Virginia Hull Welch's Blog: BooksontheBeach

When Justice Is Denied: The Case of Jose Reyes Leon-Deras

No matter what you believe about the pros and cons of illegal immigration, one thing is certain: child rapists should not be walking free. Protecting children from violent predators must take priority over protecting illegal aliens from deportation.

Except, apparently, in Denver.

Last Friday, anti-ICE activists helped Salvadoran national and illegal immigrant Jose Reyes Leon-Deras evade arrest by tipping him off to ICE agents’ location. He fled before they arrived. His current whereabouts are unknown.

What is known? He is a convicted child rapist and a fugitive from justice in Italy.

The Content of Their Character

I struggle to put into words the outrage and sorrow this provokes. So I’ll borrow from Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.: “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” Dr. King spoke these words in the 1960s fight for civil rights. But they ring true today—for a different reason.

Anti-ICE activists ignore the content of character. They treat all illegal immigrants as one indistinguishable group—poor, oppressed, marginalized, worthy of protection. Even violent criminals like Leon-Deras are cast as victims. In the twisted logic of the far left, the government is always the enemy, and illegal immigrants, no matter their crimes, must be “saved” from it.

In their eyes, Leon-Deras isn’t a predator—he’s a symbol. A martyr. A man to be defended, not judged.

When Narratives Replace Justice

This moral blindness extends beyond immigration. Consider the $536,375 raised for the defense of Karmelo Anthony, a 17-year-old Black teen who brought a knife to a school sporting event, inexplicably sat with the opposing team, and fatally stabbed 17-year-old Austin Metcalf—an unarmed White student who confronted him. Anthony claims self-defense, but the facts look grim. Still, the money pours in. Why? Because he fits a narrative. Because saving him is more important than justice for Austin.

The Cost of Ideology

And Leon-Deras? He’s still out there. Free. A convicted child rapist—possibly seeking his next victim. But the activists who protected him aren’t worried. Odds are, it won’t be their child.

And if it’s yours? Too bad.

Because for these activists, it’s not about people—it’s about ideology. Not your safety, not your family, not the rule of law. You, your children, and your community are just collateral damage in their crusade against order.

A Nation of Laws--or Not

If we are to remain a nation of peace and order, ICE must succeed—especially in removing violent criminals. If we fail to uphold our laws, we won't have a country worth sneaking into.

As Many Bodies as Possible

Why did they do it? Why did the Biden administration open the flood gates to as many illegal immigrants as possible? The presence of millions of non-English speaking migrants has lowered wages, strained public services past the breaking point, robbed funds from other tax-funded services, increased petty crime, turned open the flow of addictive drugs into the country, and caused chaos across the U.S. landscape, particularly in major cities.

That is, democratically controlled cities—the same cities that have been bleeding population for at least a decade.

The U.S.A. currently has 13 so-called “sanctuary” states and 220 sanctuary cities (Center for Immigration Studies--CIS). Every one of these 13 states has been losing population in a measurable way for years—most notably California, Illinois, and New York, from which Americans have been fleeing the high cost of living, particularly high taxes by the thousands.

No wonder then, that Democrats fought so hard to have illegals counted in the U.S. census. It gives those states more congressional seats. Be informed:

“The net effect of increases in both legal and illegal immigration in the 2020 Census shifted 17 House seats and 17 Electoral College votes, resulting in a net gain of 14 seats in Blue States — ten seats shifting from red states and four from battleground states. That Democratic net gain is greater than the respective electoral votes of all but ten states.” (CIS)

An open border has never been about compassion. It’s about votes. And votes equal power. So desperate for votes (bodies, really) are the Democrats that they even shield violent criminal illegals from deportation just so their dwindling cities have more bodies to count.

To wit: On February 14, 2025 an illegal immigrant male from Columbia, Nicol Suarez, dressed as a woman, followed a 14-year-old boy into a public bathroom in Thomas Jefferson Park in New York City and raped the child. The boy flagged down witnesses in the park who helped police find the perpetrator, who was arrested the following day. Prior to this vile act, Suarez was wanted in New Jersey and Massachusetts for other crimes, and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement had a detainer on him.

But New York is a sanctuary city that does not collaborate with ICE; it pays no attention to ICE detainers. ICE cannot pick up and deport Suarez. And if Suarez had been apprehended in New Jersey or Massachusetts, ICE couldn’t lay hands on him in those states either, because like New York they are sanctuary states.

Prosecutors asked for $500,000 bail and $1.5 million bond. The Democratically elected judge, Elizabeth Shamahs, reduced those numbers to $100,000 and $250,000 respectively. Thankfully, until his hearing, Suarez sits in a cell on Rikers Island. But only until another bleeding heart Democratic judge releases him into the general population to rape again.

The body count for the census is more important to these liberal leaders than the 14-year-old boy who was unspeakably violated, traumatized, and changed for the worse for the rest of his life.

And they wonder why so many voted for Trump.

The first and only responsibility of government is to protect our God-given rights. Shame on New York for elevating the twisted, so-called “right” of an illegal migrant, cross-dressing rapist to avoid deportation over the genuine right of a 14-year-old boy to visit a public bathroom without fear of assault.

Government of, by, and for Facebook

Historically Americans have recognized two forms of speech: free speech and government speech. If a government limits what you can speak or publish, that’s government speech.

Now we have a third administrator in the speech restriction business: Facebook, and to a lesser extent, Twitter. Speech restrictions imposed by these two social media platforms shouldn’t matter because both are private entities. But their sheer size, global reach, and political influence negate that argument. More than 2.2 billion people use Facebook or one of its subsidiaries every day—almost one-third of the world’s population. Twitter’s monthly usage numbers are around 330 million.

Why is restriction of your speech on social media an issue? You must understand what free speech is. It’s not necessarily truth. Truth is not a requirement. You can wish, hope, think, or sincerely believe something is true even though it is false. Free speech means it’s still your right to speak it. Google agrees: “Freedom of speech is a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or a community to articulate their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship, or legal sanction.”

Facebook and Twitter protest. They have decided, most notably during the Trump years, that only “truth” can be published on their platforms and, of greater concern, they have decided that they are the arbiters of what is true and untrue. What YOU think is dismissed by the Twin Titans. When either platform blocks you for publishing something that is not “true” in their vaunted opinion, they are voiding your opinion, because to them their opinions are the only valid ones. You don’t like what one candidate has to say about climate change? You’re blocked. Don’t agree with government restrictions meant to stop the spread of the coronavirus? You’re blocked. Are you concerned that an election conspiracy may have tainted the poll numbers? You’re blocked.

I repeat: These are private platforms, thus they are not bound to apply free speech protections that we enjoy from the U.S. Constitution. What is irksome, though, is the full-frontal assault on their users’ dignity. Quite simply: What you believe does not matter to Facebook and Twitter.

Hence, you do not matter.

The bottom line is that Facebook and Twitter have no respect for their users. If they did they would step aside and let us speak freely without fear of being blocked or having our accounts cancelled. Even the fact-checking edits Twitter affixes to political tweets are insulting to users. It’s akin to being admonished by your teacher in front of the entire class while you’re giving your history presentation that you misinterpreted the outcome of a battle or got your dates wrong.

Do you like being made to feel small? I don’t either. When I find an acceptable alternative to these puffed up platforms, I’m moving on.

The Selfie Generation Raises a Hallelujah

Sunday mornings across America are witness to a subtle shift that has turned worship into a powerless, dreary experience. Lyrics no longer focus on 1) the attributes of a holy, loving God, and 2) his mighty acts, which is the biblical model for worship from Genesis to Revelation. Instead of turning our attention (a mere 1-2 hours a week, mind you) on Him, we are soothed but unchanged by religious sounding choruses that focus on ourselves, our problems, our desires, our questions, each other, God’s gifts—anything but God’s holy attributes and his mighty acts.

Why is this alarming? Thanksgiving and praise are how we come into the presence of God. In his presence is everything we need in this life: grace, joy, peace, strength, direction, physical healing, provision, salvation—everything. In his presence is fullness of joy (Psalm 16:11), and that joy strengthens us to face another week (Nehemiah 8:10).

The Bible gives specific instruction on how to cultivate his presence: Psalm 100:4 says we should “Enter into his gates with thanksgiving, and into his courts with praise.” We thank Him and we praise Him—we direct our expression upward. What is worship but “the feeling or expression of reverence and adoration for a deity” (noun). The verb: “To show reverence and adoration for (a deity): honor with religious rites.”

It’s all about acknowledging and revering Him.

When we focus on ourselves instead Him, his presence does not manifest. Without his fullness of presence in the service we are not spiritually energized; we are not changed. We leave church in the same condition we arrived. Who needs that? Why even attend? There are so many other things to do on a lovely Sunday morning. Do we even understand why we assemble in a big building once a week? It’s not about fellowship. There are opportunities throughout the week for that. It’s not even about the pastor’s message. It’s about corporate worship. It’s about giving God our time and attention, though briefly, and sacrificially setting aside our burdens and concerns to focus on his goodness (attributes) and all he has done for us (mighty acts).

Last Sunday in the church I visited the morning service started with “Freedom” by Jesus Culture. Here’s a sample of the lengthy, repetitive lyrics:

Step out of the shadows, step out of the grave
Break into the wild and don't be afraid
Run into wide open spaces, grace is waiting for you
Dance like the weight has been lifted, grace is waiting
Where the Spirit of the Lord is
There is freedom, there is freedom
Step out of the shadows, step out of the grave
Break into the wild and don't be afraid
Run into wide open spaces, grace is waiting for you
Dance like the weight has been lifted, grace is waiting.

Nice sounding words, but not once do they direct the singer to speak directly to God (to praise his holy attributes and recount his mighty acts). This song is an attempt to encourage faith. It belongs on the car radio, not in a house of worship. Most of the assembly muddled through it with few hands raised. Their lack of excitement was obvious.

Then we sang “Jesus You Alone,” by Highlands Worship. A few lines:

Who is the great King of glory
Seated on high in the heavens?
Oh-oh-ohh, Jesus, You alone
You are the Lord God Almighty.
Strong in compassion and mercy (attribute)
Oh-oh-ohh, Jesus, You alone.
You set the stars in the heavens
You set the world into motion (mighty acts)
Oh-oh-ohh, Jesus, You alone.
You breathed Your life in creation
You walked among Your created (mighty acts)
Oh-oh-ohh, Jesus, You alone.

As believers sang I noticed hands begin to lift all around the sanctuary. The mood became reverent as the presence of God began to fall. I elbowed my husband, “See the difference in how people respond?” He saw it too.

The entire purpose of our worship is to glorify God. When Moses asked God to show him his glory, God passed by Moses and declared: “The Lord, the Lord, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin” (Exodus 34:6-7). Note that God first spoke of his own attributes and then his mighty acts. It’s the same in Heaven. Isaiah speaks of a glimpse of eternity that God gave him. He saw the seraphim (type of angel) around the throne of God, calling to one another and saying “’Holy, holy, holy is the Lord Almighty; the whole earth is full of his glory’” (Isaiah 6:3). The Psalms comprise 150 chapters wherein David extols the many attributes of God and records his mighty acts. Let this be a template for our own worship.

Outside of church we should be speaking to ourselves in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs (Ephesians 5:19). This can include, if you like, the works of talented Lauren Daigle and other popular Christian artists. What matters is that we keep our minds on God and our hearts lifted to Him in praise.

But when we come together weekly on the Sabbath—commonly called the Lord’s Day—our focus should be on glorifying his name. It’s not about us. If you hear lyrics that are heavy with “I, me, my, mine,” these are red flags that you’re being led away from true biblical worship.

Don't Disadvantage a Kid

A few weeks ago I was driving across Iowa and found myself passing Ottumwa, the little town where my father was born in 1921. I got to thinking about the last time my father lived there.

Carl Hull was 16 when his mother, age 35, died from sepsis after delivering her 10th child. My grandfather--a drunk and a violent man by every account I’ve heard from those who knew him--was deemed unfit. Authorities swooped in and took the youngest eight to orphanages where they were adopted by families around the United States and received new surnames.

Overnight my father, the oldest child, lost his parents, siblings, and home. He was taken in by a childless widowed aunt. He had no money, no mentor, and only a partial education. In shock and adrift, he joined the Army at 17—he lied about his age and I have the induction paperwork to prove it—where he groomed horses. He left the Army after a few years but ran down to the enlistment office after the attack on Pearl Harbor and joined the Navy, which is how he found himself dodging bullets on a landing craft at Omaha Beach. After WWII ended he reenlisted in the Army and fought in Korea, where he helped build landing docks in Busan as a SeaBee.

My dad never finished high school, though in his 50s he earned a GED. Yet he became a sharpshooter and made the Army proud as he represented it in shooting matches all over the country. He taught himself mechanics, electricity, carpentry, sheet rock installation, and furniture repair. He kept bees, grew wine grapes, taught himself to grow fruits and vegetables and to can them, and grew beautiful orchids and flowering cacti. He was religiously frugal, saving enough of his earnings as a mail carrier (and father of four) to purchase small, older, neglected homes that he refurbished himself then rented out. Eventually he sold those and graduated to small apartment buildings.

Why does my father’s story matter? No one ever told my father that he was disadvantaged or underprivileged, yet he lacked in every area used to define both: no parents, no stable home life, no education, no money, no contacts. My father truly started at the bottom with absolutely nothing. Worse, some of his early deficiencies clung to him to the end: He lacked the polish of even the middle class. He had an insatiable desire to learn; he was always reading, yet he never overcame his poor speech. I was embarrassed by his country bumpkin pronunciation (“greezy” instead of “greasy”) when I was a teenager. He didn’t know how to dress and didn’t present well, his jackets always ill-fitting and his shirt tails about to burst out of his pants. He was neither impressively tall nor academically bright.

What he did have was determination, a strong work ethic, and a desire to improve. Above all, my father didn’t think of himself as disadvantaged or underprivileged. He didn’t blame his setbacks on other people, blaming this group or that group for his hardships—a sure way to keep you entrenched in your low estate. He simply worked harder to overcome them.

Therefore I cringe when I read articles that call kids from this neighborhood or that “disadvantaged” or “underprivileged.” Often these kids come from single parent homes—that’s one parent more than my father had. They have siblings. My father had none. They have before- and after-school programs and grief counseling and social services and food stamps and AFDC. My father had none of these. Attaching these negative tags to kids defines them—sometimes forever—always to their detriment.

My father did well because he believed he could. And because he believed he could, he put forth the effort—hard work—required to get where he was determined to go. He didn’t see obstacles. He saw opportunities. He grabbed every one he could. He didn’t look inside himself and see a flawed (disadvantaged, underprivileged) person. He saw promise.

Maybe the authorities did my father a favor by not finding a home for him, because their nametags never made it into his lexicon. He never saw himself as an orphan, a foster child, a poverty-stricken kid from a broken home. No government expert told him he couldn’t do this or that because of his deplorable background, so he assumed he could do anything, and then he did his best.

So think twice before you label a child disadvantaged, disabled, underprivileged, mentally or physically challenged, deprived, less fortunate, impoverished, poor, needy, indigent, homeless, in reduced circumstances (reduced compared to what?), in dire straits, unlucky, badly off, a have-not, a minority, disenfranchised, destitute, underrepresented, diminished, discriminated against. These are loser terms. My father would never, ever have used one on himself no matter how low his circumstances when he was a youth.

Why should you?

Black, White, Forgiven

By now you have heard of the verdict in the killing of Botham Jean, the unarmed black man who was shot by a neighbor, white Dallas police officer Amber Guyger. Ms. Guyger claimed that she erroneously thought she had entered her own apartment that night in September 2018, not Jean’s. When she saw him sitting on a couch in the dark, she presumed he was a burglar and shot him to death.

The jury was not convinced. Office Guyger was found guilty of murder on October 1 and will spend the next 10 years behind bars if she is not paroled.

It’s a story alright. The other story is the action of Jean’s younger brother Brandt Jean, also black, who said from the witness stand that he frankly forgave Guyger for killing his brother, wished her only well, preferred she not go to prison, and urged her to give her heart to Jesus Christ. Then he stepped down from the witness stand and, with the judge’s permission, gave the weeping Guyger an emotional albeit controversial hug.

Controversial indeed. Every major U.S. news outlet ran an opinion piece on that hug, and from the comments that followed, it seems many are outraged by Jean’s gift of grace. Take heed, they say, that we don’t use a hug between a black man and a white woman to lessen the impact of the countless injustices inflicted by whites upon blacks via slavery. For these writers and readers, this is a political story.

But it’s not a political story because it wasn’t a political act. Here you have the essence of the Gospel: Our sin is outrageous, an egregious affront to a holy God; therefore to have it wiped away by the blood of Christ out of sheer grace—his love for us—is equally outrageous. We are wired to want justice because we are made in God's image, and He demands justice. Someone must pay. But we we are sinful by nature. Nothing we can do or give measures up to his holy standard. So only God Himself could pay the price for our sin. Because He loves us, He paid it on the cross.

Amber Guyger did nothing to deserve Brandt Jean’s forgiveness. She didn’t even ask for it. Brandt Jean extended it out of love borne from gratitude, gratitude borne from his knowledge that his own sins had been freely forgiven. He received freely, so he gave freely.

That doesn’t make his grace cheap. It’s just that Brandt Jean knows Who paid the high price to keep him and the rest of us out of Hell.

How can I know assuredly that Brandt Jean acted from gratitude and love? Because six years ago I also sat on a witness stand and begged a judge to show mercy to the accused, the young man who was driving more than 100 MPH in a 55 MHP zone when he lost control, struck a tree, and killed a passenger, my 18-year-old son. I also wanted the driver to avoid prison, live a happy life, and find Jesus Christ. This doesn’t mean that Brandt Jean and I oppose judgment. Not at all. We know the courts will take care of that. But we also know what it cost Christ to purge our sins. When you understand the enormity of your sinfulness and the price Christ paid, it's easy to forgive.

Black and white, we all need forgiveness. That's the real story.

How much power do you want your government to have?

Recently a family member posted to Facebook a meme claiming there’s no good reason why Americans should own an automatic or semi-automatic weapon.

At first I decided to scroll on.

But I can’t keep silent. Good reasons, all constitutional (and not like you think) exist to allow Americans to own high-power weaponry.

1. Government is FORCE. As a collective of free people, we choose what type of government we want, and we give it the power to enFORCE law.
2. The only power our constitution gives our government is the power to protect our God-given, inalienable rights. Our government does this by FORCE.
3. What are our rights? Our Declaration of Independence outlines them: the right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. Our government’s one and only job is to ensure no one infringes on these rights. Only when our rights are threatened is the government charged to use force to protect us.
4. In our huge country populated by many personalities, we are surrounded by people who engage in activities we may find repugnant. But if these activities do not infringe on anyone’s rights as outlined above, the government—per our constitution—should not be involved. To wit: You may have a bedroom in your home loaded with equipment designed for sadomasochism. As long you are not forcing someone to participate in your activities, it’s your right to own such equipment. Or maybe you’re one of those people who drinks his/her own urine every morning (they exist), or perhaps you delight in living in a cave on your own land. If your life choices infringe on no one’s rights, the government has no constitutional power to be involved.
5. If there’s an AR-15 in my home, how does it infringe on your right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness? My AR-15 becomes an infringement to you only if I choose to use it to harm you. But I am a law-abiding citizen. Like 65,000,000 other Americans who own guns, today is another day that will pass without us harming anyone with our firearms. My ownership of a gun, or a tank for that matter, is no infringement on any of your rights, which makes it none of your business. The government should become involved when someone uses their AR-15—or handgun, or car, or knife, or fist—to harm another person. Doers of such evil are criminals. Criminals are the only people whose rights should be constricted by government force.
6. It is a mistake to give government the power to restrict ownership of any item by law-abiding citizens, because if we open that door, the government will keep on taking. Worse, to do so is to judge a person to be a criminal without evidence, without due process. People have been murdered by rope, twine, hangers, knives, bottles, ceramic tile, pantyhose, fertilizer, zip ties, tape, rat poison, firewood, gasoline, bed sheets, illegal drugs, legal drugs, water—the list is endless. What we need to outlaw is murder. Ah, you say, we have a law for that. Yes, we do. We need to enforce punishment of THIS, and enforce it swiftly, consistently, and publicly. The rest of us law-abiding citizens should be left in peace.
7. As for the 2nd Amendment: This was inserted into our nation’s founding documents to protect American citizens from an overbearing government that tends to grow in size over time and grab evermore power—infringing on our rights. We’ve lived for 250 years in relative peace (on and off), so those reading this now have been lulled into a deception, that is, that the peace we have enjoyed all our lives will continue and that the biggest enemy of freedom is outside our borders. History denies this. That is why Americans should have the right to choose what means they will use to protect themselves from their government and their neighbor. Should the day come when our government is our worst enemy—such as in Venezuela, North Korea, Syria, or China—I want to be able to protect my family, my property, and my life. A powerful weapon is my best defense in such a case. The framers of our constitution understood this. Likely that is why the 2nd Amendment appears so high on the list.

So how much power do you want to give your government? It has more than enough already to legislate the smallest details of your life. Choose liberty. Someday you may have to fight for it with a firearm. I hope that is never the case, but history says otherwise.

Even God Won't Take It From You

I have wondered often about our inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness: Which is the most important?

I have come to this: Liberty is supreme. Liberty, or free will, is the power to choose your destiny in myriad large and small ways. It is the only right God will never take from you. You may lose your life and your happiness, but if you really want nothing to do with God, He won’t interfere.

Americans can’t discuss liberty without dragging God into it because He is the one, per our Declaration of Independence, that endowed us with rights in the first place.

If you consider what the Bible has to say about liberty, you see at once that it is important to God. Eternity is at stake--Will you spend it with or without Him?—yet He won’t use his divine power to make that decision for you. He wants you to choose Him and his Heaven as your eternal home. He wants it badly. He sent his Son, Jesus Christ, to pay the penalty for your sin. But you can always reject his salvation. It’s always up to you. Like I said, you are at liberty to spend eternity where you choose.

God dignifies human beings above other creations by giving us liberty, and then He bows to our choices. He doesn't force us to do anything because He desires neither robots nor slaves. He respects us. We are the only creations made in his image, the only ones who have liberty to make decisions using reason. We are special. Distinguished. Exalted above other creatures because we can choose to live this way or that. Liberty is fundamental and unique to being human.

So, considering that God takes a step back and lets you choose your eternal destiny, doesn’t it make sense that your liberty now is just as important as it will be then?

Now the connection to this earthly place: Because even God will not violate the inalienable liberty He placed within us to choose how to live our lives, it should surprise no one when outrage to the point of violence results when our liberties are encroached, rule by rule, law by law, tax by tax. Loss of liberty is evil, infuriating, an outrage against our humanness. As our liberties erode daily, a tiny bit here, a tiny bit there, we become more enslaved. It is no wonder that global history is marked by intermittent, violent slave rebellions. Human slavery is a slap in the face to God, because we are made in his image.

When we need an HOA to tell us what color to paint our front door, when we have to prove a need to carry a firearm to defend ourselves, when half or more of our earnings end up in the government’s hands, then we are no longer free persons; we are indistinguishable from slaves. Do slaves make decisions about what is theirs? Are slaves armed? Do slaves get to keep what they earn?

The good news is that we can use (what’s left of) our God-ordained liberty to stop the slide to servitude. Vote for leaders who love liberty above all. Life and happiness follow when our inalienable right to choose our destiny is respected by government.

You Can't Blame the Teachers for Striking

Henrico County, Va.’s Short Pump Middle School recently hired a “diversity director” to influence undesirable student behavior. The director’s annual salary is $99,000. Yet an Henrico County high school mathematics teacher's starting pay is $45,741. I was never good at math, but it seems to me that a Henrico County math teacher makes less than half of the County’s new social engineer.

What is the new director going to do? Force black kids sit next to white kids in the lunch room?

Meanwhile, across the United States public school teachers are striking for higher pay and cash for dilapidated or nonexistent classroom supplies. Case in point: West Virginia, where school spending has increased 39 percent since 1992, while during the same time enrollment dropped by 12 percent and nonteaching staff (district personnel, assistant principals, curriculum gurus, teachers’ aides, and the like) increased by 10 percent.

West Virginia teacher pay during that period dropped 3 percent.

It’s the same across the country. More kids are moving to private and charter schools but public school administrative staff numbers keep ballooning. When I was in school in the 1960s and 70s, we had one principal per school (of three and four grades), and sometimes an assistant principal, and an office secretary. I went to large schools in a major metro area. Now even smaller schools have a principal and assistant principal and secretary for every grade. Whereas we had one psychologist per school, there are public schools in the United States right now where nonteaching staff comprise fully one-half of school staffing.

And now we have a diversity director to make sure there is equal distribution of everything by color, language, sexual orientation, religion, etc. Social engineering is what it is, and it’s at the expense of teachers. This latest is an insult to teachers, who are undervalued and marginalized at every turn. I personally know three young teachers who taught for two to three years—fewer years than they studied for the job—then left, swearing they’d never go back. Low pay, insufficient classroom supplies, long hours, administrative burdens that increase year after year, and disrespect from students and parents sends them packing, exhausted and disillusioned.

But school districts keep demanding they are underfunded. Funds are allotted by state legislatures and communities vote for bonds to make up any shortfall. But the money doesn’t get to teachers’ paychecks. Where does it go? We both know the answer.

Rights, Liberty, and the Path to Hell

As I wrote last week, inalienable rights are rights that cannot be taken from us by anyone, including government, because they are given to us by God. They are integral to humanity. They can be infringed but they cannot be transferred. They are ours forever.

Supreme among our rights is free will. The right to choose our destiny is so primary to being human that even God will not violate it. Free will was his idea. Consequently, if you want nothing to do with God now or in eternity, that is your right. He will not impose his graces upon you now nor his heavenly home upon you after death. The path to Hell is paved with the decision to reject God.

Knowing this—that free will is supreme among our rights and a characteristic of being human—explains why infringement of it engenders such blistering universal outrage. To violate our free will is to deny our humanity, and to deny humanity is to denigrate who we are.

Two unenviable classes of people, prisoners and slaves, are systematically denied free will by their governments. The prisoner may bear some blame for his or her condition, but the slave never deserves to lose rights. The plight of the slave is the fiercest injustice to humanity.

Prisoners and slaves have a few things in common. They have been stripped of their 1) free will; 2) possessions; and 3) weapons. The loss of these things gives the oppressor control. The oppressed must have their weapons confiscated because no one chooses to be a prisoner or a slave. Either condition must be imposed and maintained by force.

That’s why gun control is really people control. The founders of the United States didn’t insert the Second Amendment into the Constitution so that we can hunt. The Constitution was written to establish a new form of government. From this context we know that framers were concerned about government oppression and loss of liberty (“free state”) that would result if the populace were to be stripped of firearms. When the governed lack the means to defend themselves, the government grows bold, even tyrannical. History confirms this. Josef Stalin of Russia confiscated civilian guns in 1929. Mao Tze Tung of China confiscated them in 1935. Adolf Hitler of Germany confiscated them in 1938. Millions of citizens of these countries citizens were decimated by their government because they lacked a means to defend themselves. They lacked guns.

A hallmark of free people is their ability to defend themselves. Self-defense is critical to liberty because free will—liberty—is infringed by force. Government is force.