Discussion not allowed

I understand that for some companies, discussion is not something they normally worry about. Look to the media, where the traditional means of delivering the news has been Radio, Television, or in print, none of which allow for anyone to discuss or rebut anything published or said. The modern world, however, is moving away from those media types faster and faster, choosing online sources for their news, as you can gather multiple sources quickly, and even join in on discussing a story with a global audience. This is not to say that everyone allows this though, and those most likely to publish their stories and not allow any form of comment or discussion, legacy media companies. They present their spun version of a story, then walk away, patting themselves on the back as they congratulate themselves for “bringing the truth to the uninformed masses.” Anyone who then speaks out in any way, well, they’re ignored, or worse, attacked.

The first example of this today is CBS News, in a story about a school that supposedly forced all students to attend Christian worship services. The story on it’s own, speaks of a West Virginia High School where students are walking out in protest of a Christian revival gathering. Naturally, the assertion is made that this type of thing is un-Constitutional , which it actually is not. From there, the story spends the rest of it’s space demonizing all who would even consider holding such a gathering, and all but demanding they be punished. The fact that the students were able to walk out proves they were not forced, strike one against their claim of a Constitutional violation. The students being allowed to protest also shows that they are not being controlled. The fact that the Constitution stated Congress may not pass a law respecting a single faith, or prohibiting the free exercise of any faith not withstanding, this is a story about a gather than is legal, as it was voluntary, that someone decided they don’t approve of so they’re going to twist the story to demand they be allowed to control the world.

Bear in mind, I am a Christian and I do not support the idea of a school wide assembly that is just a worship service. There are pastors and others all over the world who speak on more than just the Christian faith. I remember one at my high school speaking about avoiding drugs and while he did mention faith, he did not say “come to my church and believe as I do.” I firmly believe this story at CBS is being twisted.

This is not an uncommon story today, someone doesn’t like that a grieving relative or friend places a cross along a public road in memory of a friend killed in a traffic fatality, so they sue the city for “violating the first amendment” and often just get given their way, but when they want to exercise their faith, or absences thereof, suddenly, no one may even sneeze in their directly as they have rights. I can remember my High School years, where our football team was told anyone praying, in any form, even in their car when not on school premises, would be kicked off the team. In response, most of the team met at our flag pole, and knelt in prayer, then told the principal, they would not be playing until the threats against their first amendment rights were stopped completely. The culprit, who never would reveal themselves, railed in the paper about the “separation of church and state” and how it’s “illegal to force religion on the world.” The ISD finally published an article saying “how does seeing something change you? If you cannot witness someone praying without being converted, the you should not be allowed into the general population of a city. Your rights do not trump anyone’s, and we will not curtail the rights of our students.” The person then sued, although the Judge rightly told them to kick rocks as their suit was baseless.

This, however, was 27 years ago or more, as I graduated in 1995, today, the ACLU has all but perfected their “send 25 lawyers to every city, sue for every minor violation possible, demand the highest possible judgement so that it will bankrupt the city, then “settle” for the city telling residents “you may not show your faith in any way.” Oddly, this is almost a violation of the first amendment, as it is almost a law stating atheism is the only religion allowed. But of course, liberals don’t care about legality do they? Pure Flix even has a movie showing this, called Finding Normal, where a small town is sued because a lump of dirt has a cross on it, but as the town owns that lump, the aclu decides that is the same as slapping everyone on the head and demanding conversion to Christianity. It’s not until that lump of dirt is bought and thus, becomes private property, that they’re forced to give up. God’s Not Dead also shows, in all of their movies, how the left treats Christians, they don’t care about our faith, only forcing their lack of faith on us.

Moving on, CNN is getting in on the “we’ll write whatever we want, you may not discuss it, and we will not tolerate dissent” bit more and more every day. It really began under George W Bush, but they were smart enough to realize in the wake of 9/11 that they couldn’t really scream for the government to be overthrown. Under Obama it was sunshine and rainbows no matter what law he ignored, and in 2016, the sky fell as Chicken Little screamed from every CNN studio about Russian collusion and mean tweets. Today it’s Joe Rogan, a man who is not conservative, but who also has a brain. Rogan brings people onto his podcast who have something to say. This story, rather, firmly points at the listener to say “you’re a horrible person if you even think about listening to Rogan’s show, how dare you even suggest people should be able to say what they want.” The gist of the title alone does this, although the article goes even further down the “if you don’t do as we say and hate Joe Rogan, you’re an evil bigot.”

Recently, he brought an MD on, one who was heavily involved in pioneering the use of MRNA vaccines to do more than just fight disease. This MD, who is listed on all of the patents for MRNA vaccines, openly says not to take the current jabs that are supposed to protect against the current plandemic. As this Doctor, who knows what MRNA vaccines can do, opposes the DNC and thus, DC stance on obeying the government, he’s been vilified and more for weeks. Neil Young and more have demanded that either Rogan be kicked or their own shows/music be pulled, although for now Spotify is holding to “Rogan has not broken the rules, so if you say so, we’ll pull your stuff.” I’m personally waiting on Young or another aged hippie to cry about their “right to be heard” and openly say “PULL ROGAN DOWN, I DEMAND IT” then cry when told no.

This story of course is demonizing anyone who listens to Rogan with their “don’t pretend you don’t know who Rogan is” opener. I do know who he is, he was a shock host on The Man Show in the early days, he then hosted Fear Factor, then moved into MMA then his podcast. He openly states he’s not an expert, but that he finds them to talk to. The problem is that the actual experts counter the government’s arguments at every turn. Ivermectin is not an equine medicine only, it just happens to be one that does one thing for equines and another for humans. HCQ works amazingly well for respiratory diseases, and has for decades, with even Fauci praising it in the 90’s, but now as it means you can recover without the jab, it’s labeled “experimental and dangerous” and anyone saying different is to be silenced.

So, wrapping things up, where do you stand? Do you support the idea of “here’s my heavily edited and biased/twisted narrative, do not discuss, just praise me and obey me” in the media, or do you want to be able to discuss, dissent and debate? If the latter, share this on any social media, taking CBS News and CNN, and anyone else you can think of who supports the “YOU WILL BOW AND OBEY” mantra, you may just find out who your true friends really are.