Cloud Hosting

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

With the recent Supreme Court decision striking down Roe v. Wade, pro-life and pro-abortion factions have been jockeying to further influence our nations culture. Its hard not to notice the hateful ugliness of a visceral recoil coming from leftist activists. So why exactly does a nations culture matter? Whats at stake? Why does choosing to live a life of virtue, or vice, even matter?

With abortion and many other issues, the world is in a massive state of confusion. Violence is increasing. Order is breaking down. Everyone knows that there is something wrong afoot. Everything that is good these days is under attack. Whats going on, and what can everyday people do about it?

In Against the Grain: Heroic Catholics Through the Centuries I tell the story of 21 saints from 21 centuries focused on 21 virtues and why virtue matters especially for our time. Better understanding individuals who lived as shining examples, as signs of contradiction, who did what was right and not what was necessarily always popular. Against the Grain is a summons to heroic virtue, to sainthood, for all. To be a saint is to change the world one soul at a time.

When the world tilts toward crazy, the desire for the heroic increases. Americans love superheroes. Feel good stories about good defeating evil. Our rational brains inform us that while comic book and movie superheroes arent real, were fascinated by them nonetheless. Why is that? Instinctively we love our military, police, firefighters, medical and everyday heroes. Heroes give us solace, energy, and hope.

MARIO LOPEZ SHARES PHOTOS OF HIS SON'S FIRST COMMUNION

Details of St Savior in Chora church, known as Kariye in Turkish, in Istanbul, Friday, Aug. 21, 2020. Turkey on Friday formally converted former Byzantine church, St Savior in Chora, into a mosque, a month after it similarly turned Istanbul's landmark Hagia Sophia into a Muslim house of prayer, drawing international rebuke.(AP Photo/Emrah Gurel)

Catholics know that those who have lived lives of heroic virtue, our Saints, were not fictitious, but real. We look to them to imitate them as they give us true solace, energy and hope. Living lives of heroic virtue is what is required to fix our broken families, nation, and church.

Dr. Jordan Peterson recently asked Church leaders to start asking more of young people. He spoke of "making big demandsbig asksof her members. By so doing they would get a heroic response, heroic involvement, and heroic dedication. Do we prefer short-term safety, affiliation or status over long-term freedom, belonging and heroism?"

Against the Grain, while focusing on heroic saints, is a highly relatable book as it also focuses on struggles and weaknesses. Against the Grain shows the path the saints walked to get to the point of strength. And thats the example that you and I need. Where we too say, "Why not me?"

Against the Grain is a roadmap. It is a message to take action. An action of resistance to the globalists "Great Reset," "Great Transition," and to the anti-Christian elites.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE OPINION NEWSLETTER

People Praying in a church

Against the Grain is also a life preserver. More to the point, its an eternal life preserver. When the culture is swamping your boat with garbage and nonsense, living a life of greater virtue, perhaps even heroic virtue, is an eternal life preserver.

We are called to be extraordinary in the ordinary. As the world whips itself into further frenzy, confusion, and madness, the cross is the answer. Saint Bruno, founder of the Carthusians, said in the 11th century, "While the world changes, the cross stands firm." Stand firm with the cross.

Against the Grain is a playbook for the good guys to stop playing defense and start playing offense. If you have been conditioned to go with the flow of our immoral culture, this book is not for you. If you live as a sign of contradiction amidst our coarsening culture, and are looking to live a life of greater virtue, perhaps even heroic virtue, be fortified with Against the Grain.

Against the Grain is a book that will change the way you see your faith and your relationship with humanity. Its about an epic struggle and mostly, about our future. As Saint John Vianney said, "The saints did not all begin well; but they all ended well. We have begun badly; let us end well, and we shall go one day and meet them in heaven."

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

(Photo by Wathiq Khuzaie/Getty Images) (2005 Getty Images)

Against the Grain is for culture-warrior, patriotic, serious, faithful Catholics, and people of all faiths interested in the Catholic story. This story isnt just about our forefathers. Its about each persons personal quest to find the courage to be truly faithful in a world where Catholicism is often unwelcome.

Dont wait for Calvary. Instead, move forward with moral confidence. If need be, heroic confidence. Step into the breach. Stand out. Go against the grain.

Saints are heroes. Be one.

Here is the original post:
Learn from these heroic saints who lived against the grain - Fox News

Last summer, I wrote about how Portnoys particular brand of transgressive boorishness served as an inspiration to Republican politicians eager to capitalize on the backlash to newly established progressive social norms around things like gender pronoun usage and diversity, equity and inclusion practices. But that alliance was never ideological it was aesthetic. To a certain kind of secular, mostly apolitical Barstool bro, the party of evangelical pro-lifers might not have been an ideal fit, but it was certainly more appealing than the party of woke scolds and stuffy bosses across the aisle.

Now that the Supreme Court has handed social conservatives their most significant ideological victory of the modern political era, those voters will have to choose: Is it worth giving sanction to an overtly religious, mostly unpopular political project simply to own the libs? Portnoy himself explicitly says no. But cultural backlash is as unpredictable as it is powerful, and its place at the heart of the modern GOP means that how a particular type of independent, attitudinally conservative voter responds could shape America for years to come.

To look at the empirical evidence in so much as it exists around opinion on abortion rights, one might think that Republicans victory over Roe is somewhat Pyrrhic. The most recent data from the Pew Research Center, collected at the beginning of July after the Dobbs decision, shows that 57 percent of the population disagrees with the decision itself (including a not-insignificant 29 percent of Republicans); the only group expressing overwhelmingly strong approval is white evangelicals. Sixty-two percent of Americans say abortion should be legal in most or all cases.

But dig deeper into the data and youll find that support for abortion varies considerably based on the duration of pregnancy, especially taking into account voters geographic distribution. There are also, of course, the inherent limitations of public opinion polling, as well as the relative rarity of single-issue voters (among whom anti-abortion voters outnumber their counterparts). Its not quite accurate to say the GOP has summarily alienated an electorate that otherwise seemed prime to embrace it in this falls midterms.

So one might look to another indicator, albeit one lacking the veneer of empiricism that polling maintains: The opinions of thinkers and leaders in the conservative movement. What actual politicians say is unreliable, as beholden as they are to pesky primary voters and wealthy, ideological donors. What about those responsible for curating the vibes of the modern conservative movement?

At the beginning of June, the National Review fellow and social-conservative wunderkind Nate Hochman wrote an op-ed for the New York Times titled What Comes After the Religious Right? In it, he expanded on the somewhat declinist view of the conservative Catholic writer Matthew Walther, who coined the term Barstool conservative in a 2021 op-ed for The Week writing that, While the old religious right will see much to like in the new cultural conservatism, they are partners, rather than leaders, in the coalition. Hochman argues that although a figure as non-pious as Trump (who could plausibly claim the mantle of the Barstool president) might have empowered social conservatives, theyre too much of an electoral minority to succeed without their comparatively libertine coalitional partners.

Hochmans insight invites a similar reflection from the other side of the aisle. Once upon a time, as the writer Matt Yglesias recently pointed out in response to Portnoys pro-Roe stance, chauvinistic bros were reliable Democratic voters, who made common cause with realpolitik-ing feminists willing to overlook the Clinton-era partys affective cultural conservatism in exchange for political wins. Both were opposed to the Moral Majority-era sanctimony of the Reagan-Bush GOP, the ethos of the alliance perhaps best summed up by a notorious quote regarding Clinton from the former Time White House reporter Nina Burleigh: Id be happy to give him a blowjob just to thank him for keeping abortion legal. I think American women should be lining up with their presidential kneepads on to show their gratitude for keeping the theocracy off our backs.

For various reasons beyond the scope of this essay, the salience of cultural politics has increased in American life to an extent that makes that alliance impossible. Conservative thought leaders now find themselves at the same crossroads liberals once did: What price are they willing to pay what are they willing to sacrifice, or excuse to keep such fickle, secular, Portnoy-like independent voters in the fold?

What are conservative thought leaders willing to sacrifice, or excuse to keep such fickle, secular, Dave Portnoy-like independent voters in the fold?|Michael Reaves/Getty Images

As the GOPs most reliable and motivated voting bloc, the anti-abortion movement is clearly not going anywhere. To the chagrin and fear of liberals, and the hope of the would-be New Right, theres some evidence that they might not have to. Looking at the replies to Portnoys initial post-Roe tweet, alongside the criticism from hard-right figures like Dan Bongino (as well as Hochman himself), one can see a slew of comments from average, non-blue-check-sporting Barstool fans, protesting that all the Supreme Court did was let it be a state issue, or that he should simply stick to sports.

This is where Barstool per se ceases to be a useful framework through which to understand the shifts occurring in American politics today. (As with any brand with as massive a reach as Portnoys, its fans are more ideologically diverse than a liberals snap judgment would assume.) The angst inspired by Portnoys pro-abortion rights turn reflects a much broader phenomenon: Just as secular and religious GOP voters are split, theres an even narrower division among those who are simply alienated by the modern left and those who are outright anti-feminists, especially among young voters.

The anti-feminism of todays young conservatives takes a few different forms. There is, of course, the outright hate spread on forums like 4chan and by trolls like Nick Fuentes; the casual, fratty misogyny of more mainstream figures like Trump White House aide Garrett Ziegler, who in a live streamed rant after his Jan. 6 committee testimony called his female former coworkers thots and hoes; and the faux-erudition of New Right leaders like Sen. Josh Hawley, who in a keynote address to the National Conservatism Conference decried the lefts attack on men in America. (Its not just America, either: In South Korea, youth anti-feminism helped propel a conservative president to the Blue House.) Young anti-feminists see a world where women are at least notionally more empowered than ever, yet no one seems to be happy about it. They look to the past for solutions in lieu of inventing new ones for the moment.

And there are plenty of historical examples, both religious and secular, to draw from. In her 1991 book, Backlash: The Undeclared War Against American Women, the feminist writer Susan Faludi described a taxonomy of anti-feminist reaction to the advances of the Equal Rights Amendment era, from Christian leaders like Paul Weyrich who promised to overturn the present power structure of the country to the quasi-paganism of the poet Robert Bly, who encouraged real men to reclaim their cultural birthright by psychologically isolating themselves from women. Faludi sums up their shared philosophy as the belief that the very steps that have elevated womens position have actually led to their downfall.

One might wonder what Faludi, in an era where Weyrich and Bly have inspired successors in figures like the (now-disgraced) megachurch pastor Mark Driscoll and the Canadian psychologist Jordan Peterson, would have to say about the backlash to womens more recent advances. To borrow a rhetorical move from Woody Allen, whom Bly especially hated, we dont have to wonder; I happen to have Ms. Faludi right here: Writing in the New York Times in response to Roes overturning, she argues that feminisms growing entwinement with celebrity culture is a primary culprit in making it more vulnerable than ever to a more pernicious backlash, one that has never relented, one that has brought us the calamity of the Alito draft opinion.

This is why social conservatives find themselves at a moment of not just dog-that-caught-the-car peril, but potential promise. The Courts ruling was only made possible by the combined forces of secular conservatism, via Trumps mass heterodox appeal, and the decades of concentrated effort by a minority of religious activists. Like with Weyrich and Bly, or Driscoll and Peterson, anti-feminism can take many forms and have many motivations, but the basic ressentiment it taps into transcends religion, class or partisanship, and is stubbornly persistent. By subsuming life-or-death social issues under the auspices of Lean In moments and social media slap downs over whether Taylor Swift is or isnt a feminist, as Faludi wrote, liberals and feminists have risked erasing the distinction in the publics mind between serious material outcomes and such symbological slap-fights.

That possibility conjures a world where arguments about womens health outcomes, or whether theres a feminist case against abortion, or over pro-family Republican economic policies might become immaterial as abortion becomes an entirely different, more recognizably modern kind of culture-war issue. We simply dont know yet whether the Barstool cohort of the modern GOP will look around at a post-Roe world and decide their party has gone too far. But if they dont, and Trumps coalition holds, it will be the most powerful symbol yet of Americas transition to a symbolic mass politics of cultural grievance.

Those politics still can have very real policy consequences, as millions of women in red states are now discovering. Improbable as it might seem, whether or not said consequences endure or even spread might depend on what occurs in the hearts and minds, and on the ballots, of men like Dave Portnoy.

See the rest here:
The Barstool Bros' Split Over Abortion Could Determine the Future of the GOP - POLITICO