What is AntiFa Really?

Theology and Politics from a Conservative, Biblical Perspective

AntiFa (so-called “Anti-Fascist”), likes to bill themselves as social justice warriors against racism, bigotry, gentrification, homophobia, sexism, and Islamophobia, to name just a few. These individuals believe themselves to be the social justice warrior group, clashing with the alleged racists on the right. How do they do this? By any means necessary apparently.

We’ve seen some of the clashes of late, with AntiFa coming out during pro-Trump rallies for the sole purpose of creating an incendiary situation that they believe allows them to use violence to shut down what they say is racism and hate speech, but in reality, they’re simply doing what they can to shut down free speech that they do not like or agree with.

The 1st Amendment guarantees that people are allowed to say what’s on their minds. Certainly, it is against the law to yell “fire!” in a crowded area when there is no fire because of the stampede that might be caused resulting in injuries or even deaths. However, a person can still make the decision to yell “fire!” It’s up to them. If there is no fire and people are hurt, then the blame rests with them for choosing to do something that asinine. We get it.

But in today’s politically charged climate, the constantly pushed belief that “hate speech” needs to be shut down is something that goes far past yelling “fire!” when there is none. Hate speech is nebulous, defined differently by different people. There is no real consensus. Hate speech is often touted as saying something that denigrates someone based on their skin color, their gender, or their lifestyle. Such things should not be said so the push is on to unofficially make it against the law to use hate speech. Remember when as children we heard “sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me”? Apparently, that’s not true anymore, though it actually remains true.

The problem is who gets to define hate speech? This is very likely why there is no mention of “hate speech” in the 1st Amendment.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

In that one paragraph, Americans are guaranteed several things. We are guaranteed that Congress will not make any law establishing any religion. In other words, government is supposed to remain completely out of the picture where religion is concerned. They cannot dictate.

Too often however (and we see this in public schools a good deal), a teacher or administrator will tell a child that they are not allowed to read their Bible (during free reading time) on campus or even bring it to school because of “separation of church and state.” This is patently wrong. It is not what the 1st Amendment is about. The school cannot force students to read the Bible (or other religious books), as an expression of religion. However, the student has the complete freedom to bring a Bible to school and read it on his/her own. There is no law being broken when a student does this and in fact, they are simply exercising their 1st Amendment rights. Most people get that, with the exception of those lacking in critical thinking skills, which seems to occur on the left more often than not.

At the same time, if a student wants to bow his/her head and thank God for the meal that they are about to eat at school, that also is perfectly legitimate and legal. However, if teachers or administrators decided that everyone must pray before they eat their meal, those teachers/administrators have abrogated the 1st Amendment rights of those students by forcing all students to be directed to a specific religious expression. This is why the uproar exists over prayer being offered before school sporting games. Because schools are often government entities or extensions, this is seen as mandating exercise of religion, something the 1st Amendment does not allow.

Next, Congress (or government officials), may not attempt to redefine, negate, or abridge a person’s right to speak freely. A person can say whatever they want and people are free to accept or reject that. Yet, we have more and more in Congress who are arguing that the 1st Amendment should be redefined or abridged. They want “hate speech” outlawed, a very, very slippery slope.

The remainder of the paragraph speaks about the right of the people to peacefully assemble and to complain to the government when it over steps its legal boundaries. The 1st Amendment is a goldmine and while countries like Great Britain and Canada have taken measures to define and curtail “hate speech,” so far, the 1st Amendment in the USA doesn’t allow for that, to the chagrin of certain politicians, community agitators (organizers), and Leftists everywhere.

Theology and Politics from a Conservative, Biblical Perspective