State of Universal Persecution (Part 2)
Persecution is a topic of high priority because it's universal issue that effects everybody regardless of there beliefs or views.
When A Important Issue Looses It's Meaning
After covering the
issues of religious persecution of those in Myanmar, China, and
ISIS-controlled areas, there is a reason why the topic of persecution
should be treated with upmost importance. Yet, this grave topic is being
discounted. How is this?
Within the church setting, spiritual leaders have trivialized the topic by painting the picture that this act only happens to them and them alone. This does a huge disservice to those other groups that have gone though the same pain. By ignoring the pain of others, this presents the picture that the pain and suffering of others wasn't important.
As mentioned in the previous article, persecution is a real issue that affects various groups around the world, regardless of there religious affiliation. As a result, there needs to be a interfaith response to this issue.
The rise of mobile internet made news-on-demand possible. Those with a smartphone can get the latest news on occurring events as a result, and come to the realization that universal persecution is a global issue. Spiritual leaders insults the intelligence of there congregation when painting the problem of persecution as a Christian-only issue, especially when there needs to be that interfaith response.
This is a very dangerous proposition as a global issue that demands awareness is treated as isolated and remote. A word as important as persecution is reduced to a sensationalist, click-bait term. The topic doesn't carry the weight that it should when treated in this manner. Many feel that because churches should only address the persecution of Christians as it's only relevant within there church setting. This topic needs to be addressed because when trivialized, harm is being done to both Christians and others religious groups because of this attitude.
Within the church setting, spiritual leaders have trivialized the topic by painting the picture that this act only happens to them and them alone. This does a huge disservice to those other groups that have gone though the same pain. By ignoring the pain of others, this presents the picture that the pain and suffering of others wasn't important.
As mentioned in the previous article, persecution is a real issue that affects various groups around the world, regardless of there religious affiliation. As a result, there needs to be a interfaith response to this issue.
The rise of mobile internet made news-on-demand possible. Those with a smartphone can get the latest news on occurring events as a result, and come to the realization that universal persecution is a global issue. Spiritual leaders insults the intelligence of there congregation when painting the problem of persecution as a Christian-only issue, especially when there needs to be that interfaith response.
This is a very dangerous proposition as a global issue that demands awareness is treated as isolated and remote. A word as important as persecution is reduced to a sensationalist, click-bait term. The topic doesn't carry the weight that it should when treated in this manner. Many feel that because churches should only address the persecution of Christians as it's only relevant within there church setting. This topic needs to be addressed because when trivialized, harm is being done to both Christians and others religious groups because of this attitude.
Understanding What Is And Isn't Persecution And When A Specific Word Is Given A Broad Definition.
Persecution is a
very real thing, as highlighted above. It's not a phony illusion. There
have been many the world over that have suffered for there faith. It's a
topic that should not be taken lightly. As noted in the Patheos article
covering this topic, Youcef Nadarkhani is in prison in Iran because of his Christian faith. His suffering for his faith should be highlighted as he has been assaulted due to his faith. Ramesh
Raju paid the ultimate price for us belief. He blocked a bomber from
entering the church in Sri Lanka. He died because of who he was, along
with many more on the island that Easter. The same can be said for those
who have been persecuted for there religious views by Boko Haram and
ISIS.
The general definition of persecution is one who is verbally and/or physically assaulted violently for there religious beliefs. This mostly happens in other places around the world, but isolated incidents do occur in this country as well in the form of hate crimes. Unfortunately, many have redefined this word in a very vague manner.
Persecution has been redefined as any negative response to a perceived bias. Having a religious opinion critiqued is suffering for your faith and persecution that is on par to those that suffered from ISIS. Any random slight is considered persecution of the highest manner. Having a difference of opinion that is challenged is considered persecution as well. When persecution is addressed in this country, it's not usually in reference to those who suffered in the Middle East by ISIS or Nigeria by Boko Haram, or those isolated hate crimes in this country, which are unfortunately increasing. Persecution is usually referenced as "I'm persecuted because my views were challenged, and now my beliefs are under assault because of it".
The term persecution was weaponized to deal with and silence any criticism both within and outside of the church. This redefining wasn't done to highlight or elevate those Christians the world over persecuted for there faith or acknowledge there suffering. Those who have suffered have been largely ignored by this change in definition.
Under this vague definition, even other Christians can be seen as persecutors just because there's disagreements that are being challenged. This redefining allows spiritual leaders to label other Christians who see the mobilization of Christianity as a political movement as a negative thing as persecutors because they're challenging there views. The phrase "under assault" is thrown around a lot as well when this happens, which has also been reduced to a sensationalist term. A example of this is: "My faith is under assault due to criticisms of it". As with persecution, a difference of opinion can be labeled as a "assault" on a person's faith. This broad redefining of the word presents those who opinions were critiqued as seeming much more dramatic than it actually was.
This redefining allows spiritual leaders nationwide to pass the blame to secularism and quote "evil liberals" for all of the worlds problems today. This redefining allowed many of them to push there preferred scapegoats and pariahs without accepting responsibility for the spiritual, moral, and ethical shortcomings within the church, and their failure to addressing it. It almost insinuates that many of them are God-like deities incapable of making mistakes, and that whatever happens is the fault of everybody else. This is despite the fact that they are still people and are prone to shortcomings as everybody else as well.
This is one of the reasons why I incorporate that phrase that I perceive to be quickly turning into a cliché: "Spiritual leaders can blame secularism all they want...". Whenever a religious leader blames secularism for the various issues today, it insinuates that they failed in there ministry somehow and are looking for a scapegoat to "pass the buck".
When persecution is redefined in this manner, the word is reduced to a click-bait term for use in sensationalist articles. It's a huge disservice to those in certain parts of the world that have actually suffered for there beliefs, like those under ISIS, and in Nigeria and Saudi Arabia. People like Ramesh Raju, the Christian who blocked that bomber from entering the church, are forgotten by the very people that should be embracing his actions. He, along with many others around the world ware forgotten when people define persecution to cover petty differences. This defining is not done to highlight those around the world that suffered, and with the most recent bombings in Sri Lanka, died for there faith. When random slights and critiques are treated as persecution, then the "boy who cried wolf” mentality is applied.
The topic is turned into a "card" for spiritual leaders to play when there views are criticized. The masses stop taking a vital issue seriously. When a situation of horrific religious violence does arise somewhere in the world, it's largely ignored because the kids that cried wolf in the past are fussing again. Those Christians and others horribly suffering for there beliefs are ignored because there suffering is seen as a "trivial complaint", because of the various claims before. The Sri Lanka bombings become just another point for those that keep score in blood of those that died for there faith.
Many won't show restraint to throwing words and catch phrases around to the point that it have little meaning. Similar to when one incorporates brain-dead platitudes to the point where they become a cliche and tropes. This results in sermons constructed to inspire crowd response, and not inspire deep insight on a issue. Phrases that trivializes there topics.
When redefined in a broad and vague manner, the church leaders can write sermons that can specifically incorporate political opinions into those sermons, attacking those perceived as enemies of Christianity just because there was a difference of opinion. Personal views with political slants are presented as the word of God.
The general definition of persecution is one who is verbally and/or physically assaulted violently for there religious beliefs. This mostly happens in other places around the world, but isolated incidents do occur in this country as well in the form of hate crimes. Unfortunately, many have redefined this word in a very vague manner.
Persecution has been redefined as any negative response to a perceived bias. Having a religious opinion critiqued is suffering for your faith and persecution that is on par to those that suffered from ISIS. Any random slight is considered persecution of the highest manner. Having a difference of opinion that is challenged is considered persecution as well. When persecution is addressed in this country, it's not usually in reference to those who suffered in the Middle East by ISIS or Nigeria by Boko Haram, or those isolated hate crimes in this country, which are unfortunately increasing. Persecution is usually referenced as "I'm persecuted because my views were challenged, and now my beliefs are under assault because of it".
The term persecution was weaponized to deal with and silence any criticism both within and outside of the church. This redefining wasn't done to highlight or elevate those Christians the world over persecuted for there faith or acknowledge there suffering. Those who have suffered have been largely ignored by this change in definition.
Under this vague definition, even other Christians can be seen as persecutors just because there's disagreements that are being challenged. This redefining allows spiritual leaders to label other Christians who see the mobilization of Christianity as a political movement as a negative thing as persecutors because they're challenging there views. The phrase "under assault" is thrown around a lot as well when this happens, which has also been reduced to a sensationalist term. A example of this is: "My faith is under assault due to criticisms of it". As with persecution, a difference of opinion can be labeled as a "assault" on a person's faith. This broad redefining of the word presents those who opinions were critiqued as seeming much more dramatic than it actually was.
This redefining allows spiritual leaders nationwide to pass the blame to secularism and quote "evil liberals" for all of the worlds problems today. This redefining allowed many of them to push there preferred scapegoats and pariahs without accepting responsibility for the spiritual, moral, and ethical shortcomings within the church, and their failure to addressing it. It almost insinuates that many of them are God-like deities incapable of making mistakes, and that whatever happens is the fault of everybody else. This is despite the fact that they are still people and are prone to shortcomings as everybody else as well.
This is one of the reasons why I incorporate that phrase that I perceive to be quickly turning into a cliché: "Spiritual leaders can blame secularism all they want...". Whenever a religious leader blames secularism for the various issues today, it insinuates that they failed in there ministry somehow and are looking for a scapegoat to "pass the buck".
When persecution is redefined in this manner, the word is reduced to a click-bait term for use in sensationalist articles. It's a huge disservice to those in certain parts of the world that have actually suffered for there beliefs, like those under ISIS, and in Nigeria and Saudi Arabia. People like Ramesh Raju, the Christian who blocked that bomber from entering the church, are forgotten by the very people that should be embracing his actions. He, along with many others around the world ware forgotten when people define persecution to cover petty differences. This defining is not done to highlight those around the world that suffered, and with the most recent bombings in Sri Lanka, died for there faith. When random slights and critiques are treated as persecution, then the "boy who cried wolf” mentality is applied.
The topic is turned into a "card" for spiritual leaders to play when there views are criticized. The masses stop taking a vital issue seriously. When a situation of horrific religious violence does arise somewhere in the world, it's largely ignored because the kids that cried wolf in the past are fussing again. Those Christians and others horribly suffering for there beliefs are ignored because there suffering is seen as a "trivial complaint", because of the various claims before. The Sri Lanka bombings become just another point for those that keep score in blood of those that died for there faith.
Many won't show restraint to throwing words and catch phrases around to the point that it have little meaning. Similar to when one incorporates brain-dead platitudes to the point where they become a cliche and tropes. This results in sermons constructed to inspire crowd response, and not inspire deep insight on a issue. Phrases that trivializes there topics.
When redefined in a broad and vague manner, the church leaders can write sermons that can specifically incorporate political opinions into those sermons, attacking those perceived as enemies of Christianity just because there was a difference of opinion. Personal views with political slants are presented as the word of God.
When Social Media Enters The Picture
This problem
escalates when social media enters the picture. This is already a major
issue as many will post articles on there Facebook timelines on impulse
without researching the validity of the article. Many bloggers and
websites are playing into this view as well. Most viewers on Facebook
will automatically assume that any blogger or website that has the word
"Christian" in the title won't lie. I'm not saying that all sources are
dishonest and there are many truthful sites, but critical thinking on
the part of the viewer is required and must be exercised.
Those operating many of the these sites know this too, so in many cases, they will create content that will generate click-bait that exploits the current social climate and the anxiety from it. The content will be geared towards that demographic, and it designed to attract viewers, regardless of whether the information presented is factual or not. This is done to generate revenue from the advertisements. Those visiting the sites will automatically take the claims made on these sites as the gospel and run with it. A lot of sensationalist click-bait is passed off as actual news.
When referencing perceived persecution in this country, many will reference these stories found on there Facebook feed. These stories will be delivered in the sermon with a fierce passion to highlight the struggle. In the vast majority of these cases, they will embrace a story on impulse without checking the validity of the article. There will be no fact-checking on the source. Validation that would have only taken a few minutes to do. There is no checking done to see if these sources have a political slant or bias, and purposely left parts of a otherwise mundane story to give it a dramatic spin. Many will treat these claims are taken at face value.
To make cases of persecution in this country, stories will be presented like how students in a high school in Tennessee were forced to bow down to Allah and convert to Islam. A story which caused many to point out the suffering of Christian persecution in this country. A story which garnered so much attention considering that the events in question never took place, and turned out to be fabricated. In this particular case, there was a Tennessee High School course that taught various world religions from a objective viewpoint. Charges were made that students were being forced to bow down to Allah, despite the event never taking place. The picture used to illustrate this wasn't even taken in this country. Most of those who make the claim operate on the view that simply acknowledging the existence of Islam is indoctrination, which was were those charges were made.
Many who incorporate these pieces into there sermons just embraced the headline and ran with it on impulse without checking to see if the story was factual or not. Many of those in the congregation that might not be knowledgeable of national and world events might have embraced this story, forming opinions based on a events that never occurred. Those that have a duty to lead there congregation based on truth could unknowingly be lying to there congregation by incorporating any piece they see on Facebook without checking whether the article in question is factual or not.
Others in the congregation who fact-check on a regular basis would have been both alarmed and felt alienated that a piece that should have never been in a sermon made it's way there.
Now, I'm not saying that social commentary shouldn't be incorporated into a sermon. It can if done right and a lot of research on the part of the presenter is done in advance. There is a huge responsibility on those speaking to the congregation. In-depth research though is often the exception though instead of the rule when it comes to sermons.
Another story that highlighted perceived persecution was how the Bible was supposedly banned in California. This story constantly showed up on my Facebook feed. Did I just run with this story and posted it on my Timeline on impulse? Since you're still in the pews listening to the responsibilities of fact-checking, one can come to the conclusion of what I did next. I actually checked to see if the information presented was factual or not. BTW, it wasn't.
In a nutshell, that particular story was that California banned "gay-conversion" therapies on a for-profit basis. There was medical studies done that showed the such conversions actually contributed to high number of suicides and other adverse health conditions. As a result, these therapies for a for-profit basis were banned. This was also done to prevent scammers from starting fake businesses to exploit people financially.
Whatever literature that these businesses were using would have been confiscated, regardless of whether it was the Bible, Koran, the Communist Manifesto, the Birds of California guide, the movie transcript of RoboCop, the KFC secret recipe, etc. The proposed bill didn't even ban these therapies either. Church groups and various organizations can still practice them despite the potential health issue of those partaking in them. These therapies can still be practiced, just not a for-profit basis. The Bible wasn't banned under any of these circumstance either.
However, a huge portion of the websites and bloggers covering this topic didn't cover this aspect. Using a sensationalist headline that didn't accurately cover the issue, this story exploded on social media. They widely misinterpreted the story for the sake of clicks, and those who saw the story reacted to it without getting the full picture. Many of these bloggers knew that those reading the story would just be taking there word for it without any research. Many encountering the articles automatically assumed that a website that had "Christian" in the name wouldn't lie to them, and took the story without validating it. These sensationalist were incorporated into sermons and then preached as if it was the gospel.
People become divisive politically over events that never occurred or were vastly misrepresented. Whether one agrees or disagrees with a particular story is irrelevant if that event never took place. This sermon is already posted on my blog, the Kixmiller Pigeon. If you go there, I will have the sources of my information referenced in this piece linked below. It's important to be as transparent as possible.
I know that at this point, this sermon is starting to sound more like a political science lecture than a sermon. However, this is a result of when social and political commentary is incorporated within the church setting, it does have a impact on the church, and thus, needs to be addressed as it is something that one on a spiritual walk with God will likely encounter.
As mentioned earlier, social and political commentary can be incorporated within a sermon. However, there is a huge responsibility on the part of the messenger to check if the information presented is factual or not. Otherwise, one could inadvertently be lying to there congregation.
Those operating many of the these sites know this too, so in many cases, they will create content that will generate click-bait that exploits the current social climate and the anxiety from it. The content will be geared towards that demographic, and it designed to attract viewers, regardless of whether the information presented is factual or not. This is done to generate revenue from the advertisements. Those visiting the sites will automatically take the claims made on these sites as the gospel and run with it. A lot of sensationalist click-bait is passed off as actual news.
When referencing perceived persecution in this country, many will reference these stories found on there Facebook feed. These stories will be delivered in the sermon with a fierce passion to highlight the struggle. In the vast majority of these cases, they will embrace a story on impulse without checking the validity of the article. There will be no fact-checking on the source. Validation that would have only taken a few minutes to do. There is no checking done to see if these sources have a political slant or bias, and purposely left parts of a otherwise mundane story to give it a dramatic spin. Many will treat these claims are taken at face value.
To make cases of persecution in this country, stories will be presented like how students in a high school in Tennessee were forced to bow down to Allah and convert to Islam. A story which caused many to point out the suffering of Christian persecution in this country. A story which garnered so much attention considering that the events in question never took place, and turned out to be fabricated. In this particular case, there was a Tennessee High School course that taught various world religions from a objective viewpoint. Charges were made that students were being forced to bow down to Allah, despite the event never taking place. The picture used to illustrate this wasn't even taken in this country. Most of those who make the claim operate on the view that simply acknowledging the existence of Islam is indoctrination, which was were those charges were made.
Many who incorporate these pieces into there sermons just embraced the headline and ran with it on impulse without checking to see if the story was factual or not. Many of those in the congregation that might not be knowledgeable of national and world events might have embraced this story, forming opinions based on a events that never occurred. Those that have a duty to lead there congregation based on truth could unknowingly be lying to there congregation by incorporating any piece they see on Facebook without checking whether the article in question is factual or not.
Others in the congregation who fact-check on a regular basis would have been both alarmed and felt alienated that a piece that should have never been in a sermon made it's way there.
Now, I'm not saying that social commentary shouldn't be incorporated into a sermon. It can if done right and a lot of research on the part of the presenter is done in advance. There is a huge responsibility on those speaking to the congregation. In-depth research though is often the exception though instead of the rule when it comes to sermons.
Another story that highlighted perceived persecution was how the Bible was supposedly banned in California. This story constantly showed up on my Facebook feed. Did I just run with this story and posted it on my Timeline on impulse? Since you're still in the pews listening to the responsibilities of fact-checking, one can come to the conclusion of what I did next. I actually checked to see if the information presented was factual or not. BTW, it wasn't.
In a nutshell, that particular story was that California banned "gay-conversion" therapies on a for-profit basis. There was medical studies done that showed the such conversions actually contributed to high number of suicides and other adverse health conditions. As a result, these therapies for a for-profit basis were banned. This was also done to prevent scammers from starting fake businesses to exploit people financially.
Whatever literature that these businesses were using would have been confiscated, regardless of whether it was the Bible, Koran, the Communist Manifesto, the Birds of California guide, the movie transcript of RoboCop, the KFC secret recipe, etc. The proposed bill didn't even ban these therapies either. Church groups and various organizations can still practice them despite the potential health issue of those partaking in them. These therapies can still be practiced, just not a for-profit basis. The Bible wasn't banned under any of these circumstance either.
However, a huge portion of the websites and bloggers covering this topic didn't cover this aspect. Using a sensationalist headline that didn't accurately cover the issue, this story exploded on social media. They widely misinterpreted the story for the sake of clicks, and those who saw the story reacted to it without getting the full picture. Many of these bloggers knew that those reading the story would just be taking there word for it without any research. Many encountering the articles automatically assumed that a website that had "Christian" in the name wouldn't lie to them, and took the story without validating it. These sensationalist were incorporated into sermons and then preached as if it was the gospel.
People become divisive politically over events that never occurred or were vastly misrepresented. Whether one agrees or disagrees with a particular story is irrelevant if that event never took place. This sermon is already posted on my blog, the Kixmiller Pigeon. If you go there, I will have the sources of my information referenced in this piece linked below. It's important to be as transparent as possible.
I know that at this point, this sermon is starting to sound more like a political science lecture than a sermon. However, this is a result of when social and political commentary is incorporated within the church setting, it does have a impact on the church, and thus, needs to be addressed as it is something that one on a spiritual walk with God will likely encounter.
As mentioned earlier, social and political commentary can be incorporated within a sermon. However, there is a huge responsibility on the part of the messenger to check if the information presented is factual or not. Otherwise, one could inadvertently be lying to there congregation.
Interfaith Response
Jesus calls on
us to do it. We must also stand up for others that feel discriminated as
well, regardless of who they are. Jesus also calls on us to do that.
Our struggle isn't ours alone.
Now there are
examples were Christians feel that they are being persecuted and/or
discriminated. The Patheos article uses the admission standards of
Vanderbilt University as a result. For those who aren't familiar, that
university uses a very rigorous admissions policy. As a result,
Christian students feel that they are being discriminated and for there
faith, as those of other religions, as Vanderbilt's policies applies to
all students equally.
In this example, Christian students can make a case that they are discriminated for there faith. At the same time though, if these students make the case for there discrimination, they must also highlight and make the case for the discrimination of Buddhist, Hindu, and Muslim students as well. The issue isn't applicable to those students alone as the same restrictions applies to all as well. The Christian students would need to stand up and make the case for those other students as well, and there struggle isn't there's alone. They would be compelled too.
I feel that in the case of perceived discrimination, many Christians have made the struggle about themselves only when it needs to be recognized that others suffer for there faith as well, regardless of religions. This is why interfaith response is necessary. There have been isolated cases in this country where Christian's have been targeted for there faith and persecuted. There called hate crimes. In order to address these hate crimes, the suffering of those of other religions need to be addressed as well, because persecution is a universal issue that demands a interface response. Persecution is a Christian issue. At the same time, this effects Muslims, Buddhist, Hindu's, and others. The addressing of religious persecution on a universal scale can't occur if these other groups aren't represented, because they go through the same suffering as well.
As Christians, we are compelled to stand up for our faith. Jesus calls on us to do it. We must also stand up for others that feel discriminated as well, regardless of who they are. Jesus also calls on us to do that. Our struggle isn't ours alone. This is why there needs to be a interfaith response to this global issue.
In this example, Christian students can make a case that they are discriminated for there faith. At the same time though, if these students make the case for there discrimination, they must also highlight and make the case for the discrimination of Buddhist, Hindu, and Muslim students as well. The issue isn't applicable to those students alone as the same restrictions applies to all as well. The Christian students would need to stand up and make the case for those other students as well, and there struggle isn't there's alone. They would be compelled too.
I feel that in the case of perceived discrimination, many Christians have made the struggle about themselves only when it needs to be recognized that others suffer for there faith as well, regardless of religions. This is why interfaith response is necessary. There have been isolated cases in this country where Christian's have been targeted for there faith and persecuted. There called hate crimes. In order to address these hate crimes, the suffering of those of other religions need to be addressed as well, because persecution is a universal issue that demands a interface response. Persecution is a Christian issue. At the same time, this effects Muslims, Buddhist, Hindu's, and others. The addressing of religious persecution on a universal scale can't occur if these other groups aren't represented, because they go through the same suffering as well.
As Christians, we are compelled to stand up for our faith. Jesus calls on us to do it. We must also stand up for others that feel discriminated as well, regardless of who they are. Jesus also calls on us to do that. Our struggle isn't ours alone. This is why there needs to be a interfaith response to this global issue.
Articles of Interest
State of Universal Persecution (Part 1)
Kixmiller Pigeon
RKIXMILLER.DUDAONE.COM
Kixmiller Pigeon
RKIXMILLER.DUDAONE.COM
Christian Persecution – Fact or Fiction
Patheos
WWW.PATHEOS.COM
Sri Lanka: The worshipper who blocked a bomber
BBC
WWW.BBC.COM
Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant
Wikipedia
EN.WIKIPEDIA.ORG
Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant
(Human rights abuse and war crime findings)
Wikipedia
EN.WIKIPEDIA.ORG
Human rights in ISIL-controlled territory
Wikipedia
EN.WIKIPEDIA.ORG
Human rights in ISIL-controlled territory
(Religious and minority group massacres, forced conversion, and expulsion)
Wikipedia
EN.WIKIPEDIA.ORG
Persecution of Christians by ISIL
Wikipedia
EN.WIKIPEDIA.ORG
Genocide of Yazidis by ISIL
Wikipedia
EN.WIKIPEDIA.ORG
Persecution of Shias by ISIL
Wikipedia
EN.WIKIPEDIA.ORG
Wahhabism
WIKIPEDIA
EN.WIKIPEDIA.ORG
Boko Haram
WIKIPEDIA
EN.WIKIPEDIA.ORG
Tennessee Schoolchildren Forced to Bow Down to Allah
WWW.SNOPES.COM
California Bill Wouldn’t Ban the Bible
WWW.FACTCHECK.ORG
Blind evangelical support for Trump is theological malpractice
WWW.THEHILL.COM
Sessions announces 'religious liberty task force'
WWW.THEHILL.COM
The State Department is holding a summit on the religious right’s agenda
WWW.LGBTQNATION.COM
Jeff Sessions' 'religious liberty task force' part of a dangerous Christian nationalist campaign of discrimination
NBCNews
Comments
Post a Comment