In a free society, why should only one political side dominate the media? Yet social media, the networks, the cable channels, newspapers, and satellite programming are all completely dominated by the left. Recently, we saw quite a kerfuffle when DirecTV, owned by giant AT&T, decided to ignominiously drop Newsmax-TV from their lineup.

AT&T did the same a year ago to a much smaller conservative outlet, One America News (OAN). Why does it seem that the corporate decisions of companies like AT&T always push in only one political direction?

Numerous leaders have spoken against this censorship by the left against Newsmax, including:

• Dennis Prager
• Mike Huckabee
• Florida Governor Ron DeSantis
• Speaker of the U.S. House Kevin McCarthy
• U.S. Senator Ted Cruz
• Actors Jon Voight and Kevin Sorbo

Many are calling for a boycott of DirectTV. Others are calling for Congressional hearings because of the potential impact on our political debate.

My big question is: Why must the left strangle what few conservative voices are heard on the other side?

When the founders of America produced the Constitution, a frequent criticism was that it did not spell out specific rights. So the founders agreed that if the Constitution were to be ratified, they would attach a Bill of Rights. These were the first Ten Amendments to the Constitution.

The First Amendment deals, first and foremost, with freedom of religion. But other rights enumerated there include the freedom of the press and free speech.

AT&T is a corporation. It is not a part of the government. But these companies wield a great deal of political power. Why are they using it to essentially stifle free speech?

There is no question that the mainstream media, the legacy media, the major networks, and so on present news from a skewed and biased perspective. National Public Radio (NPR), which receives government funding, has a program called “All Things Considered.” I remember whenever I would hear that title, I would think to myself—“Yeah, All Things Considered, from a leftist perspective.”

The founders envisioned a free society with a robust and free press. But today’s mainstream media is dominated by the leftist perspective, with only Fox News offering a significant counterweight.

Thankfully, even under dire conditions, there is always an alternative media. In the days of the American War for Independence, there were Committees of Correspondence, disseminating information to the 13 colonies contrary to royal-controlled sources.

There are different skirmishes in the battle over free speech, and some speech of more eternal significance than others. But let me use an analogy from the history of Christianity.

When the Apostles of Jesus set out to proclaim His saving message in first century Rome, the overwhelming power of the state was dead set against them. But God used them to eventually win over many converts. One of the ways was through letters that were written largely in prison.

Ultimately, there is a battle between good and evil, and the proclamation of the truth is often at the heart of that battle.

As the hymn “Once to Every Man and Nation” puts it, “Though the cause of evil prosper, yet the truth alone is strong. Though [truth’s] portion be the scaffold, and upon the throne be wrong, yet that scaffold sways the future.” God is watching and making sure that truth will prevail, which it will—even if for a time, times, and a half a time, it suffers setbacks.

Of course, this is not to equate a commercial network like Newsmax with the Gospel. But it’s beyond question that elite interests often suppress truth wherever it comes from. I’m grateful to live at a time where there is readily available an alternative media. I’m sure if some elitists in our culture had their way, they would over-regulate the Internet, talk radio, satellite programming, Christian broadcasting, and so on, to make them essentially toothless—as sometimes happens in other countries.

When Elon Musk bought Twitter late last year, he suffered the ire of many on the left, as he opened up the Twitter files and exposed a great deal of censorship against conservative speech. Musk tweeted in late November: “This is a battle for the future of civilization. If free speech is lost even in America, tyranny is all that lies ahead.”

Dr. Richard Land, president emeritus of the Southern Evangelical Seminary, said of the left’s censorship of conservative speech in general: “They want to enforce conformity, they do not want to hear viewpoints, they want to stifle viewpoints that they disagree with. They’re acting like fascist Blackshirts….They can only get away with taking away our rights if we let them.”

Indeed, must the left strangle the flow of information? As the Bible notes: “The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.”

This article was originally published at Jerrynewcombe.com.

We are often led to believe that it is the Christian thing to do to keep the southern border open. But is that really the case? This question is all the more acute in our nation’s battle against the spread of COVID-19.

President Biden is acting as if there were one standard in dealing with COVID for law-abiding American citizens and another standard for those who break the law—as in the example of the illegal aliens streaming through our porous southern border. Gary Bauer in his End of Day Report (7/29/21) notes:

“While the CDC is forcing vaccinated Americans to mask up again, and the big teachers’ unions are suggesting our schools might not reopen in the fall, Biden is leaving our southern border wide open. Six thousand illegal aliens are pouring across the southern border each and every day….These migrants are untested. They’re unvaccinated.  Many are refusing to take the COVID vaccines. And many are infected with COVID.” Furthermore, he reports that at least 50,000 migrants have been released throughout the country. And outbreaks of COVID are being reported in border detention facilities.

Dr. William Donohue, the president of the Catholic League, wrote an open letter in late July to the Secretary for Health and Human Services, Xavier Becerra: “According to recent whistleblowers, children living in HHS migrant shelters are living in subhuman conditions….After enduring a long, arduous journey, these children are sent to camps where Covid is running rampant. In the girls’ tents, lice is left untreated while the boys turn riotous because of the poor conditions they are forced to endure during their detainment at HHS facilities.”

Meanwhile, Governor Greg Abbot of Texas is trying to close the border—in part to stop the spread of COVID—and yet he’s getting direct resistance from the Biden administration. The Associated Press (7/30/21) reports:

“The Biden administration sued Texas…to prevent state troopers from stopping vehicles carrying migrants on grounds that they may spread COVID-19, warning that the practice would exacerbate problems amid high levels of crossings on the state’s border with Mexico.”

Vice President Kamala Harris, tasked by Biden to head the border crisis, says we have to address the “root causes” of why these people are coming before we can seal the borders. One may well ask, “Why is that our burden?” And besides, that could take forever. It’s like saying that before we can administer first aid to a shooting victim, we have to solve the crime first.

The founders of America made it clear when they created the Constitution that their goals were to “establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.” Clearly, Biden’s open borders violate many of these key goals.

Dr. Richard Land, president emeritus of Southern Evangelical Seminary, says,

“Open borders is national suicide. Polls show us that 170 million people in Latin America would like to come to the United States. I don’t blame them, if I lived in one of those countries, I’d want to come here too. But we cannot absorb 170 million people.”

Such an overrun of our country could ultimately cause a collapse into anarchy.

Dave Kubal, CEO and president of Intercessors for America—a group dedicated to praying for our country—notes, “We are a nation of immigrants….I completely believe in an immigration system, but it has to be legal…94% of those people that come across the border, don’t show up for their amnesty case, and so they’re just living illegally in the United States of America.”

But aren’t open borders compassionate? Gary Bauer once told me, “To suggest that because God loves all human beings including migrants, that the United States must open its borders and allow literally millions of people to walk into the country would mean that God was endorsing the end of America as we know it. This country can’t support and pay for millions of millions of people coming into the country.”

But, again, aren’t open borders the Christian position? In his book, We Will Not Be Silenced, Pastor Erwin Lutzer writes, “I reject the notion that those of us who believe in secure borders are racist and lack compassion….without enforced border control, we have in effect, lost our country. The long-term consequences are devastating.”

The left often chafes at the idea of securing the border—although I’m sure these same people lock their own doors at night. How can our country be safe and secure if the borders are wide open? Isn’t it more compassionate to keep the borders closed, especially at a time when many illegal aliens are dying or getting sick in the migration—and especially as we are experiencing new and perilous strains of COVID?

Written Chris Woodward

A longtime Christian leader says the issue of homosexuality and homosexual marriage are acting like a “truth serum” for evangelical churches.

“Either you believe the Bible and you do not accept the morality of homosexual behavior, and you do not accept homosexual marriage,” Dr. Richard Land said Monday in an AFR Talk radio interview. “Or you have taken a position that you’re going to decide which parts of the Bible you’re going to accept, and which parts you’re not going to accept,” Land said, “and you accept homosexual behavior as moral and you accept homosexual marriage.”

Land made his comments Monday on American Family Radio’s “Sandy Rios in the Morning.”

Jackson and Land were discussing Weatherly Baptist Church in Alabama, whose pastor recently announced his support of homosexual “marriage” after a member of the church staff officiated at a homosexual wedding.

The church’s website describes the church as “inclusive,” which sometimes refers to a church that holds liberal views on homosexuality – and excludes more traditional ones.

Land is currently president of Southern Evangelical Seminary in North Carolina after leading the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, a part of the Southern Baptist Convention.

A lot of churches and institutions that have historically been evangelical and Bible-believing have drifted under the influence of the culture, Land claimed.

“Unfortunately, instead of being salt and light, they have been salted and lit by the culture,” he told the radio host. “They are now going to have the truth about them revealed by the way they respond to this issue.”

Land described the issue of homosexuality as a “truth serum.” That’s because it’s forcing churches to deal with the issue, and how the Bible addresses it, after churches have ignored it for many years, he said.

Some churches claim that the Bible isn’t clear on homosexuality since Jesus never denounced it in the New Testament.

“[Jesus] also said, ‘What God hath joined together, let no man put asunder,” Land pointed out. “So a lot of evangelical churches have already ignored what the Bible teaches about divorce. So why would they not ignore what the Bible teaches about homosexual marriage?”

Originally posted at OneNewsNow.com.