Truce

Give to help Chris make Truce. A little goes a long way! In November of 1965, a young lawyer published a book called Unsafe at Any Speed about the dangers of driving a Chevy Corvair. The car could become unstable and possibly flip if driven in poor conditions or without proper training. The lawyer? Ralph Nader. It took a while for the book to find its audience, but soon it was on bookshelves across the US and made a celebrity our of Nader. Soon he and his "Nader's Raiders" were on a spree, advocating for consumer safety. This movement was met with skepticism and fear in the industrial community. Who did this guy think he was? Americans didn't need "big government" looking over their shoulders! Well, that's what big corporate leaders thought. They set out to dismantle the consumer safety movement and to convince conservative religious people that safety was actually creeping government interference. My special guest for this episode is Rick Perlstein, author of The Invisible Bridge and Reaganland. Sources: Chevy Corvair ad Reaganland by Rick Perlstein Road and Track article about the Corvair Washington Post article about the UAW strike One Nation Under God by Kevin Kruse Article with fun pictures from the Ad Council campaigns Christian Reconstruction by Michael McVicar Reagan's "I'm From the Government and I'm Here to Help" Listen, America! by Jerry Falwell p73, paperback, Bantam edition, August 1980 Discussion Questions: What do you think about the government involvement in the Chevy Corvair? How has product safety impacted your life? Is the government small, big, or somewhere in between? Do you remember Ralph Nader? Is it okay for big business to use advertising to change American minds about the government and economics? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce Gerald Ford's administration was in trouble. The country was experiencing stagflation, where prices were going up but employment was going down. What could he do? He announced his desire to lower taxes. This proposal was met with opposition by... Ronald Reagan. Reagan was worried that these cuts would increase the national debt. Then, just a few years later, Reagan changed his mind. Two major things happened. One was the invention of supply-side economics (also called trickle-down economics) and the other was the tax revolt of the 1970s. Supply-side economics was invented by an economist named Arthur Laffer. His ideas were based on an old concept but with a new twist. Laffer and his friends published their ideas in The Wall Street Journal and shared them with people like Dick Cheney. Author and historian Rick Perlstein joins us for this episode. His books are The Invisible Bridge and Reaganland. Sources: The Invisible Bridge and Reaganland by Rick Perlstein NPR story about Laffer's napkin legend International Inequalities Institute study of supply-side economics Investopedia article comparing inflation rates Reagan's "Restore America" speech Ford Library's documents about Reagan's inaccuracies in his speech Federal Reserve article about inflation. Here's another History of COVID stimulus payments Investopedia article on Keynes Zombie Economics by John Quiggin Historical tax bracket rates Proposition 13 article Discussion Questions: What is supply-side economics? How does it compare to Keynes' ideas? Does the Bible specify a tax policy? Where did you first hear about trickle-down economics? Who benefits from it the most? Rick Perlstein, former President George HW Bush, John Quiggin, and many others say that supply-side economics is bogus. What do you think? Why might supply-side economics appeal to some evangelicals? To people of the 1970s? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris continue making Truce A small group of men calling themselves The New Right had a major role to play in bonding some evangelicals to the Republican Party. Yet many Christians don't know who these guys were or how they used money and influence to accomplish their goal. Let's meet the fellas. One was named Paul Weyrich. Weyrich's contribution to the movement is that he knew how to organize people, a skill he learned from watching liberal protests. He was a former radio newsman from Wisconsin, member of the Melkite Greek Catholic Church when he thought the Roman Catholic Church became too liberal. He saw how liberals were organizing in the US and decided to do something similar with conservatives. The goal was to bring together politicians, activists, money, and the press to have a unified front. Organizational skills were his secret weapon. Howard Phillips was a follower of RJ Rushdoony's Christian Reconstruction plan. He gutted the Office of Economic Opportunity for Richard Nixon and then founded a think tank called The Conservative Caucus. He said "we organize discontent" meaning that the New Right used emotional issues to rile up their base. Then there was Richard Viguerie. He was the king of bulk mail. The New Right used his services to advocate for their kind of politicians, for Anita Bryant, and to raise money. His company RAVCO was investigated for fraud. These men and more were vital in bringing some evangelicals into the Republican Party. Our guest today is Rick Perlstein, author of amazing history books like Reaganland and The Invisible Bridge. Sources: Reaganland and The Invisible Bridge by Rick Perlstein Mobilizing the Moral Majority: Paul Weyrich and the Creation of a Conservative Coalition, 1968-1988 by Tyler J. Poff pages 22-23 The Evangelicals by Frances Fitzgerald Weyrich, Memorandum, April 16, 1973, Paul M. Weyrich Scrapbooks. But accessed through Mobilizing the Moral Majority: Paul Weyrich and the Creation of a Conservative Coalition, 1968-1988 by Tyler J. Poff page 18 Christian Reconstruction: RJ Rushdoony and American Religious Conservatism - by Michael McVicar Memo from Gerald Ford Library The 1974 Campaign Finance Reform Act James Robison at the Religious Roundtable Discussion Questions: What was meant by "we organize discontent"? Is this a statement Jesus would have made? Have you ever heard of the New Right guys before? Google Paul Weyrich and watch videos of him talking. How does he use language to stir fear in others? Are there issues that politicians can use to push your buttons? What are they? Why? Why are some evangelicals driven by these push button issues? How was the New Right able to use issues of sex to steer some evangelicals? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help make Truce more sustainable The Compelled podcast is hosted by my friend Paul Hastings. It's a testimony show that walks listeners through people's lives so that we can hear how God continues to set people free through faith in Jesus. This episode is part of an ad-swap that Chris did with Paul to get the word out about Truce, but it also serves as a reminder to us that God is still working in the lives of His people. You can learn more about the Compelled podcast at https://compelledpodcast.com/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris continue to make Truce Milton Friedman is one of the most important economists of the last hundred years. His ideas were quoted by many evangelical writers in the 1970s and 80s, despite his not being a Christian and few of his ideas being in the Bible. Figures like Jerry Falwell loved the guy. Ronald Reagan adopted many of his ideas, though they disagreed on things like the increasing national debt. Friedman played a major role in the popularization of the school voucher concept. Essentially, some people want to allow parents to have a say in which school their children attend. If they want to take the children to a private school, they believe that the government should give them a certain amount of money that would have gone to the public school and give it to the private one. Those who disagree say that this would defund already underfunded schools. Friedman also believed that teachers should not necessarily be certified and that the free market would weed out the bad ones. Stanford professor Jennifer Burns (author of Milton Friedman: The Last Conservative) returns to help Chris explore this complicated subject. Sources: Milton Friedman: The Last Conservative by Jennifer Burns Reaganland by Rick Perlstein Free to Choose A helpful Britannica article on Friedman Listen, America! by Jerry Falwell. Paperback, August 1980 reprint version Bantam edition Divided We Stand by Marjorie Spruill Capitalism and Freedom by Milton Friedman Discussion Questions: Had you heard of Friedman before this episode? What are school vouchers? How could school vouchers be seen by some as a tool of segregation? What would it mean if parents had to keep track of every teacher their children learned under? How are schools currently funded in the US? Why does that matter? How are some schools wealthy while others are poor? What should be the role of wealthy people when it comes to education? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce Milton Friedman may be the most famous American economist. His research and theories have profoundly shaped the modern American economy. But few of us can clearly articulate what he taught and what it means for our times. Friedman's career was defined by the aftermath of the Great Depression. He worked in the government administering the New Deal, but never really agreed with it. He joined the faculty at the University of Chicago and built a department around him that taught a version of free-market economics known as monetarism. Essentially, monetarism is the idea that inflation is a product of how much money is in circulation. Friedman did not like the Federal Reserve or the gold standard, instead, advocating for a standard 4% increase in the money supply every year that would not be shifted. By setting a rule, he hoped to do away with an entire governmental department. Friedman and his co-authors ventured into areas that other economists thought, perhaps, unwise. They used economics to explain things like marriage and school choice. He was also a proponent of school vouchers. Stanford professor Jennifer Burns joins Chris today to explore the many facets of Milton Friedman. This is the first of two parts. Sources: Milton Friedman: The Last Conservative by Jennifer Burns The Years of Lyndon Johnson: The Part to Power by Robert Caro https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/laissez-faire “Keynesian Economics Theory: Definition and How It's Used” Investopedia article https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2014/article/one-hundred-years-of-price-change-the-consumer-price-index-and-the-american-inflation-experience.htm Reaganland by Rick Perlstein Capitalism and Freedom by Milton Friedman Milton Friedman: A Concise Guide to the Ideas and Influence of the Free-Market Economist by Eamonn Butler Friedman on the Donahue show in 1979 Discussion Questions: Had you heard of Friedman before this episode? If so, what did you know about him? What does "laissez-faire" mean in economic terms? Does it line up with the Bible in any direct way? Why do you think so many conservative Christians lean toward laissez-faire? How bad was the Great Depression? If you had worked for the government during the Depression, what would you have advocated? Why are some people against the New Deal? What did the New Deal mean to starving people during the Depression? How does a fear of communism play into anti-New Deal sentiment? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce William F. Buckley Jr. helped change the face of conservatism in the US because he gave it intellectual backing. But that doesn't mean that his ideas were accepted completely. He had several nemesis within his own movement that tried to derail him. One opponent was the John Birch Society. Buckley's whole modus operandi was to make conservatism respectable. But Robert Welch and other members of the JBS were using their movement to spread bogus conspiracy theories. They were actively discrediting the movement that Buckley tried to build. So Buckley, National Review, and Barry Goldwater tried to bring it down. Another enemy was Ayn Rand. Buckley and Rand were libertarians, but they disagreed on something important: religion. Rand was an ardent atheist, while Buckley believed Christianity and conservatism were inseparable. When Buckley started Young Americans for Freedom (YAF) he discovered that his young followers were incorporating many other ideas into their ideology. Rand's writings were impacting the students. So Buckley had to work to expel those ideas from YAF. Libertarian economist Murray Rothbard was another enemy. Rothbard actively encouraged his followers to split YAF and leave the organization. Extremism leads to extremism. Extremism lends itself to ideological purity, which means that groups like YAF were destined to split and split and split again. Buckley has his work cut out for him. Sources Buckley: William F Buckley Jr. and the Rise of American Conservatism by Cart T. Bogus. The Rise and Fall of Modern American Conservatism by David Farber Burning Down the House by Andrew Koppelman Before the Storm: Barry Goldwater and the Unmaking of the American Consensus by Rick Perlstein God and Man at Yale by William F. Buckley Jr Heather Cox Richardson's YouTube series on the history of the GOP Hoover Institution article on the impact of Buckley and Firing Line Reaganland by Rick Perlstein The Incomparable Mr. Buckley documentary The Sharon Statement Discussion Questions: Extremism leads to extremism. Do you agree? The desire to keep a movement ideologically pure is not unique to Buckley. Discuss that desire. When is it important and when does it lead to issues? Rand and Buckley disagreed on the role of religion. Why did that put them at odds? Why would Murray Rothbard want to split YAF? Why are youth movements so important to politics? To religion? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris continue the Truce Podcast. Senator Robert Taft couldn't get the nomination. He tried to be the GOP's nominee for president three different times but could not get elected. Conservative Republicans' failure to get nominated by their own party was a source of much frustration. What could they do? Concerns of conspiracy spread through people like Phyllis Schlafly whose book A Choice Not an Echo claimed that "elites" were steering the party. It was into this world that a bright young man with an untraceable accent found his appeal. William F. Buckley Jr. was born into a wealthy family that was deeply Catholic and driven by concern over the New Deal. They were libertarians and wanted a small government. Buckley lived a childhood of privilege, riding horses, playing piano, and mostly private education. His first book, God and Man at Yale, was a sharp critique of his alma mater, stating that they should have done a better job promoting laissez-faire economics and religion. The book was a smash hit, in part, because Yale fought its charges in the press. Buckley followed it with a rousing defense of Senator Joseph McCarthy's tactics in the early 1950s, but the book was published just as the senator was revealed to be the demagogue he was. So Buckley decided to shift his effort to creating a journal of opinion that would appeal to conservatives. National Review became the "it" publication for conservatism in the US, and the most successful journal of opinion in the country. Its greatest impact was giving conservatism an intellectual voice in an era when the "liberal consensus" dominated. Buckley then went on to start in the PBS television show Firing Line, a funny thing for a libertarian because the show was sponsored, in part, through government funding. Buckley succeeded in giving conservatism an intellectual voice. In the process, he won his greatest victory: convincing Ronald Reagan to become a conservative. Sources Buckley: William F Buckley Jr. and the Rise of American Conservatism by Cart T. Bogus. The Rise and Fall of Modern American Conservatism by David Farber Burning Down the House by Andrew Koppelman https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYgv7ur8ipg&t=3018s Firing Line Episode 113, September 3 1968 Before the Storm: Barry Goldwater and the Unmaking of the American Consensus by Rick Perlstein God and Man at Yale by William F. Buckley Jr Heather Cox Richardson's YouTube series on the history of the GOP National Review. 1st edition, November 19, 1955. Page 6 (gives a helpful breakdown of what the magazine stands for) Hoover Institution article on the impact of Buckley and Firing Line Reaganland by Rick Perlstein The Incomparable Mr. Buckley documentary Discussion Questions Do you have any personal connection with Buckley? Did you see his shows or read his writings? Why did conservatism need an intellectual voice? How did conservatism change between Bob Taft and Buckley? Buckley believed in a limited government, one that incorporated Christianity. Would you like his version of the American government? Buckley claimed that he wasn't racist, but believed that black people were incapable of governing themselves. That they should earn the right to vote in the South. Is this racism? National Review welcomed segregationists to write in the journal. Would you read a publication like this? Buckley advocated for a smaller government but also stared in a TV show on public television. Does this strike you as hypocrisy? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give a little to help Chris a lot In the first part of our series, Chris explored the beginning of Barry Goldwater's career, from his early days as a young man to his rise to the Senate. In the second episode, Goldwater still hasn't agreed to be the nominee, even though groups are raising money in his name. One of his most valuable supporters was a woman named Phyllis Schlafly. In 1964 she published a small book, A Choice Not an Echo. It claimed that GOP nominations had been rigged going back many years. She felt burned that Robert Taft (a true conservative) had been avoided over Dwight Eisenhower. Her book earned Goldwater the eventual nomination by his party. At the 1964 GOP convention, Goldwater announced that extremism was a thing he was okay with. While this excited his base, it scared a good many others who were already afraid that he'd use his power to launch nuclear weapons. Lyndon Johnson won that year in the greatest landslide in US presidential history. Sources Before the Storm by Rick Perlstein. The Heritage Foundation's claims about Black Lives Matter JFK's address about the Cuban missile crisis The Years of Lyndon Johnson by Robert Caro LBJ ice cream ad Rockefeller's speech at the 1964 RNC via C-SPAN Birchers by Matthew Dallek Goldwater's speech at the 1964 RNC via C-SPAN 1964 RNC party platform These Truths by Jill LePore Goldwater's comments on the Religious Right Discussion Questions How did the 1964 Republican platform show a slide to extremism? Is the argument for "states' rights" inherently racist? How has it been used to back racism? Why did Goldwater's talk about nuclear weapons make people uneasy? How did Goldwater's address to the 1964 RNC act as a call to extremists? Why did Lyndon Johnson win by the largest victory in US presidential history? Even though he lost dramatically, Goldwater had a big impact. What was it? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris continue making Truce Barry Goldwater may be one of the most interesting figures in Republican history. He grew up the son of a wealthy department store owner. He was a city council member and then a senator from Arizona. He was handsome and took pictures with guns and cacti. Goldwater was also a libertarian who wanted a small government and low taxes. His platform was laid out in a ghostwritten book Conscience of a Conservative. L. Brent Bozell wrote the book. He was a member of the John Birch Society. The book advocated for state's rights, though Goldwater argued that he was not a racist. The problem is that the South had long been using state's rights complaints to justify their oppression of black people. So, was Goldwater a racist? He sure as heck did what racists wanted. He also advocated for nuclear weapons in the US, an end to progressive taxation, and strange plans to reduce government spending. He courted extremists, mashing traditional conservatism false conspiracies and bad actors. The Republican Party would eventually bounce back to being an establishment party, but not for long. Many of Goldwater's ideas would be carried out by Reagan just a decade and a half later. Sources Before the Storm: Barry Goldwater and the Unmaking of the American Consensus by Rick Perlstein The Years of Lyndon Johnson by Robert Caro. Especially The Passage of Power Bichers by Matthew Dallek A Choice Not An Echo by Phyllis Schlafly Buckley: William F Buckley Jr. and the Rise of American Conservatism by Cart T. Bogus https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05MPUsdFyQY The Memory Palace episode 130 “Independence Hall 2: The Legend of Walter Knott” 1964 Republican Party Platform Heather Cox Richardson's video series on the history of GOP Questions What does it mean for someone to be a "conservative"? How does it impact us when we are tied to organizations like the John Birch Society? How did it impact conservatives? Discuss the relationship between the state's rights argument and racism. Was Goldwater a racist? Many of the people we've covered over the years have been public speakers. Should we take a second pass at vetting our public speakers? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce Robert Welch was a candy magnate who invented the Sugar Daddy and sold favorites like Junior Mints and Milk Duds. He was also very anti-communist. His dubious research led him to found the John Birch Society, a group whose mission was to spread conspiracy theories worldwide. They had major support from wealthy men like Fred Koch, father of the Koch brothers (who financed opposition to Obamacare and climate change legislation). Some of their most notable campaigns were those against Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Earl Warren and President Dwight Eisenhower. They claimed that these men were communist sympathizers working behind the scenes to put the communist agenda. Bogus stuff, but they gained thousands of followers across the country. They also fought the income tax, said that black people would not have wanted equality if the communists hadn't taught them to, and argued that the US is a republic and not a democratic republic. Phyllis Schlafly, RJ Rushdoony, Tim LaHaye, and many others had ties to the birchers. This group had a huge influence on the Religious Right! Not to mention shifting the GOP to accept extremists. Our special guest for this episode is Dr. Matthew Dallek, a political historian at George Washington University. His book is Birchers: How the John Birch Society Radicalized the American Right. Sources: Birchers: How the John Birch Society Radicalized the American Right by Matthew Dallek Before the Storm by Rick Perlstein Divided We Stand by Marjorie Spruill Helpful Guardian article about the Koch brothers and Americans for Prosperity Christian Reconstruction: RJ Rushdoony and American Religious Conservatism by Michael McVicar NY Times article about J. Howard Pew's connections to Robert Welch Dark Money by Jane Mayer Discussion Questions What is the John Birch Society? Was communism a threat to the country in the mid-1900s? What would have been the proper way to respond to communism? What is the impact of conspiracy theories on American Christianity? There are real conspiracies in the US, like those by Donald Trump and his allies to steal the 2020 election. But a lot of Christians don't believe these real conspiracies. How has an abundance of false conspiracies numbed our ability to recognize reality? Are you surprised Tim LaHaye, Phyllis Schlafly, and RJ Rushdoony were affiliated with the JBS? How can believers maintain their faith even when evangelical culture has been corrupted? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris continue Truce Modern evangelicalism sometimes incorporates pieces of different ideas. Things that are in the air. Social messages. Political stances. But has evangelicalism been enchanted by libertarianism? In this episode, we cover a brief history of libertarianism. What is it and who are some of the main thinkers? We discuss Murry Rothbard, Ayn Rand, Friedrich Hayek, and Robert Nozick. What is a libertarian? Matt Zwolinski and John Tomasi define libertarianism by six characteristics. Libertarians are defined by a love of private property, they are skeptical of authority, and they like free markets, spontaneous order, individualism, and negative liberty. We will define each of these throughout the episode. Our special guest for this episode is Andrew Koppelman, law professor at Northwestern University. He's the author of the book Burning Down the House: How Libertarian Philosophy Was Corrupted by Delusion and Greed. Sources Burning Down the House: How Libertarian Philosophy Was Corrupted by Delusion and Greed. by Andrew Koppelman The Individualists by Matt Zwolinski and John Tomasi The Road to Serfdom by Friedrich Hayek Matthew 25 The Road to Serfdom cartoon version The Years of Lyndon Johnson by Robert Caro (for the Dust Bowl section in book 2) 99% Invisible episode The Infernal Machine for information on anarchists Teddy Roosevelt's first address to Congress Dark Money by Jane Mayer EPA.gov article about The Clean Air Act NPR story about law enforcement throwing protestors in unmarked vans Listen America! by Jerry Falwell Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand (I could only stomach maybe 1/4 of it. I promised myself if she wrote "Rearden Steel" one more time that I would stop reading. She did. So I did.) Discussion Questions What is libertarianism? How have you seen libertarianism crossing over into evangelicalism? Does libertarianism counter the story from Matthew 25? What is the impact of Ayn Rand? Have you read her books? Why did Atlas Shrugged suddenly become the "it" book among Republicans in 2020? Is there any place for selfishness in the Christian walk? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce Well, we survived the 2024 US presidential election! But many people still feel anxiety as we head into the Christmas and New Year holidays. How can Christians prepare for a holiday season when politics will likely arise? Chris Staron is joined by Karl Klemmer, Nick Staron, and Ray McDaniel at First Baptist Church in Jackson, WY to discuss these issues and more. Plus Chris talks about his own anger as a pedestrian as drivers have come close to hitting him. How do Christians respond when they are wronged? We also spend a lot of time talking about Romans 14 which encourages believers to love their brothers and sisters who struggle in their faith or who have convictions different than our own. Can verses about food sacrificed to idols teach us something about dealing with loved ones who are different than us? Sources: Romans 12-15 (mixed translations) Discussion Questions: Why is it important to come to a complete stop at stop signs? Has anyone ever wronged you on the road? How did that feel? How did you react? Do you get upset about things you can't change? What are some examples? How can you adjust to not beat yourself up over things you can't change? What are other examples of non-mission critical things we can give grace on (like food sacrificed to idols)? Are there political issues that are mission-critical? Which ones are not? What are some that you can let slide in a conversation? How do you prepare yourself to enter a stressful environment? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce How do ultra-wealthy people avoid paying taxes? It seems like a strange subject to bring up when discussing why some evangelicals are drawn to the Republican Party. But many of the ties between evangelicals and the GOP have to do with money. So, let's take a little side trip and explore the tax loopholes of today. More importantly, let's try to understand why so many Americans are tax-averse. Could it possibly be because we, deep down, know that someone else is getting a better deal than us? One tactic used by the ultra-wealthy is "buy, borrow, die". They avoid "income", instead opting for assets like stock and real estate they can borrow against. Borrowed money is not taxed. Then they either pay back those loans with other loans (often with interest rates that are much lower than their tax rates would be) or they fail to pay back the loans. Then... they die. Jesse Eisinger is a Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter with Pro Publica. Chris first heard about him from his book (pardon the language) The Chickenshit Club and met him when he appeared at a live event in Jackson, WY hosted by the Teton County Library, the Center for the Arts, and the Jackson Hole News and Guide. Sources Pro-Publica's reporting on taxation This lecture at the Center for the Arts in Jackson, WY on November 8, 2023 Fascinating IRS responses to some of the conspiracy theories about them Disney's Donald Duck film "The New Spirit" encourages income tax as a national duty Time Magazine article about the history of taxes William McKinley vs. William Jennings Bryan by John Pafford (pg 29) New York Times archival article listing taxes paid by the wealthy The 16th Amendment The Macomber case article on Justia.com Historic Tax Bracket data Time Magazine article on the John Birch Society Methodist History from January 1988 Discussion Questions: What are your thoughts on the income tax in general? How should countries be funded? Why might a progressive tax structure (where wealthy people pay more) make sense? How could we close some of these tax loopholes? What is the difference between income and wealth? Should we tax wealth in the USA? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris continue Truce It all started with a meeting over fancy donuts. Paige Patterson and a friend met together to plot the fundamentalist takeover of the Southern Baptist Convention. Before that time, the SBC had been more theologically diverse (though, not necessarily racially diverse due to its founding as a group that desired slavery). But if this group of fundamentalists was going to get a whole denomination to turn their way, they'd have to be clever. It would take time. Their scheme involved getting fundies elected into high office who could then turn committees and sub-committees to their side. It's a story of a minority group gaining control of a large organization, and steering it toward their vision of what it means to be a Christian. Sources The Fundamentalist Takeover of the Southern Baptist Convention – by Rob James, Gary Leazer The Evangelicals by Frances Fitzgerald Christianity Today article about Paige Patterson's allegations Religion News article about Patterson Tennesseean article about Patterson Article about early Baptists Church History in Plain Language by Bruce Shelley Cornell's article about the separation of church and state Frances Shaeffer and the Shaping of Evangelical America by Barry Hankins Johnson Archives about SBC Johnson Archives SBC Resolutions Certified Pastry Aficianatro article about beignets Discussion Questions The episode starts with a discussion of accusations about Paige Patterson. What was your reaction to that story and why? Is it possible for a spouse to be a part of the salvation of their husband or wife? Where are the lines? When were you baptized? Did you do it as an adult, child, or both? Why? What do you think is the "right" way to baptize someone? Why? What are your thoughts on inerrancy? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give $10/ month to help Chris make Truce What are the warning signs that a church leader will become a tyrant? How do we prevent church hurt from becoming our identity? What are ideologies and how do they become the overall focus of some ministries? Mike Cosper is the co-host of Christianity Today's The Bulletin podcast, the producer and host of The Rise and Fall of Mars Hill, and now the author of The Church in Dark Times. Discussion Questions: How does Mike define "Ideology"? What does it mean to have a strong ideology? Do you have any? How does this differ from having a simple belief? Why do you think so many people today struggle with anxiety? How can ideologies protect us from our anxiety? Why might that be a poor crutch? Mike recommends worship as a way to fend off anxiety. Why could that help? Is it wrong for churches and organizations to have a missions statement or goals? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris continue to make Truce In the Kanawha County Textbook War episode, Chris shared that the people of that county fought against some textbooks and stories being read in classrooms and as homework. Edgar Allan Poe's The Cask of Amontillado is one of the texts that was contested. So Chris decided to read it here as a bonus episode at the end of October. Enjoy! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce. Frances Schaeffer is one of the most important theological thinkers of the 20th century. He urged fundamentalists and evangelicals to think outside of their separatism and consider how they could reach the world and expand their worldview. He began his career as a preacher in the United States, but a foreign missions board asked him to assess the state of fundamentalism in Europe after WWII. While there he saw great works of art and met fascinating people. Eventually, Schaeffer moved to Switzerland to start L'Abri, a chalet community where wanderers could come, live, and discuss the gospel. That's where the story may have ended. But his lectures were turned into audio cassettes and books. Then, from this small mountain village, Schaeffer became one of the best-known evangelicals in the world. Once he returned to the United States, his books took on a Christian nationalist tone which sticks with us today. Our guest for this episode is Barry Hankins. He's the author of Frances Schaeffer and the Shaping of Evangelical America. He is a professor of history at Baylor University. Sources: Francis Schaeffer and the Shaping of Evangelical America by Barry Hankins The Evangelicals by Frances Fitgerald Reaganland by Rick Perlstein A helpful article about the Renaissance A helpful article about the Enlightenment Schaeffer's film How Should We Then Live? Gospel Coalition article about secular humanism A Christian Manifesto by Frances Schaeffer Discussion Questions: Have you read any of Schaeffer's work? What is your "worldview"? How did you get it? How did you become aware of that concept? Should all Christians have an idea of their worldview? Should it look a certain way? What do you think about the middle part of Schaeffer's ministry when he was preaching in L'Abri? How does it differ from the last third of his ministry? How have you seen Christian nationalism? What parts of the Bible do people use to justify it? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris continue making Truce Betty Friedan's The Feminine Mystique kicked off second-wave feminism in the United States. The book was published in 1963 and addressed what she called "the problem that has no name". As women's roles shifted with the invention of electricity and the number of workers needed to run farms decreased, women's roles shifted. The idea of a "traditional" woman went from a farm laborer or factory worker to someone who kept the home and managed her children's schedules. This left many women feeling unsatisfied and searching for their purpose in life. Friedan's book addressed those issues and inspired more extreme views of women. Several "Christian" books were published to respond to Friedan and second-wave feminism. One was The Total Woman, the number one bestselling nonfiction book of the year which has sold over 10 million copies. Published in 1973, it was the genesis of the scene in Fried Green Tomatoes where Kathy Bates goes to the door to meet her husband wrapped in Saran Wrap. It encouraged women to use costumes to greet their husbands, to avoid being "shrewish", and to use Norman Vincent Peele's philosophy of positive thinking. Another book was The Spirit-Controlled Woman by Beverly LaHaye. This was a companion piece to a book written by her husband Tim LaHaye, but it somehow managed to avoid telling women how to live by the Spirit. Special guests join Chris for this episode. Each took a different book so we can better understand this movement and counter-movement. Special Guests: Amy Fritz of the Untangled Faith podcast Anna Tran of the Love Thy Neighborhood podcast Jen Pollock Michel author of In Good Time, A Habit Called Faith, and Surprised by Paradox Sources: The Feminine Mystique by Betty Friedan The Spirit-Controlled Woman by Beverly LaHaye The Total Woman by Marabel Morgan Discussion Questions: What is your relationship to the books we discussed in these episodes? What is the difference between first-wave feminism and second-wave feminism? How have the roles of women changed in society in the last 200 years? What role did electricity, the Industrial Revolution and wars shaped those roles? What was the "problem that has no name"? How did/does it impact women's lives? How does this vision of feminism compare and contrast to biblical images of women? How have we added or subtracted from what the Bible says about women to create our modern image of a "Christian woman"? Morgan advised her readers to meet their husbands at the door in costumes. What is your opinion of this idea? What did she mean when she said she had been "shrewish"? Is that term insulting to women? Why? Is the "Christian ideal" vision of women one that requires women to stay home with children? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Donate to help Chris make Truce In the 1960s, Tom Tarrants was a young man on a mission - to save America from Communism, Marxism, and desegregation. He was prepared to do anything, including joining the Ku Klux Klan, drive-by shootings, or even dying for his cause. Yet God had a far greater plan for this would-be revolutionary. Find the Compelled Podcast at https://compelledpodcast.com/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris continue making Truce The National Women's Conference was set to take place. State meetings were overrun by conservative women causing disruptions to the meetings as they paid the entrance fee with pennies or made noises during the discussions. But liberal women were not angels either. Some went so far as to accuse the conservatives of sending in mental patients to do their voting. It's easy in all of the noise to forget that this was a monumental meeting. Women from all over the country gathered together to discuss issues that impacted them. They ran the show. They set the agenda. Conservative women, by and large, didn't show up for the main meeting. Why? Because of conspiracy theories circulated by groups led by people like Phyllis Schlafly saying that the elections would be rigged. Also, they started their own conference across town. This pro-life, pro-family rally was only about three hours long. But it packed a big punch. People from all over the country took busses overnight to attend. They couldn't stay the night because hotels were already booked up for the main meeting. So they came and went on the same day, taking the pro-family, pro-life movement with them. In this episode, Chris winds up a three-part mini-series that takes us from Phyllis Schlafly's turn against the ERA to this momentous weekend in 1977. The fallout of the conference is still with us today as religious people on the right work together to accomplish their goals, often trying to undo what liberals on the far left have already done. Extremes continue to snipe at extremes as the middle tries to get things done. Our guest for this episode is Marjorie Spruill, author of the book Divided We Stand. It is an excellent resource that is balanced and well-notated. Sources: Divided We Stand by Marjorie Spruill Reaganland by Rick Perlstein Interviews from the National Women's Conference Phyllis Schlafly Report from December 1977 NBC's coverage of Phyllis Schlafly's funeral with Donald Trump's eulogy Discussion Questions: What were some positive outcomes of the National Women's Year conference? What were some challenges they faced? Why did conservatives feel shut out of the conference? What do you think about the role of conspiracy theories in conservative circles (example: Schlafly's insistence that the meeting votes were rigged)? Schlafly was overlooked in the Reagan administration. Why do you think that is? Why is it so hard for people of different beliefs to work together, even for the common good? What do you think would have happened if the IWY conference had not featured lesbian rights? Should it have avoided that controversial topic, or was it an issue whose moment had come? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make the Truce Podcast In 1977, the Congress of the United States allotted $5 million for the National Women's Conference. The money was intended to bring together women from around the country so that they could put together recommendations for the Congress and President. It would highlight women of color, and those minorities who were sometimes overlooked like Native American women. But there was conflict from its inception. Liberal women, some of the same who turned NOW into a liberal group, took control. They did not want the far-right to participate, women like Phyllis Schlafly who had fought so hard to stall the ERA. This only made conservative women more bitter. There was more fuel for the fire. Gay and lesbian rights were added to the discussion topics of the convention. That was a big deal in 1977 when conservative women rallied around Anita Bryant and her fight against equal rights for homosexuals in Miami, Florida. The Bible says that homosexuality is a sin, so some conservative religious people did not want to give homosexuals rights in the US. So for liberal women to incorporate a gay and lesbian plank into the National Women's Conference was a BIG deal. And a way to pick a fight with conservatives. The battle ultimately led to conservatives hosting their own conference a few miles away. This gathering ultimately united the Religious Right and kicked off the Pro-Life, Pro-Family movement that we know today. How did women play a role in uniting evangelicals with the Republican Party? Our guest today is Marjoie Spruill. She is the author of the fantastic book Divided We Stand. She is a distinguished professor emerita of history at the University of South Carolina. Sources: Divided We Stand by Marjorie Spruill Reaganland by Rick Perlstein The Evangelicals by Frances Fitzgerald Anita Bryant's orange juice commercial Phyllis Schlafly on PBS video Former President Trump's eulogy for Phyllis Schlafly Andy Warhol's cover art for Time Magazine of Bella Abzug New York Times article about women swinging while their husbands were in Vietnam "Revive Us Again" by Joel Carpenter Discussion Questions: What is your impression of Anita Bryant? Do you remember her? What rights should homosexuals have in the United States? In the last episode about Phyllis Schlafly, we looked at conflicting opinions of what equal rights look like for women. Should they be treated the same as men or have equality plus protections? Let's transfer that question to homosexuals. Should they have equal rights, fewer rights, or equal rights plus protections? Should women on the president's council have opened the National Women's Conference to women on the far right? What do you think will happen once the conference is launched? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce Paypal Venmo Patreon Help via check at: Chris Staron PO Box 3434 Jackson, WY 83001 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris continue the Truce Podcast. Phyllis Schalfly was a remarkable woman. Regardless of your politics, you have to admire the impact that one person, who was never elected to office, could have on national political conversations. Schlafly was already part of the in-crowd in Washington when she took a stance against the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). She was an exercise in nuance herself-- a woman who fought for traditional views of women in society, while also earning a law degree and touring the nation on speaking tours. She had a family and held a prominent position in the national zeitgeist, even building on battles fought by Anita Bryant. But who was Phyllis Schlafly? She was a Catholic woman, which is important because Catholics had long been the victims of prejudice in the United States. She was a mother, a popular speaker, publisher of The Phyllis Schlafly Report newsletter, and author of books like A Choice, Not An Echo, which was a conspiratorial screed about stealing elections. This lady knew how to turn a story. She ran for Congress in 1955 and again in 1970, losing both times. Then in 1972, she learned about the ERA. The Equal Rights Amendment was first proposed by Alice Paul in 1923. The goal was to have men and women treated equally under the law. That means that women would no longer receive special protections either. So... a double-edged sword, right? Women in the 1960s and 70s still had a ways to go when it came to equality. It brought forth some big questions about how to achieve it. Schlafly wanted to protect the protections. So she formed STOP ERA (Stop Taking Our Protections, ERA) to rally her followers against the ERA. This was a big twist because state after state had rushed to ratify the amendment. But once Phyllis got going, they applied the brakes and waited. Schlafly may have single-handedly stopped an Amendment to the Constitution. In this episode, we're going to learn about this dynamo. A woman who is both loved and hated. An intelligent woman, and someone who traded in falsities. Our guests for this episode are Marjorie Spruill, author of Divided We Stand and Angie Maxwell, author of The Long Southern Strategy. Important Sources: Divided We Stand by Marjorie Spruill The Long Southern Strategy by Angie Maxwell Reaganland by Rick Perlstein A helpful list of milestones in women's rights Video of Esther Peterson Video of Phyllis Schlafly talking about A Choice, Not An Echo on C-SPAN A copy of Ladies, Have Ya' Heard? as mentioned in the episode Illinois State Archives interview with Phyllis An article from Time Magazine about the ERA's history Britannica article about The Fairness Doctrine Smithsonian article about Phyllis Schlafly Discussion Questions: What do you think about legal protections for women? Are you an Esther, an Alice, or a Phyllis? The ERA is really short. Do you think it should be more specific to clarify its position? How have you seen sexism? How has it impacted your life? Have you seen women treated well in the workplace? What made the difference? Are stay-at-home mothers respected in our society? If not, what can you and your church do to support them? What are your impressions of Phyllis? Are you okay with people using conspiracy theories to bolster their followings? We've spent a fair bit of time this season talking about parachurch organizations. What are your thoughts on them? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce RJ Rushdoony is not a household name. But he influenced a lot of interesting people, from members of the New Right to the Christian homeschooling movement. His books and lectures inspired people to pull their kids out of public schools and teach them at home. But who was RJ Rushdoony? He was deeply impacted by his time doing missionary work on a Native American reservation. There he saw how difficult it was to get anything done and to give people proper access to their government. He went on to work with libertarian organizations like Spiritual Mobilization and the Volker Fund. His mentor Cornelius Van Til taught him to see the triad of government, church, and family in a new way. In Rushdoony's mind, those three spheres should not interfere with each other. BUT, he did want Christians to run the government. Instead of doing a top-down change, he wanted change to begin with families, then rise to the church, eventually taking over the political sphere. Howard Phillips, one of the founders of the New Right, was a disciple of Rushdoony. So was his son, Doug Phillips, who founded the homeschooling movement known as Vision Forum. In this episode, Chris interviews Paul Hastings of the Compelled podcast about how they met at a Vision Forum film festival. The special guest for today is Michael McVicar, author of "Christian Reconstruction: R.J. Rushdoony and American Religious Conservatism." Sources: Christian Reconstruction: R.J. Rushdoony and American Religious Conservatism by Michael McVicar Reaganland by Rick Perlstein The Evangelicals by Frances Fitzgerald Helpful article about libertarian philosophy One Nation Under God by Kevin Kruse Discussion Questions: How do you think Rushdoony was impacted by his experiences on the reservation? What is libertarianism? What do you think about it? In what ways have you seen libertarianism presented in evangelical culture? What did Rushdoony think about public schools? How was this a departure from progressive-era Christian thinkers? How does Christian homeschooling differ from other forms of homeschooling? Why did homeschooling take off in the 1980s and 1990s? What role, if any, should Christians play in public schools? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce In 1974, Alice Moore was a member of the school board in Kanawha County, West Virginia. The board met to hear the recommendations of the textbook committee and approve them. But Alice protested when she read a portion from the Autobiography of Malcolm X, which thanked Allah for preventing Malcolm X from being a black Christian. From there they uncovered a number of potentially offensive texts, some because of language, others because of discussions of rape. Race was likely a factor as well, though Moore denied it. Local pastors decried what they saw as secularism and humanism creeping into public schools. Parents blocked school buses, and others kept their children at home. Soon, there were fights, and dynamite was used to blow up school buildings. What started as a disagreement over books erupted into an all-out war. One that echoed in other parts of the country at the same time as families wrestled with changes in education. Sources: "The Great Textbook Wars" - award-winning documentary on the battle "The Invisible Bridge" by Rick Perlstein "Soul on Ice" by Eldrige Cleaver (archive.org) "Androcles and the Lion" by Aesop Texas Monthly article about the Gablers Video of the Gablers talking to William F Buckley on "Firing Line" The New York Times article about schools closed in WV The New York Times article about the textbook war Radio interview about the John Birch Society Discussion Questions: Had you heard of the textbook war before? What did you think of the passage from "Soul on Ice"? Should it be read by senior students headed for college? What about other students? Who should decide what gets taught in local school districts? How about nationally? How did Alice Moore and others act appropriately? How about inappropriately? The KKK and John Birch Society show up a few times this season, often opportunistically. Does their appearance automatically smear all participants as racist? What else was going on in 1974 that could have escalated the panic of the era? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Partner with us by donating at: www.trucepodcast.com/donate Something had to be done. The Great Depression meant the loss of a vast number of jobs and left families waiting on bread lines. Economists like John Meynard Keynes puzzled over what to do. President Hoover took a laissez-faire approach to the catastrophe, only to have matters get worse. Then Franklin D. Roosevelt came into office and his administration kicked The New Deal into gear. It was a program that offered diverse aid to citizens from protections for money in banks to homeowner assistance. Many Christian leaders came to hate the New Deal, especially libertarians. Their opposition to the New Deal as creeping socialism sparked the National Prayer Breakfast, some of Billy Graham's speeches, and the bonding of capitalism to Christianity and the US. So we should probably know what the New Deal was! Our guest on this episode is Justin Rosolino. He's a high school history teacher and the author of the book "Idiot Sojourning Soul". You can find pictures of Chris' 50-mile New Deal Bike Tour on the website at www.trucepodcast.com. Helpful Links: FDR's Inauguration Speech on C-SPAN Interesting YouTube video about the causes of the Great Depression Topics Discussed: What was the Social Gospel? Who was Franklin Roosevelt? What was the New Deal? The Civilian Conservation Corp The Works Progress Administration Jenny Lake - Grand Teton National Park Unemployment Discussion Questions: Why do some people dislike the New Deal? Which of the programs most impacts you? What do you think of the New Deal? Was it a form of socialism? Do you think there will ever be another New Deal in the US? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make the Truce Podcast In 1955, the Board of Regents for New York issued an optional prayer to be used in public schools. It became known as the "Regent's Prayer". Here it is: "“Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers, and our Country.” That short prayer was contested not only by non-religious people but also by Protestants who thought that it was too vague. What God is it talking about? Where is the mention of Jesus or the Holy Spirit, salvation, sin, grace, etc.? With help from the ACLU, parents sued and the case made it all the way to the US Supreme Court. It was known as Engle v. Vitale. It overturned prescribed prayer in schools. In this episode, Chris goes through the arguments the court and Justice Hugo Black made during this landmark decision. A year later, the Court heard Abington School District v. Schempp, which ended prescribed Bible reading in public schools. This season we're covering how American evangelicals bonded themselves with the Republican Party. There are a lot of reasons that evangelicals started to vote as a block in the late 70s and early 1980s. They range from women's liberation, changes in attitude toward taxation, and battles over gay and lesbian rights, to education. This is part of our coverage of the education section. This episode has been rewritten and recorded, updating an episode from season 3. Sources: "One Nation Under God" by Kevin Kruse Transcript of Abington School District v Schempp Census data about public and private schools Transcript and audio of Engel v Vitale Discussion Questions: Did you ever pray in school? What did you pray? Did you ever read the Bible in school? Is there an "ideal" prayer that should be read in schools? If so, what is it? What objections might parents have? Is it important for school children to learn about religions in school? Do you agree or disagree with Justice Hugo Black? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to support the Truce Podcast It seems like so many people define their faith by what they believe about Donald Trump. How can godly Christians return to the gospel to get us back on track? In this round table discussion episode, Chris is joined by Pastor Ray McDaniel of First Baptist Church in Jackson, WY and Nick Staron to prepare us for the season. Topics Discussed: What is Christianity? The importance of forgiveness and going to those who are angry with us Why it is important to cover things like the Watergate scandals of the 1970s in a Christian podcast The need for humility in our lives The gospel in 10 words or less Do you have a gospel message in 10 words or less? Find Truce on social media and let us know! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give a little to help support the Truce Podcast When did Republicans, the party of Abraham Lincoln, start courting the American South? It's a big question! For decades, Republicans were known as the party that helped black people (except, you know, for ending Reconstruction to help gain the White House). Then, with the nomination of Barry Goldwater, the tide turned. Goldwater's team promoted him as a racist when he toured the South. And... he won some ground in the traditionally Democratic region. So when it came time for Richard Nixon to run in 1968, his team decided to court the South. Not out in public like Goldwater had. Instead, they decided to operate a campaign of "benign neglect" where they would not enforce existing laws meant to protect African-Americans. Our special guest this week is Angie Maxwell, author of The Long Southern Strategy. Discussion Questions: What caused the rift in the Democratic Party that made Strom Thurmond leave (hint: it has to do with Truman)? What was the Democratic Party like before Truman? What influence did Strom Thurmond have on Nixon? Who was Barry Goldwater? How did he change the Republican Party by courting white Southerners? How might the idea of the South being "benighted" impact them as a people? Why do so many evangelicals see themselves as "benighted"? Sources: "The Long Southern Strategy" by Angie Maxwell and Todd Shields. "Reaganland" by Rick Perlstein YouTube clip of Nixon not wanting "Law and Order" to mean "racist" Nixon talking about "law and order" in a speech Nixon's campaign ad about protests and tear gas Article about Nelson Rockefeller Nixon's civil rights ad Helpful Time Magazine article "These Truths" book by Jill Lepore Bio on Strom Thurmond Article about Reconstruction "The Evangelicals" book by Frances Fitzgerald Truman's speech to the NAACP Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help make Truce! Billy Graham, the famous evangelist, was good friends with Richard Nixon. The two played golf and gave each other advice. Graham was the person who encouraged Nixon to run for president a second time. He also encouraged Nixon to regularly attend church, so Nixon started the first regular church service in the White House, only to make it another "it" place to be seen. But when Nixon's crimes were made public, Graham continued to support him, commenting only on the strong language used by the president. What does it mean for Christian leaders to stand behind a corrupt president? In this episode, Chris interviews David Bruce, a historian at the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association. NOTE: I thought it was especially important to outline the many crimes of the Nixon administration. Today these crimes are downplayed by bad actors wishing to rewrite history. It is important to emphasize that not only were there immoral acts of shenanigans, there were real crimes perpetrated against individuals, organizations, and the American people. Sources "The Surprising Work of God" by Garth M. Rosell An article from The Atlantic about the Pope and Mussolini "The Popes Against the Protestants" by Kevin Madigan NPR interview with Kevin Madigan "A Prophet With Honor" book by William Martin "The Invisible Bridge" by Rick Perlstein "The Evangelicals" by Frances Fitzgerald "The Failure and the Hope: Essays of Southern Churchmen" book of essays accessed on Google Books New York Times article about how the Watergate break-in was financed Pat Buchanan hearings during the Watergate investigation Frost/Nixon transcript Discussion Questions: Was Billy Graham being a good friend by supporting Nixon after Watergate? Should religious leaders maintain a certain amount of distance between themselves and people of power? Why do we like to see our governmental leaders as religious people? Was Nixon's church service in the Whitehouse wrong to be a gathering place of the rich and famous? How bad was the Watergate break-in? How does it change your mind about Nixon to know about the other criminal activity? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help the Truce Podcast! Harold Ockenga was a famous fundamentalist(ish) pastor from Boston. And he had a problem. Liberal Christians had the ear of the government. That meant that military chaplain positions and free radio time were going to liberals, not conservatives. Why shouldn't conservatives have access to the radio waves like theologically liberal Christians? But that would take unity among evangelicals, or, what he called neo-evangelicals. Neo-evangelicals were evangelicals who didn't separate from the world. In Ockenga's case, this meant maybe going to the movies or an opera. So he, along with other preachers like Billy Graham, founded the National Association of Evangelicals with the hope of uniting neo-evangelicals under one banner. It didn't work. The real story, though, sometimes gets lost. The was a big boom in evangelism in the 1940s as WWII wrapped up. Evangelists targeted the youth with organizations like Campus Crusade for Christ springing up left and right. This boom meant that churches swelled in the 1950s, only to begin their long slide a few decades later. In this episode, Chris speaks with Joel Carpenter, a senior research fellow at Calvin College and author of "Revive Us Again". Resources Used: "Revive Us Again" by Joel Carpenter "The Evangelicals" by Frances Fitzgerald "The Surprising Work of God" by Garth Rosell "Reaganland" by Rick Perlstein NPS article about the Bonus Army “After the Ivory Tower Falls” book by Will Bunch Billy Graham audio National Association of Evangelicals "The New Treason" Interviews from Harold Ockenga at Wheaton College Discussion Questions: What spurred the revivals of the 1940s? How has youth evangelism shaped American society? Why is it important to understand the role that cheap higher education played in shaping the 1960s? Why did neo-evangelicals feel that they needed access to the radio waves? Is unity important to the Christian walk? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help the Truce Podcast Thomas McIntyre stood before the US Congress to deliver a moving speech. The man was being hounded by a fringe movement known as the New Right. The movement came from the work of men like Paul Weyrich, Howard Phillips, and Richard Viguerie. Their goal was to disrupt the Republican Party. They wanted to do away with much of the federal government and program to help the poor while simultaneously cutting taxes and increasing the military. They hoped to accomplish this by controlling direct mail. Direct mail! It sounds silly, but by inundating voters and congressional offices with bulk mail they could control the story. Men like McIntyre and Senator Mark Hatfield didn't know what to do with this influx of petty politics. Someone had even gone so far as to question Hatfield's Christian salvation just because of how we was going to vote on the Panama Canal treaty. What does giving the Panama Canal back to Panama have to do with salvation? Almost nothing. Today, we're going to explore this wacky phenomenon where we call something "Christian" or "biblical" if it fits out politics not if it is addressed in the Bible. How are we being manipulated by propaganda like this? And what can we do about it? Discussion Questions: Was the United States responsible in its claiming the Panama Canal as a territory? Are there things in your life that you mix with Christianity? How have your politics gotten confused with your faith? Does the Bible have anything to say on the Panama Canal treaty? Sources: "Reaganland" book by Rick Perlstein Handy article on the history of the Panama Canal Congressional record including the speeches Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce In this special bonus episode, Truce host Chris Staron walks you through a day in the life of a podcast host. He works about 11 hours per day between this show and his full-time job driving a school bus. Imagine what he could do if he were doing this show full-time!!!! Chris has worked on Truce for 6 1/2 years and is ready to make the show his main focus. We could make that happen if every listener gave $15 per year! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce Season six is almost here! This season we're exploring the backstory of why so many evangelicals turned to the Republican Party in the 1970s and 80s. It's a huge story that involves murder, corruption, greed, taxes, school choice, racism, and a lot of big questions. Special guests include Rick Perlstein, Frances Fitzgerald, Marjorie Spruill, Jesse Eisinger, and so many more. Subscribe to Truce wherever you get your podcasts, or listen at trucepodcast.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris keep Truce going! Season six is coming along nicely! I'm super busy trying to get it all put together before I start releasing episodes. But I want to also make everyone aware that I'm looking for more advertisers for the show. Want to participate? Visit www.trucepodcast.com/advertise to get started! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce! Joseph McCarthy was an unexceptional junior congressman from Wisconsin. He grew up brawling in the streets, playing cards, and embellishing his stories. Then, during a Lincoln Day address in 1950, Joseph McCarthy told an audience that he had a list of 205 communists working in the government. Within days, he was a household name. McCarthy started "investigating" suspected communists in the American government, focusing on the US State Department. Along the way, he brought in a young lawyer named Roy Cohn. Cohn was already known for his work sending Julius and Ethel Rosenberg to the electric chair. Now, he and McCarthy bullied and cajoled during private hearings. Being labeled a communist, or even a suspected communist could ruin a person's career. People committed suicide rather than face their scrutiny. Their reign lasted four years, ending in the televised broadcasts of the Army-McCarthy hearings in which a lawyer asked if McCarthy had any decency. That was pretty much it for McCarthy. But Roy Cohn went on to have a well-connected career, providing legal services for the mob and Rupert Murdoch, owner of Fox News. He also became a mentor to a young real estate mogul named Donald Trump. Famous people like Andy Warhol attended his birthday party at Studio 54. Cohn died of AIDS, something that was killing gay men rapidly in the 1980s, though he denied he ever had it. This is the story of two men allowed to prey on the fears of the American people for their own gain. One fell hard, the other found himself fighting against his own people. In this episode, Chris interviews Larry Tye, author of the book "Demagogue". He's also the author of "Satchel: The Life and Times of an American Legend" and "Bobby Kennedy: The Making of a Liberal Icon". Sources: "Demagogue" by Larry Tye Helpful article about the Rosenbergs Article about Klaus Fuchs McCarthy's speech in Wheeling, WV New York Times, February 23, 1954. Pages 16-17 “Transcript of General Zwicker's Testimony Before the McCarthy Senate Subcommittee” Video from Army-McCarthy hearings (forward to the last 20 minutes if you want to jump to the stuff I used) The guest list for Roy Cohn's birthday at Studio 54 Discussion Questions: Why do we love demagogues? Who are other demagogues in American history? The threat of communists in the government in the 1950s is sometimes downplayed. Do you think it was a real concern? McCarthy ran for Congress in an illegal way while still in the Marines. How do you feel about that? Roy Cohn sometimes went against his own people, claiming that gay people did not deserve equal rights. What might have been his motivation? Do you see any crossover between McCarthy, Cohn, and Donald Trump? Cohn died of AIDs in the 1980s when the disease was at its peak. Why might he have wanted to keep his illness a secret? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make the Truce Podcast! The Love Thy Neighborhood podcast is really well produced. But they also take deep dives into some of the things going on in modern Christianity that I can't cover on Truce. They are a good supplement to the stuff we cover on this feed. So we thought... why not share each other's show? In this bonus episode, you'll hear Chris talking with Anna Tran and Jesse Eubanks about their episode "Where the Gospel Meets Artificial Intelligence". It is a look into the ways in which AI may someday try to gain ground in the spiritual realm. Also, they do an interview with TikTok evangelist York Moore who uses that medium to share the gospel. I was especially interested in the ways in which AI chatbots are building false relationships with people, taking the place of human interactions. They cover a lot of ground! Let them know that you heard about their show from the Truce Podcast! Season six starts in just a few months, but I will be launching a bonus episode in a few weeks. Subscribe so you get every new episode as it's released. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Season 5 of the Truce Podcast was a blast! I'm hard at work on season 6, which will discuss how American evangelicals got tied to the Republican Party. It is already coming together so well! I can't wait to share it with you. God willing, season 6 will drop in the fall or early winter of 2023. Like, subscribe, sign up for the email list, and remember the show in your prayers! Godspeed! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to support the Truce Podcast On March 4, 1933, FDR delivered his inaugural address. In it, he used the phrase "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself". I did a little searching and this phrase is used a LOT in Christian books. So often. But it almost always refers to the fear one person has in their heart. In reality, it is a comment on collective fear. The Great Depression started in 1929 and was exacerbated by a bank run in which Americans lost faith in the value of our currency and the banking systems. That is an important distinction. FDR's speech is about collective fear. As I've contemplated the modernist/fundamentalist debate this season, I keep returning to the idea of fear, not in the US economy but in God's economy. He commands us to love the Lord, keep His commands, love our neighbors, turn the other cheek, and give to those who ask of us. Why do we forget to do this important work? Could it be because we've lost faith in God's economy? This episode features a clip from my discussion with Jacob Goldstein, former host of NPR's Planet Money podcast and the current host of Pushkin's What's Your Problem? podcast. His book is Money: The True Story of a Made-up Thing. Select Sources FDR's Inaugural Address Jacob Goldstein's Money: The True Story of a Made-Up Thing Movie: It's a Wonderful Life Discussion Questions: Why does it matter that FDR's quote "...the only thing we have to fear is fear itself" is a collective statement and not one about individual fear? What are some identifying features of God's economy? Do you trust in the way that God tells us to do things? When was the last time you prayed for someone who you don't like? Do you believe in turning the other cheek? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Love Truce? Give a little to help support the show! "The ends justify the means" is a phrase we hear occasionally. Often it is used to justify bad behavior, so long as it creates a profitable outcome. But we Christians know that we are called to live righteous lives. Are we people of the ends, or should we be known as a people of the means? Chris is joined this week by Pastor Ray McDaniel of First Baptist Church in Jackson, WY, and his twin brother Nick Staron to discuss this important issue. Discussion Questions: What does "the ends justify the means" mean? How have you seen that philosophy played out? Is that something you believe? How would things change if we focused more on the way we do things instead of our goals? How have fundamentalists justified their goals with poor behavior? How have modernists? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give a little to help Chris continue to make Truce! In 1945, C.S. Lewis published his excellent book "The Great Divorce". It happens to be one of my favorite books. It has many themes, the biggest of which is that there can be no hell in heaven. The two are divorced from each other (hence the title). Another is that humans are easily distracted from God's work and the gospel. This season I've been telling the backstory of Christian fundamentalism. I think many of us have been distracted from the gospel because of politics or the people around us. If you were joined by a loved one who passed away or an angel who challenged you to walk to heaven, would you? What distracts you from following Jesus? From really going for it? Special thanks to my improv troupe (Nick, Josh, and Jackie) who helped with voices. Additional vocal work came from Paul Hastings from the "Compelled" podcast and Jerry Dugan from "Beyond the Rut". Give their shows a listen and let me know what you think! Sources: The Great Divorce by C.S. Lewis (though I only used some concepts) Discussion Questions: What distracts you from following God? Are you tied too strongly to things? Safety? Your family? Your job? Your identity? Your politics? What books do you read over and over again? Why? How can a person's own love of intellectualism be a distraction? How can we have compassion? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In the fall of 1814, the powers of Europe gathered together to discuss what to do with the continent after the Napoleonic Wars. Napoleon had changed a lot in his time in power! He cowed the Roman Catholic Church, ended serfdom where he went, freed Jews from their ghettos, took away kingdoms, and placed new kings in charge. The Congress of Vienna was tasked with a Humpty Dumpty scenario and they couldn't put Europe back together again. The various countries also wanted to be compensated for their efforts to stop Napoleon. Couldn't they take a little piece of land? Encroach on one of the lesser kingdoms? Install their own puppet governments? In trying to undo all of the changes Napoleon made, they became little Napoleons themselves. In the same way, when we confront extremism with extremism we become exactly what we dislike. Shouldn't Christians be more focused on simple righteousness than culture wars? Select Sources: The Rites of Peace by Adam Zamoyski Napoleon: A Life by Andrew Roberts (a great place to start if you want to learn about Napoleon) Discussion Questions: What was the Congress of Vienna? Why did the congress matter? Have you ever served God to the point where it cost you something big to do so? How have you seen the modern Church become what it opposes? Have you seen Christians or churches act in a righteous way? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Donate to help Chris make Truce! The first-century Christian Church had a lot going on. Their Savior died and was resurrected, sending the Holy Spirit and leaving them with the command to take this new message to all tribes and tongues. The book of Acts records some of their travels, as they went all over the known world with this good news. But they were not the only people evangelizing. So were the gnostics. Gnosticism takes a lot of different shapes. It was a belief system that challenged Christianity, even as some tried to incorporate elements into the faith. Now consider modernist theology - what we've been talking about all season. It is a belief system that doesn't believe in the miracles or the divinity of Jesus. To evangelicals of the 1800s and 1900s, this was a real threat. Like Gnosticism before it, modernism threatened to destabilize the gospel message. What to do? In this bonus episode, Chris takes a look at 1-3 John to see what they have to say about dealing with heresy. Chris is hard at work on season 6! He'll be presenting these short episodes in the meantime to recap some of the themes of season 5. Discussion Questions: If you were alive in the mid-1800s and saw modernism rising, what would you do? Do you think modernism is a heresy? How should Christians today deal with heresy? What did the fundamentalists get right and how did they mess up when approaching heresy? Selected Source Materials: 1-3 John "The Early Church" by Henry Chadwick Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Rebroadcast! Chris has had a VERY busy few months! He's had to move (again!) and was in 2 different car accidents (neither of them his fault, but everyone was okay). He's busy at work on season 6 and there are a bunch of great "takeaway" mini-episodes coming up soon. With all of the hubbub and busyness, let's rerun this classic episode from season 3. Thanks for your patience! God willing, we'll talk again in two weeks. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

US Senator Joseph McCarthy unleashed an era of suspicion on the American people as he went looking for communists. His trials, both public and behind closed doors, focused on the government as well as Hollywood and the Army. He claimed that he had lists of communists, but failed to produce that list. It wasn't until the Army-McCarthy hearings in the spring and summer of 1954 that his unfounded hearings were put to rest. One year later the play Inherit the Wind opened. It was supposed to be a critique of the McCarthy era set inside of a re-telling of the Scopes "monkey" trial. In doing so, it got many of the facts wrong. John Scopes never spent any time in jail. He didn't have a girlfriend, and that girlfriend was not berated on the stand. The townspeople of Dayton, TN were welcoming to both Bryan and Darrow. To explore this work of art and revisionist history I spoke with the hosts of the Seeing and Believing podcast Kevin McLenithan and Sarah Welch-Larson. Select differences between the Scopes trial and Inherit the Wind John Scopes was arrested but never spent time in jail. He was "arrested" in a soda fountain where the test trial was conceived and not in school. Scopes later claimed he never taught evolution, which is why he never took the stand in real life. The entire case was set up as a publicity stunt to bring attention to the town of Dayton, TN. They got the idea when they saw an ad placed by the ACLU. The character of Rachel did not exist in real life. The people of Dayton were welcoming to both Darrow and Bryan and Scopes was loved by many. He even spent time swimming with the prosecution between trial sessions. The moment when Bryan was on trial was held outdoors. H.L. Mencken was not some loveable curmudgeon. He was an anti-semite and a racist. Dayton largely did not vote for Bryan when he ran for president. Bryan died a few days after the trial, not while in the courtroom. Darrow did not carry a copy of the Bible and Darwin out of the courtroom. The textbook in question during the trial was clearly pro-eugenics, was sold in the soda fountain, and had been approved by the state textbook committee. The preachers of the town were kind. The odd sermon given the night of the trial never happened and the script adds a lot of strange things that are not in the Bible. Bryan wished the law to have no penalty, unlike his stand-in in the movie who hoped for a harsher punishment. Sources Inherit the Wind (1960 version) starring Spencer Tracy Summer for the Gods by Edward Larson Chris' own visit to the Dayton museum dedicated to the trial Helpful video about the Napoleon painting Discussion Questions: Where is the line between art and propaganda? Does art have an obligation to the truth? Do you see McCarthyism in Inherit the Wind? Is Inherit the Wind a fair way of discussing the Scopes trial, or a work of revisionist history? Why does it matter? What would it mean for a group that feels maligned and misunderstood to have a film misrepresent them? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Love Truce?? Donate to keep the show going! The trial was basically over. The prosecution won. John Scopes was moments away from being convicted of teaching evolution in Dayton, Tennessee. The ACLU and the prosecution had what they wanted. But Clarence Darrow did not. He wanted to make a monkey out of William Jennings Bryan, the famous "fundamentalist". But how? Darrow knew that if he turned down the chance to make a closing argument that Bryan would not be able to make one either. That meant that Bryan's carefully crafted words would never get heard. But he had one more trick up his sleeve. He would call Bryan, the lawyer for the prosecution, to the stand. Imagine that! The case was no longer about the defendant. It was about the lawyers trying to flex. Bryan took the bait. He got on the stand outdoors next to the Rhea County Courthouse in front of an audience of millions. Darrow, in a masterstroke, hit him over and over with the questions of any village atheist. Did Jonah really get swallowed by a large fish? Did the sun really stand still because Joshua prayed that it would? And Bryan... floundered on live radio. This event was made even more famous by the long-running play Inherit the Wind on broadway, which was followed up by a movie adaptation. But the play got it all wrong. Edward Larson, professor at Pepperdine University, and author of the Pulitzer Prize-winning book Summer for the Gods, joins Chris to uncover what really happened on that muggy summer day. Helpful Sources: "Summer for the Gods" by Edward Larson Rhea County Heritage and Scopes Trial Museum Worth a visit! Court Transcript of the Scopes Trial (easy to find online) "A Godly Hero" by Michael Kazin Discussion Questions: Bryan believed in majoritarianism. What is that idea? What do you think of it? Do you think Bryan should have gotten on the stand? Why or why not? How did Bryan do on the stand in your opinion? Does this court case matter in your understanding of fundamentalism? How and when should Christians make stands for their beliefs? When should we stay quiet? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris do Truce full time! Tennessee was the first state in the United States to crack down hard on the teaching of evolution in public schools. Others had dabbled, but Tennessee went all the way. The ACLU wanted to challenge the validity of the case in the courts. In order to do that they needed an educator to teach it, get busted, and be brought to trial. At the same time, the town of Dayton, TN needed a boost. After the biggest employer closed down it faced serious economic trouble. What if the men of Dayon could manufacture a court case to draw the attention of the nation? They found a young teacher named John Scopes and convinced him to participate in their scheme. They booked Scopes, even though he probably never taught evolution. The ACLU had its case. Soon William Jennings Bryan and Clarence Darrow hopped on board and it went from a publicity stunt to something for the history books. This is the event that some historians (wrongly) point to as the death of Christian fundamentalism in the United States until it was revived by the Moral Majority. One man fighting for the biblical idea of creation and another for godless atheism. But the real history is far more complex. Edward Larson, professor at Pepperdine University, joins us to discuss the trial and his Pulitzer Prize-winning book "Summer for the Gods". Helpful Sources: "Summer for the Gods" by Edward Larson Rhea County Heritage and Scopes Trial Museum Worth a visit! Court Transcript of the Scopes Trial (easy to find online) "A Godly Hero" by Michael Kazin Discussion Questions: What events led to the Scopes trial? Why did the ACLU feel they had to try the Tennessee Law? Who should decide what is taught in schools? Teachers? Parents? Lawmakers? Or some combination? What were William Jennings Bryan's motives for joining the prosecution? What were Clarence Darrow's motives for joining the defense? Should prayer be allowed before a trial about religion? Should Christians get involved in what is taught in schools? To what degree? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Truce! Donate here. In the 1600s, an Irish Archbishop named James Ussher did a bunch of math. The Bible is full of numbers and genealogies. He sat down and calculated that, in his opinion, the Bible dated creation at 4004 BC. According to Ussher, that is when God created man. That number has really stuck around! I gathered my small group together to explore the Adams Synchronological Chart. It is a 23-foot-long timeline of human history, beginning in 4004 BC and ending in 1900. There it was! The 4004 BC number! Which brings up an interesting question, right? What did Christians really believe about evolution just before it became a linchpin battle for fundamentalists? I turned to Edward Larson for answers. He's a professor at Pepperdine University and the author of the Pulitzer Prize-winning book "Summer for the Gods". The book chronicles the Scopes "Monkey" trial that we'll be covering in the next two episodes. But it also gives us a great introductory look at what Christians believed about evolution in the build-up to the trial. It turns out that evangelical Christians and even fundamentalists were all over the place when it came to ideas of evolution. Many Christians, like William Jennings Bryan, believed in an old earth and even some forms of evolution. But they thought that it was God who caused that evolution. Charles Darwin, though, said that evolution was a matter of chance adaptations, thus cutting God out of the equation. Fundamentalists like Bryan were determined to stop the spread of Darwinian evolution for that very reason. They believed that if young people were taught that they were the result of grand mistakes then what reason did they have to treat each other with respect? To be good citizens? Helpful Sources "Summer for the Gods" by Edward Larson "A Godly Hero" by Michael Kazin "The Birth of a Nation" on YouTube Article about James Ussher and his burial in Westminster Abbey Helpful article about Lamarck "The Evangelicals" by Francis Fitzgerald More about Henry Ford's Anti-Semitism An interesting article about "The Birth of a Nation" Discussion Questions: How did Cuvier and Lamarck differ in their ideas about evolution? Do you believe in a young or old earth? Do you believe in some evolution, macro-evolution, or no evolution at all? What is the best way to oppose an idea? When should we propose laws to combat ideas we don't like and when should we allow others to believe what they like? Do you think the fundamentalists were right to combat teaching evolution in schools? Now that you know about Bryan's failure to call out the KKK, what do you think of him? "Birth of a Nation" shaped American views about black people. Are there more modern films and series that have shaped society in similar ways? Or changed public opinion in other ways? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce! Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb were wealthy young men in the early 1920s. They lived in big homes in Chicago and had world-class educations. They were both pushed hard academically, and Richard was sexually abused as a child. Both graduated early from high school and college. The two were an odd pairing. Nathan was quiet and awkward, not particularly handsome. Richard was gregarious and outgoing, good-looking... and a psychopath. Nathan loved Richard, and the two sometimes had sex with each other. Richard realized he could control Nathan by trading intimacy for criminal activity. They started with typical juvenile delinquent behavior. Soon, though, Richard wanted more. He considered himself a master criminal, someone too smart to get caught. He and Nathan were exposed to the ideas of Friedrich Nietzsche. Nietzsche wrote that the ultimate purpose of humanity was to evolve into what he called the ubermensch or superman. Leopold and Loeb thought they were that evolved human. Therefore, they should be able to plot and execute the murder of a young boy without ever getting caught. Only, they were so bad at it that it took very little time to pin it on them. Only the brilliance of Clarence Darrow, the country's most prominent defense attorney, could save their lives. In this episode, we're joined by Candace Fleming. She's the author of the book Murder Among Friends about the crime. The version of Also Sprach Zarathustra used in this episode is courtesy of the Creative Commons License and was produced by Kevin MacLeod. Sources: Murder Among Friends by Candace Fleming Helpful article on the Houston Symphony's website about Also Sprach Zarathustra Article about what Nietzsche meant by "God is dead" Full text of Also Sprach Zarathustra Helpful video about Nietzsche's work Smithsonian article about Leopold and Loeb William Jennings Bryan's closing arguments of the Scopes trial Clarence Darrow's closing arguments of the Leopold and Loeb trial Discussion Questions: Now that you know what the song Also Sprach Zarathustra is about, does it change your opinion of the piece? Do you think Nietzsche was right to worry about what would happen after Christianity took a back seat to world events? What should have been our response? With this little bit we covered about Nietzsche today, what do you think of his work? Can you see why it makes Chris nervous just to mention it in an episode? Do you see the connection between evolution and superman? Were people like Darrow and Bryan right to be concerned about young people learning Nietzsche's philosophy? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Eugenics. It's one of those words that gets thrown around these days, often by people accusing "the other side" of wrongdoing. But what is eugenics? I invited law professor Paul Lombardo, author of "Three Generations, No Imbeciles", to join me to try to answer that very question. It turns out that that question is harder to answer than you'd think. In the early 1900s, the word "eugenic" was often used to mean "pure" or to imply that a product was healthy for babies. But that word also extended into segregating certain populations from society and forced sterilizations. It is important to understand the history of eugenics because some Christians use the fear of eugenics as a lens to understand the Scopes "Monkey" trial. I think that is an accurate connection, but we really should understand it. Did William Jennings Bryan support eugenics? Can Christians support eugenics? Many did. There were even competitions that rewarded pastors for writing pro-eugenics sermons. That was especially true for liberal pastors. In this episode, we attempt to answer some tough questions. I hope you enjoy it! Helpful Sources: "Three Generations, No Imbeciles" by Paul Lombardo "Preaching Eugenics" by Christine Rosen "Summer for the Gods" by Edward Larson An article from Smithsonian Magazine about Herbert Spencer Paul's article about William Jennings Bryan's support of the WCTU and eugenics CDC article about syphilis Helpful article about the immigration act Helpful Focus on the Family article about how some Christians don't believe that the sins of the father carry over Washington Post article about the "welfare queen" of the Reagan era Discussion Questions: What is eugenics? How did the term "eugenics" differ in the early 1900s from today? Are you in favor of eugenics? Why or why not? How is eugenics tied to evolution? How is it not? Do Christians have a responsibility to play when it comes to protecting people with special needs? What can we do to help those with special needs? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices