Eagle Forum Collegians http://www.efcollegians.org The Next Generation Standing Up Today Tue, 14 Jul 2015 17:00:07 +0000 en-US hourly 1 Liberals Target Religious Charities In Wake Of Obergefell Decision http://www.efcollegians.org/liberals-target-religious-charities-in-wake-of-obergefell-decision/ http://www.efcollegians.org/liberals-target-religious-charities-in-wake-of-obergefell-decision/#comments Tue, 14 Jul 2015 17:00:07 +0000 http://www.efcollegians.org/?p=835 The country is still reeling from the gay marriage decision of Obergefell v. Hodges and everyone is still trying to figure out exactly what the ruling will mean for America. While we can’t be sure yet what shots the liberals will take with the ammunition that Obergefell gave them, we can be sure that there’s a huge target on our churches.

In an article in Time Magazine, Mark Oppenheimer is already calling on the IRS to take away tax exempt status for religious organizations because of the Supreme Court decision. You might think the logical next battle for liberals is to target those churches that oppose the gay lifestyle. However, Oppenheimer suggests skipping this step altogether and abolishing tax exemption for all religious organizations. This shows just how bold liberals are getting as a result of the Obergefell decision.

Note that he isn’t merely calling for tax exempt status to be removed from churches, but “all religious organizations”. He cites the 1983 case of Bob Jones University v. United States in which the Supreme Court ruled that the IRS could revoke tax exempt status from religious organizations if they prohibit interracial dating/marriage. I’m not going to take the time to delve into how gay marriage and interracial marriage are vastly different (which they are), but let’s take a look at the societal implications of a policy shift like this.

hand-serving-soupOf course, religious groups are responsible for a significant portion of charitable organizations, including homeless shelters, soup kitchens, etc. According to a 2013 study, 73 percent of household charitable giving went directly to congregations or to religiously-affiliated charities. Oppenheimer grudgingly acknowledged the predominance of religious charities, but nonetheless calls for a restructuring of the tax code for nonprofits; his solution: bigger government. He suggests that we tax churches and religious charities and use that money for government-issued soup kitchens and homeless shelters. As he put it, “We’d have fewer church soup kitchens — but countries that truly care about poverty don’t rely on churches to run soup kitchens.” The horrendous inaccuracy of this gross misinterpretation of the nature of charitable giving can’t be understated. I’m sure that Michelle Obama would have lots of fun coming up with super-healthy menus for all of the soup kitchens, but clearly this isn’t the way that our country should help our needy. You don’t have to look any further than the healthcare industry to see that whenever the government gets involved, things quickly get more expensive and of worse quality.

Our response to this should be two-fold. First, we need to vocally oppose government control over any religious institution by means of taxation. That may seem obvious on paper, but in the massive battle going on in America for religious liberty, taxation can easily become a “back burner issue.” Don’t let it. Second, we need to continue to prove that individual charitable contribution is the best way to help the needy. You can do this by personally giving to charities that you feel passionate about. If you don’t have any money to give, donate your time to a charity that could use a hand. Not only will you be helping people who are in need, but you will also be reaffirming the longstanding Christian and American tradition of a strong society through voluntary religious charity. It may sound cheesy and overused, but charitable giving really will make you feel as good as the people that you help. That is something that an involuntary tax can never do.

http://www.efcollegians.org/liberals-target-religious-charities-in-wake-of-obergefell-decision/feed/ 0
EF Collegians Summit Will Feature Top Conservative Speakers http://www.efcollegians.org/ef-collegians-summit-features-top-conservative-speakers/ http://www.efcollegians.org/ef-collegians-summit-features-top-conservative-speakers/#comments Fri, 10 Jul 2015 19:04:29 +0000 http://www.efcollegians.org/?p=823 The 2015 Eagle Forum Collegians Summit is just around the corner and we’ve got some speakers that you don’t want to miss! Many Congressmen are going to speak, including Jason Chaffetz, Dave Brat, Alex Mooney, Steve King, and Jeff Sessions. We’ll also be hosting a number of authors and other conservative speakers including Ann Coulter, Ryan Anderson, Steve Deace, Kevin Jackson, and John Solomon. The event is totally free, so come join us at the Heritage Foundation in Washington DC on July 23 and 24! You can register now at www.efcollegians.com!alex-mooney ann coulter jason chaffetz jeff sessions Kevin Jackson Ryan Anderson steve king steve.deace_

http://www.efcollegians.org/ef-collegians-summit-features-top-conservative-speakers/feed/ 0
An Etymological Tribute To Justice Antonin Scalia http://www.efcollegians.org/an-etymological-tribute-to-justice-antonin-scalia/ http://www.efcollegians.org/an-etymological-tribute-to-justice-antonin-scalia/#comments Wed, 08 Jul 2015 14:32:41 +0000 http://www.efcollegians.org/?p=817 The Supreme Court has dealt two hefty blows to conservatives in the past few weeks, but one man on the bench is exposing all of the jiggery-pokery surrounding this argle-bargle. I’d like to take a moment to write a little bit in tribute to the Supreme Court’s most eloquent justice: Antonin Scalia. Friend and foe alike are dusting off their dictionaries to get the full scoop on Scalia’s scathing dissents to the recently-released King v. Burwell and Obergfell v. Hodges cases. To save you from flipping through yours, here’s a list of Justice Scalia’s greatest etymological highlights from the two cases:

justice scaliaJiggery-Pokery

This is without a doubt the most famous line of Justice Scalia on either of the Supreme Court decisions. Jiggery-pokery is defined as “dishonest or suspicious activity.” Justice Scalia uses it in the context of the Supreme Court’s “interpretive jiggery-pokery” in King v. Burwell.


SCOTUS is an abbreviation for Supreme Court Of The United States. It is a derivative of POTUS, or President Of The United States. Other derivatives include VPOTUS for the Vice-President and FLOTUS for the First Lady. Justice Scalia said that because the King v. Burwell decision rewrites Obamacare rather than merely ruling on its constitutionality, the Supreme Court should bear the name of the law. As Justice Scalia put it: “We should start calling this law SCOTUScare.”


A Putsch is a secret attempt to take over a government. This is the word that Justice Scalia uses to describe the court’s majority ruling in Obergfell v. Hodges to mandate gay marriage in all fifty states. Scalia wrote his dissent on the basis that to write gay marriage into the fourteenth amendment as a constitutional right would be judicial fiat. As he puts it: “This practice of constitutional revision by an unelected committee of nine, always accompanied (as it is today) by extravagant praise of liberty, robs the People of the most important liberty they asserted in the Declaration of Independence and won in the Revolution of 1776: the freedom to govern themselves.”


This is the abbreviated version of overweening, which means “excessive or unpleasant, especially with regards to pride or confidence.” Justice Scalia used this term in the closing paragraph of his dissent to Obergfell v. Hodges to describe the Supreme Court’s attitude towards itself. He referenced the court’s “o’erweening pride” giving it the confidence to legislate a new constitutional right into existence for gay marriage. He goes on to warn that this o’erweening pride could prove disastrous for the our republican form of government and for the American people.

No matter the case, Justice Antonin Scalia can always be counted on to make sensible decisions, and to express those decisions eloquently. If you want the truth amidst the media firestorm surrounding the King v. Burwell and Obergfell v. Hodges decisions, I highly recommend reading Justice Scalia’s dissents to both of these cases. Hopefully this article has made them that much easier to understand!

http://www.efcollegians.org/an-etymological-tribute-to-justice-antonin-scalia/feed/ 0
What The Gay Marriage Ruling Means For The Young Conservative http://www.efcollegians.org/what-the-gay-marriage-ruling-means-for-the-young-conservative/ http://www.efcollegians.org/what-the-gay-marriage-ruling-means-for-the-young-conservative/#comments Thu, 02 Jul 2015 18:44:16 +0000 http://www.efcollegians.org/?p=814 I can’t speak for everybody, but I’m not entirely surprised by the ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges; extremely disappointed, but not surprised. This is certainly not the Supreme Court’s first act of judicial supremacy. What has surprised me is the reaction of many conservatives to the decision. The only thing that I’ve been reading from my friends on Facebook  and from many news sources is that the debate is over, the issue is settled for all time, and there is nothing that anyone can do anymore to stand in the way of the homosexual agenda. Some are even saying that Obergefell v. Hodges proves that our nation is irreparably condemned.

marriage-definition-BW_f_improf_249x137Don’t get me wrong, I think that this ruling proves that we’re headed in the wrong direction as a nation, but there is no way that I’m ready to give up on America yet. In a recent article on WND.com, Phyllis Schlafly, founder and president of Eagle Forum, compared the Obergefell v. Hodges ruling to the Roe v. Wade decision of 1973. Think about it, the Roe decision used judicial supremacy to create a new right supposedly in the US Constitution. That’s the same thing that happened in Obergefell. When the Roe decision was passed, people assumed that the debate was over and that people would just have to lie down and take it. That’s the same thing that’s happening right now with Obergefell. The most important parallel to draw is that the Roe decision did anything but end the debate.  It started what is arguably one of the biggest socio-political battles in American history. It is my prediction that the same thing will happen with the Obergefell decision. As Mrs. Schlafly said, “it’s not the end, it’s the beginning.”

Don’t let anyone try to tell you that we can’t engage in this battle that the gay lobby started because it would make us sore losers or something like that. Let’s not forget about 2008’s District of Columbia v. Heller and the subsequent 2010 case McDonald v. City of Chicago. In those cases the Supreme Court upheld the Second Amendment right to bear arms for the purpose of self-defense. I don’t need to tell you that the decision made in those cases didn’t mark the definitive end of the debate on gun rights. Liberals are just as likely to carry on debates after Supreme Court rulings, the only difference is that liberals like to fight against Constitutionally-guaranteed rights while conservatives fight against rights that the Supreme Court writes into the Constitution through judicial supremacy.

Conservatives should take heart in the midst of this moral and political upheaval. The liberals may have five unelected judges in their corner, but we have God, the Constitution, millennia of precedent, and common sense in our corner. Not only will there be a battle, but I have total confidence that we can and will win. It has never been a better time to be a young conservative; we have the privilege and honor of being on the front lines in the biggest battle for the soul of America.

http://www.efcollegians.org/what-the-gay-marriage-ruling-means-for-the-young-conservative/feed/ 0
Proud To Be An American? http://www.efcollegians.org/proud-to-be-an-american/ http://www.efcollegians.org/proud-to-be-an-american/#comments Mon, 29 Jun 2015 20:11:01 +0000 http://www.efcollegians.org/?p=807 Independence Day is almost here and I, for one, am proud to be an American. I’m a traditionalist when it comes to the Fourth, so family, fireworks, cookouts, and watermelon are standard fare for me. In fact, I can say without question that Independence Day is my favorite holiday. There’s nothing quite like visiting the veterans’ cemetery and being filled with pride watching dozens of American flags wave in the wind. There is no better time to celebrate how much we love our nation.

ProudAmericanUnfortunately, patriotism doesn’t come as easy to some people as it does to you and me. According to a report from The Washington Post, a recently released study by the Pew Research Center shows that liberals, especially solid liberals, are significantly less likely to be patriotic. To be fair, other polls within the last five years have been less polarized, but the wording of this poll by the Pew Research Center really indicates that it is a stronger test then those anyway. The test shows that only forty percent of consistently liberal Americans say that they are “often proud to be American.” To reiterate my point, that means sixty percent of solid liberals are not proud to be American! Conservatives, on the other hand, are firmly on the other end of the spectrum. Business conservatives top the chart with eighty-one percent saying they “often feel proud to be American,” followed by seventy-two percent among what Pew calls “Steadfast Conservatives.”

What application do you think that we can draw from this information? Obviously, this doesn’t prove that liberals are all die-hard communists that want to see America burn. Especially in our generation, many liberals are just confused young people who have been duped by the indoctrination of some liberal professor somewhere. To me, these statistics prove that young conservatives have something great that we can share with our misguided friends and classmates. As bearers of the truth, we have an imperative to use our love for America to make her even better. As you keep up the good fight this summer, whether it be working for a pro-life cause, interning with a legislator, or just respectfully offering some counterpoints to a particularly loud liberal friend, don’t forget that we do it to make the America that we love even better for those who inherit it after us. Happy Independence Day everyone!

http://www.efcollegians.org/proud-to-be-an-american/feed/ 0
What’s Really At Stake With The Jenner Debate http://www.efcollegians.org/whats-really-at-stake-with-the-jenner-debate/ http://www.efcollegians.org/whats-really-at-stake-with-the-jenner-debate/#comments Thu, 25 Jun 2015 17:00:21 +0000 http://www.efcollegians.org/?p=804 espnlogoIt seems like all people have been able to talk about lately is the whole debacle with Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner and the ESPY Arthur Ashe Award for Courage. For those of you who may not be keeping up with it, in a nutshell, former Olympic athlete Bruce Jenner decided that he wanted to be a she and now ESPN decided that he should get an award for his so-called “courage.” Republican presidential candidates are scrambling for answers or avoiding the issue completely. A video of Mike Huckabee has recently resurfaced in which he jokingly said, “I wish that someone told me that when I was in high school that I could have felt like a woman when it came time to take showers in P.E.”

All joking aside though, this issue is huge. Although it’s important to note that I totally disagree with Jenners’ actions and don’t think that voluntary surgery should entitle this guy to any award, let’s take a step back and look at the broader issue that conservatives don’t seem to be bringing out in this whole ordeal. In a written statement, ESPN said that Jenner was chosen “to help move forward a constructive dialogue about progress and acceptance.” They just said outright that they chose Jenner not because of his so-called “courage,” but because they have a hidden agenda. I shouldn’t even call it a hidden agenda because of how public they are being with it, but that just shows you how far gone our culture is today. Most people don’t even care that Jenner was picked just to manipulate public opinion.

ESPN is so wrapped up in their agenda that they failed to recognize athletes that actually deserve the courage award, like Iraq veteran Noah Galloway, who lost most of an arm and a leg fighting, but still competes in extreme sports. They also overlooked 19-year-old basketball player Lauren Hill, who courageously battled brain cancer while staying on the university team. That should show you how important the agenda is to these people, and how important it is for us to fight it. The media would like nothing more than to go out of their way, at the expense of disabled war veterans and cancer victims, to promote a fad that has only really existed for about ten years in the name of “equality.” That is what they stand for.

Let’s not forget what we stand for. We stand for the acceptance of basic biological differences between genders. We stand for the acknowledgement that gender is not a “spectrum” or a “choice,” but a unique attribute given to us by God. We understand that transgenderism doesn’t just affect the individual who identifies with that lifestyle, but affects everyone around them. We understand that children should be taught about how both genders give us inherent strengths and weaknesses that allow us to complement one another. We have a duty to subsequent generations of Americans to create a culture where they can have a home with both a mother and a father, and no confusion about which is which. The traditional family is the foundation upon which America was built, and that is a legacy that we must pass on to our children.

http://www.efcollegians.org/whats-really-at-stake-with-the-jenner-debate/feed/ 0
ACLU Argues FOR Religious Expression http://www.efcollegians.org/aclu-argues-for-religious-expression/ http://www.efcollegians.org/aclu-argues-for-religious-expression/#comments Mon, 15 Jun 2015 17:00:59 +0000 http://www.efcollegians.org/?p=788 “Wait, what?” If you know anything about the American Civil Liberties Union, you are probably having the same reaction that I did whenever I first read about it. Sure enough, an article from Fox News confirms that the ACLU has decided to make legal intervention on behalf of a high school student who wants to wear a symbol of religious expression on his graduation cap at his graduation ceremony.

School Graduation Eag_Cham640360As you would probably suspect, there’s a catch. The item that student Christian Titman wants to wear isn’t a cross, rosary, or any other religious item that you’re probably picturing right now. The ACLU wants him to be able to wear an eagle feather to honor his Native American religion. Here’s what ACLU attorney Novella Coleman had to say: “The district’s refusal to allow a small symbol of religious expression during the graduation ceremony is a misunderstanding of both the spirit and the letter of the law. The implication that an eagle feather with religious significance is unacceptable or disruptive signals a deep disrespect from the district.” If you were to substitute “eagle feather” with “cross,” you would have a very common argument used AGAINST many cases that the ACLU is a part of. These are the same people who demand the removal of the Ten Commandments, nativity scenes, and other Christian symbols from public places.

Do you think that the ACLU would have been nice enough to step in and defend the religious expression of a Christian student? I think not. Clearly, this is liberal hypocrisy at its worst. The ACLU doesn’t want religious expression for everyone; they want religious expression for everyone who isn’t Christian. Don’t be intimidated by ACLU arguments about how Christian symbols offend others. Take pride in the fact that, at the very least, we can keep our story straight.

http://www.efcollegians.org/aclu-argues-for-religious-expression/feed/ 0
If Chimps Are Human, Why Aren’t Babies? http://www.efcollegians.org/if-chimps-are-human-why-arent-babies/ http://www.efcollegians.org/if-chimps-are-human-why-arent-babies/#comments Thu, 11 Jun 2015 17:00:56 +0000 http://www.efcollegians.org/?p=775 It would almost be funny if it wasn’t so sad. Lawyers in New York are in court trying to prove that two chimpanzees named Hercules and Leo are deserving of human rights. The lawyers came on behalf of the Non-human Rights Project to prove to the world that chimps are somehow human enough to enjoy freedom at a sanctuary in Florida instead of their current home at State University in New York. Instead of suing for violation of animal welfare laws like you might expect, the lawyers demand that the chimps be given human rights.

chimp5The hypocrisy of this situation couldn’t be more appalling. We live in a country where 1.2 million innocent children are killed every year by abortion. The same people who will fight to the bitter end that unborn children aren’t human are also trying to tell us that apes are. It’s just wrong on so many levels. First and foremost, the Bible clearly teaches that humans are made in the image of God from conception (Jeremiah 1:5). Apes, however, are not. Second, DNA proves that humans are all of one species, born or unborn. Apes are genetically separated from humans by a wall 150 million DNA base pairs high. Third, they are called HUMAN rights; doesn’t that inherently disqualify chimps or any other non-human species?

Liberals might claim that the link between human rights for animals and human rights for the unborn is a non sequitur, but at heart both issues are a battle for how we define what it is to be human. The unborn child that isn’t aborted can grow up to help others, experience God’s blessing, enjoy intellectual and spiritual pursuits, and live a full life that apes could never live. Let’s take a stand to make sure that the next generation of unborn children can have that chance.


http://www.efcollegians.org/if-chimps-are-human-why-arent-babies/feed/ 0
Sign Up For The 2015 EF Collegians Summit! http://www.efcollegians.org/sign-up-for-the-2015-ef-collegians-summit/ http://www.efcollegians.org/sign-up-for-the-2015-ef-collegians-summit/#comments Mon, 08 Jun 2015 17:00:00 +0000 http://www.efcollegians.org/?p=763 registration-butonEagle Forum is hosting the 22nd Annual Collegians Leadership Summit on July 23-24 in Washington, D.C. This is a totally free two-day conference with travel and lodging scholarships available too. Lunch will be provided both days and dinner Thursday night will be provided as well.

We will be staying at the Hotel Harrington, just off of Pennsylvania Avenue. Scholarship recipients will receive free lodging, but other attendees interesting in coming can stay for the great rate of just $50/person per night. (To reserve, let us know on your registration form, not the hotel.)

Each of our speakers will speak on the latest issues facing our country and especially our youth. We’ll have Senators, Representatives, authors, and other conservative leaders inspiring and challenging Summit attendees to stand for the truth and take ground on their campuses.

Now more than ever our country needs young leaders who will take a stand for what is right on our college campuses. The Eagle Forum Collegians Leadership Summit is dedicated to bringing tomorrow’s conservative leaders together today to network and collaborate with fellow students, legislators, and conservative experts.

We want you to join us, but you have to act quickly. There are a limited number of scholarships and hotel room spots available, so register quickly to guarantee your spot. Remember, it’s free to register, and there are a few scholarships still available. The scholarship deadline has been extended to June 13th so that we can take as many students as we can, so send in your registration today!

http://www.efcollegians.org/sign-up-for-the-2015-ef-collegians-summit/feed/ 0
Guns On Campus: Problem Becomes Solution http://www.efcollegians.org/guns-on-campus-problem-becomes-solution/ http://www.efcollegians.org/guns-on-campus-problem-becomes-solution/#comments Thu, 04 Jun 2015 17:13:18 +0000 http://www.efcollegians.org/?p=727 Since this is the first post of EF Collegians’ newly revamped blog, I thought that it would be a great idea to start with some good news. Texas has made a bold new step in protecting the Second Amendment by allowing concealed weapons on college campuses. An article from the Washington Times says that the bill, which just passed through the Texas legislature last weekend, is going to be signed into law by Governor Greg Abbot very soon.

This bill requires public universities to allow concealed handgun license owners to bring their firearms on campus. Of course, the universities are granted a small measure of freedom with how they handle it, with “very limited, reasonable prohibitions” being allowed by individual universities. Private schools are exempt from this law.

There is no doubt about it that mass-shootings and other violent crimes are a huge problems on university campuses. Everyone agrees that something has to be done, but not everyone agrees on what needs to be done. Texas realizes that having law-abiding citizens who are trained and licensed carrying guns on campus will be a great deterrent to crime on those campuses. Most people who suggest that we rely solely on law enforcement officers for our protection don’t know the facts. The very fastest response times to 911 calls generally fall around four minutes. However, according to the Women’s Self-Defense Institute, the average violent criminal interaction takes only ninety seconds. As they put it, “That translates to you being robbed/injured/maimed/raped/murdered and waiting for an additional 2 and a half minutes for the police to arrive.” This new law is going to be highly beneficial for the safety of Texas students in emergency situations.

So what does that mean for us non-Texans? Well, that depends on what happens in Texas. In the April 2015 edition of the Phyllis Schlafly Report, Mrs. Schlafly points back to a quote attributed to Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis in the 1932 case New State Ice Co. v. Liebmann. Brandeis said that states are to be “laboratories of democracy” that come up with innovative and sometimes controversial ways to handle problems. That is exactly what Texas is seeking to do with Senate Bill 11. It’s nice to see that there’s a state that’s taking defense of the Second Amendment on the offense by passing this new law. Keep up the great work Texas!

http://www.efcollegians.org/guns-on-campus-problem-becomes-solution/feed/ 0