thestream--2020-10-20--Debate Commission’s New Rule Designates Mic Mute Times for Thursday’s Debate

President Donald Trump and Democratic nominee Joe Biden will have their microphones muted during Thursday ’ s debate when it is not their turn to speak , the Commission on Presidential Debates announced Monday .
The rule was created in order to avoid the interruptions and crosstalk seen during the first presidential debate , according to The New York Times .
The commission noted the campaigns might not be pleased and both Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden and President Donald Trump ’ s aides were informed of the rule on Monday .
“ We realize , after discussions with both @ @ @ @ @ @ @ totally satisfied with the measures announced today , ” the commission said in a statement .
“ One may think they go too far , and one may think they do not go far enough .
We are comfortable that these actions strike the right balance and that they are in the interest of the American people , for whom these debates are held , ” the statement continued .
Each candidate will have two minutes to answer the moderator ’ s questions , during which time his opponents microphone will be muted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ microphones will be unmuted so the president and form Biden and Trump can debate freely .
The commission said after the first debate that “ additional structure should be added to the format of the remaining debates to ensure a more orderly discussion of the issues , ” the NYT reported .
Those planning the debate were hesitant to make changes after Trump withdrew from the second debate when it was switched to virtual .
“ President Trump is committed to debating Joe Biden regardless of last minute rule changes from the biased @ @ @ @ @ @ @ advantage to their favored candidate , ” Bill Stepien , Trump ’ s campaign manager , said in a statement .
Trump will question Biden about the former vice president ’ s son , Hunter Biden , and China because the debate concerns foreign policy , Stepien added .
“ If the media won ’ t ask Joe Biden these questions , the President will , and there will be no escape for Biden , ” Stepien continued .
The Biden campaign and the Commission on Presidential Debates did not immediately respond to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience .
For licensing opportunities of our original content , please contact licensing @ dailycallernewsfoundation.org .

President Donald Trump and Democratic nominee Joe Biden will have their microphones muted during Thursday’s debate when it is not their turn to speak, the Commission on Presidential Debates announced Monday.
The rule was created in order to avoid the interruptions and crosstalk seen during the first presidential debate, according to The New York Times. The commission noted the campaigns might not be pleased and both Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden and President Donald Trump’s aides were informed of the rule on Monday.
“We realize, after discussions with both campaigns, that neither campaign may be totally satisfied with the measures announced today,” the commission said in a statement.
NEW: Debate Commission will *MUTE* candidates' microphones during their opponent's 2-minute opening answers. Then mikes turn back on & candidates have at it. https://t.co/KEffKVRbod — Michael M. Grynbaum (@grynbaum) October 19, 2020
“One may think they go too far, and one may think they do not go far enough. We are comfortable that these actions strike the right balance and that they are in the interest of the American people, for whom these debates are held,” the statement continued.
Each candidate will have two minutes to answer the moderator’s questions, during which time his opponents microphone will be muted. After each have responded, both microphones will be unmuted so the president and form Biden and Trump can debate freely.
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic, and Moral Issues of Our Day.
The commission said after the first debate that “additional structure should be added to the format of the remaining debates to ensure a more orderly discussion of the issues,” the NYT reported. Those planning the debate were hesitant to make changes after Trump withdrew from the second debate when it was switched to virtual.
“President Trump is committed to debating Joe Biden regardless of last minute rule changes from the biased commission in their latest attempt to provide advantage to their favored candidate,” Bill Stepien, Trump’s campaign manager, said in a statement.
Trump will question Biden about the former vice president’s son, Hunter Biden, and China because the debate concerns foreign policy, Stepien added.
“If the media won’t ask Joe Biden these questions, the President will, and there will be no escape for Biden,” Stepien continued.
The Biden campaign and the Commission on Presidential Debates did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Copyright 2020 The Daily Caller News Foundation
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].


thestream--2020-10-20--Pompeo Calls Twitter’s Censorship of Hunter Biden Story ‘Dangerous’

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo called Twitter ’ s reported decision to censor the New York Post ’ s story about Hunter Biden ’ s alleged hard drive “ dangerous ” and politically motivated in a Washington Examiner interview Monday .
“ It is dangerous when a powerful force like the communications tool which is Twitter adopts a non-viewpoint-neutral view of the world , ” Pompeo told the Examiner .
“ They have to make a choice , either it ’ s going to be viewpoint neutral or they ’ re going to make a different decision , ” the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that decision can ’ t be based on whether it is supportive of this administration or attempting to undermine America.
” President Donald Trump ’ s personal lawyer , former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani , reportedly sent a copy of former Vice President Joe Biden ’ s son ’ s alleged hard drive to the Post after it was left at a Delaware computer repair store , the Post reported .
Twitter censored the report , locked the Post ’ s account , and refused to re-open it unless the outlet deleted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ according to Fox Business .
The tech giant said the Post relied on “ hacked ” information to write the story , Fox reported .
The Post wrote that Hunter Biden took a job with a Ukrainian energy company called Burisma for $ 50,000 a month and reported unconfirmed email exchanges in which a foreign energy executive suggested Joe Biden had met with the man who employed his son .
Joe Biden previously has stated that he “ had never spoken ” to his “ son about his overseas business dealings , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also reportedly contained images of Hunter Biden engaged in lewd behavior with one picture appearing to show him asleep with a crack pipe dangling from his mouth , according to the Post .
Both the Biden campaign and Pompeo did not immediately respond to requests for comment from The Daily Caller News Foundation at the time of publishing .
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience .
For licensing opportunities of our original content , please contact @ @ @ @

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo called Twitter’s reported decision to censor the New York Post’s story about Hunter Biden’s alleged hard drive “dangerous” and politically motivated in a Washington Examiner interview Monday.
“It is dangerous when a powerful force like the communications tool which is Twitter adopts a non-viewpoint-neutral view of the world,” Pompeo told the Examiner.
“They have to make a choice, either it’s going to be viewpoint neutral or they’re going to make a different decision,” the secretary of state continued. “And that decision can’t be based on whether it is supportive of this administration or attempting to undermine America.”
President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, reportedly sent a copy of former Vice President Joe Biden’s son’s alleged hard drive to the Post after it was left at a Delaware computer repair store, the Post reported.
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic, and Moral Issues of Our Day.
Twitter censored the report, locked the Post’s account, and refused to re-open it unless the outlet deleted uploads containing the hard drive story, according to Fox Business. The tech giant said the Post relied on “hacked” information to write the story, Fox reported.
The Post wrote that Hunter Biden took a job with a Ukrainian energy company called Burisma for $50,000 a month and reported unconfirmed email exchanges in which a foreign energy executive suggested Joe Biden had met with the man who employed his son.
Joe Biden previously has stated that he “had never spoken” to his “son about his overseas business dealings,” the Post reported.
The hard drive also reportedly contained images of Hunter Biden engaged in lewd behavior with one picture appearing to show him asleep with a crack pipe dangling from his mouth, according to the Post.
Both the Biden campaign and Pompeo did not immediately respond to requests for comment from The Daily Caller News Foundation at the time of publishing.
Copyright 2020 The Daily Caller News Foundation
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].


thestream--2020-10-21--Leftist ‘Rights’ vs. Your Freedom of Conscience

The foundation of civilized society is freedom of conscience .
But this core freedom is under severe assault from the Left .
And that is frightening because all our constitutionally-enumerated freedoms rest on the bedrock liberty of conscience .
Consider the First Amendment .
Free exercise of religion is informed and motivated by the dictates of conscience .
So also with the other planks of the First Amendment — free speech , free press , freedom of assembly and freedom to petition the government for redress of grievances .
All these liberties spring from the foundational freedom of conscience and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ For James Madison , often called the Father of the Constitution , his commitment to religious freedom and the rights of conscience may have begun while standing with his father outside a Virginia jail .
There he heard Baptists preaching from the jail cell windows .
What was their crime ?
According to historian William J. Federer , they were unlicensed ministers — preaching religious opinions not approved by the government .
Prior to his work on the U.S. Constitution , Madison wrote his famous “ Memorial and Remonstrance ” against religious assessments @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In it , the man John Marshall called “ the most eloquent man I ever heard ” wrote : While his argument focused largely on religious liberty , Madison ’ s use of the phrase “ the dictates of conscience ” highlights the broader and more general applicability of freedom of conscience — which undergirds all our God-given freedoms .
Thomas Jefferson , whose letter to the Danbury Baptist Association was widely quoted on the question of church and state , speaks even more powerfully about freedom of conscience in that same @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
This highlights the distinction between rights and beliefs — a distinction that must be made for civil society to exist .
But that distinction is rapidly yielding to the onslaught of the radical Leftists .
Today , a whole cast of Leftist characters argue that their right to assume non-biological gender identities ( for example ) is superior to your right to deeply-held religious convictions .
As one LGBT activist put it : “ For human rights to flourish , religious rights have to come second.
” Chai Feldblum , the openly-lesbian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Commission , agrees .
She is the architect of the so-called Employment Non-Discrimination Act , which would force religious organizations to hire people not having the same ( or any ) religious convictions .
Feldblum also writes : “ Heterosexuality , homosexuality and bisexuality are all morally neutral … but lack of gender equity is morally bad.
” This is the agenda of the Left — now on full display .
Their “ rights ” must always prevail over your beliefs .
In their fevered understanding , your beliefs are “ morally bad.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ be an election — one holding greater portent for America than at any time since the Civil War .
This election is fundamentally about whether this cornerstone freedom of conscience can endure and whether the Gospel is one of those things that must come second .
The question today is the same posed by Abraham Lincoln at Gettysburg : “ Will government of , by and for the people perish from the Earth ?
” The answer depends largely on you .
Will you bend the knee to radical Marxists , or remain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Will you be bullied into silence or stand on your convictions ?
Will you cower in your homes for fear of the pandemic , or will you stand and defend freedom for the sake of future generations ?
Many have gone to ends of the Earth — giving their lives for the sake of the Gospel .
You need only set aside an hour of your life to stand for Christ in the voting booth .
The hour is late .
The Constitution is on life support .
Our freedom to proclaim the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can help preserve the Constitution which guarantees rights endowed by our Creator .
The very freedoms of those yet unborn hang in the balance .
Vote .
Vote your conscience — while it ’ s still allowed .
Frank Wright , Ph.D. , is President and CEO of D. James Kennedy Ministries .
Click here to watch Billionaire Radical : George Soros and the Scheme to Remake America .

The foundation of civilized society is freedom of conscience. But this core freedom is under severe assault from the Left. And that is frightening because all our constitutionally-enumerated freedoms rest on the bedrock liberty of conscience.
The hour is late. The Constitution is on life support.
Vote your conscience — while it’s still allowed.
Consider the First Amendment. Free exercise of religion is informed and motivated by the dictates of conscience. So also with the other planks of the First Amendment — free speech, free press, freedom of assembly and freedom to petition the government for redress of grievances. All these liberties spring from the foundational freedom of conscience and date to America’s founding.
Jailed for Preaching
For James Madison, often called the Father of the Constitution, his commitment to religious freedom and the rights of conscience may have begun while standing with his father outside a Virginia jail. There he heard Baptists preaching from the jail cell windows. What was their crime? According to historian William J. Federer, they were unlicensed ministers — preaching religious opinions not approved by the government.
Prior to his work on the U.S. Constitution, Madison wrote his famous “Memorial and Remonstrance” against religious assessments (taxes imposed to support religion). In it, the man John Marshall called “the most eloquent man I ever heard” wrote:
The equal right of every citizen to the free exercise of his religion according to the dictates of conscience is held by the same tenure with all our other rights. If we recur to its origin, it is equally the gift of nature (of God); if we weigh its importance, it cannot be less dear to us (emphasis added).
While his argument focused largely on religious liberty, Madison’s use of the phrase “the dictates of conscience” highlights the broader and more general applicability of freedom of conscience — which undergirds all our God-given freedoms.
Thomas Jefferson, whose letter to the Danbury Baptist Association was widely quoted on the question of church and state, speaks even more powerfully about freedom of conscience in that same letter:
Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions (emphasis added).
Actions only. Not opinions. This highlights the distinction between rights and beliefs — a distinction that must be made for civil society to exist. But that distinction is rapidly yielding to the onslaught of the radical Leftists.
Religious Rights Second?
Today, a whole cast of Leftist characters argue that their right to assume non-biological gender identities (for example) is superior to your right to deeply-held religious convictions. As one LGBT activist put it: “For human rights to flourish, religious rights have to come second.”
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic, and Moral Issues of Our Day.
Chai Feldblum, the openly-lesbian former member of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, agrees. She is the architect of the so-called Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which would force religious organizations to hire people not having the same (or any) religious convictions. Feldblum also writes: “Heterosexuality, homosexuality and bisexuality are all morally neutral … but lack of gender equity is morally bad.”
This is the agenda of the Left — now on full display. Their “rights” must always prevail over your beliefs. In their fevered understanding, your beliefs are “morally bad.”
The Hour is Late
In less than two weeks will be an election — one holding greater portent for America than at any time since the Civil War. This election is fundamentally about whether this cornerstone freedom of conscience can endure and whether the Gospel is one of those things that must come second.
The question today is the same posed by Abraham Lincoln at Gettysburg: “Will government of, by and for the people perish from the Earth?” The answer depends largely on you.
Will you bend the knee to radical Marxists, or remain obedient to the truth of God? Will you be bullied into silence or stand on your convictions? Will you cower in your homes for fear of the pandemic, or will you stand and defend freedom for the sake of future generations?
Many have gone to ends of the Earth — giving their lives for the sake of the Gospel. You need only set aside an hour of your life to stand for Christ in the voting booth.
The hour is late. The Constitution is on life support. Our freedom to proclaim the Gospel stands in jeopardy. Your vote can help preserve the Constitution which guarantees rights endowed by our Creator. The very freedoms of those yet unborn hang in the balance.
Vote. Vote your conscience — while it’s still allowed.
Frank Wright, Ph.D., is President and CEO of D. James Kennedy Ministries. Click here to watch Billionaire Radical: George Soros and the Scheme to Remake America.


thestream--2020-10-21--Military Photo of the Day: Serving Our Country … and Our Feathered Friends

U.S. Coast Guardsmen rescue an injured pelican from a cement ship near Kiptopeke State Park in Virginia on October 10 @ @ @ @ @ all glad this distressed pelican is now safe and sound !

U.S. Coast Guardsmen rescue an injured pelican from a cement ship near Kiptopeke State Park in Virginia on October 10, 2020.
We are all glad this distressed pelican is now safe and sound!
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic, and Moral Issues of Our Day.


thestream--2020-10-21--Christian Voting Myth #4: ‘I’m Not in the Majority Where I Live, So Why Bother?’

This is the final part of a 4-part series debunking four common myths Christians use to not vote .
Read myth # 1 : “ One Vote Doesn ’ t Make a Difference ” ; myth # 2 : “ God Is in Charge Anyway So It Doesn ’ t Matter if I Vote ” and myth # 3 : “ I Don ’ t Like Either Candidate , So What ’ s the Point ?
” It ’ s election season , and with every election comes polling .
And with every poll comes the quest for 51 percent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote than the other guy and I win .
The fact that the person with the most votes wins elections is the reason most of us believe that the majority wins .
But is it true ?
Not entirely .
Here ’ s why .
In the United States , the population is 327 million people .
But not everyone who lives in America can vote in elections .
To be eligible to vote , you have to be a citizen , at least 18 years old , and , in most places @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 327 million people , only 253 million are eligible voters .
But that doesn ’ t mean all of them are voters .
In fact , of the 253 million eligible voters , only 153 million are registered voters .
That means less than half the U.S. population is a registered voter .
But that ’ s not all .
Not every registered voter actually votes .
In 2016 , 137 million people voted , but they didn ’ t all vote in every race .
Only 127 million votes were cast for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and we learn that 54 percent of eligible voters and less than 42 percent of Americans voted .
As a result , Donald Trump was elected president with just under 63 million votes .
That ’ s right .
The President of the United States was chosen by only 25 percent of eligible voters and less than 20 percent of the population .
That doesn ’ t represent a majority of Americans , that represents a majority of Americans who voted .
This phenomenon is true in every election and in every race @ @ @ @ @ @ @ win comfortably aren ’ t getting support from a majority of their constituents .
In 2018 , Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf won comfortably with over 57 percent of the vote , but he received the votes of only 22 percent of his constituents .
The lack of participation in every election is magnified in close elections .
In 2017 , a Virginia House of Delegates race ended in a tie after more than 23,000 ballots were cast .
Even one more person deciding to vote would have made a tremendous difference .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seat was decided by two votes out of 14,000 ballots cast .
Two votes made a big difference there .
In more local races , the drop-off rate increases , meaning that races are decided by a smaller number of total votes and a smaller percentage of the electorate .
State legislative races are often decided by less than 10 percent of the people in a district .
School board races are commonly decided by less than five percent of the people affected .
Sometimes it ’ s closer to one percent .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ true that the majority wins elections , it ’ s just not the whole story .
Elections are not decided by a majority of a country , state or city , they ’ re decided by a majority of those who actually participate .
According to George Barna , 61 percent of eligible evangelicals voted in the 2016 election .
This means that almost 40 percent did not vote .
In other words , four out of 10 people you go to church with do not vote when given the opportunity .
Despite @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disproportionate impact .
According to Pew Research , in the 2018 election , white evangelicals were 26 percent of all voters despite being only 15 percent of the population .
Imagine the impact the church could have if everyone did their part .
The point is , participate .
It isn ’ t hard but it is important .
If you ’ re not registered to vote , get registered .
If you don ’ t usually vote , fill out your ballot .
Don ’ t worry that not everyone in your @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not even matter .
After all , it ’ s not the majority who wins , it ’ s the majority of those who actually show up .
It ’ s our job to show up .
Joseph Backholm is Senior Fellow for Biblical Worldview and Strategic Engagement at Family Research Council .
He combines extensive legal , political , and policy experience with a love for the way biblical truth cultivates human flourishing .

This is the final part of a 4-part series debunking four common myths Christians use to not vote. Read myth #1: “One Vote Doesn’t Make a Difference”; myth #2: “God Is in Charge Anyway So It Doesn’t Matter if I Vote” and myth #3: “I Don’t Like Either Candidate, So What’s the Point?”
It’s election season, and with every election comes polling. And with every poll comes the quest for 51 percent. After all, just one more vote than the other guy and I win. The fact that the person with the most votes wins elections is the reason most of us believe that the majority wins. But is it true? Not entirely. Here’s why.
The Election Phenomenon
In the United States, the population is 327 million people. But not everyone who lives in America can vote in elections. To be eligible to vote, you have to be a citizen, at least 18 years old, and, in most places, not a felon.
Out of 327 million people, only 253 million are eligible voters. But that doesn’t mean all of them are voters. In fact, of the 253 million eligible voters, only 153 million are registered voters. That means less than half the U.S. population is a registered voter. But that’s not all. Not every registered voter actually votes. In 2016, 137 million people voted, but they didn’t all vote in every race. Only 127 million votes were cast for president.
After all, it’s not the majority who wins, it’s the majority of those who actually show up. It’s our job to show up.
Put it all together, and we learn that 54 percent of eligible voters and less than 42 percent of Americans voted.
As a result, Donald Trump was elected president with just under 63 million votes. That’s right. The President of the United States was chosen by only 25 percent of eligible voters and less than 20 percent of the population. That doesn’t represent a majority of Americans, that represents a majority of Americans who voted.
This phenomenon is true in every election and in every race around the country. Even candidates who win comfortably aren’t getting support from a majority of their constituents.
Participation Matters
In 2018, Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf won comfortably with over 57 percent of the vote, but he received the votes of only 22 percent of his constituents.
The lack of participation in every election is magnified in close elections. In 2017, a Virginia House of Delegates race ended in a tie after more than 23,000 ballots were cast. Even one more person deciding to vote would have made a tremendous difference.
In 2016, a New Mexico State House seat was decided by two votes out of 14,000 ballots cast. Two votes made a big difference there.
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic, and Moral Issues of Our Day.
In more local races, the drop-off rate increases, meaning that races are decided by a smaller number of total votes and a smaller percentage of the electorate. State legislative races are often decided by less than 10 percent of the people in a district. School board races are commonly decided by less than five percent of the people affected. Sometimes it’s closer to one percent.
So, yes. It’s true that the majority wins elections, it’s just not the whole story. Elections are not decided by a majority of a country, state or city, they’re decided by a majority of those who actually participate.
The Impact of Evangelicals
According to George Barna, 61 percent of eligible evangelicals voted in the 2016 election. This means that almost 40 percent did not vote. In other words, four out of 10 people you go to church with do not vote when given the opportunity.
Despite this, the church still has a disproportionate impact. According to Pew Research, in the 2018 election, white evangelicals were 26 percent of all voters despite being only 15 percent of the population. Imagine the impact the church could have if everyone did their part.
The point is, participate. It isn’t hard but it is important. If you’re not registered to vote, get registered. If you don’t usually vote, fill out your ballot. Don’t worry that not everyone in your community agrees with you, that may not even matter. After all, it’s not the majority who wins, it’s the majority of those who actually show up. It’s our job to show up.
Joseph Backholm is Senior Fellow for Biblical Worldview and Strategic Engagement at Family Research Council. He combines extensive legal, political, and policy experience with a love for the way biblical truth cultivates human flourishing.
Originally published at FRCBlog.


thestream--2020-10-21--Foundations: Why Should Christians Support Traditional Marriage?

Evangelicals and Catholics have a reputation .
We ’ re opposed to homosexuality , and gay marriage in particular .
People see us as the “ anti ” group because of it , but they ’ re wrong .
The reality is that we ’ re a “ pro ” group .
We support marriage — the traditional kind , between a man and a woman .
We ’ re pro-marriage because we see marriage as a distinct human good worth honoring and protecting .
We oppose what threatens this good thing .
That ’ s why we ’ ve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ marriage .
Five basic biblical passages speak to God ’ s prohibitions on homosexuality : Leviticus 18:22 , 20:13 ; Romans 1:26-27 ; 1 Corinthians 6:9 ; and 1 Timothy 1:10 .
Some have looked at that and concluded , unfortunately , “ If the Bible doesn ’ t like LGBT , then I don ’ t like the Bible.
” They don ’ t realize that God is a God of love .
He ’ s not looking for ways to kill our fun , but rather to enhance our lives , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ designed us .
God ’ s view on homosexuality is closely aligned with His view on marriage .
From the opening chapters of Genesis to the closing pages of Revelation , God supports and celebrates marriage , which is always between a man and a woman .
Jesus clearly endorsed that view in Matthew 19:3-9 .
Same-sex marriage was known in Greco-Roman culture during New Testament times , but the Bible supports only marriage between man and woman .
This may seem restrictive , but God intends it for our good .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , after all .
It is He who made marriage to be the good that it is .
His instructions on it , including his commands regarding sex , are for the purpose of keeping it the good thing He intended it to be .
Still , many would say He went too far in limiting marriage the way He has .
What ’ s wrong with a man and a man , or a woman and a woman , enjoying the same kind of relationship that a man and a woman can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to know more than what the Bible says about sex and marriage .
We need to be able to explain why the Bible ’ s teaching is good ; why God was helping us , not harming us , with his guidelines and instructions .
One key part of that explanation is that same-sex marriage isn ’ t the same kind of relationship as traditional marriage .
It can ’ t be .
Man-woman marriage is a unique relationship not matched by same-sex couples , and as such it has unique importance .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and maintenance of strong children and strong communities .
When marriages turn to other purposes instead of that , it weakens .
If that change becomes widespread , it undermines marriage itself , which results in real , lasting damage to the same children and communities .
That ’ s exactly what happens when gay marriage becomes widely approved , and it ’ s one key reason Christians can agree with our Lord that He knew what He was doing when He designed marriage the way He did .
But these paragraphs have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The rest of this article will expand upon it .
Marriage differs from all other relationships in that it is the one best setting in which to raise children , build communities , and build a stable , enduring society .
This used to be completely uncontroversial .
There was a time when everyone knew that being married meant having kids , unless medical circumstances prevented it , and that kids need a mom and a dad .
That latter fact is still true .
You don ’ t need tons of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tell you .
Just ask any 14-year-old , “ Are your parents still married , still loving each other , still getting along ?
” If they say yes , ask , “ Are you glad ?
” If they say no , ask , “ Do you wish it could be that way ?
” You know how they ’ ll answer .
Marriage has changed over the past half-century or so , however .
That change began in the context of heterosexual marriage , and it has not been healthy .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of that toxic turn in marriage culture .
Marriage used to be about much more than the couple .
It was oriented forward into the future , and outward into the community .
It had to be : The marriage relationship was one that naturally produced children .
Since the advent of easy , reliable contraception , however , sex has become separable from having kids , so it ’ s also separable from marriage , and this in turn makes marriage separable from “ having a family.
” Therefore , for many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ connection between marriage and children .
It ’ s about the couple .
Even if they decide to have kids , that decision is in many ways about the couple , too : They choose what they want , what they “ need , ” what they think they can handle and afford .
In all these ways , marriage has become ( for many ) about the pair , a “ just you ’ n me , babe ” affair .
This has consequences , since that ’ s not what marriage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s also not a great way to keep a marriage strong .
“ Just you ’ n me ” can easily turn into , “ What ?
You and me ?
Still ?
” When the marriage no longer fulfills the function the couple thought it was meant to fulfill , and they end it .
What Happens With “ Just You ’ n Me , Babe ” Marriage Divorce has skyrocketed since the 1960s , and “ just you ‘ n me ” is not the only reason .
But it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ If marriage is about the family and the future , couples are bound to remain more committed .
If it ’ s just about the two of them , it can easily become a throw-away relationship .
So now , generations of children are reeling now from divorce .
But the result spreads further than that .
Twenty years ago , Robert Putnam observed we were “ bowling alone ” — the title of his book on our loss of community .
When marriage is about family and the next generation ( as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ naturally ) , couples tend to invest in community , but not so much when home life is more about “ just you ’ n me , babe.
” On an even broader scale , today ’ s angry , polarized politics demonstrates how we ’ ve lost the ability to get along when we disagree — a skill people should be learning in families and neighborhoods as they grow up .
Marriage is good , then , for children , for communities , and for society as a whole .
And if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many studies have shown the one greatest individually controllable difference between poverty and adequacy or abundance is marriage .
Still , one might ask what all this has to do with gay marriage .
Sure , it ’ s good for straight couples to raise families .
What is there about that , though , that makes it bad for gays and lesbians to marry ?
One could answer by pointing to biblical passages , and for those who accept the Bible as the authority , that should be sufficient .
Not everyone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ answer do we give them , to show that the Bible isn ’ t outdated on this ?
There are many answers , actually .
We can only focus on one here .
It ’ s about protecting marriage from further destruction .
Marriage needs social support .
It ’ s difficult staying married .
What starts as starry-eyed romance quickly devolves into the hard realities of living in close quarters with a flawed human partner .
( Your spouse ’ s spouse is flawed , too . )
Where marriage is honored @ @ @ @ @ @ @ through these problems .
Where marriage is devalued , spouses are more likely to see the relationship as tentative throw-away .
If it works , it works , if not then , “ Oh , well.
” This is a far cry from , “ We ’ re committed to making this work.
” The strength of a marriage is partly a function of the couple , the depth of their personal commitments , and their own emotional and relational health .
It ’ s partly of their local circle of support or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ culture ’ s effects on marriage .
That last item , the broader culture , has become toxic to marriage .
And this contributes to a cycle of weak , short , painful marriages , leading to adults who haven ’ t discovered what it really means to grow up in loving , responsible relationships .
Think of the other answer that 14-year-old might give : “ Oh , you don ’ t know my dad .
I can ’ t imagine being around him.
” Or even the answer , “ But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” There ’ s no quick , easy answer to that , but the eventual , long-term answer must include stronger families for boys and men to grow up in .
Gay Marriage Puts a Stamp of Approval on the Death of Marriage But still , what does this have to do with gay marriage ?
Today ’ s rampant marriage problems began 50 to 70 years ago in the heterosexual community .
Gay marriage isn ’ t primarily to blame .
But it does represent a legal and social stamp of hearty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ marriage .
Gay marriage is inherently “ just you ’ n me , babe.
” Gay couples can adopt , but that ’ s accidental to their relationship , not inherent .
And the best research to date by far shows that kids do better with a mom and dad than with same-sex parents .
I say “ to date , ” because anyone who tells you the research is already finished and settled is wrong .
It ’ ll take decades to discover how gay parenting really works out for children .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to experiment on kids this way in the meantime is beyond imagining .
It ’ s appallingly unethical — especially since the early results are not encouraging .
When the U.S. Supreme Court approved of same-sex marriage , it said in effect , marriage isn ’ t for children , and it ’ s not really so much for future generations , either .
It ’ s for the satisfaction of the couple , and some legal benefits besides .
The state decreed that the next generation wasn ’ t all that important @ @ @ @ @ @ @ effect of gay marriage .
Others may be found in the recommended resources below .
For supporting marriage that builds the next generation , Christians have a reputation as haters .
There ’ s more than a little stereotyping going on there .
Perhaps some projection , too .
When we look at how gays have targeted Jack Phillips and his bakery in Colorado , for example , it ’ s hard to see that as anything but hate in action .
They don ’ t need him to supply the services they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to see him buckle , or be forced into either compliance or massive penalties .
They want him serving as an example to the rest of us .
Similar things could also be said about forced compliance with transgender demands .
The Christian answer is to stand firm with the truth , speaking it in love ( Ephesians 4:15 ) , letting our speech be both wise and gracious ( Col 4:6-7 ) ; and especially avoiding stereotyping gays and lesbians .
Our greatest pushback — the worst anti-Christian hatred — comes from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a minority of homosexual and transgender persons .
In any event , we ’ re to seek to follow Jesus ’ example of truth and grace ( John 1:14 , 18 ) .

This is an entry in The Stream’s Foundations series. We offer it for Valentine’s Day and World Marriage Day.
Evangelicals and Catholics have a reputation. We’re opposed to homosexuality, and gay marriage in particular. People see us as the “anti” group because of it, but they’re wrong. The reality is that we’re a “pro” group. We support marriage — the traditional kind, between a man and a woman. We’re pro-marriage because we see marriage as a distinct human good worth honoring and protecting. We oppose what threatens this good thing. That’s why we’ve had to take a stand against gay marriage.
Five basic biblical passages speak to God’s prohibitions on homosexuality: Leviticus 18:22, 20:13; Romans 1:26-27; 1 Corinthians 6:9; and 1 Timothy 1:10. Some have looked at that and concluded, unfortunately, “If the Bible doesn’t like LGBT, then I don’t like the Bible.” They don’t realize that God is a God of love. He’s not looking for ways to kill our fun, but rather to enhance our lives, according to the design by which He designed us.
God’s view on homosexuality is closely aligned with His view on marriage. From the opening chapters of Genesis to the closing pages of Revelation, God supports and celebrates marriage, which is always between a man and a woman. Jesus clearly endorsed that view in Matthew 19:3-9. Same-sex marriage was known in Greco-Roman culture during New Testament times, but the Bible supports only marriage between man and woman.
God Intends It For Our Good
This may seem restrictive, but God intends it for our good. He knows us better than we know ourselves, after all. It is He who made marriage to be the good that it is. His instructions on it, including his commands regarding sex, are for the purpose of keeping it the good thing He intended it to be.
Still, many would say He went too far in limiting marriage the way He has. What’s wrong with a man and a man, or a woman and a woman, enjoying the same kind of relationship that a man and a woman can enjoy? Christians in this day need to know more than what the Bible says about sex and marriage. We need to be able to explain why the Bible’s teaching is good; why God was helping us, not harming us, with his guidelines and instructions.
One key part of that explanation is that same-sex marriage isn’t the same kind of relationship as traditional marriage. It can’t be. Man-woman marriage is a unique relationship not matched by same-sex couples, and as such it has unique importance. It’s crucial to the building and maintenance of strong children and strong communities. When marriages turn to other purposes instead of that, it weakens. If that change becomes widespread, it undermines marriage itself, which results in real, lasting damage to the same children and communities.
That’s exactly what happens when gay marriage becomes widely approved, and it’s one key reason Christians can agree with our Lord that He knew what He was doing when He designed marriage the way He did. But these paragraphs have only barely outlined the reasoning for this. The rest of this article will expand upon it.
Marriage is a Unique Relationship
Marriage differs from all other relationships in that it is the one best setting in which to raise children, build communities, and build a stable, enduring society.
This used to be completely uncontroversial. There was a time when everyone knew that being married meant having kids, unless medical circumstances prevented it, and that kids need a mom and a dad. That latter fact is still true. You don’t need tons of research to show it; kids will tell you. Just ask any 14-year-old, “Are your parents still married, still loving each other, still getting along?” If they say yes, ask, “Are you glad?” If they say no, ask, “Do you wish it could be that way?” You know how they’ll answer.
Marriage has changed over the past half-century or so, however. That change began in the context of heterosexual marriage, and it has not been healthy. Same-sex marriage follows right in the train of that toxic turn in marriage culture.
Marriage used to be about much more than the couple. It was oriented forward into the future, and outward into the community. It had to be: The marriage relationship was one that naturally produced children. Since the advent of easy, reliable contraception, however, sex has become separable from having kids, so it’s also separable from marriage, and this in turn makes marriage separable from “having a family.”
Therefore, for many people, there’s no essential connection between marriage and children. It’s about the couple. Even if they decide to have kids, that decision is in many ways about the couple, too: They choose what they want, what they “need,” what they think they can handle and afford.
In all these ways, marriage has become (for many) about the pair, a “just you ’n me, babe” affair. This has consequences, since that’s not what marriage was meant to be, and it’s also not a great way to keep a marriage strong. “Just you ’n me” can easily turn into, “What? You and me? Still?” When the marriage no longer fulfills the function the couple thought it was meant to fulfill, and they end it.
What Happens With “Just You ’n Me, Babe” Marriage
Divorce has skyrocketed since the 1960s, and “just you ‘n me” is not the only reason. But it’s certainly a major contributor. If marriage is about the family and the future, couples are bound to remain more committed. If it’s just about the two of them, it can easily become a throw-away relationship.
So now, generations of children are reeling now from divorce. But the result spreads further than that. Twenty years ago, Robert Putnam observed we were “bowling alone” — the title of his book on our loss of community. When marriage is about family and the next generation (as well as being for the couple, naturally), couples tend to invest in community, but not so much when home life is more about “just you ’n me, babe.”
On an even broader scale, today’s angry, polarized politics demonstrates how we’ve lost the ability to get along when we disagree — a skill people should be learning in families and neighborhoods as they grow up.
Marriage is good, then, for children, for communities, and for society as a whole. And if that’s not enough reason, many studies have shown the one greatest individually controllable difference between poverty and adequacy or abundance is marriage.
Marriage Needs Societal Support
Still, one might ask what all this has to do with gay marriage. Sure, it’s good for straight couples to raise families. What is there about that, though, that makes it bad for gays and lesbians to marry?
One could answer by pointing to biblical passages, and for those who accept the Bible as the authority, that should be sufficient. Not everyone does, though, obviously. What answer do we give them, to show that the Bible isn’t outdated on this?
There are many answers, actually. We can only focus on one here. It’s about protecting marriage from further destruction.
Marriage needs social support. It’s difficult staying married. What starts as starry-eyed romance quickly devolves into the hard realities of living in close quarters with a flawed human partner. (Your spouse’s spouse is flawed, too.) Where marriage is honored and supported, couples tend to work through these problems. Where marriage is devalued, spouses are more likely to see the relationship as tentative throw-away. If it works, it works, if not then, “Oh, well.” This is a far cry from, “We’re committed to making this work.”
The strength of a marriage is partly a function of the couple, the depth of their personal commitments, and their own emotional and relational health. It’s partly of their local circle of support or non-support, and partly of the broader culture’s effects on marriage. That last item, the broader culture, has become toxic to marriage.
And this contributes to a cycle of weak, short, painful marriages, leading to adults who haven’t discovered what it really means to grow up in loving, responsible relationships. Think of the other answer that 14-year-old might give: “Oh, you don’t know my dad. I can’t imagine being around him.” Or even the answer, “But I don’t know my dad.” There’s no quick, easy answer to that, but the eventual, long-term answer must include stronger families for boys and men to grow up in.
Gay Marriage Puts a Stamp of Approval on the Death of Marriage
But still, what does this have to do with gay marriage? Today’s rampant marriage problems began 50 to 70 years ago in the heterosexual community. Gay marriage isn’t primarily to blame. But it does represent a legal and social stamp of hearty approval on everything that has undermined real marriage. Gay marriage is inherently “just you ’n me, babe.” Gay couples can adopt, but that’s accidental to their relationship, not inherent.
And the best research to date by far shows that kids do better with a mom and dad than with same-sex parents. I say “to date,” because anyone who tells you the research is already finished and settled is wrong. It’ll take decades to discover how gay parenting really works out for children. How our society agreed it was okay to experiment on kids this way in the meantime is beyond imagining. It’s appallingly unethical — especially since the early results are not encouraging.
When the U.S. Supreme Court approved of same-sex marriage, it said in effect, marriage isn’t for children, and it’s not really so much for future generations, either. It’s for the satisfaction of the couple, and some legal benefits besides. The state decreed that the next generation wasn’t all that important anymore.
This is just one negative effect of gay marriage. Others may be found in the recommended resources below.
Speaking of “Hearty Approval”
For supporting marriage that builds the next generation, Christians have a reputation as haters. There’s more than a little stereotyping going on there. Perhaps some projection, too.
When we look at how gays have targeted Jack Phillips and his bakery in Colorado, for example, it’s hard to see that as anything but hate in action. They don’t need him to supply the services they’ve demanded. They just want to see him buckle, or be forced into either compliance or massive penalties. They want him serving as an example to the rest of us. Similar things could also be said about forced compliance with transgender demands.
The Christian answer is to stand firm with the truth, speaking it in love (Ephesians 4:15), letting our speech be both wise and gracious (Col 4:6-7); and especially avoiding stereotyping gays and lesbians. Our greatest pushback — the worst anti-Christian hatred — comes from the activists, and they’re a minority of homosexual and transgender persons. In any event, we’re to seek to follow Jesus’ example of truth and grace (John 1:14, 18).


thestream--2020-10-21--This Woman Was Rescued, Yet Thousands in Nigeria Still Need a Miracle

The Nigerian pastor had just started his Sunday sermon in his small village church , when his phone rang , from a number he didn ’ t recognize .
He didn ’ t answer .
Then it rang again .
“ I think I must answer this call , ” he said .
A rough-sounding man said he held one of the pastor ’ s parishioners as hostage .
( Advocates use the pseudonym “ Grace ” to protect her identity . )
He demanded an exorbitant sum for the Christian woman .
Then he hung up .
The shaken @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gave them the kidnappers ’ and Grace ’ s numbers .
He later learned she had hidden her cell phone and kept it on , for the signal to be tracked .
But the Nigerian police did nothing .
The pastor , over a hundred miles from the captors , had to negotiate her release .
He and his small congregation had no means to pay the massive ransom .
He decided to sell virtually everything he owned : furniture , tools , nice clothes , a vehicle .
His church followed suit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Seminary hadn ’ t prepared him to be a hostage negotiator .
But he rented a car , met the captors at a designated location , and handed over the money .
Grace was released unharmed .
“ She was saved through literally a miracle and that pastor ’ s heroism , ” said Rabbi Abraham Cooper in a phone interview .
“ But several Christian men traveling with her were killed on the spot.
” In February , Grace and her pastor traveled to the Nigerian capital city of Abuja .
They @ @ @ @ @ @ @ say they are “ freelance diplomats ” : Cooper , an Orthodox Jew , and itinerant Christian minister Johnnie Moore .
Rabbi Cooper has spent over 50 years advocating for human rights and against genocide .
He serves as director of global social action at the Simon Wiesenthal Center based in Los Angeles .
It is one of the world ’ s largest nonprofit groups standing against hate and violence .
Moore , who runs PR firm The Kairos Company , is an appointed member of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom @ @ @ @ @ @ @ serves as a watchdog for religious freedom rights .
Cooper and Moore recount the dramatic story of Grace ’ s rescue last December in their new book , The Next Jihad : Stop the Christian Genocide in Africa .
“ This woman Grace was traveling in a van , heading home to see family for Christmas week , ” said Cooper .
“ Their route took them near the capital city .
They even passed a government checkpoint .
About one hundred yards later , these kidnappers took this Christian woman and several @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Open Doors , a leading advocate for persecuted believers , ranks Nigeria as the 12th most dangerous nation for Christians .
That astounds many observers .
After all , Nigeria is known as Africa ’ s largest democracy and has the most prosperous economy on the continent .
Islamist extremist groups connected to the Fulani people have attacked hundreds of Nigerian churches .
Over the past five years , a Nigerian nonprofit group estimates , they have killed at least 12,000 Christians .
More than 17 million people identify as Fulani , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sunni Muslim .
Moore is quick to speak up on their behalf .
“ When we ’ re talking about the Fulani attacking Christians , it ’ s a small segment of this vast ethnic group , ” he said .
He and Cooper use the term “ Fulani militants ” in the book .
He noted the Nigerian government ’ s inaction has emboldened Fulani terrorists .
“ The attacks on churches are spreading , ” he added .
“ Violent groups are targeting Christians and trying to literally ‘ cleanse ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ report documents the recent surge in violence .
“ In recent years , violence and insecurity have escalated in many countries with prominent Fulani populations , ” states the report .
“ [ Yet ] the role that religious ideology plays in Fulani fighters ’ motivations is highly debated.
” The report notes that Fulani militants have been responsible for at least 47 attacks in Nigeria during the first half of 2020. Cooper and Moore insist they are at least partly driven by Islamic extremism .
Yet the two men remain hopeful that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and all faith groups — will prevail .
Historically , these diverse groups have lived side-by-side peacefully in west Africa .
Cooper initiated this latest effort to defend Christians in crisis .
After several Nigerian Christians spoke with him at the 2019 State Department Ministerial to Advance Religious Freedom , he strategized with Moore .
“ Johnnie and I are linked spiritually and as Americans , ” he said .
“ Shouldn ’ t people of faith work together to defeat theologically fueled terrorism ?
Silence is the ally of evil .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ make a difference.
” Their message to policymakers has been loud and clear .
“ This situation is a five-alarm fire , ” said Moore .
“ Nigeria has historically been a good friend to our nation .
It ’ s time for the U.S. to put intense pressure on them , to take action against terrorism.
” Nigerian officials have the most options to institute justice , the authors note .
They urge an independent investigation be set up involving governmental and diverse faith leaders .
This inquiry would be empowered to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prosecution .
Yet American believers also underestimate their power .
Recommended actions include prayer , giving to front-line nonprofits , and sharing the stories of Nigerians .
Importantly , they advocate believers partner together .
“ Imagine if even just 25 American churches announced they were each adopting a church in Nigeria , ” said Cooper .
“ [ Do it ] during this Christmas season .
The Nigerian government might take notice — and they have the capability of dealing with this issue .
“ Nigerians feel like they ’ ve been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Speaking as a Jew , I think American Christians are the sleeping giant here who can help halt this violence.
” Stream contributor Josh M. Shepherd covers culture , faith , and public policy issues for media outlets including The Federalist .
Find him on Twitter and follow The Stream @ Streamdotorg .

The Nigerian pastor had just started his Sunday sermon in his small village church, when his phone rang, from a number he didn’t recognize. He didn’t answer. Then it rang again. “I think I must answer this call,” he said.
A rough-sounding man said he held one of the pastor’s parishioners as hostage. (Advocates use the pseudonym “Grace” to protect her identity.) He demanded an exorbitant sum for the Christian woman. Then he hung up.
The Pastor Negotiator
The shaken pastor immediately informed local authorities. He gave them the kidnappers’ and Grace’s numbers. He later learned she had hidden her cell phone and kept it on, for the signal to be tracked.
But the Nigerian police did nothing. The pastor, over a hundred miles from the captors, had to negotiate her release. He and his small congregation had no means to pay the massive ransom. He decided to sell virtually everything he owned: furniture, tools, nice clothes, a vehicle. His church followed suit, even selling their small building.
Seminary hadn’t prepared him to be a hostage negotiator. But he rented a car, met the captors at a designated location, and handed over the money.
Grace was released unharmed. “She was saved through literally a miracle and that pastor’s heroism,” said Rabbi Abraham Cooper in a phone interview. “But several Christian men traveling with her were killed on the spot.”
United to Stop the Violence
In February, Grace and her pastor traveled to the Nigerian capital city of Abuja. They met with two men who like to say they are “freelance diplomats”: Cooper, an Orthodox Jew, and itinerant Christian minister Johnnie Moore.
Rabbi Cooper has spent over 50 years advocating for human rights and against genocide. He serves as director of global social action at the Simon Wiesenthal Center based in Los Angeles. It is one of the world’s largest nonprofit groups standing against hate and violence.
Moore, who runs PR firm The Kairos Company, is an appointed member of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF). The bipartisan commission serves as a watchdog for religious freedom rights.
Cooper and Moore recount the dramatic story of Grace’s rescue last December in their new book, The Next Jihad: Stop the Christian Genocide in Africa.
“This woman Grace was traveling in a van, heading home to see family for Christmas week,” said Cooper. “Their route took them near the capital city. They even passed a government checkpoint. About one hundred yards later, these kidnappers took this Christian woman and several people in that van were killed.”
Open Doors, a leading advocate for persecuted believers, ranks Nigeria as the 12th most dangerous nation for Christians. That astounds many observers. After all, Nigeria is known as Africa’s largest democracy and has the most prosperous economy on the continent.
Tragic Toll of Extremism
Islamist extremist groups connected to the Fulani people have attacked hundreds of Nigerian churches. Over the past five years, a Nigerian nonprofit group estimates, they have killed at least 12,000 Christians.
More than 17 million people identify as Fulani, the largest African tribe. It is predominantly Sunni Muslim. Moore is quick to speak up on their behalf. “When we’re talking about the Fulani attacking Christians, it’s a small segment of this vast ethnic group,” he said. He and Cooper use the term “Fulani militants” in the book.
He noted the Nigerian government’s inaction has emboldened Fulani terrorists. “The attacks on churches are spreading,” he added. “Violent groups are targeting Christians and trying to literally ‘cleanse’ parts of Nigeria.”
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic, and Moral Issues of Our Day.
A new USCIRF report documents the recent surge in violence. “In recent years, violence and insecurity have escalated in many countries with prominent Fulani populations,” states the report. “[Yet] the role that religious ideology plays in Fulani fighters’ motivations is highly debated.”
The report notes that Fulani militants have been responsible for at least 47 attacks in Nigeria during the first half of 2020. Cooper and Moore insist they are at least partly driven by Islamic extremism.
Fighting ‘Five-Alarm Fire’
Yet the two men remain hopeful that religious freedom — for Muslims, Christians, and all faith groups — will prevail. Historically, these diverse groups have lived side-by-side peacefully in west Africa.
Cooper initiated this latest effort to defend Christians in crisis. After several Nigerian Christians spoke with him at the 2019 State Department Ministerial to Advance Religious Freedom, he strategized with Moore.
“Johnnie and I are linked spiritually and as Americans,” he said. “Shouldn’t people of faith work together to defeat theologically fueled terrorism? Silence is the ally of evil. We have an obligation to try to make a difference.”
“Silence is the ally of evil” – Rabbi Abraham Cooper
Their message to policymakers has been loud and clear. “This situation is a five-alarm fire,” said Moore. “Nigeria has historically been a good friend to our nation. It’s time for the U.S. to put intense pressure on them, to take action against terrorism.”
Nigerian officials have the most options to institute justice, the authors note. They urge an independent investigation be set up involving governmental and diverse faith leaders. This inquiry would be empowered to report what has occurred and recommend legal prosecution.
Pray, Give, Share
Yet American believers also underestimate their power. Recommended actions include prayer, giving to front-line nonprofits, and sharing the stories of Nigerians.
Importantly, they advocate believers partner together. “Imagine if even just 25 American churches announced they were each adopting a church in Nigeria,” said Cooper. “[Do it] during this Christmas season. The Nigerian government might take notice — and they have the capability of dealing with this issue.
“Nigerians feel like they’ve been totally forgotten,” he added. “Speaking as a Jew, I think American Christians are the sleeping giant here who can help halt this violence.”
Stream contributor Josh M. Shepherd covers culture, faith, and public policy issues for media outlets including The Federalist. Find him on Twitter and follow The Stream @Streamdotorg.


thestream--2020-10-21--#Election2020: Joe Contradicts Hunter as Scandal Takes Creepier, Darker Turn

It ’ s 13 days until America decides its fate and both candidates are hitting the campaign trail hard .
Well , one is hitting the trail .
The other is hitting the snooze button .
Joe Biden is spending another day at his home in Delaware away from voters .
I ask you , undecided voter : Who would hire somebody who repeatedly refuses to show up for the job interviews ?
And we ’ re hiring for the most important job in the world .
Meanwhile , the scandal surrounding Joe , Hunter and the rest of Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ominous .
Biden Tries to Rebuff Scandal , Contradicts Hunter and Proof Joe Biden did finally answer a question from Wisconsin TV station WISN about the evidence on Hunter Biden ’ s laptop .
Biden says there is “ no basis ” to believe claims Hunter Biden profited off his family name .
The bad news ?
Hunter Biden himself admitted last year that he has , in fact , profited off his family name .
“ I don ’ t think that there ’ s a lot of things that would have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ name wasn ’ t Biden , ” he told ABC News , adding , “ because my dad was Vice President of the United States.
” Further , new emails out yesterday show that Hunter ’ s business partners saw his name as “ currency.
” In fact , as a direct line into the Obama White House .
The NY Post revealed emails that indicate Hunter was paid $ 10 million a year by the Chinese for “ introductions only.
” State Department documents also show Burisma , paying Hunter $ 83,000 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s name to U.S. officials there .
The goal ?
To get the U.S. to pressure Ukraine to stop its Burisma investigation .
Hunter himself planned meetings with State over Burisma .
Is the State Department going to meet with a Hunter Lipschitz about a corrupt Ukraine company ?
That ’ s just a small list .
And Joe insists there ’ s “ no basis ” to say Hunter profited from his father ’ s positions ?
Biden also made the bizarre claim that the intelligence community has cleared his family of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In fact , the only thing the Intel Community is saying is that there is zero evidence of Russian involvement .
Joe is likely referring to 50 former intel officials who signed a letter claiming the Hunter Laptop scandal smells like a Russian disinformation campaign .
Point One : There is zero evidence for their claim .
Or one of the 50 intel officials would have presented it .
Instead they merely offered the verdict of Deep State groupthink .
Point Two : Both former CIA director John Brennan and former Director @ @ @ @ @ @ @ letter .
Both are neck deep in the Trump Russia hoax .
And both have a proven history of saying one thing publicly to condemn Trump and Russia connections , and another when under oath .
“ Trump ’ s compromised by Russia !
” they harp on CNN and MSNBC .
“ Uh , we ’ ve seen no proof of any Trump-Russia connection , ” they say under threat of perjury .
Frankly , anyone who takes seriously anything Brennan and Clapper have to say other than “ I confess ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also called the growing Hunter laptop scandal “ a last-ditch effort in a desperate campaign to smear me and my committee.
” Perhaps he meant to say “ my campaign.
” But you have to wonder if he meant to say “ my committee.
” As in Joe Biden thinks he ’ s still heading the Senate Judiciary Committee .
After all , just nine days ago , he said he was running for Senate .
Political corruption is one thing .
Depravity involving children takes this scandal somewhere much darker and sadder @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he turned over to Delaware police sexually explicit texts and photos involving Hunter Biden and a 14-year-old girl .
( Along with a text exchange with his father about it .
He said Hunter Biden ’ s laptop contained “ numerous pictures ” of underaged girls . )
One America News reports they too have seen the images .
Delaware Senate candidate Lauren Witzke tweeted that a police source confirmed the laptop contained child pornography .
Her thread went on to say the laptop/hardrive was turned over to New Castle County PD , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Delaware Attorney Kathy Jennings , who turned it over to the FBI Wilmington office .
Of course , the FBI has had the laptop for almost a year at this point .
Is the buck being passed so it could be dumped in the Swamp ?
But Does It Tie To Joe ?
In the best of situations , this news would be bad , if you were Hunter Biden ’ s father .
However , when you yourself have a well-documented history of uncomfortable — okay , say it , creepy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is no way your history doesn ’ t become more ominous .
And become a campaign issue .
Dinesh D ’ Souza pointed this out on Twitter this morning .
It is a very harsh and dark place to go .
And we do need to know more about what has been found on Hunter ’ s computer , what Joe Biden knew , and when .
We know from the Senate report on Hunter Biden ’ s activities that he was engaged with prostitutes connected to human trafficking .
Were any under @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden to blackmail ?
How much at risk was national security ?
And , of course , we must be praying for all the young girls allegedly involved ; that they will be identified and assisted .
And if any trafficking ’ s involved , these girls will be rescued and restored .
Politics can be a game .
This is no game .
Staying in the basement may be cynical political strategy .
But the Bidens must be dragged out of the shadows and into the light .
Al Perrotta is the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , with @ JZmirak , of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Immigration .
You can follow him at @ StreamingAl .
And if you aren ’ t already , please follow The Stream at @ Streamdotorg .

It’s 13 days until America decides its fate and both candidates are hitting the campaign trail hard. Well, one is hitting the trail. The other is hitting the snooze button.
Joe Biden is spending another day at his home in Delaware away from voters.
I ask you, undecided voter: Who would hire somebody who repeatedly refuses to show up for the job interviews? And we’re hiring for the most important job in the world.
Meanwhile, the scandal surrounding Joe, Hunter and the rest of Biden, Inc., mushrooms. And grows ominous.
Biden Tries to Rebuff Scandal, Contradicts Hunter and Proof
Joe Biden did finally answer a question from Wisconsin TV station WISN about the evidence on Hunter Biden’s laptop. Biden says there is “no basis” to believe claims Hunter Biden profited off his family name.
The bad news? Hunter Biden himself admitted last year that he has, in fact, profited off his family name. “I don’t think that there’s a lot of things that would have happened in my life if my last name wasn’t Biden,” he told ABC News, adding, “because my dad was Vice President of the United States.”
Further, new emails out yesterday show that Hunter’s business partners saw his name as “currency.” In fact, as a direct line into the Obama White House.
The NY Post revealed emails that indicate Hunter was paid $10 million a year by the Chinese for “introductions only.”
State Department documents also show Burisma, paying Hunter $83,000 a month, was dropping Hunter’s name to U.S. officials there. The goal? To get the U.S. to pressure Ukraine to stop its Burisma investigation. Hunter himself planned meetings with State over Burisma. Is the State Department going to meet with a Hunter Lipschitz about a corrupt Ukraine company?
That’s just a small list. And Joe insists there’s “no basis” to say Hunter profited from his father’s positions?
Joe Lies About Intel Community
Biden also made the bizarre claim that the intelligence community has cleared his family of wrongdoing. That is a blatant lie. In fact, the only thing the Intel Community is saying is that there is zero evidence of Russian involvement. Joe is likely referring to 50 former intel officials who signed a letter claiming the Hunter Laptop scandal smells like a Russian disinformation campaign.
Point One: There is zero evidence for their claim. Or one of the 50 intel officials would have presented it. Instead they merely offered the verdict of Deep State groupthink.
Point Two: Both former CIA director John Brennan and former Director of National Intelligence John Clapper signed the letter. Both are neck deep in the Trump Russia hoax. And both have a proven history of saying one thing publicly to condemn Trump and Russia connections, and another when under oath. “Trump’s compromised by Russia!” they harp on CNN and MSNBC. “Uh, we’ve seen no proof of any Trump-Russia connection,” they say under threat of perjury.
Frankly, anyone who takes seriously anything Brennan and Clapper have to say other than “I confess” is deluded or brain dead.
The Scandal Takes Darker, More Perverse Turn
Political corruption is one thing. Depravity involving children takes this scandal somewhere much darker and sadder.
Rudy Giuliani revealed last night that he turned over to Delaware police sexually explicit texts and photos involving Hunter Biden and a 14-year-old girl. (Along with a text exchange with his father about it. He said Hunter Biden’s laptop contained “numerous pictures” of underaged girls. )
One America News reports they too have seen the images.
UPDATE: Multiple @OANN reporters have now viewed the emails, photos, and videos on the #HunterBiden hard drive. We can confirm: There appear to be not one but several images of a minor that justify immediate attention. We have reason to believe the minor is a US citizen. — Chanel Rion OAN (@ChanelRion) October 21, 2020
Delaware Senate candidate Lauren Witzke tweeted that a police source confirmed the laptop contained child pornography. Her thread went on to say the laptop/hardrive was turned over to New Castle County PD, who turned it over to “leftist” Delaware Attorney Kathy Jennings, who turned it over to the FBI Wilmington office. Of course, the FBI has had the laptop for almost a year at this point. Is the buck being passed so it could be dumped in the Swamp?
THREAD: Information on Hunter Biden hard drive from POLICE SOURCE here in Delaware. — Lauren Witzke (@LaurenWitzkeDE) October 21, 2020
But Does It Tie To Joe?
In the best of situations, this news would be bad, if you were Hunter Biden’s father. However, when you yourself have a well-documented history of uncomfortable — okay, say it, creepy — behavior toward young girls, there is no way your history doesn’t become more ominous. And become a campaign issue.
Dinesh D’Souza pointed this out on Twitter this morning.
Jos Biden’s pawing and sniffing of little girls—which Biden himself attributed to his harmless affectionate style—takes on an ominous new significance now that we know Hunter Biden is a pedophile. I wonder if the son learned his perverted habits from the father pic.twitter.com/kvgNCJZkhY — Dinesh D'Souza (@DineshDSouza) October 21, 2020
It is a very harsh and dark place to go. And we do need to know more about what has been found on Hunter’s computer, what Joe Biden knew, and when. We know from the Senate report on Hunter Biden’s activities that he was engaged with prostitutes connected to human trafficking. Were any under age? Just how open was Joe Biden to blackmail? How much at risk was national security?
And, of course, we must be praying for all the young girls allegedly involved; that they will be identified and assisted. And if any trafficking’s involved, these girls will be rescued and restored.
Politics can be a game. This is no game.
Staying in the basement may be cynical political strategy. But the Bidens must be dragged out of the shadows and into the light.
Al Perrotta is the Managing Editor of The Stream and co-author, with @JZmirak, of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Immigration. You can follow him at @StreamingAl. And if you aren’t already, please follow The Stream at @Streamdotorg.


thestream--2020-10-21--Judge Barrett: An Originalist, Not a Conservative Activist

I won ’ t pretend to be surprised by this , but Senate Democrats , knowing they don ’ t have the power to stop Judge Amy Coney Barrett ’ s confirmation to the Supreme Court , have turned the confirmation hearings into a campaign platform to smear President Donald Trump .
The Democrats Have It All Wrong — Here ’ s Some History The Democrats ’ approach to the hearings illustrates how disingenuous their professed commitment to preserve the integrity of “ our democracy ” is .
Indeed , nothing better illustrates their failure to distinguish between a democracy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ judicial philosophy .
The framers of our Constitution designed our system as a constitutional republic , not a democracy .
As students of history and ancient democracies , they incorporated safeguards against pure democracy , which they knew could lead to mob rule .
They aimed to maximize political liberty , and that required protecting the minority from the tyranny of the majority .
They divided and limited governmental power , as unrestrained governments tend toward tyranny .
We all know the drill .
They divided power between the federal and state governments @ @ @ @ @ @ @ among three separate branches of government ( separation of powers ) .
They imposed an intricate scheme of checks and balances , pitting each branch against the other two to prevent any branch from becoming too powerful at the expense of the others and of individual liberties .
They included the Bill of Rights , which contained further express limitations on government , and they created a bicameral legislature to retard the governmental process and insulate it against impassioned mobs .
George Washington described the upper chamber as the “ senatorial saucer ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more democratic House .
Just as all of these structural safeguards are essential to maintaining our liberties against authoritarianism and absolutism , so is our ongoing jealous protection of these safeguards .
We have two political branches whose members are elected , directly or indirectly , by the people and that pass laws and otherwise make policy and enforce the laws .
The judicial branch is a nonpolitical branch that should interpret , rather than make , laws .
Courts must not act as super-legislatures because their members are not democratically chosen , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the people and because the judicial branch serves the important function of interpreting laws .
When appellate courts make laws instead of interpreting them , they thwart the will of the people who elected the political branches .
They violate the separation of powers and undermine the very system that was carefully crafted to preserve our liberties .
We ’ ve seen examples of this throughout history , but especially since the ’ 60s , where the Supreme Court , by fiat , employs elaborate legal fictions to strike down perfectly constitutional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , or to uphold unconstitutional laws .
Democrats argue that Republicans are just as guilty as Democrats in seeking to install judges who will enact their policy agenda .
Many Democratic senators alleged that Republicans support ACB because they want her to advance their policy agenda .
According to them , the GOP needs Barrett on the court to eliminate Obamacare , abortion rights and same-sex marriage — and to rule in Trump ’ s favor if a legal challenge to the results of the upcoming presidential election arises .
Sen. Chris Coons @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new chapter of conservative judicial activism , but that is simply false .
Republicans don ’ t want judges to advance conservative policies but to interpret the Constitution according to its originally understood meaning .
This could result in overturning liberal legislation and court-enacted laws if they are unconstitutional , but not otherwise .
Liberal activists , on the other hand , do substitute their policy preferences for those of Congress and twist the Constitution to do it .
Examples of liberal activism abound , but you ’ d be hard-pressed to find @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cruz cited the example of school choice : Originalist judges wouldn ’ t mandate that all states have school choice , but leftist judges would prevent them from having it .
If Roe v. Wade were overturned , conservative judges wouldn ’ t force states to outlaw abortions but would leave the question to their democratic determination .
Sen. Cory Booker said that replacing Ruth Bader Ginsburg with ACB would tilt the court further to the right .
No , it would tilt the court further toward the Constitution , where it ought @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a big difference .
It is not surprising that Democrats regard Barrett as a threat , given their reliance on unelected judges to usurp the lawmaking authority of the politically elected branches .
But that is not how Republicans look at the judiciary , and if Democrats respected the separation of powers and truly wanted to protect the integrity of our republic , they would have nothing to fear from such stellar judicial nominees as ACB .
Democratic senators are campaigning from their senatorial perch instead of performing their duty of advice and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voters into believing that ACB and other GOP-appointed judges will take away the people ’ s coverage for preexisting health conditions .
Just like they continue to falsely accuse Trump of not having denounced white supremacy , they are misleading the people on health care , knowing that even if the court strikes down the Affordable Care Act entirely , Republicans have guaranteed that any replacement bill would include coverage for preexisting conditions .
Using all relevant criteria — judicial philosophy , qualifications , temperament and personal character — Judge Amy Coney Barrett @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Court nominees in our history .
Adding her to the court will not threaten our liberties but rather greatly protect them .
David Limbaugh is a writer , author and attorney .
His latest book is Guilty by Reason of Insanity : Why the Democrats Must Not Win .
Follow him on Twitter @ davidlimbaugh and his website at www.davidlimbaugh.com .

I won’t pretend to be surprised by this, but Senate Democrats, knowing they don’t have the power to stop Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation to the Supreme Court, have turned the confirmation hearings into a campaign platform to smear President Donald Trump.
The Democrats Have It All Wrong — Here’s Some History
The Democrats’ approach to the hearings illustrates how disingenuous their professed commitment to preserve the integrity of “our democracy” is. Indeed, nothing better illustrates their failure to distinguish between a democracy and a constitutional republic than their misguided judicial philosophy.
The framers of our Constitution designed our system as a constitutional republic, not a democracy. As students of history and ancient democracies, they incorporated safeguards against pure democracy, which they knew could lead to mob rule. They aimed to maximize political liberty, and that required protecting the minority from the tyranny of the majority.
They divided and limited governmental power, as unrestrained governments tend toward tyranny. We all know the drill. They divided power between the federal and state governments (federalism) and distributed federal power among three separate branches of government (separation of powers).
They imposed an intricate scheme of checks and balances, pitting each branch against the other two to prevent any branch from becoming too powerful at the expense of the others and of individual liberties.
They included the Bill of Rights, which contained further express limitations on government, and they created a bicameral legislature to retard the governmental process and insulate it against impassioned mobs. George Washington described the upper chamber as the “senatorial saucer” that would cool legislation passed in the more democratic House.
Just as all of these structural safeguards are essential to maintaining our liberties against authoritarianism and absolutism, so is our ongoing jealous protection of these safeguards.
Protecting the Safeguards
We have two political branches whose members are elected, directly or indirectly, by the people and that pass laws and otherwise make policy and enforce the laws. The judicial branch is a nonpolitical branch that should interpret, rather than make, laws. Courts must not act as super-legislatures because their members are not democratically chosen, because they are more insulated from accountability to the people and because the judicial branch serves the important function of interpreting laws.
When appellate courts make laws instead of interpreting them, they thwart the will of the people who elected the political branches. They violate the separation of powers and undermine the very system that was carefully crafted to preserve our liberties. We’ve seen examples of this throughout history, but especially since the ’60s, where the Supreme Court, by fiat, employs elaborate legal fictions to strike down perfectly constitutional laws passed by the other two branches, or to uphold unconstitutional laws.
Democrats’ Policy Agenda — Twisting the Constitution
Democrats argue that Republicans are just as guilty as Democrats in seeking to install judges who will enact their policy agenda. Many Democratic senators alleged that Republicans support ACB because they want her to advance their policy agenda. According to them, the GOP needs Barrett on the court to eliminate Obamacare, abortion rights and same-sex marriage — and to rule in Trump’s favor if a legal challenge to the results of the upcoming presidential election arises.
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic, and Moral Issues of Our Day.
Sen. Chris Coons said that ACB would open up a new chapter of conservative judicial activism, but that is simply false. Republicans don’t want judges to advance conservative policies but to interpret the Constitution according to its originally understood meaning. This could result in overturning liberal legislation and court-enacted laws if they are unconstitutional, but not otherwise. Liberal activists, on the other hand, do substitute their policy preferences for those of Congress and twist the Constitution to do it.
Examples of liberal activism abound, but you’d be hard-pressed to find one of conservative activism. Sen. Ted Cruz cited the example of school choice: Originalist judges wouldn’t mandate that all states have school choice, but leftist judges would prevent them from having it. If Roe v. Wade were overturned, conservative judges wouldn’t force states to outlaw abortions but would leave the question to their democratic determination.
Tilting Toward the Constitution
Sen. Cory Booker said that replacing Ruth Bader Ginsburg with ACB would tilt the court further to the right. No, it would tilt the court further toward the Constitution, where it ought to be — and there’s a big difference.
It is not surprising that Democrats regard Barrett as a threat, given their reliance on unelected judges to usurp the lawmaking authority of the politically elected branches. But that is not how Republicans look at the judiciary, and if Democrats respected the separation of powers and truly wanted to protect the integrity of our republic, they would have nothing to fear from such stellar judicial nominees as ACB.
Scaring and Misleading Voters
Democratic senators are campaigning from their senatorial perch instead of performing their duty of advice and consent. They are trying to scare voters into believing that ACB and other GOP-appointed judges will take away the people’s coverage for preexisting health conditions. Just like they continue to falsely accuse Trump of not having denounced white supremacy, they are misleading the people on health care, knowing that even if the court strikes down the Affordable Care Act entirely, Republicans have guaranteed that any replacement bill would include coverage for preexisting conditions.
Using all relevant criteria — judicial philosophy, qualifications, temperament and personal character — Judge Amy Coney Barrett is one of the most qualified Supreme Court nominees in our history. Adding her to the court will not threaten our liberties but rather greatly protect them.
David Limbaugh is a writer, author and attorney. His latest book is Guilty by Reason of Insanity: Why the Democrats Must Not Win. Follow him on Twitter @davidlimbaugh and his website at www.davidlimbaugh.com.
COPYRIGHT 2020 CREATORS.COM


thestream--2020-10-21--Struggling Bar Owner in Biden Ad Revealed to Be Wealthy Angel Investor

A Michigan bar owner featured in a Joe Biden campaign ad saying his business may fail because of President Donald Trump ’ s COVID-19 response is a wealthy tech investor who made it big after receiving a large family inheritance .
Joe Malcoun , the co-owner of The Blind Pig , said in the ad his bar was nothing more than an empty room because of Trump ’ s inaction against the virus .
“ This is the reality of Trump ’ s COVID response , ” Malcoun said .
“ We don ’ t know how much longer we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ A lot of restaurants and bars that have been mainstays for many years will not make it through this , ” the bar owner said .
“ My only hope for my family , this business and my community is that Joe Biden win this election.
” However , the Washington Free Beacon reported Monday that the odds that Malcoun falls under financial hardship are slim .
Malcoun told a Michigan-based NBC affiliate in 2018 that he received a lottery-like inheritance from his wife ’ s grandfather about a decade ago and used @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in tech companies in the state .
“ Usually you become a CEO and you make money , and then the money allows you to become an angel investor , ” Malcoun said .
“ I happened to have different circumstances where I had money ( first ) .
” Malcoun leveraged his inheritance to become the “ go-to guy ” for people seeking investments in the Ann Arbor area , according to Click On Detroit .
And despite pinning his bar ’ s hardships on Trump in Biden ’ s ad , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he decided it was “ not worth it ” to host any live shows at the bar despite having authorization from the state to hold events at limited capacity .
“ Now that we tried it and saw it ’ s really hard to communicate what it means to have a really socially distanced and live music show , we decided it ’ s not really worth trying , ” Malcoun explained .
“ The very last thing we want is to be the epicenter of a new outbreak.
” Malcoun acknowledged in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ technically ALLOWED to be open at reduced capacity right now … we are closed because it ’ s UNSAFE and irresponsible to be open.
” “ If Trump had taken this virus seriously from the beginning and imposed a national strategy to address it venues like the Pig would be open by now and you would be enjoying live music again , ” Malcoun tweeted .
“ But instead he chose to weaponize COVID for his own political gain and has convinced his supporters that the medicine is the illness.
” Malcoun @ @ @ @ @ @ @ report , saying the story “ is not about me or any individual.
” “ I am the mechanism for telling a story on behalf of thousands of others , ” he tweeted .
“ Right now thousands of venue employees and musicians are out of work and millions of fans were robbed of live music experiences .
That is the real tragedy.
” In addition to co-owning the bar , Malcoun is the co-founder of Cahoots , a coworking destination for tech startups in Ann Arbor , the CEO of the software @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Capital Partners and a board member of the ACLU of Michigan , according to his LinkedIn profile .
Malcoun also contributed $ 5,000 to Biden ’ scampaign in July , Federal Election Commission records show .
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience .
For licensing opportunities of our original content , please contact licensing @ dailycallernewsfoundation.org .

A Michigan bar owner featured in a Joe Biden campaign ad saying his business may fail because of President Donald Trump’s COVID-19 response is a wealthy tech investor who made it big after receiving a large family inheritance.
Joe Malcoun, the co-owner of The Blind Pig, said in the ad his bar was nothing more than an empty room because of Trump’s inaction against the virus. “This is the reality of Trump’s COVID response,” Malcoun said.
“We don’t know how much longer we can survive not having any revenue. A lot of restaurants and bars that have been mainstays for many years will not make it through this,” the bar owner said. “My only hope for my family, this business and my community is that Joe Biden win this election.”
However, the Washington Free Beacon reported Monday that the odds that Malcoun falls under financial hardship are slim.
Malcoun told a Michigan-based NBC affiliate in 2018 that he received a lottery-like inheritance from his wife’s grandfather about a decade ago and used those funds to become an angel investor in tech companies in the state.
“Usually you become a CEO and you make money, and then the money allows you to become an angel investor,” Malcoun said. “I happened to have different circumstances where I had money (first).”
Malcoun leveraged his inheritance to become the “go-to guy” for people seeking investments in the Ann Arbor area, according to Click On Detroit.
And despite pinning his bar’s hardships on Trump in Biden’s ad, Malcoun told Michigan Live in June that he decided it was “not worth it” to host any live shows at the bar despite having authorization from the state to hold events at limited capacity.
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic, and Moral Issues of Our Day.
“Now that we tried it and saw it’s really hard to communicate what it means to have a really socially distanced and live music show, we decided it’s not really worth trying,” Malcoun explained. “The very last thing we want is to be the epicenter of a new outbreak.”
Malcoun acknowledged in a tweet Tuesday that his bar is “technically ALLOWED to be open at reduced capacity right now … we are closed because it’s UNSAFE and irresponsible to be open.”
“If Trump had taken this virus seriously from the beginning and imposed a national strategy to address it venues like the Pig would be open by now and you would be enjoying live music again,” Malcoun tweeted. “But instead he chose to weaponize COVID for his own political gain and has convinced his supporters that the medicine is the illness.”
Malcoun also responded to the Beacon’s report, saying the story “is not about me or any individual.”
“I am the mechanism for telling a story on behalf of thousands of others,” he tweeted. “Right now thousands of venue employees and musicians are out of work and millions of fans were robbed of live music experiences. That is the real tragedy.”
In addition to co-owning the bar, Malcoun is the co-founder of Cahoots, a coworking destination for tech startups in Ann Arbor, the CEO of the software company Nutshell, the president of CKM Capital Partners and a board member of the ACLU of Michigan, according to his LinkedIn profile.
Malcoun also contributed $5,000 to Biden’scampaign in July, Federal Election Commission records show.
Copyright 2020 The Daily Caller News Foundation
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].