Share This Episode
Janet Mefferd Today Janet Mefferd Logo

Gail Heriot (Race-Based Preferences in Higher Education)

Janet Mefferd Today / Janet Mefferd
The Truth Network Radio
June 3, 2021 4:00 am

Gail Heriot (Race-Based Preferences in Higher Education)

Janet Mefferd Today / Janet Mefferd

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 638 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.


June 3, 2021 4:00 am

How are race-based preferences actually harming higher education? I'll talk about it with Gail Heriot, law professor at the University of San Diego and co-editor of the book, "A Dubious Expediency." Plus: Newly released emails from Dr. Anthony Fauci are raising renewed questions about the COVID-19 guru's credibility. We'll tackle that and more on Thursday's JANET MEFFERD TODAY

YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE

This archived broadcast of Janet Mefford today is brought to you by Liberty health sheer liberty healthcare is a nonprofit healthcare sharing ministry that allows you to control and manage your own healthcare and choose any doctor or hospital in the nation. If your freedom loving American looking for contract free healthcare call now 855-585-4237 or go to liberty healthcare.org/GMT for more information liberty healthcare.org/GMT Janet River today. Our confidence is in Christ alone, Sawyer is now for affirmative action in higher education, wealth, legal scholars have just released a study that they say provide some of the first empirical evidence to support the idea that diversity enhances higher education outcomes. Forbes reports that the study, which is called assessing affirmative-action's diversity rationale is to be published in the Columbia law review and is sure to stir heated debate is lawsuits challenging race conscious college admission policies continue to be filed and heard, but is there really a solid diversity, rationale, or in fact have these race-based preference standards actually harmed higher education were to talk about it today with Gail Harriet law professor at the University of San Diego and member of the US commission on civil rights. She cochaired both in 1996 campaign for California's proposition 209 and the successful 2020 campaign to prevent its repeal and she is editor of a new book called a dubious expediency how race preferences, damage, higher education Gail wonderful to talk to again how are you doing fine having me on the planet, will you bet it's great to have you here.

I am wondering is active as you have been in California on this issue for such a long time. What we make of the fact that the value of race-based preferences in higher education is still a matter of such a huge debate and because you know the American people. When you pull them on the head and dreamily confident. If you look at polls going back even to the 1970s, Americans have always opposed rated preferential admission there again. Race discrimination is a matter of principle and in bed what you find there is a very thin layer of of of academic people in high positions, who think that race preferences are a good idea and time and time again voters vote them down.

Most recently here in California. Let me add deep blue if there's any fees in the union where you'd expect that rated preferential treatment and in college admissions with Pat. It would be California and yet overwhelmingly voters voted it down. They believe in the principle of colorblind. Well, that's right. And it's interesting to because I know the Supreme Court may hear this case out of Harvard students for fair admissions. The Harvard which is all about this policy at Harvard that is seen is discriminatory against Asian Americans and not giving them the same preferences.

So again it looks like the Supreme Court may be taking it up and this is been going on a long time, going all the way back to the Bakke decision allowed lately and for a week difficult it Asian Americans have to be that much better than any other applicant in order to get into to a college or university. And that's bad. To me that's un-American that it shouldn't matter what one's skin color is it should matter what one's academic credentials and other credentials. I'm not arguing that colleges and universities only consider SAT scores or or or grade point average. Is there a lot of things that go into what colleges and universities should should consider when it comes to to admission and different colleges and universities can and should had different ways of looking at this matter, but raise the one of the things that they consider that should be verboten and will see whether the Supreme Court is willing to take this this case, students prepare admissions versus Harvard University will see probably in the next few weeks, but the petition for certain if they call it was filed back at the end of February and then there were quite a few friend of the court briefs, including one filed by me on asking the court. Please take this case and will see will feed probably sometime this month will face yet. Right now, I mentioned this study that just came out or is about to come on the Columbia law review talking about this diversity rationale and apparently this shows that after these prestigious law reviews adopted diversity policies for choosing student editors the articles they published were cited more often. Add would you see that as being a diversity rationale since little thin to me but I'm not expert that you are guided more often just mean there's more and more of the literature out there and so everything side of more than it used to be a very funny way to beat beat beat measuring whether or not this is been a good idea. So I would say that is not a good measure in observed and lots of effort to move that diversity is a good thing back when the Supreme Court was considering this issue back in like 2003 in the Grider versus Bullinger case, which was against the University of Michigan. There was a study that basically you know what happens if you tell students that that diversity is really important and then you pull them and ask them. Diversity is important, and their answer course will be yeah that's what I was a pot, it's important, and that was their proof that that that racial diversity is a good thing. I'm in favor of racial diversity but not if it means that your discriminating on the basis of race, get it right exactly, right now you you talk in this book and is such a great book for people to understand this entire issue, but you talk about how racial preferences have actually damaged higher education.

What would you point so I know there are number of different things that you discuss in the book and the different authors address but what would you say are some of the most significant race. Preferential damage examples that you have on what's going on in the University and an college system, especially the one most important to me is what Thomas soul Hall mismatch and that is whenever you give preferential treatment to one group and not to another. It means the student to get into that particular college and university on a preference will ordinarily have academic credentials that put them towards the bottom of the class is complete, poisonous, specially in the area of science and engineering and that of course includes medicine and dentistry and everything else that's related what happens is that we actually have fewer African-American decisions dentist engineers scientific. Then we would've had if those students had not gotten a preference and so they had gone to the school where there academic credentials put them in the ballpark with other students, for example, in, out, and not just this is not just a matter of race this is any kind of a preference Indo Caltech know here in California is one of the hardest school to get into and in the entire country. In fact in the world and those people they are literally the student to get in. They are literally rocket scientist to know very very smart and very very good at math and science.

You know when I'm in high school I was good at math and science to not Caltech good if you had sent me to a school where my credentials were similar to other students and I could've come out as a scientist or engineer that you put me in with the Caltech students, and it would be utterly intimidating and all I would have to say oh my gosh, I'm not good at this. After all, and I would probably have switched majors and what happened time and time again African-American students all tilted legacy students to get into a college on a preference because there at their their mother or their grandfather went to that school.

It's not a good idea to go to school where your academic credentials put you at the bottom of the class and it's an especially bad idea for math and science students sleeping again.

We have more African-American doctors more African-American engineers today if we had simply used admissions policies that don't grant preferential treatment will write it would seem that you would have a much better shot, if you were to go to a school that might not be quite as high up as Caltech or Harvard or some of the other top schools and instead may be went to a state school, but graduated at the top of your class when they give you a better shot in the job market where would you know there are plenty of Greek State University. I may be a little leave you to get into that then Caltech or Harvard, but if you come out of those schools with honor.

You can do well in life. Yeah if you simply come out in the middle of the class are going to do well well in life but being at the very bottom of a class any class is a problem and too many of our minority students end up at the bottom of the class on this very significant Thomas soul obviously knows what he's talking about has been a great voice on these issues, but there is a lot more to talk about will come back with Prof. Dale Harriet, a dubious expediency is the name of the book she's edited for listening to Janet my for today will be right back. This is Janet Mefford on a 100 day in Ethiopia Africa. Hundreds gathered for Sunday worship outdoors, and some walked in our to be there afterward 30-year-old caveman frantically copied Scriptures from an old Bible to a piece of paper. Then his face turned sad as he close the Bible and handed it back to its owner, one of only a few in that church of hundreds to have a Bible you see came and loves the Lord leads his family and his faithful at Sunday worship, but he's never read a single verse in his own Bible because Bibles are very difficult to obtain, where he lives with our way through the ministry of Bible league international you can send God's word to a new believer in Africa.

Five dollars sends one Bible $50 sends 10 call 800 yes word 800 YESWO RD 800 yes word or there's a banner to click@janetmefford.com. Thank you. Hi this is Janet my for if you're in need of a new healthcare program but you miss the open enrollment deadline in December. It's not too late. Special enrollment period is taking place now through August 15.

During this time you can enroll in the healthcare program of your choice without the need for a qualifying event. This means you can now enroll in a healthcare sharing program from liberty Hill share with memberships for individuals, couples and families. You can find a variety of options to best of your medical needs.

Plus, you really can choose the doctor and hospital of your choice. Best of all the membership options start for as low as $199 a month more than 200,000 Americans trust liberty healthcare for their healthcare needs. What are you waiting for discover more about the power of sharing@libertyhealthcare.org/GMT today more information call 855-585-4237 855-585-4237 or liberty help share.org/GMT liberty healthcare.org/GMT you're listening to Joe Mefford today. You welcome back. How does race actually racial preferences, damage, higher education, a dubious expediency is the new book explaining all of this edited by Prof. Dale Harriet to his law professor at the University of San Diego and as long been involved on this whole issue of racially-based preferences and higher education. And you know Galen were talking about some of the problems that are created when you have race-based preferences. It probably goes a long way to explain why these poles are what they are, that so many Americans say that now, this is not right and we we want to have everybody in America succeed and we don't want anybody but held back because of their race in any sense, but there are problems that are created when you start embracing racial preferences. Now another thing that you mentioned and I know this is mentioned in the book John Ellis is one of the people who writes an article in your book who is graduate Dean at the University of California Santa Cruz.

He talks about the fact that they these preferences have ended up damaging free expression and affecting curriculum and even increasing the issue of grade inflation. What about some of those problems on the practical level, just what students experience as they're going through college.

Because of these preferences.

Oh boy yeah well grade inflation is the real problem on campus and it has been for decades now and it is partly driven by rate preferential admission policy and out nobody of goodwill wanted to see minority students getting a bad grade simply because they were given preferential treatment in admissions and now nobody wants to admit that the and of this is not working out the way they hoped it would. And so grade inflation has marched on the end in colleges and universities for the last several decades on another aspect of this that I think is hugely important and pure Christian who is my colleague on the commission on civil rights write about it in the book and that is campus separatism enough these days. If you go to a college campus.

You will often see dormitories that are that are actually based on on racial studies of one sort or another. In theory, these storms are open to everyone. However, when you open a door menu say well this is this is for the study of African-American culture. What happens in reality is that that dormitory that is lived in exclusively or almost exclusively by people of the particular race that it's devoted to.

We have no special graduation ceremony based on race. We have special student lounges based on race, know the argument here is that we need to provide safe space. Well it's all nonsense. We should be trying to integrate colleges and universities.

The whole point of rate preferential admissions policies was that we need to integrate all minorities into you know that the mainstream and yet and yet what happens instead is this campus separatism and and peak personnel argues against that an essay on he contributed to the book and it hugely important issue. We cannot go on separating people by rate. In this way, and yet he admission policies telegraphed to the students.

What's most important about you with your mates. That's why we let you win so you should be surprised under the circumstances that students then demand that the separate and college administrators have not been willing to stand up to it.

They allow it, and then they turn around and argue we need based preferential admissions in order to better integrate in all our our country and yet we do in the opposite giving the exact opposite separating people by rate it's going backwards wasn't the 60s about ending segregation. A lot of people have made these observations, that is, we've seen the rise of woke nests in this leftist activism and trying to raise pain and call people white supremacists even though they don't have a shred of supremacy or racism in them.

They were going backwards.

Now back to the 60s. I mean what what is the sense in doing this, you're exactly right that but were doing and that's why we need to get back to the principal on race discrimination of any kind on is wrong.

Do we need to be doing a better job of integrating our community including our campus community were doing just the opposite of the more the more we engage in rate preferential admissions, the more it's going to be impossible to achieve the kind of integration that I think it'll almost all Americans want exactly what know what is happened. You obviously have been very involved. As we mentioned before in California. What is happened in states in which these race preferential admissions has been outlawed, especially in California where you are well in California. You know the University of the state universities that are affected have tried very very hard to get proposition 209 repealed. They had failed in that they also try to get around it as best they can, but they can't do it entirely what they can do under the law is to give preferential treatment in a little thumb on the scale, in favor of people who come from from disadvantaged backgrounds and there's nothing illegal about saying we are going to give a little bit of a preference to people who are raised by by poor families in a legal and that's one thing that my coeditor, and I my coeditor as is my mentor child who is also here on the faculty at the University of San Diego on my more weary of of of that kind of preferential treatment and I am we both agree that it that the Lord preference.

It's going to have the same mismatch problem that racial preferences have racial preferences tend not to be small. They tend to be very, very large, and the University California when it gives preferences based on socioeconomic and no disadvantage. It tends to be small because otherwise it doesn't get them what they want, but what they really want is racial diversity that what they really want. This is to get rid of proposition 209 but when they do it based on disadvantage. There are a lot of of disadvantage whites disadvantage Asians on and out in the state of California as well on the end.

So the company to preference. I think were talking about was socioeconomic class have not gotten out of hand the way raised it so that that's a good thing right after proposition 209 Pat, we had basically a miracle here in California and that is suddenly suddenly African-American students were doing much much better at the University of California here at the University of California at San Diego, which is just up the road from where I am prior to prop 209. They had had only one African-American honor student on out of out of it. I don't member the exact number right now to top my head but it was a very, very, very, no poor performance on but right after prop 209 went into effect. Suddenly, African-American students were getting honors at basically the same rate as white nations did and the number of of African-American students who were in no performing poorly. That is, that it is getting getting low grades in a basically disappeared. It became about the same rate as white nations so it was a giant success story.

A economist at Duke University has studied the University of California, and if graduation rates post prop 209 more carefully and found that yeah suddenly African-American students were patiently doing as well as everyone else they were getting. You know they were graduating at rates that were much higher than what they were prior to prop 209, when California was simply giving huge preferences, that is grace. But you would think if people were trying to be fair-minded about it that they would look at those numbers and say, well, let's not push for affirmative action like we used to, because clearly that wasn't the answer. And yet the left in California doesn't seem to be going down that road.

They seem to want to go back where they were, for reasons known only to them. I guess it's just activist mindsets that that ails them. Yeah, I think that's right.

It activist mindsets. The notion that you know they'd been pushing for this for years and when evidence comes up, that it's not doing the good that they're hoping that it would do they just ignore it yeah and handing out that the tragedy well it is what you see this issue headed in an age like ours. That's increasingly yelling about racial injustice and fixing inequities in the end of the systemic racism problem at all. This woke nests what what is likely to occur at our universities. Do you think regarding race-based preferences in the environment that were heading into which, again, as we discussed before.

Seems to be going backwards yet to be going backwards, but I kind of optimistic right now may be that crazy of me but I think we've bottomed out and I think people are starting to push it back to me for goodness sake.

That's why my men and I wanted to edit this this book, we saw that it was becoming increasingly difficult for people even to talk about this issue so we thought will be gone. We had to turn this around.

I got a start talking about it but you know with the defeat of prop 16 here in California we we understood that yeah the American people are on our side on this issue and I think a lot of people get it they understand how destructive the these preferences have been and I think were starting to see things turn around were starting to see people say hey you know we do need to speak up and with any luck, the Supreme Court is going to see that and they are going to take on the Harvard case and my guess is they won't issue a a a an opinion that absolutely, positively, you know, we are turning this around they'll do it bit by bit and in hope. I am waking up every morning and hoping you knows that the Supreme Court does take that case I think it will take the judiciary to help a bit to make this happen that I am. I am optimistic that people are getting sick and tired of the notion that that everything is racism and that the principle that race discrimination is wrong is itself racist. Of course it's not racist and it's something that we need to get back to and we can allow herself to be bullied. Absolutely. And like you say the real conflict in all of this is about the means of racial integration of the rightness of racial integration, which I think everybody wants an NSF yeah that's such a good point that you make a dubious expediency professor Gail Harriet with us. Thank you so much Gail is great to have your wonderful buck thank you Janet take care you listening to Janet today. This archived broadcast of Janet my for today is brought to you by Liberty health, share liberty, health share is a nonprofit healthcare sharing ministry that allows you to control and manage your own healthcare and choose any doctor or hospital in the nation. If your freedom loving American looking for contract free healthcare call now 855-585-4237 or go to liberty, health share.org/GMT for more information liberty health chair.org/GMT today. Here's your host Joe for this is interesting coming from Breitbart, the White House is reportedly actively looking to dump Dr. Anthony Ouchi amid all of his recent flip-flopping, and these newly released emails showing further contradictions on the pandemic response. That's quite interesting that's coming from Jack Persaud Bianco is with the trump administration. They are apparently in the Biden White House discussing an exit strategy for the highest-paid federal employee whom Democrats have praised is a truth teller. Well it's gonna be a little difficult to do now that we have seen some of these emails now that we have seen his performance in front of Congress, and Sen. Rand Paul's grilling of Dr. Fauci revealing that the guy can't tell the truth there's a lot on that guy and he goes back to the show that I did not too long ago all about this gain of function research and Nicholas Wade's piece on medium the former New York Times science reporter pointing directly to the fact that yes, this was a lab leak. That's where the coronavirus came from and that in fact filed.

She had a role in funding the bad lady who likely created the coronavirus was sealed records. By the way is we've talked about before, but will we know what's going on and Rand Paul actually has accused Dr. Fauci of perjuring himself, so little too late to do the right thing.

Now I don't know any. At what point the pandemic is essentially over. When we have masks being dropped and we have some new people vaccinated in life is getting back to normal now. They're going to fire him, why did you fire him a couple weeks in that would've been a better move.

It really does grieve me that Pres. Trump didn't do a better job sniffing these people out and I feel form. I'm not trying to criticize into severely because nobody really knew what was going on. Initially, we were all kind of flying blind, I can only imagine what it was like to be the president of the United States in early 2020 when you try to get a handle on the scope of the problem and what you do and we've never been in this situation before so I give him some grace, but boy, looking back, I sure wish the trump had gotten rid of both Ouchi and Burks the scarf where so here is the deal on these released emails again. Breitbart and some other outlets are reporting on this.

This was something that Dr. Fauci replied to Sylvia Burwell, president of American University and former US Health and Human Services Sec. This was on February 5, 2020 and the Washington Post reported about this by the way this all came about because there was an FOI request freedom of information request getting all of these emails showing what found she was doing on email during the early days of the pandemic and this is what he said to Sylvia Burwell this is Ouchi. He said masks are really for infected people to prevent them from spreading infection to people who are not infected rather than protecting uninfected people from acquiring infections. That's funny. The typical mask you buy in the drugstore is not really effective in keeping out virus which is small enough to pass through the material. It might however provide some slight benefit in keeping out gross droplets. If someone coughs or sneezes on you. I do not recommend that you wear a mask, particularly since you are going to be a very low risk location on what that means. Your instincts are correct, money is best spent on medical countermeasures such as diagnostics and vaccines, so there he is. It's the same thing that he basically said in March 2020 on 60 minutes. At that time. He said there's no reason to be walking around with a mask when you're in the middle of an outbreak wearing a mask might make people feel a little bit better and it might even block a droplet, but it's not providing the perfect protection that people think that it there it is. And often their unintended consequences. People keep fiddling with the mask and they keep touching their face. Now outlets like CNN later reported off Ouchi changed his mind. It was just a mistake to not recommend that people wear a mask but you know what it it's it's ridiculous because that's not really the full story here. What happen was found. She was same. Yeah, you don't really need a mask and then he went all in on masks. He went all in on masks so one way or another. He was lying, and in fact what were reading here in this email from Dr. fact sheet to Sylvia Burwell. He was telling the truth because we've already played the audio of a lot of these government videos such as OSHA that already said the same thing if you're wearing one of those little blue masks with white on the other side. That's not can it prevent you from getting covert, 19 because the size of the holes is bigger than the virus so the virus is not to be stopped by those masks found. She was the same the same thing. And the question is why in the world as the highest-paid employee and the Cova 19 Guru didn't you stick to your guns and say we shouldn't have mask mandates because they're not gonna do any good.

And if you are uninfected you not can be prevented from catching code 19 by wearing a mask. There's no reason to have uninfected people walking around with masks. Why did he stick to that. Why didn't he stick to that he could've had a huge effect, especially given the degree to which the left warships Sam and everything that comes out of his mouth such that they're putting Fauci dolls on their shelves and filming themselves on zoom and patting themselves on the back for being so awesome that they would have a Fauci doll. If Ouchi had stuck to the truth.

Then you would've had all these stupid mask mandates and people thrown off airplanes, two-year-olds being thrown off airplanes because they wouldn't keep their masks on and it would've taken away any sort of rationalization for the Biden administration who impose a mask, mandates, or be seen as violating federal law.

When you go on an airplane even know even now here we are in the state of Texas. We don't have mask mandates anymore. You have businesses theoretically who are able to make their own decisions.

In that regard, but nobody's wearing masks anymore. Are we going to stores nobody's wearing masks.

None of the stores that have previously required masks are requiring them anymore. I can't speak for the rest of the country, but that's how it is in the state of Texas. Now we could have avoided all this mask nonsense.

If Ouchi had been honest, it's just maddening. They were effective but outgo had everybody should wear mask unbelievable. And of course he was talking in these emails about other things as well. The Federalist talks about a Dr. Anthony if Ouchi knew about US funding for the gain of function research occurring at the Wuhan lab in China, but downplayed its role in the Cova 19 pandemic new email show found. She recently denied that specific research was used by the overseas virology Institute or funded by him again denied it, but it wasn't true in emails acquired by Buzz feed news.

Ouchi conversed with NIH principal Deputy Director Hugh Auch and Klos in a conversation labeled important about an article detailing the gain of function research occurring in Wuhan through the Wuhan virology Institute and give some of the details of that particular email but this is kinda crazy gain of function research. I thought he said he wasn't into gain of function research is that what he told Sen. Paul, the US government. They report band funding for the gain of function research in 2014, we told you about that, but the Wuhan Institute of virology was still operating and conducting the controversy of research using US taxpayer dollars. This funding was funneled on scrutinized to the Eagle health alliance by the NEA, led by if Ouchi to propel Wuhan studies on bad coronavirus is. It is just a you get so upset. Even reading this and allowed NIAID to hide research that they said didn't meet the standard for gain of function from the potential pandemic pathogens control and oversight framework review board. I realize this is a lot of wording if Ouchi previously defended gain of function research in 2012 and said it might be worth it even if it caused a pandemic. I mean can you even wrap your head around the possibilities here. I don't know about you but I have questions. I have a lot of questions. I have a lot of questions that haven't been asked publicly that I know of, but probably are being asked privately in the wordplay endemic comes to mind. Do you know what I'm saying play endemic. Perhaps it was planned while they did plan to try to get to the bottom of the coronavirus issue by putting together this coronavirus in the Wuhan Institute of virology, which was funded this gain of function research was funded through another person, Peter sick, who in fact was one of the people tasked with being on the investigative force looking into whether or not there was a lab leak and then was I Conan no Lampley. Yeah, that's good to put the fox in charge of the henhouse as well. That's a really good move US government know it shouldn't be the case that found she is merely fired. It should be the case that if Ouchi is fully investigated and Francis Collins as well.

Francis Collins as well.

Will it ever happen under a Democrat administration completely unlikely, but I hope that Sen. Paul and other Republican lawmakers like him will not let this go is it's not just about the fact that he was putting out outrageous emails. It's the fact that all roads are pointing to the fact that he didn't tell the truth at all on some major things.

Think of all the people of die do this pandemic. It's maddening for you to take a break will be right back don't go away. Janet met for today is proud to partner with pre-born to help save babies lives.

My name is Dan Steiner and I'm the president of prewar ultrasound truly is a game changer when a mom comes into pregnancy center under pressure to abort her child. Perhaps the day is gone, perhaps her mother is pressuring her most of the time in her heart she doesn't want to abort what she needs is something that will give her the strength to choose life against the pressures that are forcing her to consider abortion. Thus, the ultrasound she hears her baby's heartbeat and sees that baby on ultrasound. Everything's different. We can join us in saving babies lives pre-born funds. Pregnancy centers across the nation so they can offer free ultrasounds to women in crisis pregnancies. Ultrasound is a game changer because one abortion minded women actually see their babies in their wombs for themselves. 80% of the time they choose life, would you please join us at Janet met today to support the ministry of pre-born for $140 you can provide five free ultrasounds to women in crisis pregnancies. One ultrasound is just $28 and every gift helps to donate please call now 855402, baby.

That's 855-402-2229 or there's a banner to click@janetmetfor.com. All gifts are tax-deductible, and 100% of your gift goes directly toward saving babies, you can get involved and you can help save a life for a gift of $140.05 free ultrasounds will be offered to women in crisis pregnancies.

Let's do more than talk about abortion. Let's save some lives. Please call now with your gift. 855402, baby. That's 855402 baby 855-402-2229 or there's a banner to click@janetmetfor.com you're listening to Joe Wood River today though. Joe writes well, as I have previously told you we have the resignation that is to spread across evangelicalism like wildfire in the last few weeks and that is the resignation of Dr. Russell Moore from the ethics and religious liberty commission at the Southern Baptist convention, and I wish he had a shorter title. Every time I say that I feel like I'm losing brain cells, but at any rate he resigned. He's leaving he's going Christianity today he's gonna become a public theologian, I say it's perfect for you Russell, that is the perfect place for you. You just enjoy those progressives and you just knock yourself out. Oh and by the way he's leaving the SBC.

This is from a new story via religion news service he's moved on personally attending a Tennessee church that is not affiliated with the Southern Baptist convention, TJ Timms, who is the lead pastor of a manual. Nashville announced on social media this week. That war is now the church's minister in residence. He said in a video we want to be a home base for Dr. Moore and his family as he serves the body of Christ at large body of Christ at large doesn't want to be served by Ron Russell Moore, are we locked it. I mean I guess you could just turn them off. It's like these people never just go away. What is it with it. It's kinda like I used to say about some of these big scandals that happen in the church.

They never go away. They just couldn't bide their time and then they resurface their like you know you go first coming out of the golf holes or something like well there. He is okay is going back down up up areas. Again, this is what goes on in Christendom.

You just you can never just retire and go over and work at Home Depot or something. You always have to find another place in ministry and talk about this was your lifelong dream to work at fill in the blank whatever it happens to be, so he's off the SBC. No surprise there. But I'll tell you what is really crazy and that is another RN a story that's come out religion news service. What is likely favorites because they're so darn liberal over there and pro-gay, and everything else. Religion news service has this headline Russell Moore to ER LC trustees. They want me to live in psychological terror. Yeah, in February 2020, the president of the ER, LC, Russell Moore defended himself after a second task force was mounted to investigate complaints against them in man this thing is long and boring it's just so long and boring its way you can tell it's written by somebody who spent too much time in academia. Chest rambles on and on and on and on and the bottom line is Russell Moore's painting himself is just one long victim.

By the way, a leaked email will you think leaked the email to RNS or leaked it to somebody who leaked it to earn as let's see home. Let me think for a moment, have a motivation to Lincoln. I'm a victim letter to RNS who could possibly have come up with that idea. I don't know it's die flummoxed.

I've no clue at all whom I have any sort of motivation to leak a letter a private email to religion news service shortly after leaving what you have that motivation had scratch had scratch okay so he's rambling on about all of his complaints and he talks about why this is one portion of it, I will not bore you with this long ridiculous email but he talks about one of the absolutely draining and unrelenting issues that he's had to deal with is head of the ER LC is that of racial reconciliation. This is what he writes. My family and I have faced constant threats from white nationalists and white supremacists for laughing, but I don't believe this for a minute, including within our convention really are there a lot of white nationalists and white supremacists of the Ku Klux Klan variety running around the Southern Baptist convention sending threats to Russell Moore, Adam Byatt, but maybe I tell you why because people like Russell Moore throw around the term white nationalist to mean trump voters and and do I really believe that trump voters are threatening him like of the physical violence variety.

I don't believe that either. I mean, maybe there's one not urgent or two but I don't believe that any decent Southern Baptist who voted for Tromp is sending him threats real threats that that completely concern him. Maybe I'm too cynical. I mean, I hope he's not getting threats. I don't want to get actual threats.

But when you're talking about white nationalists and white supremacist, and you see how the left constantly uses those same terms to mean rank-and-file normal people who just happened to vote for a Republican in the last election, then you've emptied those ridiculously loaded terms into it. To an extent where we don't even believe them when he says some of them have been involved in neo-Confederate activities going back for years, what's a neo-Confederate activity.

Did they do like Civil War reenactments were they involved in. I don't know working in a museum honoring those Civil War generals idea. Who knows you not you're supposed to read into this all kinds of horrors insert sharp intake of breath here. People who were involved in neo-Confederate activities have been threatening Russell Moore. He doesn't name names. Of course some are involved with groups he says funded by white nationalist nativist organizations. What is that me know some of them have just expressed raw racist sentiment behind closed doors. What is wrong racist sentiment they want to deflect the issue to arcane discussions that people do not understand such as critical race theory arcane discussions. The people don't understand.

No Russell we understand critical race theory just fine. What we don't understand is why you and your cronies. The liberal elites of the SBC continue to lie about the fact that critical race theory has absolutely no place in the SBC we can point to all sorts of instances and videos people on video espousing critical race theory even as you guys work really hard to scrub the videos off the Internet or at least I know Al Mohler did at one point he says there is no Southern Baptist that I know of any ethnicity who is motivated by any critical theory, but by the text of Ephesians in Galatians and Romans the gospel themselves. The framework of Revelation yet right okay sure Russell from the very beginning of my service. He says I have been attacked with the most vicious guerrilla tactics on such matters and have been told to be quiet about this, by others. You been attacked in a guerrilla warfare way about critical race theory. Nobody was talking about. Critical race theory back in 2014, Dr. Moore. I was there at the beginning of your tenure.

Nobody was talking about. Critical race theory, much less launching guerrilla tactics against you.

He says one SBC leader who is at the forefront of these, behind closed doors, assaults, assaults had already rip me to shreds verbally for saying in 2011 that the Southern Baptist convention should elect an African-American president.

Why would anybody shred you verbally for St. see I don't believe that either. I think there's no context here. It's kinda like Megan Marcos Lam of the royal family and saying you know Archie my son was denied the Prince title because they're a bunch of races so that it comes out that know it's because of the royal family succession line that Archie doesn't have a title has nothing to do with whether or not his mother is half black, so I I'm just taken this with a big grain of salt. Oh, and then he says another SBC leader use constant pressure against me in protest of our hiring of Daniel Darling and truly a new bell in 2013 and at the time it was said that they didn't have adequate Southern Baptist backgrounds. When I answered this man's concerns to his face. He said I was really just concerned about that black girl whether she's an egalitarian when I asked what possibly could lead him to think that a woman who is written complementarily. Articles for complementarity websites was an egalitarian, he responded a lot of those black girls are the same leader also let me have it will close this sadness. Then he complains that he's called a liberal people call me a liberal.

I believe in the inerrancy of Scripture in the authority of Scripture. I've spent my life defending such concepts as the exclusivity of Christ for salvation right but see were focused on what you did that has nothing to do with the Bible were focused on what you actually do, not what you profess because that's what you do when you're trying to discern whether or not somebody is problem so he's denying he's a liberal. Here he then goes on to say oh you know I care about social justice, but I don't really believe in social justice and I love bigots you do you love bigots. Then he says here's the pattern. His experience in the SBC find a way to investigate means secret so the Southern Baptist do not hear what goes on in those rooms, you mean like your backdoor meeting with gay activists in 2014 that secret backdoor meeting because you've never told anybody in the Southern Baptist convention publicly what you discussed with gay activists in 2014 are you now suddenly against secret meetings, I guess so.

Then he says he's been charged with not playing enough to the Bubbas and the rednecks they pay the bills.

He says I don't think we have Bubbas and rednecks. I find such lawyers offensive interrogatory. Okay this is the same guy who came on board and I written all about this.

This is the same guy who came on board and started likening conservatives to a caricature of Elmer Gantry meets Yosemite Sam, but he's the man who's gonna stand up against offensive interrogatory slurs I just you know want move on to your non-SBC church Dr. Moore. We don't wish you well. I just want to congratulate you on finally finding the right home for yourself with the progressives and the ridiculous critical race theory adherence over Christianity to have a good time. Leave it at that. Pray for the SBC. Thanks for reading with us. We gotta go will see you next time though,


Get The Truth Mobile App and Listen to your Favorite Station Anytime