme park and they haven't locked me in. I feel unsafe.

I feel uncomfortable when somebody is challenging me. That's huge. Because we can't even promise safety. There's no one that can say to you, you're going to be safe your entire life, unless you're in a bubble. And even then, there could be a fire. And if you're in a bubble, maybe the oxygen tanks blow up. I mean, I can't promise you safety, no one can.

But you should never want to be promised a lack of uncomfortability. I am only uncomfortable when I'm learning something new. For instance, yesterday, I was in a -- I was in a meeting, and I was very uncomfortable. I was very uncomfortable.

But I was very uncomfortable, because we were all learning something new. Never been there before.

Didn't know exactly how to handle it. None of us did. And we were all uncomfortable. But we will be better because we had that moment of uncomfortability. If we didn't have that uncomfortable moment, we would never solve it. It would just decay and get worse and worse and worse.

Your kids are uncomfortable doing their homework. They don't like it. You do it because you know it's important.

So the first thing that we have to -- the first thing that we have to change is the understanding of being unsafe and uncomfortable.

If somebody says to you, hey, I like that dress, and would you like to go out? That may make you uncomfortable. And say, that makes me uncomfortable. Don't do that anymore.

Somebody stalking you is making you unsafe. And they are very different. Learn that first. More in a minute.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

All right. So Clarence Thomas said, you know, a couple of things. And could we play this again, Sarah, please? This is Clarence Thomas.

VOICE: When you think of people like my grandparents, these were people who had been through quite a bit and had a calmness and a contentment about life and they understood putting things in context, what was important, priorities. What battles are you --

GLENN: Okay. Stop. First of all, I want to start there. What he said here is, our grandparents were content.

And why? Because they had priorities. They put things in context. They put -- they knew what mattered.

This is why I've been on this kick lately in my own life. What matters most? Once you know and you make a list of what matters most, this is what matters most to me. This is where I'm headed. This is what I want to do.

Once you start doing that, oh, my gosh, your life changes. You suddenly have no tolerance for stuff that just doesn't matter. You're just like -- you want to have this conversation, go someplace else and have this conversation.

I'm working on this. Once we know -- Stu, what is the greatest gift from God? What would you say -- I thought of this yesterday. What would you say God's greatest gift to us is? Most precious gift.

STU: Probably queso, I would think. It's a tough line.

GLENN: Right. That was the first one that I thought of too. But now go to the second level.

STU: Obviously chips --

GLENN: Well, I'll help you a little. I'll bet a lot of people would say and I've said most of my life, forgiveness.

STU: Grace.

GLENN: Yeah, grace. The chance to start all ovary again is phenomenal.

But I don't think that's his greatest gift. Time -- time is our greatest, most precious commodity. Time.

And there's a limited amount of it. There's enough grace for the entire universe, for all eternity. But time is limited.

What are we doing with our time? We are not putting things into order. What matters most? We're like -- we are so ADD driven -- think of this. Where are we on ISIS today, talking about what happened in ISIS? We're not talking about it. Because we're currently talking about guns because of the shooting. Last week, we were all about ISIS. Last week, we got to be all about ISIS. This week, shooting, shooting, guns. First Amendment. Next week, it will be something else.

What the hell is wrong with us? We are, shiny object, shiny object, squirrel!

STU: Yeah. If you were super-duper into the NFL protests a few weeks ago, now that's ancient history. Was there any purpose in getting all fired up about that? I don't know.

GLENN: Nope. Nope.

STU: And this goes, every single week, there's another one of these stories.

GLENN: No. So we have to say: What matters most? For our time. But we have for look at that also as, in our society, what matters most?

What matters most? And I will tell you, that it is not getting rid of ISIS or getting -- or, I'm sorry. Getting rid of the Nazis or getting rid of Antifa. It's not getting rid of the Democrats or the Republicans. It's not getting rid of Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton.

Because another one will appear. Have you ever thought -- I don't watch the news anymore. And you're all keyed up from it from it.

And then you leave, what have I missed? And it's the same crap, different names. Have you ever noticed when you read the Bible, it's the same crap, just different names. You're reading this, and you're like, did these people not see what happened 500 years before? Did they not see?

They didn't see it. We're not seeing it. It's the same story over and over again.

So what matters most? We could do all kinds of things to get rid of guns. But is that what matters most?

We want to get rid of guns because we're against guns. No, I am for security. I am for the defense of the innocent. I am for the defense of the helpless. Now, that changes things. Because if I'm against guns, I can solve what happened in a Petri dish. Not actual solve it. I could solve what happened in a petri dish, by telling you that I'm going to make sure that that gunman on Sunday, isn't going to get a gun. Well, he's going to find someplace else. He'll mow a bunch of people down with a truck. You know, and if they're really committed, they'll fly a 747 or 727 into a building. They'll find a way. That doesn't solve anything. That kicks the can down the road.

What matters most is, I am for security and safety. I am for a -- a society that doesn't want to rip the throats out of each other. Well, now that's a different problem. That's a totally different problem.

That's going to make me now look at the shooter on Sunday and say, we have to look at mental health. We have to look at the divide between Christians and atheists. How can Christians and atheists -- what would be better in our country? If we were having a discussion this week about, how do we get together with atheists? You know what, see if we can get Penn Jillette on tomorrow. Penn, this guy was an atheist, what can the Christian community do to reach out, to atheists, and say, "We don't want to be those kinds of people, and I know you don't want to be those kinds of people. How can we break down some of these barriers?"

Wouldn't that do more for the safety of our nation and the -- and the calmness of the nation? Wouldn't that make us feel more safe? It's going to make us feel uncomfortable. But if you're not willing to be uncomfortable in thought, what you're saying to the world is, I got it all figured out, and it's my way or the highway. And that leads to Nazis. That leads to Antifa. That leads to rounding people up.

We have to be for things. I'm going to show you tonight at 5 o'clock, on TheBlaze TV, I'm going to take to the chalkboard, and I'm going to show you the things that people are saying now that we need to solve. We have to do something. And I'm going to show you that if you are against something, that solution will look really good. That solution will be like, yep. That could take care of it. I'm not going to guarantee it. But that could take care of it. But unless you're for something -- and these are really big principles that we should all be for, you will destroy those big principles. Because you're just going to pick them off, one by one, without even noticing.

I'll show you that tonight on the chalkboard at 5 o'clock, only on TheBlaze TV. Become a subscriber now at TheBlaze TV. That's TheBlaze.com/TV. And you can watch them all -- I think it's a buck an episode or something. And you can watch them all. But we just did -- last week was all about socialism. This week is kind of turning out to be e pluribus unum. What do we believe that will bring us together? Because if we don't bring ourselves together, we're toast. We're absolutely toast.

From the moment the 33-year-old Thomas Jefferson arrived at the Continental Congress in Philadelphia in 1776, he was on the radical side. That caused John Adams to like him immediately. Then the Congress stuck Jefferson and Adams together on the five-man committee to write a formal statement justifying a break with Great Britain, and their mutual admiration society began.

Jefferson thought Adams should write the Declaration. But Adams protested, saying, “It can't come from me because I'm obnoxious and disliked." Adams reasoned that Jefferson was not obnoxious or disliked, therefore he should write it. Plus, he flattered Jefferson, by telling him he was a great writer. It was a master class in passing the buck.

So, over the next 17 days, Jefferson holed up in his room, applying his lawyer skills to the ideas of the Enlightenment. He borrowed freely from existing documents like the Virginia Declaration of Rights. He later wrote that “he was not striving for originality of principle or sentiment." Instead, he hoped his words served as “an expression of the American mind."

It's safe to say he achieved his goal.

The five-man committee changed about 25 percent of Jefferson's first draft of the Declaration before submitting it to Congress. Then, Congress altered about one-fifth of that draft. But most of the final Declaration's words are Jefferson's, including the most famous passage — the Preamble — which Congress left intact. The result is nothing less than America's mission statement, the words that ultimately bind the nation together. And words that we desperately need to rediscover because of our boiling partisan rage.

The Declaration is brilliant in structure and purpose. It was designed for multiple audiences: the King of Great Britain, the colonists, and the world. And it was designed for multiple purposes: rallying the troops, gaining foreign allies, and announcing the creation of a new country.

The Declaration is structured in five sections: the Introduction, Preamble, the Body composed of two parts, and the Conclusion. It's basically the most genius breakup letter ever written.

In the Introduction, step 1 is the notificationI think we need to break up. And to be fair, I feel I owe you an explanation...

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another…

The Continental Congress felt they were entitled by “the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God" to “dissolve the political bands," but they needed to prove the legitimacy of their cause. They were defying the world's most powerful nation and needed to motivate foreign allies to join the effort. So, they set their struggle within the entire “Course of human events." They're saying, this is no petty political spat — this is a major event in world history.

Step 2 is declaring what you believe in, your standardsHere's what I'm looking for in a healthy relationship...

This is the most famous part of the Declaration; the part school children recite — the Preamble:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

That's as much as many Americans know of the Declaration. But the Preamble is the DNA of our nation, and it really needs to be taken as a whole:

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

The Preamble takes us through a logical progression: All men are created equal; God gives all humans certain inherent rights that cannot be denied; these include the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; to protect those rights, we have governments set up; but when a government fails to protect our inherent rights, people have the right to change or replace it.

Government is only there to protect the rights of mankind. They don't have any power unless we give it to them. That was an extraordinarily radical concept then and we're drifting away from it now.

The Preamble is the justification for revolution. But note how they don't mention Great Britain yet. And again, note how they frame it within a universal context. These are fundamental principles, not just squabbling between neighbors. These are the principles that make the Declaration just as relevant today. It's not just a dusty parchment that applied in 1776.

Step 3 is laying out your caseHere's why things didn't work out between us. It's not me, it's you...

This is Part 1 of the Body of the Declaration. It's the section where Jefferson gets to flex his lawyer muscles by listing 27 grievances against the British crown. This is the specific proof of their right to rebellion:

He has obstructed the administration of justice...

For imposing taxes on us without our consent...

For suspending our own legislatures...

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us...

Again, Congress presented these “causes which impel them to separation" in universal terms to appeal to an international audience. It's like they were saying, by joining our fight you'll be joining mankind's overall fight against tyranny.

Step 4 is demonstrating the actions you took I really tried to make this relationship work, and here's how...

This is Part 2 of the Body. It explains how the colonists attempted to plead their case directly to the British people, only to have the door slammed in their face:

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury...

They too have been deaf to the voice of justice... We must, therefore... hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

This basically wrapped up America's argument for independence — we haven't been treated justly, we tried to talk to you about it, but since you refuse to listen and things are only getting worse, we're done here.

Step 5 is stating your intent — So, I think it's best if we go our separate ways. And my decision is final...

This is the powerful Conclusion. If people know any part of the Declaration besides the Preamble, this is it:

...that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved...

They left no room for doubt. The relationship was over, and America was going to reboot, on its own, with all the rights of an independent nation.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

The message was clear — this was no pitchfork mob. These were serious men who had carefully thought through the issues before taking action. They were putting everything on the line for this cause.

The Declaration of Independence is a landmark in the history of democracy because it was the first formal statement of a people announcing their right to choose their own government. That seems so obvious to us now, but in 1776 it was radical and unprecedented.

In 1825, Jefferson wrote that the purpose of the Declaration was “not to find out new principles, or new arguments, never before thought of… but to place before mankind the common sense of the subject, in terms so plain and firm… to justify ourselves in the independent stand we are compelled to take."

You're not going to do better than the Declaration of Independence. Sure, it worked as a means of breaking away from Great Britain, but its genius is that its principles of equality, inherent rights, and self-government work for all time — as long as we actually know and pursue those principles.

On June 7, 1776, the Second Continental Congress met in Philadelphia at the Pennsylvania State House, better known today as Independence Hall. Virginia delegate Richard Henry Lee introduced a motion calling for the colonies' independence. The “Lee Resolution" was short and sweet:

Resolved, That these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States, that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved.

Intense debate followed, and the Congress voted 7 to 5 (with New York abstaining) to postpone a vote on Lee's Resolution. They called a recess for three weeks. In the meantime, the delegates felt they needed to explain what they were doing in writing. So, before the recess, they appointed a five-man committee to come up with a formal statement justifying a break with Great Britain. They appointed two men from New England — Roger Sherman and John Adams; two from the middle colonies — Robert Livingston and Benjamin Franklin; and one Southerner — Thomas Jefferson. The responsibility for writing what would become the Declaration of Independence fell to Jefferson.

In the rotunda of the National Archives building in Washington, D.C., there are three original documents on permanent display: the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence. These are the three pillars of the United States, yet America barely seems to know them anymore. We need to get reacquainted — quickly.

In a letter to his friend John Adams in 1816, Jefferson wrote: “I like the dreams of the future, better than the history of the past."

America used to be a forward-looking nation of dreamers. We still are in spots, but the national attitude that we hear broadcast loudest across media is not looking toward the future with optimism and hope. In late 2017, a national poll found 59% of Americans think we are currently at the “lowest point in our nation's history that they can remember."

America spends far too much time looking to the past for blame and excuse. And let's be honest, even the Right is often more concerned with “owning the left" than helping point anyone toward the practical principles of the Declaration of Independence. America has clearly lost touch with who we are as a nation. We have a national identity crisis.

The Declaration of Independence is America's thesis statement, and without it America doesn't exist.

It is urgent that we get reacquainted with the Declaration of Independence because postmodernism would have us believe that we've evolved beyond the America of our founding documents, and thus they're irrelevant to the present and the future. But the Declaration of Independence is America's thesis statement, and without it America doesn't exist.

Today, much of the nation is so addicted to partisan indignation that "day-to-day" indignation isn't enough to feed the addiction. So, we're reaching into America's past to help us get our fix. In 2016, Democrats in the Louisiana state legislature tabled a bill that would have required fourth through sixth graders to recite the opening lines of the Declaration. They didn't table it because they thought it would be too difficult or too patriotic. They tabled it because the requirement would include the phrase “all men are created equal" and the progressives in the Louisiana legislature didn't want the children to have to recite a lie. Representative Barbara Norton said, “One thing that I do know is, all men are not created equal. When I think back in 1776, July the fourth, African Americans were slaves. And for you to bring a bill to request that our children will recite the Declaration, I think it's a little bit unfair to us. To ask our children to recite something that's not the truth. And for you to ask those children to repeat the Declaration stating that all men's are free. I think that's unfair."

Remarkable — an elected representative saying it wouldn't be fair for students to have to recite the Declaration because “all men are not created equal." Another Louisiana Democrat explained that the government born out of the Declaration “was used against races of people." I guess they missed that part in school where they might have learned that the same government later made slavery illegal and amended the Constitution to guarantee all men equal protection under the law. The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments were an admission of guilt by the nation regarding slavery, and an effort to right the wrongs.

Yet, the progressive logic goes something like this: many of the men who signed the Declaration of Independence, including Thomas Jefferson who wrote it, owned slaves; slavery is evil; therefore, the Declaration of Independence is not valid because it was created by evil slave owners.

It's a sad reality that the left has a very hard time appreciating the universal merits of the Declaration of Independence because they're so hung up on the long-dead issue of slavery. And just to be clear — because people love to take things out of context — of course slavery was horrible. Yes, it is a total stain on our history. But defending the Declaration of Independence is not an effort to excuse any aspect of slavery.

Okay then, people might say, how could the Founders approve the phrase “All men are created equal," when many of them owned slaves? How did they miss that?

They didn't miss it. In fact, Thomas Jefferson included an anti-slavery passage in his first draft of the Declaration. The paragraph blasted King George for condoning slavery and preventing the American Colonies from passing legislation to ban slavery:

He has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating its most sacred rights to life and liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating and carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere... Determined to keep open a market where men should be bought and sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable commerce.

We don't say “execrable" that much anymore. It means, utterly detestable, abominable, abhorrent — basically very bad.

Jefferson was upset when Georgia and North Carolina threw up the biggest resistance to that paragraph. Ultimately, those two states twisted Congress' arm to delete the paragraph.

Still, how could a man calling the slave trade “execrable" be a slaveowner himself? No doubt about it, Jefferson was a flawed human being. He even had slaves from his estate in Virginia attending him while he was in Philadelphia, in the very apartment where he was writing the Declaration.

Many of the Southern Founders deeply believed in the principles of the Declaration yet couldn't bring themselves to upend the basis of their livelihood. By 1806, Virginia law made it more difficult for slave owners to free their slaves, especially if the owner had significant debts as Jefferson did.

At the same time, the Founders were not idiots. They understood the ramifications of signing on to the principles described so eloquently in the Declaration. They understood that logically, slavery would eventually have to be abolished in America because it was unjust, and the words they were committing to paper said as much. Remember, John Adams was on the committee of five that worked on the Declaration and he later said that the Revolution would never be complete until the slaves were free.

Also, the same generation that signed the Declaration started the process of abolition by banning the importation of slaves in 1807. Jefferson was President at the time and he urged Congress to pass the law.

America has an obvious road map that, as a nation, we're not consulting often enough.

The Declaration took a major step toward crippling the institution of slavery. It made the argument for the first time about the fundamental rights of all humans which completely undermined slavery. Planting the seeds to end slavery is not nearly commendable enough for leftist critics, but you can't discount the fact that the seeds were planted. It's like they started an expiration clock for slavery by approving the Declaration. Everything that happened almost a century later to end slavery, and then a century after that with the Civil Rights movement, flowed from the principles voiced in the Declaration.

Ironically for a movement that calls itself progressive, it is obsessed with retrying and judging the past over and over. Progressives consider this a better use of time than actually putting past abuses in the rearview and striving not to be defined by ancestral failures.

It can be very constructive to look to the past, but not when it's used to flog each other in the present. Examining history is useful in providing a road map for the future. And America has an obvious road map that, as a nation, we're not consulting often enough. But it's right there, the original, under glass. The ink is fading, but the words won't die — as long as we continue to discuss them.

'Good Morning Texas' gives exclusive preview of Mercury One museum

Screen shot from Good Morning Texas

Mercury One is holding a special exhibition over the 4th of July weekend, using hundreds of artifacts, documents and augmented reality experiences to showcase the history of slavery — including slavery today — and a path forward. Good Morning Texas reporter Paige McCoy Smith went through the exhibit for an exclusive preview with Mercury One's chief operating officer Michael Little on Tuesday.

Watch the video below to see the full preview.

Click here to purchase tickets to the museum (running from July 4 - 7).

Over the weekend, journalist Andy Ngo and several other apparent right-leaning people were brutally beaten by masked-gangs of Antifa protesters in Portland, Oregon. Short for "antifascist," Antifa claims to be fighting for social justice and tolerance — by forcibly and violently silencing anyone with opposing opinions. Ngo, who was kicked, punched, and sprayed with an unknown substance, is currently still in the hospital with a "brain bleed" as a result of the savage attack. Watch the video to get the details from Glenn.