Details

Written by: Rex M. Rogers

Published: 24 February 2025

If First Amendment freedoms are eroding in the U.S., is it an understatement to ask, should we be calling for all hands-on deck to protect these precious freedoms?

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #193 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.

Since COVID – not so much the pandemic, but American governmental and official reactions to it – I’ve written a few times that I’ve begun to see things that I never thought I’d see in my own country. You see, for me the U.S.A. was, and still is, despite its sometimes-checkered history, the land of the free and the home of the brave, the nation where one was innocent until proven guilty in a system of justice for all, the country that believed in liberty, freedom of religion, speech, and opportunity.

But what I began to see was over-reaching government officials assuming unconstitutional powers, public willingness to submit to restrictions in their freedoms out of fear of a disease, and maybe worst of all, a growing support for curtailing or suppressing or silencing freedom of speech, one of the core, fundamental, most essential freedoms that, along with freedom of religion, made America what it was in the first place.

In his book, Last Call for Liberty: How America’s Genius for Freedom has Become Its Greatest Threat, Christian social critic Dr. Os Guinness noted how these trends worked themselves out in public discourse: “Political debate,” he said, “has degenerated into degrading and barbaric incivility, and wild talk of spying, leaking, impeachment, governability…even assassination and secession are in the air.” Now also along with insults and incitements, seething rage, mortal struggle for soul of the republic, chaos and conflict.

Guinness’s book was about last chances, about a threat to our freedoms and future.

Guinness noted that “Freedom of religion and conscience affirms the dignity, worth, and agency of every human person by freeing us to align ‘who we understand ourselves to be’ with ‘what we believe ultimately is’ and then to think, live, speak, and act in line with those convictions.” This Freedom is absolute to the point of belief but qualified at the point of behavior because behavior touches others. “Someone is free to believe in paganism, for example, but not to sacrifice an animal or another human being.”

“What is at stake with freedom of religion and conscience is nothing less than human dignity, human self-determination, and human responsibility.”

In this short but profound book, Os Guinnes is wrestling with the state of American culture, literally wondering aloud if the United States of America can last much longer or whether it will implode and cave in on itself. This seems like extremist perspective, but Os Guinness is no fly-by-night nutty observer. He is British in heritage, is now in his 80s, lives near Washington, DC, and has authored and edited more than 30 books, all of them noteworthy.

Eroding freedom of speech is what I mean about seeing things in my own country I never thought I’d see: teachers and professors losing their positions for refusing to follow the gender confusion ideology hoisted upon them by public education, conservative voices who raised questions about vaccines or other medical procedures regarding the pandemic being ousted from social media platforms or banned on YouTube, a U.S. president’s Twitter account being shut down because the then-owners of the platform did not agree with his political views.

Pastors have been harassed, at times arrested, in formerly free countries like Canada, the U.K., Germany, and other European nations, for speaking out against government policies. Similar incidents have already begun to happen in the U.S.

U.K. police have rousted people in their homes for posting what was considered “hateful” content on social media. “Numerous arrests have been made of people who did nothing but post their feelings or opinions on social media.”

“Western civilization appears to be on the cusp of a new Dark Age — for any government that arrests and locks up its own citizens for saying, writing, or thinking the ‘wrong’ opinions or beliefs can no longer say it stands for freedom or human rights.” Free speech is now on the defensive throughout Europe and perhaps now in North America.

February 14, 2025, United States Vice President JD Vance gave a speech at the 61st Munich Security Conference. In his speech, Vance criticized the European Union leaders for what he described as backsliding on freedom of speech and democracy. “Vance accused European leaders of using "ugly, Soviet-era words like misinformation and disinformation" in order to hide "old, entrenched interests" against alternative viewpoints that "might express a different opinion, or, God forbid, vote a different way—or even worse, win an election."

“The Vice President also heavily denounced the UK government for its "renegade" free speech laws, citing the example of Adam Smith Connor, who was jailed for breaching a "safe access zone" around an abortion clinic in Bournemouth. He also denounced Sweden's conviction of a Christian activist for burning a Quran as prosecution of religious expression, police crackdowns on anti-feminist comments in Germany, and warning letters sent by the Scottish government to people in Scotland whose homes were in safe access zones that allegedly outlawed private prayer…He argued that European leaders should embrace rather than fear public opinion, even when it challenges established positions.”

Of all the things that have concerned me in the past five or more years, among those things I never thought I’d see in my own country, the steady erosion of support for freedom of speech ranks right at the top.

Frankly, I have found it hard to relate to people who declare their dislike or disagreement with some position or point of view, followed quickly by their declarations so-called “unacceptable” speech should be silenced via loss of social media accounts, loss of jobs, or worse, some statement the other person espousing the unacceptable view should be arrested or go to jail. These people evidence no understanding of the value and precious civil liberty we call freedom of speech.

Recently, during a CBS "Face The Nation” interview host Margaret Brennan contended that Vice President JD Vance's support for free speech in his Munich presentation was reminiscent of Germany’s Nazi approach to the Holocaust. She said, Mr. Vance “was standing in a country where free speech was weaponized to conduct a genocide.” Secretary of State Marco Rubio immediately pushed back, saying, “No. I have to disagree with you. Free speech was not used to conduct a genocide. There was no free speech in Nazi Germany. There was also no opposition in Nazi Germany, they were the sole and only party that governed that country."

"The point of (the Vice President’s) speech was basically that there is an erosion in free speech and intolerance or opposing points of view within Europe…That's not an erosion of your military capabilities, that's not an erosion of your economic standing, that's an erosion of the actual values that bind us together in this transatlantic union that everybody talks about."

We now know that Big Social Media’s earlier denial during the last presidential campaign and during the Biden Administration that it was in any way squelching conservative views is indeed false. And we now know government colluded with Big Social Media during the pandemic to silence anti-vax views. We know this because the leaders of Big Social Media, like Meta Facebooks’s Mark Zuckerberg, admitted as much and declared they want to right their ship on this matter.

The United States Constitution, the First Amendment states:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

The future of freedom is ours to protect.

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. Download an episode for your friends. For more Christian commentary, check my website, r-e-x-m as in Martin, that’s rexmrogers.com. Or check my YouTube channel @DrRexRogers for more podcasts and video.

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

© Rex M. Rogers – All Rights Reserved, 2025  

*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 or https://x.com/RexMRogers.

Details

Written by: Rex M. Rogers

Published: 17 February 2025

Is the U.S. Department of Education critical to the success of American education?

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #192 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.

I remember when the federal Department of Education was created by President Jimmy Carter in 1979. Now President Donald Trump is considering dismantling the department.

“The heads of the education departments in multiple GOP-led states describe the move as a potential opportunity to get rid of red tape around funding and burdensome reporting requirements on their schools.”

“The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) recently showed students are still behind in reading and math, and that the gap between high-performing and low-performing students is widening.”

“Betsy DeVos, Trump’s secretary of Education in his first term…wrote in an op-ed for The Free Press that the department should be scrapped entirely.” She said, “Since its creation in 1979, the Department of Education has sent well more than $1 trillion to schools with the express purpose of closing the gaps between the highest and lowest performers. Today, those gaps are as wide as they have ever been, and by many measures, even wider.”

“Seven in 10 American fourth graders are not proficient readers, meaning they struggle with reading grade-level literature and comprehending informational texts. Forty percent graded out at “below basic,” meaning they struggle with basic comprehension. In math, the picture is similar: six in 10 fourth graders are behind in math. The gap between the highest and lowest performers has grown by 10 percent since 2019.”

She further noted, “The Department of Education does not run a single school. It does not employ any teachers in a single classroom. It doesn’t set academic standards or curriculum. It isn’t even the primary funder of education—quite the opposite. In most states, the federal government represents less than 10 percent of K–12 public education funding.”

So, we’re back to President Trump’s suggestion: why maintain a federal Department of Education?

Before we return to the Department, allow me to share some flashback biographical information.

I didn’t know it then, but I know now that I was enormously blessed to attend Ohio public schools, 1958-1970, graduate from small but high academic standards Cedarville College in 1974 and finally earn a doctorate in political science from the University of Cincinnati in 1982. I say “blessed” because throughout my educational experience, except for no more than five poor teachers, I attended school when teachers taught the subject matter, I was incentivized and expected to work and to achieve, and I was told by involved parents that if I got in trouble at school I’d be in trouble at home. I learned reading, arithmetic, spelling, and science. I learned problem solving critical thinking skills. I learned to express myself, writing and speaking, in a manner that was logical and cogent.

Today, there are still dedicated, hard-working, high-standards public school teachers and professors in university. I do not blame teachers for all our educational problems. But these good faculty members and academic staff are working within a massive system now governed by corrupted values and motives misaligned with what it means to be well-educated in a free and pluralistic society.

The educational landscape in which they work today is like Earth-to-Mars different from what I experienced growing up.

As I said, I experienced only a handful of teachers who should have worked somewhere else. The rest of my teachers and professors were outstanding: Mrs. Holmes in 1^st Grade and Mrs. Sigmon in 2^nd who taught me to read, the Mackley brothers, Ray and Ivan, in 4^th and 5^th Grade, one who taught me geography and one who taught me fractions. And by the way, most of my elementary school experience included starting the day with the Pledge of Allegiance and a Bible verse read to us all.

In 8^th Grade, favorite of many of my class cohort, Mr. Chuck Chippi, who taught me how to diagram sentences and speak the King’s English. He later went on to be a beloved high school administrator. Mrs. Crevey, who was short, and round as she was tall, but a tough-love taskmaster who taught me Algebra, Mrs. Burns who called me “Rexie” throughout my high school experience and taught me Latin, Mr. Farley who was a masterful lecturer and taught me to take notes as I learned American history and government. I was similarly blessed in college and university with professors dedicated to academic excellence and wanting to see it flower in me. Here and now, I thank and salute them all. I am forever grateful.

My point is that I was given a gift that has kept on giving throughout my life. I was well educated. I was taught to think.

But sadly, while I was yet in school, and certainly soon thereafter, education began focusing more on social engineering than on education.

And also – don’t miss this – the idea of getting in trouble at home if I caused problems in school, well, forget that. Now, many parents look upon teachers with suspicion, as adversaries, as someone to sue and who dare not discipline their child because, of course, he or she is angelic. Guess how the students game that system?

With this shift, teachers and administrators lost the authority to hold students accountable and thus to instill a proper work ethic and demand academic attainment.

Beginning in the 1960s, public schools became the nation’s Petri dish, the place where we experimented with our myriad, intractable social problems. Sex, drugs, and rock and roll, yes, but way more than this. Segregation/desegregation, school shootings and safety, debates about standardized testing, overcrowding, bullying, broken families and absentee fathers, technology pros and cons, self-absorbed teacher unions, jettisoning prayer and religion in general. And more recently, add woke or progressive, leftist ideological initiatives that have taken control of education from kindergarten to university: LGBTQ+ pride, gender fluidity and trans activism, pronoun mania, political correctness, critical race theory pushing DEI or diversity, equity, and inclusion, “anti-racism,” ironically, to the exclusion of many worthy educational programs.

This morass of social pathologies is rooted in something other than education as such. Schools and teachers can’t propagate values parents and society have rejected. Our school social pathologies are rooted in American society’s rejection of God and truth, the importance of two-parent families, recognition of moral parameters, work ethic, accountability, and a vision of a well-educated citizenry.

I was fortunate to be a student before these social problems dominated the school and classroom.

Today, millions of students are being ill-served by an educational bureaucracy more interested in social justice ideology than critical thinking, more interested in the politics of the adults than in the pedagogy of the students.

Just since I was a grade schooler, tens of millions of dollars have been dumped into public education, yet schools are now failing their students at all levels.

“The cost of the Department of Education is phenomenal. Since its creation, the Department of Education in the United States has spent over $1.4 trillion.

This funding, which primarily comes from taxpayer dollars, has had zero impact on test scores…Over the past 40 years, results have stayed flat or declined in most categories, which shows just how wasteful this system happens to be.”

Why should we keep pouring money into a bottomless pit and see little to no positive in return? Why should American tax dollars be earmarked to support values and philosophies, like so-called “anti-racism” or “gender inclusivity” that undermine the body politic and e Pluribus Unum? Why, if our students are falling behind other developed nations, and our national debt is now $36 trillion, should we spend $80 billion per year on educational bureaucrats and unproductive programs? If we care about our children and the nation’s future, why should we put up with the Department of Education’s left-leaning initiatives that turn out graduates who cannot read or think well, do not know American civics, are ill-prepared for college or the workplace, and who have been inundated with extensive pessimism about their own country and their future?

The bottom line is this: a) How do we create an educational system that better educates our children for the future? b) How do we disband governmental activities, even a department, no longer serving a needed function, and save the federal government billions of dollars?

The U.S. Department of Education is not a sacred entity. It is a bureaucracy that has seen its day and deserves a death with dignity. Abolishing the Department of Education will, it is my hope, increase the chances that my grandchildren attending public schools gain an education as good as the one I received. This is only possible if education is the actual focus of the activities in the schools.

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. Download an episode for your friends. For more Christian commentary, check my website, r-e-x-m as in Martin, that’s rexmrogers.com. Or check my YouTube channel @DrRexRogers for more podcasts and video. 

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

© Rex M. Rogers – All Rights Reserved, 2025  

*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 or https://x.com/RexMRogers.

Details

Written by: Rex M. Rogers

Published: 10 February 2025

Should children born in the United States to illegal immigrants automatically become American citizens?

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #191 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 question of who is entitled to U.S. citizenship is most often raised during debates over illegal immigration. While most of the debate turns on the question of who can become a citizen through legalization and naturalization, some groups argue that the way to end illegal immigration is to change the rules of the game by denying citizenship to the U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants.”

“January 20, 2025, President Donald J. Trump issued an executive order, titled ‘Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship,’ which said that the federal government will not ‘issue documents recognizing United States citizenship” to any children born on American soil to parents who were in the country unlawfully or were in the states lawfully but temporarily.”

In short order, US District Judge Deborah Boardman blocked this executive order, saying “it’s likely unconstitutional and “runs counter to our nation’s 250-year history of citizenship by birth.” Another legal scholar, Joseph Mead said, “For well over a century, the 14th Amendment has been understood to guarantee citizenship to all persons born in the United States.”

“Eric Hamilton, a lawyer representing the Trump administration, argued that the framers of the 14th Amendment did not intend to ‘create a loophole to be exploited’ by temporary visitors or undocumented immigrants.’”

Among the problems with birthright citizenship in recent years is something called birth tourism. “Birth tourism is the practice of traveling to another country or city for the purpose of giving birth in that country. The main reason for birth tourism is to obtain citizenship for the child in a country with birthright citizenship (jus soli).

Such a child is sometimes called an ‘anchor baby’ if their citizenship is intended to help their parents obtain permanent residency in the country. Other reasons for birth tourism include access to public schooling, healthcare, sponsorship for the parents in the future, hedge against corruption and political instability in the children’s home country.”

“Numerous ‘maternity businesses’ advise pregnant mothers to hide their pregnancies from officials and commit visa fraud—lying to customs agents about their true purpose in the U.S. Once they give birth, several 'birth tourism' agencies aid the mothers in defrauding the U.S. hospital, taking advantage of discounts reserved for impoverished American mothers.”

“United States citizenship can be acquired by birthright in two situations: by virtue of the person's birth within United States territory (jus soli) or because at least one of their parents was a U.S. citizen at the time of the person's birth (jus sanguinis). Birthright citizenship contrasts with citizenship acquired in other ways, for example by naturalization.”

Birthright citizenship is explicitly guaranteed to anyone born under the legal "jurisdiction" of the U.S. federal government by the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution (adopted July 9, 1868), which states:

‘All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.’

“The term ‘jurisdiction’ was carefully chosen to intentionally exclude U.S.-born children of foreign diplomats and Native Americans living under tribal sovereignty.”

“It was necessary to include the citizenship clause in the Fourteenth Amendment because the Supreme Court’s Dred Scott decision of 1857 had denied citizenship to the children of slaves.”

So, upon initial quick review, it sounds like the Trump Administration is assailing a sacred and historic American ideal…and admittedly, it’s close. Citizenship is a precious gift, not known to millions in history past who were serfs or subjects of their kingdoms, not always protected by authoritarian regimes even today, and a key part of what is means to be an American.

We all know Emma Lazarus’s famous lines from the base of the Statue of Liberty: “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,

the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!” These immortal words were taken from her sonnet, New Colossus. The words immediately became a “powerful portrayal of the United States as a beacon of hope, freedom, and opportunity for those seeking a new life. The poem captures the essence of the Statue of Liberty as a welcoming symbol and reflects the American ideals that have shaped the nation's history and identity.”

Immigration and citizenship, including birthright citizenship, are a part of this American Dream. All our ancestors were immigrants at some point in time. With few exceptions like the progeny of foreign ambassadors, the children born on American soil, at least since the 14^th Amendment in 1868, have been granted American citizenship. Now suddenly, the United States seems to be turning its back on this deeply embedded ideal.

But before we proceed, what we need is perspective. “How many other countries have birthright citizenship? How many such children are there in the United States, and how much is this costing us? The Center for Immigration Studies released a study by Jon Feere that gives some answers.”

Listen to this. “The “overwhelming majority of the world’s countries do not offer automatic citizenship to everyone born within their borders. Only 30 countries out of 194 offer automatic citizenship. Of the 31 counties listed on the International Monetary Fund’s list of advanced economies, only the United States and Canada grant automatic birthright citizenship.”

What countries do not offer automatic birthright citizenship? Most of Europe:  United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, all the Scandinavian countries, Switzerland. Most of Asia and the Middle east: China, India, Japan, South Korea, Israel, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, Kuwait, Egypt. Then add Australia and New Zealand. So, the Trump 2.0 Administration is not considering something out of the box or ipso facto anti-humanitarian, much less racist.

“Nobody is talking about repealing the 14th Amendment, or taking away anyone's citizenship. Nor must we amend the Constitution. But Court needs to clarify the extent of birthright citizenship. It should do so as part of a clear and meaningful policy concerning immigration, naturalization, and citizenship that is consistent with the core principles and highest ideals of the United States.”

“And the hundreds of thousands of such children (born here to illegals) are no accident. Many of them are the result of a deliberate effort by illegal aliens and foreign tourists to exploit our law and use these children to keep themselves in the country. Such children provide access to welfare benefits that would otherwise be off-limits to the parents and can ‘ultimately initiate chain migration of the child’s extended family and in-laws.’”

“CIS estimates that 40% of illegal alien households nationwide receive some type of welfare despite federal prohibitions. That rate is even higher in states with larger numbers of illegal aliens such as New York (49%), California (48%), and Texas (44%). Contrast that very high rate with the fact that only 19% of households headed by a native-born citizen receive welfare benefits. Birthright citizenship is not mandated by the 14th Amendment and the Supreme Court has never held that children born of individuals who are in the United States illegally are citizens — only that the children of individuals who are born to legal permanent residents are citizens.”

So, birthright citizenship is a policy that should be administered in a manner that protects and reinforces the ideals and well-being of American interest and citizens.

Altering it is not a sin, nor does it mean Americans suddenly reject legal immigration or will make citizenship off-limits to their children.

I am not against birthright citizenship, nor do I want to see it eradicated, only legally administered in a manner that avoids fraud, discourages willful abuse of the system and its intent by birth tourists, implemented in a way that respects naturalization, and preserves the beauty and blessing of citizenship for all who qualify.

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. Download an episode for your friends. For more Christian commentary, check my website, r-e-x-m as in Martin, that’s rexmrogers.com. Or check my YouTube channel @DrRexRogers for more podcasts and video. 

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

© Rex M. Rogers – All Rights Reserved, 2025  

*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 or https://x.com/RexMRogers.

Details

Written by: Rex M. Rogers

Published: 03 February 2025

After 25 years of dominance DEI – Diversity, Equity, Inclusion – seems finally to be on its way out. Why is this a good thing?

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #190 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.

DEI, “diversity, equity, and inclusion,” is now Dead On Arrival, or at least Dead Man Walking.

“Diversity and inclusion,” were first used politically in the 1990s. The focus was initially on representation—ensuring more women and minorities were included. This was followed by the addition of “equity” in the 2010s. The Black Lives Matter movement accelerated the use of the term equity regarding what they considered systemic racism in the 2020s in the woke explosion following in the wake of George Floyd’s death in police custody.

Remarkably quickly, DEI was promoted, adopted, and then used as a bludgeon to virtually take over American culture, inculcating socialist, Marxist race and gender categories in the minds of impressionable school children, demanding, or forcing by threat of canceling, adults in education, business, government, even the military to accept these freedom-destroying categories. Then these ideas were marketed not just with religious zeal but in essence as a new religion designed to displace Judeo-Christian values and Christianity. Not everyone pro-DEI was or is anti-Christian, but the philosophic foundation of DEI is indeed built upon anti-Christian values.

One enormous problem with DEI is that it subjugates or abolishes merit or meritocracy in favor of discrimination based upon race, ethnicity, or gender, all in the name of something made up called “inclusion” and something damaging called “equity” – not equality before the law or equality of opportunity, but equity of result, meaning leveling, sameness in the name of fairness and racial justice. Along with this, many proponents of DEI demonstrated not freedom of choice but a willingness to use authority to force acceptance of their views.

DEI destroys a key part of the American Dream – equal opportunity for all, meaning the freedom and chance of advancement based upon one’s talent and work.

DEI displaced this in favor of race or gender quotas and advancement as a matter of entitlement or restitution for society’s past sins like pre-Civil War slavery.

But this equality to equity switch is deceptive and dangerous. Equality of condition or playing field says, “It’s up to you.” Equity says, “It’s up to the government or some other authority to make something happen for you.” In other words, if necessary, resources will be redistributed based upon the left’s vision of fairness.

With warp speed, DEI became the religion of record for much of American education. DEI categories, including gender fluidity, are being promulgated daily in many public institutions of learning, not as theory but as established narrative.

Yet all the while DEI is a failed and dangerous un-democratic philosophy that does not improve education achievement for anyone, including minorities.

“There is something curious about Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI)…Modern political ideologies, such as socialism and fascism, have been understood as secularized versions of Christianity for a long time, at least since the French Revolution. The question is, do DEI statements clothe Christian concepts in secular garb? The short answer is Yes.”

“DEI is The Doctrine That Ate America. If it is not stopped, DEI will supplant the country’s Judeo-Christian value system and push America farther down the road of decline.”

Lest I be misunderstood, I am not speaking here against working for a better America that improves opportunities for all. I am not speaking against anyone because of their differences. I am not speaking against anyone, including those who make sexual preference choices with which I morally disagree. For example, “If someone is gay, straight, trans, black, white, brown, male, female, faith-based, or atheist. If that person is truly qualified for a job based on merit and experience alone, they should get it.”

This is common sense. This is a free, open, pluralistic society. This is a color-blind society as argued eloquently by Martin Luther King, Jr. Until the last twenty years, this was America.

But now DEI’s juggernaut has infiltrated every nook and cranny of American society, discouraging recruits to join the military, displacing incentive with disincentive in the workforce, coopting professional training with DEI seminars, and undermining workforce effectiveness and morale, as witnessed among fire departments in Los Angeles County that were decimated by DEI baloney and budget cuts, rather than reinforced by firefighting training.

In my view, DEI does not help racial minorities or any other so-labeled under-represented group. Rather, it replaces your freedom with someone else’s power, removing individual choice and establishing government or other authority. Meritocracy does the opposite.

Meritocracy promotes excellence, advances civilization and culture. Even if inadvertently or unintentionally, still, DEI promotes mediocrity, denigrates civilization and culture. Meritocracy promotes independence and freedom. DEI promotes dependence and constraints.

In January barely a week into his second administration, President “Trump went about systematically dismantling diversity, equity, and inclusion practices throughout the vast federal bureaucracy, federal contractors, and receivers of federal grants.”

“Trump signed a second anti-DEI executive order, ‘Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing”…The following day, Trump signed a third executive order, “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity.’”

“The second executive order, No. 24, laid out in detail what the departments and agencies needed to do to expel DEI. Mainly, they would have coordinate with the Office of Management and Budget, the attorney general, and the director of the Office of Personnel Management as they ceased all DEI activity.”

“The executive order, for example, called on the bureaucracy to take the following actions: ‘Terminate, to the maximum extent allowed by law, all DEI, DEIA, and ‘environmental justice’ offices and positions (including but not limited to ‘Chief Diversity Officer’ positions); all ‘equity action plans,’ ‘equity’ actions, initiatives, or programs, ‘equity-related’ grants or contracts; and all DEI or DEIA performance requirements for employees, contractors, or grantees.”

These DEI executive orders, along with others stating the federal government will recognize only two biological genders, male and female, and still others banning trans individuals from the military and athletics are, to put it mildly, extensive, transformational, draw a line-in-the-sand actions.

Some consider these actions lacking compassion or hateful or discriminatory or fascist, but none of these changes declare anything but what American society and culture considered normal, reasonable, moral, and common sense just since my days as a youth. None of these actions punish people but only state their sexual proclivities will no longer be the standard by which the rest of society must operate. They just will not be able to leverage their choices for advantage against others, for placement in the U.S. military, or for cheating in athletic events while endangering girls and women.

Will the decimation of DEI in government contribute to similar changes in business? Yes, it’s already begun. Corporations finally have cover to do what they know is good and wise for their customers and company without someone suing them or calling them racist or haters.

Walmart, McDonald’s, Ford, Harley-Davison and John Deere, now Target, are among the well-known consumer brands that reduced or phased out their DEI commitments in recent months. Others like Tractor Supply announced they will no longer conduct political cause related marketing initiatives, including Pride Month.

Will the end of DEI mean a setback for Blacks, minorities, and women? No, not if companies and American culture advance the ideals that made the country thrive in the first place: free enterprise, merit and work ethic, liberty and justice for all, rule of law blindly applied, opportunity for all.

“True diversity comes through the practice of nondiscrimination, outreach, and compliance with existing civil rights law and the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. Honoring the First Amendment freedoms of speech and religion can and should result in diversity of thought and goodwill among diverse groups of people. Institutions can and should abide by the First Amendment.”

DEI is now DOA in the federal government and U.S. military. It’s now up to non-governmental and private agencies, including churches, to provide open doors for all who wish to work.

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. Download an episode for your friends. For more Christian commentary, check my website, r-e-x-m as in Martin, that’s rexmrogers.com. Or check my YouTube channel @DrRexRogers for more podcasts and video.

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

© Rex M. Rogers – All Rights Reserved, 2025  

*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 or https://x.com/RexMRogers.

Details

Written by: Rex M. Rogers

Published: 27 January 2025

Is deportation of illegal immigrants morally justifiable?

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #189 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.

Immigrants and immigration are part of the warp and woof of the American nation state. In a very real sense, there would be no United States of America without immigration. Yet today we are embroiled in a major, costly, political problem involving not simply immigrants but unvetted illegal immigrants.

I’ve talked about immigration in several podcasts.

The Immigrant Problem

Immigrant Qua Cultural Enricher

Western Nations and Mass Immigration

Love Your Neighbor—Immigrants Too?

Are Nation States Legitimate?

Before I proceed, let’s pause for a few qualifiers.

I am not taking a position against immigration, nor am I anti-immigrant. When I say this, I mean individuals who have come to America via a legal process. I have friends who fit this definition, people who came from other countries, worked for a time with a Green Card, and in the requisite period, applied for and attained their American citizenship. Bravo to them.

Our problem today are not these legal immigrants who worked the process and became American citizens. Our problem involves millions illegal or undocumented immigrants, many of whom it seems have not come to assimilate and pursue the American Dream, but to seek entitlements and apparently to prey on those around them.

So, when I say we have a major political problem relating to immigrants I am talking about illegals.

“As of January 2024, more than 7.2 million migrants had illegally crossed into the U.S. over the Southwest border during U.S. President Joe Biden's administration — a number higher than the individual populations of 36 states.” Other listings cite as high as 11 million migrants illegally entering the U.S. during the Biden Administration. Mr. Biden opened the floodgates his first day in office in 2021with executive orders that overturned the previous Trump Administration’s policies, like Stay in Mexico, and stopped work on the border wall. And, then the Biden Administration and so-called Progressives allowed illegals to flood the border, even employing night flights of illegal immigrants around the country, forcing state law enforcement to stand down, and more.

Since that time, several cities like New York, Chicago, Denver have spent billions of dollars on illegal immigrants, coopted schools and hotels to house illegal immigrants, spent millions on food credit cards, free cell phones or insurance, inexplicably refused to prosecute illegals involved in crimes against property and even rape and murder.

Now the Trump 2.0 Administration is closing the border and plans to deport, as necessary, millions of illegal immigrants. This, of course, has produced reaction: some 54% of Americans support mass deportation, while others, Democrats, Progressives, social justice advocates, cry fascism and say Trump and those who support his efforts lack compassion, or worse.

Why President Joe Biden, and why most Western European nations, opened borders in the past few years to mass immigration is at this point murky at best.

One reason is a philosophy called Multiculturalism, which wedded to the leftist progressive Democrat desire for political power is at work in the U.S. The last few years’ influx across the open southern border of unvetted, unauthorized, mostly male military-age migrants is now producing predictable, social fragmentation, unrest, and dangerous circumstances in American cities.

“The events on the border are not a humanitarian crisis but a political one…What’s at stake is whether or not laws apply to citizens and foreigners alike. Biden believes that the law should only apply to the former; Trump, to both…People often say, ‘the system is broken’ and call for new laws, but the legal framework isn’t broken, it’s ignored. It’s ignored because various people with power benefit from the chaos politically and economically.”

Meanwhile, many Christian leaders argue it would be wrong for the U.S. to consider closing borders or curtailing immigration because to do so is to not love our neighbors or not welcome strangers. So, this view states that to close borders, restrict immigration, and certainly to deport illegals, is to act in a non-loving, non-Christian manner. 

Recently, “Pope Francis said Donald Trump’s plans to impose mass deportations of immigrants would be a ‘disgrace,’ as he weighed in on the incoming U.S. president’s pledges nearly a decade after calling him ‘not Christian’ for wanting to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexican border.” Interestingly, the Pope failed to mention the walls that surround Vatican City.

Author Megan Basham observed, the United States should welcome ‘huddled masses yearning to breathe free’ to share in the blessings God has bestowed on us. But if we incentivize illegal immigration by rewarding those who ignore our laws and fail to ensure that those to whom we grant citizenship understand and respect our founding ideals that made the nation great, the United States will soon look little different from the countries these immigrants are fleeing.

So, deportation is one approach to correcting what many consider an unsurvivable wave of mass immigration.

Deportation of illegal immigrants is nothing new. The first U.S. presidential administration to order the deportation of illegal immigrants was that John Adams, the second President of the United States. All U.S. president administrations have deported unauthorized non-citizens. Recently, George W Bush deported 2 million, Obama 2.8 million, Trump 1 766,373, and Biden 1.1 million.

Is deportation of illegal immigrants morally justifiable and why?

• National sovereignty, including self-determination of identity and who may live here, is part of citizenship, and without citizenship, there is loss of freedom.
• For a nation-state to exist, it must maintain territorial boundaries that are recognized by other nation-states. No borders, no identity, no nation-state. No nation-state, no common purpose or accomplishments, and likely no security. 

• Deportation is a legitimate means, not an intrinsically evil act,of protecting the common good, of protecting culture and safety, of advancing e Pluribus Unum based on a desire to assimilate, while upholding the dignity of each human person.
• “The reason for the deportationremains that(illegal immigrants) have no right to be in the country to begin with…This follows the basic principle of equivalence in moral justice: the punishment should be calibrated to offset the crime, and should not impose suffering that exceeds that caused by the violation. Deportation merely reverses the harm caused by the person who entered illegally. And if you acknowledge that illegal immigration has negative effects on American citizens – particularly the most vulnerable ones – justice and morality demand that we offer them redress…When illegal immigrants are allowed to work, to make use of public schools, to get drivers’ licenses, to receive in-state tuition at our universities, to receive medical care at the cost of American citizens, to collect welfare assistance, and indeed, in some cases, even to vote…what benefits remain the sole privilege of citizens? We owe it to all citizens – especially the most vulnerable, who are most affected by the mass importation of impoverished, uninvited foreigners – to restore the value of citizenship.”

• Considerations of national and local security. “The lesson of the last 20 years of immigration policy is that lawlessness breeds more lawlessness. Once a people or government decide to normalize one form of lawbreaking, other forms of lawlessness will follow until finally the rule of law itself is in profound jeopardy…Immigration is not a service we provide to the rest of the world. Yes, we are a nation of immigrants and will continue to be. No other country welcomes as many newcomers. But rewarding illegal immigration does an injustice to the many legal immigrants who played by the rules to get here.”

• To continue as we are now with open borders is to destroy America’s position as a beacon of hope to the world.

So, the U.S. must develop immigration policy that protects and preserves American ideals and identity, rule of law, and borders so that the nation may survive and meet the needs of its citizens, and the U.S. must develop immigration policy that provides a legal, orderly, just path for those who desire freedom and opportunity to become Americans. Both these conditions empower us to love our neighbors.

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. Download an episode for your friends. For more Christian commentary, check my website, r-e-x-m as in Martin, that’s rexmrogers.com. Or check my YouTube channel @DrRexRogers for more podcasts and video.

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

© Rex M. Rogers – All Rights Reserved, 2025   

*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 or https://x.com/RexMRogers.