All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 10, 2025 - The David Knight Show
39:21
From Marxism to Gender Delusion: Societal Collapse
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
The book is A Godless Crusade, a progressive campaign to rid the world of religion, I guess any religion except theirs.
Thank you so much for joining us.
And of course, Dr. Richard Creighton is a psychologist and a psychoanalyst, and I'm not really sure what the difference is between those two.
He is a professor emeritus from Harvard Medical School.
We won't hold that against you.
Sorry.
But give us an idea of what you see as a problem with the left.
And you say I diagnose it as a psychological disorder.
I think we can all see elements of it, but give us your take on it as a psychoanalyst.
You know, I think one of the problems that we have with understanding the left is understanding their version of reality.
The diagnosis of a mental disorder really revolves around a certain consensual understanding of what reality is.
And if you're dealing with a group that has a separate reality or has a whole different set of tenets that make up their reality, then it's almost impossible to use the usual diagnostic approach to understanding what they're about.
So from the perspective of the conservative mind, the left is clearly at some level mentally disturbed.
On the other hand, they're not playing by the same rules that we are.
And so if you can't get a consensual agreement about what the rules are, then it's impossible to really even define what mental disorder is.
That's right.
They constantly tell us that they've got their own truth.
They've got their own reality, right?
Yeah, well, this is what the neo-Marxist post-modern philosophies are about.
They're about the idea that there is no truth, that there's moral relativism.
And again, I think it speaks to what I've been listening to you talking about, the whole idea of promoting conflict.
And the conflict is persistent.
And as a result, there's no possibility of producing a coherent society, which is how they intend to transform the society by undermining it.
Yes, yes.
And the conflict is key.
Now, how did these people get in charge of everything?
I have people ask me that all the time.
And it's like, as you point out, they've infiltrated the universities, they've infiltrated politics, even churches, corporations, and so forth.
How did they get in charge of all this stuff?
Well, I think I'm old enough to realize where it began, at least from my perspective, and that was probably back in the 60s.
And the idea of a violent revolution was not seen as something that was likely to be workable in the United States or in the West.
And so the approach was instead to infiltrate the institutions and to produce this conflict around race in particular and around any other division that they could inject into society.
And as a result, rather than being active on the streets, the activists entered the institutions.
They entered higher education in particular.
And from there, they just moved on to all positions of leadership.
And so at this point, again, virtually all of the institutions have been markedly infiltrated by this type of thought.
I agree.
I think it really is.
You know, the educational institutions are really seminal in this.
They act as seminaries for this type of thing.
And I always think back to Bill Ayers.
Do you see that as part of, you mentioned how they switched from kind of a class-based struggle, which the Marxists used in Europe, to a race-based struggle.
And they were the ones who really kind of popularized.
I think somebody else came up with the term white-skinned privilege.
They just shortened it to white privilege.
And Bill Ayers and his group there stopped bombing buildings and they decided they would start bombing mines and they got involved in education, right?
Yeah, Herbert Marcuse, who was part of the Frankfurt School coming over from Europe back in the 60s, became prominent in the educational system in California.
Angela Davis was one of his students.
Bill Ayers, again of the same mindset.
And Barack Obama, you know, really is, you know, just a generation removed from that.
And so again, this has been a systematic infiltration of the institutions.
And I think unfortunately most Americans have been naive and probably good-natured enough not to believe that this is truly happening.
That's right.
People don't want to believe that this is, they don't want to believe the worst of people.
And we typically will project our values onto them.
I remember at the end of Barack Obama's administration, I think it was Harry Belafonte, I believe, who would support him, who was very leftist.
And he said, I don't know who this guy is.
We just projected our values on him.
And of course, he was disappointed that Obama had not been radical enough.
But I think we all wind up doing that to some degree.
We can't believe that somebody would do the types of things that people will do out there.
But how do you see this happening with the various adoptions that are happening right now at Gen Z?
You've got a stat in your book, 42% of Gen Z is struggling with depression, which is double the rate of older adults.
What is causing that?
Well, there's a number of causes.
Clearly, the internet and social media and the iPhone has played a role.
And you can look at the statistics and you can see that as people spend more time on their screens, they become more and more anxious and more depressed.
But in addition, again, the loss of a commonly held set of religious values, moral values, I think has left most young people with the sense that there's no meaning in their life.
And so they can't look to any defined sort of meaning.
And as a result, you know, the human psyche is essentially conservative.
And it's unable to keep up with some of the technological advances that have been made over the last 20, 30 years.
And so as a result, you know, we're seeing a kind of revolt of the mind that really can't absorb what the technological changes are that have been occurring.
And it's really going to accelerate with artificial intelligence, isn't it?
Absolutely.
I think that's going to be a huge problem.
Yeah, we look at this generation that is constantly online, as you point out, and on social media, it's making them anxious.
They've lost a moral foundation.
They don't have a framework of what's right or wrong.
And they're just kind of adrift.
And then we bring into this mix this tool that can be used.
It's not necessarily that it's going to do its own thing, but it is being wielded by people.
They have people who are setting a bias into this thing.
And yet people are going to be able to do it.
By all means.
I mean, I've done some recent searches on AI just to see whether or not there is a clearly artificially induced bias within the system, and there's no doubt about it.
You get questions that really just mimic the propaganda of the left when you get an answer.
Yes.
And they pay people to do that.
I mean, it is a deliberate thing.
What I find so dangerous about it is that it operates under the veneer that it is objective when it is anything other than that.
As an engineer, we would constantly be warned by our professors, garbage in, garbage out, right?
Don't take this as something that is objective fact simply because you've got a computer printout.
And yet people will do that with artificial intelligence.
It sounds very intelligent.
It sounds very authoritative.
Well, unfortunately, most people will trade almost anything for comfort and ease.
And so if it's easy, if it helps them write their papers, helps them do their studies, helps them with whatever they're trying to do, they'll defer to that without being critical about what they're absorbing.
Let's talk a little bit about the corporations because we just had Cracker Barrel update this.
First, they changed the logo, and I saw that, and I thought, yeah, but are they going to still change the interior of the buildings?
Because that's not what the customers want.
And now the Cracker Barrel CEO has tapped out and said, we're not going to spend all this money remodeling all these things.
But there's a lot of corporations that maybe they've learned from what Bud Light and some of the others did.
What do you think is going on with this?
Over and over again, we see corporations counter-programming and going head-to-head with the perspectives and the cultures and the opinions of their own base.
We see that especially like with NASCAR, for example.
Well, I think there are two sometimes conflicting motivations for the corporations.
One obviously is the profit motive, which one would think would be the driving force, and I think underlying it for most corporations it actually is.
But the other issue, I think, is that you're seeing that the people who come to head these corporations have gone through the institutions.
And they've actually absorbed this leftist propaganda and leftist ideology as their way of being in the world.
And so they're really out of touch with the consumer in many cases, such as Cracker Barrel or Bud Light.
But they're so isolated and insulated from the rest of the world that they don't see that as an issue.
But ultimately, again, I think for people like the Zuckerbergs and the Cooks, they realize that the bottom line is they need to make money and they've got a globalist agenda with respect to money.
Corporations basically run the West.
They run this country.
They run the countries in the West.
I mean, there's nothing new there.
It's just become more overt.
Yeah, it's something that I saw.
We had video stores about 30 years ago, a little bit more than 30 years ago.
And we would see this with Hollywood.
They would increasingly make films that would not do well.
And they seem to revel in offending people.
And it's the same kind of stuff that you see coming out of Bud Light or NASCAR or whatever.
These movie studios loved to offend people, or at least the directors that were there loved to do it.
And as you point out, they're true believers in this stuff.
But there's also this peer pressure.
They wanted to be respected by their peers in the industry.
And the way that they would be respected by their peers in the industry is just to show how awful the middle class is and how awful religion is and to deconstruct all these things in a very Marxist way.
And the audience, even if they didn't analyze it along those kinds of lines, still could understand that they hated them.
It's pretty obvious that they hated their audience and their audience didn't like their films either.
But they wouldn't change.
Even when you talk to them and say, you know, we'd make more money if you would make movies that were not combative with your audience, but they just continued to go down that route because it was, as you point out, it's like a religion.
I like the analogy that you had about the religious aspects of this.
It's most definitely a religion.
And the most cynical aspect of it is that this neo-Marxist ideology, which again is a secular humanist religion, has adopted many of the Judeo-Christian elements of social justice as their goal without crediting traditional religion for it.
But that's where it's coming from.
But it's a very cynical adaptation, if you will, because it really has nothing to do with social justice as it was understood in traditional religious mode.
So let me ask you, what do we do to reclaim a religious foundation in this thing?
How do we get that old-time religion?
Is it based on what we do in terms of education?
I think that is fundamental.
But how do you see it?
You know, I really can't say that I know the answer to that.
I think one of the things that I tend to believe is that the ideas coming out of the woke left at this point are so bizarre and so unnatural, if you will, that it may reach the point where the minds of people will just rebel against it and seek another form of meaning.
And to find that meaning, they're going to have to go back to traditional religion because in the West, in Western civilization, that's where it comes from.
You can't find anyone who has real moral values that won't trace them at some level back to traditional religion.
So I'm hoping that at some point, and maybe it's beginning to occur, there's some evidence perhaps that it is, that people are just getting fed up with this nonsense because it makes no sense.
It's not improving their life.
And they will begin to seek other modes of meaning.
It seems like the danger is that as people realize that this moral relativism, that this humanism, that this transhumanism, whatever, you know, all these different elements don't make any sense, that they can't produce anything that anyone wants.
There's no good to be found in them, that they'll start seeking around for other failed modes.
We might wind up with a religion of the state or something like that.
And so that's the key thing.
When I look at it, Dr. Creighton, I think that so often, you know, we want to make a major change in our life and we take off all these different things that we want to do and we try to do them all at once.
And I think, you know, the wise people have said you pick one of these things that you want to change in your life, focus on that one at a time.
And I think that when we look at society, this big nebulous thing, I don't think anybody can change society.
It's like trying to move this gigantic ship that has massive momentum in the sea with a little tiny boat or something.
But I think that we can make a change if we accept that we're going to do the small things and fix those one-on-one in people's lives.
I think that is maybe the perspective that we need to have.
We can't fix society, but we can fix maybe one person here, another person there, or maybe a family here and a family there.
And as you point out, that is going to be with a foundation that has a moral foundation that is rooted, most likely, in a religious belief.
Well, I think if there's one thing that probably needs to be done, and it's a small thing, but it's at the same time a huge thing, and that is to focus on the education of our children.
Yes.
Because they are the future, and if they're not educated properly, we're going to go down the wrong path in the future.
I agree.
So either changing the public educational system or pulling one's children out of the public educational system and educating them either at home or in religious schools, I think is probably an important task and something that needs to be seriously considered by most parents at this point.
I absolutely agree with you.
And I think we can see that the other side agrees with that as well, because that's where they began.
You look at some of the utopian societies in the middle 1800s.
And they said, well, this society that we're trying to set up here failed because we didn't get to the kids early enough.
And they were entrenched with the values of their parents, which are antithetical to this utopian society that we're trying to set up, typically socialists.
And so they began in the educational system.
And I think that we're going to have to begin there as well.
And we're going to have to gradually unroll that.
As you said, family by family, they're going to have to have the determination that they are going to take control of their children's education.
Maybe that's going to be homeschool, or if they want to create some other structure in conjunction with other people, that they want to have some kind of a charter school or something that's not as formal.
And I think a key issue with all that is going to be it's going to have to be the kind of mindset where people don't place money first.
In other words, if they go begging for financial support from the government, it's doomed to failure because the government's going to then drag them right back into some frame of reference that is going to be antithetical to what they're trying to do.
What do you think about that?
Well, I agree with you.
And again, you know, the educational system is one critical part of this, but the other critical part is what takes place in the home.
You know, what values are the parents actually conveying to their children?
And it's not clear to me that even conservatives these days have really adhered to the proper morality to instill in their children.
I mean, they've given a lot over to the left and the propaganda of the left and the acceptance of homosexuality, same-sex marriage, all of these types of things.
They're all problematic.
Yes.
Even the homosexual population, which again, I think almost everyone will kind of agree is kind of accepted as normal these days or even celebrated.
There are problems with the homosexual population.
I've treated many homosexuals in my practice, and they all, virtually all, have major psychological issues.
And much of what's detrimental to the morality in society today is coming from the LGBTQ community, not just the transgender community, but the homosexual community.
Yes, I agree.
I agree.
So, you know, when we look at what is happening, you've talked about what may be happening and the blowback as we see these people who have been gaslit as young children or teenagers into mutilating themselves.
We're starting to see people as they grow up as I say, wait a minute, you did this to me, and I was taken advantage of.
We've even seen that from a former Navy SEAL who they convinced to transition as an adult.
And he came out against that and attacking the people who pushed him in that direction and speaking about how, well, he said, if they can do that to me as an adult Navy SEAL, imagine what they can do to children.
What do you think is going to happen in that regard in terms of how that's going to blow back against the institutions, both educational and even medical?
The transsexual transgender community is a community that suffers from severe mental disorder.
And this was generally accepted by the psychiatric community until it was infiltrated as well and taken over by leftist ideology.
And again, it links directly to the acceptance of homosexuality back in the 1970s when it also was considered a normal lifestyle instead of a neurotic type of disorder.
The fact that people can even accept the idea of transgender as a transsexuality just shows how far gone we are as a community, as a society, and even entertaining the idea.
And I blame the mental health profession in large measure for this, because the mental health profession has really taken on the role of Nazi doctors back in Germany who were working for the state without any concern for the welfare of their patients or individuals.
So that transgenders are treated in any way other than with some type of psychological support is abhorrent, frankly.
There's going to be blowback.
Absolutely, there's going to be blowback, but we want to be careful that the blowback doesn't take the form of another element of victimization within society because we have enough of that.
Yes.
Yes.
That's right.
It's kind of interesting, you know, when all this stuff started.
I used to play clips of Corporal Klinger from MASH all the time because he was deliberately dressing up in a woman's outfit as a cross-dressing so that he could get a Section 8, meaning that he would be declared insane and kicked out of the military because he wanted to get out of the Korean War and go home.
And that was the running joke with him.
And they didn't do it because they all knew it was an act.
And so it's kind of funny that we see this coming back in that way.
We know that it is an act by the people who are running the institutions now, rather than the individual who wants to get out of the institution.
They're trying to institutionalize them.
But it was always, as you point out, it was a mental disorder.
And it still is, quite frankly.
It is making the people, as we've seen the violence that's been done recently, again, targeting religion and the transgender shootings that we had in Nashville and the other one that was up in Minneapolis.
Do you want to comment on that?
Well, once again, as I said, this population is seriously mentally disturbed and they're very angry.
That generally goes along with serious mental illness.
It's not unusual for seriously mentally ill individuals to be extremely angry and paranoid.
And I think it's the paranoia that you're seeing in this population when they feel that they're being threatened in some way, again, artificially, but being threatened by conservatives or being threatened by traditional religious ideas, then they lash out.
I mean, they see this as self-defense on their part.
So again, it's just indicative of how mentally disturbed these individuals are and how in need they are of treatment and how abominable it is that the mental health profession has gone along with this idea that this is essentially a lifestyle of choice.
Yes.
Yeah, that was something that really surprised me when that began about a decade ago.
And then five years ago, what we saw was the informed consent attack, how the government started using medicine as a weapon where they removed people's informed consent.
Talk about that and the damage that that's done to the institutions and how do we pull that back?
How do we, you know, RFK Jr. said that his mission was to restore confidence in HHS and by extension, I guess, the CDC and FDA and others underneath that umbrella.
But how do they get that kind of confidence back?
We have to see some real change, don't we?
Absolutely.
You know, I've written two other books.
One dedicated to this whole issue of what's taking place in the mental health profession and the other in terms of what's going on in the general medical profession, because in addition to being a psychotherapist, I am actually a pulmonologist.
I'm a lung doctor.
Oh, wow.
What do you think of the ventilators?
The ventilators.
The ventilators being pushed for people who had respiratory issues at the beginning of the lockdown.
There was a big push for ventilators, and I've been told that they had a very, very high casualty rate.
What do you think of ventilators?
I'd seen one pulmonologist who said, we've never done that type of thing typically.
Well, you know, I forgive a lot of the confusion that occurred at the beginning of the pandemic because I think when you're faced with a serious disease and with people dying at an increased rate, it's easy to make mistakes.
Ventilators are absolutely life-saving when they're used properly and when they're used for the right populations.
When they're not used properly and overused or used with incorrect settings, which is often the case, then they can produce increased lung injury and they can produce death.
So again, I don't know exactly how to evaluate each and every case.
You'd have to look at the specifics of that.
But certainly what the medical profession did with respect to the COVID epidemic, again, is another abomination.
And it just speaks to how readily that particular profession and maybe the population in general is to just conform to what is expected of them.
But the decisions that were made were obviously contrary to general scientific thought.
The idea that a quiet immunity was not effective for a virus is something that I never heard of.
I mean, it was very obvious, I think, to some of us that what was going on with COVID was just the scientific decisions were just totally incorrect.
The masking, the distancing, the lack of isolation of the people who are sick and mandating vaccines or a vaccine that you had to take endless numbers of times.
I mean, no one had ever seen anything like that.
And the fact that the medical profession was on board with that is just extraordinary.
But if you read anybody who questioned the safety of the efficacy or why they would roll something out without sufficient testing of it in a very radically different approach, they were vilified and canceled.
I can tell you.
They were vilified not only by the government, but by the medical profession itself, by the professional societies.
You know, the fact that they were threatening cancellation of one's licensure if you prescribed ivermectin, it's just nonsense.
Yeah.
And nothing that we'd ever seen before.
And so the medical profession, you know, if you read the medical journals these days, half of the articles are about DEI in medicine.
They're no longer about medical issues.
They're all about distributing care equitably to minority populations.
So, I mean, the whole profession has been co-opted by progressive thought.
It's a travesty.
Yes.
What Robert Kenny is doing is extremely important.
He may not be right on every issue, but he's certainly right in terms of realizing that what we're doing and prescribing for people has no scientific basis anymore.
And much of this has been because it's been co-opted again by money.
It's been corrupted and corrupted largely by the influences of foreign governments, particularly China.
When I worked at Harvard, most of the people who were working in the laboratories were Chinese.
The Americans no longer wanted to work in the laboratories.
There wasn't enough money in it for them.
So the Chinese Communist Party was sending people over here and they were filling up the laboratories.
So the researchers were perfectly happy to have these people here, but they were taking the information and sending it back to China, you know.
And so the money was coming from other places and it just corrupted the whole institution.
Well, you know, we were talking about the insanity of the left and especially of transgenderism.
But it really was truly insane.
I mean, even with the virology paradigm, the purpose of a vaccine was to train your immune system.
So how in the world can they say that, according to that paradigm, that if you have actually been exposed to the thing that they're trying to protect you from and you've recovered, how has your immune system not been trained by that?
That's the whole idea of natural immunity.
So do we have to go back and rethink the whole field of urology now with these people?
Or was it clearly a case that they had a political agenda that had nothing to do with any of their scientific beliefs or teachings?
It's the latter.
I mean, I'm trained also as an immunologist.
And, you know, I did research for many years in respiratory immunology.
Immunologists understand how the immune system works.
And it doesn't work the way the people were telling us it worked during the COVID epidemic.
So it was clearly political.
It was clearly ideological.
It was clearly being driven by the drug companies and the corruption within the NIH with Dr. Fauci and others.
So, I mean, again, it's just a travesty.
And I don't know what it's going to take to restore America's faith in the health profession.
Yeah, I think when you go back and we look at it, you know, people began to look more closely at what was happening with the pediatricians and the vaccine schedule and other things like that.
I was really surprised at how they wanted to do multiple boosters with the COVID thing.
I said, you know, what is up with that?
But when I went back and looked at the standard vaccine schedule for children, you see the same vaccines being given over and over and over and over again, sometimes multiple times a year for these childhood diseases.
And that begins to raise questions as to whether or not what the real motivation is for this and whether or not these things have any efficacy at all.
I think that's one of the reasons why people are looking at the vaccine schedule.
Well, two things along those lines.
First of all, the children, for the most part, virtually none of them developed any lethal disorder from COVID, so to keep vaccinating them was just improper.
Second of all, the mRNA vaccination by itself, it was clearly experimental.
It had never been used.
It had never been used on people.
And so to use the entire world as a guinea pig to see whether or not this vaccine worked without any knowledge whatsoever as to its efficacy or the complications that might ensue, it's just extraordinary.
And yet you see in this.
The WHO and the Globalists went along with that.
It's just, you know, it just tells you what it's about.
I agree, yes.
Yeah, Moderna had been around for a decade and they had never been able to get past any safety testing.
So with this, they just skipped it.
But now we're at the situation where, and you've got a lot of people in the current administration who are trying to remove all of the concerns about AI and rush it as quickly as possible.
Peter Thiel says that he's trying to tie it into Christian eschatology and saying that if you try to regulate AI, you're going to have to do it with a global government, which is going to actually be the beast itself, not the AI, but the global government.
And so there's a move to get rid of any oversight of AI.
And there's also a move to get rid of oversight of mRNA.
And you've got people who are rushing to apply this in a lot of places.
Trump's very first event that he had was Stargate, where they wanted to use AI to design mRNA.
And it's like, whoa, you know, what could possibly go wrong with this?
How do we get control?
Well, I think people need to begin to reevaluate what progress actually means.
Progress is not solely some advance in technology.
I agree.
Progress needs to have some evaluation with respect to whether or not it improves the welfare of society.
And if it doesn't do that, then that's not necessarily progress.
I mean, Chesterton wrote about that years ago.
And so I think people need to get beyond their individual comforts and ease and really see what's being introduced into my life into this society improving it or not.
I agree.
I agree.
Yes.
The book is A Godless Crusade, The Progressive Campaign to Rid the World of Religion.
We're talking to Dr. Richard Creighton.
That's K-R-A-D-I-N.
Do you have a website that you sell that, or can people find this on Amazon only or best?
You can find it on Amazon and Barnes ⁇ Noble.
Okay, great, great.
Well, it's a fascinating book, and I think it is important for us to keep pointing back to the foundation that we must have.
We are a society that is cut adrift and we're being tossed about by every new wave of ideas or technology that come in.
We're going to have to have an anchor somewhere.
And that has always been religion.
You're right about that.
And I think an anchorless society is a very dangerous society.
And I think we're approaching a very dangerous time.
And people need to start looking at what is really going to be necessary for us to move forward in all this.
I agree.
Thank you so much for focusing on that.
And I think it's very important that you see it for what it is, I think, and that is a crusade.
It really is their religion, and they really are on crusade with it.
And they seem to be, even though they deny any objective truth in their moral relativism, they hold that, if you want to call it a truth, that truth is totally absolute and a few other things that they push out there.
And they seem to have a greater conviction, unfortunately, in this religious lack of religion or lack of any moral beliefs.
They have more of a conviction to that religion than the people who profess to have a connection to religion do.
I think that's one of the reasons why we're losing the battle.
So thank you so much for picking that up and pointing out the different aspects of that.
And one of the things that you talked about was the narcissism of the left and the woke technology.
Talk a little bit about that from a psychological standpoint.
I think people are very fascinated by narcissism.
It's kind of hard to get our heads around it.
But just briefly, what do you think, because we're almost out of time, as a parting thing here, what do you see the narcissism of the left?
How does it manifest itself?
You know, one of the basic tenets of virtually all traditional religions is an abhorrence of narcissism.
That is, you know, the idea that one is egotistic, prideful, thinks that, you know, things revolve around oneself and totally involved, engaged with oneself.
That was one of the messages, critical messages of religion.
As religion is basically ignored, narcissism emerges and replaces it.
And, you know, Christopher Lash wrote about this back in the 70s, that we've become a culture of narcissism.
I don't think there's any question about it.
All you need to do is see people out on the street or see what's on social media or on the TV screens or in the movies.
It's all about self-absorption.
Yes.
So again, in the absence of religion, of religious ideas that counter that, one comes to a society where individuals just are completely self-absorbed and not particularly concerned about the welfare of others.
I mean, that's really what narcissism is.
I think exactly right.
We end the interview on a very important insight, I think.
We see that in Christianity.
We see the pride of Satan from the very beginning, and we're told that in the last days, people will become lovers of themselves.
And we now call that narcissism, but that's exactly what it is.
Lovers of themselves more than they love God or each other or anything else.
And that really is where we are.
So thank you very much.
Again, the book is A Godless Crusade, The Progressive Campaign to Rid the World of Religion by Dr. Richard Creighton.
Thank you so much, sir, for joining us.
Thank you.
And all of you, thank you for joining us and have a good day.
Hopefully we'll see you tomorrow.
The Common Man.
They created common core to dumb down our children.
They created common pasts to track and control us.
Their commons project to make sure the commoners own nothing in the communist future.
They see the common man as simple, unsophisticated, ordinary.
But each of us has worth and dignity, created in the image of God.
That is what we have in common.
That is what they want to take away.
Their most powerful weapons are isolation, deception, intimidation.
They desire to know everything about us while they hide everything from us.
It's time to turn that around and expose what they want to hide.
Please share the information and links you'll find at thedavidnikeshow.com.
Thank you for listening.
Thank you for sharing.
▲
Export Selection