Google’s New Fact-Check Feature Almost Exclusively Targets Conservative Sites

Google, the most powerful search engine in the world, is now displaying fact checks for conservative publications in its results.

No prominent liberal site receives the same treatment.

And not only is Google’s fact-checking highly partisan — perhaps reflecting the sentiments of its leaders — it is also blatantly wrong, asserting sites made “claims” they demonstrably never made.

When searching for a media outlet that leans right, like The Daily Caller (TheDC), Google gives users details on the sidebar, including what topics the site typically writes about, as well as a sidebar titled “Reviewed Claims.”

Vox, and other left-wing outlets and blogs like Gizmodo, are not given the same fact-check treatment. When searching their names, a “Topics they write about” section appears, but there are no “Reviewed Claims.”

In fact, a review of mainstream outlets, as well as other outlets associated with liberal and conservative audiences, shows that only the conservative sites feature the highly misleading, subjective analysis. Several conservative-leaning outlets like TheDC are “vetted,” while equally partisan sites like Vox, ThinkProgress, Slate, The Huffington Post, Daily Kos, Salon, Vice and Mother Jones are spared.

Occupy Democrats is apparently the only popular content provider from that end of the political spectrum with a fact-checking section.

The Robert Mueller fact check (pictured above) is a case in point for Google’s new feature.

Ostensibly trying to sum up the crux of the post, the third-party “fact-checking” organization says the “claim” in a DC article that special Counsel Robert Mueller is hiring people that “are all Hillary Clinton supporters” is misleading, if not false.

The problem is that TheDC’s article makes no such claim. Their cited language doesn’t even appear in the article. Worse yet, there was no language trying to make it seem that the investigation into the Trump administration and Russia is entirely comprised of Clinton donors. The story simply contained the news: Mueller hired a Hillary Clinton donor to aid the investigation into President Donald Trump.

Still, the Washington Post gave the claim, which came from Trump himself, its official “Three Pinocchios” rating. The method applies to several other checks. Claims concocted or adulterated by someone outside the TheDC are attributed to TheDC, in what appears to be a feature that only applies to conservative sites.

Examples of such misattribution and misrepresentation are aplenty.

For instance, using Snopes.com, an organization with highly dubious fact-checking capabilities, Google’s platform shows an article by TheDC to have a so-called “mixture” of truth.

The “claim” made, according to Snopes.com, and in-turn Google, is “a transgender women raped a young girl in a women’s bathroom because bills were passed…”

A quick read of the news piece shows that there was no mention of a bill or any form of legislation. The story was merely a straightforward reporting of a disturbing incident originally reported on by a local outlet. (RELATED: Why is Google CEO Eric Schmidt Technically Serving In The Department Of Defense?)

And like Snopes, another one of Google’s fact-checking partners, Climate Feedback, is not usually regarded as objective.

Snopes and Google also decided to “fact-check” an obviously tongue-in-cheek article in which a writer for TheDC pokes fun at a professor saying the solar eclipse in 2017 was naturally racist.

Even Vox pointed out the absurdity of the educator’s literary tirade on Mother Nature’s purported racial prejudice, and the damage it might have done to real arguments of apparent racism. While Snopes got some flak for its choice, no one seems to have noticed the absurdity of the world’s go-to search engine providing fact-checks to purposefully irreverent content, rather than hard news stories.

Overall, such inclusion embodies Google’s fact-checking services, which, as many presciently feared, are biased, if not also downright libelous. (RELATED: Silicon Valley Seems To Love Burying Conservative News)

Google acknowledged it received an inquiry from TheDCNF, but did not fully respond in time of publication.

The post Google’s New Fact-Check Feature Almost Exclusively Targets Conservative Sites appeared first on The Daily Signal.

My Quest to Help Americans Rediscover the Bible

I won’t make any assumptions about how many readers noticed I took a three-month break from column writing.

Nevertheless, I want to explain why.

I needed the time to finish the first volume of the biggest project of my life as a writer, a commentary on the first five books of the Bible, or what are called the Torah in Hebrew.

The commentary is addressed to people of every faith and, especially, to people of no faith.

I have believed all my life that the primary crisis in America and the West is the abandonment of Judeo-Christian values, or, one might say, the dismissal of the Bible.

Virtually everyone on the left thinks America would be better off as a secular nation. And virtually all conservative intellectuals don’t think it matters. How many intellectuals study the Bible and teach it to their children?

And yet, from the time long before the United States became a country until well into the 1950s, the Bible was not only the most widely read book in America—it was the primary vehicle by which each generation passed on morality and wisdom to the next generation.

Since that time, we have gone from a Bible-based society to a Bible-ignorant one—from the Bible being the Greatest Book to the Bible being an irrelevant book.

Ask your college-age child, niece, nephew, or grandchild to identify Cain and Abel, the Tower of Babel, or the ten plagues. Get ready for some blank stares.

I recently asked some college graduates (none of whom were Jewish) to name the four Gospels. None could.

But what we have today is worse than ignorance of the Bible. It is contempt for it. Just about anyone who quotes the Bible, let alone says it is the source of his or her values, is essentially regarded as a simpleton who is anti-science, anti-intellectual, and sexist.

Our society, one of whose mottos is “In God We Trust,” is becoming as godless as Western Europe—and, consequently, as morally confused and unwise as Europe.

Just as most professors regard most Bible believers as foolish, I have more or less the same view of most college professors in the liberal arts.

When I hear that someone has a Ph.D. in sociology, anthropology, political science, or English, let alone women’s studies or gender studies, I assume that he or she is morally confused and bereft of wisdom. Some are not, of course. But they constitute a small minority.

Whenever teenagers call my radio show or I meet one in person, I can usually identify—almost immediately—the ones who are receiving a religion-based education. They are far more likely to act mature and have more wisdom than their Bible-free peers.

One of our two greatest presidents, Abraham Lincoln, rarely attended church, but he read the Bible daily. As he said while president, “In regard to this great book, I have but to say, I believe the Bible is the best gift God has given to man.”

Were he able to observe America today, Lincoln would be shocked by many things. But none would shock him as much as the widespread ignorance of and contempt for the Bible.

I have taught the Torah, from the Hebrew original, for 40 years. Of the many things I have been blessed to be able to do—from hosting a national radio show to conducting orchestras—teaching Torah is my favorite.

When asked how it has affected my life, I often note that in my early 20s, when I was working through issues I had with my parents, there was nevertheless not a week during which I did not call them.

And there was one reason for this: I believe that God commanded us to “Honor your father and your mother.”

In my commentary, I point out that while the Torah commands us to love our neighbor, love God, and love strangers, it never commands us to love our parents. It was sophisticated enough to recognize that love of parents may be impossible but showing honor to a parent is a behavioral choice.

In America, there is an epidemic of children who no longer talk to one or both of their parents. In a few cases, this is warranted. But in most cases, adult children are inflicting terrible, unfair pain upon their parents.

This is one of a myriad of examples where believing in a God-based text is transformative.

Secular callers tell me that they hardly need the Ten Commandments to desist from murdering anyone. That may well be true. But apparently, a lot of people could use the Ten Commandments to avoid inflicting terrible pain on (admittedly, flawed) parents.

The title of my work is “The Rational Bible” because my vehicle to God and the Bible is reason. If you have ever wondered why all of America’s founders revered the Bible, let alone why anyone today might do so, this book should provide an explanation.

My ultimate aim is to help make the Bible America’s book once again.

The post My Quest to Help Americans Rediscover the Bible appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Problematic Women: Planned Parenthood, Iran Protests, and Celebrity Feminists

The voices of American feminists are largely absent on protests in Iran, Joy Behar  of “The View” says Trump needs to be “medicated and hospitalized,” Iceland takes its equal pay law to a new level, and Planned Parenthood released its 2017 annual report. All this and more in this week’s edition of Problematic Women, co-hosted with Katrina Trinko of The Daily Signal. Listen in the podcast below.

The post Problematic Women: Planned Parenthood, Iran Protests, and Celebrity Feminists appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Most Problematic Women of 2017

2017 was a rough year for conservative women. Public figures such as Ivanka Trump, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, and the anchors at Fox News were constantly attacked for their appearance.

“Please welcome that dumpster, smokey-eyed raccoon, White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders!” said Chelsea Handler on her self-titled Netflix series.

Attacking women for their looks was a theme among self-proclaimed feminists, who time and time again found a reason to call conservatives “problematic.”

To highlight the hypocrisy on display from liberal women in 2017, The Daily Signal and The Federalist teamed up to declare the most problematic women of the year. For more, tune into our podcast and Facebook Live “Problematic Women” show every Thursday.

The post Most Problematic Women of 2017 appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Problematic Women: Taylor Swift Isn’t Allowed to be Happy

According to New York Magazine, Taylor Swift isn’t allowed to be happy having a successful year in 2017—or thank fans for wishing her a happy birthday.

“I love you guys so much,” the pop singer shared on Instagram. “I couldn’t have asked for a better year, all thanks to you. Thanks for all the birthday wishes. Can’t wait to see what 28 will be like. See you on tour.”

But because Swift is “a straight, white, multi-millionaire pop star,” New York Magazine had a problem with her post.

“Congrats to the now 28-year-old Taylor Swift for being the only person who seemed to enjoy 2017,” the magazine tweeted, along with a column sarcastically listing “highlights” from the year, such as Trump getting sworn in as president, the Las Vegas shooting that killed 58 people, and the hurricanes devastated parts of Texas, Florida, and Puerto Rico.

In this week’s episode of “Problematic Women,” The Daily Signal addresses New York Magazine’s inability to be happy for Taylor Swift, as well as Rosie O’Donnell’s strange attempt to break the law. We also take on Hillary Clinton’s latest “What Happened” theory, E! news host Cat Sadlerand quitting her job over a pay dispute, and crown a group of Harvard sorority sisters who are vowing to continue recruitment despite it violating the schools’ “non-discrimination principles” our Problematic Woman of the Week.

Listen in our weekly podcast below.

The post Problematic Women: Taylor Swift Isn’t Allowed to be Happy appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Christmas Reminds Us That Our Spiritual Nature Endures

Let us first agree on how not to celebrate Christmas: by standing in a Walmart check-out line. Let’s get our priorities straight. The spiritual takes precedence over the material, especially at Christmas.

Barry Goldwater knew this as well as anyone. Here’s how the charismatic senator from Arizona, who sparked a conservative revolution, put it in his book, “The Conscience of a Conservative”:

The root difference between the conservatives and the liberals of today is that conservatives take account of the whole man, while the liberals tend to look only at the material side of man’s nature. The conservative believes that man is, in part, an economic, an animal creature; but that he is also a spiritual creature with spiritual needs and spiritual desires. What is more, these needs and desires reflect the superior side of man’s nature.

Christmas is a time to remember those spiritual needs and to provide for them. Let us mute our television sets with their incessant “Buy! Buy! Buy!” commercial message, and instead turn to the Good Book, which says, “No man can serve two masters … You cannot serve God and mammon.”

Let us thank Him for sending his only Son to us some 2,000 years ago and starting salvation history.

Salvation has had its deadly enemies over the centuries. I am especially mindful of the many millions of Christians who lived under communism and those who still live under the communist yoke in China, Cuba, Vietnam, Laos, and North Korea, and are denied any public demonstration of their faith.

One dramatic challenge to the communists occurred in June 1979 when Pope John Paul II visited his native Poland. Church officials gave out 30,000 tickets for a farewell mass, but 60,000 young people showed up.

Ronald Reagan at the time was a widely listened to radio commentator, and he covered the event. He reported that young people spread flowers on the path the pope would take, and on his entrance began to sing old hymns from memory while thousands “watched from housetops and windows from as far as the eye could see.” A deeply moved John Paul II put aside his prepared sermon and began speaking from the heart about the need for high ideals and to love God. It was 10:30 at night when he finished, and time for the blessing of the several large crosses the students had carried.

Suddenly, there was a multiplication not of loaves and fishes, but of crosses. The meaning of the night was revealed as the young men and women raised high the thousands and thousands of crosses they had brought, many of them homemade.

“These young people of Poland,” Reagan said, “had been born and raised and spent their entire lives under communist atheism.” He paused and concluded, “Try to make a Polish joke of that.”

The people of Poland and Hungary and Czechoslovakia and the other Soviet satellites of Eastern and Central Europe had to wait more than a decade for their freedom. But thanks to Reagan’s leadership as president—and the power of prayer—the Berlin Wall fell in 1989 and the Soviet Union dissolved two years later, ending the Cold War without a shot being fired.

So let us thank God for our many blessings, and borrow from William F. Buckley Jr., who was ever optimistic about America’s future.

One biographer has written that in 1970, when the nation’s divisions over the Vietnam War were at their most intense, the economy was faltering, politicians were predicting we would soon run out of natural resources, and the media spoke of irreconcilable societal differences, Buckley saw only good days ahead.

He declared over network TV that the “full-time undertakers” were always “disappointed that America does not die on schedule.”

Let us reject the naysayers, then, ignore the prophets of doom and gloom, and sing “Joy to the World” for the Lord has come. Let us turn to the Bible, which tells us: “This is the day the Lord has made. Let us rejoice and be glad in it.”

The post Christmas Reminds Us That Our Spiritual Nature Endures appeared first on The Daily Signal.

This Former Drug Addict Now Runs Program to Help Other Addicts Recover, Stressing Responsibility

Jeff Iverson is no stranger to the trials faced by drug addicts.

Iverson is the founder, president, and CEO of Freedom House Sober Living Inc., a residential facility in Las Vegas for recovering drug addicts. Freedom House emphasizes  long-term solutions for addicts without a place to stay.

Drug addiction is a problem in Las Vegas, where 273 people died in 2015 from heroin and methamphetamines alone. Iverson was born and lived in Las Vegas most of his life, so the drug problem there is more than familiar to him. “Substance abuse is the worst health crisis we have in the community,” he said in a phone interview with The Daily Signal.

Earlier in his life, Iverson, who was born in Las Vegas and has lived there most of his life, had his own struggles with drugs.

Iverson said his addiction began when he was 13 years old, when he started smoking cigarettes. He said that though he grew up in a good home, he experimented with other drugs without anyone knowing. Between the ages of 16 and 18, Iverson used marijuana, alcohol, LSD, and cocaine.

Despite his growing dependency on strong narcotics, Iverson said that he was able to graduate high school and hold a job. But by the time he was in his 20s, he struggled to keep his life together. He took meth daily, and his family and friends became  increasingly suspicious.

His behavior was affected by his substance abuse. He spent more time with other drug addicts and continued to hurt his relationships with the people who cared about him.

“My mom was the only one who didn’t turn her back on me,” Iverson said. “[But] the people who love me the most feared me the most.”

At age 25, Iverson said, he wasn’t able to hold a job and soon became homeless. He was involved in drug possession, trafficking, and manufacturing.

His family hired someone in 2002 to find him and encourage him to seek help at a treatment center. Iverson said he agreed to go, but only to get out of his situation, not necessarily to get rid of his chemical dependency.

But in 2005, Iverson said, he finally realized that he was an addict. He was arrested for possession of heroin and meth and spent three weeks in jail. The court ordered him to participate in a drug program.

Iverson said that he finally became clean in 2006.

“Unfortunately, that’s what it takes to stop addicts in their tracks,” he said. “I was grateful for the court-ordered programs.”

In 2007, Iverson came up with an idea for a program for addicts like himself. He said he knew a lot of people who were trying to get clean, but had no place to stay, which made it more difficult for them to recover.

Addicts with good insurance and employment status have an easier time getting help, Iverson said, but most people who have a problem getting off drugs don’t have those luxuries.

He and a friend purchased a few apartments for drug addicts to live in. Within the first six months, 20 people were living in the apartments, but that number quickly grew to between 40 and 50 people.

“The [police] thought I was crazy,” Iverson said, when he told them about his project.

But today, the Las Vegas Police Department is one of Freedom House’s largest sponsors.

Iverson said that the recidivism rates for criminals, including those arrested for drug-related crimes, are high, which shows that rehabilitation programs need to be designed to ensure long-term success for recovered people.

“I don’t know any for-profit treatment centers that provide self-sufficiency plans,” he said.

Patients who decide to participate in the Freedom House program are expected to take responsibility for themselves. They live in shared living spaces of 2 people or more. The program requires residents to clean their clothes, buy their own groceries, attend their meetings, and not be in possession of any narcotics.

“We believe that in addition to understanding the disease of addiction and learning how to cope in life without using substances, self-sufficiency and accountability are key components to successful long-term recovery,” Iverson said. “We strive to teach our residents to make good, and personally responsible choices in every area of life promoting overall well-being.”

But what Iverson said sets Freedom House apart from other residential treatment programs is their focus on long-term stability for recovering addicts, giving them the resources they need to sustain themselves and become functioning members of society.

Along with having on-site drug and behavioral supervisors, Freedom House has an on-site food bank, an adult education program in partnership with the Clark County School District in Nevada to help residents graduate high school, and other opportunities to help people get back on their feet.

“We also provide anger management, moral reconation therapy, recovery support groups, as well as classes in job-application assistance, job-interviewing skills, resume and cover letter preparation, and much more,” Iverson said.

Residents spend 60 to 90 days in the treatment program and then an additional 90 to 120 days in their transitional program, depending on the individual needs of the patient.

Though many patients that graduate move away to restart their lives, losing connection with the program, Iverson estimates that out of the 2,200 people that Freedom House served, 75 percent of the people who come in for treatment complete the program successfully.

The post This Former Drug Addict Now Runs Program to Help Other Addicts Recover, Stressing Responsibility appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Problematic Women: Reporter Asks Sarah Huckabee Sanders This Extremely Inappropriate Question


On Monday, Brian Karem, CNN political contributor and Playboy White House correspondent, asked White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders if she’s ever been sexually harassed.

“As a woman, standing up there talking to us, I know your job is to relate what the president says—have you ever been sexually harassed?” Karem asked. “And I’m not saying by the president, I’m saying ever.”

“I’m not here to speak about my personal experience on that front,” Sanders responded. “But I am here to relay information on behalf of the president and that’s what I’m focused on doing here today.”

In light of Karem’s inappropriate question suggesting Sanders is incapable of empathizing with victims of sexual harassment without experiencing it herself, The Daily Signal’s “Problematic Women” is crowning her our “Problematic Woman of the Week.”

Co-hosted with Bre Payton of The Federalist, “Problematic Women” shines a spotlight on strong conservative women, current events, and the hypocrisy of the “feminist” left. Also covered in this week’s episode, Merriam-Webster declares “feminism” the word of the year, the “10 Things Every Intersectional Feminist Should Ask On a First Date,” and another massive study shows adverse side effects of hormonal birth control.

Watch in the video above, or listen in the podcast below.

The post Problematic Women: Reporter Asks Sarah Huckabee Sanders This Extremely Inappropriate Question appeared first on The Daily Signal.

This Test Claims to Show Whether You’re Unconsciously Racist. Here Are Its Problems.

Are you secretly a racist? Do you harbor prejudices deep within your subconscious? Could you be bigoted without even knowing it?

These are highly charged accusations, but a team of social psychologists developed a test claiming to uncover such unconscious biases. Known as the Implicit Association Test, it measures bias based on how quickly test-takers respond to images and words that flash before them on a computer screen.

Proponents of the test claim the results signal “discriminatory behavior.” But does this test predict real-world behavior? And should lawmakers and decision-makers in academia and corporate America take steps to remedy these unconscious biases?

Here’s how the test works: Test-takers are instructed to press one key when a picture of a black person appears on the screen, and another key when there’s a picture of a white person. Then you do the same with positive and negative words (“magnificent,” “delightful,” “rotten,” “hurtful,” and so on).

You repeat this exercise, but with photos and words (so presumably, black people will be paired with negative words and white people with positive words). Then the test flips the race that is paired with the two types of words.

The difference in your response times for associating one race with positive or negative words indicates whether you have a slight, moderate, or strong bias.

You can join the millions of people who have measured their bias, and take the test here. There are tests measuring several types of bias—based on race, sexuality, weight, and religion, among others.

>>> Read more about the Implicit Association Test in this new Heritage Foundation Special Report.

For the record, I took the race test twice and got conflicting results. One time, it concluded that I have a “slight preference” for black people, and a second time, I got the opposite result with a slight preference for white people.

According to the test, my bias depends on whether or not I’ve had my afternoon coffee. My casual and highly unscientific foray into the world of unconscious bias shows the imprecise nature of the test.

While the test promises to identify biases, one of its original proponents, Brian Nosek, has admitted there’s “substantial risk for both falsely identifying people as eventual dis­criminators and failing to identify people who will discriminate.”

Warnings like this, however, haven’t stopped the media, academia, and corporate America from jumping on the unconscious bias train.

The legal community is following suit. The American Bar Association now offers “Elimination of Bias” credits for some of its continuing legal education courses, and there have even been lawsuits based on claims of unconscious bias.

Writing in the Harvard Business Journal, one of the test’s creators, Mahzarin Banaji, boldly claimed, “Most of us believe that we are ethical and unbiased. … But more than two decades of research confirms that, in reality, most of us fall woefully short of our inflated self-perception.”

She explained in a Washington Post interview, “The Implicit Association Test measures the thumbprint of the culture on our minds. … [I]t is picking up that aspect of the culture that has gotten into your brain and mind.”

And apparently that culture is overwhelmingly anti-black: Data from the online test shows that 88 percent of white test-takers had a “pro-white or anti-black implicit bias.”

Putting aside the images of Orwellian thought police that this calls to mind, there’s a growing consensus among researchers that the Implicit Association Test falls woefully short.

Before it becomes further engrained in hiring, college admissions, law enforcement, banking, government contracting, and many other industries, policymakers and cultural leaders should consider the broader “social and political implications of this research,” as a new Heritage Foundation report argues.

>>> Join us on Thursday at the Heritage Foundation for a public event on the Implicit Association Test.

While the intention behind the test—ensuring that everyone is treated fairly by seeking to root out racism—is a good one, statistician Althea Nagai explains, “[T]here is consensus on neither unconscious racism nor the [Implicit Association Test].”

Though the test’s proponents claim “[it] is to psychology what Galileo’s telescope was to the Copernican Revolution,” Nagai identifies several flaws—including the test’s unreliability, the lack of clarity about what it actually measures, its failure to predict real-world behavior, and the high rate of false positives.

Taken together, these flaws make the case that incorporating the test into public policy, the legal system, or ethics training in corporate America is not only ineffective, but may also exacerbate race relations.

Nagai explains:

False accusations of racism are highly likely, and true instances of racism lose their salience. The real difficulty is the public cynicism and indifference that results when accusations are made, new policies are implemented, and millions of dollars are spent on the problem—with little perceived progress.

She continues:

Although it has been hailed by the media as uncovering a dark, secret side of the American psyche, numerous critics of the [test] have demonstrated that it simply cannot predict how test takers will act in the real world.

So while the media may enjoy running stories with gimmicky, sensational headlines like “Across America, Whites Are Biased and Don’t Even Know It,” “Is Everybody a Little Bit Racist?” and “You May Be More Racist Than You Think,” there’s mounting evidence that the Implicit Association Test is just that: a gimmick that can’t deliver what it promises.

The post This Test Claims to Show Whether You’re Unconsciously Racist. Here Are Its Problems. appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Even the Best Laws Cannot Save Our Society. Here’s What We Need.

I’m approaching my 82nd birthday, and my daughter will occasionally suggest that modernity is perplexing to me because I’m from prehistoric times.

As such, it points to one of the unavoidable problems of youth—namely, the temptation to think that today’s behavioral standards have always been. Let’s look at a few of the differences between yesteryear and today.

One of those differences is the treatment of women.

There are awesome physical strength differences between men and women. To create and maintain civil relationships between the sexes is to drum into boys, starting from very young ages, that they are not to use violence against a woman for any reason.

Special respect is given women. Yesteryear even the lowest of lowdown men would not curse or use foul language to or in the presence of women.

To see a man sitting on a crowded bus or trolley car while a woman is standing used to be unthinkable. It was deemed common decency for a man to give up his seat for a woman or elderly person.

Today young people use foul language in front of—and often to—adults and teachers. It’s not just foul language. Many youngsters feel that it’s acceptable to assault teachers. Just recently, 45 Pennsylvania teachers resigned because of student violence.

Back in what my daughter calls prehistoric times, the use of foul language to an adult or teacher would have meant a smack across the face. Of course, today a parent taking such corrective action risks being reported to a local child protective service and even being arrested.

The modern parental or teacher response to misbehavior is to call for “time out.” In other words, what we’ve taught miscreants of all ages is that they can impose physical pain on others and not suffer physical pain themselves. That’s an open invitation to bad behavior.

It has always been considered a good idea to refrain from sexual intercourse until marriage or at least adulthood. During the sexual revolution of the 1960s, lessons of abstinence were ridiculed, considered passé, and replaced with lessons about condoms, birth control pills, and abortion.

Out-of-wedlock childbirths are no longer seen as shameful and a disgrace. As a result, the rate of illegitimate births among whites is over 30 percent, and among blacks, it’s over 70 percent.

For over a half-century, the nation’s liberals—along with the education establishment, pseudo-intellectuals, and the courts—have waged war on traditions, customs, and moral values.

Many in today’s generation have been counseled to believe that there are no moral absolutes. Instead, what’s moral or immoral, right or wrong, is a matter of convenience, personal opinion, or what is or is not criminal.

Society’s first line of defense is not the law but customs, traditions, and moral values. Customs, traditions, and moral values are those important thou-shalt-nots, such as thou shalt not murder, shalt not steal, shalt not lie, and shalt not cheat. They also include respect for parents, teachers, and others in authority, plus those courtesies one might read in Emily Post’s rules of etiquette.

These behavioral norms—mostly transmitted by example, word of mouth, and religious teachings—represent a body of wisdom distilled over the ages through experience, trial and error, and looking at what works and what doesn’t.

The importance of customs, traditions, and moral values as a means of regulating behavior is that people behave themselves even if nobody’s watching.

There are not enough cops. Laws can never replace these restraints on personal conduct in producing a civilized society. At best, the police and the criminal justice system are the last desperate lines of defense for a civilized society.

Unfortunately, customs, traditions, and moral values have been discarded without an appreciation for the role they played in creating a civilized society, and now we’re paying the price—and that includes the recent revelations regarding the treatment of women.

The post Even the Best Laws Cannot Save Our Society. Here’s What We Need. appeared first on The Daily Signal.