Rex M Rogers - Discerning What Is Best

Discerning What Is Best
with Dr. Rex M. Rogers

Details: Written by: Rex M. Rogers; Published: 14 June 2026

Fathers are a biological essential for the fact of our lives, but well beyond this, in a troubled and chaotic world good fathers are needed more than ever.

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #266 of Discerning What Is Best, a podcast applying unchanging biblical principles in a rapidly changing world, and a Christian worldview to current issues and everyday life.

Fathers are more important than ever in modern American society because the culture is increasingly marked by social instability, moral disagreement, and declining religious influence. The role of a committed father remains a powerful source of guidance, stability, and character formation for children and families.

“There is a crisis in America. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 19.7 million children in America—more than one in four—live without their biological dad in the home. Consequently, there is a “father factor” in nearly all of the societal issues facing America today. We must realize there is a father absence crisis in America and begin to raise more involved, responsible, and committed fathers.”

“Research shows when a child grows up in a father-absent home, he or she is…

1) Four Times More Likely to Live in Poverty

2) More Likely to Suffer Emotional and Behavioral Problems

3) Two Times Greater Risk of Infant Mortality

4) More Likely to go to Prison

One in five prison inmates had a father in prison.

5) More Likely to Commit Crime

Family structure significantly predicts delinquency.

6) Seven Times More Likely to Become Pregnant as a Teen

Teens without fathers are twice as likely to be involved in early sexual activity and seven times more likely to get pregnant as an adolescent.

7) More Likely to Face Abuse and Neglect

Compared to children living with married biological parents, those whose single parent had a live-in partner had more than 8 times the rate of maltreatment overall, over 10 times the rate of abuse and more than 6 times the rate of neglect.

8) More Likely to Abuse Drugs and Alcohol

9) Two Times More Likely to Suffer Obesity

10) Two Times More Likely to Drop Out of High School

Students living in father-absent homes are twice as likely to repeat a grade in school.

Father involvement in schools is associated with the higher likelihood of their children getting mostly A's.”

· “85% of youths in prison come from fatherless homes.

· 71% of high school dropouts come from fatherless homes.

· 90% of all homeless and runaway children come from fatherless homes.

· 60% of youth suicides come from fatherless homes.”

“Perhaps a more universal problem is father irrelevance. Too many fathers in our society are not necessarily absent from their homes, but they are certainly uninvolved in the lives of their children. These men are often disconnected emotionally, socially, and certainly spiritually.”

One of the defining features of contemporary life is the sheer volume of competing messages that children encounter every day. Through social media, entertainment, and the internet, young people are exposed to countless viewpoints—many of them morally degenerate—about identity, values, success, and relationships. In such an environment, a father can serve as a steady and trustworthy influence. Rather than allowing a child to be shaped primarily by online trends, vacuous celebrities, or peer pressure, an engaged father helps provide a consistent framework for making decisions and evaluating right from wrong.

Moral relativism has also become increasingly common in American culture. Moral relativism is the idea that moral truths are largely subjective and dependent on individual preferences or circumstances. Many parents are concerned about how to raise children in this relativistic environment, children who then will mature with strong convictions, integrity, and a sense of responsibility. Fathers play a critical role in this process. Through their actions, discipline, and example, fathers can teach virtues such as honesty, courage, self-control, respect, and accountability. Children often learn these values less from lectures and more from observing how their fathers live.

The decline of religious participation has further increased the importance of fathers. For generations, religious institutions helped transmit moral teachings, provide community support, and reinforce family values. For religious families, fathers help pass down faith and spiritual traditions. For nonreligious families, fathers still serve a vital role in helping children develop ethical principles, purpose, and a sense of belonging.

Upstanding fathers are also important because society benefits when families are strong. Research has frequently linked a strong nuclear family unit and a positive father involvement with better outcomes for children in areas such as education, emotional well-being, and social development. A loving and responsible father, one who has “been there, done that,” can help children build confidence, resilience, and healthy relationships.

Importantly, the significance of fathers does not diminish the importance of mothers. Both parents contribute unique strengths to family life. Nevertheless, fathers bring distinctive perspectives, experiences, and forms of support that can have a lasting impact on a child’s development.

“The breakdown of morality in our society is contributing to this disturbing trend. Traditional values that once served as guiding principles seem to be waning, leaving a moral vacuum in which right and wrong are increasingly ambiguous.

The erosion of moral foundations means that young people are less equipped to distinguish between ethical choices and destructive actions.”

In a society buffeted by growing chaos, moral uncertainty, and weakening traditional institutions, the presence of a devoted father with an admirable moral compass provides stability and direction. By modeling responsibility, teaching values, setting right boundaries and accountability, while offering unwavering support, fathers help prepare the next generation to navigate a complex world with wisdom, confidence, and character.

As we’ve noted, “fathers are crucial to the healthy development of children, particularly sons. If there is one great wrong feminism must be held to account for, it is the devaluation of men’s role in the family. In their quest for self-actualization, the second-wave feminists scorned men and fathers, insisting that women were fine on their own. To be sure, men should be held to high standards. Men who fail to honor and respect women deserve obloquy. But by defaming men as a class and dismissing the importance of fathers in children’s lives, feminists committed a grave error. Social science research confirms what ancient wisdom teaches – from roughhousing with sons to offering their daughters unconditional admiration, fathers play a crucial role in children’s lives. Girls who grow up without dads have lower self-esteem, more eating disorders, and lower grades, among other things, than girls who have fathers in their lives. Boys who grow up without fathers do even worse. They are less likely to finish high school, attend college, or be employed as adults than even their sisters who also grew up without fathers.”

“From education to personal health to career success, children who lack a father find themselves at a disadvantage to their peers raised in a two-parent household.”

My father has been in heaven now for eight years. Doesn’t seem possible it’s been that long. He was a hard-working man, a farm kid if you will who could fix anything, and he was a Christian believer who consistently sought to live his life according to the teachings of Scripture. He loved Mom, who misses him to this day, and he loved my sister and me. Beyond this, he taught me most of what I needed to know to begin life as a man, not as a spoiled or immature kid. What he taught me was love for the Lord and Christian commitment, work ethic, and respect for others.

My wife, too, was blessed with a father like this, but not everyone is. If you had a bad father or a deadbeat dad or a father whose choices and behaviors you are ashamed of, then choose by the grace of God to not be him. Fathers are influential but we are still individually blessed with free will and an ability to think and choose right from wrong. It’s the passed baton. It’s our turn now.

Fatherhood and good fathers should be celebrated. This follows Christian teaching, honors right behavior, creates role models for children, and benefits and blesses a free society. Praise God the Father for his love. Thank the Lord for good fathers here on earth.

Well, we’ll see you again soon. This podcast is about Discerning What Is Best.

If you find this thought-provoking and helpful, follow us on your favorite podcast platform. For more Christian commentary, see my website, r-e-x-m as in Martin, that’s rexmrogers.com, or check my YouTube channel @DrRexRogers.

And remember, it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm.

*This podcast blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact me or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com/ or my YouTube channel @DrRexRogers, or connect with me at www.linkedin.com/in/rexmrogers.

Details: Written by: Rex M. Rogers; Published: 08 June 2026

Everyone has a family, right? Well, sadly, not always, but a family is one of the most important and fundamental associations of our lives.

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #265 of Discerning What Is Best, a podcast applying unchanging biblical principles in a rapidly changing world, and a Christian worldview to current issues and everyday life.

The nuclear family—what some Christian scholars prefer to call the “natural family,” is typically defined as two parents and their children living in the same household. This family structure has long been regarded as a foundational social institution in societies worldwide. Indeed, many sociologists and historians have referred to the traditional family structure as the basic building block of society.

Externally, families, then clans, then tribes made sense for protection. There is strength in numbers and in a fallen world, the families even at the dawn of time quickly learned there was value in sticking together.

Historically, the nuclear family also served as a primary unit for child-rearing, economic cooperation, socialization, and the transmission of cultural values. While family structures have varied across cultures and time periods, the nuclear family has played a particularly influential role in the development of modern societies and nation states, including the United States.

One reason the nuclear family has been considered an important building block of healthy societies is its role in providing stability and continuity across generations. Families are often the first environment in which children learn language, social norms, moral values, and interpersonal skills. Parents typically serve as a child's earliest teachers and caregivers, helping to shape emotional development and educational outcomes. Research has frequently found that children, on average, benefit from stable and supportive family environments.

Historically, the nuclear family also functioned as an economic partnership. In agricultural and industrial societies alike, family members often pooled resources, shared responsibilities, and provided mutual support during times of hardship. Strong family networks could reduce dependence on external institutions while fostering social cohesion and community engagement. The family unit also contributed to cultural continuity by passing traditions, beliefs, and identities from one generation to the next.

Over the past fifty years in the United States, however, the status of the nuclear family has undergone significant change.

In my lifetime, there has been a “remarkable ‘flight’ from the family. It has been not only from the ‘traditional’ family, the relatively patriarchal form made up of male breadwinner and female housewife, but also from the nuclear family itself—one focused on childrearing and constituted by a legal, lifelong, sexually exclusive, heterosexual, monogamous marriage. The rejection of the traditional family now has wide popular support, but we are perhaps unwittingly in the process of throwing out the baby with the bath water.”

“The recent transformation has been especially dramatic because just prior to the period in question the nuclear family had reached its apogee in America. In the 1950s-fueled in part by falling maternal and child mortality rates, greater longevity, and a high marriage rate-a higher proportion of children than ever before grew up in stable, two-parent families. Similarly, in this period, the highest-ever proportion of women married, bore children, and lived jointly with their husbands until at least age 50.”

“In the 1960s, however, four major social trends emerged to prompt a widespread decline of the nuclear family: rapid fertility decline; the sexual revolution; the movement of mothers into the labor force; and the divorce revolution…The unavoidable conclusion from recent family trends is that American society has been moving in an ominous direction—toward the devaluation of children.”

“Statistically speaking, (the traditional nuclear family) is no longer the norm. In fact, 80% of households have a non-traditional family structure in the United States. Family structures that may be considered non-traditional or alternative include but are not limited to single-parent families (a single parent raises a child alone), cohabitation (an unmarried couple shares a household), same-sex families (two individuals of the same sex raise a family); grandparenting (grandparents raising grandchildren) and polygamy (marriage between at least three people).”

Beginning in the 1960s and accelerating through the 1970s and beyond, a variety of social, economic, and cultural forces—which is to say choices—altered family formation patterns. Rising divorce rates, increased participation of women in the workforce, delayed marriage, declining fertility rates, and changing social attitudes toward relationships all contributed to a diversification of family structures.

“The nuclear family crumbled piece by piece. In 1970, more than two-thirds of American adults between 25 and 49 lived with a spouse and at least one kid. By 2021, only 37% of adults fit the bill, Pew Research found. Economic pressures have been particularly significant. Housing costs, wage stagnation for many workers, student debt, and the increasing cost of raising children have made family formation more difficult for many Americans. Young adults now often marry later than previous generations, and some choose not to marry at all. At the same time, greater geographic mobility and changing work patterns have weakened some forms of extended family support.”

The decline of the traditional nuclear family as the dominant household model has been a subject of considerable debate.

Some scholars and commentators argue that reductions in marriage rates and increases in single-parent households have contributed to social challenges, including economic inequality and reduced social stability. Today, the nuclear family remains an important and influential institution in the United States, but it is no longer the sole or overwhelmingly dominant family form. Its cultural significance persists, yet it exists alongside a wider range of household structures than in previous generations. The past fifty years have therefore been characterized not simply by the disappearance of the nuclear family, but by its adaptation within a society experiencing profound economic, demographic, and cultural change.

Yet, “a nuclear family headed by two loving married parents remains the most stable and safest environment for raising children. There are, of course, still reasons for legitimate concern about the state of the American family. Marriage today is less likely to anchor family life in many poor and working-class communities. While a majority of college-educated men and women between 18 and 55 are married, that’s no longer true for the poor (only 26 percent are married) and the working class (39 percent). What’s more, children from these families are markedly less likely to live under the same roof as their biological parents than their peers from better-off backgrounds are.”

“The positive effects of stable marriage and stable nuclear families also spill over. Neighborhoods, towns, and cities are more likely to flourish when they are sustained by lots of married households. The work of the Harvard sociologist Robert Sampson tells us that neighborhoods with many two-parent families are much safer. In his own words: ‘Family structure is one of the strongest, if not the strongest, predictor[s] of variations in urban violence across cities in the United States’...Communities are stronger and safer when they include lots of committed married couples.”

But, in spite of the fact much of the American intelligentsia rejected the nuclear family, or at least said they were open to other forms of arrangements, still, the traditional Dad, Mom, and children model has proven again and again its staying power, its positive contributions to emotional and other forms of growth, and its capacity to provide a safe environment in which children can learn, make mistakes, and grow, learn moral parameters, form their personalities, and enjoy a security in which they can discover their own interests and talents, in which they know for certain they are loved, valued, and that they matter – thus avoiding rampant teenage traumas in anxieties and personal instability.

Families matter, so we should do our part to reinforce our own families and to enjoy and contribute to the family of God represented by our local church.

God said, “Let us not grow weary of doing good” (Gal. 6:9). This starts with the family.

Well, we’ll see you again soon. This podcast is about Discerning What Is Best.

And remember, it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm.

*This podcast blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact me or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com/ or my YouTube channel @DrRexRogers or connect with me at www.linkedin.com/in/rexmrogers.

Details: Written by: Rex M. Rogers; Published: 01 June 2026

Sports wagering seems to be thriving, at least on the surface, and insofar as this is true, it means gambling operations owners are laughing all the way to the bank while the great bulk of players go home with empty pockets.

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #264 of Discerning What Is Best, a podcast applying unchanging biblical principles in a rapidly changing world, and a Christian worldview to current issues and everyday life.

Over the past ten years, American sports gambling has changed from a largely illegal and underground activity into a major commercial industry integrated into professional sports, media, and popular culture. A turning point came in 2018 when the Supreme Court of the United States struck down the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA), allowing individual states to legalize sports betting. Since then, dozens of states have approved online and in-person sports wagering, creating a market worth billions of dollars annually.

For Super Bowl LX, February 2026, analysts estimated about $2.0 billion in legal wagers. For the 2026 NCAA men’s and women’s basketball “March Madness,” industry estimates projected about $3.1 billion legally wagered.

Technology has driven much of this growth. Smartphone apps allow users to place bets instantly from home or while watching games live. Companies such as DraftKings, FanDuel, BetMGM, and several more, originally known for fantasy sports contests, became dominant sports betting platforms. Advertising for gambling now appears constantly during sports broadcasts, podcasts, and social media. Betting odds are discussed alongside game analysis, and many leagues that once opposed gambling now partner with sportsbooks for sponsorships and data-sharing agreements.

One innovation, prop bets, or proposition bets, sometimes called side bets, now allow gamblers to wager on highly specific outcomes such as how many points a player will score, whether the next play will be a pass, or even the result of a coin toss. Because these bets can be offered continuously throughout games, they encourage more frequent participation and repeated wagering. So-called “micro betting also allows for a greater range of betting options, as it provides a more granular level of detail for bettors to place wagers on. This increased level of detail can also result in higher odds and greater potential winnings for bettors. Additionally, micro betting is often faster paced and more immediate, as results can be determined in real-time during the course of a game or match.”

Sportsbooks profit significantly from prop bets or microbets because they generate high betting volume and often carry larger profit margins than traditional bets on game winners or point spreads. Needless to say, the popularity of live betting and microbets has therefore become a major source of industry revenue growth.

Prediction markets are another innovation that have developed alongside this trend. Prediction markets are platforms where people increasingly engage in speculative wagering that resembles modern prop betting culture, helping drive gambling revenues higher for sportsbooks and betting companies. Unlike traditional sportsbooks, prediction markets often resemble financial exchanges where prices fluctuate based on collective expectations. Advocates argue these markets can aggregate information efficiently and provide insight into public opinion and probabilities.

The largest prediction markets are Polymarket, Kalshi, and Betfair. Betfair became especially influential because it popularized the “betting exchange” model in which users effectively trade positions with one another instead of betting against a bookmaker.

Prediction markets occupy a controversial and somewhat uncertain legal space in the United States. Some are regulated as financial products rather than gambling operations. Critics argue that, in practice, many prediction markets function similarly to sports betting and therefore raise the same ethical and social concerns.

Prediction market platforms are accessible across state lines, meaning users in states that have explicitly rejected legalized sports betting can still participate, which undermines the authority of states to set their own laws and standards. Federal officials are pushing to treat prediction markets as gambling.

Platforms like Kalshi argue they are not traditional bookmakers, but rather financial exchanges regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. By framing wagers as financial "event contracts," these platforms operate in many U.S. states with restrictive sports betting laws. Meanwhile, many international jurisdictions classify them as gambling. For example, Spain temporarily blocked both Polymarket and Kalshi for operating without local gambling licenses.

The rapid expansion of sports gambling has generated significant debate. One major concern is gambling addiction, especially among young men and college-age audiences heavily exposed to betting advertisements. Easy access through mobile phones allows constant wagering, including live “microbets” on individual plays during games, which may encourage impulsive behavior. Financial losses and debt problems have become increasingly common for some gamblers.

Another concern is the integrity of sports competition. Heavy gambling activity raises fears about match-fixing, insider information, and pressure on athletes or referees. College athletics are considered particularly vulnerable because many student athletes are unpaid and more susceptible to outside influence or harassment from angry bettors.

Critics also worry about the cultural normalization of gambling. Sports once centered primarily on athletic competition and fandom, but gambling now shapes how many viewers experience games. Supporters argue legalized betting provides consumer protections and tax revenue, yet opponents caution that the long-term social costs may outweigh the economic benefits.

At the same time, critics raise moral objections to gambling itself. I am one of these critics. Historically, Christians have always condemned gambling because it promotes greed, exploits vulnerable individuals, and encourages people to seek wealth through chance rather than productive work. The industry profits from addiction and financial desperation, especially among lower-income consumers.

Constant gambling opportunities can weaken community values by normalizing risky behavior and turning sports into vehicles primarily for financial speculation rather than entertainment or athletic achievement.

Several illegal or improper sports betting scandals have made major news in the past decade, especially since legalized sports wagering expanded after 2018.

One of the biggest recent scandals involved Ippei Mizuhara, the former interpreter for Shohei Ohtani. Federal investigators alleged Mizuhara stole more than $16 million from Ohtani to pay debts owed to an illegal California bookmaker. Prosecutors said he placed roughly 19,000 bets and lost more than $40 million over several years. The MLB ultimately cleared Ohtani of wrongdoing, while Mizuhara pleaded guilty to bank and tax fraud.

Another major case involved Jontay Porter, a former player for the Toronto Raptors. In 2024 the NBA banned Porter for life after investigators found he shared confidential information with bettors, wagered on NBA games, and allegedly manipulated his participation in games tied to prop bets. The scandal became one of the first major match-manipulation cases since widespread legalization of online sports betting in the United States.

Professional leagues have also disciplined players for violating gambling rules even when no game-fixing was proven. And professional leagues must own their part of the surge in sports betting, for the leagues not only invested directly in sportsbooks but promote gambling – endlessly on game broadcasts.

The 2026 FIFA World Cup will be the biggest World Cup ever: total matches: 104 games, 11 U.S. host cities, 48 national teams. The tournament is also hosted by Canada and Mexico, bringing the total number of host cities across all three countries to 16.

Authorities, sportsbooks, FIFA, and integrity-monitoring groups are already preparing for several sports betting risks. FIFA has expanded its anti-corruption and integrity operations, including, integrity officers assigned to teams and officials, mandatory education for players, referees, and staff, reporting hotlines for suspicious activity, and monitoring of betting markets worldwide.

These scandals have intensified concerns about legalized sports gambling.

Again, prop bets or microbets have been the center of concern. These bets are easier to manipulate than the outcome of a game, i.e., cheating.

The history of betting is a story that never ends well. Gambling is a time bomb in a pretty package, a snake in the grass that sooner or later bites, sometimes leaving lifelong wounds.

Well, we’ll see you again soon. This podcast is about Discerning What Is Best.

And remember, it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm.

Details: Written by: Rex M. Rogers; Published: 25 May 2026

The older we get the more we think about yesterday than tomorrow, and with this comes a perspective on social change—a lot of it in my lifetime.

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #263 of Discerning What Is Best, a podcast applying unchanging biblical principles in a rapidly changing world, and a Christian worldview to current issues and everyday life.

At the risk of sounding like an old guy, I’d say much has changed in my lifetime. But then again, now that I’m into my three-score-and-ten-decade, well, I am an old guy. Again, like an old codger, I’d say it’s sometimes challenging to get younger people, including our own kids, to understand just how much has changed, and that, in my view at least, a lot of the change has been negative in its impact. In other words, in many important ways we’re not better off than we used to be.

Think with me for a few moments about some of these changes.

Since the 1960s—when I was in grade school through high school—religious and moral philosophy in America have undergone major transformation. When I was a youth entering my teens, American society was still strongly influenced by the broadly shared Judeo-Christian values upon which the country was founded. I’ve often said I was blessed, and I do mean this, with a near idyllic smalltown Norman Rockwell childhood.

Back then, the United States was shaped by strong social norms, widespread church attendance, stable family structures, and a shared national identity influenced by the post–World War II era. Most Americans consumed the same television programs, read local newspapers, and trusted institutions such as government, schools, and churches at relatively high levels.

As I noted, church attendance was high, but more importantly, biblical morality shaped public expectations, if not everyone’s behavior, and many Americans viewed marriage, sexuality, patriotism, and family life through a traditional religious framework.

Then the 1960s and 1970s brought enormous social upheaval. The Civil Rights Movement challenged segregation and expanded legal equality for African Americans. I watched this and I think it was a good thing, and if you’ve never watched the video of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr’s “I Have a Dream” speech on the Lincoln Memorial steps, Aug. 28, 1963, by all means do so. It is not only loaded with an admirable expression of right values, but it is one of the finest pieces of American oratory we’ve ever experienced.

The feminist movement reshaped expectations for women in education, work, and family life. Antiwar protests during the Vietnam era weakened trust in political leaders, while the sexual revolution loosened traditional attitudes toward marriage, sexuality, and personal behavior. Immigration reforms in 1965 also changed the demographic makeup of the country, increasing ethnic and cultural diversity over the following decades.

Moral philosophy increasingly emphasized tolerance, self-expression, autonomy, and inclusivity rather than adherence to fixed moral codes. Still—unlike the secularism that beset Europe—in the US religious faith continued to play a major role in American life, particularly in politics, charitable work, and cultural debates.

And by the time I became an undergrad, 1970-1974, Supreme Court decisions on school prayer, abortion, and other cultural issues intensified debate over the role of religion in public life. Moral authority increasingly shifted from institutions such as churches and families toward the individual conscience and personal experience, or feelings.

Over time, America also became more religiously diverse, secularism grew rapidly, especially among younger generations. And many Americans moved away from organized religion while still describing themselves as “spiritual.”

By the 1980s and 1990s, consumerism and entertainment culture became increasingly dominant. Cable television expanded media choices, while globalization connected Americans more closely to international markets and ideas. Technology began reshaping everyday life through personal computers and the internet. At the same time, political polarization deepened as Americans increasingly divided along ideological and cultural lines. American culture continued to change dramatically, moving from a more unified, traditional society toward one marked by diversity, technology, individualism, and fragmentation.

The period from 2000 to 2026 accelerated these trends. Smartphones, social media, and streaming platforms transformed communication, entertainment, and even identity formation.

Americans no longer share a common cultural experience to the extent they once had. Algorithms and online communities allowed people to live within highly customized information environments. This increased both personal freedom and social fragmentation. In my view, social media did not cause social polarization and politicization, but it certainly enabled these negative trends because social media allows people to put their unfiltered thoughts out there for global consumption without any governor or apparently without much second thought. Social media is a vast ocean of anger, frustration, angst, whining, hostility, and at times, hate.

Attitudes toward religion, gender identity, divorce, cohabitation, race, and sexuality also shifted significantly. Younger generations accepted same-sex marriage and broader LGBTQ identities, which grew rapidly. Discussions about race, immigration, nationalism, and historical memory became more intense and politically charged.

Economically, America became more knowledge- and technology-driven. Manufacturing declined while digital industries expanded. Remote work, artificial intelligence, and globalization changed how people work and interact.

In the 21st century, Muslim immigration to the United States has continued through family reunification, refugee resettlement, education, and employment opportunities. American Muslims come from many backgrounds, including the Middle East, South Asia, Africa, and increasingly from native-born converts. Compared to many European countries, Muslims in America have generally experienced higher levels of economic mobility, educational achievement, and civic participation.

Assimilation among Muslims in the United States has been mixed and varied. Many Muslim immigrants and their children have integrated into American society through schools, professional careers, business ownership, military service, and political involvement. English fluency, intergenerational adaptation, and participation in democratic institutions have helped immigrant Muslim communities become part of mainstream American life.

At the same time, some Muslims maintain strong cultural and religious separateness, especially in tightly connected immigrant communities—parallel societies. Distinct religious practices involving dress, gender roles, dietary laws, and views on sexuality can create tension with broader American social norms. In some cases, younger generations experience identity conflicts between traditional family expectations and modern American culture.

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, deeply affected public perceptions of Islam and individual Muslims in America. Concerns about terrorism, radicalization, and national security increased scrutiny of Muslim communities, at times unfairly, and some Muslims faced discrimination and suspicion. Meanwhile, it is a truism that most American Muslims strongly reject extremism.

The growth of Islam in America, what some call Islamization or Islamification, presents broader questions about multiculturalism, assimilation, and national identity. Public discussions increasingly focus on whether America should emphasize cultural integration around shared civic values or encourage greater preservation of distinct cultural and religious identities. The problem with maintaining distinct identities is that this is the failed multicultural approach that has not worked in Europe and it tends to magnify the pluribus at the expense of the unum. Additional debates involve free speech, religious accommodation, women’s rights, education, and the role of religion in public life. These issues reflect larger cultural tensions within an increasingly diverse American society.

Despite these many social changes, thankfully, certain American themes remained constant that we can celebrate on Memorial Day: belief in freedom, opportunity, innovation, and individual rights. From 1960 to 2026, American culture evolved from a comparatively cohesive national culture into a far more diverse, connected, contested, and rapidly changing society.

The question Americans must consider and answer correctly in this 250^th year is how do we maintain the best values and key ingredients preserving a free society even as we continue to grow, become more pluralistic, and experience social change?

I still believe America’s founding values—“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”—are essential, exceptional, and efficient for all.

Well, we’ll see you again soon. This podcast is about Discerning What Is Best.

And remember, it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm.

Details: Written by: Rex M. Rogers; Published: 18 May 2026

Multiculturalism has been political elites’ religion du jour for fifty years, so it’s been around long enough for us to know it’s a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #262 of Discerning What Is Best, a podcast applying unchanging biblical principles in a rapidly changing world, and a Christian worldview to current issues and everyday life.

A philosophy called “multiculturalism” has been one of the major philosophical frameworks shaping debates about immigration in both United States and Europe, especially since the mid-20th century. Supporters and critics often disagree not only about immigration levels, but also about national identity, integration, religion, social cohesion, and liberal democracy itself.

After WWII, with a reaction against what was perceived as the excesses of nationalism resulting in massive destruction and death, Europeans searched for a new philosophic approach to governance that they hoped would reduce if not eliminate the possibility of ever again seeing the continent in flames. Multiculturalism gained acceptance in academia, government, and civil rights discourse because it seemed to offer a new tolerance, a new way to allow for commerce without conflict.

Multiculturalism can refer to both a social reality (many cultures living together) and a philosophy or political theory about how diverse societies should function. So, some see it as a move from cultural assimilation (“everyone becomes culturally the same”), and some see it as a move toward cultural pluralism (“different cultures can coexist publicly”), with both approaches rejecting nationalism.

In the 1970s and 1980s, multiculturalism was adopted by several European governments as a framework for integrating immigrants while allowing them to retain distinct cultural and religious identities. Policymakers in countries such as Germany, United Kingdom, Netherlands, and Sweden promoted the idea that diverse communities could coexist under a shared legal and economic system without requiring full cultural assimilation. At first, it was an economic argument, considered practical in the face of declining populations.

Population, i.e., fertility replacement rates, in Western countries, and indeed most countries of the world has been declining. Family size is not simply about biology. This trend is not just happenstance, nor is it that people in the West have forgotten how to make babies. It’s happening because of changing values and moral choices: rejection of “be fruitful and multiply,” childbearing no longer viewed as a vocation or blessing, but as a burden or lifestyle option, loss of God-centered purpose, and life oriented toward self-fulfillment rather than stewardship and legacy. Biblical language “children are a heritage from the Lord” (Ps. 127) is replaced by cost-benefit thinking. Children are seen as obstacles to freedom rather than signs of hope and continuity.

Fear and anxiety regarding future global crises are replacing trust in providence with a consequent loss of hope in the future. When societies become dominated by fear, comfort-seeking, or radical individualism, they often lose the willingness to sacrifice for the next generation. Population decline is not merely a demographic trend but a reflection of deeper spiritual, cultural, and moral realities.

As labor shortages grew and humanitarian commitments expanded—particularly after decolonization and later during refugee crises—multiculturalism was frequently cited as a moral and logical rationale for relatively high levels of immigration. The approach emphasized tolerance, anti-discrimination protections, and public recognition of minority identities as compatible with liberal democratic values. It also evidenced a rather astounding naiveté about religion and religious worldview.

Multicultural mass immigration emphasized something called cultural relativism, the idea that no cultures are better than others, that a given culture’s practices and mores are defensible and cannot be judged by others or by some non-existent (proponents assumed declining influence of religion) higher standard.

Political leaders failed to foresee the sheer numbers or scale of new immigrants that would flood their countries and did not understand nor account for the impact of Islam and its worldview, which is diametrically opposed to the Judeo-Christian worldview and natural law theories upon which modern Western Europe was founded and which still, even if diminished, motivate their cultures.

Cultural relativism easily gives way to moral relativism wherein truth, right and wrong, and thus law and order collapse. When leftist, woke ideas about diversity and inclusion are added to this equation, you get moral and social chaos.

Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel’s stance on multiculturalism evolved noticeably over her tenure, reflecting both shifts in policy experience and public sentiment. In the early 2000s, Merkel, along with much of Germany’s political establishment, endorsed multiculturalism as a framework for integrating immigrants. She and other leaders emphasized that Germany was becoming more culturally diverse and that immigrants should be able to maintain their cultural and (Islamic) religious identities while participating in German society. This naive pipedream aligned with the broader European trend at the time, which promoted tolerance, anti-discrimination measures, and recognition of minority communities as compatible with liberal democratic values.

With respect to immigration, the question became: Should immigrants mainly assimilate into a dominant national culture, or should societies adapt to enduring cultural diversity? During the multicultural era, diversity, borrowed from woke DEI or Diversity, Equity, Inclusion emphasis, emerged as the end-all, be-all with vacuous phrases like “Diversity is our strength” or “Equity over equality.”

But as it turns out, what multicultural policies (without the benefit of prioritizing unity) encourage is communities remaining socially separated rather than integrated. Multicultural policies yield ethnic enclaves, language isolation, and limited interaction between groups, and worst of all, it provides a Petrie dish for religious radicalization. Leaders such as former German Chancellor Angela Merkel and former UK Prime Minister David Cameron now declare that state multiculturalism has not succeeded in promoting integration and indeed the policy, in Merkel’s words, “utterly failed.”

What they did not foresee is that millions would come, millions would not assimilate, and millions would bring with them religious values and cultural practices markedly different and often opposed to Europe’s historic Western values.

Fast forward to the 2020s and Europe is now awash in serious demographic, social, and political problems, many of them stemming from the fragmented societies they allowed, nurtured, then could not stop. Under President Joe Biden, the USA pursued a similar path, cloaked in the new religion of multiculturalism and “No one is illegal” mantras. Mr. Biden opened the southern US border and welcomed immigrants from all over the world, largely unvetted and unmanaged, with no plan for how to house, employ, feed, or provide education and healthcare for these masses. Again, the idea of multiculturalism is that somehow all these new immigrants representing varying cultures and religions would provide economic and political power with no side-effects. But, like Europe has learned, we now know this is a hugely misguided generational error.

In terms of newly arrived immigrants, multiculturalism means they need not learn English because, of course, their language is just as good. They need not assimilate, for this would be a violation of multiculturalism. Immigrants need not adapt or adopt any American cultural practice for this would threaten the sanctity of their heritage culture, so they might best live in parallel communities, cultural ghettos, some “not American” space. American citizens cannot adopt any of immigrants’ cultural practices, for this would amount to another new sin, “cultural appropriation,” the idea a given culture somehow owns a practice for time and eternity, so for example, if my family celebrates Cinco de mayo by wearing Mexican sombreros, we’ve somehow deeply offended all Mexicans.

The late, great Harvard University professor Samuel P. Huntington argued large-scale immigration combined with multicultural ideology could weaken traditional American cultural cohesion. His 1996 book, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, outlined some of his insights and concerns, and for this he was strongly criticized. Those on the left thought, how dare Huntington question their love of multiculturalism? But time will tell, and we now know Huntington was correct. Multiculturalism weakens and provides the ground for destroying nation-states.

Multiculturalism that simply seeks to respect and learn from different cultures can be interesting and useful. But as a political policy, it rarely if ever stays at that level. Perhaps inevitably, it morphs into cultural relativism, which is the idea that a culture’s values and behaviors are all morally justifiable, worthy of praise, no matter what a culture propagates. To call out these values and behaviors is, in terms of cultural relativism, racism, the ultimate insult and today’s original sin.

So, the next time you hear multiculturalism or cultural relativism or moral relativism, speak the truth in love and challenge these damaging ideas. Don’t let them ruin the future society in which your children will live.

Well, we’ll see you again soon. This podcast is about Discerning What Is Best. If you find this thought-provoking and helpful, follow us on your favorite podcast platform. For more Christian commentary, see my website, r-e-x-m as in Martin, that’s rexmrogers.com, or check my YouTube channel @DrRexRogers.

And remember, it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm.

Details: Written by: Rex M. Rogers; Published: 11 May 2026

Sadly, antisemitism is now a near-weekly occurrence in American society, but it strikes at the heart of the American ethos.

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #261 of Discerning What Is Best, a podcast applying unchanging biblical principles in a rapidly changing world, and a Christian worldview to current issues and everyday life.

There are many social and political developments in America, my country, that I find astounding. They are so beyond the pale I never thought I’d see them in the land built upon self-evident truths, that all men are created equal and that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights. I never thought I’d see things I’ve seen in just the last ten years, no, not in my country. But here they are:

Abortion is number one. That dates to 1973. If slavery was the tragic human scourge of the 19^th century, then abortion is the tragic human scourge of the 20^th and early 21^st I don’t want to offend those who rightly consider human slavery the ultimate human sin, and certainly thousands of victims suffered and died under the system, but under abortion, every human victim dies.
Sexual perversion, a list that keeps getting longer in the name of sexual liberation and freedom of human expression. In Canada recently, a member of parliament listed a new 16-character acronym of the hour. No more, LGBTQ+ but MMIWG2SLGBTQQIA+. She actually stated this from memory on video. It means Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women, Girls, Two-Spirit, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Questioning, Intersex, and Asexual+. I’m not sure if she was trying to go viral or is deluded enough to affirm this acronym, but this illustrates the run-amok nature of the any-sexual-proclivity-is-OK crowd. The same trend is running in America. Once biological binary is tossed there’s no end of self-seeking.
Antisemitism – after the Allies defeated Nazi Germany, found the prison camps, and liberated roughly 200,000–250,000 Jews from Nazi camps.

These were survivors found in concentration camps, labor camps, and some subcamps as Allied armies advanced. About 6 million Jews were murdered in the Holocaust. General Ike Eisenhower foresaw a day when the horrors of the Holocaust might be denied. He invited the media to document the scene and compelled Germans living in the surrounding towns and any soldier not fighting at the front to witness the atrocities for themselves.

April 15, 1945, Eisenhower said, “The things I saw beggar description.... I made the visit deliberately in order to be in a position to give firsthand evidence of these things if ever, in the future, there develops a tendency to charge these allegations merely to ‘propaganda.’”

Yet with this history, antisemitism is propagated by American citizens in American cities. One of my earlier podcasts, “Antisemitism Is Evil,” says it all in the title.

“Post-Holocaust, it’s very hard in the West…to say, “Let’s go kill the Jews.” So, people do all kinds of strange dances where they claim to be anti-Zionist but not antisemitic. But their ending point is always the same: we hate the Jews but try to say so artfully by couching it in Zionism, Israel, etc.”

“Estimates place the number of Jews in the world at around 15.6 million, with nearly half living in Israel. So, of the 8 million Jews living outside of the Holy Land, is life dangerous? There is no question that in the West (as opposed to, say, China), there is a significant increase in the reporting of antisemitic events, from the minor to the fatal.”

At one time, Jews were exterminated because they are “not white.” Now, in major American universities, professors are teaching that Jews are “white,” and not just white but the epitome of colonialism, occupation, apartheid, and now genocide. This is coming from intellectuals then down into society and the street. Students are literally being misled, mis-taught, and misinformed in the interest of hate. Qatar is pumping billions of dollars into American higher education funding the future antisemitic, anti-Israel American citizens.

Islamists, under different names, now working in Western societies all believe in the overthrow of Western democracies, they all believe in the destruction of Israel and the murder of Jews, and they all believe in the destruction of Western countries. Some say through political means and entryism and some through violence.

Europe is in serious trouble, at the moment ahead of the USA in its abandonment of democratic principles like freedom of speech and human rights, if not an embrace than at least a fear and hands-off attitude toward mass migrant Muslims now living in parallel societies, not assimilating, and set on the Islamization of Europe. With this comes increasing antisemitism.

“We have graduates in Europe and North America coming out of the best universities supporting and praising and walking in the streets supporting Hamas…Hamas is headquartered in Qatar.”

“Sophisticated second-generation people now supporting Hamas who are now the Mayor of New York City, once the great Jewish city and Jews sitting around the Shabbat table in New York and asking the question, ‘Where do we go?’”

“But as Elie Wiesel always taught us, ‘Antisemitism may begin with the Jewish people, but it never ends with the Jewish people.” “And this unleashing of Jew-hatred, which is now normalized and morally required, again, because it runs deep in European society, it will not end with the Jews.”

“Antisemitism in America has reached record highs, with over 9,300 reported incidents in the last year, representing a 350% increase over five years. Fueled by tensions from the Israel-Hamas war, online hate speech, and ideological extremism, 70% of U.S. adults acknowledge it as a problem. Nearly half of young American Jews report experiencing personal attacks, leading to widespread behavioral changes, such as hiding Jewish identity. 91% of American Jews say they feel less safe as a Jewish person in the United States due to violent attacks in the past year including the burning of a Jewish governor’s home, the firebombing of Jews in Boulder, CO, and the murders at the Capital Jewish Museum.”

Christians must own a sad history of at times perpetuating what has been called the “oldest hatred.”

“Anti-Semitism is not disliking a person who happens to be Jewish. It is disliking a person because they are Jewish. The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) defines anti-Semitism as ‘a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews.’”

“According to the IHRA, anti-Semitism often takes the form of ‘mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective —such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.’ Particularly among evangelicals, anti-Semitism falls into one of three categories: political/economic, social, or theological.”

1-Political/economic – “They view the relative financial success and influence of the American Jewish community, particularly, as sinister—evidence, even, of a conspiracy to control the country and the world.”

2-Social – “is based on personal encounters with Jewish people.” We experience something negative and then generalized to the entire ethnic group.

3-Theological – “One of the most pernicious anti-Semitic theologies is that of Supersessionism, popularly termed Replacement Theology… Supersessionism… is the view that the New Testament church is the new and/or true Israel that has forever superseded the nation Israel as the people of God. The result is that the church has become the sole inheritor of God’s covenant blessings originally promised to national Israel in the OT. This rules out a future restoration of the nation Israel with a unique identity, role, and purpose that is distinct in any way from the Christian church.”

“Another example of theological anti-Semitism within evangelicalism is the view that the Jewish people are uniquely responsible for the death of Jesus. The answer to evangelical anti-Semitism is the same as any other sin. It requires that we acknowledge it as sin, confess it to the Lord, and through the grace of God, allow Him to work in our hearts to root it out and to heal.”

Why should Christians care about antisemitism?

Human dignity and equality, which teaches that all people are made in God’s image, Gen. 1:27. “Antisemitism, which involves prejudice, discrimination, and hostility towards Jewish people, undermines this core biblical principle.”
Shared spiritual heritage – “The Old Testament, integral to the Christian faith, is also the Hebrew Bible, containing the laws, prophecies, and teachings that form the foundation of both religions.”
Countering hatred and violence – “Antisemitism comes from such hatred and leads to violence, especially given the historical persecution Jews have faced. The Bible teaches love, compassion, and justice, calling believers against all forms of hatred.”
Christian witness to love all people – Jesus commands his followers to love one another, Jn 13:34-35.

Antisemitism in American society grieves me. It’s morally wrong and it defies the ideals upon which this country was founded as a “nation of immigrants” welcome to all who embrace the ideals and commit themselves to good citizenship.

I pray in America’s 250^th year we can all proclaim and live out liberty and justice for all.

Well, we’ll see you again soon. This podcast is about Discerning What Is Best.

And remember, it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm.