Episode 140

This week we continue our series chronicling how much our world has gone bonkers. In this third installation, we examine the possible return of COVID masking and vaccination protocols, the fallout from a case in which a teenager allegedly murdered her newborn, Utah schools banning the King James Bible from their libraries, and teachers fighting back as public schools toy with the idea of further weakening grading standards to increase diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) requirements. Join us as we discuss it and remember how our Savior came to redeem us from it to life eternal in His presence.

[MCG]

But what is the difference between what this young lady did and full-term abortion? Oh, what is nothing?

[Jay]

Thank you for tuning in to the Removing Barriers podcast. I’m Jay and I’m MCG, and we’re attempting to remove barriers so we can all have a clear view of the cross.

[MCG]

This is episode 140 of the Removing Barriers Podcast, and this is the third in the series of this world has gone bonkers. And in this episode, we have a number of articles lined up that we think will show that this world is bonkers.

[Jay]

Hi, this is Jay MCG and I would like for you to help us remove barriers by going to removingbarriers.net and subscribing to receive all things, removing barriers. If you’d like to take your efforts a bit further and help us keep the mics on, consider donating at removing barriers.net/donate Removing Barriers, a clear view of the cross.

[MCG]

Alright, Jay, what is the first article you want to look at?

[Jay]

I have an article from ABC News titled COVID Hospitalizations increase for the 6th consecutive week. The article goes on to say that COVID hospitalizations are continuing to increase in the United States according to data. Updated Monday from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Hospitalizations rose for the 6th consecutive week, this time by 18.8% during the week. Ending and it gives a specific date. The reason why I think that this article is bonkers is because of how it’s written. It’s an indication of the dishonesty in media and how they present information they know fairly well that most people, when they see an article, will maybe skim the 1st 2 lines. Maybe a little bit in the middle and then read the conclusion. If they do any of that, most people don’t read the entire article and so when they present an article like this, it makes it sound like COVID. Has returned with a vengeance. It’s been rising for the 6th consecutive week, but if you read the entire article, it actually tells you that the COVID metrics remain at historic lows and that hospitalizations this week are about 2 1/2 times lower than compared to the same time. Last year and about 5 1/2 times lower compared to what it was this week in 2021. So my question is why in the world is this article even needed and why is it presented and headlined in such a way that is meant to? I guess get people riled up. I can’t imagine any other reason for such a sensational headline unless they’re trying to scare people and bring the mandates back in which a lot of conspiracy theorists claim that because of the upcoming election year, that because Democrats need mail in voting in order to. When that somehow they’re going to find a way, somehow, some way to bring COVID regulations in, since it works so well back in 2020.

[MCG]

Yeah, I don’t know. I do know that I have seen recommendations on some parts of the country have also brought back mass. So some hospital have now started acting folks to wear masks again and stuff like. That I think you’re going to be an uphill battle if they try to institute COVID mandate for their upcoming election, where there is 2023 in November or the presidential election in 2024. I think you’re gonna be uphill battle, maybe in blue states there might be. Successfully doing that, but I can’t imagine Republican states that they would allow that to happen so they can try us if you don’t know a lot of folks that really say they’re not going to comply. And a lot of folks didn’t complain the first time, so especially now that we know so much about COVID that we didn’t know in 2020 and I don’t think they’re going to be successful in doing it. But it’s interesting though, because I also know that the first Lady, Jill Biden, has been diagnosed with COVID-19. Again, and the article said that she is twice vaccinated and double boot. Instead, and yet she has contracted COVID-19 for the second time. And of course, I think you may have seen the news as well. Joe Biden was saying that they’re going to come up with another vaccine that works, so he’s admitting that the first one didn’t work. And he’s also said that they’re going to figure out a way to get everybody to take. Well, good luck on that one, President Joe Biden. But yeah, the COVID scares are coming back.

[Jay]

I can only. Hope that as a people we see how nefarious all of this is. Tend to think that Americans are just an ornery people when it comes to obeying authority. I don’t even think it’s that as much as it is the. History of tyrannical rule when we blindly follow those that are in power is. I don’t even think it’s refutable at this point. It’s well documented. When you give the government an inch, they will take a mile and it’s so odd with COVID we walk around and talk about how vaccinated and boosted we are. We don’t do that with any other illness. We don’t do that with any. Other epidemiological disease, but with COVID for some reason, perhaps because it’s so polarized, we walk around and we do that. And I remember during the pandemic it was a sort of virtue signaling a badge of honor. If you got your vaccine, you had to take a selfie of yourself taking the vaccine so that you could let people know that you’re a team. Player and that you do what the government tells you to do and for me personally, I remember how they were arresting people that were meeting for worship. In the parking lot in their cars, like each family in their cars, the cars are separated 6 feet apart, so you like. You’ll have a car parked in one spot. The next spot will be opened up will be empty, then the next car on and on throughout the entire parking lot. No one went into the building. Everyone stayed in their cars in the parking. Not wanting to come to a House of worship trying to follow all of the regulations and stipulations that were put in place in their particular state and they still, many of them still got arrested or ticketed or punished somehow. I remember talking to my mother-in-law and she said where she was living. People were being thrown in jail for violating curfew. I thought at some point. And meanwhile this is around the time where we started the podcast. Meanwhile, we see on TV how Black Lives Matter. Rioters and protesters were allowed free reign in the streets. That’s when for me. I washed my hands of it. It was clear to me that this was some political thing going on, and I can’t imagine. Maybe I can’t imagine, but I want to give our government the benefit of the doubt that they are not tone deaf enough to think that the American people will accept any type of COVID regulation. I don’t think that they’re going to be able to scare the American people this time around. But then again, during the pandemic, it was incredible. To see how many people were so quick to bend the knee to government mandates, and so perhaps maybe they have a point. Maybe they want to up the hysteria because they probably think that we’ll bow down to them again. So maybe that’s why they’re going this route. I just think it’s bonkers that they would try the same thing over. Again, for something that we know we now have data that it doesn’t warrant such a drastic response. The economy was thrashed because of it. The educational and emotional and social development of our children has been stunted because of it. Although homeschooling families generally have thrived, there are many, many negative effects of their reaction to the virus. That it’s incredible to me. They seem to be making that same mistake again. That’s bonkers to me.

[MCG]

Well, to be honest, I think it’s going to work if the courts allow it to be so. The reason why I said the court is because. There’s most likely it’s going to be settled in court if the Democrats decide, hey, COVID is coming back with a vengeance, we need to institute the COVID mandates and the COVID restrictions and the COVID regulations that we used for the last election in this election. I think the Republicans are going to sue and they’re going to come down to the courts to say, hey. We’re going to allow this or not allow this because at the end of the day, COVID is political.

[Jay]

And still is.

[MCG]

Right in the political statement to wear a mask is a political statement to get the vaccine so. At the end of the day, you’re going to be divided and you’re going to come down to the courts to say, hey, this makes sense. This doesn’t make sense. Whatever case may be, but a lot of folks are vaccinated. A lot of folks have gotten it and have community, so I don’t see what’s the big deal at this point. As the article says, the hospitalization is nowhere close to where it was. Initially you know so. They’re making a hysteria of it, but it’s not really that. It’s just, yeah, it’s the fall. And COVID is on the rise. Just like the flu is going to be on the rise a little bit or whatever. So yeah, I think they’re making.

[Jay]

Too much of it, but well, yeah, I think like you said, the courts, it would have to come down to the courts. But if there’s enough hysteria in America’s institutions, it may not even have to go that far. Many colleges have already instituted mask mandates requiring 14 days in a letter written to faculty. This is let’s see Morris Brown College, the article says. Morris Brown College is an HB CU and historically black college or university, and it’s in Atlanta. They say that masks would be required for at least 14 days. How many of us remember at the beginning of the pandemic? Was it 15 days to slow the spread when they say 14 days, what they really mean is indefinitely give an inch. They’ll take a mile. And so if all. Of the colleges and institutions, many of the Silicon Valley companies are returning with these mandates if certain liberal cities are doing it, they may not even need. To get to. The core it’s, I’m afraid to say, but it just seems like the Republicans will just kind of lay down and take it and. I don’t know. I’m very unhappy about it. I was very resistant to it before I I feel like I’ll be resistant to it again. We just can’t allow the government to run ramshot over people like that and destroy the economy as they have or to allow for the negative effects to take hold as they had the first time around. Well, we’ll have to wait and see what happens.

[MCG]

Yeah, that’s true. Well, I have one. OK. Are you to school district remove the Bible from some schools libraries now it’s received a request to remove the Book of Mormon. So the Bible has been removed from. Some school libraries, and now they’re deciding that they might want to remove the Book of Mormon. Of course, being at Mormons and the Book of Mormon is not on par with the Bible, but the article is interested, and I think it’s bonkers for the reason why they remove the Bible and for the reason why they want to remove the Book of Mormon. But here it goes. A Utah school district that recently pulled the. King James Bible from elementary and middle school libraries has now received a request. To review the Book of Mormon for removal, according to school officials. So no, it’s not just the Bible, it’s the King James version of the Bible that was removed. Christopher Williams, director of communications and operation at the Davis School District, said the district received a request Friday to review the Book of Mormon. For sensitive material as well, the Book of Mormon is the religious text used in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, which is headquartered in Salt Lake City, the Salt Lake Tribune report the request calls for the book to be reviewed because it contained violent. Include battles, beheading and kidnappings, Williams told CNN. He has not seen the request and does not know the grounds on which it was made. There have been no other requests made regarding other religious texts, William said the district will treat this request just like any other request and will follow the policy as outlined. On school library media centers, the request removed the Book of Mormon comes after the district announced they would remove the King James edition of the Bible from the district Elementary and middle school libraries because of vulgarity or violence. They remove the Bible because of vulgarity or violence. Can you imagine?

[Jay]

Wish they would tell us exactly what are they talking about, like the description of the battles and description of people killing each other or the sin that’s you know, that’s described in the Bible that people have done, is that their grounds or.

[MCG]

I have no idea Thata continues. The committee decided to retain the book in school library circulation only at the high school level based on age appropriateness due to vulgarity of violence, he wrote in an e-mail. William Tolstoy. And then he estimates 7 or 8 elementary schools and middle schools had the Bible in their libraries before the decision, he said the school district is attempting to follow House Bill 374, a 2002 law which prohibits certain sensitive instructional materials in public schools and requires a local education. Agency to include parents who are reflective of a school community when determine whether an instructional material is sensitive material, the text of the law defines sensitive materials as instructional materials that is pornographic or indecent material. Again. What in the Bible is pornographic or indecent material? The original request to review the King James Bible came from a person critiquing their bad faith process of reviewing books, according to CNN affiliate KUTV. So it seems like if someone they pass a law and someone say, aha, why don’t you look at the Bible, see if the Bible falls under. The description of books to be removed and they review it and they decide the King James version specifically should be removed and this could be someone attacking Mormons. Actually because Mormons specifically use the King James Virgin and also now they’re asking for the Book of Mormon to remove as well. And of course.

[Jay]

And this is in Utah, so.

[MCG]

Right, this is due to as well. With you know you can get, you can say the Mecca of Mormonism.

[Jay]

A Mormon stronghold? Yeah.

[MCG]

Now we can all ban books and you don’t even need to read them. I’ll be accurate about it, wrote the person in the anonymous request. Heck, you don’t even need to see the. Corwin Johnson, Public relations director at youth appearance United, a nonprofit which advocate for the 2002 Utah law, told CNN the parent who challenged the Bible was clearly doing so in an attempt to undermine parents who are working diligently to protect children from addictive pornographic stimulants. And someone is saying, hey, you want to get rid of these books that promote LGBTQIA and all these things, why don’t we remove the? Rebel. So they’re basically saying, hey, the Bible is on par with gender queer. This book is gay, and all these crazy stuff, this world, this world, this definitely have gone bonkers, he continued. William explained the school district has a process allowing certain individuals, including parents, students, and district.

[Jay]

It’s bonkers.

[MCG]

Employees to request books in school, libraries to be reviewed for inappropriate. Material the sensitive materials we view community consists of a facilitator, at least one administrator working at the District school, a licensed teacher at the District school, a librarian at the District school and a minimum of four parents with students enroll at a district school and lesser sensitive materials reviewed requests on the Davis School. District website shows the district received a request to review the King James Bible on December 11th and completed the review on May 22nd. They made a decision to keep the book available in high school library because they determined the book does not contain sensitive material. As defined under Utah law, the book of Mum and does not yet appear under the sensitive material list on the school website that they finally that it does not contain sensitive material, but yet they remove it from elementary and middle school. But they kept it for high school. The school received a request to appeal the Bible decision on May 31st. According to the website. William Socin and the Bible will now go to an appeals committee of three members of the Davis School District Board of Education. The appeals committee will make a recommendation to the full Board of Education. About keeping or remove the book in schools and the board will make the final decision. The Davis Schools District has 73,993 students enroll in 92 district schools serving students from pre-K to 12th grade, according to its website, the School District is located in Farmington. Around 17 miles from Salt Lake City, CNN has requested a copy of the request for removal for both the Bible and the Book of Mormon from the school district. I’m gonna leave it right there, but they continue to talk about other states that have banned books and stuff like that. They specifically mentioned Florida, Texas, South Carolina. I think all have instituted some sort of book banning. And the reason these. Republican states, our red states have decided that they’re going to ban certain books is because gender queer. This book is gay, basically pornographic books that teach people how to be or engage in homosexuality and all these other things. But now they’re saying, hey, let’s get rid of. Bible. Initially I thought it was going to be on religious grounds, separation of church and state quote and UN quote. Of course, we know we have in 1962 the Supreme Court decided Vengal versus Vitaly determined basically that, you know you can’t require or have prayer in public schools and then a year later in the Abington School District. Versus Shemp, they require the Bible read and be banned in school as well. You know, I know they’re saying, hey, let’s get rid of it out of this school libraries itself. And again, I think it’s a backlash is saying, hey, you’re gonna remove these LGBTQIA books. Well, let’s get the Bible removed as well. Kind of thing again. Or it could just be attacked on the moments, as we said earlier.

[Jay]

It doesn’t make any sense to me because those books are not on par. There’s nothing in Scripture that glorifies the sin or that leads the reader to participate in sin. It merely tells what happens, and it points out the sin and all throughout the Bible is the clear instruction and direction. To go the other way, not to go down the way of sin books like this book is gay or or queer theory. And all of these different types of books that are LGBTQIA. They are not just books that explain what these things are. They are books that explain what these things are, encourage the children. To explore that world and also teaches them how to perform actual sex acts and use sexual apps and sexual items in the very explicit ways that adult homosexual people use. Them so the contents are explicit, they are pornographic, and they’re not there simply for education. They are there in order to desensitize the child to all of these things, open them up to all things sexual at the elementary level. Why in the world? But that’s what they’re doing, and also how to do things. How to use apps like Tinder and Grinder and things of that sort of nature? Why does an elementary school child need to know how to use those apps? Why does an elementary school child need to know about kink which is?

[MCG]

What does anybody need to know about it?

[Jay]

Why does anybody need to? You know, so it. Sounds like the person that brought the charge was just trying to make a point saying, hey, the method for reviewing books is in bad faith, bad faith would be like if I know what you’re about. But I mischaracterize what you’re saying. If I mischaracterize your position in an effort to destroy you in a debate or in an argument. Bad faith. It’s not bad faith. To have your children come home and tell you. Hey, Mommy, look at what I found. And then you open it and you read it and you know what it’s about. And you could see the destructive potential of it. You could see the destructive nature of it. It is not for information. It is not for exposing. It is there in order to groom and to inculcate and to encourage children to go down this aberrant or divergent. Path it’s not the same thing as the scriptures on any level.

[MCG]

Could it be that if they’re unintended consequences of book banning, you know, I’m sure this is in other disciplined, but in software engineering we have. Something we call the unintended consequences of the code you may have written. You wrote the code to do one thing, but then you realize the code also do another thing that it wasn’t necessarily written to do, or that wasn’t the intention you had. But then someone can use it for bad purposes, you know.

[Jay]

I don’t think there’s anything wrong with book banning in the sense that there needs to be discernment in the things that we consume, whether it’s the movies we watch, whether it’s the books. To read, there are certain books that are not appropriate to be read at the elementary level that are perfectly fine for high schoolers to read. I wouldn’t want the book in the High School library, but. If we were. Arguing about whether or not this should be in the high school library, I don’t think that’s a completely different, but I guess I could understand that a little bit more, but we’re talking about elementary school children. It seems like there’s a straw man. Argument here that if you are for banning then you should be for it across the board to binary like you’re either for it completely for it or completely against it. And I don’t think either one is a biblical position. I think that the middle Rd. there in the biblical position is the call for discernment. If you are in an educational situation institution and as a teacher. As a librarian, as any authority figure, the children that are placed in your care, they deserve to be taught and instructed in a path that will not harm them. And the Bible is clear that when you expose children to these sexual things, the song of Solomon says, do not awaken love until it’s time I’m paraphrasing that. And I know that the context is different. But the principle, I think, is the same. There is no reason to expose children to these sexual things at that age and in exposing them, expose them to the. Antithesis of what God intended for sexuality, what God intended for normal and godly procreation and intimacy within the confines of marriage between a man and a woman. All of those things have been. Related, when it comes to anything LGBTQ and when it comes to these books that explain LGBTQ lifestyles as teachers, as parents, and as people in any sort of authority over children that are responsible for the educational, intellectual, emotional, spiritual development of these children, it’s incumbent upon us to. Protect them from influences that could be harmful and that requires discernment, and that does require that we remove some books and allow some others. So for them to put these godless. Alternative books on the same level as the Scriptures. It shows their lack of the understanding of scripture. It shows their disdain or disrespect or hatred for the things of God and how they feel like it’s not important at all to protect the children from those sorts of things.

[MCG]

Yeah, I agree with you. But the question begs to. Whose responsibility is it to protect the children from those books? Is it the school? Is it the government? Because it comes down to something. I think a little bit more deeper. And is this how much influence should the government have in our education? Because I think if we’re going to talk about the biblical way. That the Bible gives the appearance, the responsibility to educate their children. Now the parents have decided that they’re going to give that. Task that power over to the government or over to Christian schools, or over to private schools, or whatever. Dare I say that may be the root cause of this, because at the end of the day, if just for arguments sake, I can say, hey, you know, if we’re going to be for banning books, you know. For whatever reason. We’re gonna end up with stuff like this where somebody gonna say ohh they want to ban a book. What about banning the Bible and some wrap the bait out? They’re going to decide that the Bible deserves to be banned. For instance, in my home I can say hey, I don’t want that book in my home. The government has no sale for that. But when I send my sons to a government school. The government have a lot of say over what is in that library and what my kid is exposed to. So who’s responsible it is? Should the government. I have the responsibility of protecting my kid from certain books, or should me as a parent, have the responsibility again and we live in a puristic society? So I guess what I’m saying is for Ross has questions to answer is clear. For others it might not be. That’s clear.

[Jay]

This is where I’ll push back a little bit. I agree with you, but only to a certain extent because just because you send your children to. The public school. That doesn’t mean that you’re seating all responsibility and control over your child’s parents. Admittedly, they relinquished some control over what their children are being exposed to, but the schools are still beholden to the parents. The schools still have to answer to the parents. The schools still have to take away or add or whatever, according to what the parents want in their schools now, where the hiccup. Comes is, as you said, being in a pluralistic society. The the parents are a mixed bunch. They do not have the same values, so one parent would say that gender queer is OK, one parent would say that it’s not one parent says the Bible is OK. The other parent says that it’s not and so as a school district or as a school board, you would have to adopt some sort of utilitarian approach where you know majority rules or. And hey, most parents want this. And then as a parent, you would have to either take your child out of whatever Media Center activities that the class might be participating in, or you might have to specifically instruct the child as to what they should not be encountering. I remember as a student in the ninth grade in our Media Center, the wall to the left, right before you head out of the Media Center. So it’ll be the first thing on your right when you walk in. The last thing on your left when you walk out, that entire bookcase was filled with pornographic romance novels. This is at the 9th grade level. No one in our community made an uproar. About it, and I don’t know if parents didn’t know about it or what the situation was, but if the parents accept it, well, then the school will keep doing it. But at the same time, if parents speak up about it, and if there’s an uproar, the school board would have no choice but to rescind that book or to remove that. Look, thankfully it seems like this person is trying to prove a point and not trying to actually get the Bible removed, although that did end up happening where I disagree with what they were doing is that they say that the process of removing the books is done in bad faith. OK, if it’s done in bad faith, well then let’s evaluate the process. Let’s look at the process and see what’s not so fair. About it, let’s identify our terms. Let’s define our terms and let’s go about it that way. A publicity stunt like this, or at least trying to make a point like that for removing a book that is in many ways the foundation of Western Society, along with a few other books. Makes no sense to me. That’s bonkers.

[MCG]

Yeah. You know, as Ken Ham said, when they remove God from the school, they believe they have removed religion. But. They simply just replace it with their humanism and all their stuff. So there’s something here they feel like they maybe they remove the Bible, but they really just replace it with other filthy.

Speaker

Was there?

[MCG]

That will be approved. You know, I think again about the poet who wrote the Bible contains the mind of God, the state of man, the way of salvation, the doom of sinners, and the happiness of believers. Its doctrines are holy, its precepts are binding. Its histories are true, and its decisions are immutable. Read it to be wise. Believe it to be safe and practice it. Be wholly it contains light to direct you food to support you, and comfort to share you. It is the traveller’s map, the Pilgrim staff, the pallets, compass, the soldiers soared and the Christian chatter. He a paradise is restored. Heaven open and the gates of hell disclosed. Christ is the grand subject. Our good, the design and the glory of God is in. It should fill the memory, rule the heart, and guide the feet. Read it slowly, frequently, and peripherally. It is a mine of wealth, a paradise of glory, and a river of pleasure. It is given to you in life and will be open at the judgment and will be remembered. Forever. It involves the highest responsibility will reward the greatest labour and will condemn all who trifle with his sacred contents.

[Jay]

Do you have the desire to earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the Saints? Answers in Genesis can help. They provide biblically sound books, CD’s, DVD’s, homeschooling materials, VBS materials, online courses, digital downloads, and the Answers magazine and more. Plus tickets to the Creation Museum and Ark encounter go to the answers bookstore by clicking the link in the description section below, so you too can be ready to give an answer to anyone who asks the reason of the hope that is in you. Hi, this is Jay MCG and I would like for you to help us remove barriers by going to removingbarriers.net and subscribing to receive all things, removing barriers. If you’d like to take your efforts a bit further and help us keep the mics. On considereddonating@removingbarriers.net/donate removing barriers, a clear view of the cross.

[MCG]

RJ, what else do you have for us?

[Jay]

OK, I have an article here that says from. Let’s see it’s from Fox News, Portland Schools mall, banning zeroes for cheating and not doing work. Quote The bigotry of low expectations. Students might not be judged on behavior. Participation or effort. The first few paragraphs here say that students in Portland, OR may soon be able to get away with cheating and not doing assignments. If the public school implements new equitable grading practices. If adopted, the new practices will bring various changes, such as new grading structures, not grading homework, not giving students failing grades for not completing their work, or cheating, and not grading for quote non academic factors such as behavior, participation and effort. The Heritage Foundation is fighting back, saying that not giving a student a zero when his. Or her work. Earned such a low mark actually harms that child. You hurt a student when you pass them on from one grade to another without asking that student to show that they can complete the work that he or she is assigned. So later on in the article, it explains that some of these grading practices and some of these grading. Rubrics came out of the COVID-19 pandemic. The changes that were made as a result of the pandemic, I should say those initiatives were made and so they want to keep those same initiatives and advance them further so that the students are not graded based on what they actually turn in, not giving zeroes for poor quality work. It says that those practices during the pandemic accounted for inequalities. In access to curriculum and instruction, as a side note, I’m not sure how I understand how there’s any quality and access to curriculum and instruction. If you’re in the same school.

[MCG]

Ohh, I think the article is referring to students of color that. They say may have different behavioral standards, different help at home to get the homework done and stuff like that. So because their family structures are different, that their gradient should be different as well. So basically, as it says, the bigotry of low expectation. So because I’m black or because my kids are black. They don’t expect them to be able to complete their homework or have help at home. They complete their homework. So if their homework is of poor quality, we’re not grading homework, we’re not gonna deduct marks because of their behaviour. Because we expect black people to have poor behavior. So therefore we’re going to give them multiple Childs. Complete that homework or determining that homework or attorney in that assignment and whatever you do, you’re not going to give. Them a zero which. As they say, is an equitable position as opposed to equality where equity is equal outcome rather than equal opportunity. But basically, it’s reverse racism. It’s looking at someone and determined because of the color of their skin or because of XY and Z that do not be able to compete. So therefore we’re going to change. Change so they can compete, which at the end of the day you’re going to produce students like in Baltimore County, where you graduate high school, where you can barely read. So look, I was a teacher for like, a year and a half. Right story time, MCG, story time and I gave a test. These were well in the carbon is a little bit different, so this was secondary school and this was form one of secondary school. So form one you’re about 12 and you finish school at 16. And you in form 5 at the end of Form 5, so this was. And it was the other all girls school. And I gave a test. And I observed and caught one of my students. Treating was a little bit of a surprise to me because she’s normally a brilliant student, I would say. So what did I do? Well, I took away their material. She had that she was looking at and answering the question, and I let her finish the test. I actually graded the test and I can’t remember how many exactly did I took off, but I didn’t give her zero, but I greatly deducted from her tests. I think she had up and got in the 90s on the test when I graded it and then I think I deducted probably 50 or 60 points from that. Whatever it is she end up with an FA failing grade. Now the option was given to me whether or not I want to have the parent come in right away and discipline the child and say hey, I caught you. Cheating. Or I could have the child report to their parent that, hey, I was caught cheating on the test, so I wrote in red ink on the paper a message to the parent that this child was caught cheating and stuff like that. And I told the child. Your mom or father is required to sign this, and then he could have returned it to me so that I know that you have shown your parents this. She returned the paper to me with a signature in it, and I knew right away that wasn’t any grown adult signature. But what did I? I do. I let it slide. I said OK, fine, because I knew at the end of the semester that the parent would have to come and collect the child’s report and the way they did it at their school was that, at least for the first two semesters, is that the parent comma collect the report and the teachers have to make themselves available. If the parents want to meet with the teacher, so most of the time the teachers are sitting in a big auditorium, kind of just open up so parents can come and sit with the teacher and find out. So I was there and the parent came to me, this was report. Time and the parent came to me with her daughter in hand and the parent says, you know, at that point they called me Mr. and my last name. And she said, I don’t understand why my daughter has a feeling great in science and I kinda smiled because I already knew. And I said, why don’t you ask your daughter? Why? She has the feeling great in science. That’s when it gets for the first time, she confessed to her mother that she was caught cheating. No, I said all that to say, you know, do you necessarily have to give a child as? Grow for cheating. Well, I guess. Depends on how you’re grading standards. You know, for me, if I had given her a 0 for most tests, I’ll mark numbers of 100 for homework and assignments. I will mark them out of 10 out of 20. So you know, maybe I show a little bit compassion and say I’m not going to give her a full zero on one of the highest. Points that she could earn, you know, during the semester, but it did greatly affected her. It can’t really pull yourself up after you get a 20 or 30 on something that’s worth 100 points. So could they revise their grade in Siemens say, hey, we’re not going to give people zero, but I guess the reason why I disagree with it is for the reason behind of it. I have no problem with this. Say we’re going to try our best not to give students zero, but they’re not. They going to have them. We do the assignment because they fail it or it’s clear that they didn’t understand something. Or I’m going to sit with them and help them with their assignment. But to say that we’re doing it for equity and because you don’t expect students of a certain racial group to be able. To get the assignment done and to be able to behave properly and to be able to do all these things, it’s racist.

[Jay]

Absolutely. And one of the Silver Linings in these articles is that teachers and parents seem to be standing up and fighting back. Two years ago, they tried to do the same thing in Virginia. The school district, particularly in Arlington, tried to implement the same wording, a more equitable system, a more equitable grading framework. And it was the teachers who. Cut back, and in fact, there’s another article that’s related to this one that you could just click on it and see. Just last year it says teachers weigh in on grading policies, and they debate the quote no 0 trend. This idea of not giving a child a zero if they fail or if they don’t do well on that particular assignment or if they’re caught cheating. And they’re all generally saying it’s a patently. Idiotic idea that’s in quotes. The the teachers are saying. This is absolutely ridiculous. The reason for that is because if you don’t grade the students accordingly, they will never know when they do something that is on par or some or wrong. If there are no consequences for sin, you’re just going to keep going on in that sin. Human nature demands that.

[MCG]

It’s not even that when you finally grew up and get a job, if they so able to get a job.

[Jay]

They’ll be completely unreliable.

[MCG]

When they both give them an assignment, what are you going to do? When they turn it in and the ball say hey, this is not up to power, it will be the first time in their life that someone have told them that what they turned in is not up to power.

[Jay]

And they’ll be frustrated and entitled because their entire lives they are accustomed to turning in subpar work and being praised for it and having it accepted. But then when they go into reality, when they go. Into the real. World it’s going to punch them in the face and they won’t know what to do about it. They will be completely unprepared. OK, so when I was growing up, one of the shows that was on the. UB is called the Gilmore Girls, and the premise of the story was that there is this single. Mother, daughter of a wealthy family and she is raising her daughter. Her daughter is actually quite brilliant, but the daughter is accustomed to everyone praising her and everyone going well for her. She’s never really challenged her inadequacies and her character, flaws and all of those different things are never really quite addressed. So that when she grows up and she gets her first job and they tell her that her work is OK, but it’s not on par with. What really rigorously trained students are actually putting out there? She can’t handle it. She just has this emotional breakdown, falls away and and can’t bounce back, and she goes back home where it’s safe, where everyone keeps praising her. And it’s that same idea when you are surrounded, just the opposite, instead of being so great, you’re surrounded by the soft bigotry of low expectations. Very settled nefarious way. It’s meant to keep you down, keep you in that same place, and you’re never allowed to strive for better, which is a racism in and of itself. But as I say, teachers are fighting back. The argumentation for the rules, as you said it says here as a quote, finally, given the emphasis on equity in today’s education systems, we believe that some of the proposed changes will actually have a detrimental impact towards achieving this goal. That is the goal of evaluating teachers, because the ones that are against this change, they’re also saying that if you can’t give students zeros and if you can’t evaluate them honestly. According to the caliber of work that they’ve turned in, you won’t be able to. Evaluate the teachers, either you. Won’t be able to tell which teachers are good and which teachers are bad if they’re all doing this whole nosey reading. Families that have means could still provide challenging and engaging experiences for their children, and they will continue to do so, but more specifically, those families that can afford to hire tutors and sign up their children to attend enrichment activities and camps and all that sort of thing in order to prepare them for college admissions. You know, those parents that can do that, they’ll be fine. They’re saying the students who come from families that are not as savvy or as aware or have the means they’re subject to further disadvantage because they will not be held accountable for not completing their homework. Comments and for the formative assessments according to the deadline set by their teachers, such results are anything but Equitable. Conversely, they offer our most needy students reduced probability for preparing for and realizing success in post secondary institutions, which is exactly what you’re seeing. Parents that know what’s going on, that are involved in their children’s. Activities and they are able to provide for tutors and enrichment. They will not be affected by this no zero policy. It’s the students that are at a slight disadvantage whose parents are, say, single parents who can’t attend the parent teacher meetings and they can’t really be as involved as they would like, not because they can’t be. It’s just because if they’re the only parent in the household. They’re wearing six different hats. They might not be able to give us much attention or time to their children’s education, and they may not have the resources to pursue all of these enrichment opportunities and tutors and things of that nature. They’re the ones that will be adversely affected. But isn’t it true that whenever they’re pursuing this whole equity thing, it’s always the? People who are most disadvantaged, that are further disadvantaged by the result of their.

[MCG]

Yeah, it’s sad because at the end of the day, as you said, the people they’re trying to help or the people that are still going to be pushed further down the hole, you know, that’s why equity doesn’t.

[Jay]

Right. Work. We are a home school family, but I’m still absolutely keen on getting the students tested. How do you know? Where are the gaps in their education are if they’re not tested, how do? You know how well their. Not just receiving the information, but assimilating it and using it and stretching their brains as it were. You won’t be able to tell those things unless you have some sort of assessment, some sort of hard line that says, OK, this is the standard you didn’t meet up to it. This is where you need to go. Students and teachers alike, all of us need that. This whole idea of having no limitations, no boundaries, no correction. No harsh work. Birds. That sounds like a recipe not for flourishing, but for choking out the potential and the ability of each child. If you have a a rose Bush, for example, or any plant, you do need to do some pruning in order for it to thrive and be its best. Pruning is a process that we have to cut off pieces of that it’s unpleasant and difficult to know where to cut, but the end result. As a thriving plant that’s unencumbered by its dead leaves and brush and all. That sort of thing. I think there’s an analogy here. If you don’t provide hard feedback and give them the grades that they earn and allow them to see the cause and effect of what they’re producing as students and how they can correct accordingly, you’re not going to end up with a child that thrives, you’re going to end up. With a plant that’s encumbered.

[MCG]

Yep. Well, I have a final one. More than 12,000 signed petition to kick out Alexei Chievo. From university after her bail was changed so she can go to classes despite being accused of murdering her newborn baby.

[Jay]

This is such a disturbing story to me.

[MCG]

More than 12,000 people have signed a petition to ban a New Mexico teenager who’s accused of murdering her newborn baby from attending college. Alexei Treviso, 19, gave birth to her son in a bathroom at Artesia General Hospital on January 27th. Before putting his body in a trash can. Alright, So what? This teenager is accused of? I’m going to use the word accuse. Because of course this is going to code and. The teenager is alleged something else and she’s been charged with murder and she’s attending college and her classmates basically saying, hey, we don’t want this girl here because she murdered her baby. Alright, I continue, the teenager claims the baby boy wasn’t crying when she gave birth to him. And was a stillborn while prosecutors said she killed him by strangling him. Now I’m not defending her, but when my first son was born, he wasn’t crying at all. So this could be this girl. Simply the baby was born and she believed that every baby that born should be crying or whatever the case may be. She didn’t hear the baby crying, so therefore she believed he was. Yet could be now it has emerged that more than 12,000 have signed a petition to kick Treviso of the New Mexico State University in Las Cruces after a judge modified her bail condition so as to allow her to attend her classes in person. There, the petition stayed by Evelyn Grassino. On change that, org said, allowing Travisa to pursue higher education when she has been charged with a heinous crime is morally wrong. It is important to consider the impact that this case may have on public trust, the petition states. Someone charged with murder access into education where they will be entrusted with other individuals could undermine public confidence as well as the justice system itself. The petition repeatedly referenced that Chavismo is pursuing a career in nursing or social work, but there is no evidence to support the claim. The petition came just days. After a judge ruled Chavista will be allowed to go to her college classes in person, Chavismo appeared with her attorney via zoom for the preacher hearing in Eddy County Court. Previously, another judge had ruled using the domestic violent firmware that Chavez should not be allowed to see her boyfriend and alleged father have her child, who also attends the same college, reports law and crime. But Judge Jane Gray expressed her shock at the ruling and said there were no domestic abuse allegations in the case. And ruled that Chavismo should be allowed to see her boyfriend and attend the same university, and he’s gonna HIV. So gave birth in the bathroom. On January 27, delivering the baby alone, she put the baby in a church can. She claimed it was a stillborn. You know, this story is really bad. And again, she’s been accused of murder. But what I want to highlight here and why I think this story is so bonkers, is not so much because this young lady. Allegedly kill her baby boy and I’m used allegedly because he has been proven the court is technically her words against some tests that they run on the baby and find that they were here in the baby lungs. But what is the difference between what this young lady did and full term abortion? Ohh, what is? Nothing. There’s absolutely nothing the difference between. Hillary Clinton and the Democrats saying that someone who is 9 months pregnant days away from delivery that they can go to a Planned Parenthood clinic or to some other clinic or some other state that allow full term abortion, AKA California, and abort their baby. Is before the delivery date, and if you. Old lady having her baby on a hospital floor and killing it. There’s no difference. There’s nothing in the difference here. But yet we have a bunch of people who would not have a problem with a full term abortion condemning this young lady saying, hey, you are a murderer. We don’t want you among us. But if she had gone to California. Two days prior. And a doctor did practically the same thing. They would have given the hugs. Is this bonkers or hypocritical or what?

[Jay]

It’s both. I can’t even talk about this particular story without like a physical reaction, because this is just so horrendous. I don’t buy that. When she gave birth, that because the baby didn’t cry, that she thought it was dead. If you gave birth and you thought it was dead. It seems to me that the first thing that you would do is run and scream and call for help. You’re in a hospital. After all, instead you throw the child into the trash can. You didn’t want to be pregnant. You didn’t want to face the consequences of.

[MCG]

Well, she claims she didn’t know she was.

[Jay]

Pregnant. But her classmates have also refuted that claim, talking about how she already knew that she wanted to name the baby a particular name. I wonder if perhaps she freaked out at that moment and realized that she couldn’t be a mother and then decided to do this terrible thing. Or if her boyfriend put some sort of pressure on her. To get rid of the child because he didn’t want to take care of the child and he. Didn’t feel like. He was ready. Whatever the case was, I can’t see a scenario where you are blameless in. I remember delivering our third son and he came into the world in a whirlwind. We didn’t have time to do anything that we planned. He was born right in the front yard, and when he came out, he didn’t cry either. But my first thought was ohh no. Why is my baby not crying? You know what’s going on? It wasn’t to throw the child in the trash.

[MCG]

Correction he was a born in the front yard. He was born in an ambulance. He didn’t.

[Jay]

Ambulance the front yard we had. The point was that the child came out in a hurry and my first thought is not, hey, let me get rid of this child unless that was your goal all along. Unless that’s what you fixated on all along. You can’t convince me that you didn’t have. Intention to kill that child I remember. What I used to be like before I had kids and what I am like now. There are certain things like for example, there are certain scenes that you see on TV where children are hurt or people are hurt and you just kind of watch it and you’re just like, ohh. I mean, it’s sad, but then you’re not as deeply affected now that I’ve had children. I can’t watch those things. I cannot sit there and watch a show about children being hurt, mothers losing children. Can’t handle that. Anymore, because when you have children, you feel it down to your core. You cannot convince me that you didn’t intend to kill that child, that you didn’t know that you thought it was dead. Even if you did think all of those things, you’re in the hospital. The first thing you would do is call for help. If you wanted that child. Maybe I’m being harsh, but it seems clear to me that they did not want that child. And so they took matters into their own hands. And left him aftermath there for other people to find later on. And I’ve watched the video of her arrest. I’ve read subsequent articles. She is being enabled and emboldened and protected and encouraged by her mother, who is trying to protect her and keep her from. The consequences of her actions if you watch the video where the police of her city or of her town came to arrest her on suspicion of murder, how her mother just stood there and tried to defend her and keep her from being arrested and all that sort of thing. So when you see the mother, it’s not so hard to see why the child is. I hate to say that.

[MCG]

Yeah, I do agree that the evidence, in my opinion. Points more to this young lady not wanting the child and decide to get rid of it. However, I must also agree that there are evidence to show that she may not have known she was pregnant, and that’s not uncommon among teenagers, and there was evidence to show that when she went to the hospital again another. So on this so that she planned this really, really well. Because she went to the hospital because she was in pain. Not because she was in labor, but we know now that she was in pain because she was in law. But she went to hospital because she was in pain and they gave her. Bunch of pain medication. They admitted her and gave a bunch of pain medication, including morphine and some other strong stuff, and the lawyer is arguing that the baby had morphine and many of the other other strong medicine they gave her to help her with her pain in the bloodstream. It wasn’t until maybe an hour or so, probably 2 hours in, after she got to the hospital on more that day. Actually, after running lab tests, they came back and found out that she was actually pregnant. So they could be that she didn’t know, or she was really well planned.

[Jay]

Doctor Worth their salt? That would. Then that’s malpractice. Then, because there are certain medications that you can’t give pregnant women. In fact being pregnant.

[MCG]

But they didn’t know they. Didn’t know she was pregnant either.

[Jay]

If they were going to administer medicine like that, the first thing that they would do is to test for pregnancy because you can’t give that to pregnant women.

[MCG]

Well, that’s true, but at the same time, we don’t know if they asked her and she said no, I’m not sure if I want to put much blame on the hospital. Because if she was in such pain that they gave her morphine, that means she was in pain. Where she basic can’t function.

[Jay]

Well, yeah, that’s what labor pain is. I understand what I’m saying is, is that when you go into a hospital, there will always ask you for a urine. It doesn’t take long to test for pregnancy. A urine sample is more than enough for them to test.

[MCG]

Stand but.

[Jay]

For pregnancy, I don’t believe.

[MCG]

I understand all that, but I’m saying if you read the article, the article break it down by timeline when they decide to take blood. Sample and when they found out she was pregnant. So apparently she didn’t tell them she was pregnant. That’s another fact in her defense that she maybe she probably didn’t know. I’m gonna saying all these things are affecting their difference.

[Jay]

This is the this. Is her defense attorney saying these particular things? I don’t.

[MCG]

Well, he found out to her and to the. Hospital. So I’m saying every case go through what they call a discovery period where you know the prosecution has to share whatever evidence they have with their defendant. So I’m just simply saying, again, I’m not defending her. I’m saying is saying the evidence is true, that what she’s saying is probably true. They also post images of her. In her cheerleading. Uniform and I look at her and she looked at me, clearly pregnant. So I don’t know. How can she say she’s not pregnant? Because I look at her and I’m like, I don’t know her from Adam, but I can look at her and say, well, yeah, that’s a pregnant woman right there. But she says, you know, she was pregnant. She put on 10 to 15 pounds. And she figured it was because she was using contraceptive. And she claimed that throughout the entire period, she was still menstruating. So if that’s true, all those are evident in her favor that she did not. No. So my big thing is, is that Even so much the court case, because that’s going to be plotted, the court, and we gotta find out what the truth is, hopefully in the courts that whether she knew or she did not know and whether or not she should be charged with murder. My biggest thing here is the double standard that this is showing. Because there’s absolutely no difference. Between her two days earlier, going for an abortion or throwing the baby in the trash can, there’s absolutely no difference. And folks that say it is are being hypocritical. You know, abortion is not OK what this woman did is not OK and the reason why it’s hypocritical is because both of them are murder. And it’s a double standard. That’s why I’m glad for a biblical worldview, because with a biblical worldview, we can look at it and realize, hey, the standard is always the same. Whether this was the. Two week old embryo or a baby that was just born 10 minutes ago. The Bible standards is the same. This is murder, but they’re looking at it and say ohh, just because of the position of the baby, the fact that the baby came out without a doctor hate to be so graphic sucking it out all of a sudden. It’s murder. And I’m saying no if. One is not, the other is not, and if one is, the other is as well. That’s the big thing for me here. Whether or not it is hypocritical because the only difference is the position of the baby where the baby is anyways.

[Jay]

Well, then, Christians need to get their house in order because there is a argument in the pro-life movement right now as to whether or not the mother should be prosecuted. Or getting an abortion, some pro lifers say that the act should not be criminalized because now you have the government criminalizing something like a medical decision that people have to make. Where does the line end? That sort of argument? While the abolitionists say absolutely, the mother should be prosecuted, the AG in Alabama has said I think this was about. A few days ago where they said that people who help the mother travel out of the state for an abortion can be held liable as well, so this is not something that is resolved or agreed upon by any means in the United States, because even within the pro-life movement, there is disagreement as to where. Whether the act of abortion should be criminalized, like should the mother be prosecuted, or people who help her go for that abortion, whether it’s at a state or doing some type of back alley or DIY abortion, whether they should be prosecuted as well. So I think maybe as Christians or maybe more broadly, as pro lifers, we should get our ducks in a row before we go telling the world what they ought to be doing.

[MCG]

You know, that’s why I mentioned in our biblical worldview, you know, if you happen to agree that this world is bonkers, my question to you is, what are you doing about it? If you’re safe, born again, may I encourage you? That saturate your Jerusalem with the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Go out there. Tell folks every opportunity you have about the saving grace of Jesus Christ. If you’re not safe and happen to be listening to this, please know firstly that we are all sinners. We are all sinners by birth and by the. Romans 5 verse 12, third with fourth by one man. Sin entered the world and death by sin and so dead path upon all men. For that all have sin. If you’re part of the outer race, the human race, the fallen race. You are a Sinner if you’re listening to this. You are a Sinner. Romans 3, verse 23, for all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. All means all that include you listening, friend. But the good news is all can be set free from this bonkers world of sin and its consequences to Jesus Christ. We were all born in the sin. We are all sinners by choice, and by the man Jesus Christ. We can all be saved. Romans 517 to 24 if by one man offends death reigned by 1. Much more did, which receive abundance of grace. And the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one Jesus Christ. Therefore, as by the offence of 1 judgment came upon all men to condemnation. Even so by the wretchedness of 1 the free gift came upon all men, unto justification of life, forced by one man. Disobedience. Many were made sinners, so by the obedience of. One shall many be made righteous. Moreover, the law entered that the offense might abound, but where sin abounds, grace did much more, abound that as sin had reigned unto. Death, Even so might Grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord. We can escape the consequences and the judgment of sin by placing our faith in Jesus Christ. Yes, we all sinners. Yes, because of sin, we all should be condemned to hell by actually said that we are condemned. Already Romans, chapter 5, verse 8:00 and 9:00. Devices. But God commended his love towards us and that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us much more than being justified by his blood. We shall be saved from wrath through. Him while we were yet sinners. While we’re yet filthy, Christ died for us. You can be saved to repentant fate. To Jesus Christ acts 26, verse 20, but chauffeurs unto them of Damascus and at Jerusalem and throughout all the course of Judah, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God. And do works meet for repentance acts 1730 and the times of this immigrant God winked at but now commanded all men everywhere to repent. Repent simply means turn from your sin, turn to Jesus Christ is basically a 180 turn. And he will save you Romans 10, verse 9013 that if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shall believe in thine heart that God has raised him from the dead, thou shall be saved, for with the heart man believeth unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. For the scripture said, whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. But there is no difference between the Jew and the. Week for the same Lord overall is rich unto all that call upon him, for whosoever shall call upon the name of The Lord shall be saved my encouragement to you, listener, if you’re not safe, if you realize that your Sinner, if you realize that God is going to judge you one day for what you have done, the sense that you have committed. And for you to turn to Christ in repentant fate, would you trust him to?

[Jay]

Thank you so much for listening to the Removing Barriers podcast. Make sure to rate US everywhere you listen to podcasts, including Spotify, Apple Podcast, Google Podcast, or Stitcher. Removing barriers, a clear view of the cross.

[MCG]

Thank you for listening. To get a hold of us to support this podcast or to learn more about removing barriers. Go to removingbarriers.net. This has been the removing barriers podcast. We attempted to remove barriers so that we all can have a clear view of the cross.