Saturday • November 8 • 2025
Vol.XVII • No.XLV
Manchester, N.H.
Olympic gold medalist Caster Semenya has set a new standard for small talk at meetings, banquets, weddings, or any gathering where you might encounter women you’ve never met before. And I’m sure it’s likely to catch on as quickly as the culture that justifies it.
Do you have testicles?
Maybe don’t lead with that one. I don’t think it is ready to be the ice-breaker opening, certainly not as a pickup line, unless you are looking for women with testicles, and I’m thinking with rare exceptions, you may not need to ask. But a growing number of women have them, testicles, and it’s not their fault. It is something with which they have to contend while robbing women without testicles – at least in competitive sports – of scholarships, opportunities, and even awards.
And none of that is their fault.
It is also unfair to judge them or limit them from competing with scrotum-less women. It is not (for example) Caster Semenya’s fault that “she” was born with testicles or the levels of testosterone they afford “her” or other “women” burdened with the deformity. But Athletic associations and national and international courts have noticed the difference and chosen to have a say in whether that “deformity” does, in fact, matter.
[A] Swiss court upheld 2018 regulations from the IAAF, the track-and-field world governing body now named World Athletics, barring Semenya and other athletes with “differences of sex development” (DSD) from running in certain races, including the 800-m, unless they lowered their testosterone levels to a certain threshold via medical intervention. Semenya refused, and she’s continued to fight the regulations.
Why would they step in?
On June 30, 2019, South African runner Caster Semenya—already a three-time world champ and two-time Olympic gold medalist in the 800-m—lined up at the starting line at Stanford University, to roars from the American crowd. She would win the prestigious Prefontaine Classic, with a time of 1 min. 55.70 sec., the fastest 800-m time ever run on American soil. It was her 31rd straight victory in the 800-m. Fans crowded around a fence after it was over to voice their appreciation for the superstar.
Caster’s testicles would appear to provide an advantage against textile-less women in – at the very least – the 800 meter, and after 31 consecutive victories, you’d be right to ask why women would even compete in this category. Sorry, I mean women without testicles. And so we see the problem. While Caster may be of the opinion that testicles don’t make him less of a woman, they do appear to make him a better athlete than women who lack them, sort of like a performance-enhancing drug.
Governing bodies have a vested interest in regulating the use of performance-enhancing drugs even when they are not your fault. As such – at least in the case of the IAAF – women with testicles will need to compete against other “equally impaired” individuals whether they identify as women or not.
By”equipment” advantage, if you like, to achieve the parity missing from, say, the women’s 800 meters.
The alternative is, of course, a more balanced women’s field in which they all have testicles, but then what about the women without them? What happens to their rights? Is this the new glass ceiling? The foundation of second-class citizenship, at least in contests of sport. And who will step up to defend them from this new discrimination?
And why did the women’s rights movement, after finally achieving most if not all of their aims, decide to toss women under the equipment bus?
“My testicles don’t make me less of a woman” – Caster Semenya
Of course, this outlandish statement went totally unchallenged this morning
Semenya is not a woman with high testosterone levels. He is a male with normal testosterone levels. pic.twitter.com/LKhkP7SnlN
— Riley Gaines (@Riley_Gaines_) November 7, 2023
The post Night Cap: Women’s Olympic Gold Medalist says, “Testicles … Don’t Make Me Less a Woman” appeared first on Granite Grok.
In open defiance of several United States Supreme Court rulings on gun ownership, Illinois has enacted a ban on certain kinds of commonly owned firearms and has required owners of other kinds of commonly owned firearms to register them with the state.
So far, compliance with the registration requirement seems to be well under 1%. That’s the good news.
The bad news is that if you refuse to comply and you get caught the first time, that’s a misdemeanor, but the second time it’s a felony. Which means you lose1 your right to own any kind of gun.
In other words, if the government says you have to register your guns, and you decide that it has no authority to do so, you are no longer law-abiding. You are a felon — guilty of the ‘crime’ of believing that the federal constitution actually means what it says.
So according to the government — and for that matter, according to the NRA and the vast majority of ‘gun rights supporters’ that I’ve met — you can’t have guns.
And even when the Supreme Court gets around to striking down that law in a few years, your felony conviction will still stand. So unless you have a pile of money and several years to devote to having it overturned, that won’t be of much help to you.
It’s time for people who think that only ‘law-abiding Americans’ have the right to keep and bear arms to rethink that position, which is what allows laws like this to exist in the first place.
At the very least, simply refusing to be disarmed (or to give the government the information it would need later to disarm you) shouldn’t be grounds for disarming you. That’s the kind of thing that we should be reading about only in novels like Catch-22 and not in our law books.
¹ To be more precise, you don’t actually lose the right, because it is inalienable, which means it can’t be taken from you or even surrendered voluntarily. If you’re a person, you have the right to self-defense and to own the tools necessary for self-defense. But the state will punish you for trying to exercise that right.
The post Catch-223? appeared first on Granite Grok.
If you shop at convenience stores, you may have noticed that checking for proof of age during tobacco & alcohol purchases has quietly moved from viewing the customer’s driver’s license to electronically scanning our licenses. I first noticed this at Circle K stores and then found the same practice in others.
Our privacy is once again under attack in a seemingly “small” way, but I became alarmed enough to dive into the legality.
A trusted State Rep pointed me to state law RSA 263:12. The last section of this law prohibits the scanning of my driver’s license with all of my personal information on it without my consent (with an exception for pawnbrokers, scrap metal dealers, and other secondhand dealers).
RSA 263:12 states in part,
It shall be a misdemeanor for any person to:
I filed a complaint with the NH Attorney General’s office that the law – as well as my Constitutional Right to privacy – was violated. The response I received confirmed my concern as I was pointed to the phrase in RSA 263:12 X “unless authorized by the department.”
The “Department” referred to in RSA 263:12 is the NH Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), which is run by unelected bureaucrats and political appointees free to push their political ideologies with apparently no desire by the NH Department of Justice to provide any oversight or enforcement.
Below is how The Department of Motor Vehicles and the NH Attorney General’s office washed their hands of their responsibilities to monitor and safely regulate who can access, scan, and store our personal data. They closed the case in typical Jedi Mind Trick fashion, inferring “there was nothing to see here” – but as you will see, can not back up their finding of no wrongdoing.
The Attorney General’s office identified DMV “rule” Saf-C 5606.05 which was written by those ideological, political appointees in the DMV, to unconstitutionally violate our Right to privacy. Therefore, I was told that Circle K was “authorized” (by those appointed ideologues) to scan my license electronically, and the case was closed.
DMV rule Saf-C 5606.05 states:
(a) Notwithstanding any rule to the contrary, the department authorizes the scanning of personal information from any license in any electronic form or format so long as all the following conditions are met:
(1) The equipment used to scan such personal information does not visibly identify any personal information other than driver license number and name;
(2) The equipment used to scan personal information does not retain, store, or transfer any personal information, other than driver license number and name, for any period of time; and
(3) The equipment used to scan personal information does not store any personal information, other than driver license number and name, in a central repository disaster recovery central repository, such as a cold site or hot site, whether on-site or in a remote location.
So, I asked the AG’s office three simple questions:
Before closing the case, did you confirm the following:
It appears they did not.
Instead of answering my questions, they told me I had to talk with the DMV – but could not/would not give me a contact at “The Department.” I found that to be a strange response from an investigative body that is tasked with enforcing the law based on facts.
How could the AG’s office close the case and not have answers to the very pertinent questions I raised? Did Circle K violate the law or not?
Stay tuned…
The post Are Convenience Stores Violating Your Privacy? appeared first on Granite Grok.
Aaron Day is running for President, but not to win. He is on a mission to increase awareness about a looming issue he believes will come to the fore before November 2024, and it could mean the end of liberty in America as we know it.
I’ve known Aaron for a number of years in various capacities as a candidate for office, grassroots activist, and in a number of roles in between. He recently wrote a book and is traveling around the country talking to audiences, other Presidential candidates, Senators, and others about the threat of digital currency and how close we actually are to having one.
Note: The podcast is presented as is. The working concept is five questions, uncut. The video was recorded on Riverside FM and was not altered or edited. Length will depend on the answers, but the target is 10-15 minutes. This maiden voyage is a few minutes longer, but as noted, these will not be edited.
Here is my interview with Aaron Day. [Watch it on YouTube, Rumble, Facebook, or GAB.]
The post Watch: Five Questions with Presidential Candidate Aaron Day appeared first on Granite Grok.
Almost eighty years ago, Margaret Scoggin, a librarian at the New York Public Library, made an odd choice. As one of the founders of the NYPL children’s branch in the early 1940s, Scoggin had been contributing a column to Library Journal called “Books for Older Boys and Girls.” In 1944, she inexplicably decided that her articles should instead be published under the title “Books for Young Adults.”
This decision catapulted the group of children for whom she was recommending books into an age bracket to which they did not actually belong. It is to Miss Scoggin, therefore, who first coined the term “young adult,” that we owe the existence of this illogical category used only by librarians and publishers to promote books for readers aged twelve and up who are actually still children.
The American Library Association arbitrarily defines a “young adult” as a library patron between the ages of twelve and eighteen. This category does not only apply to public library patrons but also includes middle and high school students who use their school libraries. Legally, however, adulthood is not attained until a person turns eighteen, so the youngest adult cannot possibly be younger than eighteen years old. The age at which an individual becomes an adult also called the “age of majority,” is set at eighteen years in forty-seven states (in Alabama, Nebraska, and Mississippi, you have to be even older).
Medically, adulthood is similarly defined. The American Medical Association and the National Institutes of Health only consider those who are eighteen and older to be adults; 13 to 17-year-olds are categorized as “adolescents.” Considering these standards, “young adult” emerges as an illogical term. “Pre-adults,” odd as it sounds, would make more sense, being similar to the term “preteen,” which is used, according to Merriam-Webster, to designate a child younger than thirteen. (The trendy word “tween” is also frequently used in libraries to specify children between young childhood and adolescence, generally ages 8-12.)
So, what explains this push by librarians and publishers to erroneously refer to children as adults? Is it merely an innocuous marketing technique, or is the motivation behind it more insidious? Some more library history may help to answer this question. Where Scoggin got the notion to suddenly refer to older children as young adults is unclear, but in speculating about her reasons for suggesting this change, a look at the influences upon her, including her educational background might shed some light on this mystery.
In the 1940s, Scoggin attended Columbia University’s School of Library Service, the first “library school” established in the United States. Two decades earlier, Columbia University had become the epicenter of Communist intellectual activity in the United States led by Frankfurt School intellectuals who relocated there from Germany. It is well documented that Columbia University’s Teachers College and other departments at this institution of “higher education” were strongly influenced by Communist ideology at this time, so it is likely that the library school was similarly affected.
In the past year, the political infiltration of the American Library Association has become quite obvious as self-proclaimed Marxist Emily Drabinski has taken over the leadership of the organization. Considering the origins of training programs for librarians, however, the roots of ALA’s ideological takeover may likely be traced back to the time of Margaret Scoggin.
Manhattan Institute Senior Fellow Chris Rufo recently appeared on Fox’s Jesse Watters Primetime. In the beginning of the segment, “Dirty Books Are Being Used to Advance the Marxist Dream,” a clip was shown of Deborah Caldwell-Stone, Director of ALA’s “Office for Intellectual Freedom,” admitting to a “sustained messaging” program to “reframe” and “promote” inappropriate books on sexual themes as “diverse materials …that are about inclusion and fairness.” When asked why the ALA is pushing this agenda, Rufo explained, “The goal of Marxist political leaders since the beginning was always to abolish the nuclear family,” an institution which they consider one of the “impediments to the revolution,” and to have kids reject “notions of ‘heteropatriarchy’” to “advance the revolution” and “to dissolve the moral notions of children and their families.”
One of the goals of Marxism, as Rufo suggests, is to eliminate parental authority so that children become mere wards of the state. The sooner children are not under the control of their parents, the sooner they will be more easily controlled by the government. Indeed, Karl Marx called for the abolition of the family in The Communist Manifesto because he believed that children were being exploited by their parents. Considering its current agenda, the values of the American Library Association appear to align with Marx, and its organizational structure supports its agenda.
Just as there is a separate section in most public libraries designated as “young adult,” the American Library Association has a distinct branch called the Young Adults Library Services Association (YALSA). It should be no big surprise that Margaret Scoggin, thanks to her efforts to promote “young adult” literature, was appointed the first president of YALSA’s precursor, the Young Adult Services Division, which was founded in 1957. This organization was rebranded as YALSA in 1992 and continues its mission of influencing the publishing industry and libraries nationwide in accordance with its Marxist ideology.
YALSA’s recent award-winning books clearly reflect its woke agenda. Jason Reynolds is YALSA’s recipient of the 2023 Margaret A. Edwards Award, established in 1988, which “honors an author, as well as a specific body of his or her work, for significant and lasting contribution to young adult literature.” What was one of Reynolds’s “significant and lasting” contributions to YA literature?—a book he co-authored in 2020 with CRT-guru Ibram X. Kendi titled Stamped: Racism, Anti-racism, and You.
Meanwhile, the YALSA Printz Award is given to “a book that exemplifies literary excellence in young adult literature.” This year’s prize went to All My Rage by Sabaa Tahir, a novel based on a victim/oppressor worldview, which Kirkus Reviews praises for confronting “head-on the complicated realities of life in a world that is not designed for the oppressed to thrive in.” In Scout’s Honor, by Lily Anderson, one of the four honorable mention books in this category, “the cast displays an effervescent mix of racial and ethnic identities” (also from Kirkus Reviews), which certainly checks off the box for any ALA-award winning book requiring that its theme relates to racial or gender ideology.
In the latter category are the three other “honorable mention” books for the 2023 Printz Award. These include Icebreaker, featuring a gay romance between two hockey players, When the Angels Left the Old Country, in which, according to Kirkus Reviews, “Queerness and gender fluidity thread through both the human and supernatural characters,” and Queer Ducks (and Other Animals): The Natural World of Animal Sexuality, a book that “offers nature-based analogs for many types of human sexual orientation and gender identity” according to a BookPage review.
With all of the YALSA Printz-ward-winning books being geared towards racial and sexual themes, there is an obvious overemphasis on woke ideology in material recommended for readers aged 12-18 (ALA’s arbitrary definition of “young adult”).
As part of the obvious agenda of libraries towards getting woke literature into the hands of older children, ALA supports all efforts to allow this age group to access these books without parental knowledge. The ALA believes that children should be allowed to read books like Gender Queer and Lawn Boy without any parental consent, even if such books are shelved in the adult section of the library. Article VII of the ALA’s “Library Bill of Rights,” which was not added until 2019, eighty years after the original “Bill of Rights” was written, states that all people, no matter how old, “possess a right to privacy and confidentiality in their library use.”
This initially sounds like a good thing until you realize that it undermines those parental rights that should supersede it. ALA also “opposes all attempts to restrict access to library services, materials, and facilities based on the age of library users.” Most current state laws maintain the confidentiality of library records for all ages so that parents are not permitted to know what books their children are reading. The ALA is just fine with this situation and opposes all efforts to amend state law so that parents would be allowed to access their children’s library records.
Considering how strongly the ALA promotes woke literature to children, baffled parents are left wondering why. The answer is simple: the American Library Association is just following the Marxist dictate to undermine the authority of parents. That’s why libraries, predominantly managed by adherents to the ALA agenda, can’t just let kids be kids. To weaken the family, kids must become adults (or “young adults”) as soon as possible!
The cancer that had its roots decades ago has metastasized, and the only cure lies with parents and concerned citizens who vehemently reject the indoctrination supported by the American Library Association. They must support all efforts to have their towns and states cut financial ties with ALA, elect conservative library trustees who will reject ALA’s toxic agenda, and demand that their state representatives support legislation allowing parents to have access to their children’s library records.
The post Why Can’t They Just Let Kids Be Kids? appeared first on Granite Grok.
I’d call this developing, and that’s not just a photography play on words. Pictures have hit the internet taken by photographers who appear to have been embedded with Hamas militants as they invaded Isreal.
The AP, CNN, Reuters, and The New York Times used footage and photos from reporters embedded with Hamas terrorists during their slaughter of hundreds of Jews.
These Western media outlets then posted the photos in their coverage of this horrendous surprise attack on Israel.
AP reporter Hassan Eslaiah took photos and video while traveling with Hamas killers during the massacre. Hassan also provided photos to CNN.Yousef Masoud provided photos to The New York Times.
Hassan Eslaiah was seen with Hamas leader Yahya, Sinwar following the slaughter of Jews.
I don’t suppose we’ll ever learn how they knew to be there before the events of October 7th. You know, to capture the history of it.
On October 7, Hamas terrorists were not the only ones who documented the war crimes they had committed during their deadly rampage across southern Israel. Some of their atrocities were captured by Gaza-based photojournalists working for the Associated Press and Reuters news agencies whose early morning presence at the breached border area raises serious ethical questions.
What were they doing there so early on what would ordinarily have been a quiet Saturday morning? Was it coordinated with Hamas? Did the respectable wire services, which published their photos, approve of their presence inside enemy territory, together with the terrorist infiltrators? Did the photojournalists who freelance for other media, like CNN and The New York Times, notify these outlets? Judging from the pictures of lynching, kidnapping and storming of an Israeli kibbutz, it seems like the border has been breached not only physically, but also journalistically.
As ghoulish as that sounds – a word that keeps popping up to describe the premeditation media’s indifference to the death and destruction they signed up to record – what are the odds one or more of these “reporters” gets nominated for a Pulitzer?
The post ICYMI – The Media Had “Reporters” Embedded With Hamas as it Invaded Israel appeared first on Granite Grok.
The picture book “The Meaning of Pride,” targeted at ages 4 to 7, was prominently displayed in June in the Nashua Library’s children’s room. Six months before, Kristin Beck, who is featured in the book as a “transgender woman,” reclaimed his identity as a man.
Chris Beck, a decorated Navy SEAL, described the trauma and mental health problems he was facing when he was falsely sold transition as a cure by quack medical professionals at the Veterans Administration.
A year before, in August 2022, singer Demi Lovato, who had claimed a non-binary identity and is also featured in the book, said, “Recently, I’ve been feeling more feminine, and so I’ve adopted she/her again.” Demi has been very public about her struggles with mental health problems and drug addiction. If you have followed Demi over the years, it is pretty obvious that adopting a non-binary identity was a way for her to cope with these challenges, and it failed.
Both Demi Lovato and Chris Beck are people with serious mental health struggles who have detransitioned or desisted from a gender identity, and yet their gender transition is being sold to kids in “The Meaning of Pride” as something to emulate.
Related: The Truth Leaks Out: Dolls and Trucks Are for Everyone
It would be helpful if the library featured age-appropriate books about detransitioners and shared the pain and regret detransitioners deal with. I don’t expect we will be seeing those books in the library’s children’s room or the teen room because the American Library Association-approved book review journals won’t endorse them. It’s tragic that these important stories are being withheld from children.
I am delighted that the Nashua Library acquired “Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters,” which highlights the harm being done to kids and teens, as well as other gender-critical books for adults, but we need more books for the children’s and teen rooms that push back on the propaganda being fed kids and teens about gender ideology in books like “The Meaning of Pride.”
The post Gender Cult Propaganda in the Nashua Library Children’s Room appeared first on Granite Grok.
Polls have been soft for Biden since day one of his Presidency, but this weekend, they tanked, and every Democrat pundit either jumped or was pushed off the Biden Train. ABC News, not precisely a Right Wing tool, reported that 76% of Americans think the country is on the wrong track.
These people are on every media outlet proclaiming Biden as the man for these difficult times, but you also see them choke on their words like an Angora cat on a fur ball. It is pathetic and fake, and Americans see through the smokescreen.
Mark Levine, a former VA Democrat Delegate, appeared on The Ingraham Angle and embarrassed himself by fawning over Biden and Harris. He compared Biden to Truman and Reagan on the international stage and called Harris a positive for the ticket, and her accomplishments need to be highlighted. Good God, drug test this man before he utters another word. David Ignatius of the Washington Post says that Biden has to tap into the enthusiasm he has shown as a man of the center who can quickly bring this country back together. Still, if he fails, we are headed for a cataclysmic election. How far back in the Time Machine does he have to go to witness Biden’s enthusiasm? Maybe in the East Room when Obamacare passed, and Biden was caught on a hot mic telling Obama, “This is a big F$%^#%$ deal.”
And, of course, Stacey Abrams used her time with Jenn Psaki on Sunday to pull out the race card. Does she have any others in her deck? Abrams blamed the Republican racists, bigots, and misogynists for not giving Harris the credit she was due, and if she were a white man, people would be singing her praises. Well, she is not, and, honestly, she isn’t Black either. Her parents were from India and Jamaica, but it is politically advantageous for her to be Black. Okay. But even if we were all colorblind, she would still be the worst Vice President in our history.
How can a writer with the status of Ignatius jeopardize his credentials to ignore reality and elevate Biden to Mount Rushmore? Joe Biden has shown no ability to fulfill any of his campaign promises other than to have the most diverse Administration in history. It is okay to be diverse, but not if inept is your other descriptive. Nobody in Biden’s cabinet, from Harris to Buttigieg, performs even at an average level. And what policy of Joe Biden has made life better for America? I’m still waiting.
As bad as Joe Biden’s policy package has been, his inability to unify the country is what his critics point to as his biggest failure. This country has never been so divided, and it is because of two significant reasons. Obviously, the policies of Joe Biden have put America in a weakened place in the world but have put every American family in a sorry state. From having enough money in their budget for food after paying the bills to have their kids indoctrinated in school and possibly convinced they should change their gender. Realizing their savings and retirement funds are gone, retirement is no longer an option. They don’t feel safe in their neighborhoods as they see war springing up around the globe. They have nightmares about a phone call that Fentanyl or an illegal alien killed their child. In three years, Joe Biden took a prosperous and dynamic country and turned it on its head, and these ignorant talking heads try to convince America that Biden is the man for the time. I don’t know about you, but I have had enough of Joe Biden.
The post I Don’t Know About You, but I Have Had Enough of Joe Biden appeared first on Granite Grok.
The US House did at least two interesting things Tuesday evening. They presented a clean appropriations bill: “…a standalone funding bill for the General Services Administration, Securities and Exchange Commission, and other related agencies.”
They then muddied it (just a bit) with an amendment to reduce the Transportation Secretary’s salary to one dollar.
I wonder if he’ll get the message.
Since taking office in 2021, Buttigieg has faced criticism for Republican lawmakers in response to several crises that have faced the Department of Transportation.
For example, in February, after a train carrying vinyl chloride, a dangerous colorless gas, derailed in East Palestine, Ohio, Buttigieg was criticized for his apparent inaction and for waiting several weeks before traveling to the site of the derailment.
In addition, there have been multiple instances of mass commercial airline cancellations during his tenure for various reasons, including a pilot shortage. Republicans and Democrats alike had called for Buttigieg to take decisive action to ensure air travelers are protected from such cancellations.
Pete’s been busy making Kamala look competent in comparison [update: whose office they also tried to defund], so Marjorie Taylor Greene introduced an amendment to save taxpayers some money by paying Pete what he’s worth—one increasingly useless dollar.
BREAKING: I’m proud to announce my amendment to FIRE Pete Buttigieg just PASSED the House.
Pothole Pete staged fake bike rides to the White House and used private planes funded by taxpayers to receive awards for the way certain people have sex.
American taxpayers should not… pic.twitter.com/9fq9XrXLV2
— Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (@RepMTG) November 7, 2023
Is he even worth that? I’d go with no. His existence as a squealing piggy at the seat of government is an endless waste of resources, and it’s not just Pothole Pete. Congress should use this power more often in more places, not that it will be more than political theater. The Senate will never go for it unless they had a bet that they could make Pete Buttigieg Transportation Secretary.
The post Is Useless Pete Buttigieg Even Worth the One Dollar after House Passes an Amendment to Slash his Salary appeared first on Granite Grok.
Sam Smith’s Grammy Awards tribute to Satan reflected the acceptability in the current culture of what would be unthinkable even in jest in the past: glorifying the hellish. The normalization of Satanism as a respectable belief system is just one of many signs of these seemingly End Times.
In eerie irony, the number of self-identified Satanists increases in direct proportion to the decline of belief in a literal Hell.
Various denominations of Satanism flourish in 2023 America. Some sects claim to worship Lucifer himself, but most espouse secular beliefs and disavow any faith in a literal spiritual person known as Satan. The general popularity of Satanism may be because of growing antipathy toward Christianity, a sort of oppositional radicalism. Yet the vacuum created by a loss of traditional faith is filled through various permutations of secular religiosity or New Age imaginings, including the unlikely cloak of Luciferianism.
Smith’s Grammy Awards depiction of a plump, salivating Satan on stage for millions, would traditionally have been viewed as inappropriate for prime-time TV. But America is a nation where the Temple of Satan boasts some 700,000 members, and children have for years been exposed in public schools to “After School Satan” programs to “balance” against Christian “Good News Clubs” and similar sectarian efforts.
The belief in Satan would necessitate a belief in the God of judgment, the God of Christ. However, most modern Satanists eschew belief in the supernatural, and thus meet the devil at the crossroads, believing they can invoke Satan’s name without yielding to any actual spiritual power or control. And so as godlessness rises in America, Satanic “churches” increase.
Polls show a steady decline in the number of Americans who believe in the dark side. In 2001, one poll suggested sixty-eight percent of Americans believed in the devil. By 2007, this number had dropped to sixty-two percent; a recent 2023 poll pegs the number of demon-believing at fifty-six percent. (Optimistically, sixty-nine percent of Americans still believe in angels!).
The fastest-growing religion in America is “none,” according to a 2021 Pew Research Center poll. Satanism was reportedly the fastest-growing sect in 2018, but perhaps this is a distinction without a difference: most Satanist groups embraced the tenets of secular humanism.
One question is unanswered by the polls: If more Americans believe in angels than in the Devil, why don’t more atheists and agnostics choose to name their after-school programs and faux temples after angels instead of Beelzebub? As the nation’s woes deepen, perhaps more people will be repulsed by Satanism and instead seek the Light, rather than the dark, for spiritual guidance. God may well use the evil of Satanism to draw people toward a 21st-century Christian revival. (Romans 8:28).
Because Christians understand the limitless malice of the spiritual adversary, it is unimaginable that anyone would consider deliberately worshipping the Evil One. Fortunately, scripture provides our defensive remedy against such villainy: “Therefore submit to God. Resist the devil and he will flee from you. Draw near to God and He will draw near to you…. “(James 4:7-8, NKJV).
John Klar is an Attorney, farmer, and author. Mostly farmer… And Regular Contributor to GraniteGrok and VermontGrok.
The post Normalizing Evil appeared first on Granite Grok.
YouTube has become one of the most popular platforms for learning new skills. With over 2 billion monthly users, YouTube offers an immense library of educational content on just about any topic imaginable. Whether you want to learn a new language, pick up a musical instrument, master a software program, or dive into a hobby like cooking or woodworking, YouTube likely has high-quality instructional videos to help you out. Here are some of the key reasons why YouTube is such a great resource for learning new skills:
Variety of TopicsYou can find videos on virtually any skill or interest on YouTube. A quick search will reveal in-depth tutorials, how-tos, lessons, lectures, and more. The breadth of topics covered is truly impressive. While books and courses may only cover common mainstream subjects, YouTube has niche videos on everything from niche hobbies to technical skills to obscure academic subjects. So, no matter how obscure or specific the skill you want to develop, there’s likely a video that can help get you started.
Variety of InstructorsYouTube has videos presented by all kinds of instructors – from expert academics and renowned professionals to fellow hobbyists. This variety is valuable because sometimes you may connect better with certain presenters’ teaching styles over others. You can sample videos from multiple creators to find the ones that best match your learning preferences. Whether you prefer an energetic, comedic approach or a formal, in-depth tutorial, YouTube has instructors that fit the bill.
Short Digestible SegmentsMost YouTube videos are relatively short, often less than 15 minutes. The bite-sized segments make it easy to fit learning into small pockets of time. You can conveniently access educational videos during breaks at work, while commuting, or whenever you have a few free minutes. The short segments also appeal to shorter attention spans and make it easier to stay engaged. You can steadily gain knowledge by watching multiple videos over time versus tackling lengthy lectures or courses in one sitting.
Free AccessAccessing educational content on YouTube is free for anyone with an internet connection. This removes financial barriers that would otherwise prevent people from being able to access learning materials. Anyone can start picking up new skills through YouTube, regardless of their economic status. Being able to learn for free via a channel like James Cordier YouTube is an invaluable benefit for many people around the world.
Visual LearningYouTube videos are multimedia – often combining video footage, audio narration, text, graphics, screenshots and more. This multimedia approach appeals to visual learners and makes digesting information easier compared to mere text. Seeing processes and concepts presented visually can accelerate learning and help retention. Whether it’s seeing how a car engine works through an animation or watching step-by-step processes for software skills, YouTube offers powerful visual learning experiences.
Recommendation EngineYouTube’s recommendation engine analyzes your watch history and preferences to suggest additional relevant videos to further your skills. This makes it easy to find related tutorials to continue expanding your knowledge. The platform essentially does the work for you by identifying other videos aligned with your interests and learning path. This allows you to steadily build upon existing skills over time by progressing through YouTube’s suggested recommendations.
YouTube has become one of the best online destinations for picking up new skills through self-paced learning. It’s easy to see why millions rely on YouTube as their go-to platform for enriching their knowledge and developing new talents.
The post Why YouTube is a Great Place to Learn New Skills appeared first on Granite Grok.
