Mega Actor Makes ‘Joke’ Towards Trump That Sounds More Like a Threat

By Patrick Smith. In a year that he would like to forget, which included his acrimonious divorce to Amber Heard, Johnny Depp appeared at a Q&A at the new Cinemageddon stage at Glastonbury.

Introducing his 2004 film The Libertine, about a 17th-century poet who notoriously drank himself to an early death, the 54-year-old chose to discuss American politics.

“I think [Donald] Trump needs help,” he said. “There are a lot of dark places he could go.”

He added: “I’m not insinuating anything – by the way this will be in the press and it will be horrible – but when was the last time an actor assassinated a president?”

Responding to loud cheers, Depp said: “Don’t worry, I’m not an actor, I lie for a living.” (Read more from “Mega Actor Makes ‘Joke’ Towards Trump That Sounds More Like a Threat” HERE)

_______________________________________

Elise Jordan Says Defending Trump ‘Like Hugging a Suicide Bomber’

By Aidan McLaughlin. Elise Jordan warned Republicans against defending a fact-challenged President Donald Trump, comparing doing so to “hugging a suicide bomber” on MSNBC Thursday.

The comments were in response to Trump’s latest tweets undermining his previous statement hinting that he may have recorded tapes of his conversations with former FBI director James Comey . . .

MSNBC’s Craig Melvin asked Jordan about the president’s tweets, noting “it would seem as if the president may have been lying all along about the existence of these tapes.”

“No, he’s just wasting — he wasted the country’s collective time speculating over whether these tapes existed or not,” Jordan said. “It’s a sad day when you cannot depend on the president’s word.”

Jordan — a Bush White House aide turned MSNBC analyst and TIME contributor — then doled out some advice for Republican lawmakers: “My advice would just be to Republicans who do cozy up to him — it’s like hugging a suicide bomber.” (Read more from “Elise Jordan Says Defending Trump ‘Like Hugging a Suicide Bomber'” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Open Marriages Happier? Not So Fast, Family Research Expert Says

Anecdotal praise of open relationships can be found all over the internet. The New York Times’ May feature is the most prominent example. The headline wonders, “Is an Open Marriage a Happier Marriage?

Meanwhile, LGBT advocates are celebrating the first polyamorous “family” to be legally recognized in Colombia this month.

But are these kinds of relationships really as healthy as recent reports suggest?

Just as Happy?

Studies traditionally report that people in open marriages and other forms of polyamory are less happy than monogamous couples. A March study suggests that’s because society is biased against them. Researchers at SAGE Journals found that “CNM [consensual non-monogamous] relationships generally have equally positive relational outcomes as monogamous relationships.”

But Dr. Brad Wilcox said there is a lack of good evidence on the actual appeal of open marriages. For instance, the Times piece on open marriages was “data free.” That was “striking,” he told The Stream. Wilcox is the director of the National Marriage Project at the University of Virginia.

Studies favoring polyamory “are based on non-representative samples,” he said. “It’s not really good science.” Even the SAGE study’s authors admit their survey respondents were not chosen randomly. They may have been biased toward positive reporting.

“My guess is that these marriages are really unstable,” Wilcox said. The complexity that comes along with an open marriage might be harder in practice than in theory, he added.

Wilcox noted that most Americans still favor the idea of fidelity. And people who have had just one partner in the last year and not several tend to be happier, he said. He called those pushing for polyamory and open marriages “a small minority.”

Redefining Morality

Why is that minority so vocal? Perhaps it has to do with Americans’ shifting view of morality.

LifeWay Research released a telling study last month. It revealed that 81 percent of Americans worry about “declining moral behavior.” But people disagree about the meaning of “moral.” Nearly 50 percent said that right and wrong are absolutes. But 20 percent said something is “wrong” only if it hurts someone.

According to the study, “More than 6 in 10 of those older than 45 say right and wrong do not change. For those 35 and younger, fewer than 4 in 10 make that claim.” The age gap between the two is not surprising. Another recent study revealed that only 4 percent of millennials hold a “biblical worldview.”

Since many people don’t view moral truths as absolute, the growing acceptance of polyamory makes sense. If it doesn’t hurt anybody, why not? “How is love bad?” asks one husband who lives with his wife, daughter, and his wife’s boyfriend.

True Happiness Requires Holiness

The Times portrays its “Open Marriage” interview subjects with sophistication. The author is impressed by the “boldness” of their unconventional ways. But really, there’s nothing new or bold about seeking sensual pleasure.

In Galatians, Paul refers to sinful desires as “the flesh.” He warns Christians to “not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh.” (Galatians 5:13) A few verses later, he writes:

But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh. For the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit, and the desires of the Spirit are against the flesh, for these are opposed to each other, to keep you from doing the things you want to do. (Galatians 5:16-17)

Christians are taught to reject fleshly desires in favor of something greater. We believe true joy is found in holiness. And we become holy by accepting God’s salvation through Jesus Chirst. In that salvation, there is freedom from the sin that enslaves all of us.

Anything in marriage beyond fidelity between one man and one woman is sin. And so participating in anything else is to resubmit to sin’s bondage. As D.C. McAllister wrote for The Federalist in 2015, critiquing a polyamorist columnist:

Burrows was so quick to throw off the chains of religion and social norms that she fails to see that she has entered a new kind of bondage: she is bound by the chains of her sexual desires. Little does she know that those butterflies that make her feel so alive will soon become dragons that burn off her soul and reduce her to an empty shell of animalistic appetites. Burrows fails to see that liberty — real liberty — is found in self-government and self-control.

The idea of open marriage and poly-romance isn’t new. Neither is defining happiness and freedom by the unbridled pursuit of sensual pleasure. But there is a recent wave of exploration when it comes to the idea of polyamory as a legitimate, ethical relationship (and parenting) style — even if led by a “small minority.” Founded on empty desires, false morality and little research, it’s a wave that deserves push-back. (For more from the author of “Open Marriages Happier? Not So Fast, Family Research Expert Says” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Man Accused of Moving Cocaine Through Children’s Day Care

Children played and slept surrounded by pounds of cocaine at a Los Angeles day care center that a man used as a drug trafficking hub, authorities said . . .

Felipe Talamante is accused of trafficking dozens of pounds of cocaine out of the house that also functioned as an unlicensed day care center for children of all ages.

Police had previously arrested Talamante at the same home two years ago — also for allegedly possessing 20 kilograms of cocaine, according to the city attorney’s office. But that case was not prosecuted, Feuer said. Drug enforcement agents did not return messages asking why. (Read more from “Man Accused of Moving Cocaine Through Children’s Day Care” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

CNN Program Lauds Rep Who Refused Abortion

Washington Republican Rep. Jaime Beutler explained why she refused to abort her baby in a recent CNN piece on “Bada** Women of Washington.”

Beutler discovered she was pregnant with her first child shortly after her first reelection in 2012. However, the happy news soon turned devastating when doctors diagnosed her unborn child with Potter Syndrome, a condition where the unborn baby fails to develop kidneys. Additionally, the fetus fails to properly develop lungs. Doctors told her the condition is 100 percent fatal.

“They took us into a back room and just said, ‘There’s nothing that can be done. Your baby’s gonna die,’” Beutler told CNN. The physician recommended an abortion due to the fatal nature of the condition.

“Being able to hear the heartbeat … we had this gut feeling of there has to be something — I mean, a doctor may say it, but she’s moving. That’s pretty convincing. We know she’s still alive,” said her husband, Dan Beutler . . .

“But what she went through to have — and save — her baby is truly bada**, a lesson in courage from a woman who wouldn’t take no for an answer,” wrote CNN’s Dana Loch. Finally, a doctor at Johns Hopkins University agreed to administer the treatment. (Read more from “CNN Program Lauds Rep Who Refused Abortion” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The Church Will Never Embrace Homosexual Practice

There’s a bizarre argument which basically goes like this. “Look at how many churches are embracing homosexual practice. This proves we’re getting closer to the truth.” The logic behind this argument is as wrongheaded as it is unbiblical. All it really proves is that more and more churches are apostasizing.

‘Many False Prophets Will Arise’

To argue that acceptance of homosexuality by churches is proof of spiritual growth is like arguing that acceptance of obesity by doctors is proof of medical progress. The reverse is actually true.

The Bible often warns us against compromise and apostasy, both moral and creedal. In every generation, there are heretics who depart from the faith. Should we celebrate every heretical doctrine and practice as proof of our spiritual maturity?

Jesus warned His disciples, saying “See that no one leads you astray” (Matt. 24:4). He also said, “And many false prophets will arise and lead many astray. And because lawlessness will be increased, the love of many will grow cold. But the one who endures to the end will be saved” (Matt. 24:11-13).

What is to be celebrated is not apostasy but faithfulness. Not deception, but steadfastness. Not moral laxity, but moral firmness. The words of Jesus may have more specific application to certain times in history. But there is certainly an application to our day, in which “lawlessness” has greatly increased.

4 Reasons Why the Church Will Never Embrace Homosexual Practice

Last month, the gay activist organization Faith in America announced its plans to ask the Southern Baptist Convention to remove homosexual practice “from the sin list.”

“Ultimately,” they said, “we at FIA believe LGBT people should be removed from the sin list. We know interpretations and new revelations come to light. We believe the Church will one day stop diminishing the lives of those who are LGBT and we strive to help this come to pass. We are optimistic people and see the glass 75% full!”

They are encouraged by what they have seen in recent years, as more and more churches in America and Europe drop homosexual practice “from the sin list.” Soon enough, they believe, the whole Church will follow suit. To paraphrase (in my words, not theirs!), “We’re encouraged by the increasing apostasy we see in the Church. We’re expectant that one day, the whole Church will be completely apostate.”

The facts are as follows.

First, as I’ve stated repeatedly:

No new textual, archeological, sociological, anthropological, or philological discoveries have been made in the last fifty years that would cause us to read any of these biblical texts differently. Put another way, it is not that we have gained some new insights into what the biblical text means based on the study of the Hebrew and Greek texts. Instead, people’s interaction with the LGBT community has caused them to understand the biblical text differently.

The truth hasn’t changed. Instead, some professing Christians have departed from God’s unchanging truth. This is because of personal relationships and cultural decline.

Second, most church groups that have removed homosexual practice from the sin list are in numerical and spiritual decline. In contrast, most church groups that are holding to biblical truth, especially overseas, are growing numerically and spiritually.

Third, the embrace of homosexual practice cannot be separated from the larger cultural embrace of the sexual revolution. This includes an increase in extra-marital sex, out of wedlock births, pornography, and divorce, along with all kinds of sexual perversions. That’s why the same society that celebrates same-sex “marriage” is increasingly celebrating polyamory, polygamy, and consensual adult incest. (I’ve documented this in many articles and several books. See, conveniently, the relevant chapters here.)

This points to spiritual and moral regress, not progress.

Fourth, the idea that the whole Church will one day embrace homosexual practice is as certain not to happen as the idea that the whole Church will one day deny Jesus. Forget about not holding your breath. Don’t even think about holding your breath.

Tragic Self-Deception

It’s certainly possible that in some locations, parts of the Church will fall away, and this will be marked by numerous spiritual compromises. But the notion that the whole Church will fall away is completely self-contradictory. If there is a true Church, it has been established by Jesus Himself. And it was He who said that He would build His church and that “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it” (Matt. 16:18).

It is not only theologically ignorant to imagine that the Church worldwide will one day embrace homosexual practice. It is also missiologically ignorant. Wherever the Church is growing worldwide, it is growing with a conservative message and morality.

I truly believe that the leaders of groups like Faith in America mean well. They believe they are doing God’s work. That makes their self-deception all the more tragic. (For more from the author of “The Church Will Never Embrace Homosexual Practice” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Canadians Could Be Jailed or Fined for Using Incorrect Gender Pronouns

Canada passed a law Thursday making it illegal to use the wrong gender pronouns. Critics say that Canadians who do not subscribe to progressive gender theory could be accused of hate crimes, jailed, fined, and made to take anti-bias training.

Canada’s Senate passed Bill C-16, which puts “gender identity” and “gender expression” into both the country’s Human Rights Code, as well as the hate crime category of its Criminal Code by a vote of 67-11, according to LifeSiteNews. The bill now only needs royal assent from the governor general.

“Great news,” announced Justin Trudeau, Canada’s prime minister. “Bill C-16 has passed the Senate – making it illegal to discriminate based on gender identity or expression. #LoveisLove.”

“Proud that Bill C-16 has passed in the Senate,” said Jody Wilson-Raybould, the country’s attorney general and minister of justice. “All Canadians should feel #FreeToBeMe.”

“[There’s an argument] that transgender identity is too subjective a concept to be enshrined in law because it is defined as an individual’s deeply felt internal experience of gender,” said Grant Mitchell, a conservative senator, in November 2016. “Yet we, of course, accept outright that no one can discriminate on the basis of religion, and that too is clearly a very deeply subjective and personal feeling.” (Read more from “Canadians Could Be Jailed or Fined for Using Incorrect Gender Pronouns” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Religious Adoption Agencies Can Reject LGBT Parents in Texas

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed a bill allowing faith-based foster care and adoption agencies to deny LGBT parents Thursday.

Abbott signed HB 3859 into law, effectively protecting faith-based agencies from being sued for choosing not to place children with gay, lesbian, transgender or other LGBT couples.

Democrats argue the bill is redundant because the law already protects the rights of faith-based agencies to make child placement decisions based on an agency’s religion. The new law, however, further ensures that the state cannot sue agencies for denying potential parents based on religious criteria.

State Rep. James Frank, author of the bill, said it would not only defend the rights of religious agencies, but also help solve the housing crisis that plagues the foster and adoption systems.

“This is a defensive bill. It allows everyone to participate,” said Frank. “It requires [Child Protective Services] to maintain a diverse network of homes and provides reasonable accommodations to those who are helping solve our foster care capacity crisis.” (Read more from “Religious Adoption Agencies Can Reject LGBT Parents in Texas” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

When Your Basketball Team Partners With Planned Parenthood

I grew up in a small town without a lot going on. There were two types of girls at my high school: those who dropped out, and those who played basketball.

We had other sports, too, but they served mainly to keep us in shape. Kids at my school couldn’t name our (female!) senators, but they knew everything about legendary coach Pat Summitt. At sleepovers we watched the movie Love and Basketball or a screening of A Cinderella Season: The Lady Vols Fight Back.

When Seattle got their WNBA franchise in 2000, girls in my class drove three hours to watch their first games with Lauren Jackson. When they made the playoffs in 2002, we celebrated Sue Bird, the fresh, energetic rookie from UConn.

So I was surprised when I saw that Bird is still playing. And my heart sunk when I saw the headline at The Seattle Times: “Storm Partners With Planned Parenthood for Fundraising Rally.”

For the first time ever, the abortion giant is getting public support from a professional sports team. Given the abortion provider’s history of exploiting women, I would have expected the Pittsburgh Steelers. But no, it’s the WNBA’s Seattle Storm who will raise money for Planned Parenthood.

Raising Money for Organ Harvesters

The Storm’s owners announced a rally on July 18, with proceeds going to Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest and Hawaii (PPGNHI).

And guess where infamous Planned Parenthood organ harvester Deborah Nucatola is now? After undercover videos exposed her practice of changing abortion procedures and profiting from the sale of human organs, Nucatola moved … to Hawaii. She is now the Hawaii Medical Director for PPGNHI.

Which means that ticket sales on July 18 will help support the work of a doctor who illegally performed partial-birth abortions. Remember that Nucatola is the one who taught other abortionists the best methods to harvest organs “intact” by ignoring federal law.

Storm owner Dawn Trudeau explained the move to support Planned Parenthood in a statement: “Access to affordable, quality health care, including a full range of reproductive care, is a critical precondition for anyone — especially girls and women, to pursue their dreams and grow into their best selves.”

Basketball is a great thing. It teaches girls how to grow strong, focused and disciplined, and it brings communities together. But any dream that requires killing children in the womb is not going to lead to anyone’s best self.

Abortion is Hurting Female Athletes

Female athletes already face tremendous pressure to abort. Olympic runner Sanya Richards-Ross just wrote a book about her abortion and her post-abortive journey to healing, by God’s grace. But her story is too common.

“I literally don’t know another female track and field athlete who hasn’t had an abortion,” Richards-Ross told Sports Illustrated. “And that’s sad.”

Partnering with America’s largest abortion provider may benefit the team’s owners, but it doesn’t help women. It only compounds the pressure they already feel. And raising money for an organization that harvests human organs is the opposite of empowering.

The Storm’s decision to partner with Planned Parenthood is heartbreaking for pro-life fans. They were a team we once looked to with excitement and pride. But with this partnership, they’re choosing a side in the fight for life ­— and it’s the side of despair and greed. (For more from the author of “When Your Basketball Team Partners With Planned Parenthood” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Transgender Sports: Men and Women Have Physical Differences That No Surgery or Hormone Treatment Can Change

Kate Hall won the 100m sprint at regionals her sophomore year. But a year later, Hall was beat by Andraya Yearwood, a high school freshman. Yearwood was born male but “identifies” as female. At the time of the race, he had not undergone hormone treatment or surgery to “transition from male to female.”

More Than Testosterone

Much of the debate about “transgender” athletes has focused on testosterone. Consider the NCAA policy for such transgender athletes focuses only on testosterone. According to the NCAA’s policy for men transitioning to women:

A trans female [male transitioning to a female] student-athlete being treated with testosterone suppression medication for Gender Identity Disorder or gender dysphoria and/or Transsexualism, for the purposes of NCAA competition may continue to compete on a men’s team but may not compete on a women’s team without changing it to a mixed team status until completing one calendar year of testosterone suppression treatment. (NCAA Inclusion of Transgender Student-Athletes, 2011)

Notably, a trans male (female identifying as male) does not have to wait a year before competing on a men’s team.

Testosterone plays a big role in athletic performance. But when we start talking about high-performance competition, especially in track and field, small variations make all the difference. These go well beyond testosterone.

Hip Structure and Center of Mass

Some differences can’t be changed, even with surgery and hormone treatments.

One of the major differences between male and female runners is the hip structure along with everything attached to hip movement. It’s not just a matter of having wide or narrow hips. A key difference is the ratio between hip width and femur length. Women tend to have a greater hip width-to-femur length ratio, which leads to greater hip adduction — that is, movement toward the center of the body. This difference has a domino effect that results in small differences in joint rotation and muscle recruitment.

In other words, men and women differ in how the lower parts of their bodies move as a coordinated wholes.

Other Differences

Men also tend to have more fast-twitch muscles than women. According to experts this isn’t something that can change with training. Fast-twitch muscles are what you want for sprinting because they help you explode off the starting line. They also help produce the kind of “anaerobic” energy you need for sprinting . Slow-twitch muscles are good for conserving energy. They’re the kind of muscles you want in a distance race.

Men also tend to have larger internal organs. This sounds like a disadvantage for sprinters, but larger lungs and heart result in more oxygen uptake. The more oxygen you can take in, the more that can be transported to your muscles. VO2max measures an athlete’s maximum oxygen uptake. It’s higher in men than it is in women, even for men and women that have the same body mass and equivalent lean muscle mass. Biologically, men have a higher VO2max, all other things being equal.

As a result, men also tend to have a higher concentration of hemoglobin in their blood than women do. For athletes, that’s an advantage. This is why doping with EPO, a protein that increases your oxygen-carrying hemoglobin, is illegal in sports. A runner who is born male, therefore, has an advantage over most female athletes wanting to run a clean race.

The Body Can’t Be Completely “Reformatted”

Even with surgery, doping, and hormone treatment, you can’t change every piece of your body. The body functions as a cohesive whole. The skeletal system, the size of major internal organs, and one’s center of mass are all fundamental components of the body. We see this in athletes who use steroids. They often sustain injuries because steroids change muscle mass without changing the ligaments and tendons connected to the muscle.

Doctors can change some things about the body. But they can’t “reformat” the body to become something else completely. A biological male is going to have the fundamental structures of a male body. That’s an inherent advantage in many sports.

Subordinating Athletes Who are “Born Female”

Separating men and women in sports has opened the door for many opportunities for women. Title IX has allowed women athletes to attend college on a scholarship and compete at a high level. Women athletes have also served as role models to other women.

Consider some of the great female runners. Joan Benoit Samuelson took gold the first year the women’s marathon was part of the Olympics. Paula Radcliff holds the women’s marathon world record. Jackie Joyner Kersee holds the best heptathlon score and the second farthest women’s long-jump. Florence Griffith Joyner, considered the fastest woman of all time, ran the women’s 100m in 10.49 and the 200m in 21.34.

All these female athletes have made huge contributions to running. Yet even Florence Joyner’s times would not have qualified her for the men’s semi-finals. In fact, the top twenty-five fastest men in 100m have times under 10 seconds, beating Joyner’s time of 10.49.

Of course elite athletes are by definition outside the norm. But there’s something wrong when half of the population has an inherent disadvantage. If biological males can compete against biological females, it won’t be long, especially in elite sports, before males win all the races and hold all the records.

Women will, in effect, but pushed out of competition because they were born with female bodies. Does that make any sense? As Jeff Jacobs asks in his thoughtful article in the Hartford Courant, “What do we tell these girls? A transgender’s journey is more important than your journey?”

Kate Hall showed grace and maturity in the face of disappointment. But how many more young women will have to say what Hall said in response to her defeat, “It’s frustrating … but that’s just the way it is now”? (For more from the author of “Transgender Sports: Men and Women Have Physical Differences That No Surgery or Hormone Treatment Can Change” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Our Public School System Isn’t Producing Education Equality

All across America, preparations are underway for high school graduation. It’s a glorious time, representing both a milestone and a gateway to adulthood.

But missing from this year’s ceremonies are more than one million kids who dropped out and will not be attending graduation day.

The future those high school dropouts face is chilling. They will have a much harder time getting a job and will earn much less than those who did graduate. They’re also more likely to commit a crime and more likely to be the victim of one.

In short, many of them face a life that will be so much more difficult—all because they could not or chose not to finish high school.

The consequences of this crisis are especially evident in my community. Today, more than half of all African-American students in many large U.S. cities don’t graduate from high school. Think about that.

And those kids aren’t just dropping out—they’re escaping.

According to the National Assessment of Educational Progress, schools that serve majority-minority communities have the worst performance, the highest crime rates, and the largest achievement gaps.

In cities like Detroit, more than nine in 10 black students can’t even read or do math at grade level.

It wasn’t supposed to be this way.

In 1954, the Supreme Court issued its landmark Brown v. Board of Education decision, ruling that school segregation is unconstitutional. “Massive Resistance” soon followed as many states launched an all-out effort to block integration.

My home state of Virginia was one of them, and anti-reform forces there mobilized to prevent black students from going to whites-only schools. They succeeded for a while but, in 1960, the first contingent of brave black students changed all that.

I was a member of the second contingent and, in 1961, was one of 26 black students assigned to integrate John Chandler Middle School in Richmond.

As the first day of school approached, we heard ominous threats of “blood flowing in gutters.” Thankfully, that didn’t happen. Instead, the only blood I saw was mine.

For the first month at Chandler, I never made it through the packed hallways between classes without at least one white student pricking me with a pin.

Sometimes, I was stuck so many times I had to press my dress against my body to keep the red streams from dripping down my legs.

It was awful, but it was worth it. In my own little way, I knew I was fighting for our equal right to get a great education.

Little did I know that more than half a century later, other girls and boys would still be fighting for education equality. Many of those kids are African-American like me, and the families many of them come from are poor and broken, like mine was.

But I was able to attend a better school, and they aren’t. Instead, anti-reform forces are blocking them from going to better-performing public charter and private schools.

Today, the nemesis isn’t the old Massive Resistance crowd, but a similarly determined cartel of unions, bureaucrats, and politicians. They make a great deal of money from the current system in the form of union dues, salaries, and political contributions.

As a result, they view education equality as a threat and anyone seeking it as their enemy.

Just ask Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos. Appearing before Congress recently, DeVos testified that her goal is “ensuring that every student has an equal opportunity to receive a great education.”

But rather than be hailed for seeking the equality promised decades ago, she’s being attacked by those who want things to stay just as they are.

But the secretary isn’t just right—she’s echoing the Supreme Court’s 1954 ruling which declared education to be “a right which must be made available to all on equal terms.”

Today in America, that right is conditional. If you are wealthy, white, connected, or elected, your child probably goes to or graduated from a great school.

But if you are African-American or Latino and living in a poor urban neighborhood, your child is much more likely to go to a failing school, a school where more than half of all students can’t read or write well, have low math scores, face the daily threat of bullying and violence, and won’t graduate.

Do these sound like “equal terms” to you?

In place of the equality mandated by the Supreme Court, we have disparities that are so shocking they defy belief.

Right now, America’s public school system includes outstanding institutions where students get an excellent education, use the best academic, athletic, and cultural facilities tax dollars can buy, and go on to college and promising lives.

And the same school system also includes failure factories where students don’t learn, spend their days in dilapidated and crime-infested buildings, fall further and further behind, and often drop out.

Now, which of these schools do you think is most often found in poor minority neighborhoods?

The reality, as House Speaker Paul Ryan has put it, is that the current system is effectively quarantining poor and minority children in failure factories.

For the sake of all those high school dropouts who will miss out on this month’s graduations, our nation needs the proponents of education equality to prevail.

Every single child—no matter their race, income, gender, or address—has the equal right to receive an excellent education. And every day in which that right isn’t a reality is a day in which we are losing more of these precious children. (For more from the author of “Our Public School System Isn’t Producing Education Equality” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.