Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

We can’t let Christianity be used to ‘lynch’ anyone

Man speaking on stage

A Maricopa County GOP leader told an audience that if local election official Stephen Richer (above) were in the room with them, she would '"lynch him."

Sexton is executive director of the Arizona Faith Network and an ordained pastor in the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ). Campbell is lead pastor at Desert Springs Bible Church and author of “ Disarming Leviathan: Loving Your Christian Nationalist Neighbor.”

As pastors in Arizona, we are concerned about the toxic polarization that has taken hold in our state and the weight it is adding to the souls of our neighbors. A video recently surfaced that showed violent rhetoric toward an Arizona public servant. It deserves the rebuke of Christians in our state — and all people of goodwill.

Maricopa County Republican Party official Shelby Busch told an audience that if Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer, a Republican, were in the room with them, she would “lynch him.” This was not only a call to violence. It is a term that carries a particularly disturbing connotation in the history of our country.


The troubling mention of 'Christian disagreements'

Violent rhetoric of this kind has no place in Maricopa County or anywhere in Arizona. With hate crimes on the rise and violent threats against public officials — especially election officials — at a dangerous high, this type of language is reprehensible and contrary to the teachings of Jesus.

Furthermore, Busch stated that there was a difference between Richer, who is Jewish, and other public officials because other officials can have “Christian disagreements.” To be clear: No matter what types of disagreements Arizonans have, our religious tradition calls us to resolve them peacefully. Disagreements should never be resolved through violence, regardless of their extent.

Beyond the danger of this call to violence, the rhetoric of “Christian disagreements” implies that Christians can treat non-Christians with less respect or dignity. This is contrary to the teaching of Jesus, who calls us to love our neighbor as ourselves.

We can't manipulate religion to divide people

Busch’s comments can also give the impression that non-Christians should not serve in public office. This could not be further from the truth.

While we believe in strongly expressing our Christian beliefs in the public square and advocating for policies that reflect our values, religious tests for officeholders are a violation of the First Amendment.

What’s more, we would embrace any politician who serves the public with integrity, honesty and fairness, regardless of their faith tradition.

To demand that public officials adhere to a single interpretation of a single religion is a betrayal of foundational American values.

Faith's tenets are love and compassion

The combative environment in Arizona politics stems largely from the lies about the 2020 election — and the demands that Arizona officials overturn the will of the people.

When individuals are willing to throw aside the results of a free and fair election — and silence the voices of the majority of their neighbors — these elements cultivate a dangerous environment for our democracy.

We are tired of this divisive violent rhetoric that manipulates our religious values, distorting the core tenets of compassion and understanding that define our faith.

As local church pastors, we invite our community to reject the path of violence and follow the way of Jesus, a path of peace, grace, love and truth. As the Apostle Paul wrote to Christians living under the Roman Empire (Romans 12:17-18), “Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everyone. If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone.”


Read More

Trump never actually had a plan

President Donald Trump speaks to reporters before boarding Air Force One at Palm Beach International Airport in West Palm Beach, Florida, on March 23, 2026. President Donald Trump said Monday that there are "major points of agreement" in US- Iran talks which he said must result in Tehran giving up its nuclear ambitions and enriched uranium stockpile.

(TNS)

Trump never actually had a plan

US President Trump spoke at the Saudi Future Investment Initiative on Friday, March 27. He offered a pristine example of what he calls “the weave.” What detractors take for incontinent verbal rambling is, in his own telling, genius-level embroidery of a rhetorical mosaic.

While spinning his tapestry of soundbites, the wartime president declared that the Iranians “have to open up the Strait of Trump — I mean, Hormuz. Excuse me, for — I’m so sorry, such a terrible mistake. The fake news will say he ‘accidentally said’ (chuckle), now there’s no accidents with me. Not too many. If there were, we’d have a major story. No. Well, we had that with the Gulf of Mexico. Remember the Gulf of Mexico? And one day I said, ‘Why is it the Gulf of Mexico?’ ”

Keep ReadingShow less
Border Communities Know ICE’s Impunity All Too Well

Close-up of a rusty iron fence painted with stars and stripes at the American-Mexican border in Tijuana.

Border Communities Know ICE’s Impunity All Too Well

The Department of Homeland Security shutdown has officially passed one month as lawmakers continue to debate limits on ICE’s use of force. Though we’ve arrived at this legislative standoff due to aggressive, and sometimes fatal, immigration enforcement actions in cities in our country’s interior, for communities along the U.S.–Mexico border, such abuses are nothing new. As I reveal through my academic research, immigration agents have operated with near-total impunity at the border for decades.

I uncovered patterns of excessive violence, coercion, and abuse at land ports of entry, through which more than 200 million people including workers, students, and visitors legally enter the U.S. every single year. The link between agents’ actions on the streets of American cities and the way they operate at the southern border is inevitable—yet something the current conversation about ICE and potential reforms overlooks.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Exit Coalition: A Bipartisan Chance to Defend the Institution
us a flag on pole under cloudy sky

The Exit Coalition: A Bipartisan Chance to Defend the Institution

In the year marking the United States Semiquincentennial, dozens of members of Congress—from both parties—will quietly make a consequential decision: they will not return. Most coverage treats this as routine political churn—retirements, career moves, the normal rhythm of electoral life. But in a Congress defined by constraint and dysfunction, these departures create something rare and fleeting: freedom to act independently.

Fifty-plus lawmakers across the House and Senate are not seeking reelection in 2026—well above the typical 25 to 35 members who step aside in most election cycles. Republicans account for roughly 40 of those departures, including nearly 35 in the House. Some are retiring outright. Others are pursuing higher office. A smaller number are simply stepping away.

Keep ReadingShow less
Protestors outside, holding signs that read, "Justice for survivors" and "National Organization for Women."

Protesters gather as Harvey Weinstein arrives at a Manhattan court house on January 06, 2020 in New York City.

Getty Images, Spencer Platt

We Teach Prevention to Victims, Not Accountability to Power

Each time a major sexual assault case comes to light, the public conversation follows a familiar pattern. Awareness campaigns are launched. Safety tips are shared. People are reminded to watch their drinks, walk in groups, and trust their instincts. The focus quickly turns to what potential victims should do differently.

But the harder question remains: Why does sexual assault continue to happen on such a large scale?

Keep ReadingShow less