What is religion? And what recognition does it deserve?

Independence Hall, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Photo credit: Dan Hall on unsplash

Two years before the Constitutional Convention, America’s founding fathers were embroiled in a battle over religious liberty in Virginia. Patrick Henry faced off against James Madison over a bill to fund the teaching of morality. Thomas Jefferson, George Mason, and other famous names joined the fray. 

The principles that prevailed became the pillars of the “establishment” and “free-exercise” clauses of the First Amendment. The controversy also produced a document titled, “Memorial and Remonstrance.” It deserves recognition on par with the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution among our most important documents. 

The Memorial begins with a quote from the Virginia Declaration of Rights, “Religion or the duty which we owe to our Creator and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence.” America’s founders defined religion not as a collectivist project, but as an individual duty that each person owes to the Creator.

Only illegitimate rulers consider religion fundamentally as mindless “group think.” The opposite is true. Human beings do not join some group and subsequently conform their thinking to its precepts. Rather, each person’s individual mind comes to a conviction about reality and, subsequently, finds others who share this same conviction. 

Groups and religious leaders do not create or validate beliefs. Nor are religious beliefs confined to the margins of human existence. Religion encompasses all of life. Therefore, it is deeply antihuman both to treat people only as group-members, and to restrict the subject matter of religion. Nevertheless, many misguided corporations and government officials today are doing just that.

Cheyenne Regional Medical Center

Cheyenne Regional Medical Center (CRMC) is one such example. Its standard application for religious exemptions to vaccinations subjects them to the whims of “the Chief Legal and Human Resource Officer.” It reserves the right to require “documents from your religious leader” and “will not”’ grant exemptions based on “personal” beliefs. 

This policy threatens faithful employees with loss of job in a bid to force compliance without the need to persuade by evidence and reason. CRMC is not alone with its policy. It is following a new and progressive denial of the religious liberty for which America’s founders fought and died.

Denial of “personal” beliefs destroys religious liberty because religion is precisely personal. Madison and company understood that personal convictions can “only be directed by reason and conviction, not by force or violence.” Failure to govern by this principle is the exact opposite of the American ethos. 

Progressives object that this gives too much freedom for people to hold unreasonable opinions. Those who believe this simply do not understand human nature. Examine your own mind and observe that you cannot bring yourself to believe and act upon unreasonable opinions. No sane person can. You will not throw yourself off a cliff. Nor will you willingly ingest poison.

Sane people may do unreasonable things if they are misinformed about the truth. But the solution for this is simply to present evidence and reason that persuades them of the truth. Humans simply cannot thrive in circumstances where reason and persuasion are replaced by force and violence.

So, Madison wrote: “The Religion then of every man must be left to the conviction and conscience of every man; and it is the right of every man to exercise it as these may dictate.” Notice, here, that the “right” stands in service of a prior “duty.” The duty is to the Creator.

For this reason, the “right is in its nature an unalienable right.” That means that it cannot be taken from anybody without denying an individual’s personhood. Even that person, cannot barter away this right. For, properly speaking, it is not a right that belongs to the individual, but to the Creator who gave it. Thus, there are two reasons why religious liberty is an “unalienable right.” 

It is unalienable, first, “because the opinions of men, depending only on the evidence contemplated by their own minds cannot follow the dictates of other men.” Madison knew that human nature—not personal stubbornness—makes it impossible for a person to act against his or her own mind.

Religious liberty is unalienable, second, “because what is here a right towards men, is a duty towards the Creator.” Soldiers know that duty cannot be denied even on pain of injury or death. Every sane person also knows this. Governments that act otherwise deny the very humanity of their citizens.

In its opening four sentences, the Memorial sounds a powerful corrective to the flawed progressivism of our day. The rest of it is equally profound. It should be required reading for every policy maker and thoughtful citizen. Policies from school curriculum to vaccine mandates, would all be truer to human nature if we relearned the truths of Memorial and Remonstrance.

Also published in the Wyoming Tribune Eagle, September 24, 2021.

American Thinker: What do you do in the middle of a hijacking?

On the 20th anniversary of 9-11, Kylee Zempel over at The Federalist published a poignant reflection titled "Would you have stormed the cockpit?"  Through the lens of that question, she examined the character necessary for the passengers of Flight 93 to take on terrorists armed with box-cutters and bombs.  She further asked what sort of culture instills that character.  It was a powerful piece.  But it left unexplored the imminent reality that every American is already facing the same situation today.

The passengers of United Flight 93 were ordinary citizens who realized that their airplane had been hijacked. But that was only the first shock of the day.  Until that day, hijackers made demands and promised safety if the demands were met.  The proper response was: Stay calm and wait for the professional hostage negotiators to arrive.  But that morning, everything changed.

Read the full article here:  https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/09/what_do_you_do_in_the_middle_of_a_hijacking.html

We are all Todd Beamers, now

Boeing 757 (like Flight 93) leaving Newark
Photo credit: Bing Hui Yau on unsplash

In the afterglow of last week’s reflections on 9-11, Todd Beamer and the resistance fighters aboard United Flight 93 have been much on my mind.

These ordinary citizens realized that their airplane had been hijacked. But that was only the first shock. Until that day, hijackers made demands and promised safety if the demands were met. The proper response was: Stay calm and wait for the professional hostage negotiators to arrive. But that morning, everything changed. 

Through cellular communication, the passengers of Flight 93 learned that three other hijacking situations had not ended by landing the plane and commencing hostage negotiations. Instead, one by one, planes slammed into targets making the carnage ten times worse. This was the second shock. We have had decades of hindsight to process this. But the passengers of Flight 93 were forced to grasp their new reality on the fly.

Beamer and company had to process the new threat in real time. Imagine the hushed conversation among the passengers as they took in the situation and came to the horrific realization that the civilian airplane they had boarded was now a militarized weapon. It had become a 90-ton missile, loaded and bearing enough fuel to immolate its target—hurtling towards an unknown number of innocents at 500 miles per hour.

Todd Beamer

None of these people had official standing. They were neither flight officers nor crew. They were not law enforcement officers or counter-terrorism experts. They had no training for the situation. And they didn’t have the luxury of time to ponder their predicament over days. The only authority they had was the truth of the moment and their own humanity. And they had minutes to act.

But Beamer understood. The awesome power that enabled 90 tons of materials and fuel peacefully and safely to convey passengers had been hijacked into the employ of evil. He understood that the evil exceeded the death of those aboard. Rather, they themselves had become a weapon against untold innocents on the ground. Control of the plane was not just about self-preservation. It was about the preservation of hundreds ignorant of the approaching threat.

In that moment, the option of inactivity was taken off the table. Beamer heard the call of a thousand voices saying, “We don’t even know that you exist, but you are the only one in a position to avert our destruction.” It was a responsibility he could not shirk. 

Beamer’s wife, Lisa, confirms his realization in her book, Let’s Roll!: Ordinary People, Extraordinary Courage. There she related an interview with Lisa Jefferson, the last person with whom he spoke. Discussing his plan to rush the cockpit, she asked, “Are you sure that’s what you want to do?” He answered, “It’s what I have to do.” There is no choice left in these words. Duty is an unremitting obligation.

The passengers of Flight 93

Last week, Kylee Zempel published a thoughtful piece in the Federalist asking, “Would you have stormed the cockpit?” It’s a fair question. But I think our question is more immediate than that. Beamer’s choice 20 years ago is a microcosm of our situation today.

Institutions, like airplanes, have been built to be powerful for the accomplishment of much good. But that power can be hijacked for evil purposes. When control of these institutions is taken from the people that they were built to serve, the havoc that they can wreak on civilization is proportional to their power for good. This is more than a danger to its members. Like Flight 93, they have become hijacked airplanes aimed at the destruction of innocents who don’t even know the institution exists.

The long march through America’s institutions has weaponized many. The cockpits of corporations, professional associations and unions, charities, political parties, and government bureaucracies have been invaded by people intent on destroying our world. Those who have poured out their talents and treasure to make them strong, are suddenly astonished to find themselves aboard a missile aimed at the heart of America.

For too long we have reacted to this situation like the hijacked hostages of old: Staying calm and waiting for others to act. But by now, you should notice the results of this strategy. Many institutions have exploded over their target. The rescuers never arrived. Think of the Boy Scouts, professional sports leagues, and American corporations making billions on the backs of foreign slaves. Consider the havoc wrought on the Afghani people and ask yourself who is positioned to end it. 

Like Todd Beamer, once you see the pattern you can no longer escape the truth. You can assess the institutions you inhabit—maybe the school system, or your place of employment, or your church. You can take responsibility, develop a plan and rise from your seat. You may be the only one positioned to protect the innocent. If so, only one option remains. “Let’s Roll.”

Also published in the Wyoming Tribune Eagle, September 17, 2021.

When it comes to Ivermectin, Seriously, y'all, stop it.

Photo by Matt Seymour on unsplash

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has now officially joined the ranks of federal agencies that have scuttled their own credibility with media-enabled nonsense. At 5:57AM on a Saturday morning, August 21, it issued the folksy tweet: “You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all, stop it… Using the drug Ivermectin to treat COVID-19 can be dangerous and even lethal. The FDA has not approved the drug for that purpose.” 

By Monday morning, as if on cue, every compliant media outlet from Seattle to Miami published articles as if this were a serious problem. Rod Miller was the first out of the gate in the Cowboy State. He profanely opined, “I sure as h--- wouldn’t ingest it [Ivermectin].” He failed to notice that over a billion doses have been given to human beings since 1988. In all that time, and in 125 countries, zero deaths have been tied to its use. 

Rod Miller, columnist

What is more, the FDA approved Ivermectin for human ingestion in 1996 and it made the World Health Organization’s “Model List of Essential Medicines” in 2019. Nevertheless, the FDA deliberately created a narrative that Ivermectin is horse medicine. The condescending, “y’all” was calculated to paint anyone who might imagine otherwise as uneducated yokels. 

Soon Ellen Fike parroted the narrative by calling Ivermectin an “anti-parasitic medication most often used to treat livestock.” While admitting that the FDA had approved it for human use, the unmistakable point was that Ivermectin is not FDA-approved for treating COVID-19.

In the pharmaceutical industry, this is called “off-label” use. Doctors do it all the time some for good, and some for ill. As this column discussed several weeks ago, Testosterone is regularly prescribed off-label to minor girls! For more examples, Wikipedia has an entire page on the subject. 

What good could come of prescribing Ivermectin for COVID-19 off-label? Here is where it gets interesting. Barely a month after COVID-19 hit America, researchers submitted a paper to Antiviral Research that found Ivermectin to be effective against COVID-19 in the lab. It turns out that the same properties that make it effective against parasites also make it promising against viruses. 

Before the paper even could be published, the FDA issued a “Letter to Stakeholders” that threatened “FDA investigation and potential enforcement action” against any doctor with the temerity to try it against COVID-19. The letter stated: “Additional testing is needed to determine whether ivermectin might be safe or effective to prevent or treat coronavirus or COVID-19.” It then went on, bizarrely, to warn against people taking Ivermectin packaged for animal use.

Okay. That’s a weird caution. But at least we could expect the FDA to do the additional testing that would either prove or disprove the effectiveness of Ivermectin as a treatment for COVID-19. After all, thousands were dying daily, and millions of cases were available for Randomized Controlled Trials that could provide a definitive answer.

One might think that while granting “emergency use authorization” to Remdesivir, two mRNA injections (Moderna and Pfizer), and one vaccine (J&J) against COVID-19, the FDA could have included a study of one of the safest drugs known to man. But, alas, 17 months later and we still have no such study. Nor has the FDA updated its guidance based on multiple external studies. Rather, on August 21, 2121 we got a snarky tweet bringing up the same unlikely scenario that it had imagined on April 10, 2020. 

The intellectually curious soon asked: Where are all these people slurping down ointments intended for cows? Dr. Jason McElyea went on the Rachel Maddow show to say that they lived in Oklahoma. In the very heart of hick-dom, supposedly, so many people were ill from taking “horse de-wormer” that gunshot victims were turned away from emergency rooms. Rolling Stone even put his claims into print. But he was lying.

The hospital issued a statement saying that Dr. McElyea didn’t currently work there, and that it had treated no cases of Ivermectin abuse—not a single one. We are still waiting to meet the knuckle-draggers that the FDA is so worried about.

Why am I taking up this subject? I am no doctor—not even a veterinarian. But two things kept me from passing over this ridiculous tale. First, a newspaperman, whom I respect, asked me to address it. Second, people are tired of lies. They just want to know what is real and go about their daily lives. If Ivermectin is proven ineffective, just show the receipts. But don’t peddle silly narratives that make even Rolling Stone print a correction. 

Ellen Fike, reporter

Truth begins with accountability for lies told. People need and deserve reporters and columnists who will publicly apologize for public falsehoods. Where that doesn’t happen, they will look elsewhere for reliable information, and they should.

Those at the CDC and FDA, who have spent a year and a half failing to study Ivermectin, should be put out of a job. The Centers for Disease Control was created to control diseases, not to control the narrative. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.

Post Script: 

On May 25, 2021 the Indian Bar Association sued Soumya Swaminathan, the WHO chief scientist for India. On June 13, 2021 an additional legal brief was filed. Both seek prosecution for causing the deaths of Indian citizens by sending a Tweet that caused the state of Tamil Nadu to withdrew the use of Ivermectin from their protocol. 

On August 19, 2021 Haruo Ozaki, Chair of the Tokyo Metropolitan Medical Association explained the data on why doctors should prescribe ivermectin for COVID-19. Perhaps this explains the timing of the FDA tweet on August 21.

Also published in the Cowboy State Daily, September 9,2021, and in the Wyoming Tribune Eagle, September 10, 2021.

Just laws should protect everyone from medical mandates

Photo by Prasesh Shiwakoti (Lomash) on Unsplash

We regularly hear people with medical credentials claim that abortion is “health care.” Not only is this obviously untrue for the unborn, it has not been demonstrated for the mother either. Never has a randomized, controlled trial (RCT) demonstrated any physical, emotional, mental or spiritual health improvement attributable to elective abortion.

Nevertheless, abortion advocates make this unsubstantiated claim to advanced policies that entice women to procure abortions, use tax-payer dollars to subsidize them, and coerce doctors, nurses and pharmacists to participate in them. This is bad medicine. But it happens.

Similarly, we now hear claims that mastectomies, hysterectomies, puberty blockers and unnatural hormones are “health care” for minor children suffering gender dysphoria. Again, although there are no RCTs that prove the benefits of these “treatments,” politicians are stripping away the rights of parents to object to them. The Biden HHS Department, in anticipation of the so-called “Equality Act,” already is coercing physicians and psychologists to perform these procedures against their best medical judgment.

Medical conscience rights exist to protect people from abuses like these. Nobody should be forced to perform or to undergo a medical treatment that he or she believes to be harmful. This is especially true when medicine has been politicized. But it is just as true when there is simply an honest difference of opinion. 

In America, a million medical interventions are prescribed every day. And yet, not one of these is begun until the patient, facility, and physician all agree that it is the best option for the given situation. If a physician or hospital disagrees, the patient is referred elsewhere. If the patient disagrees, he or she withholds consent and declines the drug, injection, or procedure.

It is unlawful and unethical to coerce anyone into giving that consent. Every patient has the right to be fully informed of the benefits and the risks of a recommended procedure. Every patient has the right to be free of pressure from outside parties. Every patient has the right to be free of enticements that could weight a medical decision.

Now however, in a bizarre turn of events, we are hearing calls for one medical procedure to be denied such protection. Make no mistake, “vaccine mandates,” and “vaccine passports” are calling for unlawful coercion to be applied to people who know their own bodies, have studied the medical options, and have freely decided the best health care for their situation. 

Coercion comes in many forms. The most egregious form of medical coercion is when guns, incarceration and fines are used to coerce medical procedures. The Chinese Communist Party is currently doing this to the Uyghur people under the banner of “health care.” They force women into abortions and sterilization against their will and the will of their husbands.

Coercion also happens when people are threatened with loss of job, access to goods and services, and denial of visits to loved ones. Medical workers, military personnel, and others are facing such extortion as we speak. This is illegal. But it is happening, nonetheless. Until these cases are justly overthrown in court, people are being intimidated into compliance. 

Even forcing patients to choose between two medical procedures, like a jab in the arm or a swab up the nose, is a form of unethical coercion. Nor should we fail to mention monetary enticements. Currently the University of Wyoming is offering students a chance to “win” thousands of dollars—but only if they submit to a COVID-19 vaccine. Likewise, faculty and staff of the Cheyenne school system are being paid $500 to get the same shot. What elected official authorized our tax dollars to be used in this unethical way?

There is at least one elected official who is fighting to keep medical coercion away from Wyoming citizens. Rep. Sue Wilson (R-Cheyenne) is the prime sponsor of a bill that would prevent Wyoming’s “health care facilities, governmental entities, and providers of essential services,” schools, and places of employment from mandating immunizations against the willing consent of Wyoming citizens.

Kudos to Wyoming’s Joint Labor and Health Committee that recently voted 13-1 to sponsor it. This reasonably written bill upholds existing laws and medical ethics while accommodating those who needlessly worry. CDC Director, Rochelle Walensky, has stipulated that the vaccine does not prevent a person either from catching the virus, or from infecting others. There is no reason to think that the unvaccinated are more dangerous than the vaccinated. 

Rep. Sue Wilson

Nevertheless, for those who are not convinced by the CDC, the bill allows schools, health care facilities and places of employment to impose “reasonable accommodations” on those who choose not to get vaccinated. As long as these “reasonable accommodations” do not coerce other medical procedures, this clause will preserve the bedrock principle of bodily integrity: no one should be coerced to receive or to provide a medical intervention that he or she believes to be harmful.

Also published in the Wyoming Tribune Eagle on September 3, 2021.

Afghanistan couldn’t keep it. Can we?

Army Specialist Jonn J. Edmunds was one of the first soldiers to die in the Afghan war. The 20-year-old Cheyenne native was killed in action on October 19, 2001, five and a half weeks after the Twin Towers fell. Over the next two decades, America’s longest war claimed the lives of 2,352 soldiers. These, together with over 20,149 injured, tell only part of the story. 

Mark Geist, former U.S. Marine and founder of the Shadow Warriors Project, reports that for every active-duty soldier in Afghanistan, there are 2.9 military contractors. These are mostly retired service members who are hired back as non-uniformed soldiers. At least 3,800 have been killed in action. Since April, nearly 9,000 contractors have been withdrawn. Still, as of July 21, 7,800 remained in country. These make up the bulk of Americans stranded in the aftermath of the Biden Administration’s debacle.

These Americans, together with their Afghani helpers, expect to be hunted down and tortured to death over the coming weeks, according to Geist. Add this human cost to the millions of dollars (actually billions) in usable war materiel that was deliberately handed over to the Taliban and you have an unfolding disaster that is beyond imagining. 

Sec. Def. Lloyd Austin, Chair JCS Mark Milley

Both the Washington bureaucrats and military brass responsible for this murderous miscalculation must be held to account. Trust in America’s institutions cannot be restored otherwise.

While we are holding lying leaders to account, it is also necessary to criticize our own contribution to the mess. Some of the unfolding disaster results from the administration’s incompetent implementation of a sound withdrawal plan. But some of it lies at the foot of every single American citizen who encouraged a war intended to bring democracy to the Afghani people.

I was one of them. I not only supported our troops, in general, I supported the war in Afghanistan and Iraq, in particular. I believed, falsely, that the only thing standing between the people of these countries and their freedom to self-govern was an oppressive and brutal government. I was wrong.

The freedom to self-govern—the republican form of government—does not begin with the Constitution and the formal institutions found in the American tradition. Nor does it even begin in the human heart that yearns for freedom—as President George W. Bush promised America at the inception of the war. 

Rather, successful self-governance begins with a worldview. Unless a people buy into that worldview, no external force can keep them free. To put it in American terms, our Constitution, our Bill of Rights, our state and federal government institutions are all incapable of keeping us free unless we all buy into the worldview articulated in the Declaration of Independence.

That’s what Benjamin Franklin meant when he emerged from a summer of negotiating the U.S. Constitution and fielded a question from a certain Mrs. Powel. She asked, “Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?” He replied, “A republic, if you can keep it.”

Over the past two decades, America gave the Afghani people a republic. It cost two trillion dollars, 2,352 soldiers, 3,800 contractors, 20,149 injuries, and the deaths of 140,000 Afghani citizens and soldiers. They couldn’t keep it. The world watched in real time as the Afghani republic evaporated into the very same brutal oligarchy that it was on the day Jonn Edmunds died. 

Self-evidently, they do not believe “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.” If they believed this worldview, they would not be hunting down ideological opponents. Instead, they would be building coalitions with them. If they believed this creed, they would not be forcing women into brutal “marriages,” or torturing infidels.

Those who believe in a good and just Creator cannot act unjustly and evilly without denying the very core of their being. This is the true foundation of a republican form of government. Give up this creed and our own government will fall just as spectacularly and horrifically as the government of Afghanistan.

If we had seriously wanted to build a republic in Afghanistan, we should have started with this creed. Likewise, if we are serious about restoring America’s republic, we have no choice but to reestablish this same creed in our land. 

All men are created equal. Americans are no different than Afghanis when it comes to self-governance or brutal oligarchies. Americans have no magical qualities that will spare us from the chaos currently playing out in Afghanistan. We, like them, have only one thing standing between us and barbarism: the firm and uncompromising belief that all people are created by the same good and just Creator.

NOTE: Any veterans of the Afghan war who are struggling, in any way, are encouraged to reach out to the author at the address below. I will answer you, talk with you, and do everything in my power to arrange any other help that you may need.

Also published in the Wyoming Tribune Eagle, August 20, 2021.

Christian youth point to a bright future

Photo by Natalie Pedigo on Unsplash

Last Wednesday’s sun rose upon a gaggle of teenagers who had just summited a small peak in the Wind River Range. It happened during this author’s annual retreat above Sinks Canyon State Park west of Lander. 

Nobody was compelled to go. Rather, the campers themselves took charge. They organized a predawn expedition of three dozen youth who assembled in nautical twilight for the climb.

These are the leaders of tomorrow. And the future looks bright. They are filled with the vigor of youth and the usual spunk and recklessness. But it is no longer directionless and careless. Something has been added to the usual qualities of youth. It is almost imperceptible, but it is palpably present. Purpose, unity, determination and grit can be seen in their bright eyes.

The ascent was not a scrambled melee. It was teamwork. The strong helped the weak. The discerning advised the reckless. The fast waited for the slow and the slow happily pressed their limits to keep up. I was a counsellor allowed to be a part of something special. But, like a fly on the wall, I did more observing than guiding. It was a beauty to behold.

I can vividly remember the first day that I met some of these people in the summer of 2015. There were uncertain greetings exchanged as awkward preteens and an inexperienced counsellor met for the first time. We occupied cabin 7 at the Freemont County Youth Camp and were clueless about the routines and rhythms of summer camp. Everything we did took twice as long and was half as good. That was a long time ago.

Slowly, imperceptibly, boys became men and men became leaders. There is no single person who can claim the credit. Parents, grandparents, brothers and sisters, pastors, teachers and a host of unnamed role models each contributed something. Together, it led to a summit marked by a rustic cross that had been cobbled together from a pair of lodgepole pines.

This experience, while heart-warming, is probably not terribly unusual in Wyoming. Our mountains are dotted with summer youth camps that are booked solid from the spring thaw to late fall road closures. Rocks, water, dirt and pines form an outdoor classroom filled by kids and counsellors from every walk of life. All share the experience described above.

But this year I was privileged to witness something else that I have not seen before. I wager that few have. It happened back in the lodge. Still before breakfast, twelve men of high school age spontaneously picked up hymnals, stood before 70 peers and two dozen counsellors, and sang the Church’s hymns. The cross at the top of the mountain was not an empty symbol to them. It silently proclaimed the Creator’s redemption of His world. These young men were unashamed to stand before their female peers and lead the song.

It was the recklessness of youth redirected. And in that carefree confession, something remarkable happened. No longer were the adults trying patiently to spoon feed the lessons that youth would need for life. The baton was passed to the next generation.

That full throated song of a dozen young men was like the dawn of a new day. These are tomorrow’s leaders. They recognize not only the need to put a hand to the plow. They recognize, also, the Maker of the plow and the Maker of the soil. 

In a flash of light, those present saw the potential of the generation who will lead us out of our present confusion. They are eager to take their place as the builders of tomorrow. And they recognize that true building can be done only by “men with chests.” 

That phrase comes from one of C.S. Lewis’ most important writings. In “The Abolition of Man,” he laments that the scourge of Materialism treats human beings as soulless machines. It removes “their chests” and then wonders why they act as less than human.

To treat people as “men without chests” is to address only half of their potential. We should not be surprised when it results in corruption, confusion and chaos in the institutions we once revered. Materialism that denies the spiritual side of man ties one hand behind his back and still asks him to build. 

Photo by Anthony Fomin on Unsplash

Tomorrow’s generation of leaders is growing to see this folly. It is determined to do something about it. Soulless materialism has led us into a box canyon from which there is no escape. Yet rather than give up the fight, a new generation sees that the way out is the way up.

Beleaguered builders of our day can take heart as these happy warriors come of age. They are the dawn of a new day.

Also published in the Cowboy State Daily on August 15, and in the Wyoming Tribune Eagle, August 13, 2021.