Get Your Story Straight, Hillary! Are Women Strong or Are They Victims?

/1 Comment/in , /by

Americans are still recovering from the whiplash of Hillary Clinton’s rhetoric concerning women during the final presidential debate Wednesday evening.

Clinton’s anti-women, anti-family politics were on full display during the final pre-election showdown, masquerading before millions of viewers as “women’s empowerment” and “feminism.” But in the end, instead of brandishing her womanly strength, the Democratic nominee abandoned her campaign slogan, “Stronger Together,” and whipped out her woman card.

Prior to the event, Clinton tweeted this inspiring statement to her supporters:

Her message was clear: Women need to stand up to men like Donald Trump and show them that they won’t be pushed around.

But as with all things “progressive,” over the course of the evening, Clinton laid out her case for female victimhood instead. Her long list of grievances included the fact that states are restricting women’s “right” to an abortion by defunding Planned Parenthood, and the fact that the so-called wage gap is a roadblock in the fight for women’s equality.

And of course, she addressed Trump’s lewd comments about groping women:

“Donald thinks belittling women makes him bigger. He goes after their dignity, their self-worth, and I don’t think there is a woman anywhere who doesn’t know what that feels like.”

Donald Trump’s poor track record with women shouldn’t be ignored or diminished. But while Trump absolutely does belittle women (and everyone, for that matter), Hillary belittles women as well — but in a much deeper sense. Laying aside the fact that she has received millions from countries that do actively persecute women, the way she undermines women’s dignity is far subtler, and far more dangerous.

Hillary capitalizes on the emotions of American voters in order to convince them of their ultimate dependency on Big Government. Her vision for America is beyond belittling — it’s a direct assault on the dignity of women and all people.

Everything about Clinton’s rhetoric Wednesday said that women need to be rescued from men like Trump. And though they are “strong,” their strength is ultimately dependent on Big Government handouts and Planned Parenthood.

So, do women need to be empowered, or are they already powerful?

Why should women be forced to pay for other women’s abortions? Why should they be forced to welcome in millions of migrants who hail from countries where actual abuse of women is the norm? (We see the consequences, on a regular basis, throughout Europe.)

That seems like a hefty price to pay for “empowerment.”

If there’s one thing the former secretary of state has shown the American people during this election season, it’s that she hates accountability. But anyone who truly supports women should hold her accountable for victimizing women, patronizing them, and yes, bullying them into compliance. Trump may be an unapologetic bully, but Clinton is a sneaky, hypocritical bully with a much more damaging message. (For more from the author of “Get Your Story Straight, Hillary! Are Women Strong or Are They Victims?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Judge Reaffirms Nationwide Ban on Obama Transgender School Bathroom Policy

/0 Comments/in , /by

A federal judge has stopped President Obama’s policy forcing public schools to allow boys in the girls’ locker room.

U.S. District Court Judge Reed O’Connor rejected the Obama administration’s request to lift an injunction against enforcement of the transgender bathroom policy put forth by the Department of Education.

In response to 13 state attorney generals, Judge O’Connor issued the nationwide injunction in August. The Justice Department requested the injunction at least be limited to the 13 objecting states, but O’Connor ruled late Tuesday against the Obama administration.

“It is clear from Supreme Court and Fifth Circuit precedent that this Court has the power to issue a nationwide injunction where appropriate. Both Title IX and Title VII rely on the consistent, uniform application of national standards in education and workplace policy,” O’Connor, a George W. Bush appointee, ruled. “A geographically-limited injunction would be ineffective.”

The Justice Department vowed to appeal to the Fifth Circuit Court in New Orleans if it did not prevail. (Read more from “Judge Reaffirms Nationwide Ban on Obama Transgender School Bathroom Policy” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Planned Parenthood CEO: HHS Mandate Is My ‘Proudest Moment’

/0 Comments/in , /by

In a wide-ranging interview with Texas Observer, Planned Parenthood CEO Cecile Richards says that her “proudest moment” at America’s largest abortion company was when she found out the federal government’s birth control and abortifacient mandate was about to become federal policy. Asked by the liberal magazine to name her proudest moment, she answered:

Definitely the day President Obama called to say he was about to announce that birth control would be covered for all women under their insurance plans, because it had been a hard-fought battle, long before I came to Planned Parenthood. We were fighting to make sure that insurance companies covered it and pharmacies would fill prescriptions. The fact that now, I believe, for your generation, all women will be able to get it without a fight, and they’ll be able to get the best birth control, is an enormously important moment. It was a win for the movement.

Elsewhere in the interview, Richards said that her movement is “fighting these issues in the Supreme Court for some employers who are completely unwilling to allow their employees to get access to birth control….” After the establishment of the Affordable Care Act, the Department of Health and Human Services created a “contraceptive mandate” requiring almost every organization to include contraception coverage in its insurance plan. Religious groups were not given an exception, and the administration vigorously fought in the courts to force religious groups to comply.

The Mandate Against Religious Groups

The mandate’s backers have said it is an important way for women to gain access to contraceptive measures. Though Richards doesn’t say so, almost all these groups are Christian ministries or businesses, such as the Little Sisters of the Poor, Priests for Life, Franciscan and Oklahoma Wesleyan universities, the Catholic diocese of Pittsburgh and the Hobby Lobby business. Most have sued the Obama administration, saying they have no intention of preventing women from accessing birth control. They argue they simply do not wish to participate in insuring their employees’ use of birth control and abortifacients.

Many of the contraceptives that are required to be insured also double as abortion-inducing drugs and devices — products that end the life of unborn children. This is one reason mandate supporters and opponents, as many who back the mandate claim that human life is not created until after implantation in the womb. Catholic organizations object to contraception of any sort, in keeping with Catholic teaching.

The mandate has faced legal difficulties since it was first announced in 2012. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled the mandate partially unconstitutional in its 2014 Hobby Lobby decision, and earlier this year ordered lower courts to reconsider how the mandate could be worked without requiring religious non-profits with moral objections to cover the products.

The face of the mandate’s non-profit opponents is the Little Sisters of the Poor, an order of Catholic nuns that provides care to the elderly poor. Represented by The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, the nuns have received enormous support from Members of Congress, including two Democrats. In an exclusive interview earlier this year,a spokesperson for the order told The Stream that the Obama administration has admitted women can easily access contraceptives and abortifacients without involving the nuns, priests and others opposed to the mandate. (For more from the author of “Planned Parenthood CEO: HHS Mandate Is My ‘Proudest Moment'” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

University Threatens to ‘Silence’ Professor Protesting Genderless Pronouns

/0 Comments/in , /by

A psychology professor at the University of Toronto who is protesting a law that would force him to use certain pronouns for transgender and other gender nonconforming individuals says the school is trying to “silence” him.

“The university, yesterday, basically told me to silence myself,” Jordan Peterson told The Daily Signal. “That’s the second warning letter.”

Peterson has been a vocal opponent of a measure before Canada’s Parliament known as C-16, which would amend the nation’s human rights and criminal codes to make it illegal to discriminate based on gender identity and gender expression.

If passed, failure to refer to a person by the preferred pronoun or refusing to hire someone based on gender identity could qualify as discrimination and be punishable by law.

In a phone interview with The Daily Signal, Peterson said he has no problem with addressing people “as whatever gender they appear to be presenting themselves as.”

Peterson, a clinical psychologist, is a tenured professor.

“If Caitlyn Jenner wants to be called ‘she,’ I don’t give a damn,” he said. “If someone’s going through a fair bit of work to manifest themselves as a female or manifest themselves as a male, I’m not going to make an issue of it.”

What Peterson takes issue with, however, is the Canadian government potentially forcing him to speak in a manner that reflects a particular ideology, such as using the genderless pronouns “zie” or “hir.”

“The law should be very careful when it mandates what people have to say,” Peterson said, adding:

That’s the fundamental issue here. The mistake of this legislation is, it’s an attempt to force people to utter certain words that are not of their choosing. There’s a big difference between being required to not say something, and being required to say something. It’s a different category of law. One is closing your mouth. The other one is putting a hand inside you and forcing you to be a puppet.

As part of his opposition to C-16, which currently is in committee, Peterson got involved in free speech rallies, published a video series online, and wrote articles explaining his stance.

Some students and other members of the University of Toronto community took immediate offense to Peterson’s remarks, telling school leaders they found his comments “unacceptable, emotionally disturbing, and painful.”

Some fear for their safety because of his perspective, two university officials said in a letter to Peterson. David Cameron, dean of the Faculty of Arts & Science, and Sioban Nelson, vice-provost for faculty and academic life, wrote:

Some members of the university community report that the statements and the invective that has followed in the ensuing commentary and debates on social media have caused them to fear for their safety on the university campus.

The university first warned Peterson to stop making “discriminatory” remarks in an Oct. 3 letter from Susanne Ferber, chairwoman of the Department of Psychology, who wrote:

Concerns have been raised by members of the University of Toronto community regarding statements you have made publicly regarding transgendered persons in a recent YouTube presentation. I wish to remind you that in your activities as a University of Toronto faculty member you are expected to comply with applicable human rights law.

The Daily Signal sought comment from the University of Toronto, but did not receive a response by deadline.

The letter signed by Cameron and Nelson, dated Oct. 18, informs Peterson:

The impact of your behavior runs the risk of undermining your ability to conduct essential components of your job as a faculty member and we urge you to consider your obligations as a faculty member to act in a manner that is consistent with the law and with university policy.

Peterson’s tenure status provides “some protection” from being fired, he said, “but the limits of that can always be tested.”

The university officials object to what they call Peterson’s “discriminatory intentions”—that, as a matter of principle, he has said he’d refuse to comply with rules or laws dictating pronoun usage.

“You should also be aware that many members of the university community are concerned and distressed about the declarations of your discriminatory intentions,” Cameron and Nelson write.

The letter also cites the Ontario Human Rights Code, which already bans discrimination based on gender identity and expression. The university is located in Toronto, the capital of Ontario.

“Depending on the context, if personal pronouns are being used, the refusal by a teacher or colleague to use the personal pronoun that is an expression of the person’s gender identity can constitute discrimination,” they add.

Peterson said he doesn’t intend to stop speaking out on the issue, and warned that political correctness is spiraling out of control, particularly in the U.S.

“This has also happened in New York City, where you can be fined $250,000 for misgendering someone,” he said.

Under the New York City policy, landlords, employers, and businesses face civil penalties up to $125,000 per violation and up to $250,000 “for violations that are the result of willful, wanton, or malicious conduct.”

Peterson said he was discouraged by the thought of losing his job, and possibly losing his license to practice psychology. He said the situation has been hard for his family to bear.

On principle, however, Peterson told The Daily Signal he refuses to be silenced, and knows that as a result, he stands a real chance of losing his job and livelihood:

I think the university will send me a third warning letter, because I think they’re getting the documentation in order, and then I think there’s a reasonable probability that they’ll take action against me. And I think there’s a nontrivial possibility that I’ll be held up in front of the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal. I’m obviously prognosticating with regards to something I can’t predict, but the university did yesterday tell me to silence myself, and I didn’t expect them to do that.

(For more from the author of “University Threatens to ‘Silence’ Professor Protesting Genderless Pronouns” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

These Abortion Parties Are the Most Disgusting Thing You Will Read About This Week

/0 Comments/in , , /by

Over 30 parties celebrating abortion were held all over the country Saturday night in tandem with a concert in Cleveland. Hosted by “All Access,” a coalition of groups such as NARAL Pro-Choice America, Planned Parenthood, and the Center for Reproductive Rights, the parties gathered attendees in Chicago, Miami, Atlanta, Philadelphia, and even remote places like Sioux Falls, S.D.

The Cleveland event was headlined by Sia, a Grammy-nominated singer whose song “Cheap Thrills” dominated the Billboard Hot 100 this summer. Leslie Jones, a comedian who starred in this year’s “Ghostbusters” revival, and Jessica Williams, a former correspondent on “The Daily Show,” also performed at the event. Despite the big names, however, the venue wasn’t packed:

The photo above was posted 40 minutes before the start of the concert. And while the venue filled out more by the start of the concert, it was by no means packed:

All Access tries hard to portray abortion as a matter of routine health care, as well as a social and religious good. On the All Access website, a rabbi argues that denying abortion rights “rob us of our religious dignity” and restrict women’s “full agency over their own bodies.” Some of the smaller parties around the country got creative in celebrating abortion: The All Access party in South Bend, Ind., featured 200 flags citing reasons why abortion is a social good.

Supporters used the hashtag #Access4All, along with #BeBoldEndHyde, referencing the Hyde Amendment, which bars federal funds being used by Medicaid to pay for abortions (in most cases). For the first time this year, the Democratic Party platform included language to repeal the Hyde Amendment, further deepening the political divide over abortion.

Ignoring the obvious, one supporter maintained, per the South Bend Tribune, “Abortion shouldn’t be politicized and separated out as a controversial issue.” (For more from the author of “These Abortion Parties Are the Most Disgusting Thing You Will Read About This Week” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Super PAC Set to Release Pro-Trump Ad Pitting Michelle Obama Against Hillary Clinton

/0 Comments/in , /by

First lady Michelle Obama’s past words will come back to haunt her this week with the release of a new campaign ad bought by a super PAC that is backing Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump.

The ad, to be aired in Orlando and Tampa, Fla., uses Obama’s quote from 2007 about Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, who was facing Obama’s husband in the Democratic primary.

“If you can’t run your own house, you can’t run the White House,” Obama says.

The statement appeared to be a reference to former President Bill Clinton’s extramarital affairs, although Barack Obama denied it at the time.

Make America Number 1, the superPAC that paid for the ad, is hoping it will cause women in the key battleground state of Florida to rethink voting for Clinton.

Clinton leads Trump by 15 points among female voters in the Sunshine State — 54 percent to 39 percent — according to a Quinnipiac University poll released Monday.

Throughout the course of the election, Trump has struggled to win over many female voters. His efforts were hurt by a recent leaked tape of his lewd comments followed by sexual harassment accusations from several women.

Although Trump apologized for the remarks and denied the women’s claims, his poll numbers with female voters have dropped.

Make America Number 1 is looking to help give him a boost in this area with its ad featuring the first lady.

Michelle Obama has emerged as one of Clinton’s strongest advocates on the campaign trail, giving powerful speeches attacking Trump and how he treats women.

The White House last week gave a subtle warning to Trump not to respond in kind to Obama.

“I can’t think of a bolder way for Donald Trump to lose even more standing than he already has than by engaging the first lady of the United States,” White House spokesman Eric Schultz said.

With this new ad, though, Obama isn’t attacked at all. Instead, her words are used to attack Clinton.

Super PACs are restricted by law from directly communicating and coordinating with a campaign, but they have no limits on how much money they can raise.

The commercial initially debuted as an ad on Facebook, where Make America Number 1 spent $72,000 trying to reach and win over women voters in nine major battleground states.

Hogan Gidley, a spokesman for Make America Number 1, said the group now will spend about $400,000 to get the commercial on network television. (For more from the author of “Super PAC Set to Release Pro-Trump Ad Pitting Michelle Obama Against Hillary Clinton” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Ivanka Trump Breaks Lengthy Silence on Leaked 2005 Video of Her Father

/0 Comments/in , /by

Ivanka Trump has been a loyal and diligent worker in her father’s effort to win the White House.

But the 34-year-old wife and mother had to pause briefly when a 2005 video showed Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump making vulgar comments about women. For more than a week, she had no reaction to the video.

Then, Monday, she released a statement in an interview with Fast Company.

“My father’s comments were clearly inappropriate and offensive, and I’m glad that he acknowledged this fact with an immediate apology to my family and the American people,” she said in a statement.

The statement mirrored words of Trump’s wife, Melania, who issued a statement the day after the video surfaced.

“The words my husband used are unacceptable and offensive to me,” Melania Trump’s statement said. “This does not represent the man that I know. He has the heart and mind of a leader.”

“I hope people will accept his apology, as I have, and focus on the important issues facing our nation and the world,” the statement concluded.

In the Fast Company interview, Ivanka Trump said that despite an onslaught of allegations claiming her father groped or was otherwise inappropriate with women, she stands by his denials that the accusers are wrong.

“The greatest comfort I have is the fact that I know my father,” she said.

”Most of the people who write about him don’t. I do. So that gives me an ability to shrug off the things that I read about him that are wrong,” she added.

Ivanka Trump is not only in the spotlight as the leading female in the Trump entourage, but she is also an entrepreneur who must market herself to America.

“She wants to be the brand of glamorous millennials,” Donald Trump critic Jennifer Rubin commented to Fast Company. “But what young woman wants to be reminded every time she puts on a pair of Ivanka shoes of her father boasting about sexual assault?”

However, for all of Ivanka Trump’s business savvy, nothing has broken the bonds of family.

“Ivanka’s brand has always been built on a really carefully balancing act,” says Rajiv Menon, a cultural analyst with the branding consultancy TruthCo. “She’s really demonstrated a sense of drive, a sense of ingenuity, and really established something strong with her apparel brand and larger public presence. But with all of that, she’s never really lost her sense of family loyalty.”

“And as the campaign has continued, she’s maintained that balancing act — but as the campaign has also mutated and turned into what we see now with the tape that was released … that balancing act becomes a lot more precarious. It becomes much more of a liability for her.”

However, the public understands that family comes first.

“Any child or parent is going to defend their parent or their child,” said leadership consultant Gregg Ward. “That’s her right.”

In fact, were she to turn on her father, it might backfire.

“She would lose points if she didn’t stand by her father,” said Larry Chiagouris, a marketing professor at Pace University. (For more from the author of “Ivanka Trump Breaks Lengthy Silence on Leaked 2005 Video of Her Father” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

15 States Have Moved to Defund Planned Parenthood Since Undercover Videos Were Released

/0 Comments/in , /by

In the wake of a series of undercover videos that hit the abortion industry last year, 15 states have attempted to cut funding to Planned Parenthood.

After the Center for Medical Progress released undercover video footage that raised questions about whether Planned Parenthood was making a profit from selling aborted baby body parts (Planned Parenthood denies illegal activity), Republican lawmakers around the country called for cutting federal and state funding to the abortion provider.

Fifteen states—Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, Florida, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah, and Wisconsin—have moved to defund Planned Parenthood in wake of the videos.

A handful of states, some mentioned above, along with Indiana, Michigan, Tennessee, and New Jersey, already reduced taxpayer funding to Planned Parenthood before the release of the undercover videos, according to the nonprofit Christian legal organization Alliance Defending Freedom.

In some states, such as Arkansas, defunding efforts have been caught up in legal challenges.

As The Daily Signal has previously reported, “Governors and other officials generally say their state has ‘defunded’ Planned Parenthood by taking one or more of these steps:

Ceased funding the organization through state family planning programs.

Diverted federal Title X family planning grants to other health clinics.

Terminated a Medicaid contract with the organization or barred it from participating in the Medicaid program.”

As Planned Parenthood celebrated its 100th anniversary on Sunday, many in the pro-life community say they reflect on the organization with heavy hearts.

“At Planned Parenthood’s 100-year anniversary, tens of millions of Americans have now seen the shocking and callous way that this abortion factory’s top-level leaders scheme to make an easy and illegal profit off of tiny baby organs,” David Daleiden, Center for Medical Progress founder and investigative lead, said in a statement provided to The Daily Signal. “Millions of Americans are becoming increasingly aware that Planned Parenthood, as the biggest abortion provider in the country, receives over half a billion taxpayer dollars annually.”

Daleiden added:

The House Energy and Commerce Committee’s Select Investigative Panel is the only official investigation taking a comprehensive, nationwide look at Planned Parenthood’s harvesting and sale of baby body parts. The panel has so far found probable cause that Planned Parenthood and its business partners profited off the sale of fetal organs, [and] used fraudulent and invalid consent forms to convince patients to give permission for harvesting …

Planned Parenthood has denied any illegal action.

“Planned Parenthood may be in a celebratory mood as it turns 100, but the nation’s largest abortion chain has many reasons to worry,” Ashley McGuire, senior fellow with the Catholic Association, said in a statement provided to The Daily Signal. “At the state level, the trends are clear: Americans want more protections for women and children, not less, and are increasingly skeptical of a for-profit company that places abortion profit ahead of safeguards for women.”

In total, at least 24 states have attempted to defund Planned Parenthood since July 2015, according to Live Action News.

“Planned Parenthood has always claimed to ‘care’ for women and their health, but the evidence shows it’s really an abortion business focused on making money,” said Lila Rose, president of Live Action, a pro-life advocacy group. “Planned Parenthood, which falsely claims that abortion makes up only 3 percent of its services, has become the largest abortion chain in the nation, committing over 320,000 abortions last year alone by starving pre-born children of nutrients until they die or dismembering them alive.”

Planned Parenthood receives roughly half a billion dollars every year from federal funding, mostly through Medicaid and Title X, a family funding program designed for low-income Americans. According to its most recent annual report, Planned Parenthood received $553.7 million in government health services grants and reimbursements for the organization’s fiscal year ending June 30, 2015.

Planned Parenthood claims it is “100 years strong.”

“We’ve made incredible gains during our first century and we’re just getting started,” Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, said in a statement. “We will build on our proud legacy and launch our second century with as much passion, courage, and conviction as our first.”

The organization touts that nearly one in three women will have an abortion at some point in their lifetime.

“I am saddened that for eight years of my life, I worked for Planned Parenthood and played a role in their deceit,” said Abby Johnson, former Planned Parenthood director and founder of And Then There Were None, a nonprofit that helps abortion clinic workers leave the abortion industry. She added:

As I reflect on Planned Parenthood’s 100th anniversary, I am haunted by the fact that for 100 years this organization has treated women as second-class citizens and aborted nearly 8 million children.

As of September, 22 states have both Republican governors and Republican-controlled legislatures, Democrats control 8 states, 19 states are split, and one state has a unicameral and nonpartisan legislature, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

The Obama administration has warned certain states that cutting off Medicaid funding to Planned Parenthood may be against the law. (For more from the author of “15 States Have Moved to Defund Planned Parenthood Since Undercover Videos Were Released” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

I Was Raped. But I Decided to Have My Baby Because, Like Me, She Was Innocent

/0 Comments/in , /by

My name is Julia and I was raped at 14 years old by a friend of the family who we all thought was trustworthy.

I remember when I found out I was pregnant and that the baby was the product of the most horrible crime that a woman can undergo. I remember bursting in tears of despair, fear, because I was only 14. At that age I had had no boyfriend, knew nothing about babies or pregnancy, never got involved in anything about that.

But then the only social media I knew was Facebook and one day by chance I came across this Salvar El 1 page (Save The 1 Spanish Facebook page) and I read many testimonies that touched my heart in a very deep way. I had never thought of abortion but perhaps I had considered giving that baby up for adoption because I did not feel ready to face motherhood being so young. I remember a quote I read that made very clear that if I was a victim of a crime, I wouldn’t become guilty of another one and I decided to have my baby and be a mother forever.

Despise the fact of being just a child myself, I decided to have my baby because, like me, she was innocent and she didn’t have to carry the guilt of the aggressor who, eventually, is the one who deserves being punished.

My beautiful baby girl was born a few days after I turned 15. Her name is Mia Victoria and I love her more than anything else on earth. She is one month and a few days old, and being myself so young, I start learning how to be a mother. (Read more from “I Was Raped. But I Decided to Have My Baby Because, Like Me, She Was Innocent” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

This Election Proves the American Church Is in Even Worse Shape Than You Think

/0 Comments/in , /by

There’s been a lot of justifiable hand-wringing regarding the Christian vote in this election cycle. Unfortunately, the reality is even worse than the perception.

That’s because data suggests that what’s driving many believers to vote isn’t their beliefs as much as it is their racial/ethnic identity — just like the electorate at large. In other words, voters coming from the institution charged with preserving America’s vitally important moral foundation — the church — collectively aren’t approaching the ballot box any differently than the secularly-minded.

That’s bad news if you’re trying to conserve a society based on God-given (not government granted) rights, but more on that later. First, let’s permit the troubling data to speak for itself.

Let’s begin with Catholic voters, which are a crucial voting bloc for both Republicans and Democrats. Since Roe v. Wade, only once has either side won the presidency without winning the Catholic vote. And that was in 2000 when George W. Bush won the Electoral College despite losing the popular vote, so that’s obviously an outlier.

How critical is this bloc of voters? Consider Obama won Catholics by three points in 2012, which mirrored almost precisely his national popular vote advantage (3.8 points).

While polls have shown Democrats with a decided edge among Catholics ever since the race was narrowed to Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, Trump doesn’t have a Catholic problem as much as he has a minority problem. Trump has narrowly led among white Catholics since last summer. However, that’s not enough to overcome Clinton’s astounding three-to-one lead among Hispanic Catholics.

The same pattern exists among evangelical protestants, but it’s even more striking.

LifeWay Research just published a fascinating survey drawing distinctions between voters who simply identify as evangelicals, and those who actually have evangelical beliefs. Overall, the survey found among whites who hold evangelical beliefs Trump overwhelmingly leads, 65-10. Meanwhile, Clinton holds almost the exact same lead among non-whites with evangelical beliefs, 62-15.

For the sake of its survey, LifeWay defined evangelical beliefs as the following:

Trusting in Jesus Christ alone for salvation.

Believe they have a responsibility to share their faith in Christ with others.

Believe the Bible is the final authority in their lives.

What’s unsettling is how those who claim they “believe the Bible is the final authority in their lives” could have such starkly different voting patterns. Especially because the Bible makes it clear the Christian is to set aside their worldly identity (race, ethnicity, gender, family legacy, nation of origin, etc.) in order to find his/her identity in Christ first and foremost.

Sadly, just the opposite appears to be happening with many voters.

Whites with evangelical beliefs are voting for a Republican whose lack of character and tendency to bully/demean flies in the face of what the Bible requires of our leaders. On the other hand, non-whites with evangelical beliefs are voting for a Democrat who is a staunch advocate for infanticide and sexual immorality, which are clearly condemned by the Scriptures. Not to mention Clinton’s willingness to have government violate the First Amendment to punish those who believe in Biblical morality.

Here’s why this trend spells certain doom for American Exceptionalism if it continues.

John Adams once said our Constitution establishing self-government was “meant only for a moral and religious people.” Many of his fellow founding fathers echoed similar sentiments. It’s no coincidence that as the culture has become more decadent the government has gotten bigger. The less moral restraint we have, the more government is needed to suffer the consequences of our actions.

Furthermore, those who fundamentally just believe in big government will seek to further incentivize immorality in order to justify their calls for more government. Thus creating a self-fulfilling prophecy. Either way, morality and limited government are hand-in-hand. You cannot have one without the other.

This is why great spiritual awakenings came before liberty in our history, and then later revivals were required to secure that liberty for future generations once it was established. Spiritual revival leads to a morally-restrained people. A morally-restrained people require less government to restrain them.

But if we are now living in a time, as this data suggests, when even those who have inherited that spiritual legacy will instead see things as racially polarized and ethnically balkanized like the general population does, then the last line of defense to preserve our heritage has also been lost.

Many of us long for a day when it seems the majority of Americans once more believe in the right things regardless of our political differences. Those days will not return if believers, who are required to set their cultural biases aside to serve a greater cause, are unable to do so. For if someone is unable to set what divides us aside to serve God, they’ll never do it to serve their fellow man.

This puts us in existential danger. Without a moral and religious people, good luck preserving the notion of God-given rights that empowers individual freedom and limits government intrusion.

Is it any wonder we’re mired in a depressing presidential action between, as 19-year-old Janae Petijean told the Boston Globe, a man who “is everything wrong with America’s culture” and a woman who “is everything wrong with our government,” given everything wrong with the church? (For more from the author of “This Election Proves the American Church Is in Even Worse Shape Than You Think” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.