Category: Allie beth stuckey
Allie Beth Stuckey exposes therapy’s popular ‘inner child’ concept as unbiblical
The therapy world has exploded in recent years. Not only has going to therapy been totally destigmatized and is even seen as a status symbol, but the research and clinical sides of the industry have developed an enormous range of different types of treatment.
But how are Christians supposed to view the therapy world? Just because a particular treatment has been touted as effective, does that mean a believer can give it a stamp of approval?
On a recent episode of “Relatable,” BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey dove into the secular therapy world and exposed several popular practices as unbiblical — one of which is the concept of the “inner child.”
The “biggest threat” to Christian women in particular, says Allie, is “not progressivism,” “not feminism,” “not the New Age,” and “not toxic empathy.”
“It’s therapy culture,” she says bluntly.
“I actually believe that the progressivism, feminism, toxic empathy, emotionalism, me-centeredness, New Age-ish stuff that unfortunately infects so many women’s Bible studies … and conferences are all downstream from the secular therapy, pop psychology, pseudo-spiritualism that we find on social media that is dedicated to women’s therapy and therapy concepts.”
For Allie, a lot of “therapeutic language” is just “an excuse for complaining and self-centeredness” and “a replacement for sanctification, for self-denial, for generosity, and the hard work of Holy Spirit-empowered holiness.”
She says that nowhere is this more evident than in the concept of the “inner child.”
In the therapy world, the “inner child” refers to the part of your adult self that still carries the emotions, needs, wounds, and beliefs formed during childhood. Therapeutic treatments often include patients learning to identify, reconnect with, and heal their childhood wounds, unmet needs, and emotions through techniques like visualization, reparenting exercises, emotional processing, and inner dialogue work.
But Allie says that “there’s no such thing as an inner child in the Christian worldview.”
While she validates the existence of “childhood memories,” “childhood experiences that shaped us,” and “childhood pain,” she argues that “the concept of an emotional or spiritual existence of an internal version of ourselves at 6 or 8 or 12 years old does not exist.”
Further, the concept of an inner child has problematic origins for the Christian, she says.
Sigmund Freud “popularized the idea that repressed childhood trauma is what drives much of our adult behavior,” but this perspective, Allie argues, denies our “sin nature that we inherited from Adam.”
One of Freud’s protégés, Carl Jung, then expanded on the idea of an internal child, which he called “the divine child” — a symbol for the pure, whole, innocent, and miraculous potential inside each person.
But Allie condemns this concept, as it also denies the biblical reality of sin nature. It has also, however, birthed and fed the New Age notion of the “inner goddess” — a divine or sacred internal energy or essence in each person that, if awakened, allows one to reclaim personal wholeness and embody her highest self.
“This underlying assumption that if it weren’t for all of these other factors, my inner self would be perfect and perfectly loved and if I can find her and find a way to perfectly love her and heal her, then I’ll just be okay — that is a secular New Age idea. It’s not a biblical idea,” says Allie, citing Jeremiah 17:9, which warns that “the heart is deceitful above all things.”
Ultimately, the inner child and other concepts that turn our gaze inward put the focus on us instead of God — the true healer, says Allie.
“This journey to finding the untainted, perfect, divine self inside of us is a losing battle that actually will just encourage more self-focus, which is the thing that is oppressing and trapping us, not the thing that’s going to liberate us.”
To hear Allie’s full biblical breakdown of the inner child — as well as more therapy treatments that she argues are unbiblical — watch the episode above.
Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?
To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
3 must-watch highlights from Allie Beth Stuckey’s David French debate
Yesterday, BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey debated New York Times columnist David French, who has long identified as an evangelical Christian and a conservative.
Despite their shared theological and political identities, Stuckey and French clash on a number of issues, including transgender pronouns and gender ideology, abortion, and Texas Democratic Senate nominee James Talarico, among others.
In their 95-minute debate, the duo respectfully went head-to-head on topics that have drawn strong criticism of French from many on the conservative right.
Here are three highlights from the debate:
Talarico dispute
Allie brought up French’s recent article in which he praised Texas Democratic Senate nominee James Talarico as a Christian who sets a positive example of the faith in politics compared to “MAGA Christianity.”
In contrast, Allie has sharply criticized Talarico’s progressive theological views, accusing him of twisting Scripture to support abortion, homosexuality, transgenderism, and left-wing policies
But French doubled down: “I’m just really not willing to say James Talarico is not a Christian.”
He continued, “When I look at our political discourse around Christianity in this country and political Christianity, it’s so broken. … We’re writing people out of Christianity based on policy positions.”
Allie pushed back, arguing that Talarico is pushing far more than policy positions.
“They’re not policy positions to say God is non-binary … or to say our trans neighbors need abortion care too, or to say that, ‘I think all religions share the same central truth,’” she countered, insisting that these are primarily “theological” issues.
Given that Talarico refuses to “affirm Genesis 1,” Allie made it clear that it’s “going to be tough” to agree that he’s the Christian he identifies as.
The Harris vote
In another part of the debate, Allie brought up French’s 2024 endorsement of Kamala Harris.
“I don’t understand voting for someone like Kamala Harris,” she said, referencing the Biden DOJ’s removal of SNAP benefits for public schools that refused to allow biological males to use girls’ facilities or compete on girls’ teams.
She also pointed to Harris’ pledge to restore the Roe v. Wade framework and her opposition to bills banning late-term abortions.
“I agree with you on so many of these issues. … I just don’t think I could ever vote for Kamala Harris,” she reiterated.
French countered by arguing that for him, the Russia-Ukraine War took precedence over gender and abortion issues.
“I would place a war in which a million people are being killed and injured, which could potentially lead to a World War III that we may not survive as a species … way above things like pronouns,” he said.
But Allie pushed back on what she saw as “diminishment” of her original argument.
“You know I’m not just talking about pronouns,” she resisted.
“I’m talking about medical guidance for hospitals to chemically castrate kids. I’m talking about in Democrat states … taking kids out of the custody of their parents because the parents won’t affirm this newfound gender of the child,” she continued.
Pronoun clash
Allie also called out what she perceived to be conflicting statements regarding French’s position on “pronoun politeness.”
Last year during a podcast, French referred to his male colleague (Brian Riedl) who identifies as a woman using female pronouns — an act many, including Allie, perceived as a contradiction to his 2018 article, in which he wrote, “The use of a pronoun isn’t a matter of mere manners. It’s a declaration of a fact. I won’t call Chelsea Manning ‘she’ for a very simple reason. He’s a man.”
“Is your stance one of pronoun politeness that you believe that a man who identifies as a woman should be referred to as ‘she/her’?” Allie inquired.
French claimed he “didn’t remember” using female pronouns to refer to Riedl and partially reaffirmed his 2018 statement.
After praising Riedl as a “brilliant analyst,” French stated, “I’m going to be kind to [trans people], but I also don’t want to say things that I don’t believe are true, and so the way I deal with that is, I use people’s names.”
He caveated, however, by declaring that he’s “definitely not going to go out of [his] way” to call trans-identifying people by the pronouns matching their biological sex.
Allie replied, “I don’t see it as unkind calling someone, whether it’s to their face or not to their face, the gender that God made them.”
But French dissented. “Oh, I think if somebody is dealing with gender dysphoria, … I don’t see the value in me saying something to them that I know and they know is going to be hurtful to them.”
“It’s just normal, complete politeness and manners,” he continued.
“I’m just not going to go out of my way to say something that I know is going to be hurtful just because I can justify it as being true. All true words are not kind by virtue of just simply being true.”
Allie conceded, “I agree that you don’t have to be rude to someone and say, ‘That shirt looks bad on you.’”
“But when it comes to [gender], when we know it’s a lie that damages someone, that hurts them spiritually and physically and emotionally, hurts their family, I just can’t get on board with assenting to the idea that 2+2=5.”
Overall, the debate offered a revealing look at the growing divide within evangelical Christianity over truth, compassion, and cultural engagement. Watch the full hour-and-a-half exchange below.
Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?
To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
‘That’s not what I say’: Allie Beth Stuckey takes David French to task over ‘toxic empathy’ smear in rare interview
BlazeTV’s Allie Beth Stuckey sat down with New York Times columnist David French in a rare, candid debate about the concept of “toxic empathy,” which Stuckey wrote about in her book “Toxic Empathy: How Progressives Exploit Christian Compassion.”
‘You are using the title of my book, and you called me the foremost architect of this concept of toxic empathy.’
Stuckey confronted French’s mischaracterization of her views on empathy in his NYT op-eds, in which he argued that some Christians who align with President Donald Trump have waged a war on empathy.
“My issue is, really, we don’t have enough empathy, that empathy needs to be more holistic,” French said.
“In my view, one of our big problems is not enough empathy and, particularly amongst very partisan people, very selective empathy, so that ‘only my ally’s experience really matters,'” he continued.
French called it a “cultural phenomenon,” particularly among parts of “MAGA Christianity,” to dismiss empathy for human suffering as “toxic.” He claimed instead that it is “incomplete” or “selective” empathy.
Stuckey contended that “selective empathy” that leads to “immoral decisions is a form of toxic empathy.” She continued to press French on his articles.
“I tell both sides of the story. … I’m actually doing what you say needs to be done, which is expanding compassion, but I don’t end there. Because I think you would agree, we don’t get anywhere if both sides are just saying, ‘Well, my story’s sadder. No, my story’s sadder,'” Stuckey stated.
She argued that ending there “actually paralyzes you from making a good moral decision.” She instead called for Christians to be thoughtful and consider both sides of the story, giving the example of illegal immigrants and victims like Laken Riley, a 22-year-old college student who was murdered by a foreign national who was in the U.S. illegally.
“We have to ask discerning questions: What is biblically true? What’s morally true? What’s politically true, logically true, historically true?” she added.
RELATED: David French catches flak for claiming Talarico, a pro-abortion Democrat, ‘acts like a Christian’
David French. William B. Plowman/NBC
During the exchange, Stuckey noted areas of apparent agreement, stating, “It doesn’t really sound like you disagree with me here, but it did sound like you did in the articles.”
“In 2025, you said, for example, ‘If people respond to the foreign aid shutdown and the stop-work orders by talking about how children might suffer and die, then they’re exhibiting toxic empathy,'” Stuckey said. “That’s not what I say toxic empathy is.”
“Well, it’s absolutely what I see a lot in the public discussion,” French responded.
“You are using the title of my book, and you called me the foremost architect of this concept of toxic empathy. But I don’t say that toxic empathy is someone caring about children dying, and that’s how you describe it in the article,” Stuckey remarked.
“I’m not putting this all on you,” French said. “One of the sad things that has occurred is this global, larger attack and talk about empathy has led to an immediate response when you talk about human suffering. I will see many Christians say, ‘That’s toxic empathy.'”
RELATED: Pro-life support plummets among churchgoers despite faith resurgence
Allie Beth Stuckey, David French. Image source: BlazeTV
During the interview, the two also discussed gender, abortion, French’s defense of voting for Vice President Kamala Harris (D) in the 2024 presidential election, and his support for Texas state Rep. James Talarico (D) in the upcoming Texas Senate election against either incumbent Sen. John Cornyn (R) or Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R).
As part of his argument for voting for Harris over President Donald Trump, French cited the abortion rates under Trump’s administration compared to those under former President Barack Obama.
French, who considers himself pro-life, told Stuckey, “The largest drop in abortions actually occurred during the eight years of the Obama administration.” While he admitted that the rise in abortion rates under Trump is the result of multiple factors, he argued that the Republican president perpetuates a problematic culture of “libertinism” that “is incompatible with a pro-life ethic.”
“Complex social phenomena typically don’t have singular causes. … We’ve been dealing with some culture changes that I think are really negative. … America is a lot more libertine, and Donald Trump is a very libertine man. He does what he wants,” French said.
Megan Basham, a journalist for the Daily Wire, reacted to Stuckey’s interview with French, criticizing the columnist for his abortion-rate argument.
“Oh my gosh, that is such a ridiculous response. French had said something similar about Obama. He said that the abortion rate went down under Obama because Obama gave people hope. Absolutely idiotic. The truth was, red states enacted more restrictions under Obama and that what was what was bringing the abortion rate down. And French is too smart not to know that,” Basham wrote. “So what does that make him?”
Kylee Griswold, the managing editor for the Federalist, added, “Additionally, abortion #s under Trump 2 can’t be divorced from the Biden-Harris administration removing the in-person dispensing requirements for mifepristone — which is how most abortions are performed. An egregious move that puts women at SERIOUS risk and also causes abortion in red states to SKYROCKET.”
In a separate post, Mollie Hemingway, the editor in chief of the Federalist, wrote, “David French struggles and faceplants with his attempt to justify to @conservmillen why he endorsed Kamala Harris, given her lengthy track record of persecuting prolife Christians and journalists.”
Not the Bee commended Stuckey for the debate.
“I love your way of confronting men like French. I’d say in this case, it would have made sense to bring up the fact that if you follow his logic, speaking to somebody about the Gospel could be equated to telling them an unkind truth. They are sinners. They are incapable of saving themselves, and they need Jesus. That’s not ‘kind.’ But it’s necessary. If you avoid unkind truths, you will never share the Gospel,” Not the Bee wrote.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
‘That’s not what I say’: Allie Beth Stuckey takes David French to task over ‘toxic empathy’ smear in rare interview
BlazeTV’s Allie Beth Stuckey sat down with New York Times columnist David French in a rare, candid debate about the concept of “toxic empathy,” which Stuckey wrote about in her book “Toxic Empathy: How Progressives Exploit Christian Compassion.”
‘You are using the title of my book, and you called me the foremost architect of this concept of toxic empathy.’
Stuckey confronted French’s mischaracterization of her views on empathy in his NYT op-eds, in which he argued that some Christians who align with President Donald Trump have waged a war on empathy.
“My issue is, really, we don’t have enough empathy, that empathy needs to be more holistic,” French said.
“In my view, one of our big problems is not enough empathy and, particularly amongst very partisan people, very selective empathy, so that ‘only my ally’s experience really matters,'” he continued.
French called it a “cultural phenomenon,” particularly among parts of “MAGA Christianity,” to dismiss empathy for human suffering as “toxic.” He claimed instead that it is “incomplete” or “selective” empathy.
Stuckey contended that “selective empathy” that leads to “immoral decisions is a form of toxic empathy.” She continued to press French on his articles.
“I tell both sides of the story. … I’m actually doing what you say needs to be done, which is expanding compassion, but I don’t end there. Because I think you would agree, we don’t get anywhere if both sides are just saying, ‘Well, my story’s sadder. No, my story’s sadder,'” Stuckey stated.
She argued that ending there “actually paralyzes you from making a good moral decision.” She instead called for Christians to be thoughtful and consider both sides of the story, giving the example of illegal immigrants and victims like Laken Riley, a 22-year-old college student who was murdered by a foreign national who was in the U.S. illegally.
“We have to ask discerning questions: What is biblically true? What’s morally true? What’s politically true, logically true, historically true?” she added.
RELATED: David French catches flak for claiming Talarico, a pro-abortion Democrat, ‘acts like a Christian’
David French. William B. Plowman/NBC
During the exchange, Stuckey noted areas of apparent agreement, stating, “It doesn’t really sound like you disagree with me here, but it did sound like you did in the articles.”
“In 2025, you said, for example, ‘If people respond to the foreign aid shutdown and the stop-work orders by talking about how children might suffer and die, then they’re exhibiting toxic empathy,'” Stuckey said. “That’s not what I say toxic empathy is.”
“Well, it’s absolutely what I see a lot in the public discussion,” French responded.
“You are using the title of my book, and you called me the foremost architect of this concept of toxic empathy. But I don’t say that toxic empathy is someone caring about children dying, and that’s how you describe it in the article,” Stuckey remarked.
“I’m not putting this all on you,” French said. “One of the sad things that has occurred is this global, larger attack and talk about empathy has led to an immediate response when you talk about human suffering. I will see many Christians say, ‘That’s toxic empathy.'”
RELATED: Pro-life support plummets among churchgoers despite faith resurgence
Allie Beth Stuckey, David French. Image source: BlazeTV
During the interview, the two also discussed gender, abortion, French’s defense of voting for Vice President Kamala Harris (D) in the 2024 presidential election, and his support for Texas state Rep. James Talarico (D) in the upcoming Texas Senate election against either incumbent Sen. John Cornyn (R) or Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R).
As part of his argument for voting for Harris over President Donald Trump, French cited the abortion rates under Trump’s administration compared to those under former President Barack Obama.
French, who considers himself pro-life, told Stuckey, “The largest drop in abortions actually occurred during the eight years of the Obama administration.” While he admitted that the rise in abortion rates under Trump is the result of multiple factors, he argued that the Republican president perpetuates a problematic culture of “libertinism” that “is incompatible with a pro-life ethic.”
“Complex social phenomena typically don’t have singular causes. … We’ve been dealing with some culture changes that I think are really negative. … America is a lot more libertine, and Donald Trump is a very libertine man. He does what he wants,” French said.
Megan Basham, a journalist for the Daily Wire, reacted to Stuckey’s interview with French, criticizing the columnist for his abortion-rate argument.
“Oh my gosh, that is such a ridiculous response. French had said something similar about Obama. He said that the abortion rate went down under Obama because Obama gave people hope. Absolutely idiotic. The truth was, red states enacted more restrictions under Obama and that what was what was bringing the abortion rate down. And French is too smart not to know that,” Basham wrote. “So what does that make him?”
Kylee Griswold, the managing editor for the Federalist, added, “Additionally, abortion #s under Trump 2 can’t be divorced from the Biden-Harris administration removing the in-person dispensing requirements for mifepristone — which is how most abortions are performed. An egregious move that puts women at SERIOUS risk and also causes abortion in red states to SKYROCKET.”
In a separate post, Mollie Hemingway, the editor in chief of the Federalist, wrote, “David French struggles and faceplants with his attempt to justify to @conservmillen why he endorsed Kamala Harris, given her lengthy track record of persecuting prolife Christians and journalists.”
Not the Bee commended Stuckey for the debate.
“I love your way of confronting men like French. I’d say in this case, it would have made sense to bring up the fact that if you follow his logic, speaking to somebody about the Gospel could be equated to telling them an unkind truth. They are sinners. They are incapable of saving themselves, and they need Jesus. That’s not ‘kind.’ But it’s necessary. If you avoid unkind truths, you will never share the Gospel,” Not the Bee wrote.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
‘You’ve lost the right to exist’: Matt Walsh rips ‘incapable’ ruling in Iryna Zarutska case
Last August, 23-year-old Ukrainian refugee Iryna Zarutska was fatally stabbed in an apparently random attack while riding the light rail in Charlotte, North Carolina. Last week, however, her alleged killer, Decarlos Brown Jr., was found “incapable to proceed” to trial on the state murder charge due to mental health issues.
The decision has sparked national outrage. Social media is ablaze with furious comments like “no justice for Iryna”; Republican lawmakers are warning the decision will cause more erosion of trust in the system; even some mainstream coverage is framing it as another failure of soft-on-crime policies.
BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey was certainly appalled by the decision.
“How in the world did we get here?” she asks in disbelief.
On a recent episode of “Relatable,” Daily Wire host Matt Walsh joined Allie to answer that very question.
– YouTube
Walsh begins by arguing that “the concept of being incompetent to stand trial makes no sense” and that it “shouldn’t be a category.”
“Because the way that I look at it … either you knew exactly what you were doing and you did it anyway, and that makes you evil beyond measure, or it’s true that you really don’t understand that you’re not allowed to do that, in which case, that’s all the more reason, as far as I’m concerned, why you are not fit for human society,” he explains.
Decarlos Brown Jr.’s case, as well as many other cases, is the result of the psychiatric industry “[medicalizing] the human condition,” Walsh argues.
“And now because academics, psychiatrists, and communists … have taken over criminal justice and have for decades — at least since the mid-20th century — all human evil is now just categorized as a medical problem,” he tells Allie.
The result of this inversion of objective morality is that criminals are turned into the victims.
“The justice system looks at the most evil people as victims of some sort of condition, which means that all we can do is offer them treatment. What we can’t do is actually punish them. And that’s just totally absurd and wrong,” says Walsh.
Unless it’s a “white male” who commits the crime, Allie points out.
“We see that kind of story much less often,” she says.
But “if you’re part of a victim group, you get advocacy from the public, from the media, from some kind of mob pressure, from these groups like the Innocence Project or the ACLU, and you are much more likely to be seen as absolved of your crimes or mentally unstable or something like that.”
She continues, “It’s not just that progressive ideology has medicalized the existence of evil in human nature; they’ve just done it for certain groups of people, which is even worse in my estimation.”
“Yeah, absolutely. I mean, that’s a major factor as well,” Walsh agrees.
“If you’re anything but a white male, then you can claim victim status … and then you add in the supposed mental health challenges … then you get even greater victim status.”
Regardless of the skin color of the perpetrator, Walsh entirely rejects mental illness as an excuse for criminal behavior: “What was your mental state at the time? I don’t care! … I don’t care what you were feeling; I don’t care what you were thinking. I care what you did. That’s all that matters. And if you did something this heinous … by my estimation, you’ve lost the right to exist.”
To hear more of the conversation, watch the episode above.
Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?
To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Ex-porn star shares the shocking moment she realized the industry encourages pedophilia
Brittni De La Mora spent seven years in the adult film industry before walking away for good in December 2012. A profound encounter with Jesus on an airplane — while flying to film what would become her final scene — gave her the strength and conviction to leave permanently and fully embrace her Christian faith.
Today, she and her husband, Pastor Richard De La Mora, co-lead Love Always Ministries and direct Jesus Loves Porn Stars, two outreach-focused ministries dedicated to helping people break free from pornography addiction and reaching those still working in the adult entertainment industry with the gospel.
On a recent episode of “Relatable,” Allie Beth Stuckey invited Brittni to share her amazing story — including the first time she realized that the porn industry was so much darker than just producing adult films.
Brittni was just 18 years old when she became an adult film star. Her success was immediate — but not necessarily because of talent. It was her age that made her so marketable.
“When I first started off in the industry, the reason why I was getting booked so much is because I was 18 years old, and I looked like a little girl,” she says.
“They would put me in pigtails and costume jewelry and schoolgirl outfits and have me say, ‘Oh, I’m barely 18.”’
It wasn’t long before “a light flickered” on in Brittni’s mind.
“I was like, ‘Do you guys realize this is encouraging pedophilia?”’ she recounts, noting that she immediately went to her agent and demanded that she not be booked for these kinds of shoots anymore.
Now that Brittni is on the other side of the industry and helping others escape, she sees the full sinister picture.
“Now that I’m out, I see that pornography really is a drug,” she says. “It releases so much dopamine in your brain, and eventually what you watch on porn does not fill you anymore, and so now you have to go re-enact those things in real life.”
But there comes a day when even re-enactment fails to satisfy. The addiction then begins to demand novelty.
“It starts off by hiring escorts, and then that’s not enough. And then people are doing things to children,” says Brittni.
“I truly blame pornography for [pedophilia] because what they’re watching, they’re feeding their soul — and then they start craving that because eventually it’s just not enough anymore.”
Brittni recounts watching a documentary of a man who was caught with “6,000 images of child pornography.”
“He started off watching the ‘morally acceptable’ scenes — the husband and wife — and then started watching the young teenage 18- year-old with the old man. And eventually that wasn’t enough,” she says.
To hear Brittni’s full story — from her tumultuous childhood and her entrance into the adult film industry to her Christian conversion and eventual exit from pornography — watch the episode above.
Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?
To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Crucial detail about Iryna Zarutska’s suspected murderer may ease online outrage after ‘incompetency’ ruling
Outrage spread online earlier this week after reports emerged that Iryna Zarutska’s suspected murderer was ruled incompetent to stand trial. Amid the outrage, however, a glimmer of good news came out for those invested in seeking justice in the high-profile case from August 2025.
Blaze News reported Wednesday that Decarlos Dejuan Brown Jr., the suspect in Iryna Zarutska’s senseless stabbing on the subway system in Charlotte, North Carolina, was deemed incompetent to stand trial. This news caused many to speculate that the suspect may escape punishment on a technicality.
‘How many more innocent people must we sacrifice for the sake of coddling and babying the absolute scum of the Earth?’
Many online commentators and even a foreign leader reacted to an X post from the New York Post on the development.
“The purpose of a system is what it does,” White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller said.
Peter Zay/Anadolu/Getty Images
“If you’re competent enough to target a woman and murder her, you’re competent enough to stand trial, be found guilty, and receive the death penalty,” BlazeTV’s Allie Beth Stuckey responded.
The Daily Wire’s Matt Walsh’s response summed up the outrage:
The whole idea of “incompetent to stand trial” is f**king nonsense. If you’re too “incompetent” to understand that you shouldn’t butcher an innocent woman on the train, you should die. Period. Arrest, convict, execute. You are not fit to be a part of human society. How many more innocent people must we sacrifice for the sake of coddling and babying the absolute scum of the Earth? Our ancestors had it right. They would have had this guy hanging from the gallows an hour after conviction. The old system of justice was light years better than this insane bulls**t we’re dealing with now.
El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele, who has cleaned up his country from crime quite effectively in recent months, said, “Impeach the corrupt judges.”
CEO of NXR Studios and Pastor Joel Webbon weighed in as well: “No one is too incompetent for the death penalty. All you have to do is sit there. He’ll do fine.”
While the outrage surrounding the murder case continues, the report from the New York Post’s headline did not mention separate federal charges against Brown that are unaffected by the findings of the state case. The Post did, however, mention this fact in the report.
The Western District of North Carolina U.S. Attorney’s Office made this key detail abundantly clear in its response to the Post on social media: “DeCarlos Brown is in federal custody on a federal indictment. The state proceedings, including any competency finding in those proceedings, are completely separate.”
Brown faces a federal charge of one count of committing an act causing death on a mass transportation system. If convicted, he could still face life in prison or even the death penalty.
“Crimes like this … affect everyone who relies on mass transportation to get to and from work and go about their daily lives,” U.S. Attorney Russ Ferguson said in September, “and federal charges are necessary to protect the public and ensure confidence in our transportation systems.”
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Allie Beth Stuckey busts 3 ‘Christian’ myths deceiving believers today
Just because something sounds Christian doesn’t mean that it is. Nobody knows this better than BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey, who frequently exposes lies wrapped in Christian-sounding language
On this episode of “Relatable,” Allie unravels three common “Christian mythical mottos” and shines a light on the deception underneath.
Myth #1: “Christianity is a relationship. It’s not a religion.”
Allie acknowledges that this phrase is usually employed with good intentions — typically when Christians are evangelizing specifically to people who have “come out of legalism” or are brand-new to Christianity and are “confused about some of the rules and the standards.”
In these cases, the evangelizer is most often trying to push someone “into daily conversation with and pursuit of Jesus.”
“And there is part of that that is really true and really good,” says Allie.
“Christianity says that you can have a relationship with God right now, no matter what you’ve done or who you are, by grace through faith in Jesus. Okay? So yes, Christianity is a relationship,” she concedes.
But that doesn’t change the fact that it is “also a religion.”
“If you look at the roots of the word ‘religion,’ you can go all the way back to the ancient use of the Latin word, which is relegere,” meaning “to go through again — especially in thought or in word,” Allie explains.
“I love this connection because it implies a routine, a habit, a discipline of repetition that turns an isolated belief into a pattern of thought that dictates a person’s life.”
Another closely related Latin word — religāre — means to “bind again or to tie back.”
“You’ll notice the shared prefix in these words, which is re-. It’s the prefix that we see in repeat, rehearse, rebound, redo. Re- … means to do it again, to repeat,” says Allie.
“Christian religion is the practice of rebinding ourselves to the things of God … rebinding ourselves through grace-filled effort — Holy Spirit-inspired effort — to His wisdom, His ways, the good things of the Christian life.”
Citing the book of James, which explicitly refers to Christianity as a “religion,” Allie concludes, “Scripture does not preach that our Christian faith is not a religion; rather, it’s the one true religion. Religion and relationship in Christianity are not pitted against each other.”
Myth #2: “God answers all of our prayers; the answer might just be no.”
“It is true that God says no; it is not true that God answers every prayer,” Allie says frankly.
The Bible, she explains, explicitly outlines several “kinds of people” whose prayers God may ignore: “those who have personal and selfish motives” (James 4:3); “those who remain in sin and will not heed God’s law” (John 9:31; Proverbs 28:9); “those who offer unworthy service to God” (Malachi 1:8-9); “those who reject God’s call or have no faith” (James 1:6-7); “those who are violent” (Isaiah 1:15); “those who are self-righteous” (Luke 18:11-14); and “those who mistreat God’s people (Micah 3: 2, 4).
“There are several other passages that we could go through that indicate that God sometimes does not hear or does not respond at all to certain prayers due to a person’s heart condition, motives, or relationship with Him,” says Allie.
For Christians, however, who the Bible says are free to approach God’s throne with confidence (Hebrews 4:16), she says it’s difficult to determine whether or not God answers all their prayers.
“I simply don’t know for sure that the answer is always that God is responding to every single prayer that a Christian has … but we do know for sure that for the nonbeliever, it is not true that God hears and answers every prayer,” Allie says.
Myth #3: “Share the gospel; when necessary, use words.”
This maxim expresses the idea that “we preach the gospel by just how we treat people” and that “preaching at people and trying to push religion down their throats is not something that’s going to be convincing,” says Allie.
“It is true that your life serves as an inspiration. It is true that what we do absolutely matters and how we live our life is a testimony to what we believe — 100%.”
But this doesn’t excuse us from the biblical mandate to take the gospel to all nations.
“We are called to preach the gospel with our words. If anyone could have preached the gospel only using deeds, it would have been Jesus, because Jesus perfectly lived out the gospel in his actions. And yet he didn’t just do the deeds. … He constantly preached the gospel using his words,” says Allie.
Between Jesus’ example and the many verses that call believers to speak the gospel (Romans 10:14, 17; 2 Timothy 4:1-2), there is no escaping the reality that Christianity is “a word-based faith.”
“The Bible obviously strongly affirms that our actions, our love, our holy living must back up our message and that hypocrisy undermines it, and it also repeatedly emphasizes the gospel itself must be verbally proclaimed,” Allie concludes.
To hear more, watch the episode above.
Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?
To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
She stood up for women’s soccer. Her team called her racist.
Former professional soccer player Elizabeth Eddy made headlines when she wrote an op-ed in the New York Post calling for clear biological sex eligibility standards in the National Women’s Soccer League to protect the fairness of women’s soccer — but it was not received well by her fellow players.
Eddy received intense backlash from her Angel City FC teammates, who publicly accused the piece of being harmful, transphobic, and racially motivated.
Unlike those teammates, BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey is grateful to Eddy for sounding the alarm on what’s really going on in women’s sports.
“She did not back down,” Stuckey says, before asking Eddy about the initial response to her article.
“What ended up happening is, the article came out … and then before every game, our captains get sent out to the press to do media. … And the two captains shared their thoughts on the article, and they spoke on behalf of the team and the organization,” Eddy tells Stuckey.
“And that was really, really hard to hear because I’d had conversations with both of them in the past, and I was really close with both of them to the point where they were both invited to our wedding. One of them helped my fiancé plan the proposal,” she continues.
And while the article was not “racist” or “transphobic,” her teammates still claimed it was.
“I’ve had a lot of convos with my teammates in the past few days, and they are hurt and they are harmed by the article, and also they are disgusted by some of the things that were said in the article, and it’s really important for me to say that,” one of her teammates said at the press conference.
“And we don’t agree with the things written for a plethora of reasons, but mostly the undertones come across as transphobic and racist as well,” her teammate added.
“I was 100% shocked because … the words I wrote, there’s no way that could be conceived,” Eddy explains.
“Were you able to have a private conversation with them? … After they accused you, racist, transphobic, all of these things, were you able to have a reasonable discussion to be able to say, ‘Well, no, this is what I meant, and this is why it’s not racist,’ or was that not able to happen?” Stuckey asks.
While Eddy admits that those teammates who publicly discussed her article were not willing to have a private discussion with her, she did hear from multiple teammates that they didn’t stand by what the captain said.
“Were you disappointed by any people who said, ‘I completely agree with you, I support you, but I could never do that’?” Stuckey asks.
“Yeah, there’s a part of me that’s like, come on, because if you do, it snowballs and this thing actually changes in a shorter time frame than not. But at the same time, I can totally empathize with them because it was so hard for me to do this,” Eddy answers.
“I was waffling for months about it,” she adds.
Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?
To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Allie Beth Stuckey takes down absurd motherhood lies spouted on ‘The View’
When conservative mother Isabel Brown spoke at the Conservative Political Action Conference, she used the platform to champion having more children — a cause BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey of “Relatable” can easily get behind.
However, not everyone appreciated Brown’s stance, particularly the women of “The View.”
“I think it’s just really reckless to be suggesting that people should have children when you now know, in this country, there’s this affordability crisis. And for a two-person household, a married household, you need over $400,000 for child care,” Sunny Hostin explained to the panel.
Hostin went on to claim that Brown was “advocating for people to be born into poverty,” where those children will not be educated, housed, or fed.
“At the same time … this government is cutting all of the services that would allow people to have families and big families,” she added.
Stuckey calls Hostin’s statement “over-the-top, inaccurate, and absurd.”
“No one said that having children comes without sacrifices and comes without some form of what people may call inconvenience. But the idea that you have to be making almost half a million dollars a year to be able to just survive with children is absurd,” she says.
“It’s not true today. It has never been true in all of history,” she adds.
But Hostin wasn’t the only one on the panel who criticized Brown’s statement.
“I gave our girl Isabel a little Google,” Whitney Cummings said. “She has a baby. She has a 1-year-old. Of course, she thinks everyone should have a lot of kids. She has a 1-year-old that sleeps all day.”
“I also was like, ‘I’m going to have a bunch more kids.’ Wait till your kid is up and walking and you spend most of your day trying to get its shoes on. You’re probably going to rethink how many kids you have,” Cummings added.
“I must be doing motherhood wrong because, see, my 1-year-olds were awake all day, and they took a nap for a couple hours in the afternoon, but they were awake. Are you thinking about a 1-month-old? A 1-year-old is a toddler,” Stuckey responds.
“Having a 1-year-old is, like, one of the most challenging times because they’re so mobile, they’re so energetic, and yet they can’t just sit there and be entertained by a book for very long. And so, that’s crazy,” she continues.
Stuckey, who has three children of her own, believes that Hostin and Cummings are actually just placing convenience and luxury over children — much like other women in the “child-free movement.”
Stuckey plays a clip one woman posted on TikTok of herself discussing how wonderful it is to lie around all day and prioritize her own needs instead of having children.
“That’s such a superficial and selfish reason not to have kids,” she says.
Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?
To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
