Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) warned militant vaccine advocates would get more and more aggressive with their tactics during an appearance on FNC’s “Hannity” on Friday.
The Kentucky Republican lawmaker said children were a target of those efforts.
“You know, these people won’t be happy until they get your newborn,” he said. “I mean, they really want to get your newborn inoculated before they leave the hospital. They’re going to restrict certain things. You know, they’re not going to dispense schooling. But they’re also going to try to get them before they leave the hospital. I think it’s outrageous and ignores the science. It’s all based on this misreading of the science that says we haven’t been vaccinating enough and that we’re under-vaccinated. The truth from the CDC is quite the opposite. Over age 75, 97% of people have voluntarily chosen to be vaccinated. Between ages 64 and 75, 99% of people have been vaccinated.”
“So we are voluntarily accepting this,” Paul added. “Most people at high risk have been vaccinated. This is a disease of the elderly, not of children. And the thing is, is that he’s not obeying science. He’s sort of granting his impulse to authoritarianism. His default position is always, how can I control people? How can I regulate people? But I can tell you — he’s not going to be too happy with the Paul family Christmas. We have 57 for Christmas, no vaccine passport. The only requirement is that you have read and understand the Constitution.”
Americans are awakening to the call to protect children from being sexualized. Following the national news coverage of local school board meetings in Virginia, many U.S. citizens are shocked to learn that today’s elementary school lessons include material that would make most adults blush.
Whether or not you are a parent, it is stomach-turning to learn that our taxpayer dollars have been used to make sexually explicit materials available in school libraries and attendance to pornographic sex-ed lessons mandatory.
The alarm rang even louder when we found out that government officials were willing to assign weighty terms like “terrorist” to parents wanting to protect their children from being sexualized. When a government is willing to use labels that pack the capacity to bypass our liberties while giving tremendous latitude to authorities to investigate a supposed threat to the homeland, it begs the question: Why is propagating sexual material to children so valuable to the government? Why do these officials remain recalcitrant to the rebukes from their historically favored voting block? Most importantly, where does this slippery slope end?
Until this past month, most of the public could only speculate where the institutionalized sexualization of our children would lead. In case you missed it, in November, we got a peek into some of the current academic discourse when a professor from Old Dominion University in Virginia, Allyn Walker, suggested that having sexual desire for children isn’t wrong.
Rather, Walker suggested we should use a less stigmatizing term such as “Minor-Attracted People” (MAPS) instead of the word “pedophile.”
As someone who worked in a clinical setting with people who were sexually abused and some who went on to act out that same abuse, I know the importance of providing a place to talk without affirming thoughts that could prove detrimental to a child. This is a boundary that should not be moved, not even in theory. It is troubling that any serious academic institution would be willing to diminish, even in terminology, the horror that should be associated with any expression of violation against a child.
Public outrage over the comments resulted in Walker’s resignation. Pressure needs to remain high on any institution willing to relax the stigma of pedophilia and lead us down the slope to its acceptance.
Although Walker’s story might be new to the public at large, it’s important to keep in mind that the road to normalizing pedophilia is, unfortunately, not a new discourse in the institutions of higher education. For years, many have turned a blind eye to the pedophilia of scholars like Michael Foucault, who had exploits with minors in Northern Africa and was also a proponent of lowering the age of consent.
And then there was Dr. John Money, the academic psychiatrist whose work added to the current conceptualization of gender roles and transgender theory, which influenced diagnostic terms in the manual for mental disorders (DSM). Let’s not forget his therapeutic methods, which are best known in the case of David Reimer and his brother.
Money’s supposed clinical acumen involved simulating and photographing sex acts with the brothers. At Money’s recommendation, David’s family was counseled to raise him as a girl and “reassign” his sex, but David never felt like a girl and later chose to live with his biological sex. In the end, he committed suicide. By all accounts, this decision was influenced by the early therapeutic endeavors of Money.
If no other moral standard exists within the research community, at minimum, one would hope that academics could hold fast to the edicts contained in the Nuremberg Code or the Research Act of 1974, which outline the conduct for a humane class of researchers engaged in the scientific method for the betterment of society. Both include special protections for children. Instead, what we’ve learned is that unbridled curiosity has mostly remained unchecked in the ivory tower, and some scientists are exploring lines of inquiry about children that should remain unthinkable.
By the way, this is not a uniquely North American trend down the slope to pedophilia. More recently, it was revealed that the German government had doled out funding to the Kentler Project. This study began in the 1970s with a 30-year agenda that placed homeless children with known pedophiles. Helmut Kentler, the chief scientific investigator of the project, held that sexual interactions between children and adults were benign and perhaps even beneficial to the homeless youth.
Thankfully, in this recent debacle with the defamed professor, we have one instance where the slide down the slope was quickly stopped. Let this case serve as a wake-up call and an alarm that keeps us awake. This kind of discourse must not germinate in the darkness of academic silos. It must be called out into the light.
Dr. Jennifer Bauwens serves as Director of the Center for Family Studies at Family Research Council. In her role, she researches and advocates for policies that will best serve the health and well-being of families and communities.
Whatever you are feeling at any given moment, God already knows it. You might as well talk to the Lord about it openly and honestly.
“But there are certain things I could never express to God.” Why not? After all, the Lord knows exactly what makes you tick, and precisely why you feel the way you do in any given circumstance.
“But I am mad at God.” OK. He can handle your anger. Be open about it. Simply tell God why you are mad at Him. You might be surprised how you feel once you get that off your chest.
“But I don’t understand why God allows so much suffering.” It is very natural for you to feel that way. The Lord hears that complaint all the time because multitudes of people struggle with this issue. Have you tried talking to God about it? There is more to the story than first meets the eye.
In fact, Jesus endured greater agony than any man has ever had to endure. Seven hundred years before Christ was born in Bethlehem, Isaiah prophesied that the coming Messiah would experience tremendous suffering. “But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him” (Isaiah 53:5).
God did not leave us alone in our suffering. Instead, Jesus entered our broken world in order to redeem us and ultimately bring us into His eternal kingdom where “there will be no more death or sorrow or crying or pain” (Revelation 21:4).
“Since we have a great high priest who has gone through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold firmly to the faith we profess. For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are — yet was without sin” (Hebrews 4:14-15).
Remind yourself everyday that the Creator of the Universe (Col. 1:16) was willing to endure excruciating pain in order to pay for your sins on the cross so that you could have a personal relationship with God that will last forever.
If you are a Christian, you are essentially at the beginning of your eternal relationship with the Lord. Even if you have known Christ for decades, it is only the tip of the iceberg. There are many things we will not understand until we get to Heaven. For now, God has our back, even when we feel like He has forgotten us.
“Therefore we do not lose heart. Though outwardly we are wasting away, yet inwardly we are being renewed day by day. For our light and momentary troubles are achieving for us an eternal glory that far outweighs them all. So, we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen. For what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal” (2 Cor. 4:16-18).
In the meantime, you never have to pretend with God. “Trust in Him at all times, O people; pour out your hearts to Him, for God is our refuge” (Psalm 62:8).
David often poured out his heart to God.
“How long, O Lord? Will you forget me forever? How long will you hide your face from me? How long must I wrestle with my thoughts and every day have sorrow in my heart? How long will my enemy triumph over me?” (Psalm 13:1,2).
David also expressed these honest feelings:
“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me? Why are you so far from saving me, so far from the words of my groaning? O my God, I cry out by day, but you do not answer, by night, and am not silent” (Psalm 22:1-2).
David’s intense exasperation foreshadowed the anguished cry our Savior would exclaim on the cross: “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46).
No one has ever suffered the kind of all-consuming affliction Christ endured when our Savior bore the weight of the sins of the world (1 John 2:2). You will never find a more committed, loving and faithful friend than Jesus. Your friendship with Christ will grow stronger as you talk to the Lord often in prayer and listen to God speak to you daily through His Word.
Hudson Taylor said, “Do not have your concert first, and then tune your instrument afterwards. Begin the day with the Word of God and prayer and get first of all into harmony with Him.”
Billy Graham said, “The Christian life is not a constant high. I have moments of deep discouragement. I have to go to God in prayer with tears in my eyes, and say, ‘O God, forgive me,’ or ‘Help me.’”
Corrie ten Boom helped many Jewish people escape from the Nazis during the Holocaust in World War II by hiding them in her home. Corrie was arrested and sent to a concentration camp. She said, “Any concern too small to be turned into a prayer is too small to be made into a burden.” Corrie did not pretend with God. She poured out her heart to Jesus in the midst of her hardship.
The primary way God will speak to you is through His Word. As you memorize Scripture and meditate upon passages in the Bible, the Holy Spirit will reveal insights to you, especially in your time of distress.
“Call upon me in the day of trouble; I will deliver you, and you will honor me” (Psalm 50:15). And as you lay out your burdens before the Lord, you can always tell God exactly how you are feeling.
One of the many benefits of knowing Christ as Savior is that you never have to pretend with God. And the more you express your honest feelings to God, the more your heart will be comforted by the Lord’s amazing grace and unfailing love.
Dan Delzell is the pastor of Redeemer Lutheran Church in Papillion, Nebraska.
A “Black Lives Matter” banner hangs on the fence erected around the White House to protest the death of George Floyd in Washington, D.C., on June 10, 2020. | OLIVIER DOULIERY/AFP via Getty Images
The people of God are in many ways also the people of the state. The issues that permeate dialogue in the political realm also make their way inside the walls of the church, and people of faith are every bit as tempted to divide along political lines as their nonreligious counterparts. Ideas connected with critical race theory are currently at the forefront of this divide.
Before examining the church’s criticism of critical race theory, a proper definition is vital. Legal scholars at the UCLA School of Public Affairs define critical race theory as the idea that “racism is engrained in the fabric and system of … American society. The individual racist need not exist to note that institutional racism is pervasive in the dominant culture. This is the analytical lens that CRT uses in examining existing power structures.”
Critical race theory has garnered a bevy of commentary from many within the Christian community. Gerald McDermott, Anglican priest and author of Race and Covenant: Recovering the Religious Roots for American Reconciliation, wholly denounces critical race theory, calling it a “repudiation” of “traditional liberal political theory.”
On the other hand, figures like David French see CRT as useful tools, as long as one acknowledges their innate problems. “Critical race theory,” French opines, “has on occasion helped me to identify the reality and effects of oppression … [b]ut we cannot lose sight of the fact that it’s ultimately Christ who ushers in the new creation.”
McDermott and French are far from the only voices in the space — the interested reader can read hundreds of Christian perspectives on the subject from Jemar Tisby to Voddie Baucham. But, amidst the plethora of perspectives, the practical question remains: How are Christians to continue to live in community alongside one another even as they wrestle with the latest controversy?
Opinions on critical race theory are rarely what truly divide Christians. It’s our fear that those with differing opinions on this issue are not merely mistaken, but violating scriptural essentials. This sense is dangerous, says Dr. Carl Trueman, theologian and author of The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self. Trueman, a professor of biblical and religious studies at Grove City College, exhorts Christians to first take their discussions on issues like CRT out of the world of social media and engage with each other on platforms that allow for real discourse.
“Do it person to person, or via substantial op-eds and articles, not via Twitter,” he exhorted, noting the tendency of online arenas to unnecessarily raise the temperature of discussions.
While Trueman’s exhortations to have debates in person are well worth considering, the non-electronic medium of debate has admittedly proven no guarantee of charity when it comes to subjects like CRT. For example, Southern Baptist Convention theologian Russell Moore alleged that dialogue on race relations in the convention, even within members’ own homes, was marked by “vicious guerilla tactics” and that those who called for increased racial diversity in the convention were hit with “psychological terror.”
While the temperature in the convention was already high before the contentious June 2021 meeting — several majority-black churches left in late 2020, and Beth Moore made her exit in March — Russell Moore’s letter emerged in February 2020. The debate was already there, it was already predicated on issues like critical race theory, and it had already turned toxic before the convention splintered around these issues. This splintering wasn’t confined to the Twitterverse; it involved real theological alliances and real consequences for the SBC.
If one only looks at groups like the Southern Baptist Convention to guide their perspective, the church’s response to critical race theory resembles the fictitious worshippers in Aleksandr Kuprin’s short story Anathema: “A mournful wail, tender angelic voices giving the response, ‘Anathema.’”
Such examples, says Trueman, are not to characterize the Christian community. While Trueman has many critiques of CRT, he places the divide over critical race theory as distinct from the church’s true purpose. Trueman mused: “What is the church for?” He explained that the goal of the religious community is not ultimately to solve political issues but to grow closer to the God we are called to worship.
The church’s debate around critical race theory, like any other political controversy, is at its heart a clash of two systems of thought. Within that clash are well-meaning Christians on both sides who are striving earnestly and honestly to grow closer to God. Some of them are wrong in their means of doing so, some deeply so. But the goal of the Christian community isn’t merely to understand the truth. It’s also to unite a community around it. Christians, including myself, have missed the mark of charity countless times. However, our imperfect reactions to the current moment do not negate our obligation to imitate our perfect Savior as best as we can.
Trueman’s words in Rise and Triumph describe the path ahead with refreshing clarity: “Every age has had its darkness and its dangers. The task of the Christian is not to whine about the moment in which he or she lives but to understand its problems and respond appropriately to them.”
He is right. As the church approaches Advent and commemorates the birth of our Lord, it behooves the church to realize once more the implications of the Incarnation. Christ did not come to earth merely to wage war against the forces of evil on this earth, but to instruct his Church as to the wisest way to fight that war. The church cannot successfully fight to advance the Kingdom while simultaneously anathematizing CRT and the Christians who see its benefits.
These discussions must happen, and we should strive to have them on platforms that allow for the civility and humanity that the people of God are called to. Have these discussions out — the debate is too big to sweep either side under the rug. Allowing true churches to break over issues like critical race theory is not only a patently unwise move but a disservice to the power of Christ, its one true Foundation.
Isaac Willour is a journalist for The College Fix and an editor for the Grove City College Journal of Law & Public Policy.
Friday on FNC’s “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) explained his state’s new policy aimed at preventing the Biden administration from surreptitiously placing illegal immigrants in Florida.
The Sunshine State governor said such measures were justified because they prioritize his own citizens over those here illegally.
“For one, any of these contractors that are facilitating Biden’s illegal policies by bringing people into Florida, oftentimes flying in at two o’clock in the morning with no notice to the State, anyone who is doing that forfeits the ability to have contracts with State and local government in the State of Florida, and they are going to be responsible for providing restitution to the State of Florida for every single person that they bring because when they dump somebody, a lot of costs end up being borne by the State in the future, whether that’s education, healthcare, whether that’s the criminal justice system,” DeSantis said. “Unfortunately, we had somebody brought from Biden that murdered somebody in Jacksonville just a few weeks ago, and so we’re very concerned about doing that, and we want to basically say, this is not the right decision to be making to be facilitating, which is basically an illegal human smuggling operation.”
“We are also saying to some of the institutions in Florida like non-profits, we’re not going to be giving license to folks who are actively helping Biden do this,” he added. “And so, we want people focusing on our own citizens. A lot of people do a lot of great work. We’ve got a lot of people in our state that need help, and we can’t just have people who are from foreign countries displacing the needs of our own people.”
The first people to deconstruct their faith were not young people in America — they weren’t people dissatisfied with American Christianity. The first people to deconstruct their faith were people in the Garden of Eden — they were people dissatisfied with God.
Adam and Eve are the first people to deconstruct their faith.
People deconstruct their faith when they’re dissatisfied with their faith — when they’re dissatisfied with God: and it always ends in disaster.
People who deconstruct their faith destroy their faith, and they destroy their souls.
Deconstruction is essentially just a fancy word for doubt. People who deconstruct their faith are people who doubt their faith. When people say they’re deconstructing their faith, they’re just using a pretentious phrase to say they’re doubting what God says in the Bible.
Actually, it’s worse than that. People who deconstruct their faith are not merely doubting or struggling with their faith: they are dismissing their faith. They are dismissing biblical truth.
Deconstructionism is an approach to critiquing literature and beliefs. People who deconstruct their faith critique the Bible (literature) and beliefs (Christian theology).
Specifically, deconstructionism is a postmodern concept that expands on Nietzsche’s theory that there’s “there is no such thing as facts, just interpretations.”
Therefore people who deconstruct their faith believe there is no such thing as biblical truth, just interpretations — interpretations mostly dominated by supposedly racist, misogynistic, homophobic and transphobic white people who — according to deconstructionists — preach American or Western Christianity as the only correct interpretation or version of Christianity.
In postmodernism, deconstructionism is a strategic approach to critiquing and attacking Western philosophy as an oppressive philosophy designed by Europeans to manipulate people into accepting harmful ideas as truth.
In the same way, people who deconstruct their faith critique and attack (Western) Christianity as an oppressive theology designed by Europeans to manipulate people into accepting harmful ideas as Biblical truth.
This is why deconstructionists tend to call themselves ex-evangelicals instead of ex-Christians. They believe evangelicalism is Western Christianity — not real Christianity.
So just as postmodernists attack Western philosophy, people who deconstruct their faith primarily attack (Western) Christianity.
Deconstructionists believe Christianity — or specifically, Western Christianity — was constructed by ignorant and oppressive white men — not God. Therefore according to them, (Western) Christianity needs to be deconstructed or destroyed.
For that reason, when people say they’re deconstructing their faith, it means they’re critiquing and attacking doctrines they believe have been constructed to harm others — doctrines like the inspiration and inerrancy of the Bible, the divinity and exclusivity of Jesus, complementarianism, Christian sexual ethics, justice and more.
Meaning, when people say they’re deconstructing their faith — they’re simply repeating what Satan said to Eve in the Garden of Eden: “Did God actually say…?”
When Satan said to Eve, “Did God actually say, ‘You shall not eat of any tree in the garden?’” (Genesis 3:1), he was attempting to deconstruct her faith. He was craftily suggesting Eve had misinterpreted God’s words.
Then when Eve said to him God said they shouldn’t eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil or they’ll die — Satan suggested God was oppressing and manipulating Adam and Eve in order to keep them from becoming enlightened or “woke” about his harmful lies about the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
Satan said: “You will not surely die. For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil” (Genesis 3:4-5).
Does that sound familiar? Deconstructionists suggest we Christians do not want other Christians to deconstruct their faith because we don’t want them to become enlightened or woke to Western Christianity’s supposedly harmful interpretations and lies about sexuality, social justice, salvation and Scripture.
Deconstructionists, clearly, haven’t stumbled on a new phenomenon — Satan is the founder of deconstructionism. Adam and Eve became the first people to deconstruct their faith when they became dissatisfied with God’s words and believed Satan’s lies.
Nevertheless, deconstructionists acknowledge they haven’t developed a new concept. Actually, some deconstructionists suggest they are the new version of the Reformers. They claim when the Reformers protested Catholicism, they were deconstructing their faith.
That, of course, is a ridiculous lie. The Reformers didn’t deconstruct Christianity, they did the opposite. They didn’t reject the authority of the Bible — they returned to the authority of the Bible.
People who deconstruct their faith conform to this world. People who reform their faith, however, are transformed by the renewal of their mind by discerning the will of God (Romans 12: 2).
A Reforming faith trusts in Scripture alone. However, a deconstructing faith distrusts Scripture.
The people deconstructing their faith are nothing like the Reformers from the 1500s. However, they are a lot like Rob Bell and the emerging church from 15 years ago.
A little over 15 years ago in 2005, Rob Bell published his book, Velvet Elvis: Repainting the Christian Faith. In the book, Rob Bell said:
“It’s possible to make the Bible say whatever we want to, isn’t it? … The moment God is figured out with nice neat lines and definitions, we are no longer dealing with God … What’s disturbing, then, is when people talk more about hell after this life than they do about hell here and now. As a Christian I want to do what I can to resist Hell coming to earth: Poverty, injustice, suffering — they’re all hells on earth and as Christians we oppose them with all of our energies.”
At the time, young Christians weren’t deconstructing their faith on TikTok. They were deconstructing their faith through the emerging church, a postmodern movement led by people like Rob Bell and Brian McLaren.
But the connections between the emerging church and the people deconstructing their faith today are less interesting than the connections between the evangelical movements that attracted young people to the emerging church and attract young people to deconstruct their faith today.
Just as the seeker-sensitive movement made many professing Christians vulnerable to the emerging church 15 years ago, the social justice movement today is making many professing Christians vulnerable to deconstructing their faith.
The evangelical seeker-sensitive movement attempted to attract young people to churches by elevating culture over Scripture. However, elevating culture over Scripture eventually introduced many young Christians to postmodernism and the emerging church.
In the same way, the evangelical social justice movement today attempts to attract many people to churches by elevating our culture’s positions on racism and justice over Scripture. Naturally, that is introducing postmodernism and deconstructionism to Christians.
It’s interesting, some of the evangelical leaders preaching critical race theory — race-centric postmodernism — are some of the evangelical leaders warning Christians against deconstructionism.
For instance, Matt Chandler and The Gospel Coalition, who have been influenced by critical race theory for several years, have recently warned people against deconstructionism.
I’m grateful they’re warning people against deconstruction. However, their lack of self-awareness is frustrating. You can’t tell a generation of young people in churches that Christians have it all wrong on racism and justice and then expect them to not believe you.
Evangelical leaders who preach postmodernism shouldn’t be surprised when their listeners respond with deconstructionism.
For years, some evangelical leaders have suggested the Bible isn’t sufficient to address racism and justice — they’ve suggested (Western) Christianity and white Christians are racist, but they apparently didn’t expect anyone to believe them.
I know several people — including Reformed Christians — who deconstructed their faith and became apostates after they embraced critical race theory. And many of us have become familiar with stories of influential Christians deconstructing their faith. Some of these influential Christians were Christian rappers who have recently deconstructed their faith and denounced Biblical Christianity. One of these rappers actually released a song on deconstructionism.
When I mentioned on social media earlier this week that I was writing an article on the connections between critical race theory and deconstructionism, one person replied saying some evangelical leaders’ reactions to the George Floyd incident last year prompted him to flirt with deconstructionism. He said:
“I myself did start to deconstruct my faith due to getting heavily mixed signals about how to approach racism and anti-racism in the wake of the tragic George Floyd case.”
Preaching critical race theory while warning against deconstructionism is like preaching the Gospel while warning against repentance.
It’s absurd. Just as repentance is the appropriate response to the Gospel, deconstructionism is the appropriate response to postmodern ideologies like critical race theory.
If you do not want people to act like postmodernists, do not preach postmodernism.
Nevertheless, some of you might be struggling believers who are tempted to deconstruct your faith. You might be tempted to believe Western Christianity is constructed by Europeans. But that’s not true. Western Christianity is identical to Christianity all over the world.
I grew up in African churches. And I assure you, just as Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever — He’s the same for Western Christians, African Christians and all Christians around the world.
Christianity — real Christianity — is the same in West Africa as it is in North America. In fact, there’s no such thing as Western Christianity or African Christianity. There aren’t different kinds of Christ, so there aren’t different kinds of Christianity.
Around the world, real Christians preach the same Gospel in different languages (Revelation 7:9-10).
So do not deconstruct your faith, depend on grace — depend on the grace of God. Deconstructing your faith will not save you from the penalty or pain of your sins. Only the justifying death and resurrection of Jesus Christ — received by persevering faith can do that.
Adam and Eve deconstructed their faith, and it resulted in disaster. If you deconstruct your faith, it will result in disaster for you too. So do not deconstruct your faith. Instead, ask God to decrease your doubts and increase your faith. Say to Christ what one person said to him many years ago, “I believe, help my unbelief! (Mark 9:24).”
Samuel Sey is a Ghanaian-Canadian who lives in Brampton, a city just outside of Toronto. He is committed to addressing racial, cultural, and political issues with biblical theology, and always attempts to be quick to listen and slow to speak.
YEREVAN, Armenia (AP) – Armenia’s parliament approved a law Friday that would allow employers to fire workers who refuse to provide proof of vaccination against COVID-19 or a negative test result.
Russia’s ex-Soviet neighbour has some of the lowest vaccination rates in the Caucasus region.
The new rule follows an August order by the ministry of health which required Armenian citizens to provide their employers with proof of vaccination or a negative PCR test every two weeks or face a fine.
“If the employee is not providing a vaccination certificate, or a negative COVID-19 test, the employer is given the right to turn the employee away from the workplace, suspend their pay and fire the employee, if they are off for 10 working days because of that,” Deputy Minister of Labour and Social Affairs Ruben Sargsyan said Friday.
New Zealand Prime Minister Admits She Wants to Create Two Classes of Citizens Based on Vaccination Status https://t.co/pva9LWiCL0
The new vaccination requirement will not apply to the country’s president, prime minister, members of parliament or the National Assembly, the ombudsman, judges of the Constitutional Court and a number of other officials, Sargsyan said.
“This exception was established for the reason that these positions are either (institutional), as in the case of parliamentary deputies, or their holders are appointed in accordance with the Constitution,” he said.
Armenia began its mass vaccination campaign in April with authorities planning to inoculate 700,000 of the country’s 2.9 million citizens by the end of the year. However, only 516,989 citizens had been fully vaccinated by Dec. 6.
In Armenia, citizens can choose to get vaccinated with the Sputnik V, AstraZeneca, CoronaVac, Sinopharm, or Moderna jabs.
Segregation: Austria to Keep Unvaccinated Locked Down as Jabbed Given ‘Freedom’ Date https://t.co/eJhc2CQXit
During an interview with Colorado Public Radio on Thursday released on Friday, Colorado Gov. Jared Polis (D) defended his refusal to reinstitute a state mask mandate by saying that the coronavirus “emergency is over” and state public health officials don’t “get to tell people what to wear.” Polis also argued that because vaccines have been available for a long time, “People who want to be protected are.” And that “If you haven’t been vaccinated, that’s your choice. I respect that. But it’s your fault when you’re in the hospital with COVID.”
Polis said, “Well, you know, our top goal is always to follow the science, and there was a time when there was no vaccine and masks were all we had and we needed to wear them and Colorado stepped up, which was great. The truth is, we now have highly effective vaccines that work far better than masks, I mean, not even close. If you wear a mask, it does decrease your risk of getting COVID, and that’s a good thing to do indoors around others. But if you get COVID and you are still unvaccinated, the case is just as bad as if you were not wearing a mask. So, it’s a different place. Everybody’s had more than enough opportunity to get vaccinated, I think. … At this point, if you haven’t been vaccinated, it’s really your own darn fault.”
He added that he sees the vaccines as “the end of the medical emergency, frankly. People who want to be protected are.”
Polis further stated that having a mask mandate is “the kind of thing that I never — I didn’t hesitate to do in the emergency. The emergency is over. So, you know, public health doesn’t get to tell people what to wear. I mean, that’s just not their job. I think it’s great to wear a mask indoors around others. But when you’re not in an emergency situation — public health would say to always wear a mask. Because it always decreases flu, it always decreases anything. But that’s not something that you require. You don’t tell people what to wear. You don’t tell people to wear a jacket when they go out in winter and force them to. If they get frostbite, it’s their own darn fault. If you haven’t been vaccinated, that’s your choice. I respect that. But it’s your fault when you’re in the hospital with COVID.”
After the interview, Polis’ office put out a statement saying that he was referring to the role of state officials, and he “believes that local leaders can and should put disease reduction protocols in place based off their disease levels and community support for those policies.”
Most voters do not believe there should be mandates in response to the Omicron variant, a Convention of States/Trafalgar Group survey released exclusively to Breitbart News found.
The survey asked voters, “What is your opinion on the new Omicron variant of Covid-19?” and provided a series of options. It found that a majority of voters, overall, 69.4 percent, say that increased mandates and restrictions are “not needed.” Of those, 31.1 percent say it is “not a serious health risk,” while 38.3 percent say “regardless of risk, increased mandates and restrictions” are “not needed.”
Overall, 30.6 percent believe the Omicron variant poses a “serious health risk that warrants stricter mandates and restrictions.”
Notably, a majority of Republicans (86.5 percent), independents (67 percent), and Democrats (54.5 percent) agree with the bottom line that there should not be any more mandates in response to the variant, regardless of the risk. Among those, 50.3 percent of Republicans say Omicron is “not a serious health risk” — a sentiment held by 18.4 percent of independents and 21.4 percent of Democrats.
The survey, taken December 4-7, 2021, among 1,084 likely general election voters, has a margin of error of +/- 2.98 percent.
For months, even prior to the Omicron variant, public health officials such as Dr. Anthony Fauci have cautioned against relaxing coronavirus mandates.
“If we do a good job in getting the overwhelming majority of that cohort vaccinated, we very well may have a situation where the cases go down and we can say no masks,” Fauci said in November. “I hope that that’s as we get through the winter and into the spring.”
This week, World Health Organization (W.H.O.) director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus mentioned recently data out of South Africa suggesting that “there is also some evidence that Omicron causes milder disease than Delta.”
The South African doctor who identified the virus also said the symptoms seem to be “extremely mild,” speaking specifically of a 33-year-old patient who experienced body aches, a headache, and scratchy throat.
Following his acquittal, Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter have permitted teenager Kyle Rittenhouse to return to their platforms, after previously banning him and any support for him — despite the fact that publicly available video evidence pointed to his innocence.
Rittenhouse has begun posting on Twitter on the account @ThisIsKyleR. The platform has not given him a verified checkmark.
Yes and you can follow me on Facebook @ThisIsKyleRittenhouse
“You can follow me on Facebook @ThisIsKyleRittenhouse,” said the teenager in one of his first posts on Twitter.
Twitter CEO Parag Agrawal (Google Cloud/YouTube)
It appears Rittenhouse’s Instagram account was removed after being initially reinstated, but that decision was reversed by Facebook. He can be followed on the platform @thisiskylerittenhouse.
Rittenhouse killed two rioters and wounded another who attempted to assault him during violent unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin in 2020 sparked by the police shooting a black domestic abuser, Jacob Blake, after he resisted arrest while wielding a knife.
WASHINGTON, DC – APRIL 10: Facebook co-founder, Chairman and CEO Mark Zuckerberg (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)
Charged with two counts of homicide, one count of attempted homicide, two counts of reckless endangerment, one count of unlawful possession of a firearm, and one count of curfew violation, Rittenhouse was cleared of all charges in the course of his trial in November.
Shortly after the shooting, despite video evidence showing Rittenhouse acted in self-defense, social media platforms banned all statements of support for the teenager — long before he had his day in court.
If Silicon Valley leftists had their way, Rittenhouse wouldn’t be able to raise money for his legal fees either. GoFundMe banned all fundraisers in support of the teenager shortly after the Kenosha riot.
Deprecated: strip_tags(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /var/www/html/wp-content/plugins/td-composer/legacy/Newspaper/loop.php on line 65
Deprecated: strip_tags(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /var/www/html/wp-content/plugins/td-composer/legacy/Newspaper/loop.php on line 65
Deprecated: strip_tags(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /var/www/html/wp-content/plugins/td-composer/legacy/Newspaper/loop.php on line 65
Deprecated: strip_tags(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /var/www/html/wp-content/plugins/td-composer/legacy/Newspaper/loop.php on line 65
Deprecated: strip_tags(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /var/www/html/wp-content/plugins/td-composer/legacy/Newspaper/loop.php on line 65
Deprecated: strip_tags(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /var/www/html/wp-content/plugins/td-composer/legacy/Newspaper/loop.php on line 65
Deprecated: strip_tags(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /var/www/html/wp-content/plugins/td-composer/legacy/Newspaper/loop.php on line 65
Deprecated: strip_tags(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /var/www/html/wp-content/plugins/td-composer/legacy/Newspaper/loop.php on line 65
Deprecated: strip_tags(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /var/www/html/wp-content/plugins/td-composer/legacy/Newspaper/loop.php on line 65