Kerby Anderson
We recently had another case of the major media publicizing book banning that never took place. I guess we shouldn’t be surprised since the same media last year told us that the Florida legislature passed a “Don’t Say Gay Bill.” That’s how they described the Florida Parental Rights Education legislation that was supported by a majority of citizens in Florida (both Democrats and Republicans).
The Associated Press, CNN, ABC, NPR, USA Today, Los Angeles Times, Politico, Daily Mail, and the Guardian all ran headlines claiming that a school within Miami-Dade County Public Schools “banned” or “blocked” access to a poem read by Amanda Gorman (who spoke at President Biden’s inauguration). Their story was based on an original erroneous story by the Miami Herald.
The true story is that the poem (and a few other resources) were moved from a shelf in the library’s “media center” for grade school kids and put on the shelf for middle school kids. That’s all that was done. One school, one library, moved some books. But that was enough for most of the major media to run with a story about book banning.
Why do we keep getting these fake stories about book banning? They occur for the same reason that we keep getting fake hate crime stories. It is a matter of supply and demand.  For leftists, the demand is greater than the supply of examples of racism or homophobia. That’s why I have written a dozen commentaries over the years of fake hate crimes that were reported in the media long before anyone ever heard of Jussie Smollett.
Have there been attempts to ban books in the past? Of course. Catcher in the Rye, One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, and To Kill a Mockingbird are just a few examples. But as one commentator put it “Book Banning Isn’t What It Used to Be.”
The next time you read about a book banning, be skeptical.

Kerby Anderson
We recently had another case of the major media publicizing book banning that never took place. I guess we shouldn’t be surprised since the same media last year told us that the Florida legislature passed a “Don’t Say Gay Bill.” That’s how they described the Florida Parental Rights Education legislation that was supported by a majority of citizens in Florida (both Democrats and Republicans).
The Associated Press, CNN, ABC, NPR, USA Today, Los Angeles Times, Politico, Daily Mail, and the Guardian all ran headlines claiming that a school within Miami-Dade County Public Schools “banned” or “blocked” access to a poem read by Amanda Gorman (who spoke at President Biden’s inauguration). Their story was based on an original erroneous story by the Miami Herald.
The true story is that the poem (and a few other resources) were moved from a shelf in the library’s “media center” for grade school kids and put on the shelf for middle school kids. That’s all that was done. One school, one library, moved some books. But that was enough for most of the major media to run with a story about book banning.
Why do we keep getting these fake stories about book banning? They occur for the same reason that we keep getting fake hate crime stories. It is a matter of supply and demand.  For leftists, the demand is greater than the supply of examples of racism or homophobia. That’s why I have written a dozen commentaries over the years of fake hate crimes that were reported in the media long before anyone ever heard of Jussie Smollett.
Have there been attempts to ban books in the past? Of course. Catcher in the Rye, One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, and To Kill a Mockingbird are just a few examples. But as one commentator put it “Book Banning Isn’t What It Used to Be.”
The next time you read about a book banning, be skeptical.

Penna Dexter
In 2015 the United States Supreme Court, in Obergefell v. Hodges, struck down the nation’s marriage laws, bringing same sex marriage to every state.
Same sex marriage: That’s what LGBTQ activists said they wanted. But they moved on very quickly. Within a year the quest to mainstream transgenderism was underway. First there were high-profile battles over bathroom policies. Soon biological males were participating in women’s sports. Then the Left was insisting that everyone in the corporate world, in education and in the media respect gender-confused individuals’ preferred pronouns. The trans agenda was quickly being implemented by major institutions of our society. It seems to have happened so quickly.
Journalist Brandon Showalter reports for The Christian Post on the trans phenomenon. He has learned that it didn’t rise as suddenly as it may seem. He told an audience at the National Religious Broadcasters Convention that deconstruction of the gender binary has been a long-running goal of gender and queer theorists.
This new gender ideology has gained strength recently because the medical industry has learned of the tremendous amount of money to be made. Place a teenager on puberty blockers and you have begun the process that leads to cross sex hormones and surgery — often several very expensive surgeries. Once a transition is complete, a person is enslaved to the medical/industrial complex for life.
Mr. Showalter and others point to the totalitarian nature of this agenda. This movement is divisive. It assaults language and our way of communication. It inserts itself between children and their parents. It destroys the minds and bodies of young people.
The human body is good and our spiritual leaders should be saying that. Transgender ideology is an attack on the very image of God. Despite what troubled teens and their parents are being told, no one has ever been born in the wrong body.
We must summon the courage to tell them the truth.

Penna Dexter
In 2015 the United States Supreme Court, in Obergefell v. Hodges, struck down the nation’s marriage laws, bringing same sex marriage to every state.
Same sex marriage: That’s what LGBTQ activists said they wanted. But they moved on very quickly. Within a year the quest to mainstream transgenderism was underway. First there were high-profile battles over bathroom policies. Soon biological males were participating in women’s sports. Then the Left was insisting that everyone in the corporate world, in education and in the media respect gender-confused individuals’ preferred pronouns. The trans agenda was quickly being implemented by major institutions of our society. It seems to have happened so quickly.
Journalist Brandon Showalter reports for The Christian Post on the trans phenomenon. He has learned that it didn’t rise as suddenly as it may seem. He told an audience at the National Religious Broadcasters Convention that deconstruction of the gender binary has been a long-running goal of gender and queer theorists.
This new gender ideology has gained strength recently because the medical industry has learned of the tremendous amount of money to be made. Place a teenager on puberty blockers and you have begun the process that leads to cross sex hormones and surgery — often several very expensive surgeries. Once a transition is complete, a person is enslaved to the medical/industrial complex for life.
Mr. Showalter and others point to the totalitarian nature of this agenda. This movement is divisive. It assaults language and our way of communication. It inserts itself between children and their parents. It destroys the minds and bodies of young people.
The human body is good and our spiritual leaders should be saying that. Transgender ideology is an attack on the very image of God. Despite what troubled teens and their parents are being told, no one has ever been born in the wrong body.
We must summon the courage to tell them the truth.

Kerby Anderson
Is the abortion drug safe? That is a question being debated in federal court pointing back to the decision made by the Food and Drug Administration two decades ago. US District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk issued a national injunction on the use of mifepristone. The case then went to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Are the drugs used in a chemical abortion safe? Obviously, they are not safe for the unborn child since the first drug is used to block progesterone and kill the baby, and the second drug causes uterine contractions to expel the dead or dying baby.
But the question before the court is whether the drug is safe for the mother. This is no small issue since the Guttmacher Institute estimates that more than half (54%) of all abortions are done using these drugs in a chemical abortion.
If you have followed the debate surrounding the abortion drug, you have likely heard that it is safer than Tylenol. The FDA reports that there have been just 28 deaths from the abortion drug. By contrast, about 150 Americans died each year from Tylenol (usually because of an overdose).
Dr. Randall O’Bannon (director of Education and Research for National Right to Life) puts these numbers in context. Yes, there are 150 Tylenol deaths, but Americans take 25 billion doses of Tylenol each year. There have only been 5.6 million chemical abortions since FDA approval.
Once he ran the numbers, he concluded that your risk of dying from the abortion drug is about 833 times higher than your risk of dying from Tylenol. And I might mention that the risk of a woman facing a complication and having to go to the emergency room is quite high.
Doesn’t look like the abortion drug is as safe as we have been led to believe.

Kerby Anderson
Is the abortion drug safe? That is a question being debated in federal court pointing back to the decision made by the Food and Drug Administration two decades ago. US District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk issued a national injunction on the use of mifepristone. The case then went to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Are the drugs used in a chemical abortion safe? Obviously, they are not safe for the unborn child since the first drug is used to block progesterone and kill the baby, and the second drug causes uterine contractions to expel the dead or dying baby.
But the question before the court is whether the drug is safe for the mother. This is no small issue since the Guttmacher Institute estimates that more than half (54%) of all abortions are done using these drugs in a chemical abortion.
If you have followed the debate surrounding the abortion drug, you have likely heard that it is safer than Tylenol. The FDA reports that there have been just 28 deaths from the abortion drug. By contrast, about 150 Americans died each year from Tylenol (usually because of an overdose).
Dr. Randall O’Bannon (director of Education and Research for National Right to Life) puts these numbers in context. Yes, there are 150 Tylenol deaths, but Americans take 25 billion doses of Tylenol each year. There have only been 5.6 million chemical abortions since FDA approval.
Once he ran the numbers, he concluded that your risk of dying from the abortion drug is about 833 times higher than your risk of dying from Tylenol. And I might mention that the risk of a woman facing a complication and having to go to the emergency room is quite high.
Doesn’t look like the abortion drug is as safe as we have been led to believe.