Being conservative and Christian on campus

While there are social conservatives who are not religiously affiliated, many of us are.   For those of us who are Christians, faith in Jesus Christ and his message shapes our convictions and is fundamental to who we are.  That is why I was pleased and encouraged to find a vibrant Christian community when I arrived at Princeton University.  I joined and have remained active in the Princeton Evangelical Fellowship, which has been a Christian ministry on Princeton’s campus for over 75 years.

My involvement with PEF (as we call it) has been a great blessing in my life.  Its strong theological witness and commitment to Christian faith and the biblical worldview has helped me to grow in my spiritual life, to develop close ties with other Christians, and to strengthen my commitment to Christ.  PEF is actually like a family that supports and ministers to students in their spiritual and moral lives and shows them what it means to live in obedience to Christ.

Reactions to my membership in an Evangelical Christian fellowship have been mixed.  I’ve sometimes encountered the unfriendly question: “You’re a Christian?  How can you believe that?”  What this is, of course, is a prime opportunity to explain to a skeptic why I believe what I believe.  More often, my openly Christian faith is simply accepted without comment.  At Princeton there is such a thriving Christian community, with numerous and strong Evangelical fellowships and a flourishing Catholic ministry, that it is hardly strange to find someone who is involved with one.  The truth is that we are blessed at Princeton to have a thriving religious life in general on campus, with active Jewish, Muslim, and Mormon communities in addition to the Catholic and Protestant ministries.  I have not generally found there to be hostile or malicious attention paid to Christians, though there are times when Christian beliefs are ridiculed, which I will address in a moment.  By and large, unbelieving students have no problem interacting with students who are religious, and will treat them with civility and respect.

There are times, however, when Christianity, and religious beliefs in general, do come under attack.  When conversations about religious doctrine come up, some people will try to shut them down with the claim that such conversations are nothing but pretexts for attempts at conversion.  Other times, and this actually happens quite often, people will demand that students “keep religion out of it” and automatically discount any argument that has a basis in religious faith.  “You need faith to believe such things,” they say, and “faith-based arguments are no arguments at all.”  The funny thing is, of course, that every argument requires a certain kind of faith; everyone relies on faith at some level.  The faith could be placed in God, or the Bible, or another religious text, but it can also be placed in science, in the self, in the senses, in reason, and so on.  The demand to use “only empirically verifiable data” is a claim to faith in the ultimate measurability and sensibility of the physical world—and that the physical world is all that there is to reality.  (It is also a self-refuting claim, since it cannot itself be empirically verified!)  Of course empirical analysis has an important part to play in finding reasons for beliefs, but it should be recognized that it requires just as much faith as a well-grounded religious belief.

Some things that we, as Christians, believe to be revealed as true are at the same time knowable even apart from special revelation.   Some propositions that can be defended on theological grounds can also be shown to be true via historical, sociological, scientific, and philosophical investigation and argument.  The social conservative movement at Princeton has flourished because students have learned to complement and support theological arguments with arguments drawn from other intellectual disciplines.

At Princeton, the social conservative movement is truly ecumenical.  Most (though not all) members are active in religious communities.  However, a wide variety of faiths are represented in our ranks.  Early on, the movement was mainly Catholic, but in recent years the number of Evangelicals involved in the pro-life and pro-family causes on campus has risen dramatically.  We also have members who belong to the Eastern Orthodox and Mormon faiths.  There have always been a number of Jewish social conservatives at Princeton and recently some Muslim students have become involved.  All of us recognize that although we differ on important theological points, we can nevertheless come together to advance our shared beliefs in the sanctity of human life and the dignity of marriage and the family.  Across the historic lines of religion division, we realize that there are profound reasons, accessible to all, for honoring human life in all stages and conditions, and in promoting a vision of sexuality that does justice to the dignity of the human person.

For social conservatives, there are always challenges to be faced on a university campus.  And for faithful Christians and other religious students, there are some particular challenges.  We are minority (though not a small one at Princeton), and we have only a handful of faculty supporters.  Still, we are flourishing at Princeton.  Even many students and faculty who do not share our views have paid tribute to the depth of our commitment to rational discourse and the free and civil engagement of ideas.  The time when a socially conservative student at Princeton would feel it necessary to hide his or her views is long past.  It is more than possible for openly pro-life and pro-family students to thrive at Princeton.  If you need evidence, just consider these facts:  In the past two years, Princeton has produced four American Rhodes Scholars:  three have been outspoken social conservatives.  So are many winners of Princeton’s highest honors and accolades.  Princeton is a great place to be a social conservative—even a Christian one.

Jonathan Hwang is a senior at Princeton University, and is majoring in Politics with a certificate in Political Theory.  He is President of the Anscombe Society, Communications Chair of the Princeton Evangelical Fellowship, and a Junior Fellow with the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions.  More information can be found about the Anscombe Society at www.princeton.edu/~anscombe, and about the Princeton Evangelical Fellowship at www.princeton.edu/~pef.

Blaze TV hosts Glenn Beck , Chad Prather, and Steven Crowder weighed-in with similar but different thoughts on the fascism associated with canceling Dr. Seuss.

Glenn Beck can't help but wonder, "What is wrong with us?" in light of the Dr. Seuss books that have been cancelled due to "hurtful and wrong" illustrations — that takes America one step closer to complete insanity.

Chad Prather approached the issue from a comedic perspective, stating that "Dr. Seuss is dead and could not be reached for comment."

Steven Crowder explained that Dr. Seuss books were banned for being offensive and insensitive to some. So Steven decided to parody the six banned children's books with progressively titled and hilariously inappropriate versions.

Read the full story from TheBlaze News here.

'We DON'T destroy books'

"They are banning Dr. Seuss books. How much more do you need to see before all of America wakes up? ... This is fascism!" Glenn said. "We don't destroy books. What is wrong with us, America?" - Glenn Beck. Download the podcast here.

Chad Prather's comedic take on why Dr. Seuss got canceled

"Dr. Seuss is dead and could not be reached for comment'"- Chad Prather. Download the podcast here.

Dr. Seuss BANNING Bonanza! New Progressive Book Titles Revealed! 

In this 7+1 segment-- Crowder uncovers, new, unreleased Dr. Seuss titles that will be released in the near future (parody). Download the podcast here.

Use promo code BLAZE to save $10 on one year of BlazeTV.

Want more from BlazeTV?

To enjoy more Glenn, Chad, and Steven subscribe to BlazeTV - News & entertainment for people who love America.

"What's your climate credit score?" That's a question Americans may have to answer if the green global elites get their way.

While the media has distracted us with Orange Man Bad! and Russia, Russia, Russia!, the Left has been busy working on the fundamental transformation of America with a primary pressure point — YOUR money through YOUR bank. Democrats, forgetting the words of MLK, like to group people into categories. They judge you based on what skin color you have, your religion, occupation, your ideology, and now … your carbon footprint.

On his Wednesday night TV special this week, Glenn Beck exposes how they're now planning, not only to categorize you, but to give you a score. It'll determine everything for you: whether you can buy a home, get a new car, open a business … EVERYTHING. And if you don't bend the knee? You'll be blacklisted. But this isn't some far-off conspiracy theory. Multiple big U.S. banks are part of a private U.S. financial group enacting these policies now. It's here, and we're ALL at risk.

Watch the full episode below:

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Unlike the mainstream media, we at the "Glenn Beck Radio Program" decided to actually do the research and get to the bottom of CPAC's controversial stage design, which many on the Left have suggested was purposefully shaped like an obscure Nazi symbol. We got our answers straight from the source — and it's not what the media is suggesting.

American Conservative Union chairman Matt Schlapp joined Glenn on Wednesday to share the real story of the stage design, who designed it, and why he's taking legal options against those smearing the Conservative Political Action Conference's name seriously.

Matt told Glenn he'd never heard of the alleged Nazi insignia, noting that even a staff member who "studied anti-Semitism in college" did not recognize the obscure symbol. He went on to explain how the stage designing firm, Design Foundry, and Hyatt Hotels worked collaboratively with CPAC event organizers for months throughout the designing and construction of the stage. However, when pressured by the cancel culture mob on social media, both companies "ran for the tall grass."

"Both the Hyatt and [Design Foundry] looked to CPAC and said [they] had nothing to do with this stage. That's outrageous," Matt stated. "This whole process takes months ... everybody saw this. Everybody had to figure out how to construct this. Everybody had eyes on it from every angle. And nobody in that process ever raised their hand and said, 'Oh, you know, I took a European history class, and I noticed [that the stage design looked like a Nazi symbol.] Nobody."

Matt went on to add that, while CPAC expects attacks from the Left, they also have every intention of standing up for themselves, the conservative community, the Jewish community, and all the people who love America.

"We're fine with taking the hits. We always take the hits, it's part of being a prominent conservative group. We'll take the hits, but we won't let people lie," Matt said.

"I can't tell you how many people have called me during the course of this most tumultuous of years and said, at what point does the conservative community, do the 74 million Americans who voted for Donald Trump, do the people who love America, and think it's okay to read Dr. Seuss, and love Thomas Jefferson and Mount Rushmore, at what point do they start pushing back on the cancel culture? At what point do they say, this is a line you can't cross? I think we're at that line," he added.

"We called our conference, 'America Uncanceled.' The whole thing became about them canceling us. At what point do we not have the right to say,' you can't treat us this way'? You're disparaging us. You're destroying our reputation. You're destroying our ability to be respected members of our community. So, I'm taking your challenge of pursuing our legal options very seriously. And I think we have to go broader. We can't let these companies just follow the woke mob. We can't do it."

Watch the video clip below to catch more of the conversation:

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

CNN reporter Jim Acosta was confronted at CPAC by The Federalist reporter David Marcus with a valid question: "When are you guys going to start covering Cuomo?" His answer — or, really, lack of an answer — perfectly demonstrates why he was earlier surrounded by CPAC attendees chanting, "CNN sucks!"

On the "Glenn Beck Radio Program" Tuesday, Glenn and producer Stu Burguiere react to a video clip of the exchange with Acosta, as well as the mainstream media's double standards when it comes to Democratic New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo.

Watch the video below:

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.