Editor’s Note: This piece was written Monday, June 6.

Thirty-two years ago today, President Ronald Reagan stood above the rocky crags of Normandy, France and commemorated the largest and most significant military operation in the 20th Century. To the brave men who survived D-Day, he said, “You were young the day you took these cliffs; some of you were hardly more than boys, with the deepest joys of life before you. Yet, you risked everything here. Why? …What impelled you to put aside the instinct for self-preservation and risk your lives to take these cliffs? What inspired all the men of the armies that met here? We look at you, and somehow we know the answer. It was faith and belief; it was loyalty and love… You all knew that some things are worth dying for.”

So many tales of courage from that day have been handed down through the generations like fine heirlooms, knit together in the legacy of self-sacrifice. Today, 72 years removed from those heroic moments, the deep tradition that once burned bright in the hearts of our troops grows fainter with every policy issued by this administration. Apart from the size of the Army, which has nearly sunk to pre-World War II levels, very little about the military resembles the glory days of that epic campaign. And while brave men and women are still driven by a pride and calling greater than themselves, the ethos of the world’s strongest force is being profoundly changed.

Under President Obama, the military is not a symbol of American might, but American “rights.” As far as the Left is concerned, the most important battle of this administration is an internal one, marked by seven and a half years of social engineering. In an age where even the presence of a Bible verse at your workstation can get you court-martialed, it seems almost unfathomable that a modern president would call the nation to prayer like Franklin Roosevelt did in the wake of the thousands of men storming those bloody beaches. Now, Wallace Henley mourns, FDR’s heartfelt prayer “would probably evoke outrage, condemnation, scorn, and lawsuits: ‘Almighty God: Our sons, pride of our Nation, this day have set upon a mighty endeavor, a struggle to preserve our Republic, our religion, and our civilization, and to set free a suffering humanity.’”

Today, the president’s pride is not in our sons — but radical activists of the LGBT Left, the daughters he would force into combat, and the godless comforts of a faithless force. Imagine what those heroes would think now, when their commander-in-chief’s greatest priority isn’t buying parts for worn-down airplanes and tanks but guaranteeing veterans gender reassignment surgery. In a rule proposed last week, the administration is hoping to end the ban on taxpayer-funded sex changes for vets. It’s astounding. Wounded veterans are literally dying for proper medical attention while President Obama is busy financing his agenda of gender anarchy. I suppose we shouldn’t be surprised, when traitors like Chelsea (formerly Bradley) Manning are being rewarded for their acts of sedition with hormone therapy at taxpayer expense while those who served honorably go without. Apparently, putting American lives at risk — like Manning has done — entitles you to better treatment than people with actual combat disabilities. That’s the Obama military: distinguished veterans die while dishonorable traitors get sex changes. If you want a snapshot of this administration’s priorities, that’s it.

Unfortunately, there are several more — including the latest controversy with our own Lt. General Jerry Boykin (U.S. Army-Ret.), who was supposed to be at Fort Riley for today’s anniversary. That all changed when organizers of the base’s prayer breakfast decided that a Christian was too religious to keynote the popular event. Cowed by secular bullies, Major General Wayne Grigsby disinvited the former Special Operations commander, prompting a grassroots firestorm that barraged the base’s phone lines and filled its Facebook page with thousands of complaints. Rev. Franklin Graham came to the General’s defense in a fiery post calling the base’s decision “sickening.” “It is unbelievable,” Graham wrote, “that our country has fallen to this point and that Christianity is the only thing it’s okay to be intolerant of and discriminate against. Excuse me, General Boykin’s first amendment rights still exist, and so do those of everyone who wants to hear him speak.” Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas), one of the members of the Senate Armed Services Committee tweeted: “Unbelievable and unconscionable: @genboykin, a true American hero, comes under attack by the PC police – again.” Kansas Congressman Tim Huelskamp (R) chimed in next, taking aim at the Military Religious Freedom Foundation that orchestrated the complaint. “Weinstein’s protests against Lt. General Boykin’s appearance simply because he is a decorated military hero with deeply held religious beliefs is simply un-American. Lt. General Boykin is a fantastic speaker for such a prayer breakfast because of his long and admirable career serving in the Army and his deeply held religious beliefs.”

Yesterday, even the president issued a strong statement on the importance of religious liberty — for Muslims! The man who’s spent most of his two terms apologizing for Christianity — or outright attacking it — is more than happy to celebrate a religion that a majority of the country doesn’t practice. Still, the president insisted, Ramadan is a holy month. “I stand firmly with Muslim American communities,” his statement read, “in rejection of the voices that seek to divide or limit our religious freedoms or civil rights. I stand committed to safeguarding the civil rights of all Americans no matter their religion or appearance.” In the meantime, the administration’s assault on Christianity within the ranks continues as soldiers, sailors, Marines, and airmen are systematically being denied the ability to live openly by their religious beliefs.

Originally published here.

I Spot the Sheriff…

What kind of country sends a sheriff’s deputy to a child’s home for quoting Scripture? Yours! In a story that sounds like something out of communist China, a seven-year-old boy is being reprimanded for handing out Bible verses to his peers over lunch. And the punishment doesn’t exactly fit the crime. Fox News’s Todd Starnes could barely believe his ears when he heard about the first grade son of Christina and Jaime Zavala.

For weeks, Christina had put Bible verses in her son’s lunch bag, which he usually read aloud to his friends in the cafeteria. “It wasn’t long before children asked for copies of the notes and Mrs. Zavala obliged — including a brief note to explain the daily Bible verse,” Starnes reports. Eventually, the tradition caught the attention of school officials, who warned the family that sharing Scriptures at school was “not allowed.” The family complied, only to find out that the principal made a ban on Bible verses official school policy. One evening, after the boy had moved his Scripture sharing to a public sidewalk, the deputy sheriff was on their Zavalas’ doorstep — sent by the school to deal with the “problem.”

Liberty Counsel, which is representing the family, says the visit was supposed to be a “friendly warning,” but the undertone was anything but. “It should shock the conscious of every freedom-loving American,” the Counsel’s Harry Mihet said. “Apparently, all the real criminals have been dealt with in Palmdale — and now they’re going after kids who share Bible verses during lunch time.” Surely, there are better uses of the California police force than scolding a little boy for sharing the virtue and morality of the Bible. What’s more, this was outside of class time and off school property. If that doesn’t dispel the idea that the government is neutral on religion, I don’t know what will. Neutrality says we won’t make a value judgment. But clearly, this school — and hundreds of others — have made one. And it isn’t a good one — or, as most attorneys will tell you, a constitutional one.

Originally published here.